The Emerging HDTV WWW Take-Over

[METROmilwaukee]

I might watch TV but that don't mean I'm stoopit.

The February 17th 2009 digital broadcasting smoke screen will go down in history as the date marking the turning point allowing the over-the-air broadcasting oligopolists  to finally begin to compete with the telco and cable oligopolies all of whom are serrepticiously attempting to take over the web. Yada, yada, yada,  technical issues are not the only reason this February date has finally been set in stone.

I mean really, as I said and as I pose to others throughout our region, we may watch TV but does that mean we are stoopit and don't know or understand the TV, microcomputer, mobile computing devices, digital signage and any digital device that has some type of display have all rapidly converged into a digital platform supporting services which are transported to devices using I(nternet) P(rotocols) in whole or in part, in one way or another, for some purpose today that will become the defacto standard tommorrow?

Yea, I know I presume to think it really matters and yes, there is a question in here somewhere :-) So IYO which of the oligopolists (over-the-air, telco or cable) will be the first to make themselves obvious?

[Talos4]

:huh?:   What!!?    :huh?:

toilet_claw

[Tom Snyder]

I must be stoopit. I don't have a clue.

So if I stop watching TV, will I know what an oligopolist is? :huh?:

[METROmilwaukee]

I must be stoopit. I don't have a clue.

So if I stop watching TV, will I know what an oligopolist is? :huh?:

An oligopoly is a group of private sector companies that maintain a monopoly generally by means of corruption.

[Tom Snyder]

I was being facetious.

The Internet is bigger than any media, bigger than any organization, and much to their dismay, bigger than the government. It's even more than just an infrastructure, it is now a concept that cannot be stopped. Governments like China may try and control it, but even if it takes an anarchy, an open Web is here to stay.

So the presumption that media oligarchies can somehow "take over" the Web, IMO, has it completely backward. If the media doesn't continue to adapt to acknowledge the true impact and nature of the Internet, like all other businesses whop wish to survive are doing, it to will be relegated to irrelevance.

[Talos4]

In addition to that,

You cannot operate a monopoly within a oligopoly.

Two different economic structures.

If it's a monopoly, then one entity controls the product and the market.

Oligopolies operate as several companies influencing a market.  

For Example:

Many media industries today are essentially oligopolies. Six movie studios receive 90 percent of American film revenues, and four major music companies receive 80 percent of recording revenues. There are just six major book publishers, and the television industry was an oligopoly of three networks- ABC, CBS, and NBC-from the 1950s through the 1970s. Television has diversified since then, especially because of cable, but today it is still mostly an oligopoly (due to concentration of media ownership) of five companies: Disney/ABC, CBS Corporation, NBC Universal, Time Warner, and News Corporation.

All of the above heavily influence the market but do not have total control.

Your assumption is that the internet can be controlled or goverened.

That's not going happen, unless Al Gore files for a patent :rof:

[METROmilwaukee]

I was being facetious.

The Internet is bigger than any media, bigger than any organization, and much to their dismay, bigger than the government...

Well Goliath was bigger than David but it only took one well placed stone as the story goes. So it's all interesting to pontificate and if its all the same to you as you both infer and imply, why not simply answer the question?

A person with convictions as you have expressed surely has considered the question as it has been presented.

[Tom Snyder]

Because I disagree with your question as presented, Clinton.

Of COURSE they will try. But they'll eventually realize how futile their efforts are. The bigger, more ubiquitous and powerful the Internet becomes, the less powerful the media "empires" will become.

[METROmilwaukee]

In addition to that,

...
Your assumption is that the internet can be controlled or goverened.
...

Well, I made no assumption in the context of governance did I? Still, it is already an indisputable fact that the Internet --is-- governed. Its really a matter of who governs the Internet and to which extent. I have concerns about governance but I'm more interested in the aspects of commerce and the oligopolies as they currently exist.

I have my own ideas about the question I posed and and rather sound rationale I may discuss further if you and I can get back to the question as I can't take the time to academically respond to your redefinition of the terms.

So which do you think will be the first to make themselves obvious?

[METROmilwaukee]

Because I disagree with your question as presented, Clinton.

Of COURSE they will try. But they'll eventually realize how futile their efforts are. The bigger, more ubiquitous and powerful the Internet becomes, the less powerful the media "empires" will become.

Yes, of course :-)