Get Glue is a social app that allows a user to let others know what arts and entertainment they’re consuming. Log in to this service, and you can let strangers and friends alike know what book you’re reading, TV show you’re watching, video game you’re playing, etc. There’s also a wine ‘check-in.’ Based on your check-ins, you get recommendations for other content you might enjoy. 

Miso is a similar app, but focusses on television consumption.  The TV show “Bridezillas” partnered with Miso to provide a unique badge and an opportunity to win a book to those users who checked in while watching an episode of the program.

Clicker is getting a lot of press – (ed note: I’m impressed they managed to get a .com account that’s a real word – not clickr.) The app works pretty much the same way – check-in, favourite shows, follow your fave shows, get recommendations on other shows and movies to watch. This app is getting particular attention because:

• It shows you how to access episodes online by free or pay (in the U.S.)
• It was used as an example of the applications that could be used when Google TV launches

These apps make it very simple to see what early tech adopters are watching, liking and recommending. Also to note - they’re great for people like me who don’t have cable to know what’s popular and trending.

If you love television, keep an eye on these apps. If you create television, these apps might end up on your marketing plan.

Better yet – sign in – become a part of the experience of turning your passive TV watching into a activity. Let me know what you think.

As each stream was shut down, users complained they hated the fact the live feeds were being removed, mostly spewing vitriol directly at the broadcaster. “Hey NBC,” they’d say. “We’re watching the commercials! What else do you want?!”

Good question. What else do we in the TV and digital entertainment media want? Why aren’t broadcasters streaming live video more often? It happened, and quite successfully, during the World Cup – which I can only assume helped slow piracy. Why not the Emmys? Well, it usually comes down to rights.

PaidContent.org wrote a great post about how NBC had great opportunities to turn winning clips from the show into potential viral videos. Within seconds of the opening sequence with Jimmy Fallon singing Born to Run with some cast members of Glee, Tina Fey and Jon Hamm, NBC should have posted the video up on You Tube to catch the viral wave. But they didn’t – seemingly because of their inability to secure online rights. The rights for the show were cleared for TV, but not for online.

Looking back, a similar thing happened this season with an episode of Glee, where a potentially embarrassing video of Sue Sylvester singing “Let’s Get Physical” gets viral at the fictional high school. Sadly, that clip wasn’t posted to You Tube for it to get viral in real-life. Another issue with rights clearances? Or was it an oversight to not include social media in the experience?

Granted, rights clearances are more complicated and resource heavy than most people would ever understand. But as a user posted, what else do we want?  For live events like awards shows or big finales, do we want to fight for online rights or do we want the fans to post our stuff online to share between themselves? What’s the solution?

- Programming costs a lot of money to make. $100K per half hour is considered cheap. After Apple gets it cut, how many episode purchases from consumers will need to be made in order for the producer to break even, and who will fight for the international programming distribution rights?

- Broadly speaking, successful television programming in Canada is made with funds provided by the government and cable companies, who are mandated to reinvest some dollars into the local industry. To get access to this funding, a broadcaster also needs to invest in the TV program. The broadcaster makes its money for content from advertising dollars. Like it or not, reducing the power and influence of cable companies such as Rogers, Bell, Shaw, etc.,  as well as the broadcaster and the advertisers will greatly diminish the funding available to television producers to create new products for both linear TV and online (unless, of course, Apple and Google are mandated to invest in local programming and are considered by the CRTC as ‘cable company’).

-  Broadcasters want to be in this multi-screened space and are investing additional financial and people resources to make it happen. Given the extra resources it takes to put broadcasted episodes on third party content aggregators such as Apple, profit (if any) is invested back into making this content available on digital media. The industry might be willing to play with AppleTV and GoogleTV if that’s what consumers want, but in the end, each broadcaster and cable company would rather create their own walled garden for maximum return on investment.

- This tweet from Modern Family creator, Steve Levitan (@stevelevitan) brings up a good point. It’s not only broadcasters and cable companies who want a return on their investment.

It’s about choice. If anything, Apple TV and GoogleTV will help offer new choice to the user, but will it actually change the industry forever?

What do you think? Will the cable industry crumble when these devices launch, or are there other examples pointing to why Apple TV will be just another player in the marketplace?

Here is a rundown of what happens when you quit cable:

- there is about a three month withdrawl period where I replaced spending hours watching TV to spending hours on the computer.

- I occasionally hear about new shows from advertising, but it’s mostly passed on from my peers. Twitter, blog posts and in-person conversations have helped me navigate new programming launches and figure out what’s worth my time/effort to find a way to watch it online. To be fair, however, I only started watching last year’s new shows (Modern Family, Community) after 10 or 11 episodes had already broadcast – when bloggers were emotionally invested in the show and their write-ups made it sound incredibly interesting to watch.

