Life is Short for Online Videos

Given the vast supply of content and the power of search and social filters, you might expect that videos on YouTube, FunnyOrDie, MySpaceTV and the like would maintain a certain degree of evergreen viewership.  In reality, according to a study by TubeMogul which analyzed nearly 11,000 videos over a 90-day period, most videos live a fleeting existence on the web:

On average, videos are time-sensitive. Trends pointed out elsewhere, such as “evergreen” (non-time sensitive) content always fetching views or videos randomly “going viral,” seem more of a rarity than an underlying trend in the data. Significantly, 50% of all views occur in the first two weeks, peaking at day three.

The study’s findings power a new viewership calculator for would-be internet video auteurs, which claims to project cumulative viewership in a one year period… though the algorithm seems to skew the results too strongly, and contrary to their thesis.

Update: At the request of Mashable, TubeMogul authored a guest post analyzing the data by video category.  Viewed this way, “Entertainment” and “Science & Technology” reinforce (if not exaggerate) the original findings, while “How-To” viewership is distributed more evenly over time.  The author reiterated that the study’s one-year timeframe could misrepresent “a long tail that over time might add up to a significant percentage of overall views”.

"Would You Rather?": Teen Edition

OTX’s latest Teen Topix study looks at the “either/or” media preferences of teens.  When framed in such absolute terms, the survey reveals an strong preference for technology in many aspects of their lives; but OTX and research partner The Intelligence Group are quick to point out that while teens have embraced the web, they are not wholly defined by it:

Teens are not a ‘one size fits all’ market and the Teen Topix reports show this group to be complex, sophisticated consumers and media users, just as we all are,” said Jane Buckingham, President, The Intelligence Group.

Given some challenging trade-offs, here’s what 750 teen respondents had to say:

As to their concerns online, teens largely cited fear of computer viruses (78%), identity theft (67%) and unauthorized access of their personal data (65%).  [via Research Brief]

Hulu: The Home of Comedy?

Never screen a comedy in a large, stadium-seating megaplex.  Why?  A crowded theater is a petri dish for infectious laughter, and stadium-seating intentionally breaks up the crowd.  Whether you’re in distribution or simply looking for a fix of laughter, comedies are enhanced by a crowded theater with playhouse seating to further the contagious effect.

Now, I wonder, is there a web equivalent of this psuedo-fact?  Compete notes an interesting disparity in the viewership of Hulu vis-à-vis the official sites of its parent networks (NBC/Fox): people are sticking to the networks for drama, but Hulu is quickly becoming the preferred destination for comedy.

The question is “why”.  Obviously network promotion has a lot to do with it, as is evident in the numbers for The Office, which regularly directs viewers back to NBC.com specifically.  Beyond that, however, could it be that Hulu’s user experience (like the sloping theater) is simply a better medium for comedy?  The site’s focus on clips, as well as the ability to easily share and deeplink, may be more than a welcomed feature — it could be the reason that Hulu is primed to succeed in comedy.

If you want to isolate one funny scene, take in the show bit-by-bit throughout the day, or find something that made you laugh more than two years ago — all endemic facets of comedy, which don’t often come into play for a serialized drama — Hulu is apt to deliver.  Of course, the signature of the comedy viewing experience is that it is ALWAYS better in a crowd… short of avatar theater, how will video on the web evolve to create social viewing experiences which actually enhance the experience?

Beauty and the Backslash: Immigration Reform

I’m really torn on this one. Our innovation-driven economy demands that we continue to import the brightest minds from around the globe; but every visa that goes to an AJAX guru or systems architect is one more unavailable slot for a supermodel (cruel world, I know).

Fortunately, Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York’s 9th District has introduced a bill before Congress that will create a new “nonimigrant” classification allowing up to 1,000 foreign models to enter the country, and thereby creating new openings for technology geeks. Problem solved! According to InformationWeek:

The United States makes 65,000 H-1B visas available each year. But the new allotments are typically snapped up within the first weeks of availability, leaving hopefuls to wait another year for a chance to work in the country. American tech vendors, along with Indian firms with stateside offices, typically use the lion’s share of the allotment to import programmers into the country.

While this isn’t exactly the “comprehensive immigration reform” we’ve been waiting for — and I’m sure Congress has more pressing matters to attend to — this is at least one government program that everyone can rally behind. Like many acts of Congress, however, it may not actually address the issue: Silicon Alley Insider points out that most supermodels (like Nobel Prize winners) enter the country under O-1 visas… no doubt for their “extraordinary abilities”.