The gist of the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Apple and five major book publishers: The publishers, assisted by Apple, conspired to fight back against Amazon’s pricing power in the growing e-book market.

The Wall Street Journal, which has been on the story for some time, has plenty of background here. And there’s some great, baroque detail in the DOJ’s complaint, which you can read over here. (New York venues of choice for alleged antitrust meetings: The “Chef’s Wine Cellar” at Picholene, and Alto, a now-defunct Italian restaurant.)

But there’s also this odd, scintillating, throwaway line in the middle of the complaint, where the DOJ casually mentions that before Apple thought about fighting with Amazon, it thought about a different strategy: Ruling the world in concert.

From the complaint:

In addition to considering competitive entry at that time, though, Apple also contemplated illegally dividing the digital content world with Amazon, allowing each to “own the category” of its choice — audio/video to Apple and e-books to Amazon.

Really? So how would that work? And why didn’t Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos end up conspiring to work together? The DOJ doesn’t explain any of this — it simply moves on to the rest of its argument.

And here’s where we need to point out that it’s not uncommon for lawsuit complaints to contain big helpings of theatrics, with accusations and context that won’t end up having any bearing in court, if it gets that far.

Indeed, several of the publishers that the DOJ is suing this morning are expected to settle with the government this afternoon — can’t get more theatrical than that. (Actually, they’ve already settled, says Bloomberg.)

Still, that’s an especially juicy bit of red meat to dangle in front of the public, so if the DOJ has more to say about the alleged would-be conspiracy, we’d love to hear about it. Apple declined to comment, but I’ll update if that changes.

(Image courtesy of Shutterstock/Everett Collection)

Hence a rush of investment into “social TV,” which right now is a catchall euphemism for “things that let you tell your friends what you’re watching” and “things that measure what you’re watching and talking about.”

Twitter and Facebook, which already do a lot of this, seem like they’re already best-positioned to win this one. But lots of people are trying to get in on it, anyway.

Anne-Marie Roussel, who heads up social TV stuff for Sharp, has started tracking investment in the sector over at her personal blog. I added a few numbers of my own — (CBS, for instance, acquired Clicker for around $100 million) — and ended up with some $270 million.

That number is still probably lower than the total dollars sunk so far — I assume Robert Sillerman’s Function(x)/Viggle, for instance, has a good chunk of money behind it — but it actually strikes me as fairly modest.

Even if you assume that most of this stuff fizzles, it seems like the chance to create a next-generation TV Guide, or a next-generation Nielsen ratings service, would inspire entrepreneurs and check-writers to be even more aggressive.

Boy, oh boy, is Mike Daisey confused.

After a weekend of savage pounding by the media, Daisey, the opportunistic fabulist who was caught lying to one of the most respected radio documentarians in the history of broadcasting, reemerged in public today. In his latest attempt to mitigate the damage done to his reputation, he appears to compare himself to Mark Twain, opening his latest blog post by quoting — his words — another famous monologuist: “Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”

Instead he seems to be borrowing from Phineas T. Barnum, the great American showman who is often credited — perhaps apocryphally — with saying “There is no such thing as bad publicity.”

I couldn’t tell you how ticket sales to Daisey’s show have been affected by the ensuing controversy and, frankly, I don’t care. I know that Daisey addressed it in opening comments before his performance of “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs” on the night of March 17 in New York.

In summary, his defense is that his work is theater based on a body of facts that are largely true, and though they shouldn’t have been aired as factual on “This American Life,” he stands by it as theatrical work. Never mind that he insisted, not once, but repeatedly according to one account, that the words “This is a work of non-fiction,” be printed on his show’s Playbills. (For an example see page 3 of this PDF.)

But the money quotes that give the deepest insight into his state of mind are these:

“Especially galling is how many are gleefully eager to dance on my grave expressly so they can return to ignoring everything about the circumstances under which their devices are made. Given the tone, you would think I had fabulated an elaborate hoax, filled with astonishing horrors that no one had ever seen before. …

“If people want to use me as an excuse to return to denialism about the state of our manufacturing, about the shape of our world, they are doing that to themselves.”

Right. Mike Daisey, a confessed liar who parlayed his appearance on “This American Life” into a months-long string of media appearances on CBS, MSNBC, HBO and PBS — which helped raise his public visibility, built buzz and goosed ticket sales — thinks he can retake the moral high ground?

The only benefactor of all this attention certainly hasn’t been Chinese workers, but Daisey himself. Some 70,000 people have seen his show in 18 cities, and tickets in New York have been going for $75 to $85.

Worse, he continues to believe it is he alone who has been shining a light on the problems that have emerged over the years with Apple’s manufacturing arrangements in China and around the world. “Given the tenor of the condemnation, you would think I had concocted an elaborate, fanciful universe filled with furnaces in which babies are burned to make iPhone components …”

Sorry, Mike, but the discussion about Apple, Foxconn and its employees was going on well before you elbowed your way onto the scene.

For openers, at the D8 conference in 2010, AllThingsD’s Kara Swisher and Walt Mossberg asked Apple’s then-CEO Steve Jobs about the situation at Foxconn, in the wake of a string of suicides.

That same year — indeed, only weeks after nine suicides by Foxconn employees — Bloomberg Businessweek’s Fredrik Balfour conducted a three-hour interview with Foxconn CEO Terry Gou, and also several unsupervised interviews with Foxconn workers, for a story featured on the magazine’s cover. The Atlantic Monthly considered Foxconn in the wider context of the rise of China as a leading economic power. The BBC looked at Foxconn after the suicides. Indeed, there had been a great deal of attention paid to matters related to Apple, Foxconn and workers in China, well before the days of Daisey. Who does he feel has not been talking about this?

In fact, let us not leave Apple itself out of that conversation. The way Daisey tells it, you might assume that the electronics giant is sweeping its dirty laundry under the nearest rug.

This is not the case. Awakened to allegations that emerged in 2006 of worker abuses and bad conditions at a Foxconn plant in Longhua — in a British tabloid newspaper, no less — Apple started issuing an annual document it calls its “Supplier Responsibility Progress Report.” The latest one, from 2012, is here (PDF). Reports are available from 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007.

These reports hardly let Apple off the hook. Rather, they document progress made, as well as progress yet to be made. Apple CEO Tim Cook admitted to The Wall Street Journal earlier this year that a priority for 2012 is to reduce the number of hours that employees at Foxconn and other companies work. It is, as you can see by Apple’s own admission, the most difficult of its China labor issues to solve.

Hard as this is to believe, employees often want to work long hours — and to earn the overtime pay that comes with them. In being too aggressive, they run afoul of Apple’s demand that no one work more than 60 hours a week, six days a week. And keeping accurate records that prevent employees from overworking themselves is proving difficult. If you visited Foxconn, Apple’s own disclosures suggest, you would probably have no trouble finding someone who recently worked more than 60 hours in a week.