- Being the late-comer to a new show, I’d like to be able to watch all of the previous episodes to catch up. Since most broadcaster websites take down episodes after a few weeks, here’s where renting a show would really come in handy.

- I’m a little left out when people talk about shows that broadcast the night before. I bought a seasons pass to 30 Rock, but they’re not uploaded on iTunes until at least 12 hours after broadcast on TV. I feel like that guy who taped the superbowl and is trying to get everyone to shut up about the game until he gets to watch it.

- Even though a local station uploads full episodes about 24 hours after it’s on TV, I still bought a season’s pass through iTunes. For shows I like or ones that aren’t time sensitive, I’ll watch it for free online. Shows I know I’ll want to watch again, I’ll fork over the cash. I think if episodes were cheaper, I might buy more. At $2.50 a pop ($3.50 in high def) and 22 episodes a season, I need to pick-and-choose – even with the financial benefit of not paying monthly cable.

- I know NOTHING about new movies coming out. Seriously. When Inception came out, I had no idea what it was, who was in it, etc. Movie distributors are going to need to ramp up their advertising efforts to people like me who have cut the cable cord.

- I miss randomly coming across shows I may like. While I’m a fan of on-demand TV, think about the shows you stumbled upon while channel flipping that you ended up loving? Many people say on-demand television puts the control in the consumer hands, but I’m suspicious as the walled-garden, on-demand content aggregators will have a hard time making money while latching consumers onto unknown titles. Recommendation engines and free episode previews help, but online is missing the human touch of a human content curator who can create a playlist that isn’t based solely on similar purchases or keywords.

- I don’t miss commercials and yet, I still know about new products and services.

- I watched live streaming during the Olympics and the World Cup – and that’s it.

- When I mention I don’t have cable, some people react like I’m betraying the natural order of things. Keep in mind, however, I do work for a TV broadcaster.

Anyone out there also cut the cable cord and have observations? Thinking about doing it?

43% of those surveyed go online to watch news, and 15% for user-generated content. That’s where this gets confusing: does this survey mean they are going online to only view UGC, or to participate? Because from what I’ve read in the recently established comments sections in The Star and other online newspapers, everyone sure likes to give their 2 cents when reading the news… giving UGC a way higher rating than just 15%.

The games are over for another two years and Vancouver’s winter games will probably be the real test for online ad revenue for NBC, especially if it learns to open up its video player to social apps and more common video players. Yet I guess that’s what happens when you partner with Microsoft – exclusive vp rights.

The only thing I was tempted to watch online was the closing ceremonies – in particular, the bad lip-synching and weird dance moves.

Speaking of bad lip-synching and weird dance moves, check out this video of what Britney Spears’ microphone really picked up during her concerts.

I know it’s a jump in logic, but it’s something I had to share.

This is a pretty cool opportunity for partnerships with Yahoo and for developers looking to grasp the last viewers who aren’t already watching TV with their laptops on.

Courtesy of Engadget’s savvy link finding, check out some images of the product in action.

The first is an interview with Ze Frank. I’ve mentioned him before. He managed to turn a small experiment into a worldwide phenomenon all by giving power to his audience. He explains it way better. This is amusing and enlightening. 

Next, snoop around the online video player for Ted – Technology, Education and Design. It’s an amazing collection of lectures – and there are great snippets of what’s next in technology.

Kevin Kelly, says the web is less than 5,000 days old and everyone thought it would be “TV, but better.” But it’s so much more, and he looks at the next 5,000 days.

Don’t understand the long tail that everyone keeps talking about? Watch Chris Anderson break it down. Want to know why is a mobile phone an important tool for humanity?   

Sure beats Dancing with the Stars.*

*Please note I have never seen Dancing with the Stars

NBC has a schedule up on its site for online services. It’s not just for televisions. NBC announced its Olympics 2 Go for mobile phones. 

CBC’s online plans? Unsure from its summer games webpage if there are plans to simulcast the footage. But they have numerous blogs, video content and a user-generated activity asking people to upload their own cheer for the Canadian audiences.

YouTube even has its own Summer Games Channel a geo-blocked video service that goes live on Wednesday.

What will be interesting to note is the old fashioned TV ratings. Will less people watch on TV in favour of the smaller screen? Will people actually watch the smaller screen for the instant news and then later the larger for the fancy, HD footage?

As I previously mentioned, Joss Whedon’s online experiment Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog is a hit.

Now someone has been nice enough to answer the age-old question “But how do we monetize this?”

Jeffrey McManus did some math on the distribution model for Whedon’s blog experiment, and while he admits it’s just an estimate, the video’s success “could signal the beginning of the end of television as the medium of the least-common-denominator and the beginning of the profitable niche market.”