I got this idea from James Gunn a couple of months ago and decided to join Formspring! I’ve already answered a couple dozen questions, but I’m game for more!! Ask me…

Last night Rudy and I had a very candid conversation with one of the folks at Tubefilter. He’s a great guy that I’ve known since early 2007 and he’s never fed me any bullshit. As a result, he finally talked with us about what’s been happening behind the scenes.

Firstly, I’m not going to reveal the details of our conversation since he made it clear that this wasn’t something Tubefilter wanted to discuss online. As forward-thinking as they are with their online presence, they feel it’s important to keep certain business affairs off the web. Completely understandable. But, if you read Liz Miller’s article on NewTeeVee today, you’ll see the gist of what we talked about.

Over the past few months there’s been a lot of bullshit surrounding the Streamys and yesterday’s blog post just reflected that I can’t take any more of it. You know the expression “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”? At this point, I feel like they’re trying to fool us a fourth time and it’s really trying the community’s patience. Some of the community wants to fight, some want to forget, all want to move on.

Here’s what I think should happen:

1. Tubefilter should stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes and be completely honest with us from now on.
2. IAWTV members should appoint a new chair and board of directors (not necessarily 100% new, but definitely approved by the community) made up of a devoted selection of creators and executives that have the time to be involved. I don’t think it’s necessary that Tubefilter have two people on the board of directors, as long as they have one liaison for the Streamys.
3. The two organizations should work together to plan the 2011 Streamys.

Yes, I really did just say that.

From what I’ve heard and seen over the past few weeks, Tubefilter (although they never properly apologized the way we wanted them to) has their tails between their legs and wants to prove that they can still make a great award show. I think we should give them a chance… but under the supervision of the IAWTV. I would like to see the Chair (or an appointed board member) overseeing all the decisions made for next year, and members of the IAWTV volunteering to help with the preparations.

This may not be what either Tubefilter or the IAWTV want to do, but a compromise has to be made in order for us (the community) to move on to other issues (e.g. union agreements, IMDb credits, etc.). I think that giving them another chance, but under heavy supervision, is a fair idea. What do you think?

[Above photo (cc) Matthew W. Jackson]

We need to talk…

It’s been over three weeks and the web series community has been waiting to voice their opinions to the International Academy of Web Television and the Streamys organizers about the future of the Academy and the awards. I sent an email a couple of weeks ago to Michael Wayne, Chair of the IAWTV, to suggest a meeting and he responded saying they will be holding two meetings (in NY and LA) very soon to address our concerns.

Since then, I’ve heard rumblings that the IAWTV may be trying to separate themselves from the Streamys organizers and “taking back” the Streamys. Sounds great! The thing is… Tubefilter were a big part in creating not only the Streamys, but also the IAWTV itself. As a member, I believe the IAWTV should be independent and representing our community interests. And frankly, if Tubefilter hadn’t of founded the IAWTV, our community advocacy group New Media West would’ve founded something similar instead!

Today Tubefilter announced the launch of a new site called Rebuild the Trust. At first glance this looks like an admirable idea, but when you look at it closer you can see the agenda. This is a preemptive strike against the Board of Directors of the IAWTV.

Some quick points (because, otherwise, this would turn into a waaay longer blog post):

• Why a new site? Control. The ideal solution to the Streamys problem would’ve been to create a community discussion board on IAWTV.org, but since Tubefilter has already lost control over the IAWTV, it seems clear why they created a whole new site.
• What is the “Manifesto of Change”? Politics. It’s a manifesto created by Tubefilter, but written to sound like it was created by the community. If they get lots of “signatures” they can then use it as leverage in negotiations with the IAWTV.
• Isn’t Point 1 of the manifesto ironic? Totally. Why would we trust the people who established the close door policies in the first place? It’s time for the community to take charge, without having words being placed in their mouths.
• Why is Point 4 of the manifesto a really bad idea? More control. Privately a lot of community members agree that the Streamys organizers (Tubefilter) is to blame for the StreamyFail. That said, why would we tell them it’s a good idea to “officially” partner the IAWTV with the Streamy Awards? In my opinion, the Streamy Awards still have a lot to prove and making a formal agreement this soon is a bad decision. We need to give this relationship time and figure out what works along the way.
• Why now? Preemptive strike. The IAWTV is finally having meetings with its’ members (today there was a meeting in NY, and a meeting is being planned for LA next week). It seriously looks like Tubefilter launched the site today as a way to place blame on the IAWTV first and to get reactionary responses from their readers before listening to members’ opinions at the meetings.