What you would have trouble finding are the underage workers that Daisey said — in a now-debunked statement from his stage show and radio appearances — were so plentiful. Apple’s 229 audits found none of those at the final-assembly plants owned by Foxconn and others, and found only five active and 13 historical cases of underage workers at other facilities it does business with.

You would also have trouble finding people poisoned by n-hexane. As Apple documents in its 2011 report, a poisoning incident did happen, and when it did, Apple ordered the factory in question to stop using the chemical, the use of which I understand, is already a violation of Chinese law. Most of the 137 people who were poisoned had returned to work by the time the report was published. One plant using the chemical was shut down entirely by local authorities.

Read any of these reports by Apple, and you’ll find not the PR-sanitized language you might expect, but instead a rather unvarnished assessment of a company trying to come to grips with the human costs of a deeply complex industrial operation. Each report, which Apple releases voluntarily generates a new round of negative press coverage. Meanwhile, China is, despite its size, still a developing nation, and it will be some time before workplace standards there come close to resembling what we take for granted in the U.S. It is an evolving situation, one that will improve over time.

And while I readily admit that consumers and activists should continue to pressure and engage Apple on the subject of workers’ safety and rights, in China and in the other countries where it does business, it rarely gets any credit for the progress it has made and the leadership it has shown.

On that note, I think the discussion on the matter has been a healthy and engaging one for the better part of a decade. Contrary to his own inflated sense of self-importance, Mike Daisey has added nothing of value to it, and should consider shutting up.

I said as much on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” yesterday, and have embedded the video below:

CNN Reliable Sources March 18 2012 from Arik Hesseldahl on Vimeo.

Who in their right mind would lie to Ira Glass?

That was my first reaction to the revelation that the theatrical monologuist Mike Daisey had lied or fabricated — or in his words, “taken dramatic license” with — certain parts of his stage play, “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs.”

When I met people at parties in recent weeks and told them that I write about technology and that I had devoted more than a decade to covering Apple, the first question I used to get was: “Did you know Steve Jobs?” Since about January of this year, that first question has become, “What do you think of Mike Daisey?”

I haven’t had a real answer. I hadn’t seen his show, which was favorably reviewed by the New York Times, nor had I heard the episode of the highly respected public radio documentary program “This American Life” titled “Mr. Daisey and the Apple Factory,” that had been adapted from his play.

The show — or shows — hit a cultural nerve at a critical moment. Apple is the biggest company in the world, sporting a market capitalization of $546 billion as of Friday, with $100 billion worth of cash and investments on its balance sheet and the most popular stable of consumer electronics products in the world, especially the iPhone and the iPad. All of them are manufactured by workers in China, who labor for wages that are low by Western standards, put in hours that by Western reckoning are long, under conditions that to Western eyes aren’t ideal, doing jobs that by any standard are incredibly tedious.

Daisey’s stage show, which became a sensation among New York’s chattering classes, sought to draw attention to the plight of allegedly oppressed workers at Foxconn, Apple’s manufacturing partner in China. As New York Times reviewer Charles Isherwood put it, the play “is a mind-clouding, eye-opening exploration of the moral choices we unknowingly or unthinkingly make when we purchase nifty little gadgets like the iPhone.”

The stage show had been adapted for radio on public radio’s “This American Life,” which is probably the most-respected radio documentary program in the history of broadcasting. And the Daisey episode was presented as documentary, meaning the radio show’s staff of journalists and producers were vouching for it being true.

The problem: Much of it wasn’t.

In the show, Daisey described a trip to China, as well as a visit to Foxconn’s outer gates and other manufacturing companies in Shenzen, where many are located. He delivers a detailed and emotionally riveting account of meeting girls as young as 12, 13 and 14 years old who claimed to work for Foxconn. This would be in violation both of local laws and of Apple policies.

He also told of meeting workers poisoned by a chemical called n-Hexane, used to polish screens.

And, perhaps most movingly, he related a tear-jerking scene in which he showed a working iPad to a man who said he had crippled a hand while making its parts in a Foxconn metal press, yet had never so much as seen one of the devices powered on. Seeing the iPad’s screen in action, he tells Daisey, “is like a kind of magic.”

The word “magic” fits oddly here, because these meetings didn’t happen as Daisey said. “This American Life” yesterday aired a lengthy episode entitled “Retraction,” documenting Daisey’s many liberties with the facts.

To help do so, a reporter for another public radio show — Rob Schmitz of “Marketplace” — did what no one else in the media seemed to be willing to do, which was subject Daisey’s claims to scrutiny. Most damning of all in Schmitz’s report was the testimony of Daisey’s translator, called Cathy. She was found — after Daisey had told TAL he had lost contact with her — and disputed many of the anecdotes taken from the play and used in the radio segment about Foxconn.

Among the fabrications: Daisey didn’t speak to quite as many people nor visit nearly as many plants as he said he did. She disputed finding underage workers. The n-Hexane poisoning incident occurred not at Foxconn in Shenzen where Daisey visited, but at a Wintek facility in Suzchou, more than 900 miles to the north of Shenzen.

The stage show, and therefore the radio show that was derived from it, turned out to be a mixture of facts and fiction. Which might be fine for a production on the New York theatrical stage, where fiction and fact blend readily. And, while it might be okay in entertainment products, you don’t expect it from a prestigious radio documentary program.

And that is where the problems began.

When Daisey’s monologue was adapted for “This American Life,” outrage began to grow among people who wanted to do something about it. It was, Glass says, the most downloaded episode of “TAL” ever, and public radio listeners did what public radio listeners tend to do. For one thing, they started a petition. More than a quarter of a million people have signed a petition at Change.org, inspired by the TAL production based on Daisey’s work, demanding that Apple make changes.

That includes crafting a “worker protection strategy” for new products released, as well as publishing data from Fair Labor Association audits.

Feeding the frenzy, Daisey stepped up as the leading voice for worker rights in China’s electronics industry. He was seemingly everywhere in the media. Since the TAL segment aired in January, Daisey has been seen on “CBS News Sunday Morning,” in a report that, like the “TAL” episode, is now going to have to be retracted or at the very least walked back.

Another CBS-owned property, CNET, hosted Daisey as part of “Reporters Roundtable,” alongside Charles Duhigg of the New York Times, co-author of a series of front page stories in that newspaper. Duhigg ended his “Roundtable” appearance by urging people who care about the issue to go and see Daisey’s play.

Daisey also appeared on MSNBC repeating the same anecdotes and tarnishing the usually shiny Apple. And on HBO. And PBS. And C-SPAN.

Needless to say, there will have to be many more retractions in the days ahead.

At this point, it’s hard to determine what’s more outrageous, Daisey’s lies to Ira Glass and his team, or the national media’s willingness to give Daisey a platform to repeat the same lies and fabrications without making the slightest effort to vet them.

The circumstances around Apple’s manufacturing arrangements in China aren’t new. As a columnist for Businessweek I wrote about Apple’s first round of “sweatshop” allegations in 2006, well before the age of the iPhone and the iPad, which had at the time first come to light in part because of the reporting by London’s Daily Mail.

