In a similar way, I’m not crazy about YouTube’s move to become more like Hulu, setting up geoblocking and signing deals for professional content. It’s giving it multiple personalities, and just feels wrong.

In the end, neither of this will matter for indy producers. As the world becomes more viral, and the ways of sharing content expand, the cream will find a way to more easily rise to the top.

You look at Susan Boyle’s rise to fame – it was created by a mainstream television producer but it was popularized online – within days it got millions of hits and tons of media coverage. Only two years ago, a man named Paul Potts had the same story on the same television show but didn’t get as much attention as quickly. That’s not because Boyle’s story is better (I liked Potts more), but because the Internet consciousness is more susceptible to viral infection.

So keep slugging it out there (Galacticast is coming back soon, right?), and eventually something will hit (probably not what you’d expect). The Internet is more powerful than any media, even Hulu.

…

Or you could just sleep with Joss Whedon and gain instant fame. That’s my plan.

I think it will be good for indie in the long run because of the attention and validity it gives to online distribution. Youtube started to re-define entertainment, you could watch a T.V. show or cat flushing a toilet and think of it as entertainment. Hulu is helping to expand the audience for online video through mainstream content, showing online video can be more. It can be a quality experience.

As people migrate online there will be an expanding search for quality content outside what major’s provide. It is just the beginning which is why I think it’s an exciting time to be a content creator. I don’t see the divide between major’s and indie growing wider but shrinking. Cost of equipment, post-production, distribution channels, delivery options are allowing more content to compete in the market. What used to be a very exclusive club is quickly growing.

Sites for indie filmmakers to connect are growing and webshows like “The Crew” are getting attention and could one day be on Hulu. Maybe during a strike or outside normal TV season to keep interest. Content is key and if you don’t have new stuff no reason to keep coming back.

As to what it means for us indie creators, I say “meh.” There are very few of us low-budget indies who can really compete with Family Guy or Scrubs online, not because we’re not as good, but because what draws someone to watch Family Guy online (“oh, crap — I missed that episode” or “I just watched Family Guy for the first time, I wanna go back and watch what I missed” of “I’ve always wanted to watch Family Guy but never have time, Now I’m at work and bored…”) is different from what drives someone to seek out indie content without celebrities or expensive marketing campaigns.

I’m with Felicia — it’s the eternal struggle of indie content creators, online or offline. Creating content is expensive. Getting people to pay you for your content is hard. ABC buying into Hulu proves that even the Big Guys recognize the web is the future and it is worth investment (which is what all of the Guilds were arguing at last years’ contract negotiations, and what we all knew years ago). But it doesn’t largely change the landscape for us indies.

Hulu may have been new media at one point… now it’s increasingly just… media.

Viewership is going to level off because there are just too many limitations to Hulu’s model for it to gain big viewership. I point to the fact that the majority of the most successful, defining web shows have not come from famous people or from big studios – Fred, The Guild, LG15, the list goes on. And let’s face it, the majors have had a lot(A LOT) of trouble trying to make web series that work.

That’s why I think the viewership is going to level off – I think Hulu can only get so far before it hits a ratings ceiling that can only be broken by content with a more casual “watch while you surf” aesthetic that doesn’t take itself too seriously – the kind of thing indies produce all the time. Also, TV shows are available elsewhere, and it’s been shown time and again that the TV-on-the-web audience does not cannibalize the TV audience (it adds to it). So it’s not as if people are abandoning TV for the web (for now), so web ratings won’t be reaching broadcast TV levels any time soon.

Web shows, since they’re only online, have a much larger potential audience. And if you’re Hulu, why not take a chance on an indie production that meets your high standards? In terms of distribution fees, Hulu would pay almost nothing for an indie show in comparison to a major. If viewership is big for it, everyone wins.

What I meant by the tweet is that the competition at the high levels for premium content online means that there is now real value being seen in video online. YouTube has deals with studios as well, and the battle will be over who can get the good (read: popular) shows/movies first. That means distributors (Hulu, YouTube, MSN, etc.) have to pay for that right.

So it’s going to be a bit of a battle to see who can offer a better deal for first-run episodes of say LOST or Heroes.

And for indie shows that develop a loyal fan base and consistently deliver awesome episodes, like The Guild, the idea of distributors competing with each other to get it first is a good thing.

On a side note, Hulu’s growth is actually an incredible thing for online creators because it’s actually conditioning millions of living room viewers to actually head to to the internet to watch shows, particularly longer-form shows.

Perhaps the indie developers need to band together more. Revision3 is an interesting concept, but in a way it probably makes indie developers feel they are losing too much control. Perhaps we need an indie network where people don’t feel that way?