Most people don’t realize just how important the Associated Press is. The news cooperative — owned by its U.S. news organization members — has been around since 1848, and now supplies 8,500 subscriber news outlets with text wire stories and photos, and 5,000 radio and TV outlets with audio and video content. And online, the service is ubiquitous, popping up on major news site after major news site.
But for a service with such global reach, the AP made a recent business decision that will actually lower its reach. As of today, AP member sites will offer free streaming video of about 40 clips per day, but with a catch: The new AP Online Video Network is powered by Microsoft’s MSN Video, meaning you must use the Microsoft browser, Internet Explorer (IE), to view it online. If you use Apple’s Safari browser or Firefox or Netscape or Opera or any other alternative browser, you’re out of luck.
And the timing couldn’t have been worse for the AP to launch the service, as the news wire has confidential video of President Bush being briefed on Hurricane Katrina from last August 29. As of 10:30 am Pacific Time today, Google News showed 920 stories online based on the AP story, but those without IE were left unable to see the key video scenes on many sites.
So what’s the big deal, you might say. Most people use Internet Explorer or at least have it loaded onto their PCs or Macs, right? It’s true that IE had about 85% of the browser share in February, with Firefox at about 10% and Safari at 3%. But in Europe those numbers are even stronger against IE, with Firefox having more than 20% of the browser market — mainly due to home surfing without IE.
Butt the AP and its member sites are requiring millions of Net users to either download or open a new application in order to see its video. And the Net doesn’t work that way if you want to reach the most people the fastest way.
This issue came to a boil on Poynter’s Online News email list yesterday, a discussion group made up of professionals who work on the newspaper sites you know and love. Michael Bazeley, senior web editor for the San Jose Mercury News, was flummoxed as to why the AP would do this to users.
“I can’t fathom why any online news pub would want to alienate so many users, especially when cross-platform Flash video is so mature and widely available, and when the video is generally available at so many other sources, such as Yahoo and CBSNews.com,” Bazeley wrote. “I can’t believe we’re still foisting platform issues on our users.”
After much back and forth, Sue Cross, the vice president of online for the AP, jumped in to the email discussion to try to quell the furor. But her main points were that Microsoft made the deal happen quickly and that the software giant has a great sales force to sell ads (the revenues of which will be split by members who host video and Microsoft). As for compatibility issues, the AP is concerned but not really doing anything about it.
“We are actively engaged with Microsoft on compatibility issues and we
have received a very positive response from them,” Cross wrote on the list. “MSNBC is faced with the same compatibility issues as the [AP video network] and is the largest video streamer among news and information sites. Microsoft is very aware of AP members’ concerns regarding issues of platform and browser incompatibility.”
Microsoft gave the AP a “very positive response” about compatibility issues? Yes, they’re overwhelmingly positive that it will work with the Windows Video Player. But what about users who are hitting an IE-required wall? They haven’t been heard from yet, but guess where they can get news video served through Flash, a technology that runs on almost every browser: Reuters. The rival news service recently made a deal with startup Brightcove that allows any news site or blog to run Reuters video using a player that is agnostic to your browser type. Imagine that.
Reuters chooses an open solution that let’s anyone run its video on nearly every browser (and also share ad revenues), while the AP requires people to use the IE browser. Adam Gaffin, executive editor of tech trade site NetworkWorld.com, explained the situation on the Online News list better than I could.
“The issue isn’t Microsoft’s business practices,” he wrote. “The issue is a decision by Associated Press that the immediacy of revenue from Microsoft’s ad network is more important than the fact that X percent of people using AP member sites will not be able to view its product (at least, not initially). When we [at Network World] decided on a video platform, we went with Flash because of the cross-browser compatibility. But we have a dedicated sales staff (in a niche market) so we didn’t face the revenue issues described by AP. Our first advertiser? Microsoft.”
What do you think? Is this issue overblown by media insiders, or are you upset that you will be required to use IE to view AP video on hundreds of news sites? Hit the comments below to share.
UPDATE: I’ve done some random testing on various news sites that run AP video. I am using a Firefox browser on a PC and have Windows Media Player installed on my computer.
