In case you don’t know, Amanda Palmer is a musician who holds the record for the most money ever raised on a Kickstarter campaign to fund an album. In the video below, you can see a recent TED talk that Amanda gave in which she talks about her background, how she cultivated her relationship with her fans, and what she learned from being a street performer.

But most of all, she talks about the “art” of asking your fans to support you and why she’s found it to be so successful.

If you don’t follow the TV business or the social media industry closely, it’s possible you may have missed a major announcement a couple months ago that could impact how the comedy business operates in the near future.

Back in December, Nielsen (the organization that’s responsible for measuring TV ratings) announced it was partnering with Twitter to create a new Nielsen Twitter TV Rating. You can read about it here.

Not a lot of specifics were revealed about what exactly it would be, but it’s a clear indication that Twitter conversation about television shows is about to be measured in a formal way and likely to become a metric that will contribute to determining the advertising value of various shows.

If you’re a comic or anybody who hopes to some day work in television in any capacity, this is major news. Here’s why…

Virtually all decisions in television – from what gets produced to who gets cast – are made based on what networks believe will lead to bigger ratings. That’s because the bigger the ratings, the more advertisers will pay to advertise in those shows and at the end of the day, the TV business is all about making as much money as possible from advertisers.

But the introduction of a new ratings system that incorporates the level of social conversation about a show as a key metric means that suddenly that conversation is directly monetizable by TV networks. Therefore, it becomes infinitely more valuable because the more Twitter conversation there is about a show (or a cast member of a show), the more the network can charge advertisers to run their commercials in that show.

Taken one step further, this means that the talent’s ability to attract/drive conversation about a show on Twitter directly leads to increased revenue for the network producing that show.

That’s a major development.

Suddenly, having a large (and more importantly, engaged) social media following no longer has hypothetical value in the TV industry, but has actual, literal value. And even if you don’t have a huge following, having a solid understanding and proven ability to succeed with social media also has value because it positions you as somebody who can capitalize on a larger audience if given the opportunity to reach the masses through a national TV series.

Think about it:

If you’re producing a standup comedy special whose success will be (at least partially) determined based on social media activity around it, are you going to book the comic with the active social media following or the one that doesn’t have one?

If you’re hiring a writer for a late night show and part of the job is getting a lot of social media activity for the show (because in this new world tweets equals ratings), aren’t you going to go with the comic who knows how to get a lot of retweets on their own?

If you’re casting somebody to play the wacky neighbor on a sitcom, are you going to go with the comic that already has a social media following or the one that doesn’t?

If you’re deciding what show to buy and put on the air, are you going to buy the one that has built-in social elements or the one that’s a more traditional, passive viewing experience?

These new Nielsen Twitter TV ratings won’t roll out until next Fall, but it’s easy to see how they could drastically impact which comedians get opportunities and which don’t. Even before the ratings had rolled out, you’re already seeing articles about shows that are Twitter hits such as this recent Entertainment Weekly cover story about Pretty Little Liars.

Now, it’s debatable whether or not this will ultimately be a good thing for TV from a creative standpoint, but there’s no doubt it’s going to impact the business – and the comics who are trying to crack into that business.

Just something to think about the next time somebody tries to convince you that all that matters is what a comic does on stage…

I just finished listening to the newest Connected Comedy podcast episode and wanted to share my thoughts since unfortunately I wasn’t able to join for its recording.

In the episode (which I highly recommend you check out), Jordan Cooper, Josh Homer, and Chelcie Rice discuss the recent dustup in the New York comedy scene about whether or not stand up comedians should be paid for shows they do at the UCB Theater. As I listened to it, I didn’t find myself wanting to take a side but rather coming back to a broader observation.

Everybody in comedy is taking advantage of everybody else in comedy…and that’s ok.

Arguing about whether or not comedians should get paid is kind of pointless because I think there’s only one thing that should happen in comedy – comedians should take advantage of the value they create and venues/bookers/industry should take advantage of the value they create. And if both sides are doing what they should do in that matter, then the question of whether or not comics should get paid works itself out.

