Even though it won't be up for very long, I'll still point to this Chicago Tribune story explaining why the Olympic Games Won't Be Streaming onto the Web. [via Lockergnome] "The IOC's stance is an aberration at a time when sports leagues are increasingly turning to the Web as an alternative --and revenue-generating -- outlet for audio and video. Major league baseball sells subscriptions to a full season of games on Web radio, for example.'There are two main reasons,' said Stephane Kanah, Internet manager for the IOC. 'Today, there is not sufficient bandwidth or quality to show the emotions and to be able to view the competition properly.'"
Ahem. Again, feel free to laugh that they would even be quoted saying this.
" 'And most importantly, in order to protect our broadcasters' rights, especially those who are not broadcasting the games live ... we have restricted live videos until there is a technology that allows us to restrict access to videos [geographically].' "
Ding, ding, ding - it's all about the money.
"If viewers can get their fill of bobsledding or snowboarding races from a Web site, ratings and advertising revenue will drop. Broadcasters will bid less for the rights to the next Olympics, generating less money for the Games."
Isn't that a contradiction? Are they saying that it's possible for me to get my fill of bobsledding over the Web, but wait, not the "emotions," so I can't really get me fill. Right? Er. Um. I'm confused. Like you didn't see this coming: IOC = not shifted.
12:36:06 PM 
|
