Group items tagged

Yes it is nice that all different types of people can relate to her...but they were not relating to a real person, so that could of really upset them when they found out it was fake. That could cause someone to do something out of hand.

The point is that people were relating to the story. It was what held their interest. Whether or not she is fictional is unimportant. The fact that people were interested in this is what made it so substational to the future of "tv on the internet"

i noticed that they did this....they have every boy's dream...a beautiful nerdy girl who isn't afraid to be herself....not sure how much girls would like her though...

She's extremely cute. I watched the three videos on the side of the first page, and I can see why people would think she's adorable. However, the things she does and says seems a little immature for me, maybe that's the point but I don't see why people would tune into her like they apparently do. I just don't know...

Thats the difference with having this series on the internet, it is worldwide not only reaching select television networks.

The people on Survivor and the Bachelor and any other show that ends prior to the last air date must sign agreements of nondisclousure so that the ending is not revealed. How is this any different. This actually makes me think about the movie The Truman Show with Jim Carrey.

These characteristics are doing exactly what is intended to do. Just from the small three video's that i have watched so far, im interested to watch more.

This change really brought drama to the plot, but I can see how the mystery drew people in. I remember thinking the Law & Order episode that was based on this story was intriguing since it implied a future for this type of entertainment.

SO, Lonelygirl15 wasn't sure if this was a scam or not? Did she even look into it first?

I can see that. =D

So Jessica Rose had to be pretty to be on camera...that is not right. If the person has something to say...let them no matter what.

Doing this screen play was also a way for her to meet new people and to keep in contact with people she already knew.

These people are receiving instant fame. Like any celebrity there are positive and negative consequences. While Youtube may have in fact helped this actress's career, it could have also easily shattered it

good segueway.....pretty inventive and it would get vloggers interested

I can't believe that people would actually get so involved in this. When you think about it, it's kind of ridiculous. It's as if people don't value their lives enough that they have to rely on someone else's story for entertainment. Then, after all of that, they find out that it's fictional. I just think that this was very deceptive.

This is very interesting and shows a huge jump in popularity.

The amount of people that view the "diary videos" from LonelyGirl15 is not surprising to me because there are many shows on television these days that I thought no one would ever watch and yet millions do.

This is something that happens all the time were someone is asked a question and they just don't answer it or they change the subject. I had never thought of it from a legal stance though.

I am still not sure how legal not answering the question is. In the series, she is saying she is a certain individual. How is that different than if someone asks via email? Most likely, the dollar issue is the one you could get in trouble for because that would bring in false advertising.

This to me is something that would seem very weird. I do not think film is that expensive so i would not see why he would do this. I would probably have a bad feeling about it.

I would have bacxked out right then and there. It sounded shady to me too, and I wouldn't have gone along with it. I wonder why she did.

You know it really could have been. But Beckett and Flinders probably backed out on their original idea when they were afraid of lossing her. =P haha

This guy was raised on a commune with twelve other kids. He's just trying to find any way to stand out, even if it is creepy. He really thought through the process and made sure to cover himself.

I've noticed how quick people are to post vile and insulting things. They don't care who will see their remarks because they can hide behind their screen name. Cursing seems like less and less of a taboo online. I don't think this is a good way to share with our peers.

You can really tell in the advansment in the editting techs. from the first clip to the later ones. the style of the program evolves

People want to hear the dramatic, soap opery issues. Like with the YouTube video of "boom goes the dynamite," people enjoy looking at videos of people in distress, whether emotionally or socially. Plus, the title itself relates with the emotions a lot of teens feel. "My Parents Suck . . ." It's a title a lot of kids probably want to put on their life story at some time or another. It's no wonder it was so popular.

This is kind of like politics. Don't answer the question, avoid it, and no one will get in trouble.

Can you blame her? This is all very sketchy. And it's kind of ironic that they lured her to get involved in this "project" under false pretenses and the whole project itself is a lie.

I wonder how many other young actresses they tried this on before they found her? I can not image trusting these guys like she did. Exspecially when they eventually told her they would film in a private house in a bedroom.