For example, comedians should take advantage of show producers/promoters by using the audiences they attract and provide to build their own fanbases – that’s their job. And clubs should use those comedians to attract people to their venues to make as much money as possible off of them – that’s their “job.”

But here’s where it gets interesting. The big question for every show (and for that matter every TV production, podcast, web series, or any other comedy creation) is what is the real reason the audience has come out to the show?

If the audience is there because of the venue, then the venue should exploit that value to make as much money as possible for it.

But on the other hand, if the audience is there because of the talent, then the comics should exploit that value to make as much money as they would like from it. It’s basic business – whoever has the most value should reap the most rewards.

So what’s really interesting to me about the UCB situation is that it’s easily resolved if both sides are willing to figure out who really provides the most value by controlling the audience. If a popular show at UCB left the theater to go someplace else where they could make more money, how much of the audience would follow them to the new venue? And, just as importantly, how much of an audience would UCB draw to the show that replaced it in the theater?

It’s possible that both sides could thrive on their own, or it’s equally likely that both would draw smaller audiences on their own. Either way, you’d have a clear realization of who was actually providing the value and therefore who was taking advantage of who.

The business of comedy – just like all business – necessitates that people take advantage of the value they provide. That may sound crass, but it doesn’t have to be. It’s also not anti-comic. Too many comics fail to take advantage of the value they do provide.

If a venue is generating $1,200 on the strength of your name and you’re not getting the majority of it, then you’re a terrible businessman. And if you’re a venue who’s paying a big sum to a performer who’s not responsible for generating any of those ticket sales, then you’re equally dumb.

Arguing about whether or not venues should pay comics or whether comics should perform at venues that don’t is just a distraction. Wouldn’t we be better off talking about how both performers and promoters can increase the value they provide?

I write a lot of inspirational stuff on Connected Comedy designed to encourage comics at all levels to think about what’s possible in their careers and to understand that your fate really is in your own hands these days.

This is not going to be one of those posts.

Instead, I want to explain why it’s just as important to be a realist as it is an idealist.

While I firmly believe you should constantly experiment with different forms of comedy, marketing, and approaches to build an audience and further your career, you also need to be honest with yourself.

If you’re doing all these things and they’re not working, if you’re not making any progress despite your hard work, then you need to face another possibility – maybe you’re just not good enough.

I know that probably hurts to read and hurts even more to think about, but it’s important to allow yourself to consider that possibility. Maybe your jokes, your live performance, your videos, your podcast, or whatever else you’re creating just isn’t good enough to catch on with potential fans.

Great content can’t succeed without great marketing, but it’s also true that great marketing can’t succeed without great content. So no matter how much you listen to my advice and no matter how much work you put into trying to attract a fanbase, if your content (online or on stage) isn’t good enough, you will fail.

But the point of this article isn’t to depress you and it’s not to convince you that you need to give up if you’re not good enough.

The point is that you need to honestly assess your comedic talent and recognize that the reasons things aren’t clicking for you may have more to do with your skills than your lack of marketing prowess. And if that’s the case, you need to focus your efforts on figuring out how to get better as a comedian (or blogger, podcaster, video creator, writer, etc.).

You don’t need to give up on learning how to use social media and all the things I preach about to attract new fans, but you need to understand that none of it will work if you don’t have the quality content to back it up.

I can teach you how to get people to see your videos, to visit your website, or to come to your show, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to like what they see. That’s up to you to deliver and if you do, then all the stuff I discuss will pay big dividends.

So what should you do if you’re not good enough? The simple answer is get better – but of course, that’s not that simple. But it’s also not impossible.

You can always get better with work and I hope you come away from this article understanding that.

But if you can’t be honest enough with yourself to realize that you’re not good enough and you’re wondering why none of the things I discuss are working for you? Well, then you’ve got a bigger problem.