With Siri TV, Apple Will Dismantle the TV Networks

Steve Jobs died without fully transforming television, but the day after before he passed away, Apple unveiled Siri, its natural language interface. Though it’s currently only embedded in the new iPhone 4S, Siri could eventually change the face of the TV industry.

Notice I said “TV industry.”

Most observers and analysts believe that Siri’s voice commands could eliminate the need for those clunky TV remote controls. With the blurring and exponential proliferation of television and Web content, telling your TV what you’d like to watch, instead of scrolling through a nearly infinite number of program possibilities, makes a lot more sense.

But from my perspective, Siri’s greatest impact won’t ultimately be on users, or on device manufacturers (though they certainly risk losing market share to Apple). It will be on the TV industry’s content creators and packagers. Why? Because a voice-controlled television interface will fundamentally disrupt the six-decade-old legacy structure of networks, channels and programs. And that’s a legacy that — until now, at least — has been carried forward from analog to digital.

There’s an important underlying precedent here.

If the Internet can be generalized to have one effect across every industry that moves online, that effect would be disaggregation. Choices go from finite to infinite. Navigation goes from sequential to random access. And audiences choose content by the item far more than by the collection. We’ve gone from the packaged and channelized to the unbound and itemized. Autonomous albums are fragmented into songs; series into clips; and magazines and newspapers into articles and individual photos.

As much as we may think that has already happened with video, it is nothing compared to the great leveling that will occur in the voice-controlled living room. Voice-controlled TV means direct navigation to individual episodes, programs and clips. And it will almost certainly lead to a discernible deconstruction of the network and channel structure — not to mention the decomposition of even the aggregated marketplaces like Netflix, Hulu and YouTube.

Here’s the simple reason: No one is going to sit on their couch and say, “Siri, show me NBC’s ‘Community.’” In a voice-activated world, monikers like “NBC” become useless. They don’t stand for anything meaningful to the consumer. They’re just remnants of a decrepit channel structure that’s unraveling. And, in the end, they’ll simply connote the fast-fading allure of mid-20th century mass appeal.

To be sure, the TV majors will lose much of their ability to realize network effects. Already, you’re hearing less about “lead in” and “lead out.” What you are hearing more about, however, is disconnected videos. A program on YouTube, for instance, will sit on a level voice-controlled playing field with an NBC show, and that field will soon become even more level, because Siri will eliminate the menus that structure the artificial hierarchies of content collections.

So how will we be able to get network effects back in video? Let’s look at four possible ways:

  • Branded Content — Players can build a strong brand that stands for something with their audiences. Break.com, Discovery and Oprah are all meaningful and build long-term customer loyalty. (“Siri, show me new TED Talks.”)
  • Curation — Brand the collection with a curation strategy so that the curator’s name and stamp of approval means something to the audience. (“Siri, show me Jason Hirschhorn’s latest movie suggestions.”)
  • Social — In the fully social world that we expect to see, focusing on the virality of content means you tap the human distribution network and social operating system. (“Siri, show me what videos my friends are watching.”)
  • Personal — We’ve already seen the extraordinary value of well-tuned personalized recommendations, with Netflix’s notable prize and other famed stories of the benefits of great recommendations. Increasingly, our own patterns of individual videos and the brands we affiliate with, along with recommendations from friends, will be combined into personalized recommendations we won’t even have to ask for. I have no doubt that Siri will be as good a “Genius” as iTunes is at recommending what else to watch. Ultimately, in the age of data, whoever knows the most about us will be able to give us the best experience.

Beyond disaggregation, personalization is ultimately the most powerful consumer value of digital media. My mother’s TV experience was to walk over to her TV set and turn a dial to select among three channels to satisfy her individuality. But in the next generation, no two people will receive the same recommendations from the millions of content choices available.

Before he died, Jobs now famously told Walter Isaacson, his biographer, that he had finally cracked the TV code. It’s unclear what Jobs meant, what this entailed or what he thought it would lead to in the years to come. So, barring further posthumous disclosure, Jobs’s own predictions of his ripple effects will be a media mystery for now.

One thing that’s clear, though, is that Jobs’s Siri will start the dismantling — or creative destruction — of the TV industry as we’ve known it for the last 60 years.

This post originally stated that Siri was unveiled the day after Steve Jobs passed away. It’s been corrected to reflect that the announcement actually occurred the day before.

Ben Elowitz (@elowitz) is co-founder and CEO of Wetpaint, a next-generation media company that is reinventing the media model on the social web. Ben is also author of Digital Quarters, a blog about the future of digital media. Prior to Wetpaint, Elowitz co-founded Blue Nile (NILE).


comments so far. Add yours.