On San Diego’s Cox.net site, I do see the videos after the Windows Media Player pops up. On Yahoo News’ AP Video page, I can see the videos on the Yahoo-branded video player. (Note that Yahoo is not a member organization of the AP and has a different arrangement to license AP video.)
But on the AP’s own video page, I see the typical wall asking for me to use IE.
Join in the fun! Send along your experiences and misadventures trying to watch AP video at your favorite news site and I’ll add them in a future post.
UPDATE 2: Sue Cross of AP writes in the comments to clarify the issue. Right now, sites that are in this new network (numbering 450 and counting) will require IE to see video. But AP continues to license video to other sites that can show it how they want — so not every site will have the IE requirement.
“People might mistakenly think AP video is available only with an IE browser,” Cross wrote. “AP has been providing video to websites for years via FTP, and continues to do so. The Katrina video got wide play in the new Online Video Network — but also huge play beyond it. AP members that want to take advantage of the Network’s advertising support in order to get a robust news video service up quickly can do so. We are quite comfortable that the option is a smart business decision for them and for us.”
That might be true, but I’ll stick by my assertion in the post that the AP will not reach as many Net viewers with this deal, and likely anger people who hit an IE-only wall. More power to them and Microsoft to fix the compatibility issue.
UPDATE 3: I’ve followed up on this post with an Open Source Reporting post that lists other online video services that require Internet Explorer or shut out Macs. I’m calling on readers to send in more entries to the running list.
UPDATE 4: I’ve also started another Open Source Reporting list, this time a “whitelist” of online video services that will work cross-platform with Windows, IE, Firefox and on a Mac. Check out the list and let me know of your favorite cross-platform video sites.
What seems worst about this, from my perspective, is that the AP is locking its video into a browser platform known for being bad for its user’s computer’s health.
The benefit of Firefox on Windows is that it’s far more secure than IE (let alone that Safari or Firefox on a Mac is far safer still).
Browser marketshare numbers aside, what the AP, and all web developers, should keep first in mind is the end user. The AP’s locking its videos into a format and browser platform known for its insecurity seems like woefully bad customer service. I for one won’t expose my computer to the spyware and viruses that plague IE. And I guess that means I won’t be watching AP video.
Curious. I don’t recall seeing similar interest on behalf of consumers against the news sites that make video available only in Apple QuickTime format.
Different standards apply to Microsoft products?
Those who are having trouble seeing the AP Katrina videos can find a Flash version on our new website HamptonRoads.tv. We’re still in beta, and are still hearing about occasional bugs from our users, but most folks should see it fine here: http://hamptonroads.tv/index.cfm?apf=3014
What Joe Zekas, and other Microsoft apologists, fails to understand is that Apple QuickTime, like Flash, is available for PCs as well as Macs. Microsoft does not offer a version of Windows Media Player 10 for Macs. In fact, MS recently discontinued development entirely for the Mac version of WMP in January (They hadn’t released a new update since 2003) and instead suggested Mac users use a third party plug-in. Even with this plug-in installed I still cannot view the AP content. Their web designers hard coded the site to only work for specific configurations of which my Mac running Safari capable of playing WMP files is excluded.
As a completely biased observer, (I work for Adobe as product manager for Flash Media Server) I couldn’t agree more with the criticism directed at the AP.
Their logic that MSFT lets them maximize ad revenue in the short term is flawed. According the MSNBC article linked in the post, AP claims that their service reaches 45 Million unique users. Let’s say they get 100 million streams a month (2 streams per user). Assume they have pre-roll advertising sold before each stream, at a CPM (cost per thousand) of $30 (reference)
Add 15% more users, and youre looking at near $500K more advertising revenue per month.
Also, its likely that the people using Firefox and Macs are more apt to consume video on the web, and my estimates are conservative.
This is just back of the napkin guesstimating, but in addition to frustrating their end users, the AP is literally throwing away millions of dollars in ad revenue.
I don’t consider myself a Microsoft apologist, and I believe I fully understand the cross-platform issues. I would want to know more about a commenter before I would cavalierly to refer to him as being among “other Apple apologists.”
QuickTime, while available for Windows, was a miserable program to download and install. The last time I did so (which was admittedly several years ago), I had to run a gauntlet of upgrade offers and more.
One of the points the post made was that “AP and its member sites are requiring millions of Net users to either download or open a new application … ” Explain to me how that doesn’t bite worse when tens of millions of users are affected?
