Quotes About Audience

Sustaining an audience with a web series is an impossible task.

In the case of the Web, each of us has slightly more access to a mass audience - a few more people slide through the door - but Facebook is finally a crude, personal multimedia conglomerate machine, personal nation-state machine, reality-show machine. New gadgets alter social patterns, new media eclipse old ones, but the pyramid never goes away.

I never expected to make the videos a full-time job. I thought I would continue to work as a freelance Web designer and just do the videos for fun. But the audience built so quickly that it became full-time.

The target market is for people who have not been entrenched in Web culture.

Think of any news site on the web that sells subscriptions; AOL has four times as many people as the largest subscription service. We have people who pay to use our products and services, and they are heavily engaged in our content.

What's great about having a sci-fi/fantasy show start on the web: that's a gigantic part of your demographic right there. It targets a significant part of your demographic when you deliver online.

Human attention is limited, and a massive number of newly browsable books from the long tail necessarily compete with the biggest best-sellers, just as cable siphons audience from the major networks, and just as the Web pulls viewers from TV.

Katalyst is a merger of three industries. A piece of us is connected to ad agencies. Because we get the complex overlay of the social Web, we know how to engage an audience and how to make entertainment for the social Web. And we know how to gain and activate and retain an audience. So we create social networks for brands.

I've made sure to always update my web properties constantly - Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, my Hypebeast blog... making sure I divided content across all of them to keep each outlet fresh to keep people coming back.

The Web meant that I didn't have to schlep a whole bunch of stuff to a museum and fight with all their constraints and make something that, in the end, only 150 people would actually get out to see. Instead, I could put something together in my lab and make it accessible to the world.

One of the great joys of launching your idea on the web is that it's a meritocracy. The good stuff will rise to the top and find an audience, and you don't have to impress one idiosyncratic commissioning editor.

Being web video 'experts'/'pioneers,' whatever you may want to call us, has us always thinking about content that is outside the box, inherently viral in itself and good for web video audiences, as you can't just put out a good piece of content and expect it to be seen.

The original idea was to make it easy to publish content on the Web and find an audience. What we learned from publishers is that the thing they want the most is more readers and more revenue.

Before the web and these highly focused entities, journalists got to decide what was important to tell their audience and educated their readers. Now, journalists have to try and understand what their consumer actually wants to read and what angle they are looking for in order to keep audiences engaged in a highly competitive world.

I think if you make good, interesting content with compelling story lines and good characters, people will tune into the web for as long as you want them to.

There are some channels that are trying out new content. These shows have new and fresh stories. The trend on TV is changing, and along with this, there are web series, too. But the audience needs to get used to these stories.

Digital is not about putting up your story on the web. It's about a fundamental redrawing of journalists' relationship with our audience, how we think about our readers, our perception of our role in society, our status.

Writing that's native to the web is different in ways that are crucial but subtle enough that you can miss them if you conceive of your audience as reading a printed product.

Both search and social have these distribution angles to them. Before social, if you wanted any sort of traffic on the web, it had to come from search.

The audience is different for TV and web, but the latter offers everything for everyone.

I felt people wouldn't be enticed by the web, but I was wrong. I too don't watch TV anymore, and only watch digital shows.

To be honest, making films is so expensive and their shelf life is limited. On the web, content remains... you can watch it after five, eight, 10 years... There's a huge audience and content on the web is accessible at the click of a phone.

The difference between television, films and the web is that unlike the former, the latter is not appointment viewing. You decide the time you want to watch and how much you want to watch. The web is for the viewer.

Web is going to become very big... The format is different in terms of its storytelling pattern and its duration. Web audience enjoys watching stuff on the go, they prefer to watch it alone. It is isolated viewing while cinema is collective viewing.