The real community to me is the non-profit that is the IAWTV. Granted, they’ve been slow to get a decent web site together and it takes them forever to plan meetings, but these (among other issues) are all concerns that will be addressed at the upcoming meetings. I ask that you do not react to the new Tubefilter site thinking it’s the real opinion of the community. And be sure to read and understand the manifesto thoroughly, and make sure you understand the intentions behind it, before you decide to sign it. I will not.

I look forward to the IAWTV members meeting in LA. I don’t have the details yet, but I’m sure it will be a very heated and productive day.

The Streamy Awards took place last Sunday and the photos and videos have been slowly rolling out over the past week. Below are some of my favorite images taken of me, Rudy Jahchan (writer of A Comicbook Orange) and Josh Allard (director of A Comicbook Orange).

And last, but not least… the annual Galacticast intro re-creation (and boobie grab):

Sunday’s Streamy Awards has been replaying in my head for the past two days and I’ve been thinking a lot about the self-deprecating jokes made at our industry’s expense. One target in particular has been bugging me, the notion that no one is making money in web video. This bothers me because I’ve been working in the industry for almost 5 years and have seen most of my friends go on to make a living on web video, not to mention myself.

A comment on yesterday’s Streamys post by Amanda Congdon sparked a new thought in my head. She said,

“…many of us *are* making $$$ in web tv (or in my case mobile tv)… and the jokes just aren’t that funny anymore. They seemed very 2007.”

Very 2007 indeed. And 2008. And 2009. And 2010!

The reason there’s an ongoing joke that no one’s making money in web TV is because every year there are more and more people coming into this industry (awesome), but they don’t know anything about the history and past achievements of others in the industry (shame). Anyone who only started paying attention to web video after The Guild and Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog wouldn’t know how Congdon, the first Rocketboom anchor, got picked up to make video blogs for ABC in 2006, or how Wallstrip was acquired by CBS for five million dollars in 2007, or how A Comicbook Orange and The Jetset Show (now Epic Fu) were both picked up for license agreements under Next New Networks in 2007.

And those deals were just the beginning. Every year more people are launching web shows and more people are getting offers of licensing deals and buyouts. Why, then, are people still asking us to show them the money?

The reason is simple: It is in the nature of the Web TV industry for people to start with no money. As long as there are new people starting their own show, there will ALWAYS be people making content for free.

Our industry, like many others, is like climbing a ladder. You have to prove you can make good quality, engaging content before you can make a dime. Whether you want to join the YouTube Partner Program, get your show picked up as the next Crackle series, or sell your TV pilot to the SyFy channel, you need to start at the bottom like everyone else. If you’ve never made anything before, how is anyone supposed to fund your seedy idea? You need to show them the content before they can show you the money.

And, sure, not everyone will be able to climb the ladder, but that’s life. If you’re having difficulty finding an audience, sit back and take a good look at what you’re doing. Is your target audience online? Where can you go to find them? What can you do to get them to watch? All valid questions that I can’t answer for you.

With all that in mind, let us all stop making snide comments about how there is no money in web video. If you’re not making any money, you need to be asking yourself why. Does your content suck? Does your pitch document suck? Do you need to cut down the number of times you put “vagina” in your script? Maybe. One thing is for sure, Web TV is a very public growing process and, like any other career you’re passionate about, you have to work hard at it to truly excel.

Keep on truckin’.

[Above image courtesy of Kevin Dooley]