But here’s something that might bridge the gap:

WSJ reports that Vogue is lending its brand and audience to a reality web series that follows around three young up-and-coming models. Model.Live is set to launch in August.

Highlights from the article:

• 12 weekly 8-minute episodes (96 total minutes)
• The 3 models will blog in addition to their videos, and will connect with viewers on Bebo
• $3 million to produce ($31,000 per minute!)
• Streamed on-demand at Vogue.tv (also distributed at Veoh and Hulu)
• Lead sponsor Express paid “in the low seven figures”
  (Product placement is key. viewers can direct-link to buy the clothing the models are wearing. See: Video Clix writeup)
• Vogue promised Express 83.4 million ad impressions

If you estimate Express’ ad buy at $1.25 million, they’re paying about a $15 CPM. That seems right on target, and perhaps even low. Daisy Whitney reported last month that advertisers pay the networks a $25 CPM for TV-run spots and upwards of $40-$75 for an online run of the same show (though the views are less, there are fewer ad impressions).

If that’s the case, then it seems like Vogue is getting a steal, but WSJ forgot to mention one thing: if Express paid just over a million and the series cost three million, that’s a difference of almost two million dollars that needs to be made in second-tier sponsorships, second-run distribution, and other creative methods (DVD sales? Merch? A percentage of the three models’ career earnings in perpetuity?).

Almost $2 million seems like a big number to overcome after the launch and completion of the show.

But let’s not let the money get us off topic. While newspapers flounder and many popular magazines see subscription rates fall, perhaps a clever online video strategy could keep their enterprises afloat, and in a circular consumption strategy, both satisfy current readers and bring in new ones with fresh, interesting video content.

I think this really works for a couple of reasons:

Skim. Read. Watch. I think a large percentage of the public are now ready to integrate different formats of media. It’s now very commonplace to read about something in a print document, look it up online, read more, and watch a short clip… all connected to the same brand experience. I do this all the time at CNN, for example.

Niche Rules. Content is made for niche audiences. Inside jokes. Specific interests. While much of TV needs to be broad to bring in a big enough audience, most independent online video producers (ahem), would be happy with a smaller, more active and passionate audience that can justify a smaller, more effective production budget.

Audience and Marketing. Magazines have two things that online video really needs, that TV already has down. A core audience and a mechanism to influence them. Part of the reason TV shows get so many viewers is the millions in advertising spent to promote them. Magazines already have a print publication ready to deliver related content, ads, and teasers.

Man, the more I think of it, this seems like a win-win-win. Video producers get paid, audiences get good content, and magazines get additional ad inventory.

Vogue Models a New Reality Series

We all know what happened, but don’t write off our article just yet: quarterlife’s stumble on TV is still an important step for the emerging world of online media…

quarterlife

Creator Marshall Herskovitz illuminates his revolutionary stumble from TV to the Internet and back again.

By Robert Gustafson and Alec McNayr

The revolution was about to begin. Everything was in place. Established writer/producers backed it. Network marketing pushed it. The public relations machine was in full gear. The online community was buzzing. The Writer’s Strike was freshly over, and since so much of the debate centered on online content, the attention of the entire entertainment industry turned to NBC on February 26, 2008.

Write that down. It’s the date everything changed.

Quarterlife premiered as an hour-long television drama—the first directly derived from its online counterpart. Marshall Herskovitz and Ed Zwick—already among the Hollywood elite for their work on television shows like 30something and My So-Called Life and movies like The Last Samurai and Blood Diamond—had created the show expressly for the Internet, but had jumped on the opportunity to move the show to television.

Their decision became the first experiment in discovering how “the future of television” would go. Could the Internet be more than just a farm league for television? Were shows actually portable across platforms? Would broad television exposure significantly expand the audience beyond the MySpace and YouTube users that had already seen the show?

Of course, we know what happened in the days following February 26, 2008. The Nielsen ratings were released, and the premiere Quarterlife episode only netted 3.86 million viewers, a 17-year low for that time slot on NBC. The remaining five hour-long episodes were moved to NBC’s sister cable network Bravo.

Regardless of these results, Quarterlife represents an important marker for an industry in transition. In a speech given at the Harvard Business School just days following the premiere, Herskovitz stated, “When you saw [Quarterlife] on TV, it didn’t look like TV, and when you saw it on the Internet it didn’t look like the Internet.”

Though television and Internet-delivered shows have great disparity between them, they are getting ever closer in both quality and style. And if Quarterlife is the first of its kind, there are great lessons to be learned by screenwriters looking to prepare for the future.

