在最近的一篇文章里,，我寫(xiě)到為何媒體必須轉(zhuǎn)型，以及轉(zhuǎn)型進(jìn)展。簡(jiǎn)單來(lái)說(shuō),，用戶瀏覽習(xí)慣的迅速轉(zhuǎn)變和科技進(jìn)步都在迫使媒體轉(zhuǎn)型。隨便舉個(gè)例子,，美國(guó)全國(guó)廣播公司（NBC）自制的經(jīng)典情景喜劇《老友記》曾牢牢占據(jù)每周四晚“必看電視內(nèi)容”榜單,，左右著觀眾的口味,，傳輸價(jià)值觀，那樣的日子已經(jīng)一去不返,。觀眾再也不需要也不想讓電視網(wǎng)和有線供應(yīng)商決定何時(shí),、何地看什么內(nèi)容。我們想自由選擇觀看的模式,，希望選項(xiàng)菜單更靈活,、更有新意，也更符合個(gè)人喜好,。

傳統(tǒng)媒體的廣告客戶也不用太擔(dān)心,，高品質(zhì)好萊塢節(jié)目和有線電視內(nèi)容還是有需求的，尤其是40歲以上人群,。與此同時(shí),，針對(duì)年輕客戶，一批以科技為本的新生代媒體平臺(tái)涌現(xiàn),，創(chuàng)新強(qiáng)大而前衛(wèi),，內(nèi)容制作成本不高但很討喜。由于初生不久,，平臺(tái)上的頻道資源十分豐富,，來(lái)源五花八門(mén)。此外,，平臺(tái)也會(huì)幫助制作方生產(chǎn),、管理、發(fā)行內(nèi)容,，實(shí)現(xiàn)商業(yè)化,，并持續(xù)跟進(jìn)內(nèi)容。

昔日,，傳媒寡頭通過(guò)廣播,、有線電視和衛(wèi)星掌控媒體的發(fā)行渠道和內(nèi)容生產(chǎn)，控制網(wǎng)絡(luò)可謂密不透風(fēng),，然而龐大的媒體帝國(guó)已經(jīng)土崩瓦解,，寶座拱手讓給了U-verse、Hulu,、You Tube,、Facebook、Snapchat等等市場(chǎng)新貴,，有些已站穩(wěn)腳跟,，還有些虎視眈眈。新玩家都深諳新媒體和數(shù)字格式的內(nèi)容，并不介意觀眾怎么看視頻,。當(dāng)然,，如今想看內(nèi)容有多種形式選擇，觀看的地點(diǎn)也很靈活,。但是怎樣生產(chǎn),、發(fā)行并最終從紛繁復(fù)雜的各種選擇中實(shí)現(xiàn)盈利還是有點(diǎn)困難的。幸運(yùn)的是,，科技最善于解決復(fù)雜的問(wèn)題,。

新一代媒體網(wǎng)絡(luò)將配備核心的傳媒技術(shù)平臺(tái)作為支柱性基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施。通過(guò)技術(shù)手段分析Twitter和Facebook等社交媒體上的內(nèi)容,，就能鎖定用戶感興趣的領(lǐng)域和熱門(mén)話題,。例如目前金州勇士隊(duì)是NBA最火的球隊(duì)，有關(guān)該隊(duì)及隊(duì)內(nèi)最大牌球星斯蒂芬?庫(kù)里的消息就像NBA總決賽前排的座位一樣搶手,。想象下制作這樣一些相關(guān)節(jié)目,，比如和金州勇士隊(duì)飛赴各地打季后賽，或者坐在現(xiàn)場(chǎng)觀看訓(xùn)練,，或者拍全隊(duì)晚上私下聚餐,，效果會(huì)如何。

技術(shù)也可以用來(lái)協(xié)助制作或者自動(dòng)生成節(jié)目,，從攝制到后期制作全程管理內(nèi)容資產(chǎn),。內(nèi)容只要制作完畢，就可以在所有適合的渠道發(fā)布,、持續(xù)跟蹤數(shù)據(jù),，追求收入和觀眾人數(shù)最大化，然后總結(jié)經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn),。這種全鏈條式的生產(chǎn)方式可以讓內(nèi)容制作方策劃引人入勝的娛樂(lè)節(jié)目,，不用太考慮提高效率和必要的后端操作。

或許科技更重要的作用是降低一些與生產(chǎn)高品質(zhì)內(nèi)容有關(guān)的財(cái)務(wù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn),。專家預(yù)計(jì),，采用新科技和設(shè)備以后,，生產(chǎn)某些內(nèi)容的成本將大概只有傳統(tǒng)方式成本的十分之一,。Awesomeness、Vice,、Machinima和Tastemade等初創(chuàng)公司（我的公司參與投資了Machinima和Tastemade）就積極采用了極具吸引力的模式,，生產(chǎn)成本較低的數(shù)字媒體內(nèi)容，并以多種方式編輯,，方便在不同媒體上打包和出售,。創(chuàng)業(yè)公司的商業(yè)模式各種各樣，從訂閱、贊助,、許可授權(quán)到傳統(tǒng)的廣告都有嘗試,。比如我投資的Tastemade專門(mén)制作美食和時(shí)尚生活類的視頻，可以在任何時(shí)候用任何設(shè)備觀看,。該公司也獲得英國(guó)美食頻道Food Network授權(quán)制作一檔節(jié)目,。

