Why do we praise the mainstream for adopting new media? Is it the excitement that we feel when our industry is being validated, or is it just our kindhearted nature to pat the mentally challenged on the back when they finally learn to do something right. Unfortunately, I believe it’s a hint of both.

This morning Marc Hustvedt, founder of web television news site Tubefilter twittered the above message announcing:

Marc Hustvedt: Disney becomes equity partner in Hulu, the premium content battle with YouTube heats up. This will be good for content creators.. [Link]

His positive and enthusiastic remark set off a brief, but meaningful discussion on whether the new partner will, in fact, be good for content creators:

Casey McKinnon: @MarcHustvedt The problem is that Hulu is a gatekeeper, not an open platform. Have they spoken about opening themselves up? [Link]

Marc Hustvedt: @caseymckinnon, @ebregman, @nickpepito – indie creators will benefit too, it’s about first creating competition to distribute content [Link]

Nick Pepito: @caseymckinnon, @marchustvedt I think Hulu will move beyond studio content & begin to sign indie, they’ll have to. [Link]

Casey McKinnon: @nickpepito Hulu doesn’t “have to” do anything. It’s a site owned by NBC/FOX/ABC, who have obvious vested interests. [Link]

I’ve been getting more @replies on Twitter about this topic, so allow me to explain further in 140 characters of more…

As I mentioned on Twitter, Hulu is a site owned by three major networks; NBC, FOX, and ABC (Disney). They use the site to distribute their TV shows online in order to garner more views and to prevent the black market propagation of their shows on torrent sites. With the exception of made-for-the-web production Dr. Horrible’s Sing-A-Long Blog, Hulu is available exclusively in the United States.

Though Dr. Horrible was an indie production – a very expensive one – creator Joss Whedon has obvious ties with FOX that, no doubt, helped him distribute his content on Hulu. Most other web series listed on Hulu also have mainstream ties, like:

• The show is a web-based series created by a major network (Example: FEARnet)
• The show is created by or stars known celebrities (Example: Pink)
• The show is made by talented indie creators – most probably living in Los Angeles – who have been lucky enough to get a licensing deal (Example: Squeegees)

Sure, there are exceptions to the above ties to the mainstream, like Gary Vaynerchuk‘s The Thunder Show (aka. Wine Library TV), but with his growing popularity it’s not absurd to assume the other shows have licensing deals or friends in high places.

So what does the ABC Disney partnership mean for us indie creators? Nothing until we see a more open platform on Hulu.

Some have mentioned on Twitter that Hulu needs to shift their entertainment to include more indie web content or their numbers will flatten over time… and I wish that were true, but mainstream TV shows made by already famous people have a built-in audience. Indie web series creators have a much larger ladder to climb to get the same viewership as people like Joss Whedon, and the best thing we can do is to “never give up and never surrender!”

This is why I am unperturbed by the new ABC Disney partnership. In essence, it’s just more of the same… and a very obvious merger. Also, let us not forget that ABC has been distributing their shows online for a long time now… they just had a less than desirable user experience. So, to celebrate their partnership with Hulu in a world where content should be (and already is) cross platform, is rather redundant.

Marc Hustvedt believes that creating competition to distribute content will eventually help indie creators, but since Hulu and YouTube are in a competition over TV shows and movies I feel that indie web productions are being left in the cold. Perhaps someday we’ll be reminiscing on all the crazy videos we used to watch on YouTube… whatever happen to those anyway?