We spoke with Herskovitz himself, just days before Quarterlife’s NBC launch, and he provided thoughtful insights into the origins of the show and where the industry is headed, which, in light of the events of February 26, 2008, become all the more clear.

Piloted Beginnings

Co-creators Herskovitz and Zwick created a pilot called 1/4 Life in 2005, but insist that this iteration of the show has little to do with its predecessor. “People assume that because we did a pilot for ABC, that this is the same project, which I can understand,” said Herskovitz, “but in fact, we threw out that whole story and all the characters and literally started from scratch because we’d felt we had missed.”

They gravitated towards the trend of young people increasingly using the Internet to create and communicate. “Because it was so oriented around the Internet, it just dawned on us that this was the perfect project to make the leap online that we had been talking about.” He expands, “Ed and I had this ongoing joke that two kids out of film school were going to make a $15,000 film, post it on their Web site, make $80 million, and make the studios irrelevant. And we thought, ‘why don’t we be those two kids?’”

Producing for the Web

With no standards or models for success, the two faced many unknowns in deciding how to write and produce this “show concept” for the Web. Yet, unlike most online writer/producers, they had a wealth of experience that helped guide their decisions.

“We decided that we’d write an hour-long show and break it up into six pieces because networks demanded six acts [for commercial breaks], but even that was arbitrary,” he shared, “And even then, when we said that we were going to do eight-minute episodes, people laughed and said that no one watches more than two minutes on the Internet. But I don’t know how to do anything emotional in two minutes; it seemed silly to me. The irony, of course, is that the biggest complaint we get about the online episodes is that they’re too short.”

Herskovitz, however, quickly found that the same experiences that helped him as a television writer hindered him when it came to the Web. “My original thought was that we’d do it for $50,000, own it ourselves, and shoot it as cheaply as possible,” he concedes, “but I realized I couldn’t do what I do for that much. I had been ruined by working in television.”

In the end, the Quarterlife team expanded the budget to $300,000—a figure higher than any other Web show, but far lower than even one episode of a television show. The challenge, then, was to create a show with high production values on a limited budget. “We found that we didn’t need a lot of things, like a costuming designer; the actors brought their own clothes.” He adds, “We confined the shoot to just a few locations with limited lighting setups. When we shot in a car, I was the one holding the camera.”

Though limited by his own budget, Herskovitz relied on the instincts he had spent his whole career honing: “It was a series of hundreds of decisions that sat between ‘what are our resources’ and ‘what do we need to make a show that we can be proud of’ and essentially trying to balance the two.”

Freeing the Script

Herskovitz and his team may have been limited by budget, but after years of writing for television, writing for his own, fully-owned Web series was a refreshing change. “Other than restricting situations, we wrote it just like we would write a movie or TV show, but I was able to shed some of the inhibitions that I had internalized while doing television for twenty years. Inevitably, when you do television, you begin to internalize those voices of doubt.”

The change allowed him to write dialog in a new way, allowing for more natural patterns, over-talking, and age-specific terminology that seemed relevant for the subject matter, but may not have been accepted on television. “There is a strange homogenization that takes place [on TV], whether you like it or not,” he said, “It’s very presentational and, over time, it demands that of you as a writer.”

The style continued through production: “Even as we started shooting, I felt this energy coming off these people—this feeling of reality—it was very exciting.”

The Old Guard Becomes New

After a disappointing one-episode run on NBC, it seemed as though the general television audience was not ready for the style of Quarterlife. But even days before its TV debut, Herskovitz questioned whether or not viewers would connect with the show’s unique voice.

“People could say ‘wow, that’s different’ and be interested in it, or they could just change the channel,” Herskovitz admitted, “but even if our show were to tank on NBC, I’ll be proud that we made the point that creative control and ownership should live with the creators.”

Herskovitz explained that the real breakthrough of Quarterlife was not simply the move from the Internet to TV, but the revolutionary change it signals in the entertainment industry. “From day one, there were two unbreakable conditions: first, we had to own it 100%, and second, we had to have complete creative control. As far as I know, that has never happened in the history of television. [Creative control] is being lost right now, because television is owned by six companies. They own these properties and now exert a level of control they never did before.”

But things are changing, thanks to the power of the Internet. “If you look at what’s happening right now, you’re seeing the dissolution of a whole set of rules for creating entertainment, and we don’t know what will take its place.”

