Monday, December 19, 2011

TV is broken. Here's how we "fix" it.

I pay a content provider a subscription for a show. For instance, $0.75 for a season of House without ads, or $0.05 for a season of House with ads. $1.50 for a season of "The Daily Show" without ads. $0.50 for a season of the British show Red Dwarf, without ads. New show ideas can be funded with a kickstarter-like system. So, for example, you could donate $10.00 for a restart of Firefly without ads (Yes, I went there). If the fund reached the required amount, the project goes forward, and those who donated automatically get a season subscription for when the show airs. If it doesn't, the donators get their money back, no harm no foul. The greater the demand, the less the cost to the consumer (and, obviously, the greater the show run, or the more cost to create, the higher the subscription cost). "Reality" shows, where you call in to a premium-rate number to place your vote, could be entirely funded from this revenue stream alone, and would probably be "free" to subscribe to. This will put much more money in the hands of the content providers directly, rather than having the cable middlemen taking a large chunk, and will still keep all but the most obsessive tv-watcher's cable bill at about the same price as it already is. Watching 40-50 shows regularly (and that is a lot, TBH) would cost around $40, still less than the average cost of a home user's cable bill.

Content providers can poll me on my interests for new shows. They can also use those interests to customize the ads I get, if I am agreeing to get ads. This would make the ads both more attractive, relevant and interesting to consumers, and more appealing to advertisers.

The content provider releases episodes on their regular schedule via a private BitTorrent tracker (or similar methods) in a DRM-unencumbered format, so I can watch it on any device I choose. This releasing is done using a customized-to-the-user RSS feed (only the shows I subscribe to from that provider appear in that feed), which is secured using HTTPS and a unique "user key". Trailers and pilot episodes for new shows can also be published on the RSS feed (especially if they may match my recorded interests). Keys cannot be shared, and abuse of such will result in the key being revoked (or at least, changed, so the user has to update his client with the new key if he wishes to continue, which will make it difficult enough to make sharing of feeds like this unfeasable). Downloads could also be "Tagged", so that if a file is shared, it can be traced back to who shared it. Though, with prices like this, it's doubtful that would happen. Sharers could be penalised if they go too far (Like uploading an entire series, for example), but small-scale sharing between friends should be encouraged – it spreads the word about a show that might otherwise be overlooked, and can bring increased revenue for everyone involved. Don't punish your most fervent fans for encouraging others to enjoy what they are – they're doing your advertising for you!

News channels and sporting/current events can be subscribed to for live streaming using Multicast (preferably) or Unicast systems, in much the same way.

Cable companies can then become "content aggregators" or local CDNs, So rather than having to go to hundreds of different content providers, you can just subscribe through your cable company, and they aggregate all the available feeds for you and serve your content to you from local servers. Of course, going directly to the source is still an option, if you wish to track more directly, you don't want to support your local cable provider, or if your particular cable company doesn't carry that provider's content. Cable companies can then either add a small surcharge to the price of each subscription, or charge a "content distribution" fee for running the local cache.

Emergency broadcasts can be implemented with special RSS feed items, or signed and timestamped playlist files that point to a live stream, to be picked up and (dis)played immediately by boxes or computer systems. This is about the only part that isn't possible right now, and I shouldn't think it'd take that much work to implement.

This way, when you go to the TV, there's always something you're interested in watching available. You never miss an episode of your favourite shows, and you directly support the people who make it. You don't have to get, and don't have to watch, anything you don't want to, and you can do whatever you like with what you've paid for. It also means that niche shows don't get canned, and providers have a completely accurate dollar-based view of just how popular shows really are (rather than having to rely on a very limited number of Nielsen households), and it also means that shows aren't competing for ratings by being forced into a timeslot, giving a false impression of popularity (or lack thereof). It would also make it easier for indie TV producers to get up and running. You'd probably also have a fast addition to Google in the form of "Which provider makes this TV show".

If you're thinking this all sounds terribly complicated and difficult for (for example) your elderly grandparents to comprehend, it really needn't be. A set-top box with a friendly interface can hide all this "complexity".

So your mother turns on her TV, looks through the list of travel shows, or movies, or whatever, on her box, and chooses one to watch. The RSS and BitTorrent aspects are entirely transparent. She goes into the menu and chooses "Get more shows" and picks what she's interested in (by genre, alphabetically, by actor or director, search, whatever). If necessary, she puts in her Credit Card number (I know some elderly people prefer not to keep those details stored), and the box starts getting her new shows straight away, downloading in the background entirely unattended, ready and waiting for her to watch at her convenience.

It's not rocket science. And if she is really indecisive, she just hits the "pick something for me" button/option, which will select an (new, if she wants, or repeating if necessary) episode of a show and start playing, using the "next" button to skip shows she doesn't want to see right now (which is remembered for that playback session).

Just because it involves tech, doesn't mean it has to be technical, or difficult to use. A box with just 2 wires (Power, HDMI to TV) is dead easy to set up, and the prevalence of WiFi means it doesn't have to be any more complicated than that. Initial setup can be done with a nice, simple step-by-step wizard, which can also include initial selection of subscriptions. Trailers and ads for shows (if downloaded) can even have a "fast subscribe" option, so you just press the "Ok" button while a trailer's on and it'll add it to your list of downloads (Or present you with a "you asked for x while watching this, please confirm (and provide your credit card details)" screen after the show's finished).

So, rather than having to scroll through the programming guide on her cable box, she has a list of new, relevant TV always available for her to watch. She sits down, turns on the TV, and hits the "play something for me" button. The TV is at her command, rather than trying to fight it to find something interesting to watch.

Unfortunately, the way Hollywood, and the MPAA/RIAA/Media fatcats see the TV industry, and television consumers as a whole, this will never come to pass. They are so much more fond of their walled gardens and "Prime time slot"s that the idea of abandoning them and allowing people to live their lives not beholden to their scheduling whims is abhorrent. It would be so very nice, but I hold out little hope in it happening. And barring the emergency broadcast system, this is all completely possible to do RIGHT NOW. RSS aggregators, BitTorrent clients, streaming set-top-boxen and simple networking are all available now. This would be completely system agnostic, working equally well with AppleTV, GoogleTV, XBMC, Boxee, Plex, PopcornHour, WD TV Live and so much more.

That's what I think is "Wrong" with Television at the moment. And how you fix it. But, unfortunately, nobody that can do anything about it will listen to me, or is stuck in a non-compete, exclusive contract. This kind of scheme would effectively put the "TV Channels" out of business, or would force them to change their business model, and as they have all the money at the moment (Thanks to huge ad revenues), they really won't want anything to change. I'm sure the actual producers (Chuck Lorre Productions, Mutant Enemy, Stoopid Monkey, and morem for example) would like this system. They'd get rewarded for making popular shows, and wouldn't have the threat of cancellation hanging over their head constantly (I'm looking at you, Fox!). So I shake my fist in impotent rage, and continue to use eztv, FlexGet & Transmission instead.