I’ve never been to China. Many people know more about the on-the-ground facts concerning Apple’s factories than I do. But there are many reporters who have been there. In 2010, Bloomberg Businessweek’s Fredrik Balfour wrote a powerful cover story for that magazine, which aimed to get to the bottom of the string of suicides that occurred among Foxconn employees that year.

ABC’s “Nightline” visited Foxconn earlier this year. Its report was criticized in some circles, because at the time of his death, Apple’s late CEO Steve Jobs happened to be the largest shareholder of that network’s parent company, Disney. Also, ABC had been invited by Apple and Foxconn. Even so, “Nightline” anchor Bill Weir, seeing conditions very different from what Daisey described in the course of his reporting, wondered if Mike Daisey’s work was questionable.

At the very least, Daisey is a dramatist who now admits he chose to lie, but for reasons known only to himself. The chance to raise his profile and sell more tickets to his monologue are obvious potential motivations. Whatever it was, his dramatic product is meant to be consumed as thought-provoking entertainment, not as fact-based journalism, which many people assumed it was.

This is the crux of Daisey’s defense for lying to Ira Glass and his fact-checker: That he’s not a journalist and took dramatic license with the events, and now regrets doing the “This American Life” segment.

And that’s the real shame here.

Clearly, people care about how workers who make our electronics are treated, or there wouldn’t have been a market for Daisey’s show, or for an hour-long radio documentary adapting it. And the subject is one we need to discuss at length as a society. The net result of Mike Daisey’s efforts to put self-promotion ahead of the facts has badly muddied the waters, and has probably done more harm to the people he sought to help.

So, instead of illumination on a serious topic, we are left with little. Mike Daisey is an opportunistic fabulist and should be ashamed of himself for lying. Ira Glass and his team are ashamed for giving him wider attention, and have said so. But there are many more people who should be even more ashamed for taking Daisey’s lies at face value. There should be many more retractions and apologies in the days ahead.

But now we have to start the conversation about Apple and Foxconn and workers’ rights all over again, this time with real, verifiable facts at our command. Is that so much to ask?

(Image courtesy of Mike Daisey’s Web site.)

It has been almost two years since the infamous and mysterious computer worm known as Stuxnet was first detected by a team of researchers in Belarus.

Opinions on this vary, but the worm that is said to have caused explosions at certain nuclear installations in Iran is thought to have set that country’s alleged nuclear energy and weapons ambitions back by as much as two years.

The fascination persists. Although no one has ever taken official responsibility for it — the leading suspects in its creation are Israel and the U.S., acting together or independently — Stuxnet is widely considered to have been the most successful and innovative weapon of digital warfare ever seen.

And though numerous media accounts have, with the help of anonymous sources, filled in some of the narrative around its development, the subject of the covert cyber campaign against the Iranian nuclear program has generally remained outside the attention envelope of mainstream TV audiences.

That will change Sunday night when CBS’s popular television news documentary show “60 Minutes” turns its attention on Stuxnet, and the concept of offensive cyberwar generally.

If you’re not familiar with the particulars of Stuxnet, here’s a brief explanation: It’s a sophisticated worm that experts say required several months and millions of dollars to design. Via long-since-patched vulnerabilities in Microsoft Windows, it is designed to burrow its way into specialized industrial computers called programmable logic controllers, made by the German industrial company Siemens. These PLCs sit between conventional computers and industrial machinery like factory equipment, generators and centrifuges used to create nuclear fuel. PLCs and systems like them are widely used and, in many cases, not well secured, in part because they were never designed to be connected to the Internet.

(I first wrote about it at my last job in 2010 in stories found here and here.)

The story goes that the worm was first introduced to Iran via infected flash drives that were dropped around the outside of certain targeted facilities. The worm was carefully programmed to target a specific installation and to remain inert until it found its target. When it did, it seized control of some 1,000 Iranian nuclear centrifuges at Natanz, about 200 miles south of Tehran. While displaying seemingly normal operating conditions to workers there, the centrifuges were forced to spin out of control and effectively destroy themselves.

In a preview video released today (embedded below), “60 Minutes” correspondent Steve Kroft appears to get a tour of the U.S. Cyber Command, the military nerve center for U.S. cyberwar operations. And, in what’s likely to be considered a not-so-subtle message in certain circles, as you see Kroft getting his tour, it’s hard not to notice the screen behind him. Plus, his host shows a Google Maps image of Iran with lots of orange dots on it.

The report, for which CBS presumably got a lot of cooperation from the Pentagon, comes not long after the Obama Administration officially declared cyberspace as a theater of war. That means, the military can conduct both defensive and offensive operations, and that an attack on certain computer systems by other countries or terrorists is essentially equivalent to an attack against U.S. territory, property and people.

It’s not the first time that “60 Minutes” has tackled the subject of cyberwar. In 2009, it first introduced TV viewers to the concept of using digital weapons to seize control of industrial infrastructure in order to sabotage it, including some once-classified footage of a test at the Idaho National Lab where a generator was destroyed using nothing more than computer code (although the same report contains references to a 2007 power outage in Brazil which Wired has said wasn’t caused by digital saboteurs after all, though CBS has said it stands by its reporting.) Aside from that, CBS’s older report serves as something of a lead-up to tomorrow’s story on Stuxnet.

It will be interesting to see if “60 Minutes” has unearthed anything new on Stuxnet that fills in more of the picture surrounding its development and use. Neither the U.S. nor Israel has ever acknowledged any involvement in its creation or use. But Israeli officials have occasionally been described as “breaking into broad smiles” when asked about the subject. It will also be interesting to see if the program asks any important questions about the state of cyberwar post-Stuxnet. It’s pretty safe to assume that other parties have learned as much as they can about how it was created and how another worm like it might be created again.

What’s impossible to guess is where the next target is.

Update: I added a link above to a Wired story that disputed some of CBS’s reporting on the 2007 Brazilian blackout. In short, Wired says the real cause of that blackout was poor maintenance and not an attack by hackers, although CBS has said it stands by its reporting on that subject.

Here’s the short preview of tomorrow’s “60 Minutes” report.

On another level, however, I understand the motivation. When it comes to delivering audio-visual content to a wide audience, the Internet has lowered the barriers to entry so far that anyone with even the dinkiest camera can become a major broadcaster. The television industry may face a crisis of overhead when a large number of scrappy upstarts deliver comparable value with almost no fixed costs. Also, there are some aspects of the television business that the Internet simply does better, specifically when it comes to reaching an audience.

So there is the scent of blood in the water, and out of the resulting frenzy a few lessons have appeared. Here are four of them.

There doesn’t have to be a difference between a “channel” and a “show.”

You probably have a clear understanding about what a television channel is. Comedy Central is a channel. Your local CBS affiliate is a channel. A channel is the thing you tune in to at a specific time to watch a particular show. A channel runs a lot of shows on it. Time Warner Cable offers 900 channels. This seems like too many. Bruce Springsteen wrote “57 channels and nothing on.” That sounds so quaint now.

