By TDG’s numbers 60%, or 95MM consumers in just the US, are “enthusiastic” about TV Everywhere” services. And, about 34%, or 54MM are willing to pay at least $5 extra a month for the privilege. By my calculations, that’s about $3B a year. Even if that’s lower because of households verses individuals, it’s still a big enough number to get your attention.

Yes, it’s early yet. Michael Greeson, TDG partner and author of the report admits the content isn’t compelling at this stage. But I think it does show the interest users have for video. It’s big and growing.

What do you think? Do you want to watch video anywhere on any device? What would you pay for it?

The Academy of Television Arts & Sciences will celebrate the power of television– and specifically, eight programs that have had significant impact on the viewing audience and the ability to spark positive social change.

The honored programs include:
• CSI, “Coup De Grace”
• Glee, “Wheels”
• Grandpa, Do You Know Who I Am?
• Explorer: “Inside Death Row” — “Inside Death Row”
• Private Practice “Nothing To Fear”
• Taking Chance
• Unlocking Autism — “Unlocking Autism”
• Vanguard: “The OxyContin Express”

These programs concern vital issues ranging from capital punishment to racism, prescription drug abuse and trafficking, autism, the military escort for fallen service members, physician-assisted suicide and important disability issues.

Dana Delany, star of ABC’s Desperate Housewives, will host the evening.

So the power of video – whether it be on that black box in your living room or the PC on your desk – is amazing and should be celebrated. It’s not much of a prediction to say that the difference between that black box and the PC is blurring and will blur more; so I think a toast to the Emmy’s is in order. Here’s to a voice through video…no matter where it lives. Go to Emmys.tv for more information.

According to recent survey data from KPMG, few consumers see the need to bring 3-D into the home, with just 15 percent saying they expect to buy a 3-D-capable set the next time they shell out for a new TV.

According to the most recent KPMG Media and Entertainment Barometer, more than a quarter of respondents said they had viewed a 3-D film in the theater over the past 12 months, and those numbers are even higher for 18-24 year olds (42 percent) and 25-34 year olds (45 percent).

Comparatively, only 5 percent of those surveyed said they had watched a 3-D film on TV — and very few seemed to want to, with only about one in six respondents said they were likely to buy a 3-D TV for their next purchase. Only about a quarter of respondents said they would prefer to watch TV in 3-D if it was available, with a third saying they would prefer not to. A whole 42 percent were unsure if they’d prefer to watch 3-D TV, which signals unfamiliarity with the technology.

And, here’s my favorite stat “More than 40 percent said they believed 3-D was a gimmick.” While I’m certainly not a 3D technology expert, my feed-reader is filled with news about 3D and you couldn’t get away from it at CES. My quandary is those glasses. First, you have to find them in your living room (I don’t know about you, but I loose my remote at least once a day). Second, the glasses aren’t interoperable. You can’t use one brand’s glasses with another brand’s TV. So think about the Super Bowl in 3D. Only some of your friends who come for the party can see the event it its full glory. The rest of the party goers will see a screen that makes them feel drunk even if they are only drinking soda. And last, think about how silly you look in those glasses.

All that said, the change and growth in video generally is one of the things that makes this space fun.

What do you think about 3D and how that might play out – not just on the physical set in your living room, but online too?

Later Update: Hey…ask and ye shall receive. I saw this posting on companies that have 3D TVs without the “goofy” glasses. This article suggested that the glasses are what’s holding back the 3D flood waters. While none of these new technologies are without issues, and all are expensive, it shows progress towards something more mass market.

Though it’s just beginning, I suspect this blog will be more about the future than it will be about the past. However, when I saw this posting on my friend’s Facebook page (thanks Mike). I thought there were some interesting similarities to today’s pontifications and ponderings. This site from the American Historical Association has snippets of what people debated about television in the 1940s.

