Today’s MediaGuardian has an interesting piece from Emily Bell that discusses the BBC’s ongoing trial of its IMP. She writes in part:

[I]n the world of new, more open business models, should the BBC not be using this to repeat, if they wish, shows from ALL terrestrial broadcasters - or at least those with a public service remit? And if not, why not?

And goes on to add:

Here you have the BBC, light years ahead of any other broadcaster with its technologists and applications, in a market which is increasingly convergent, not yet sharing its toys. BBC management may snub these suggestions, saying they need to be careful with the “BBC brand” and what is released under it. Nonsense - what brand prevails if you are an aggregator rather than just a provider? Does Apple prevent Coldplay putting albums on Music Store because their rather dreary image isn’t compatible with the coolness of an iPod? No. The IMP takes the BBC into a completely different business from linear broadcasting and it will be interesting to see if it is prepared to behave now in a way which is as advanced as its technology.

Interesting points. I was one of the unlucky ones who was unable to participate in the IMP trial. I’m also not sure whether open-access is tantamount to advanced behavior as Emily Bell suggests. Itunes is just one example of a situation where open-access works, but many proprietary systems work just as well for the consumer (e.g., Sony’s gaming systems). And itunes is not completely open-access in any case: Apple certainly exercises editorial control of what music and video appears in its Music Store offering, both in terms of access and time-place-manner of distribution of content.

I’m also not sure I agree with Bell in terms of the strength of the BBC’s competitive position here. Sure, the BBC may be able to exclude content from other content creators from its IMP, but this is a situation where the BBC has no privileged position like television or radio. The BBC IMP will compete with what I’m sure will be similar or even more robust offerings from Apple, Google, Sony, Yahoo, Microsoft, Viacom, Time Warner, Disney, etc.

It could go either way, really: (i) the BBC could find itself the host of a successful new service that millions around the world use to access audiovisual content, or (ii) it could find itself having to explain how it wasted taxpayer money on a poorly-used service that essentially replicates DVRs. Maybe something in-between?

Comments / IMP war-stories to: blog@ofcomwatch.co.uk