Advice for the Future

Quarterlife itself may not have been a colossal success on NBC, but it does establish a new model for show creation. As studios and networks dump traditional pilot seasons and upfronts in favor of mining for and licensing content, Quarterlife may just be the new standard for serial entertainment.

That said, is a television writing job still the “big prize” for an aspiring writer? Herskovitz answers, “Yes, but [that aspiring writer] would be responding to how it was five and ten years ago. In television, everything you create is owned by somebody else. It is controlled aesthetically by someone else, whereas if you create on the Internet, you have the possibility of having it for yourself—of owning it yourself—and being the creative force behind it.”

Herskovitz acknowledged that creating something like Quarterlife isn’t necessarily a path available for all writers, especially those new to the business, but he affirms that writing, no matter the medium, is one of the best ways to break in.

“There are no undiscovered great writers. There is such a hunger for great writing, and there are so few good writers out there. I actually have a Darwinian view of writing.” He continues with some direct advice: “Write three scripts on spec, and if by the end of that third one, you haven’t felt that energy coming toward you—that excitement, that enthusiasm about finding a new voice—you should find something else to do, because you should feel that. The good writers do. It’s harsh, but it’s just true. You can get somebody to read your work. So, just try it. Just write and see who gets excited about it.”

We may not see another Quarterlife-like show make the jump directly to network television anytime soon, but Herskovitz and Zwick have put yet another chink in the armor of traditional media. The emerging world of online entertainment is still looking for a pathway to legitimacy and Quarterlife will certainly go down as one of many revolutionary battles fought between the ways of the old and new.

The meeting went very well, and the executive we pitched enjoyed the project, but passed in the room with two very good reasons:

1. The message and tone of a show about two guys who flip houses poorly was completely opposite to the message they were trying to give their viewers. (and subsequently pokes fun of who the people who follow their advice – and fail in doing so).

But most importantly…

2. The message and tone of Flipper Nation went against the message of their advertisers.

In any project you create for the Internet (or TV for that matter), it’s vital to realize that any large ad-based distribution platform such as MySpace or Sony’s Crackle are answerable to their advertisers. After all, companies in this space are here to make money through advertising, since subscription models have not worked thusfar.

In A&E’s case, Lowe’s was among one of the many housing-themed sponsors at the time and the last thing they want is to see a show on A&E that might tell potential costumers that they should give up because it’s impossible to win.

Even though that wasn’t exactly our message, satire is a difficult line to tread and giving customers the wrong impression wasn’t a risk they wanted to take.

On the flip side (pun intended), Axe deodorant spray took a risk to host the “World’s Dirtiest Film Festival” contest on collegehumor.com – and it paid off! Axe, as a brand, was loose enough for new media because online comedy fits their “anything goes” attitude. Sure, people were up in arms about it, but it worked.

So, as we look into re-launching Flipper Nation, the questions we’ll be asking ourselves are:

1. Who would be willing to advertise on our show?
2. Should we even bother approaching brands who cannot take a risk (or a joke)?

In it, Alec speaks about the events over this past year (many of which I’ve been present for) that have lead him to the place where he is now. See his list below:

“- I started a blog before I really had anything to say. (But now I do.)
- I filmed a web series for no money before there really was a market for it. (But now there is, and now I have proven expertise.)
- I attended mixers and conferences just to meet people in the online video industry. (And now I know people.)
- I participated on blogs and message boards. (Which led to conversations.)
- I emailed people who were getting publicity. (They were happy to talk to me.)
- I got a gig writing about new media for Script Magazine. (It gave me a legitimate reason to talk to more established people.)“

What I take from Alec’s post is how everything he’s done over the past few years could be seen as a calculated move and set him (and us) up for success, but this list is just a portion of his past work. Alec’s been at his craft for quite some time and ALL of it has had a direct effect on where he is now.

For example, when Alec was working as a web designer fresh out of college, he didn’t know that he would be using those skills to design and build websites for his own online series (and production company). When he was running his improvisational theatre group, he didn’t realize how the exercises would directly influence his writing, directing and producing skills. And finally, when he started this blog, he didn’t realize how writing about new media for the past year would ignite such a passion for this emerging medium, and more importantly, makes him an “expert” in the medium.

Next, throw in my experiences that are mostly in the development, production, and industry relations and the two of us are quite a team. And once we combine our talents and unique experiences, not only does our company worth go up, but we gain leverage over others in the industry. But it would be foolish to think that it happened quickly. We’ve been individually and collectively working on gaining leverage in the industry (whether we knew it or not) for years, and just now I’m seeing it in the producing gigs I’m getting and the shows that Space Shank is selling.

