<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Revver to Monetize and Distribute Through TV</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/10/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/10/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/</link>
	<description>Profiling Web 2.0</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:41:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brian Greene &#187; late late puppini sisters</title>
		<link>http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/10/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/comment-page-1/#comment-6454</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Greene &#187; late late puppini sisters</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2006 22:20:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/11/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/#comment-6454</guid>
		<description>[...] rather that sit through the Late Late show for the puppini sisters I just TV&#8217;ed it of myspace from the sharon osbourne show. do I get a reduction in tv licence fee for this? no; someone must still make the content and pay the camera men; or do RTE just lose a viewer of adverts; I already own a renault; if I watch content on a network divorced from its creator, how does its creator monetise on it. ? So tv eye balls are moving to you tubed content and YouTube (google) content is moving to TV. Well if not YouTube then Revver content; rev2.org reports In what seems like a significant move, online user-generated content player Revver has teamed up with FameTV, which is set to launch in the UK on November 6th as part of their Sky Digital Network and promises to be the worldâ€™s first channel to run fully on user-generated content. The official details can be found on the Revver blog. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] rather that sit through the Late Late show for the puppini sisters I just TV&#8217;ed it of myspace from the sharon osbourne show. do I get a reduction in tv licence fee for this? no; someone must still make the content and pay the camera men; or do RTE just lose a viewer of adverts; I already own a renault; if I watch content on a network divorced from its creator, how does its creator monetise on it. ? So tv eye balls are moving to you tubed content and YouTube (google) content is moving to TV. Well if not YouTube then Revver content; rev2.org reports In what seems like a significant move, online user-generated content player Revver has teamed up with FameTV, which is set to launch in the UK on November 6th as part of their Sky Digital Network and promises to be the worldâ€™s first channel to run fully on user-generated content. The official details can be found on the Revver blog. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dan</title>
		<link>http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/10/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/comment-page-1/#comment-6349</link>
		<dc:creator>dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2006 20:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/11/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/#comment-6349</guid>
		<description>This is not really that new. Al Gore&#039;s Current.tv has a similiar model. Internet analysts tend to overlook it, since it looks mostly a national TV station and not user submitted content. Roughly 1/3 of their broadcast content is user submitted and they stream off their site as well as Yahoo.

Current.tv might also get overlooked because their quest for &quot;high quality&quot; content often translates as boring content.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is not really that new. Al Gore&#8217;s Current.tv has a similiar model. Internet analysts tend to overlook it, since it looks mostly a national TV station and not user submitted content. Roughly 1/3 of their broadcast content is user submitted and they stream off their site as well as Yahoo.</p>
<p>Current.tv might also get overlooked because their quest for &#8220;high quality&#8221; content often translates as boring content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The OTHER video network at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</title>
		<link>http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/10/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/comment-page-1/#comment-6301</link>
		<dc:creator>The OTHER video network at twopointouch: web 2.0, blogs and social media</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rev2.org/2006/10/11/revver-to-monetize-and-distribute-through-tv/#comment-6301</guid>
		<description>[...] Sid Yadav comments that the system ought to work, since it compares to the other well-established &#8216;vote-for-your-favourite&#8217; systems in place: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Sid Yadav comments that the system ought to work, since it compares to the other well-established &#8216;vote-for-your-favourite&#8217; systems in place: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