But if you have a conversation about YouTube channels with this concept of a “channel” in your head you may experience some cognitive dissonance. There are “tens of millions” of channels on YouTube. One company, Machinima, operates 3,380 of them. That’s literally 100 times as many channels as are owned by NBC Universal, and it’s not enough. YouTube just launched 100 more channels with premium content. YouTube must be using the word “channel” differently. Except they’re not.

Both a YouTube channel and a television channel deliver a stream of content from a transmitting device to a receiving one. Viewers tune in to a television channel by selecting its number; they reach a YouTube channel via its URL. The main difference is that the cost of creating a television channel from scratch is incredibly high, while on YouTube it’s pretty close to zero. Unlike television, a YouTube channel can turn a profit with very little programming. The comedian Ray William Johnson, for example, has one of the most lucrative channels on YouTube. It plays one show. That show adds 12 minutes of new programming per week.

If a channel online costs next to nothing, and you can build one around a single show, then why do television shows need television channels at all? Every once in a while there’s a lot of fuss about getting cable channels à la carte. But who cares about that when you can have à la carte programming?

I like to think about this in the context of “The Daily Show.” On cable, you’re limited to 30 minutes of “The Daily Show” per day, and you have to tune in at 11 pm or set your DVR to watch it. There could easily just be a “Daily Show” channel, with all the extra programming that Comedy Central now reserves for the Web site, plus spinoffs for the various “Daily Show” correspondents. More content means more places to sell advertising, which means more profit. One challenge, of course, would be getting the audience to modify its behavior, but new technology seems to be inspiring this already.

Programming can now be delivered to your television set through a remote control.

Let’s define “remote control” as a handheld piece of electronics that tells your television set what to do while you’re sitting on the couch. Smartphones and tablets fit into this category, and before you argue that this definition is too broad, I submit that an iPhone is no less a remote control than it is a camera. It commands your television set far more profoundly than your traditional remote control. At least, if you have an Apple TV. Which you should.

The Apple TV comes with a technology called AirPlay, which allows you to throw videos wirelessly from your phone or tablet to your television set. Got a movie sitting in iTunes on your computer? You can watch it on TV via AirPlay. Find a video you want to watch embedded on a Web site you read? If AirPlay is available, a little button will pop up and you can stream the video to your TV. Need some good recommendations? Try one of the many “discovery” apps out there, like Shelby.tv or ShowYou or VHX. They skim your Twitter and Facebook feeds looking for videos your friends have posted. And you can throw those to your TV.

There are apps for ESPN and Discovery Channel and PBS and other traditional channels that allow you watch their shows, on demand, on your TV, via AirPlay. There are also a growing number of apps for channels that have never been included in a traditional cable provider’s lineup. The Wall Street Journal’s news channel, WSJ Live, is one of them. Time Warner Cable doesn’t carry it, but my iPad does.

I should note that WSJ Live is also available in the main Apple TV library, so you don’t actually need to use AirPlay to watch it. But the fact that you can illustrates my point. The remote control has become a very personal device, one that you carry around with you all day long, one that you use to store and index your favorite media. A viewer is just as likely to watch a channel she’s added to her home screen as anything available in the cable menu. The programming of her choice routes through her remote control.

Marketing and distribution are often the same thing.

Last month, IFC released the entire first episode of the second season of “Portlandia” online a week before its airdate. They used an embeddable video player, so that any online publication could feature the episode on its Web site. Individual sketches from the show were also made available in the same way. IFC didn’t just tease the show or talk it up, they let people actually see it for themselves. The result was an 81 percent increase in viewership among 18-49 year olds when the show returned to the network.

There are few examples of this sort of thing happening before the Internet. A movie poster hanging in a theater where that movie is playing, perhaps, or a DVD insert in a magazine ad. But this is something the Internet does really well. A single sentence can promote a film and deliver it to your computer at the same time. Allow me to demonstrate: “This video is amazing.”

That, of course, is the lifeblood of online publishing. Here’s something that resonated with me, I’m recommending it to you, my audience. They call it “curating” now. Somehow that word got separated from “blogging” recently, and I’m not entirely sure how or why. I think Tumblr and Pinterest had something to do with it. But curating, which is a thing bloggers do, is a distinct talent. It’s highly respected in other manifestations, such as museum curators or fashion buyers or television programmers. It was curators who spread that “Portlandia” preview around. And when you factor in the marketing power they brought to that show, and you consider how much a network pays to advertise a program in general, there’s only one conclusion to draw. Online curators are the most undervalued talent in the television industry.

A few of those new YouTube channels seem to recognize the power of the curatorial voice. Vice, Pitchfork, SB Nation and the Bleacher Report all received funding to create new YouTube programming. Presumably their editors will create shows that they’d want to watch themselves, and with that level of personal investment, they’d vouch for those shows to their readers.

Television is no longer that different from publishing.

Just last week, the Gawker Media site Kotaku announced a programming schedule similar to that of a television network. This strategy was conceived well over a year ago, and is designed to sell audience size to advertisers, the way television does, rather than pageviews, which have been dropping in value for years.

This is only the latest example of conceptual overlap. Video embedding took off after the launch of YouTube, turning online publications into versions of The Daily Prophet, that newspaper from Harry Potter with the magical moving pictures on the front page. Some Internet video hosting and streaming services are built on content management systems designed for online publishing. When you upload a video to Blip, the last thing you click to make it go live is “publish.” Awl Music, the music video channel launched by The Awl in January, is run entirely on Tumblr. You can watch it on a television set connected to Google TV.

Both traditional and online publishers are producing original video series with increasing frequency. Reuters, Slate and The Wall Street Journal all have news and documentary programming on the new YouTube channel lineup. The New York Times and New York Magazine have been doing their own video programming for years. It’s only a matter of time before some of these compete with the cable news channels.

Eric Spiegelman produces the Web series “Old Jews Telling Jokes,” which is about to launch its fifth season. He helped bring the hit Japanese television show “Retro Game Master” to Kotaku.com, and he helped launch AwlMusic.tv in partnership with TheAwl.com.

Some of the college basketball tourney’s games will only be available to Web users whose cable providers have deals with Turner Sports, or those who pay a $3.99 one-time fee to access the games on PCs, Google/Android and Apple/iOS devices.

Games that CBS broadcasts, though, will still be available to anyone with a Web browser, through the network’s own site.

Here’s the practical breakdown, nicely summarized by BTIG’s Rich Greenfield (registration required):

• CBS will stream the games airing on the CBS Network throughout the country live on CBSSports.com for free. Consumers will only be able to watch on PCs/Macs, with no tablet/smartphone access.
• TBS, TNT and TruTV will stream the games airing on each network live at TBS.com, TNT.tv and truTV.com for consumers who authenticate their respective MVPD service provider (currently all major MVPDs authenticate these network Web sites, except Time Warner Cable). As with CBS, the games will only be available via PC/Mac (no portability).
• Complete access to March Madness on Demand via PC/Mac, smartphone and tablets with interactive features, regardless of whether you have subscribed to MVPD service, will cost a consumer $3.99 (one-time fee for the whole tournament). Streaming online and across portable devices will be available from the selection show through the championship game.