  • KevinUSA USA2011

    first i want to say, i have nothing against apple.

    the idea of controlling a tv with voice is basically as old as the tv itself. And microsoft is already doing that with kinect. And microsoft even offers real tv, with allowing to log in with our comcast and other cable and satellite accounts. The media doesn’t write about it, because it is not apple.

    Now the thing is, disrupting the tv networks like what happend to music can hurt the industry. Look at music, albums were what made the money, now they suck, because nobody is buying them. If the same happens to tv, there will be like 2 good shows per network (not saying that the dance crap music is good).

    And what happens to quality, the quality of music changed with the lossy compression songs that are sold online. although that dance crap sounds awful anyway, because no one of those idiots now how to mix a song. so wether buying the cd or buying it online, it sounds bad either way,

    Just think of this, how do you think the shows will be paid for? Paying per show doesn’t bring in enough money, and syndication will be hurt even more. or local tv stations?

  • Patrick

    I think it is important to note, this technological leap is not the end of TV Networks.  The network model began dismantling with the arrival of Cable TV programming over half a century ago.  The process has been slow to be sure, but with advanced in digital technology, web distribution, etc we have gotten to the point where no one really thinks, “let me see what is on NBC tonight.”

    The concept of a big four networks the likes of ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC are certainly coming to a slow, long drawn out painful death.  However, more nimble less bulky conglomerates have proven, even in the age of incredible amounts of fragmentation, a “network” can exist.  Some of the best examples of this are TLC, Food Network, AMC and now the rise of original programming on TV Land.  

    Voice and motion control with certainly add clarity and “social” recommendation into video content distribution, but to imagine that a studio or “unit” will not package together content because I can no speak to my video delivery device is a bit far-fetched.  Will independent producers exist. Absolutely, but that will not change the fact that other content creators will look to pool and aggregate resources to generate efficiency in breaking barriers.  

    I watch Breaking Bad, because my sister is the sound editor on the show, and one night three years ago I asked on Facebook, “I need a new TV show to watch.” I was crowd souring my friends and family. My sister gave me the lowdown and she did work on the show so absolutely I gave it a whirl.  I gave Walking Dead and now Hell on Wheels a chance, because AMC provided me GREAT entertainment with Breaking Bad. 
    Will AMC last forever with excellent programming, who knows, my guess is “networks” will rise and fall in blocks of time.  But to suggest they are going to disappear completely because of voice control grossly underestimates the way quality content comes to be.  

  • http://twitter.com/_alexcabrera Alex Cabrera

    There’s a difference between an error in using a commenting system and being a paid, professional technology writer for the freaking Wall Street Journal getting basic facts wrong in the first sentence of an article. 

  • Anonymous

    hey thanks!

  • Yacko

    Channel surfing may be a special case. Siri is meant to get us out of the rut of going over the same path of rotating through and accepting 57 channels and nothing on. The point is to ask for what you are interested in. Anyone for English-subtitled Romanian evening news?

  • Yacko

    “using a remote will be easier in the long run”

    For some things. I wouldn’t bet voice is the only interaction. And you oldsters and your analog whatzits. Glance not read works for digital too, your mind is not trained.

  • Yacko

    Stop speaking in that filthy Scottish accent!

  • Anonymous

    ? ? ? ?

    Announced  or   Released 

  • Anonymous

    MicroSoft had also long released the tablet before the iPad.

    Whats your point!

  • Anonymous

    A terrific, insightful and articulate article, thanks.

  • Anonymous

    Siri is beta product.

    Voice recognition and even more so its semantic interpetation is notoriously slippery and complex to perfect.

    Siri being put in the wild as Beta serves the purpose of accelerating it leaning curve by mass statistical interaction with real world users.

    Be patient the child is just starting the process of acquiring language skills!

  • Anonymous

    Siri won’t/isn’t able to do that.  While Siri might be able to learn what you like, it is still just a database.  It learns what you like based on the information it stores on Apple databases.  It has no way to interact with the network databases, nor will it.  Why would the networks want to help Apple destroy their brands?  

    The author hasn’t thought any of this through.

  • scott cochrane

    Whether I ask for “Community” or “NBC’s Community”, I am still getting the content that has been created and provided by NBC.  How does my not saying their name in my request change the fact that they own,and therefore are getting paid, to show me what I want? 

  • Anonymous

    And your predictions on the iPad were

    ? ? ?

    Steve Dumb – Semblance Smart

    Your counterpoints were so well articulated.

    Thanks to your effortful participation the conversation has been vastly enriched.

  • Anonymous

    One word: Signing

    Everyone knows that most people prefer sign language over the clumsy talking thing!

