????5年多來(lái)，人們一直在爭(zhēng)論不休：谷歌（Google）到底是不是一家媒體公司？這個(gè)問(wèn)題根本沒(méi)有意義，它之所以被人們一再提及，在很大程度上是因?yàn)楣雀杳看味寂瓪鉀_沖的堅(jiān)稱(chēng)自己是一家科技公司，而非媒體公司?？萍脊九c媒體公司差別何在？你對(duì)比一下這兩個(gè)行業(yè)的股票業(yè)績(jī)和利潤(rùn)率就知道了。此外，谷歌不愿被視為內(nèi)容發(fā)布商還有一個(gè)原因，那就是它不愿承擔(dān)隨之而來(lái)的責(zé)任，因此，它希望人們將它視為內(nèi)容組織者。

????然而，不論谷歌如何辯解，它絕對(duì)是一家媒體公司。因?yàn)樗蚴鼙姵尸F(xiàn)內(nèi)容，并借此銷(xiāo)售廣告。至于說(shuō)很多內(nèi)容都不是它自己生產(chǎn)的，這根本不能說(shuō)明問(wèn)題。要知道，Netflix也是如此，很多有線電視頻道也是如此，地方電視臺(tái)和Buena Vista Television等內(nèi)容分銷(xiāo)商亦是如此。但以上這些都是媒體公司。所以，問(wèn)題不在于谷歌是否是媒體公司，而是在于它是何種媒體公司。它是一種新型的媒體公司，依據(jù)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)領(lǐng)域的經(jīng)濟(jì)法則運(yùn)作，而完全不受電視、電影或出版行業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)法則的影響。

????看起來(lái)，谷歌早晚會(huì)要卸下偽裝。近幾個(gè)月來(lái)，該公司開(kāi)始重新重視YouTube業(yè)務(wù)。最近，谷歌從Netflix 和派拉蒙（Paramount）招攬了好幾位做內(nèi)容的大腕。此外，谷歌還進(jìn)行收購(gòu)，以提高其內(nèi)容的質(zhì)量。據(jù)傳該公司還計(jì)劃斥資1億美元，為名流們創(chuàng)建新的頻道，還將幫助他們創(chuàng)作內(nèi)容，并與其分享收入。谷歌還調(diào)整了其導(dǎo)航，使之看起來(lái)更像有線電視，而非人們上傳自家寵物古怪視頻的地方。

????不過(guò)，古怪寵物視頻仍然很重要，而且仍將是YouTube的一根頂梁柱。這些個(gè)人上傳的內(nèi)容（當(dāng)然不光是寵物視頻，還有自制音樂(lè)短片、婚禮視頻等）是YouTube推行的三大戰(zhàn)略之一。另外兩個(gè)戰(zhàn)略是大眾娛樂(lè)和小眾節(jié)目。

????不過(guò)，由于其盡可能不干涉視頻制作，相比電影工作室和制作公司等絕大多數(shù)我們所公認(rèn)的“媒體公司”，YouTube有著明顯優(yōu)勢(shì)——其邊際成本幾乎為零。換句話說(shuō)，無(wú)論是寵物視頻，還是籃球比賽，YouTube將視頻呈現(xiàn)給用戶(hù)的成本幾乎是一樣的，無(wú)論廣告收入有多少，對(duì)它來(lái)說(shuō)都是一本萬(wàn)利。如果大家瘋傳雷貝卡?布萊克的《星期五》（美國(guó)最近很流行的一段網(wǎng)絡(luò)視頻——譯注）這樣業(yè)余得可笑的視頻，很好；而如果大家都涌向阿拉伯半島電視臺(tái)（Al Jazeera）頻道，那也不錯(cuò)?？傊琘ouTube并不會(huì)太關(guān)注視頻本身的內(nèi)容。

