I want it Live!

Jim M nakedi at comcast.net
Fri Mar 16 15:24:03 CDT 2007

----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin and Tania O'Neal"

> I think I can help.....

I hope so.  I need it!

> I'll never forget the feeling when Pete's Lifehouse play was webcast.
> Why do I think you were in London at the time and missed it?

If I was, I'd have just listened on the radio.  I think this must have been
broadcast before I emerged from my Who coma (1991-2001).

> We all huddled by our computers to listen to this play through the "tunnel
> affect" that the internet brought us just some 8 years ago or so (anyone
> have the date?).
> I felt part of a village....a group.
> It was as close to the Lifehouse as I've ever been.
> (dork alert!)
> It was exciting  !

More exciting than listening to it on the Radio?

> Now, imagine a live concert by The Who, with Pete and Roger talking to
> of us in the venue and on the Endless Wire.
> The possibilities are endless and pretty *fucking* exciting.
> There could be interaction (interactive).
> There could be "Zak cams" like the Ox's bass cam.
> There could be focused views on each member and you could jump from one to
> the next.
> There could be feedback (shudder the thought).
> I dunno, but such an experience just seems way cool to me.
> With good picture and audio as is now available, I see millions of
> households around the world all watching the show on their wide-screen
> and dancing around the livingroom.
> There could be some vid screens in the venue that are broadcasting some
> volunteers at home.
> People in countries (Mexico!  Brazil!) who have come close to getting a
> show, only to be disappointed, who could finally join in on the fun.
> People stationed up in Alaska or down on the South Pole researching to
> this planet from ourselves, could tune in and watch....real time..... with
> the rest of us.....and not feel so far away.....just for a few hours in
> Lifehouse.

How much of that couldn't be done with a simple live TV broadcast?  Only the
interactive/feeback aspects, and that's not even very far along on the
internet.  Am I supposed to be typing to people while I watch?  If I set up
a webcam, is anyone going to want to watch me watch the show?  I guess they
could collect bio data and use it to tailor the music...how exciting would
that actually be, though?  Seems like the Method needs to take data from
thousands just to get a decent melodie from one or two of them.

I actually think Pete's got this completely backwards.  Plenty of
experiences can be live.  Events on TV or radio or, duh, attended in person
can all be experienced live.  The real differentiation of the internet is
that it is *on demand*.  You can have whatever you want, *whenever* you want
it.  Pete hates to hear it, but that's exactly what people want today.  You
fit your product in with my schedule, or I'll find someone else who does.
It is not about bringing people together, it is about letting them interact
without having to be in the same room, or even be on line at the same time.
If I have to be somewhere during my favorite TV show, I can download it and
watch it whenever and wherever I want.

If I want live interactions with other people sharing an experience, I will
*go* to an event.  If that's impractical for me, then I'm out of luck.  The
internet simply doesn't allow for the kind of reality that would make it
exciting to me.  Maybe it will someday, in the very distant future, but I
don't see the demand for it.  Pete's vision is based on a Sci-Fi tale that's
set in a post-apocalyptic police state.  Until the day that we live in such
a place, live events are not so rare that we need a pale imitation to pacify
us.  Maybe all of this is on its way and he truly is the sage he thinks he
is, but he's pushing live internet *now*, and it just doesn't have any
allure for me...yet.

> When you start to think about it, it kind of blows the mind at what could
> done and how fun it could be.

I think I need your friend Bob to explain it to me.

Jim M

More information about the TheWho mailing list