  • Anonymous

    The point being missed is obvious.  People don’t channel surf because they can’t find what they want to watch.  They channel surf because they don’t know what they want to watch.  People use TV as a distraction.  They flip through stations looking for something interesting.  What Siri must do to meet that challenge is first determine what the user “likes” and then crowd source trusted content in real time.  This is an enormous challenge that, quite frankly, is very unlikely to me met by a firm like Apple with no expertise in that field.  See “Ping”. 

    I understand what people want Siri to be but the odds of it being that are very, very slim.  Microsoft, with close ties to Facebook or Google with its engineering prowess, will get there first.

  • Anonymous

    You’re speaking to it wrong!

  • Yacko

     While I acknowledge your objection, I am not as sure as you that there is no way to creatively undo the Gordian knot. Otherwise what’s the point of disruptiveness?

  • Anonymous

    What I’m saying is Siri is probably not the answer because the question isn’t “where can I find what I want to watch?” The question is “what do I want to watch because, frankly, I don’t know”.

    This is why hand held remote controls make sense.

  • Anonymous

    SO OK – lets take a second to wonder if we really do want to talk to our TVs?

    Yes – pointing and/or clicking devices are more convenient when activating a limited palette of continually repeated behaviours within a small fixed environment like a computer OS but language is much more effective at communicating and isolating intent within a vast set of possibilities.

    Directly accessing any particular piece of available media across the entire internet via transparent, AI based, search is a completely different kettle of fish, much better suited to language processing.

    When you ask for say, My.Favourite.Show-year2-episode5, or you ask for say, a list all documentaries on ants, you ask infrequently then you watch for a relatively long period of time before making a new request. Voice control serves a different job function than controlling your mouse or file system which would indeed be incessantly annoying under voice control.Secondly

    Whats your point? MicroSoft also built tablets a long time ago yet the iPad thunders on!

    Amusing how so many don’t even have a second to wonder why.

  • Anonymous

    A passive agressive ad-hominem word-play attack on the author.

    Thanks for your extensive efforts at enriching our conversation.

  • Anonymous

    Siri can help when it’s tied into your previous viewing habits. This was covered in the article. 

  • Anonymous

    Maybe the abysmal state of the current Google TV?

  • Anonymous

    Good point!

    The article would have been muchly improved by widening the scope to include xbox voice search.

    As you point out the race is on to polish this voice search Apple.(pun intended)

    I’ve never been a big MicroSoft fan but I think they are really starting to shine via their new interface technologies.

    I presently have an Android based phone but I am seriously curious to try out the new windows phone interface. It seems clean, functional and informative.

  • Anonymous

    People don’t channel surf because they can’t find what they want to watch. They channel surf because they don’t know what they want to watch. If I know I want to watch Breaking Bad I know what time it airs and where. I don’t, nor do I believe many others need Siri to find programs I/they know I want to watch. Where Siri would be useful is finding things I don’t know I want to watch. But how would Siri do that? The answer is it can’t, not really, because even I don’t know I what I want to watch.

    The point I’m trying to make is most people LIKE their current TV experience. The author makes the case people don’t like flipping through channels and Siri would fix that problem. This is a solution looking for a problem.

  • Anonymous

    I think the point is that if you have a history of watching certain types of shows, it can suggest new shows that are of a similar genre. Of course it’s not a sure bet that you’ll like it, but there’s certainly a useful level of correlation that can be made. For instance, someone who watches Dancing with the Stars is way less likely to want to watch the new season of Swap Loggers versus someone who watches Coast Guard Alaska.

    I’ve met very few people who like their current TV experience. From cable box UI to unintuitive remote controls, I’ve actually NEVER heard someone say they like the way they interact with their TV. It’s always to opposite. That’s my anecdotal evidence at least.

    Also, I think there’s a common misperception as to how a Siri controlled television would work. I seriously doubt there would be NO remote control. Moving up and down through lists of movies you want to browse through would be much simpler with an actual remote rather than saying “down”, “down” “down”. Where Siri comes in if for things like “put on the giants game”, or “what new comedy shows are on right now?”, or “setup a season pass to Survivor”. These are the things that currently require trudging through horrible UI to accomplish. The rest of the basic stuff like pause/play, or up/down can be handled with a remote – one similar to the existing AppleTV remote, but with a mic and bluetooth 4.0 built in.

