The growing popularity of online video has motivated cable TV operators, like Comcast, to get into the game as well.  In doing so, they aim to give their subscribers access to online video and replicate the experience on television.  Their hope is that this access will satiable consumers’ growing demand for online video while preserving their subscription revenue.

However, the logic behind this conclusion seems flawed because it doesn’t grasp the reason that people are trading cable subscriptions for online video.  One of the main reasons is that people do not want to pay expensive cable subscriptions each month and would rather trade off some premium content for free access that satisfies most of their content needs.  The logic of the cable operators seems to rest on an assumption that demand for online video is driven by convenience, not price.  This might be the case for mobile TV (which isn’t even in Comcast’s initial offering), but it unlikely that this is the primary motivation for online video.  If this is the case, as long as independent online video sites exist, Comcast and other cable operators are not going to stem the tide of subscriber defectors simply by offering online video with paid subscriptions.  As long as Hulu and others continue to stream video for free, price sensitive subscribers will continue to “cut the cord”.

To be fully transparent, as I just said, there is a key assumption in my argument which relies on third party video sites to exist.  If Comcast’s bid for NBCU is approved, Comcast will gain a stake in Hulu.  If that happens, all bets are off.

For example, one of the top 10 tweets was from the Twitter account of the Mars Phoenix Lander when it discovered ice on Mars.   The tweet was as follows:

The NASA JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) team chose to break this news on Twitter rather than through a major media outlet or blog.  The Mars Phoenix Lander Twitter account had tens of thousands of followers, and when the tweet with the news was sent out these followers immediately heard about it.  Instead of releasing the news to a media outlet/blog that would take time to produce a segment or write an article/post, NASA JPL’s decision to use Twitter allowed it to instantaneously spread the news to its followers who in turn could retweet and spread the news.  Ultimately, this move significantly raised the visibility of the Mars mission and its findings.

The Mars Phoenix Lander example is relevant because it illustrates the way in which status updates and the real-time web are changing the hierarchy of information flows and the way businesses work.   These updates give businesses direct connections with their audiences/customers, and these connections allow businesses to circumvent traditional information sites and networks in favor of direct communication with their followers.  Not only is this communication instantaneous, but it also allows the company to control the messaging.  Clearly the length limitations on most status updates mean that they are not going to replace traditional media outlets because status updates are not appropriate for all types of communication.  But these new formats do give companies more flexibility to be creative and reach their customers in new and powerful ways.

Any yogi worth her salt has spent hours trying to figure out which studios and teachers to try.  The search usually involves visits to studios, countless schedules and class descriptions, hours spent online scouring studios’ websites and Yelp! and, for me, a general sense of frustration (especially when you discover the perfect class that has already started because I wasted too much time searching for it!).

Well we can all give a good ujuaya exhale because City Stretch is here to solve all these problems.  The best way to describe City Stretch is as the Zagat’s guide for Yoga studios.  Currently, City Stretch is only available for New York City, and it is only in physical book form.  However, I see great opportunities for City Stretch online – both as a guide and a platform for yogis to connect.  In the meantime, though, go out and buy the book (available online and at participating studios – check here to find locations http://citystretch.com/buy.html) and effortlessly find classes that are best for you.  Learn more at http://citystretch.com/citystre_post/studio-updates/

In addition, the model in these photos, Filippa Hamilton, says that Ralph Lauren fired her for being too fat.  Regardless of Ralph Lauren’s intentions, its case is not helped by the fact that it altered images of this model to look much skinner.

But I believe that the real question is why fashion companies, media companies, magazines, and photographers are altering images in such a significant way, and whether this should be allowed to continue?  Fillipa Hamilton is a size 4, 120 pounds and 5 foot 10 inches tall.  Have you ever seen a woman with those proportions?  That is a very thin woman. To even suggest that this woman is fat and to photoshop her image to make her look thinner is crazy.  In addition, photoshopping gorgeous celebrities (like Jessica Alba) to appear in magazines, movies and advertisements is also egregious.  In person these women are beautiful, thin, and already other-worldly.  Why must we digitally alter their images so that when people see them their images look even more attainable?

This cycle is not only unrealistic, but it is also very damaging.  Young girls see these images and think that they are normal body types to strive for when they grow up.  Women see the images and begin an endless series of comparisons between themselves and these unnatural body types.  Women endlessly diet, are embarrassed about their bodies, and lose confidence.  Not to mention the impact these images have on men, who become conditioned to expect women to look like a picture that has been endlessly photoshopped.

The New York Times article poses an interesting question: should fashion companies, media outlets, and photographers have to post disclaimers when they photoshop an image?  Should Ralph Lauren be able to run the ads it did or should it be required to tell the public that these images are not realistic?  While I think this is an interesting idea, I also agree with the point the article made that it almost doesn’t matter if there is a disclaimer or not because the existence of the image alone is damaging enough.  Even if people view a disclaimer with the image, it will still have the same negative impacts on women and girls.  A little girl will still want to look like the woman in the picture – all beautiful and thin, and women will still wonder how they can get their thighs to look like those of the woman in the advertisement.  I believe that the only way to overcome this negative impact is to stop this photoshopping craze and publish more realistic images.   If women see images that look more realistic and attainable, they will feel more confident.  And the more confident women are, the more comfortable they are going to be going on a shopping spree at somewhere like Ralph Lauren.

Jen