Joe,
I’m company-agnostic. I just want a good, simple experience for all Web users. I’m not saying it’s ideal, but the vast majority of Internet users have the Flash plug-in on their computers. And for those who do not, the download is relatively painless, better than Quicktime or Windows Media Player, etc.
Cheers.
This seems more like poor coding rather than exclusion, I can see WMV on my mac, I have Flash 8 [not 7 as requested by the AP], but I am using firefox not explorer and fail to get past the gatekeeper at video.ap.org
Maybe it’s not a conspiracy between Microsoft and the AP against Apple but just plain bad coding?
I can see how this discussion could get easily sidetracked into a Mac vs. PC argument. However, I think that forcing anyone to download or load up anything to see video online — whether it’s QuickTime or IE or a special player — means that you shrink your potential audience. Making people jump through hoops can be bad for business, and it’s certainly not in the nature of the open web.
I’m curious whether the average users of these news sites will get upset, or whether this is just an esoteric argument among those in the know… It is true that despite the same requirements, MSNBC has a ton of video traffic.
Mark,
It doesn’t take a conspiracy for Microsoft to achieve the kind of lock-in they get with WMA-10. All they have to do is make their web-design tools incompatible with other browsers by default, and lazy, incompetent web designers will merrily tell their users “oh, why don’t you just use a bug-ridden, unsecurable mess of a web browser like I do?”
The solution is to publicly embarass web site owners who take the easy way out, as you have just done.
-jcr
Oh, one other thing: this is MSNBC we’re talking about, so in their case it’s probably quite deliberate.
-jcr
I don’t think it’s possible to discuss anything in which Microsoft is involved without bringing in a discussion of Microsoft’s business practices, strategies and ethics. This isn’t about incompetency in coding; it’s about Microsoft purposefully tying media availability to its technology platform strategy (i.e., force an all-Microsoft world).
It may be that Apple would do the same thing if they could.
But I don’t care about Microsoft vs. Apple.
I care about maintaining an open, level playing field in which anyone can publish and anyone can consume. We are all suspicious of government encroachment on press and speech freedoms. We need to be equally on guard against encroachment by giant multinational corporate interests.
I understand why AP took the route it did — not to conspire against Mac owners, but to get a service up and running quickly, with an ad sales partner (MSN) whose ability to sell the network is known. Unfortunately, AP now is entangled in Microsoft’s business practices.
I’ve recommended that my company sign the AP deal and deploy video.ap.org on our websites. But I’m doing so with a bad taste in my mouth, and with a reliance on AP’s verbal promise to push Microsoft to open the service to open, standards-compliant Web browsers.
Is everyone aware that Flash usually costs twice as much to stream than any of the other formats? Due to licensing and bandwidth cost. I would think this might also be part of a sound business decision not to use Flash.
Mark, all:
Few things:
You’ll find no argument here on the browser issues. The Network needs to be available to all users, whether they come in on IE or any other browser. That’s a top development issue for us. It’s one Microsoft is addressing. We’re working with them to make it happen as quickly as possible.
But from the postings, people might mistakenly think AP video is available only with an IE browser. AP has been providing video to web sites for years via FTP, and continues to do so. The Katrina video got wide play in the new Online Video Network — but also huge play beyond it.
AP members that want to take advantage of the Network’s advertising support in order to get a robust news video service up quickly can do so. We are quite comfortable that the option is a smart business decision for them and for us.
And the result is that through the Network, millions of people had access to those clips on on sites where video otherwise wouldn’t have been available.
Sue
Sue Cross
VP/Online
U.S. Newspapers
AP
Ms. Cross,
I appreciate your post that MS is “addressing” the browser issue but I have a feeling they will address it like they “addressed” Media Player on the Mac. By simply not supporting it anymore. Don’t even get me started on Flip4Mac. Ugh.
I think the most important part of your message is, “We are quite comfortable that the option is a smart business decision for them and for us.” This is what it comes down to, can you make money even at the expense of your readers. And your answer is a resounding, YES! To be honest this statement excites me. It is statements and business decisions like this that push the “new media establishment” (blogs, vlogs, etc) towards the democratization of media. In the past if I couldn’t get the media from you, I may not be able to watch/read it. But in the age of the Internet, I will pass you by, and get my information somewhere else while you and Microsoft count your nickels.