????然而，奇怪的是許多技術(shù)“磚家”都喜歡用一些捕風(fēng)捉影的證據(jù)證明YouTube正在涉足內(nèi)容制造業(yè)務(wù)，或正在成為一家“媒體公司”。大舉進(jìn)入內(nèi)容制造領(lǐng)域有違谷歌的核心策略：呈現(xiàn)第三方內(nèi)容，以盡可能避免風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和降低成本。

????不過(guò)既然YouTube既想保持寵物視頻業(yè)務(wù)，又想涉足高端視屏領(lǐng)域，那么它必須明白，高端內(nèi)容卻是高端，即便他們是由第三方制作的。這就是YouTube本月早些時(shí)候收購(gòu)Next New Networks的原因。該公司將幫助YouTube指導(dǎo)其內(nèi)容合作伙伴打造高質(zhì)量視頻。此舉也許會(huì)淡化內(nèi)容制作和發(fā)布之間的界限，不過(guò)并不會(huì)越界。YouTube不會(huì)采取任何審查機(jī)制，內(nèi)容合作伙伴們將一如既往地制作一切自己想做的視頻。YouTube在上周還收購(gòu)了一家愛(ài)爾蘭視頻增強(qiáng)公司Green Parrot Pictures，這同樣將增強(qiáng)YouTube在高端視屏領(lǐng)域的實(shí)力。

????盡管我私下里和好幾位正在或曾在YouTube工作的人士交流過(guò)，不過(guò)YouTube拒絕讓高管出面正式表態(tài)。

????保持對(duì)各類(lèi)視頻的兼收并蓄，這意味著無(wú)論互聯(lián)網(wǎng)/傳統(tǒng)電視市場(chǎng)走向何方，YouTube都已立足不敗之地。它一方面正和眾多好萊塢制片人洽談視頻內(nèi)容合約，旨在瞄準(zhǔn)大眾市場(chǎng)；另一方面，它還在開(kāi)設(shè)（或允許別人制作）小眾頻道——也許這會(huì)帶來(lái)絕佳的機(jī)會(huì)。

????這些年來(lái)，有線電視商一直在不斷細(xì)分電視觀眾，而互聯(lián)網(wǎng)則在繼續(xù)這一過(guò)程。例如，有線電視商制作的烹飪節(jié)目數(shù)量多得可笑，然而互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上的此類(lèi)節(jié)目有過(guò)之而無(wú)不及，數(shù)量繁多而且更加細(xì)化。就像YouTube一位員工建議的，可以開(kāi)設(shè)一個(gè)烹飪素食的專(zhuān)門(mén)頻道，或是一個(gè)關(guān)于沖浪的專(zhuān)門(mén)頻道。對(duì)于有線電視商而言，這些頻道毫無(wú)經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值，不過(guò)對(duì)YouTube這類(lèi)網(wǎng)站而言可能并非如此。

????《媒體發(fā)行業(yè)務(wù)》（The Business of Media Distribution）的作者杰弗里?C?尤林表示，“有線電視商的價(jià)值在于聚合?！倍鳼ouTube則“它有能力將內(nèi)容無(wú)限細(xì)分下去。”

????當(dāng)然，即使對(duì)于在線視頻，我們也并不清楚如此細(xì)分是否真的具有經(jīng)濟(jì)價(jià)值。不過(guò)YouTube本身并未對(duì)此下注過(guò)多，它僅僅提供了相應(yīng)平臺(tái)。如果經(jīng)濟(jì)效益真的不錯(cuò)，那么YouTube就會(huì)變成一顆搖錢(qián)樹(shù)。而即使失敗，它也不會(huì)遭受太大損失。YouTube只有區(qū)區(qū)幾百名員工，它仍然可以從內(nèi)容合作和寵物視頻中獲利。

????作者：項(xiàng)航

????For more than half a decade, people have been debating whether Google is a media company. The question is ultimately pointless, though it keeps being asked in large part because every time it comes up, Google (GOOG) peevishly insists that it's not a media company, it's a technology company. What's the difference? Just compare the stock performance and profit margins of the two industries. The company also wants to avoid the liabilities that might come from being perceived as a publisher, as opposed to an indexer, of content.

