3 thoughts on “Brightcove, Revisited”

  1. most people who have any experience at all (that is, not the bright eyed, buhsy tailed pups who want to *change the world*) think Bright Cove’s model can be summed neatly as SOD, or Shit On Demand. If there is an audience for whatever alternative video Bright Cove unearths, power to all. But most people think amateur video — excepting, of course, pornography — is, well, feces, or more politely, fool’s gold.

  2. I agree with sm. Ultimately, distribution models are simply gatekeepers, with no power at all to say where the market goes. The real issue is the quality of the content. This is the same reason there are many unsuccessful cable channels. Simply having access to the viewers doesn’t solidify an audience, there needs to be a draw, and that’s the content, not the method of transmission. Who cares if some new guy comes out with an indie film? Unless it’s really good, in which case it would get picked up by a theatrical distributor, nobody’s gonna waste their time trying a new software/transmission tool.

  3. I was introduced to Brightcove today by my instructor here at the International Film & TV Workshops in Rockport, Maine. Though it is an exciting idea, will it be seen as a passing fad? Will people actually pay to watch content not produced by the big boys? Have YOU ever bought a DVD you did not see in a theater or on TV first? Most people haven’t, though I’ve gotten shows recommended by word-of-mouth. With Big Brother breathing down the neck of VOD-casting, I can see the overlords of media actually doing “news stories” warning people that thier children will be killed by terrorists if they dare watch content from Brightcove or other alternative distro outlets.
    -Buck Kahler
    Documentary Filmmaker

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.