The Internet is changing every aspect of how we [the public] consume information. I applaud your decision to use a closed, proprietary video technology as this will only spur development for a truly cross platform solution. A solution where I can gather information from any device/platform I choose. If you don’t want my “business” I am sure there is someone on the Internet who does……
Business drives technology, not the other way around.
Microsoft gets nothing by supporting Mac users BUT shame on AP or anyone else who agrees with this and allows a “technology decision” to drive their business.
I go to MSNBC to read news, but go to CNN to watch it. Why? MSNBC does not provide Mac support. How is it that every other news site out there can support Mac but not MSNBC. It’s because they_don’t_want_to.
Just a couple of hours ago I had to shut down my Internet Explorer browser because something on a Web page crashed it. I had to pull up Firefox to view the same page (and about a dozen others) without a problem. But then I will hit a site infected by the Microsoft monopolists and I’m either right back in IE or am bypassing whatever the site designer decided to make incompatible with a non-IE browser. I want the option to not use a Microsoft browser, but Microsoft has been ingenious in forcing people into using inferior products, from its browser to its problem-plagued Windows operating systems, through its Draconian marketing practices. As a nonprofit cooperative created to disseminate news widely, the AP should be above such shenanigans.
Should it really surprise anyone in the news industry that a news agency legendary for its restrictive usage requirements would pick a restrictive, non-Open Source solution?
Any other choice by the AP would have been newsworthy.
microsoft owns a format and uses it to battle and own the media. apple does something similar with quicktime and adobe/macromedia does it with flash. they all want something for their formats use. they all make proprietary tools. microsoft has the worst business practices of the bunch but they are all out for their own businesses, its natural.
what this points to is a need for an open (not proprietary) format. if consumers and media services could decide on an appropriate format then it would open development and access to everyone.
what open format should ap and others consider for use as opposed to pimping for microsoft’s old, closed and soon dead format? what would the people and media outlets and websites like? this might be a more constuctive topic. open source and open formats been found to be very useful to avoid these conflicts and conflicts of interest. they are the future for other types of documents to avoid dependency on any one company.
longevity, quality, speed, upgradeablity and interoperability all are important. any thoughts by the tech and media experts?
For the people who object to having to download software (or don’t mind, on the flip side) to view content on the Web (regardless of the subjective quality of the installation process) are missing a VERY important point:
Unless you are running the latest versions of MS IE on the latest versions of Windows, THERE IS NOTHING TO DOWNLOAD! It’s not a question of convenience, the simple fact of the matter is that there is nothing available on the Mac, Linux, or older versions of Windows that allows you to view WMP v10 content. Period.
All content on the Web should be platform agnostic, especially news sites; there is no argument that any MBA can make that can possibly change this.
> QuickTime, while available for Windows, was a
> miserable program to download and install. The
> last time I did so (which was admittedly
> several years ago), I had to run a gauntlet of
> upgrade offers and more.
Um, millions upon millions of PC users have Apple iTunes installed. Which means they already have the latest version of Quicktime on their computers.
Sorry, Joe, but your comparison doesn’t hold water. Using Quicktime makes video available for PC and Mac users on any browser. The AP’s deal locks out anyone not using Internet Explorer on a PC. That’s a big difference.
Ms. Cross wrote:
“The Network needs to be available to all users, whether they come in on IE or any other browser. That’s a top development issue for us. It’s one Microsoft is addressing. We’re working with them to make it happen as quickly as possible.”
This is almost certainly a lie. It is either a lie by Ms. Cross or by Microsoft to Ms. Cross. Either way I will make a bold prediction, Mac users will not have access to AP WMV protected content, ever. Microsoft has actually abandoned all support of Windows Media Player on the Mac. They recommend downloading a not quite ready for prime time product called Flip4Mac. Even that isn’t good enough since Flip4Mac doesn’t do protected formats.
So, if Microsoft and by extension AP is really interested in get cross-platform availability then Microsoft should be giving out their protected format specification to Flip4Mac so that they can implement it as soon as possible. Does anyone think Microsoft is doing such a thing? I certainly don’t.
This is a terrible decision.