A few more notes: CBS and Turner split the games, so you won’t run into the paywall every time you want to watch — Turner will have 41 of the games. And as Greenfield notes, most pay-TV operators have deals with Turner, which says that means about 75 million homes will have Web access via “authentication.” That said, if you’re planning on watching the games that way, better prepare now, by hunting down your subscriber info, etc. — the process isn’t nearly as easy as it ought to be.

Big picture: This is a switch from the precedent CBS established in 2006, when it started streaming all of the tournament’s games on the Web for free (for three years before that, it had charged around $15 to watch online).

Each year, the network loudly trumpeted the number of eyeballs and ad dollars that Web streams attracted, while arguing that it didn’t hurt traditional TV ratings at all. Last year, you could even watch the tournament on an iPad for free.

But it’s in keeping with the broader move we’ve seen from big media companies, who are pulling back on free Web video. Back when Hulu launched in 2008, it seemed that most big TV networks were going to put all their shows online, but in the last couple of years, we’ve seen the pendulum swing the other way, as networks tie “free” Web TV to pay-TV subscriptions.

But as those services start to dabble in creating their own shows, big media companies could get another bump, by helping the new guys make new content.

CBS, for instance, makes about 20 shows at its own production facilities, primarily for itself. But the broadcaster may end up producing something for Netflix, CEO Les Moonves said today during the company’s earnings call.

Moonves didn’t offer any other details on the discussions, and said he wouldn’t until there was a signed deal. Netflix offered up even less information: “Anyone and everyone who produces content is looking to do deals with Netflix,” Netflix spokesman Steve Swasey said via email.

Last week, Netflix launched “Lillyhammer,” its first original series, and later this year it will debut “House of Cards,” a David Fincher/Kevin Spacey series. Twentieth Century Fox — which like this site is owned by News Corp. —  is also producing a new run of “Arrested Development” for Netflix.

The company has also reportedly reached a deal with Lionsgate to produce “Orange Is the New Black,” a new series from the creator of Showtime’s “Weeds.”

Meanwhile, Moonves says CBS continues to talk to other players who are in the market for the stuff he’s already made. Verizon and Redbox have already announced plans to launch a new subscription video service, and while Moonves wouldn’t name names — Google? Apple? — he didn’t dissuade analysts from anticipating more buyers for his stuff.

“There are a lot of conversations,” he said this afternoon. “It’s hard to predict whether they’ll be a major deal. But we’re talking to an awful lot of people.”

Now Bamboom is called Aereo, and it is backed by Barry Diller and/or his IAC Web holding company. But the concept appears to be the same: The service will let users stream broadcast TV stations to their Internet-connected devices, wherever they are.

We’ll know more Tuesday, when the service hosts a press event at Diller’s IAC headquarters in Manhattan. Press materials promoting the event describe Diller as a “minority investor” in Aereo, but don’t say whether he’s backing the company personally, or if he has put IAC’s money into the service. I asked IAC for clarification, but they referred me back to Aereo.

Financing aside, a more fundamental question about Aereo would be: Who is the market for this thing?

Aereo uses a Rube Goldberg-like system involving huge arrays of teeny-tiny broadcast TV antennas to give each user their own personal live TV stream. That’s a system created to take advantage of the legal umbrella that Cablevision’s remote DVR has earned — and one that Google and Amazon used to create their music locker services without approval from the big labels last year, too.

That’s clever, but it won’t do anything to help someone who wants to watch Monday Night Football on their iPad. Because Monday Night Football airs on Disney’s ESPN cable channel.

I assume that Aereo CEO Chaitanya Kanojia will explain tomorrow that a large percentage of TV viewing is confined to the broadcast networks like ABC, Fox, CBS and NBC, and I’m sure he’s right. But that explanation won’t satisfy someone who thought they could use the service to watch CNN or Bravo or Lifetime or whatever, and then finds out it won’t work.

So, yes, you could describe Aereo as “cord-cutting” technology — which is the way the service’s PR folks are describing it in their invitations — because it will help you watch TV without a cable subscription.

But it won’t help you watch shows you used to watch on cable, which I think is what most people expect from a service with that description. A better description would be: “A service that’s interesting but limited by itself, but if coupled with other things — say, an ‘over the top’ Web video subscription service — could get more interesting.”

More later. For now, here’s the old Bamboom explainer video, which isn’t as slick as the new Aereo video, and which touts an integration with Netflix that the new video doesn’t mention. But it is embeddable:

But if you watch the game on the Web, your eyeballs are worth a whole lot less. NBC, which is streaming the entire thing for the first time ever, will be lucky to get anything near a million dollars for that same ad when it runs online.

So why is Comcast’s broadcast network putting the game on the Web, period? Isn’t this the classic analog-dollars-to-digital-dimes trade that Big Media strives so hard to avoid?

Nope, says Rick Cordella, who runs digital for NBC Sports. The network assumes that nearly every eyeball — and every ad dollar — that it gets from the Web this week will be a bonus, because whoever watches online is simultaneously watching on a big TV, the way football is supposed to be watched.

This is supposed to be the classic “second screen” experience that Twitter’s Dick Costolo and so many other digital folks are excited about.

And that makes plenty of sense to me. Many TV guys have gotten plenty comfortable with the idea of streaming their most valuable live sports events online, for free. In most of those cases, the general assumption is that anyone who’s watching on the Web is someone who can’t watch the game on a TV to begin with — see the CBS/Turner Sports livestreams of the NCAA March Madness tournament.

And in NBC’s case, it is packing the Webcast full of extra camera angles and other goodies, including a feature that will let you rewatch every Super Bowl commercial once it’s aired. The assumption is that you’re holding the TV remote in one hand, and controlling your laptop with another.

NBC already does a version of this with its Sunday Night Football broadcasts during the regular season, and the network says it draws between 200,000 and 300,000 unique viewers per game (that’s the source of that Vikings-Saints screenshot, above).

Meanwhile, those broadcasts are the networks’ best-performing shows by a long shot, so it doesn’t seem to have slowed them down. The NFL, meanwhile, reports that Web companion streams of the Thursday night games it shows on its own channel averaged 450,000 uniques.

So Cordella argues that putting the biggest TV show of the year online, for free, is really no big deal. But I’m pretty sure that this attitude isn’t shared by everyone in the TV business, and we might hear a bit about that today at the D: Dive Into Media conference. Curious to see what ESPN boss John Skipper thinks, for starters.

