Surprise! SNL Sarah Palin Parody Getting More Views On NBC.com Than On YouTube
NEW: The real Sarah Palin's SNL appearance here.
EARLIER: We know NBC U (GE) and YouTube (GOOG) are working hard to stop video piracy. Good news: it's working! Well, sort of. So far, NBC.com is getting more views for Tina Fey's parody of Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live than pirated versions on YouTube, but just barely.
NBC.com: 2,304,539 views (according to NBC)
YouTube: 2,038,058 views (according to TubeMogul)
YouTube is busy taking down clips as they're posted. We clicked on several and got the familiar "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by NBC Universal." But they can't keep up, and have no claim over clips of news coverage of the skit.
The stats don't include any views on Hulu, where the SNL clip has become the most popular TV clip of the month. That could mean more people are watching on Hulu than on NBC, but Hulu doesn't report metrics so hard to say. But it does mean NBC is making ad revenue for at least 50% of those viewing this video clip in the Web, which in itself seems like an achievement.
See Also:
YouTube Thanks ABC For A Great Sarah Palin Interview
Jon Stewart Getting Plenty Of Lipstick For Sarah Palin Video
Fox News' O'Reilly Stomps Olbermann With Obama Interview




http://www.hulu.com/popular/clips/today
"I can see Russia from my house!"
What is preventing NBC from uploading the clips (in excellent quality) to YouTube themselves, including whatever post-roll (or even pre-roll) frames/ads they like to include? As in: sending more viewers to Hulu "for more great free clip libraries, etc." straight from YouTube's own pages!!!
It's called FREE advertisement/distribution (you can place your own link right next to the clip no less).
[Reprint of my comment on the "Redlasso" post:]
I have said for a while re:YouTube vs. Viacom as well as the Redlasso case that the Old Media types are shooting themselves in the foot majorly on this.
They should be/have been the ones uploading stuff to YouTube, controlling the links back to their own properties, putting in special pre- and/or post-roll frames, and be in talks with YouTube, Redlasso, et al. to get in on the advert monetization action (either getting a piece of 3rd party adserves, or getting the right to servve their own ads for free, in effect getting Google Adwords subsidies from Google.
Who cares where the clips are run from, go with the properties that already have the mind-share and build from there. Unless they were going to try and charge per news clip, which is extremely unlikely due to the extreme fungibility (i.e. news clips are almost instantly "old news" worth next to nothing), they should be welcoming any avenue to spread their brands through free advertising (the clips themselves show the origin/branding after all), and funnel some additional viewers to their primary business, which is selling ads against their TV content (new content that is).
Redlasso and even YouTube should be seen as a boon to them, yet once again Old Media proves that they still don't quite get it yet.
See also the "ABC-Palin interview" post proving my theory, I didn't want to comment on there since the thread got obviously overly polical...
Ron
http://www.big-crumbs.net
wow gold
wow gold
eve isk
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
warhammer gold
warhammer power leveling
china travel