Nothing makes me click away from a site faster
then the dreaded “only works with Internet
Explorer”!
It’s even worse on the AP site….
“To use this product, you need to install free
software”
I need to install something to view content?
Click…. I’m gone!
As to the WMP vs Quicktime debate.
They’re both really horrible and I wouldn’t
use either of them……
Flash and Winamp on our PCs…
Adrian and others are simply wrong or confused:
WMP 10 does not work on the Mac, and Microsoft has no intention of making it work (as they have themselves said.) WMP 10 does not work on Linux, and, again, MS has no intention of making it work on Linux.
WMP 10 works on some versions of Windows. Period.
The last version of Internet Explorer for the Mac is 5.2, it will be the last version for the Mac. Indeed, MS no longer hosts an Explorer download on their Mactopia site, they suggest Mac users use Safari.
In any case, Explorer has not been updated for the Mac in five years.
You can work out for yourselves why MS would make something (Explorer and/or WMP) free on all platforms while they have competition and then end development and lock everyone else out when they have less competition or want to shut off new competition.
What isn’t rational is why the AP, Ford Motor Credit and XM Radio, among others, would fall into this trap. I understand why MSNBC has.
Here’s a tip to anyone planning on letting this happen to their business:
Your biggest problem is probably not that your customer service is “too good.”
The Network needs to be available to all users, whether they come in on IE or any other browser. That’s a top development issue for us. It’s one Microsoft is addressing. We’re working with them to make it happen as quickly as possible.
Ms. Cross:
Did you actually say you are working with MIcrosft to make “The Network” is available to all users, “whether they come in on” MSIE or another browser?
Really?
Microsft actually said they’d work with you on this, but didn’t mention the issue with WMP 10 and the DRM in it? And you think providing access to some, and publicaly shunning others (and that’s what you do when you lock them out) is good business?
Great, I’m going to decide that I stop doing business with any entity I do business with that can’t, at the minimum, make things available on Windows, Mac and Linux.
I left XM Radio over this (submit button tied to a Microsoft JAVAesque function), I can stop supporting my local PBS station or anyone else I run into that dips their toe into this.
And I’ll make sure they know why. And I’ll praise the “business decision” the AP made.
I feel that my space is not a good communication tool for teens. I am speaking from experience when I say my son began talking to the wrong people, and believe it or not they claim to be kids. Some of the pictures that is allowed on this site is just plain porno. As a mother of three children I wish they would just get this off the internet.
I just sent this email to AP. Maybe if they got thousands of similar letters they might wake up:
Subject: Video.ap.org and Macs
Well, I just wanted to let you know that I am one of millions of Mac Users that are disappointed that video.ap.org is 100% non-Macintosh compatible.
I have no intention of switching to a Windows machine to get your content either. How shortsighted. Reminds me of the story of the clerk who said, “I keep telling people over and over again all day long that that we don’t offer Mac service because there aren’t any Mac users out there!”
-=-Ron Evry-=-
Just about every time a marginalzation issue against Mac/Linux comes up, the following reaction is completely out of proportion to their tiny market share. You have to love the demographics of this insignificant group as opposed to the microsoft sheepeople majority.
I doubt that AP don’t know, going forward IE will be available only on windows XP and above. -or- AP thinks/believes IE is the Internet and they are supporting it fully! -or – Even they may be believing, accessing Internet using any computer Mac, Windows, Linux, etc., is nothing but using IE.
With all the issues that Microsoft has had and continues to have with the EU, why don’t they have any concerns about what appears to be a monopolistic practice? Is it because they feel that the current administration will give them a pass on this issue as well?
the Bush video was released to every news service in the country the day before the hurricane. To say it was confidential is very very misleading. Sorry, I cound’t ready any further after reading that particular lie.
oh, yeah, flash does rewl. I’m glad some of you people are finally getting something right.
Flash is great for many reasons, but there aren’t many RSS agregators that support it, nor does it allow for redistributing, which is becoming a big deal as more people are trying to spread media around.
Great topic Mark!
And just when I had all my Windows using friends and colleagues converted to Firefox (a few to Opera) for security reasons….now they’re being told to return to the bad old days of I.E.? Stranger than fiction.