Our goal is to keep on gaining more and more leverage with each project that we work on. The more leverage, the more influence, and the sooner we can start paying our bills with the work we do.

Here are the many ways to accrue leverage:

Money – The king of all leverage – either money to produce your product, or perhaps attaching a person or brand which has the ability to make money
Knowledge – For example: who is looking to buy your type of script?
People/Friends – Whether you have an agent, manager or an executive at a network they often have that inside information.
Timing – Self explanatory and unreliable, but a few people have gotten lucky.
Experience (Age & Wisdom) – If you work in the business long enough, people trust you faster. Or maybe you produced a successful movie before – either financially or critically acclaimed.
Product that’s in Demand – This could be placed under “Timing.” But you could gain leverage this way by thinking ahead or do what many big businesses do: cornering the market
Favors – Self explanatory ;)
Public Relations & Marketing – Doesn’t work all the time, but good PR always helps any goal.
Technology – Specializing in the next useful tools

Although some of these tactics work better than others, what’s important is to be aware of all of them. The next step then is to take a look at your past to see what leverage you’ve already accumulated, then start working more, producing more, participate more, and learn as much as possible.

He outlines the criteria for the death threats (plans, motives, feelings afterwards) and the prize for his “death threat of choice” (a restraining order). The video has been viewed over 150,000 times (150,001 if you watch below).

Talk about viral. There are 293 response videos to his request, detailing the many ways he can expect to be maimed, tortured, and even killed.

What an ironic commentary on our time that Neil, an internet celebrity, uses YouTube to encourage pseudo-stalking for purposes of comedy, statement, and/or publicity.

If nothing else, it’s an interesting case study on engaging user interaction.

Digital production company 60Frames (backed by $3.5 million in venture capital and former UTA agent Brent Weinstein) launched its first slate of shows last week. It marks, to my knowledge, the first significant independent network of shows on the Web. 60Frames seeks to provide its content creators with all the tools needed to succeed as creators/writers/producers, from advertising connections to production equipment.

Brent Weinstein provides more detail in an interview on Veoh’s Guru:

I’ve watched the first episode of each of the shows, and I actually liked them. I’m usually a pretty harsh critic of online fare, but I’m quite impressed with the concepts of each — Brent must have a great sense of getting the “hook” right.

I’m interested in learning more about how effective 60Frames’ marketing is, so I’ve also tracked the publicly-available audience numbers after one week. (More after the jump.)

A quick synopsis of each show:

Black Version
Memorable scenes from movies, only starring black actors with new, more racist dialog. Hilarious. The first episode, a spoof on Silence of the Lambs is pretty funny. It should be a good “one-off” series, where you don’t have to follow the action from week to week.

GILF
A 37-year-old grandmother’s antics in her neighborhood and life. The name alone should draw traffic, but it will take some hefty character development to keep me coming back.

Douchebag Beach
My choice for sleeper hit. Three toolboxes try to score ladies in New Jersey. The Axe body spray scene in the first one is genius. These characters are so shameless; I can’t wait for them to really get in trouble later in the series. I hope the creators allow the worst to happen.

Erik the Librarian
An odd, almost existential series about a nerdy librarian. It’s clearly unique and clever, and was created by Brent Forrester, a writer on The Office, so it could feature a revolving door of name talent (Mindy Kaling co-stars in the first two).

Who What Wear
I had thought this a comedy. Imagine my disappointment when I finished the first episode without a laugh. It’s a simple yet well-done style and fashion show. I’m clearly not the target market, but I wonder how this show will ultimately differentiate itself from similar shows on TV… how is this unique for online delivery?

Phake TV
It bills itself as a spoof on reality TV, but I’m not sure where it’s going yet. The first episode is both crass and violent — not really my style, but certainly a commentary on shocking behaviors of faux-celebrities…

Cockpit
Our friends at Big Fantastic created this comedy about all the naughty things that shouldn’t happen in a jet’s cockpit. From what I can tell, the entire series will take place in the actual cockpit, so the shady characters and dialog will carry the story.

Numbers

Finally, a look into the first week after 60Frames’ launch.

A big caveat before looking at these numbers: they don’t include views from blip.tv (blip keeps stats like these private to researchers like me). The problem is that blip.tv handles a significant amount of 60Frames’ viewership: all the videos for all 7 shows on the 60Frames.com web site, RSS feeds, iTunes podcasts, and even on Bebo. So, don’t consider these numbers definitive — only a general measure of marketing effectiveness.