• Showing TV shows the day after they air, like Hulu does.
• Renting TV shows and movies one at a time, on demand, like Amazon, Apple, Walmart and many others do.
• Renting video games, like GameFly does.
• Getting more people to sign up for its DVD rental service, which is what Netflix used to do.

So what is Reed Hastings trying to do? He explained it again during his company’s conference call Wednesday night, but it’s the same message he’s been delivering for some time: He’s trying to create the Web version of HBO or Showtime.

That is: A premium cable channel that gives subscribers lots of viewing choices — including some stuff they can’t see anywhere else —  but not unlimited choices.

That may disappoint some customers, investors and even reporters. Because the idea of a maverick Internet video service that could upend all of Hollywood and the TV industry sounds pretty exciting. People are still hoping for one, perhaps in the form of a “virtual” cable service – perhaps from Google or Apple – though yesterday Hastings said he doesn’t believe that’s happening, either.

But Hastings’s more modest ambitions are popular enough: He now has 23.5 million Web video subscribers worldwide, which is more than CBS’s Showtime has. And he is creeping up on Time Warner’s HBO, which has around 28 million subs. [UPDATE: Let's make this an apples-to-apples comparison: Netflix has 21.7 million Web video subs in the U.S.; that 28 million number for HBO is US-only, too.]

Still, Hastings will need to keep reiterating his plan for some time in order for everyone to get it.

That’s partly his fault, because he hasn’t always been consistent. Last summer, for instance, he said the company would start marketing its DVD-only business again, but the company has since canceled those plans (and now rarely acknowledges DVDs exist, even though they are a huge business for Netflix). Last fall, Netflix also said it would get into the videogame rental business, but those plans have been scrapped, too.

“We are just another network competing for viewing time with, and licensing content from, other networks,” Hastings wrote in his letter to shareholders yesterday. That’s not quite as compelling as “All the movies and TV you’ll ever need, for $8 a month,” but it’s the truth, and it seems to work for lots of people.

Turns out there are lots of us, and we’re not just engaged in a new, postmodern behavior. We’re building valuable data sets for marketers, who would like to know what we’re saying and what we’re watching, and what that means.

Eventually they’ll use that data to show us more ads. And perhaps we’ll comment about those, too.

That is the theory, at least, behind a slew of “second screen” start-ups. And Bluefin Labs, one of the most prominent ones, has just raised another $12 million in a B round led by Time Warner’s investment arm and SoftBank Capital. Earlier investors, who have poured in some $8 million, like Redpoint Ventures and Lerer Ventures, have re-upped.

Bluefin has a fancy-pants pedigree — it uses technology hatched at the MIT Media Lab — but the idea is quite simple. It harvests comments we leave on social networks — primarily on Twitter, and to a lesser degree via Facebook, where more of the data is locked up — and analyzes it to see what we’re saying, and when.

That stuff can be used to create cool infographics like the one on the right, about last Sunday’s Giants-49ers game. But TV networks like CBS, and ad guys like Starcom MediaVest, want the data for themselves, for obvious reasons.

Given that Facebook and Twitter are deep in the ad business themselves, it will be interesting to see what kind of access they provide to the Bluefins of the world down the line. If this gets really big, it seems like they’d want a very active role.

And while we’re on that subject, we should note that Bluefin CEO Deb Roy says his company isn’t using Google+ data yet. Which is interesting, given all of those big user numbers.

Down the road, Roy says Bluefin could expand his business in different directions. He could measure other data points that tell us about the way people are watching TV: What are people saying on blogs? What are they saying when they reach call centers? And he could also measure other mass mediums. But for now, TV will keep him busy.

In a piece by Lesley Stahl of CBS news show “60 Minutes,” she interviewed the leader of the Chicago-based social buying company in his first national appearance since the company’s initial public offering.

Of course, Stahl asked hard-hitting questions about the fishy revenue figures and the questionable accounting practices that preceded the IPO.

And, because it is “wacky” Groupon, she also questioned the appropriateness of a CEO who has a video of himself practicing yoga in tighty whities in front of a Christmas tree on YouTube.

Mason, who was often grinning during the interview, tried hard not to come off as defensive.

“The difference between me and other CEOs is that I’ve been unwilling to change myself or shape myself around what’s expected,” said the 31-year-old founder. “Am I as experienced or as mature or smart as other CEOs. No probably not, but there’s something useful about having the founder as a CEO.”

At one point, he acknowledged it wasn’t enjoyable when the criticism was peaking and the company was in its quiet period. He likened the experience to the Wolverine’s skin being melted off.

Stahl had no idea what he was talking about.

Did he wear a tie? Nope. But he thinks he should get credit for asking the producers if it was necessary. Is that a sign the boss is growing up? Maybe.

For the record, he does own more than four.

All-in-all, Mason worked hard not to say anything too revealing.

Here’s the whole interview:

And, here’s Stahl comparing Mason to other tech CEOs she’s interviewed:

Of course, this infamous kooky cat-on-his-head photo from a Vanity Fair magazine shoot made it into an upcoming profile of Groupon CEO Andrew Mason. Lesley Stahl of “60 Minutes” has done a piece on the Chicago-based social buying phenom, set to air this Sunday.

And, naturally, Stahl trots out the “goofy” description of Mason.

In addition, said the preview caption for the CBS television news show: “Groupon’s Andrew Mason says he may not be as smart, mature or experienced as other CEOs, but being company founder is his edge.”

Dumber, juvenile and just-arrived — but I created this three-ring circus with my own two hands? Sounds good to me!

Here is a preview of the Stahl-Mason segment, as well as my own wacky interview with Mason from last year’s D: All Things Digital conference:

(Photo credit: Martin Schoeller, exclusively for Vanity Fair)

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120112/goofy-ceo-andrew-mason-on-60-minutes-this-week/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120109/is-dish-punching-the-networks-with-its-supersized-dvr/ http://allthingsd.com/20120109/is-dish-punching-the-networks-with-its-supersized-dvr/#comments Mon, 09 Jan 2012 21:43:07 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=161807 Yup. It’s a ginormous DVR.

Per earlier reports, Dish Networks’s big rollout at the Consumer Electronics Show today is focused on “The Hopper,” a supersized video recorder that lets users store two terabytes of data. In English, that means about 250 hours of high-def shows, or 1,000 hours of regular shows.

There are a slew of other bells and whistles, and Dish had other stuff to announce, too, like an expanded deal with Time Warner’s HBO to offer more programming to Dish customers who also pay for the premium TV service, more programing for its Blockbuster movie service, and a broadband Internet via satellite option.

Oh, and a kangaroo, which did duty as both mascot and onstage prop.

But if you were looking for an “over the top” service that lets you get pay television over the Web without getting the standard pay TV bundles, this isn’t it. It’s possible that Dish CEO Joe Clayton will offer that one day, but it’s not here now.

The chief focus here is on the DVR, which doesn’t seem like it’s the kind of thing that will attract new customers, but might keep existing ones happier. Nothing wrong with that.

