In an article entitled, The Future of Cable TV in an Open World, Steve Rubel announces that cable TV is “no longer going to be controlled by the big cable or satellite players.” It will “open up to the masses.”

I agree with Rubel that control of the medium may no longer be consolidated in the hands of the cable and satellite infrastructure providers - the “big cable or satellite players,” but I would not equate their loss of control with some sort of societal democratization.

It smells techno-populist.

A couple of thoughts:

1. Lean back vs. lean forward

Just because a technology is capable of providing greater functionality does not mean that it will be successful, or even that people will use it. People can be lazy, especially when it comes to recreation - I know I can be. On a sunday evening I want to put on pajamas, warm up some buffalo wings, and zone out to the HBO flow, which includes Rome and Extras. I want a lean-back experience.

Given a choice between greater functionality and greater complexity; and less functionality and greater simplicity, the majority of people will opt in favor of the latter. To most consumers, having ‘limitless’ choices is actually a turn-off when it comes down to practice.

There is another component to this: the fact that my computer is in my office where I have a desk and a chair. My television is in my living room where I have two couches. As an object, it simply doesn’t make sense for me to put a monitor with limitless reception capabilities in my living room where I already am starting to become irritated with the effort required to deal with on-demand.

Quality of amateur content (it mostly sucks):

Lets not kid ourselves, amateur content is not really that great. Sure, it is fun every so often when I get a link to YouTube and I can watch a cat using the toilet for about 4 seconds. Do I want to watch this when I’m relaxing in the evening? Not a chance.

There is always going to be great demand for professionally produced pieces of video content; and there is always going to be demand for an episodic flow of content. The investment required to produce an individual show, let alone an entire series, is substantial and a risk that can only be undertaken by large media firms.

HBO rocks the Ozzy

Come on. Entourage, Rome, Curb your Enthusiasm, Extras. Are you kidding me? Those four shows alone have pretty much insured HBO’s success for years to come.

Handing over the reigns

If control shifts from the cable companies anywhere else, it will not be the masses, but the Internet magnates or to a new (well-funded) player. To a certain extent, this can be viewed as a shift to the masses because of the Internet’s celebration of user-generated content, but control of the distribution, visibility, and most importantly the monetization of these things will still be controlled by non-users.

Its sort of like letting a child play with his toys but locking him in a crib.

What I do think will happen when the paradigm begins to shift, is a rift in the economic fabric will open and there will be an opportunity for a player to come along, take advantage, and get super-rich. Microsoft was the gateway to the PC; Google was the gateway to the text-based Internet. Now someone (maybe one of those two names I just mentioned) will find a way to become the gateway to multimedia content online.

And whoever that person is will be very, very, very rich.