????Whatever Google might say, though, of course it's a media company. It presents content to an audience, against which it sells ads. That it doesn't produce much of its own content is beside the point. Neither does Netflix. Neither do many cable TV channels, local stations, or distributors such as Buena Vista Television. All are media companies. The issue isn't whether Google is a media company, but what kind of media company it is. It's a new kind -- one that operates by the economics of the Internet, with no legacy ties to the economics of television, movies, or publishing.

????It seems likely that, sooner or later, Google will have to drop the pretense. The company in recent months has placed a new emphasis its YouTube division. It has recently hired several big names – all "content" people -- from companies like Netflix (NFLX) and Paramount. It has made acquisitions to improve the quality of its offerings. It is planning to spend a reported $100 million to create new channels for celebrities , whom it will help create content and with whom it will share revenues. It has rejiggered its navigation to make it – somewhat – more like cable television and less like a place for people to post their wacky cat videos.

????But the wacky cat videos are still important, and will remain a staple of YouTube. Such personal offerings (not just cats, of course, but homemade music videos, wedding videos, etc.) represent one of three strategies that YouTube is pursuing. The other two are mass entertainment and niche programming.

????But by keeping as hands-off as possible in terms of production, YouTube has a distinct advantage over most firms that we think of as "media companies," such as movie studios or production houses: its marginal costs are nearly zero. That is, whether it's a cat video or a basketball game, the company spends about the same amount of money to present the video to the public, and whatever advertising revenue it earns is all gravy. If a silly amateur video like Rebecca Black's "Friday" goes viral , great. If people flock to the Al Jazeera channel, also great. YouTube doesn't much care what the video itself contains.

????Which is why it's so strange that so many tech pundits seem so ready to pounce on this or that piece of news evidence that YouTube is getting into the content-production business, or becoming ("officially," as one writer recently declared) a "media company." Going wholesale into content production would go against Google's core strategy: to present (and profit from) the content of others while bearing as little of the risk and cost as possible.

????But since YouTube wants to be in the high-end video business as well as in the cat video business, it has to that the high-end stuff really is high end, even when it's produced by someone else. That's why it purchased Next New Networks earlier this month. That company will help YouTube advise its content partners on how to create quality video. The move might make the line between producing and distributing a bit thinner, but it doesn't breach that line. YouTube won't be greenlighting anything, and content partners will continue producing whatever they want to produce. Quality is also behind the purchase last week of Green Parrot Pictures, an Irish video-enhancement firm.

????YouTube declined to make any executives available to comment on the record, though I talked to a couple of YouTubers, current and former, on background.

????By keeping itself open to the entire range of video offerings, YouTube means to position itself to prosper no matter what the Internet/TV market ends up looking like. It is working to make deals with Hollywood producers for content to aim at a mass audience. But it also is creating (or allowing others to create) niche channels -- and that might be where the best opportunities lie.

????Cable has splintered television viewing over the years into smaller and smaller niches. The Internet is continuing the process. So, for example, while cable makes a ridiculous number of cooking shows available, there could be even more -- and more specialized -- such shows on the Internet. As one YouTuber suggested, there could be a whole channel devoted to vegan cooking, or one devoted to surfing. Such channels would make no economic sense on cable, but they might on the Internet.

????"The value of cable is silos," says Jeffrey C. Ulin, author of "The Business of Media Distribution." On YouTube, he says "there is an infinite degree of slicing and dicing that's possible."

????Of course, it' not yet clear that such niches will work economically, even online. But YouTube itself isn't gambling much on the outcome – it's simply making the platform available. If the economics work out, YouTube could become even more of a cash cow. If they don't, it's not a huge loss, and with just a few hundred employees, the company can still make money from content partnerships and cat videos.