Highlight from the original MyDigimedia Blog, published November 20, 2007:
In the past month or so since I've been out, Hulu.com, the joint NBC Universal/ News Corp. venture, has launched in private beta. I'd really, really hoped that Hulu was just a code name for something more cutting-edge. I'd fully prepared to play with Hulu for a while and then make some snide comment comparing the silly name to a silly presentation or content...
...and I can't. Hulu ain't half bad.
But it's also not half as good as it could be.
Last March, the two companies announced the site, which at the time, still had no name. The best of prime-time TV as well as other original and vintage programming was meant to be made available for streaming.
From the original press release:
“This is a game changer for Internet video,” said Peter Chernin, President and Chief Operating Officer of News Corporation. “We’ll have access to just about the entire U.S. Internet audience at launch. And for the first time, consumers will get what they want -- professionally produced video delivered on the sites where they live. We’re excited about the potential for this alliance and we’re looking forward to working with any content provider or distributor who wants to take advantage of this extraordinary opportunity.”
“Anyone who believes in the value of ubiquitous distribution will find this announcement incredibly exciting,” said Jeff Zucker, President and CEO of NBC Universal. “This venture supercharges our distribution of protected, quality content to fans everywhere. Consumers get a hugely attractive aggregation of a wide range of content, and marketers get a novel way to connect with a large and highly engaged audience.”
I don't know if News Corp has so far delivered on what Chernin predicted ahead of Hulu's launch: Much of the video currently available doesn't interest me all that much. I'm not seeing a wide variety of content yet - that may change, obviously - and the interface doesn't exactly motivate me to share my thoughts with others using the site.
On the other hand, there's little interfering with the video presentation. Blinking ads aren't competing for my attention, and the interface is really, really clean.
I decided to watch some old episodes of St. Elsewhere, one of my favorite shows growing up. The streaming quality was quite good - no interruptions, no hiccups even. As promised, there were very limited commercial interruptions. I think that I counted less than 10 seconds total devoted to Nissan, the program stream's sponsor. At the bottom of the screen were two thumbnail rows: one showed other St. Elsewhere episodes I could stream, the other offered digital video clips and episodes of other shows it categorized as "related videos."
The related content section is useless. No matter which St. Elsewhere episode I selected, the related videos shown included Prison Break, Bionic Woman, and, inexplicably, Season 15 Episode 2438 of the Conan O'Brian show with John Krasinski of The Office. Hard to tell if certain NBC content is being pushed on me because of some promo or if the site isn't exactly working yet...
The video player is lackluster - I'd expected something with more features and pizzazz. Instead, it reminds me of a very basic Flash video overlay. Nothing compared to what Fora.tv launched a year ago.
Here's what I think Hulu has going for it:
- unobtrusive advertising
- a clean and easy to use interface
- a personal playlist that actually works
- decent (though not as comprehensive as I'd like) notes and information on each episode
- a good-enough-for-now search system that allows users to browse by most of the Netflix categories
What's lacking? All of the things I love about Netflix: the ability to really search, social networking a la LinkedIn, a system that "learns" more about me as I rate and rank movies, etc. To me, Hulu looks a lot like a streaming version of what Netflix used to be. With $100 million in initial financing from Providence Equity Partners and the backing of two massive media organizations, I'd expected something...more.
Kara Swisher has more on the viability of Internet-only programming at All Things Digital. CNET says that Hulu has "nailed the basics" but that "the site featured a bare bones look, just a laundry list of show titles and thumbnails. Click on a link and a video player appears. Below the player are links to other recent episodes. Right off the bat, I felt myself wishing they offered shows from previous seasons. If you've never watched Heroes before, a show with lots of characters and subplots, good luck trying to get caught up on Hulu.com."
I particularly like Christopher Breen's take on Hulu (to be sure, he's extremely pro-iTunes): "You’ve heard of this iPod thing, right? The device that lets you take your media with you? Completely useless for Hulu content because that content is not portable. You can’t download it and therefore can’t put it on your iPod. I’m as nostalgic as the next guy but being forced to enjoy content on a device tied to an electrical outlet and Internet connection is so Three’s Company."
As journalism continues moving into the web video arena, I think it would be best to pay close attention to what the media giants are wrestling with now. How users respond to Hulu (and Netflix and all the other sites) should ultimately help to inform the decisions your newsroom makes...
Thoughts?