Thoughts

• You’ll see that YouTube provides the bulk of the views. I wonder how Black Version got so many views more than its counterparts. Could that be duplicated?
• 60Frames.com lists MySpace as a “distribution partner,” which I interpret as a deal to secure consistent home-page features. Yet, the numbers are dreadfully low for the social net… I would have secured exposure on MySpace prior to launch, especially for Douchebag Beach. I wonder what the story is?
• Why isn’t Crackle included as a distribution partner? We recently got big numbers with Hollywood Rumble on Crackle. It seems like a prime place for comedy.
• Why don’t these series have their own stand-alone web sites? I would think they would benefit from secondary content (blogging, photos, etc.). 60Frames’ marketing model, it seems, is to rely on the subscription tools available within each of the video distributor sites (for now).

So, 128,000 views in one week (beyond its primary blip.tv distribution). Certainly not a landslide, but I don’t think 60Frames is looking for an immediate revolution. They’re experimenting like everyone else. But they’re a year ahead of most financed online producers, and they’re positioning themselves for success. I’m looking forward to their next slate of shows.

Based on Marshall’s response via comment, the numbers mentioned in the article are in question, but the primary issue is clear. The success of an online series is still a crapshoot. It takes some unknown combination of show quality, creator celebrity, viewer buzz, and offline promotion.

My comment on the story:

It seems like there are some questions on the surface issues of this story, but the themes mentioned are perfectly clear.

There is still no real success model for video serial content online. Even when the “big boys” from film and television do something for the web, it’s still an educated guess, and, as Marshall himself points out in his comment, the results of Quarterlife are positive, but not consistently so.

But I think that’s a good thing — it forces him (and all of us following along) to analyze two important things: a) what builds an audience immediately (you might call this “viral-ness” or “one-time attention”) and b) what builds an audience over time. I assume that most people reading this site are interested in the latter.

I think two things really affect the popular of online content — one is basic (consistency) and one is nebulous (value).

When considering the world of online video, consistency is rare. There are no standards of production quality, delivery schedules, writing, acting, authenticity. It’s all over the place. So, setting an expectation in the mind of your viewer and then consistently delivering on that expectation is a huge advantage over 99.9% of the market. This is an important lesson I learned from Ask A Ninja — their production values are not amazing, but their voice and delivery schedule are. I also learned this lesson on my web series, Flipper Nation. The production value was good and people responded, but we didn’t deliver new episodes to meet demand. So we lost out on an opportunity. Good learning experience. As for Quarterlife, the jury is out on whether or not a large population of people want to watch the show, but I appreciate Marshall taking a huge risk and promising to deliver regularly on his promises (high production value and regular, longer-form delivery). That’s a huge step in bringing all of our games to a higher level.

Secondly, value. This is harder to strategize. How do you tell your viewers that you value their watching your stuff? I bet that Marshall and his team know that, amongst the viewing audience of Quarterlife, there is a small audience of hardcore fans. His history and his paid-for promotions brought them in. And so, his work should be to incentivize this small group to become show evangelists. To promote the Quarterlife brand, to grow the overall numbers. To build the conversation. To reward them for doing so. Increased interactivity, increased exposure, celebrity, or access. These are all structures made for your core fans (not the casual viewer).

So, how do we build our core audience to go out and grow our overall numbers? Well, that’s the question really being asked in this article, I think. Sorry for the long rant. I’d love to hear how are other people here engaging their core fans and growing their overall numbers?

I agree with that. Delivering videos for 80 straight days is a big feat, and one that put the producers/creators on the map. While online media is definitely a growing market, with a growing audience, there is still a lot of room for experimentation, because even the “big guns” aren’t making a killing yet. I would argue that Prom Queen drew an audience with a loyal core fan base, and the real challenge for online media will be keeping those viewers/participants engaged as time moves on.

We’re competing against user-generated videos of crotch shots. In that kind of game, it’s a slow roll, where consistency and quality will win out over time.

The article covers how having a successful video series means going beyond just posting on the Youtubes and Revvers. A successful online series has to find not just fans of your work, but “evangelists:” passionate people who will watch and, most importantly, spread the word about your project.

We also spoke to blip.tv’s Dina Kaplan who talks about the importance of strategic partnering in the success of an online series. I’m sure we’ll hear more from her tomorrow as she will be speaking at The Daily Reel’s Online Video Conference that Alec and I are attending.

Pretty good timing for this “digital Hollywood” conference, with the writers strike set for midnight tomorrow and all. Wouldn’t you say?