• It talks about movie studios being fearful of putting their good movies on TV, as people might stop going to movie theaters (substitute TV, for online, and how much different is the question now)?
• There’s a whole section on the FCC and spectrum. We might have finally given up the ghost on that one after 60 years with the switch to digital; but the debate still continues if you count wireless broadband in the mix to get video via the Internet;
• There’s a whole debate on standards; do we have the right ones to go forward (OK, in 1945 it might not have been Blu-ray verses HD-DVD, or HTML5…but you get the picture…pun intended); and
• There’s a section about advertising’s place in the new medium and what role subscriptions play (free verses paid is NOT a new dilemma).

So, in summary, everything old is new again. In the next 60 years (yikes…that’s 2070) how will our grandchildren look back at our debates and discussions about video in the dawn of the 21st century? And, how much will be a slight twist of today’s debates.

Photo via Library of Virginia: http://www.flickr.com/photos/library_of_virginia/

CSB will stream the pre-game, and there’s lots of sites where you can view the commercials via online video. According to Nielsen, the commercials are what a bare majority of us prefer anyway “Fifty-one percent of those questioned said they most enjoy the commercials that air throughout the game when compared to the Super Bowl game itself.” And, speaking of super bowl ads, CBS said it sold out it’s commercials as of Monday, with 30 second spots running from $2.5MM to more than $3 million for each; with a total of $200MM spent on Super Bowl ads.

So if you’re in the 51% majority, here’s a fun .tv site that bills itself as the “worlds largest archive of Super Bowl commercials” with 33 years worth of them — www.adland.tv. I may be boring, but my favorite commercial is still Apple’s 1984 ad.

And, speaking of .tv sites and Super Bowl advertising, Gatorade is showing live video via Ustream.tv of athletes testing at a performance lab in Miami in advance of  their Super Bowl marketing efforts. They are hosting pro football players for the rest of the week and inviting people to view the videos. It’s a great example of a major brand integrating video and .tv into their larger social campaign leading up to Super Bowl activity. It’s also a great example of how things you don’t normally associate with video (sports drinks) still work great for online video.

So who do I want to win the game? Well I was born in Baltimore, so I could never root for a team that was stolen in the middle of the night (watch a Barry Levinson movie and you’ll know what I mean). New Orleans has had it rough of late, so I think they deserve it. According to the latest Vegas spread; I’m continuing a tradition of rooting for the underdog.

A Zettabyte Here, A Zettabyte There…pretty soon you have real information (my apologies to Senator Dirksen). UCSD issued a study on the amount of data American households consumed in 2008. Turns out it’s 3.6 zettabytes. Om Malik puts that into perspective saying “That’s roughly the amount of information found in thick paperback novels stacked seven feet high over the entire U.S. — including Alaska — according to UCSD estimates.” Looking at the breakout, there’s lots of room for video to come online with 41% of the time spent on TV (the old fashioned kind) and only 16% on all of the Internet.

A Billion Mobile Devices Accessing the Internet by 2013 That’s only 3 years away, but an IDC’s study says that’s when we’ll reach the “B” mark. And, it says watching video is one of the favorite activities on mobile Internet today, just like on the computer accessed Internet.

BT Says Video Increases Time Spent on Small Businesses’ Site BT is running a promotion with Cisco and their Flip phones to help small business put video online. They point out that “nearly four times as many visitors (59 percent) spend five minutes or more on a website with video than on a website without video (15 percent).”

Go Navy, Beat Army As our CEO is a Westpoint grad, I’m hoping this post is not a career limiting move. I’m a Navy brat and lived at the Academy for many years, so this game is special to me. What does the 110th football classic have to do with this blog about .tv and online video? Well, NewTeeVee informs me that CBS Sports is streaming it live online. What a great way to help extend the reach to all the many dedicated service men and women around the world. As John Feinstein described it so well in Parade last week; there’s nothing more inspirational that an Army Navy Game.

To quote the Times “Specifically, the commission wants to make it much easier for anyone who makes a video program to send it directly to your television set, without having to cut a deal with a cable company.”

The wheels of government move slowly, but they can make sweeping changes that create whole industries.

Another one time obscure ruling that changed communications history also started at the FCC and involved hardware attached a communication system…the Carterfone decision.

So, the video landscape is changing and blurring…but the FCC might just be trying to push that along.