  • Anonymous

    Ben Elowitz ranks among the legions of media pundits who for years have predicted the demise of mass media… even as network television continues to deliver the largest and most reliable aggregation of mass audience among all American media.  Why does my wife wait until the network airs “It’s a Wonderful Life” instead of watching our video copy?  Because network TV viewing satisfies a tribal need to bond with other viewers in the shared experience… to talk about the telecast the next morning at the watercooler.  All media evolves, but there always will be a place for a unifying mass medium.  That’s network TV, and that’s the reason why it always will be available to All Americans, free, over the air, despite the musings of technocrat futurist wanna-bes like Mr. Elowitz.

  • Anonymous

    Oh, please don’t misunderstand, I’m not suggesting people like cable. I think most people HATE cable and the lousy user experience. I’m suggesting people like channel surfing. They like flipping channels
    during commercials. To channel surf you only need and “up” and “down” button. As for “find a Giants game” I think most people who watch sports know what stations a Giants game can be found. I don’t think people need (or want) to talk to their TV to get there. Heck, I don’t even think people want to talk to their phones. This is why the novelty of Siri has worn off for many. But that is another argument.

    All of that being said, I think voice, when it does inevitably get to the living room, will be won by companies with more experience connecting databases as that is what is required to really make it work. For the record, I have a Boxee Box and I have long since cut the cord to cable.

  • Anonymous

    To each his own, but I rarely ever channel surf. Most of the time I’m watching DVR’d content, so the commercials are fast-forwarded. As to the longevity of voice activated features, time will tell. It’s still in it’s infancy. I think there are plenty of applications where it makes sense, but not all. Saying things like “wake me up in an hour” is vastly simpler and quicker than unlocking your phone, going to the alarm app, looking at what time it is, setting the hours and minutes, enabling the alarm, and locking your phone again. Examples like this are why I think it’s more than a  gimmick. Now gesture controlled television where you wave your hand back and forth to scroll, etc… THAT seems gimmicky to me. 

  • Anonymous

    You don’t need voice for channel surfing just use a genius playlist based on shows you already like and then have it shuffle them in 30 second increments until you wait stop or go back or next.

  • Anonymous

    Announced Oct 4, 2011. Released two weeks later.

  • Anonymous

    I like the direction Microsoft is going with the interface but I think it is a mistake to rope in the cable companies. Might work as a transition box though with a foot in each camp.

  • Anonymous

    I think the problem with Google’s offering was that I don’t need to search my TV. I already know my DVR content is trapped on my cable DVR. I just want to take it with me where ever I go to watch whenever I have time.

    For example have my cable company scan my DVR and stream from their servers based on where I am in the program like you can with Kindle and iBook eBooks.

    At some point after that, I just want to have one channel that does nothing but show commercials for things coming up that I haven’t ever seen.

  • Anonymous

    After multi-touch tech, Kinect and Siri are the best stuff ever bought by their respective companies.

    I think a higher resolution sensor that detects smaller gestures would be good in combination with Tell Me or the Nuance-driven Siri AI with the gesture stuff Apple has been working on.

  • Anonymous

    I agree. Even in a disinter-mediated market, there will be content aggregation networks organized to attract the eyeball they can sell to the advertiser. Instead of showing on thing at one time, they can show all the same thiongs that people like but at different times in different places.

    Right now there are often 5-6 things I might want to watch at 9PM on a Monday or Thursday. But because they insist on a schedule for events that aren’t even live most of those programs get canceled.

  • Patrick

    That is interesting point on multiple content choices on simultaneously.     

  • Anonymous

    really8888 wrote:
    “They flip through stations looking for something interesting.”

    Flipping channels is slow and tedious. The selection is abysmal.

    Better to flip by voice command through a universe of mood driven cataegories like
    sitcoms
    war documentaries
    reality shows
    music concerts
    etc. . . . 

    It is not that big a challenge as both the search and the crowd sourcing functions can be backend scraped off many online services including Google, Bing and others. Like statistics will quickly accumulate direct within the voice command system itself

    The real challenge is a clean simple consistent mass consumer interface.

    That is Apple’s core business model.

    Granted – MS has been really pulling up its sock lately with innovative interface plays. They are back in the consumer game. Lets all hope that they can keep up the good work but they need some fresh new leadership to really excel.

  • Anonymous

    There are a million ways to improve television interfaces and the remote control; Siri isn’t one of them.

    30 Rock had an episode years ago that explained why: http://video.aol.com/video/a-n.....3666431115 (sorry for the forever-long commercial beforehand!)

    Also, the concept of Siri TV is already a joke: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hard.....ugh-/17220

  • Anonymous

    Based on your participation to “enrich” the conversation, I am beginning to wonder if you *are* the author.