可以確定的是，21世紀(jì)的科技平臺(tái)并不會(huì)改變創(chuàng)新的過(guò)程,，也沒(méi)法將劣質(zhì)內(nèi)容變?yōu)閮?yōu)質(zhì),，不會(huì)發(fā)掘新的情感、也達(dá)不到觸動(dòng)人心的境界,?？尚录夹g(shù)確實(shí)能讓內(nèi)容制作的過(guò)程更簡(jiǎn)便、更有生產(chǎn)力,、更容易盈利,，也能更好地滿足客戶的需要。今天的世界無(wú)疑比20年前更為復(fù)雜難解,，下一代媒體公司難道不應(yīng)該體現(xiàn)錯(cuò)綜復(fù)雜的特性嗎,？

時(shí)代畢竟是滾滾向前的，我寫(xiě)這文章已經(jīng)不用羽毛筆蘸墨水在羊皮紙上一筆一劃了,，不是嗎,？ （財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

作者楊卣銘（Geoff Yang）是紅點(diǎn)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資（Redpoint Ventures）創(chuàng)始合伙人

譯者：Pessy

審校：夏林

In a recent article , I wrote about how media must—and is—beginning to change. In a nutshell, the combination of a rapid shift in people’s viewing habits and technological advances is forcing the issue. To state the obvious: Gone are the days when NBC’s Friends anchored Thursday night’s “Must See TV” line up and determined viewer tastes and successes. We no longer need or want to rely on the networks and cable providers to tell us when, where, or what to watch. We want to control our own viewing patterns, choosing from a more flexible, more innovative, and more personalized menu of options.

For those who are wed to traditional media’s offerings, fear not. There will always be demand for high-quality Hollywood programming and cable bundles, particularly among the affluent, 40-plus-year-old set. But for younger consumers, a bevy of new, technology-centric media platforms is emerging that combine powerful, cutting-edge innovations with creative, relatively inexpensive, and smartly curated content. Still in their infancies, they will offer unbounded distribution channels populated by programming from a virtually limitless array of sources. Beyond that, they will help creators produce, manage, distribute, monetize, and track their content.

The once formidable oligopoly that controlled media distribution and ultimately content creation over air, cable, and satellite is already breaking down, giving way to outlets ranging from U-verse to Hulu to You Tube to Facebook FB -0.40% to Snapchat and many, many more that are either already in the market or will be soon. These players can handle a slew of new media and digital formats because they don’t care how you view video. Content, of course, is already available in many forms and in many places. But figuring out how to create, distribute, and make money off of a hodgepodge of interconnected options is a complex problem. Luckily, technology is good at solving complex problems.

The next generation of media networks will have core media technology platforms as their backbone infrastructure. Technology will be used to identify topical areas of interest and trending topics by analyzing social media feeds like Twitter and Facebook. For instance, the Golden State Warriors are currently the hottest team in basketball and information about it or its biggest star, Stephen Curry, is as coveted as front row seats to the NBA finals. So imagine programming around what it might be like to travel with the team during the playoffs, or sit in on a practice session, or see the team eating together at a private dinner.

Technology can also be used to assist or automate the creation of this kind of programming, managing the content assets through production, and then in the final production. Once it is produced, it can be published in all appropriate channels, tracked, revenue and audience optimized, and then accounted for. It’s a cradle-to-grave approach that allows creators to spend the majority of their time concocting compelling and entertaining programming and less on improving efficiencies and the essential back-end operations.

Perhaps more importantly, it can alleviate some of the inherent financial risk associated with producing quality content. Experts estimate that new technologies and equipment enable some content creation to be done for roughly 1/10th of traditional costs. Startups like Awesomeness, Vice, Machinima and Tastemade (my firm is an investor in Machinima and Tastemade) are embracing this attractive economic model, producing digital media relatively cheaply and then editing it in a variety of ways so it can be sold and packaged for multiple, different mediums. Business models range from subscriptions to sponsorships to licensing to traditional advertising. Tastemade, for instance, a company in which I am an investor, produces digital videos about food and lifestyle that can be viewed at any time on any device. It also creates a show licensed by the Food Network.

To be sure, these 21st century technology platforms will never replace the creative process or make bad content good. Nor will they push the boundaries of emotion or touch the human spirit. But, they can make the process easier, more productive, and more profitable for those creating the content while providing consumers with more of what they want. The world is infinitely more complex than it was 20 years ago. Shouldn’t the next generation of media companies reflect that complexity?

After all, I’m not writing this on parchment paper with feathers dipped in a well of ink, am I?