So, I am the proud father of a baby girl.  She entered the world on Dec 16th of this year and has been sleeping for a week solid.  I have taken some time off of work to sleep too, but have found myself running around trying to do stuff that I normally can't do when working M-F. 

My wife and I already have a son.  He's 4 years-old now.  One of the side benefits of children is that it sort of requires you to wrangle images together in the form of photos and video; and by doing so, keeps you up to date on technology.  I suppose you could shoot on film and then snail mail the photos around to nana, papa, auntie and uncle. 

I'm hardpressed to find a better distribution method right now than the simple Facebook photo upload tool. Between my wife and me I think we're spreading news of our newborn with photos and status updates to over 200ppl.  Could be more.  I don't think Facebook was where it's at now 4 years ago, or at least I wasn't a college student using it then.  Sadly, my 4-year-old son doesn't benefit from the technological advances of photo sharing in the social media landscape.  Or maybe he actually appreciated his privacy. 

I doubt very much at this stage in our technological journey both as parents and media consumers that we'll ever pull out our mini-dvd handheld sony dv camera.  We shot hours of our son on it, but now it's pretty much serving as a vcr for those inconvenient mini dvds that won't play on a dvd and won't edit on a pc. 

For our new daughter, and now for our preschooler, we've found the revolutionary Flip camera with it's built in hard drive and native editing software that makes shooting, cutting and sending low res compressed mpegs a real pleasure rather than a fools errand.  My mother is able to click on a link that serves the videos I've shot.  I can easily burn off the vids to a dvd if i want or keep them on the Flip servers. Granted business's fail and digital media in the cloud might necessitate some hard copy backup, but at least I don't need to worry about getting some video of my kids and actually showing it to people outside my house. 

Now, I know mac users like my brother have thrived with imovie but even he sings the Flip's praises. 

*Note: I am not being paid by Flip for this blog entry.

Well, my daughter is stirring so I will grab the camera and then upload some more jpegs to Facebook today. 

According to Techcrunch today the major nets have been in serious discussions about partnering up to launch a one stop video site for their tv content. Viacom, who owns Ifilm, Atom Entertainment and Disney have dropped out of the discussions, but NBC, Fox, and CBS remain at the table together.

Techcrunch reported that the motivation here is to crush Google/Youtube by suing them for copyright violations once the Nets' video site is successfully launched. Endgame would be that if you want to watch your TV shows online, you have to go to their site.

Obviously, there are pros and cons. Daily Variety reports today that Mark Cuban (whose voice is so important in this debate) commented to the press at the UBS investor confab in New York that the user-generated model is inherently incompatible with congloms; "if CBS is controlling how CBS content is used," he said, "then it's no longer a social network, it's a corporate-distribution forum."

And let's not forget that while each net clamors to be the 18-49 ratings winner week to week, they don't collectively appeal to the same demos - - and advertisers know this. Moreover, they have to be a little cautious about diluting their broadcast ratings by giving viewers the option of On-Demand programming on a massive scale.

I couldn't agree more with Mark Cuban's assessment of the incompatibility here. I also don't see how a one for all model would benefit viewers/users. Doesn't this throw competition out the window? I get that YouTube is a ubiquitous destination for TV content but there must be a way for the Nets to leverage their content individually across multiple platforms to benefit users, crush their violators, and reap rewards. Afterall, the thing the Nets know how to do is monetize and generate ad revenue. The media chiefs spent most of their time at Upfronts last year crowing about their multi-platform launches.

While I don't see these talks resulting in a deal of any kind, I cannot figure out why Fox would still be at the table. Myspace is their YouTube. NBC I get because the IVillage brand can't absorb a large digital television platform. They could consider using Heroes as a springboard for an interactive site that eventually includes other programming. CBS & their Digital Czar, Quincy Smith, are probably only months away from a major online purchase.

I will be very interested to see where these discussions lead. The rumor of a Metacafe acquisition to jumpstart things is peculiar for the collective nets. What Metacafe does might be repeatable and Bob Wright, Chairman of GE, told Charlie Rose that very thing when asked about buying YouTube. I'm sure the interactive gurus at CBS, NBC, and Fox can come up with their own Metacafe. If Metacafe is as popular as Comscore suggests, beating Yahoo Video & Myspace Video in viewers, it's going to make the Grouper pricetag look like a deal. Why not spend some smart money and purchase a giant stake in Yahoo. Create YahooNet. This will appeal to Terry Semel as it will fix their monetization issue. Yahoo, as the #1 website, has yet to be a fully tapped platform for television, and is in need of a big event.

That's how you crush Googletube and, at the same time, have the safety net of a fully operational online business, if this video craze should ever blow away when the bubble bursts on web 2.0. But that's for another discussion.

Is it fun, easy, eventful, and jump on the bandwagon gotta have it kind of stuff? Does it go on my Facebook page? The answers to these questions must be yes in order for the next interactive product to make noise or undermine the conventional wisdom that says their is no new new. Twitter did it. Facebook, with it 5,000 apps and counting is the backdrop, and if you're not a product on the Facebook platform....well you'll have to go to the big Google meeting in Mountain View, CA. Or you can go anyway because you'll want to be on this new Open Social platform too.

Are you a portal like Hulu? Forget about traction. You're too big, too repeatable, too similar, not stealthy, and not new. Then again, you might just have an HD video experience that has never been seen before, a decent round of funding to expand that experience and the content from two of the biggest suppliers in the hemisphere. But wait. I can watch Friday Night Lights on NBC.com and it works fine. But NBC.com doesn't have Conan the Barbarian. They do have Conan O'Brien. I'm so confused! But maybe that was Hulu's intention all along. For now, Joost has Showtime's Dexter for free and they're not pushing any adds down my throat (CBS might change all of that if the Writer's Strike persists in 2008), so that might be my video platform of choice for now, but I'm nomadic and so I'm sure I won't have many reasons to stay loyal (guess what Joost, your newsletters aren't really wetting my appetite to load your client on another computer). My guess is VeohTV, Joost, The CBS Audience Network that helps populate their platforms has a preeetty nice jump on Hulu by the way. Time will tell. Meanwhile, the web is getting more and more social. Are you?