  • Anonymous

    Why is SIRI even being mentioned? Standard speech-to-text programming, available on most computer systems for the past 20 years and getting better every day, can already do this. The only thing missing is the engine => TV control mechanism, which requires TV manufacturers changing their manufacturing process a bit. SIRI is not better-suited to this task, in any technological way. Can it really be true that Apple was just waiting to buy a speech engine company for all of their TV plans to come true? Or is this just an article that needed an angle, and so brought SIRI into the picture for marginally-relevant reasons? Seriously … SIRI for voice-controlling a TV? Wow.

  • http://twitter.com/dcdjason Jason Hart

    It is not the interface that is holding together the networks. It is that the networks are paying the content providers millions of dollars for their shows. Networks will not go away until other companies can pay content creators as much as the networks do. It currently takes hundreds of people and millions of dollars to produce a high quality television show. I don’t see how using something like Siri to find what you want to watch is going to change those dynamics.

  • Anonymous

    did the xbox not come out with voice controls a week ago. apparently the writer doesnt have an xbox kinect.

  • Anonymous

    Regardless of how you rationalize it, what you and range are saying is that others have to live to your lofty standards, but you don’t.

    It’s easy to smash a window, harder to make or even install one. Criticizing the ideas of others is easy; coming up with new ideas of your own, not so much. Picking on petty details is common; making a substantive contribution to the discussion is, alas, rarer.

    By the way, Ben Elowitz, the author of the article, has no personal direct affiliation with the Wall Street Journal. And you have the gall to lecture about “getting basic facts wrong.” Are either of you ever going to get anything, however brief, completely right?

  • Scott Goldman

    Siri has the potential to do even more than what is predicted here.  I blogged extensively about why, for example, I think the success of Siri will force Google to buy Sprint (it’s at http://thewirelesswizard.blogspot.com/ if you’re interested).  When Jobs talked about “cracking the code” I believe that what he meant was that he realized the optimal input device is the one that people find the most natural – their voice – and that it would be more efficient than any other could be.

  • Anonymous

    Seriously. . .do your homework. SIRI is not just another speech engine–just like the iPhone isn’t just another smartphone–just like the iPad isn’t just a tablet.

  • Anonymous

    Here’s my $0.02 on the subject:
    http://applesolo.tumblr.com/po.....ete-please

  • http://twitter.com/maartenverwaest Maarten Verwaest

    Hey Ben – I get the point you’re making but probably the soup will not be eaten as hot as served. TV didn’t kill cinema, the internet didn’t kill TV and a natural language interface won’t. 

    However, did you notice that your title is about Apple and Siri, but that the content of your story is in fact about data and knowledge management, and searcheability? 

  • Anonymous

    Writing this interface is trivial. Microsoft recently purchased a company whose technology enriches the search for video far beyond what you mentioned.

    Merely telling XBOX to search for something is simple speech to text based commands. You can already do this with a PC or MAC. Richer searches will require complex video tagging and highly specialized facial recognition.

    Imagine this: XBOX find all videos with image XYZ; where XYZ is some type of unique item displayed in a frame. Each video frame could be searched for a unique person, license plate, activity, etc…

  • Anonymous

    You have to love all this fighting between Apple and Microsoft fans. While I dislike all the fighting, it’s a positive for Microsoft in the end. I think they got a bit lazy, so I actually benefit financially in the end, because it improves their products.

    Keep up the trash talking while I profit from the fallout.

    Thx Fanboys!

  • Patrick

    Unless I am missing something, microsoft doesn’t write the code for the APPs that would be YouTube.  Yes telling XBox to search is fairly simplistic in the grand scheme of things and you can already do this on several speech recognition devices but to make it work well it is less about how the MicroSoft designs it much more but about how the content providers that wish to have a presence in XBox design the APPs to actually maximize their utility. In that regard the first iteration of the YouTube APP is pretty poor.

    Insofar as the complex scenario, the average user is not going to be interested in that level of detail.

Must-Reads from other Web sites

Henry Blodget

EXCLUSIVE: Here’s The Inside Story Of What Happened On The Facebook IPO

Leslie A. Perlow

Are You Sleeping With Your Smartphone?

Alexis Madrigal

The Remote Control as Subversive Technology

Felix Salmon

How Gawker wants to monetize comments

About Voices

Along with original content and posts from across the Dow Jones network, this section of AllThingsD includes Must-Reads From Other Web Sites — pieces we’ve read, discussions we’ve followed, stuff we like. Six posts from external sites are included here each weekday, but we only run the headlines. We link to the original sites for the rest. These posts are explicitly labeled, so it’s clear that the content comes from other Web sites, and for clarity’s sake, all outside posts run against a pink background.

We also solicit original full-length posts and accept some unsolicited submissions.

Voices is edited by Beth Callaghan.

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »