There's an awful lot of chatter today about the future of television - what with Jeff Jarvis writing a long post in response to a keynote made by a BBC executive, who referred to a column Jarvis wrote in The Guardian; rumblings about the Venice Project's launch (the new TV service from Skype's Nikas Zennstrom and Janus Friis; and Steve Gillmor suggesting "TV is dead". But what about the cableco? They have oddly not been a big part of the discussion, which is strange given they are one of the main distributors of TV programming. You would think that if the TV industry is poised for major changes, the cablecos will be impacted along with broadcasters, content producers and advertisers. It may be that cablecos are in an advantageous position because they have two key strategic assets: a ubiquitous (at least in North America) delivery platform for traditional television, and high-speed Internet networks to deliver next-generation programming/TV 2.0. If the traditional delivery model continues to thrive as people migrate to PVRs, video-on-demand and pay-per-view, the cablecos will thrive. On the other hand, id the Web starts to become a way to deliver programming through streaming video, downloads, etc., the cablecos could do well by leveraging their high-speed networks and customer relationships. Another angle to the cable story is my theory on targeted TV watching vs. couch potatoes, which is based on the idea people are watching fewer television shows but building a stronger relationship with those shows through the PVR, time-shifting and blogs. Even though more people are becoming more selective about what they watch, these programs are spread across the cable spectrum. Some shows, for example, will be found on basic cable, while others such as The Sopranos and ESPN are part of higher-tier packages. What it means - at least until pay-as-you-go TV packages emerge - is consumers will continue to pay for multiple cable packages even if they are watching less television. All in all, I would aruge it's good to be a cableco right now.

It has been a challenge but I've tried not to jump on the bandwagon when Google unveils yet another tool (e.g. Google Spreadsheets, Google Base, etc.) but I have to admit the news about its newest creation from Google's R&D lab, Google Custom Search Engine, is pretty cool. Basically, Google has rolled out a service that lets you define the Web sites you want included in a search. So, for example, if you're really into food, you can use tags to create a personalized vertical tool that only searches food-related sites. And there's more: Google has also created a way to place this search widget on a Web site or blog so it can be offered to visitors with the same interests. While many of Google's new tools have been uninspiring or simply duds, DIY search is newsworthy because it's all about vertical search, which has been getting more attention as people look for tools to make search even more effective and productive. Now, Google DIY is interesting but I wonder if it's a sign of things to come from Google about its vertical search plans. For example, what if Google launched Google Travel Search for people interested in booking trips and learning more about the world around them. This would be a great way for Google to establish a huge foothold in the travel business if advertisers embraced it as an effective way to reach consumers. The same approach could be used for real estate, automobiles, consumer electronics, sports, etc. Maybe Google Custom Search Engine is a Trojan Horse that gets people turned on about vertical search. Once people like it, Google will simply roll out its own vertical search engines as a way to expand the market. For more, check out GigaOm and Matt Cutts, who provides a nice overview on Google DIY's features.