This week's AdTech parties kept me groggy enough on Thursday morning not to post on time, but I had a great time meeting lots of heady entrepreneurs still anxious to change some piece of the Internet and busy building their ad networks and publisher tools businesses despite the rumblings in the economy and rumors that Silicon Valley as gone cold to Web 2.0.
AdTech's Keynote speech on Wednesday from NBC Chief Digital Officer George Kilavkof gave us an insight into how the big networks are thinking about the brave new world of digital media distribution. They're trying to catch up with the YouTube's of the world by finding technology partners for online, on-demand distribution (i.e. Hulu) and speeding up the placement of live programming to keep them up to pace with viewers who record the shows at home and place them online immediately after (Saturday Night Live).
Adam Lashinsky from Fortune magazine did an excellent job of questioning Kilavkof at every turn (do they talk to Fox regarding Hulu content and encryption? Are they still talking to Apple about a return to the iTunes platform? What impact will the Tibet issue have on NBC's handling of the Olympics broadcasts this summer?)
Kilavkof alluded that discussions with Apple over a potential return of NBC TV episodes to iTunes continue but he was hard-pressed to handover any strategic details of NBC's dealings with other companies.
When it comes to opening your mouth in public, there is a major difference between being a start-up in this world and being a public incumbent as the conversation on Wednesday morning reminded me.
George did as good a job as anyone could expect answering pointed questions about NBC's long-term ability to respond to disruptive web 2.0 distribution business models and ad-skipping technology in front of a geeky audience on the edge of their seats hoping for a public company slip-up.
But you could not help but see how a young entrepreneur would have approached the questions differently. Would a start-up be afraid to disclose dealings with another large player (Apple)? Probably not, more likely would proclaim them. Would a start-up be hard-pressed to dodge a question of Tibet? Much less likely, might even take it as an opportunity to grab headlines.
I wouldn't trade my spot in a venture firm or a conceivable spot in a start-up for the rigors of commercial-speak and political correctness that must come with a public company straight-jacket.
Life is short. Much more fun to be disruptive.
Comments