The most interesting wrinkle here is the Hopper feature that will let customers automatically record the primetime lineup of the four broadcast networks — News Corp.’s Fox, Disney’s ABC, Comcast’s NBC and CBS — and store the shows for up to eight days.

Anyone with a DVR is already able to record any show they want, and keep it as long as they have space, so this isn’t an earth-shifter. But it seems clearly designed to poke a bit at other playback options, like the video-on-demand offerings that many broadcasters offer for free, or the Hulu/Hulu Plus service co-owned by Disney, Comcast and News Corp. (News Corp. also owns this Web site).

All of those options, for instance, make you wait at least a day after a program airs before they let you see it. And the networks only offer some of their shows through those options (and CBS doesn’t work with Hulu at all).

My understanding is that Dish didn’t ask the broadcasters for permission on this one, and the way it’s constructed — broadcast-only, with a time limit, etc. — make me think it believes it has created something that doesn’t require a signoff, at least legally speaking. But since all of the big pay TV providers — Dish included — are signing “retrans” deals with the broadcasters and their owners, and those deals include restrictions on how the broadcast shows can be used, it seems like Dish would want to make sure its partners are okay with this.

And they might be! As a network executive pointed out to me this afternoon, this doesn’t have to be negative for the broadcasters. If Dish, for example, can get Nielsen to give the programmers full credit for the shows stored on the Hopper, then that’s a good thing — they’d rather get paid for that eyeball, for instance, than one they sell on the Web.

But it still seems like Dish is playing this one deliberately close to the line.

[Shutterstock/Anna Jurkovska]

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120109/is-dish-punching-the-networks-with-its-supersized-dvr/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20120108/dish-gets-ready-to-serve-up-broadband-and-a-giant-dvr/ http://allthingsd.com/20120108/dish-gets-ready-to-serve-up-broadband-and-a-giant-dvr/#comments Sun, 08 Jan 2012 16:11:36 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=161290 Dish Networks is a satellite TV company with some 14 million customers. But CEO Joesph Clayton has much bigger plans for the company.

We saw the first signs of that last year, when Clayton bought Blockbuster out of bankruptcy, then used the video company to create a kind of Netflix challenger. Tomorrow we should see the next steps, when the company rolls out a big announcement at the Consumer Electronics Show.

Here’s a good bet on what that will be: A new broadband Internet service, along with a super-sized DVR.

Trade pub Multichannel News has the details, gleaned from a report that went up briefly on Dealerscope, then went away, presumably because it violated a pre-briefing embargo. (Thanks to Jason Hirschhorn’s very useful Media Redfined feed for flagging.)

Since we never agreed to the embargo, happy to summarize here (not surprisingly, Dish declined to comment):

• The Internet service will be marketed to 8 million customers, most of whom can’t get fiber or cable broadband.
• The giant DVR will be called “The Hopper” and is designed to save and transmit shows in different parts of your house, and presumably outside of it, via Slingbox. You can see a teaser page for that one here, or look at the screenshot at the bottom of this post.
• There’s a cool feature that looks like it will automatically record the primetime lineups for the four broadcast networks (News Corp.’s Fox, Comcast’s NBC, Disney’s ABC and CBS).

All of which sounds interesting, and useful for existing Dish customers. But it doesn’t sound like Dish is ready to try a true “over the top” Web-based pay TV service that would rival traditional cable.

A lot of people think someone, or many people — could be Dish, could be Apple, could be Verizon, etc., etc., etc — is trying to line up one of those. But figuring out how to do that involves lots of deals with TV studios and programmers, and I don’t get the sense that anyone has those pacts yet. If Dish does, and announces it tomorrow, then it will truly be a press conference worth tuning into. If not, no worries — I’ll be watching anyway and will report back.

MORE CES NEWS:

• Complete coverage
• HP’s Former CTO: Ultrabooks Are Nothing New, webOS Still Has Life Yet
• Walt Shows Off CES Gadgets for Fox Business News (Video)
• What Kind of Web Video Plans Does Sony Have? (Video)
• Fujitsu Seeking Way Into Crowded U.S. Smartphone Market
• Why Rhapsody Is (Probably) Bigger Than Spotify — In the U.S.
• Microsoft Beefing Up CeBit Presence Even as It Pulls Back on CES
• Inside the CES Lost & Found
• FCC Chairman Has New Tablet, but Same Script: More Spectrum!
• Verizon Wireless: We Want to Connect Five Devices for Every Subscriber
• Ultrabooks From HP and Lenovo That Are (Kinda, Sorta) Different
• Walt and Katie Take a Tour of CES (Video)
• Schmidt-Storm Alert: The Google Chairman Didn’t Like Your Question
• T-Mobile Expands Bobsled Messaging Service
• Intel Shows Just How It Plans to Get Into Phones (Video)
• Motorola CEO: We’re Going to Release Fewer Phones This Year
• Kinect Helps Keep Aging Xbox at the Top of Its Game
• More From T-Mobile CEO: On Pricing, LTE and That Ever-Elusive iPhone
• Exclusive: New Boss Acknowledges Windows Phone Still Has “Awareness Problem”
• And You Thought Jawbone UP Was Going to Miss the CES Party!
• Interview: T-Mobile CEO Says No Second AT&T Deal Out There
• Grover Is at CES and I Am Missing It
• BlueStacks Bringing Android Apps to Windows 8
• Why the Future of TV Won’t Be Here Soon
• Nvidia’s Tegra 3 Tries to Save Battery in All Sorts of Different Ways
• Dynamic Dual Coverage: Ballmer’s Last Act in Vegas and the BCS Championship in 3-D
• Microsoft Phoning In Its Last CES Keynote
• Myspace — Yes, Myspace — Says It’s Going to Sell You Web TV
• Samsung Unveils “Super” 55-Inch OLED TV
• Nokia Unveils That LTE Windows Phone It’s Been Dying to Share
• Steve Ballmer Gives Ralph De La Vega a Very … Vigorous Greeting (Video)
• Interview: AT&T’s De La Vega on LTE, Tablets and Life After T-Mobile
• AT&T’s De La Vega: Shared Data Plans Still in the Works
• LG: 55-Inch Glasses-Free 3-D Screen Is on the Way
• LG Pushes 4G Smartphone Through Verizon: The LG Spectrum
• Live: AT&T’s Vegas Act Stars LTE and, Making Her Return to the Stage, Nokia
• CES Notebook: The Constant Search for Power and Vegas’ Worst-kept Secret
• Belkin Bringing Mobile TV to Lots of Cellphones, Will Anyone Tune In?
• Acer Introduces “World’s Thinnest” Ultrabook and a “Me-Too” Cloud Service
• There Better Be Some Cool Stuff at CES, Because CE Holiday Sales Data Bytes!
• CES 2012: Snooki and Bieber Are In, Gaga Is Out!
• Coming to a Smartphone Near You: Gorilla Glass 2
• RIM Hopes Next PlayBook OS Will Impress at CES
• Ultrabooks, the Ultra-Fancy New Name for Laptops
• At CES, Expect More Gadgets Telling You to Get Off the Couch
• Intel to Detail Its Phone Plans at CES Next Month
• Microsoft Pulling Out of CES After Upcoming Show
• Intel to Detail Its Phone Plans at CES Next Month
• Dell Will Drop the Flashy Vegas Act for CES This Year
• Ultrabook Conga Line Preps for CES 2012

[Shutterstock/Marko Cerovac]

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20120108/dish-gets-ready-to-serve-up-broadband-and-a-giant-dvr/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20111221/still-looking-for-gift-ideas-wal-mart-recommends-a-box-for-men/ http://allthingsd.com/20111221/still-looking-for-gift-ideas-wal-mart-recommends-a-box-for-men/#comments Wed, 21 Dec 2011 19:27:18 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://allthingsd.com/?p=155821 Still don’t know what to get your loved one for the holidays?

