3 ms·
The biggest potential danger I see is to Google's brand image. Google is respected as producing high-quality... stuff. Television networks aren't respected beca
by hugh3 15y ago
The biggest potential danger I see is to Google's brand image. Google is respected as producing high-quality... stuff. Television networks aren't respected because they produce... an awful lot of garbage. If google starts being directly responsible for the Jersey Shores of the world then surely their brand image takes a hit.
Producing a "show" or a "movie" requires a teeny, tiny amount of effort and resources these days, and can be done without spending more than 4 figures on equipment and whatnot.
Though it must be said that the only way you can produce a movie really cheaply is if you can persuade folks to work for peanuts in the hope of breaking into the industry.
But if low-budget stuff becomes the industry, then the supply of folks willing to work for nothing in the hopes of being the next George Clooney will die up when George Clooney starts taking home five hundred bucks a film.
- InclinedPlane 15y agoGood point, that is a concern. Maybe google should create a subsidiary brand for just that purpose. As far as low-budget productions, I think you're looking at it from the wrong perspective. The key is lowering the cost of entry. What this enables is not just "low-budget" productions but also "start-ups" with members who have decided to defer compensation in exchange for equity in the "start-up". This is the dominant way that bands get started, for example.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- antoinehersen 15y agoMost people have no idea that Google own YouTube.