I feel like some of the trends that have made new media appealing thusfar, particularly the sort of "monitor as mirror" effect I talked about in my response to Fred Graver <http://focus.blip.tv/file/86145> where people can see themselves in the show might be hard for "legacy" media to embrace.
OTOH, when you're making a play for the masses, how much does "street cred" or lack thereof in a very fringey industry matter? If we draw another parallel to film, one wonders...are we going to have fewer and fewer truly independent productions and see more "Warner Independent" style Internet TV programs? I realize that the studio system is good at funneling resources to and promoting talented people, but I think there's a real case for the amateurs here due to: A) sheer numbers that have not been duplicated before in any of the previous revolutions they describe B) the continuing death of distance that continues to grow niche markets. Thanks for posting this, I have been wondering in my head for a little while, "What happens when what we're calling today 'New Media' isn't really new anymore?" At the moment, places like Network2 <http://network2.tv/> aren't carrying much that doesn't come from people outside a studio, but we will see how the pendulum swings. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