Well, you better decide fast. For many sites, today is the final day that orders can be placed to get guaranteed delivery by Christmas.

If you are having a hard time coming up with ideas, there are plenty of Facebook applications that will offer recommendations based on a gift recipient’s interests.

Late last month, Wal-Mart launched an application called Shopycat, which does just that.

To be helpful, I got a list of Shopycat’s 20 most-recommended gifts. At the very top of the list was an unexpected item called a “personalized keepsake box” for men. The box, which costs $24.76, is designed to hold a man’s watch, jewelry, money clip and/or other items.

It’s not clear what a person’s interests would have been for this to surface at the top of so many lists (maybe the popularity of the holiday-themed Justin Timberlake and Andy Samberg music video “Dick in a Box” had something to do with it?) After all, many of the other items on the list are clearly based on someone’s favorite TV shows, movies or videogames. For instance, other fun items that made the list were action figures for “The Big Lebowski,” an Angry Birds beanie and “Star Wars” bathrobes.

As for the man box, it is sold out, so clearly some people agreed with Wal-Mart that it made for a good gift.

Not all of the items are recommendations for items sold on the Wal-Mart site. It also refers shoppers to other sites, such as ThinkGeek.com, Barnes & Noble, CBSstore.com and RedEnvelope.

Wal-Mart did not say how many people have used the app since it went live last month, but given that Wal-Mart has 11 million Facebook fans, it could represent big numbers.

Here is the entire list of most-recommended gifts for 2011:

1. Personalized Keepsake Box
2. “Star Wars” Jedi & Sith Bathrobes
3. Personalized “Home is Where your Story Begins” Canvas
4. “Twilight: Director’s Notebook: The Story of How We Made the Movie”
5. 3-Pointer Basketball Tin
6. “House” Cane Ornament
7. “Harry Potter” Clue
8. Men’s Comfy Feet Miami Dolphins
9. “How I Met Your Mother” MacLaren’s Irish Pub Shot Glass
10. OtterBox iPhone 4 Defender Case
11. Angry Birds Red Bird Peruvian Beanie
12. Picnic Backpack
13. “The Big Lebowski”: Urban Achiever 8-Inch Figures
14. The Official Chuck Norris Fact Book
15. Tennis Star Gift Tin
16. Dallas Cowboys Floor Mats
17. “1001 Video Games You Must Play Before You Die”
18. “The Wire”: Bubbles Depot Reusable Travel Mug
19. “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn” Wall Calendar
20. “Game of Thrones” Sword Letter Opener

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20111221/still-looking-for-gift-ideas-wal-mart-recommends-a-box-for-men/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20111206/how-to-boost-web-video-traffic-lose-a-cbs-news-deal/ http://allthingsd.com/20111206/how-to-boost-web-video-traffic-lose-a-cbs-news-deal/#comments Tue, 06 Dec 2011 14:20:48 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=150725 The last time many of us heard from Shira Lazar, the Web video host was apologizing for some dumb Tweets about Steve Jobs, which led to the loss of a CBS distribution deal.

But that was three months ago! And apparently an eon in Internet time.

Since then, Lazar and her “What’s Trending” program, a chatty chat show about memes and the people who make them, seem to have rebounded quite nicely: Lazar says traffic has doubled since CBS cut ties with the show, which runs its final episode of the year today.

The caveat here is that “What’s Trending,” which launched in May, had a very modest audience when CBS was promoting it on its CBSNews.com site — around 40,000 views a week. And it’s easy enough to guess that the Jobs controversy — the show’s Twitter account had announced that the Apple co-founder had died, then flippantly told him to “live on,” by way of a correction — actually boosted the show’s profile and helped it get to the 84,000 weekly views mark it’s at today.

Still, getting any traction on the Web is hard, and there are plenty of shows and sites that are treading similar ground — just check YouTube. So credit Lazar and Damon Berger, the co-founders of production company Disrupt/Group, for making a go of it, without a big-name Web property giving it a push.

Instead, Lazar and Berger have cobbled together a variety of one-off collaborations with big sites (MTV) and small ones (VYou); they have more in the works. Virgin America, for instance, will start running best-of clips on the airline’s 5,000 in-seat TV sets, where the show will run alongside other Web originals like Boing Boing.

It’s also possible that help from CBSNews.com was never going to be much use to them. “I don’t think a majority of CBS’s audience was our audience,” Berger says, upon reflection.

But they’d still be happy to talk to bigger partners about a distribution deal (financing and sponsorships, too, if anyone is offering). And Lazar says they’ll be back in 2012. “We built an office with employees, and a three-camera live-shooting studio, and we weren’t just going to throw that away when an incident like that happened.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20111206/how-to-boost-web-video-traffic-lose-a-cbs-news-deal/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20111206/apple-book-publishers-face-european-antitrust-probe/ http://allthingsd.com/20111206/apple-book-publishers-face-european-antitrust-probe/#comments Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:11:09 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=150709 Apple’s entry into the e-book business hasn’t been a huge success, but it has still registered with European antitrust regulators. They’ve started a formal investigation that is supposed to determine whether the company and five major publishers “engaged in anti-competitive practices.”

A press release from the European Commission doesn’t provide much detail into the probe, which will look at Apple along with Lagardère Publishing’s Hachette Livre, News Corp.’s HarperCollins, CBS’s Simon & Schuster, Pearson’s Penguin and Germany’s Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck (News Corp. also owns this Web site).

The EU says it will “investigate whether these publishing groups and Apple have engaged in illegal agreements or practices that would have the object or the effect of restricting competition.”

It also says it will look at the “agency” pricing agreements that Apple pushed through when it introduced the iPad back in 2010. Those deals allow publishers to set the retail price of their books, and give retailers like Apple’s iTunes a set percentage of the transaction.

The previous wholesale model, championed by Amazon, allowed retailers to set the price of books. After a series of high-profile negotiations, Amazon has moved to the agency model as well; the e-commerce giant still dominates the e-book market.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20111206/apple-book-publishers-face-european-antitrust-probe/feed/ 0