The world is inevitably headed towards open formats. We’re seeing governments migrate towards open documents because they need to allow anyone access regardless of hardware/OS. Even if MS chooses not to see this view, it’s a foregone conclusion, and decisions like this only serve to accelerate the migration.
I worked Dot.com and telecom mergers in D.C before the Crash, reviewing the internal correspondence of many Fortune 100 companies. What frosted my six was that business revenues, rather than platform independence and internet compatibility standards, took precedence. It looked far too much like the folks from ‘Dilbert’ had been dictating how the Net would be governed rather than the collegial folks that spawned ARPANET. Now, if a site sniffs that I have to ‘upgrade’ to IE in order to visit them, I move on. If software refuses to load without IE, I refuse to load the software. Most recently, my brand new HP printer refuses to load its drivers and applications without IE. Guess I’m going to have to box it up and take it back to the store for refund. IE *is* that bad.
I am on Windox XP, have Windows Media Player installed, but I still can’t view the video content becasue i am using “Firefox” browser and not Microsoft Internet Explorer.
Windows Media Player works fine in Firefox, Microsoft chose not to make msn video available in Firefox and it’s a shame you have accepted their lies. Forget about supporting Mac users, what about users like me who are WINDOWS users but just using a non Microsoft Browser.
I am not opening up a new browser window just to view a video link I saw on your site. There are hundreds of other sites offering these services in an easier manner. Get Real.
There is a vendor independent spec for Internet video: ISO MPEG-4. It is supported by QuickTime (and iTunes) as well as Real Player and open source software like VLC. Even though Microsoft submitted technology to the MPEG-4 Patent Pool and collects revenues from the patents, they don’t support the format. If they did, things would be a lot simpler! It would be great if Flash one day suported MPEG-4 as well, but they seem to be moving in the opposite direction with more proprietary technology. Perhaps the increasing use of mpeg-4 based technologies in wireless and dtv will get things moving in the right direction…
I think the important issue is that AP has teamed with a very large, controversial company for a key resource, and this is likely to bias the organization. Reporting organizations should be as open as possible, not lazily agree to work with a monopolist.
Hello. I have been tempted by a link to one of your videos, and was unable to play it once I got to the page. I consider myself well versed with computers, and this computer has been able to play videos from most any websites which feature video content, except for the content at MSN Video.
I am aware that my recent model iMac has fantastic video capabilities, yet for some reason MSN Video does not allow playback on Macintosh hardware. When can it be expected that I may view your video content, and why have you not allowed me to do so thus far?
Thanks.
It looks like this entire topic stopped cold about a month ago. No surprise: it had reached impasse. The AP VP pronounces empty, weasel words and lets it go at that. The non-IE passionadoes vent. Nothing changes.
If AP thought they were going to gain an unfair advantage by tying to Microsoft’s bully strategy, they might reflect on an old saying. “In a deal with the Devil, you are the junior partner.”
AP hasn’t had a chance to refuse me, because I just avoid their private, little video club. Sadly XM Radio is also IE-only. You can visit their “selling” site with any browser you want, but when you try to sign up, then you get turned away unless your browser is a Windows version of IE. Even Mac IE doesn’t satisfy the gatekeeper. Seems rude to treat paying customers that way.
At least XM’s tech folks were refreshingly honest about admitting it. Customers must use Windows/IE or call the 800-number. It turned me off, for sure. I need XM for their aviation weather product. I’ll dump ’em the minute somebody else provides it.
A friend of mine says wisely, “I don’t mind what happens. I care — but I don’t mind.” The market will resolve Microsoft’s browser gambit.
Vice Presidents come and go fast in corporate America. AP’s current one in charge of video will sink or swim with her buddies from Bellevue.
And those satellites 22,241 miles in space will outlast XM’s current hard-headedness, until a wiser, more customer-friendly successor comes along to use them.
My view is this is not a Mac/Pc problem. Instead a Micro$oft vs open source problem. OSS is quickly gaing steam as affordable, secure applications. The days of paying 200 bucks for an OS that then feeds you a pantload of Spam, PopUPs and whose security team is still living in the 1980’s is OVER. Maybe with conscientious business practices by folks like Ubuntu and Opera people will finally shake the “Redmond Monkey” off their backs. As for the AP, they can’t sell what they don’t target their markets to.