It's a simple statement with tectonic consequences. While most pundits are focused on the lame video search that's currently in beta, or think that Google will allow users to put videos in their blogs, I think there's possibly something much bigger going on. If Page was speaking literally, then Google will be the center of the media universe just as it is the center of the Web universe today. And that's huge.
As investors, we need a point of view on Google's prospects. A foray into TV could make the Web advertising explosion look like a fire cracker, or it could blow up in Google's face. So just for kicks, let's look at what Google really did for the Web, then apply that to the world of television to see what Page might be talking about.
1. What was the Web like before Google?
- Millions of individual sites, but hard to find anything worthwhile
- Primitive search engines produce hundreds of pages of results, virtually all irrelevant to what you're looking for or subverted by ad money
- If we didn't know the exact character string to search for, we used human-edited directories (see this example, Yahoo in 1996) that were often out of date or distorted by who paid to be in the directory
- Remember channels and "push" software like PointCast? They tried to force the Web into narrow channels just like TV, a handful of corporations controlling the information and ads that we received
- Untargeted, annoying, and usually ineffective banner ads
- One-way communciation, from them to us, read only
- Singlehandedly cleaned up this mess with a few elegant ideas coupled with massive computing power
- Made the Web relevant by democratizing it with PageRank, not through central command and control
- Automated system got rid of human directories, which allowed the Web to grow exponentially
- Put users at the center of the Web universe pulling information through search, replacing a few big corporations pushing content to all of us peasants
- Established trust through its Don't Be Evil philosophy, refusing to allow ad dollars to influence search results
- Broke free of channels, opened up the long tail of content, and paved the way for user-produced content that rivals the established powers
- Relevant, unobtrusive ads that often help the user find what she's looking for
- Infinite-way communication, with shared conversations happening on the Web across continents
- Hundreds of individual channels, but can't find much worth watching when you want
- Need a directory or guide, and need to know exactly what you're looking for
- Central command and control by a small number of giant corporations, who feed us what they want us to know and to buy
- Independently produced content and archive programming is scattered, mostly useless, with no market to compensate independent producers, and few ways for viewers to find it or pay for it
- One-way communication, from them to us
- Democratized TV with user-generated content that connects with viewers through relevant and fresh search
- Level playing field with the big media conglomerates, so viewers can choose among hundreds of thousands of relevant programs
- Unlocked talent of individuals to produce provacative, first-rate programming that challenges the established players
- Sure there will be porn and cellphone video of the family's trip to the lake, but relevant search allows quality to float to the top
- Rich, many-to-many conversations
- It must work with your TV, not just your PC
- It must be high-quality video, not a fuzzy 3-inch box on the monitor
- It has to make money (Google's video service eliminates the middle man and allows content creators to charge viewers directly; Battelle has an alternate sketch)
- Unlimited storage and bandwidth are prerequisites (Internet2, dark fiber, or blimps?)
Update 04/24/05 10:07: Mike Lambert agrees that while "everyone seems to be talking about home videos and video blogging, other possible outcomes are even more interesting. Such as iTunes for movies, with the twist that the content producer directly sets the price, eliminating the intermediary. Or the the Current TV tie-in, but beyond just providing a general zeitgeist segment (via Poynter).
Update 04/24/05 20:12: John Battelle sketched his vision for merging TV and search in October last year. It's a thought-provoking read as it employs today's technologies -- search, DVRs, feeds -- to paint a compelling picture.
But I have two issues with that vision. First, it solves the advertiser's problem first, when Google's proven approach is to solve the user's problem first and figure out how to monetize the solution well after several revs of the solution.
Second, the user problem that Battelle's sketch does (incidentally) address is one of the smaller problems, that of searching the program guide for shows are currently delivered by cable or satellite provider. Google is likely to go after the larger and more interesting problem as Page articulated -- to do for TV what Google did for the Web -- and that starts with the long tail of user-produced content, leveling the playing field, and rich searching of content.
Finally, one of the biggest obstacles to the Webification of TV is bandwidth, since an HDTV signal requires 10-20 Mbps. There have been solid developments here recently: Hong Kong Broadband launched 1 Gbps residential service to 800,000 households; US cities are putting in Wi-Fi; WiMax is rolling out this year; and don't forget about the broadband blimp!