I never played with hand puppets when I was 16.

OMG, how crazy is that?!?! I'm surprised no one else has commented on this particular part. I can't believe Amanda looked up people's myspace pages. My page is private but it still makes me skeptical. Maybe I should delete my myspace and facebook. Who wants people to know everything about them?

I agree. That is scary. I don't really see getting upset that the video was a fake but to get into friendships, email conversations and investigate people . No that crosses a line somewhere that is not acceptable. Those conversations were past just a unique new entertainment.

How does this justify the fact that the story line is flasified? Is this not false advertising? They are misleading the viewers.

I follow the Big Brother blogs. They are full of people who follow the live feeds. The houseguests are not permitted to sing any song because of this copyright issue. Watching the feeds, the stuff that is only seen over the internet, you can here producers come on and ask houseguests to "please stop singing" anytime they break into song. It's pretty amusing sometimes.

This is where this can get really ugly. Young girls who make a connection with her, only to learn that it is all lies. This could cause some serious emotional repurcussions.

I am not surprised. In our troubled world, people like to feel that they are not alone in the way they feel. They tend to gravitate towards people who have problems. It makes their own more bearable.

Okay, so where does this invasion of privacy end? It is like you are standing in the nude for the entire web to view.

it's interesting how the same viewers who degraded Emily embraced Lonelygirl15. I wonder if it has to do with her created persona. As they discuss later, it did appeal to a certain demographic on the web.

This is how they draw people in. When they see someone is upset and trying to deal with a problem, the viewer is drawn in. Humans like to see others besides themselves with problems.

Isn't this what most of us long for-a chance to be someone else, even if only for a bit? Think about it, I know when I was younger, I played dress up and pretended to be someone else. Even as an adult writer, I create characters that are not like me. They are from me, but are not me. Sometimes I am a child in my stories, sometimes an elderly man, sometimes I am even an anilmal or a bug, or a fairy, or a princess. The point is, it is an escape from reality, a vent, a form of release.

This is what worries me about all of this "free say" and "free expression" online. These websites are making it very easy for others to copy or steal ideas, sometimes without the true creator's knowledge. Currently, there really aren't any copyright laws about this, because no one really knows what to do about these problems.

This is quite true. We love to talk about what's going on in Hollywood, on reality shows, and the Internet. It gives us something to talk about, something to relate to with each other. With the Internet, we are able to actually show others what we are talking about.

This is interesting to think about. These "themed" and tagged sites do offer problems for advertising companies. Because thousands of new videos are being posted on You Tube, it is often hard to control and monitor what is posted.

True. Entertainment on the web is vastly different than what is found on television, especially when specific channels can boast specific content. Advertisers might not be aware of what it is they are working with when using YouTube. They like to syncronize ads with content of similarity; if you don't know the content, you don't know if the ad is appropriate for the respective viewer.

I do not think that if i was an advertiser i would associate myself with these things. They are uselly things that turn people away.

As much I would hope that advertisers would not associate with these types of things, I am not so sure they would shy away. Look at what airs now on reality TV shows. Eventually, if the general public doesn't act in an uproar over something, I think the advertisers will latch on.

I know there is a lot of risk when advertisers associate themselves with violence, porn, etc... but the truth is, is that is what sells and gets the most attention. People don't wanna hear boring, everyday issues. They want drama, and lots of it. So, if that means incorporating violence, hate, or God, then I bet they will.

This is true people will stick with what they know and are comfotable with.

This is very true when something gets really popular everone wants to see it even if they do not injoy it.

While this is true, I also think a lot of people want others to see them. The notion of people wanting to have their 15 minutes of fame should probably not be overlooked when talking about why YouTube is here to stay.

I think this is really true. But I also think that in some ways it is beginning to delute certain genres. Everyone thinks they can make a movie now and the fact that you can make a digital movie doesn't mean it was worth making. Director's like Scorsese spend years honing their crafts and this instantaneous everyone is a star atttitude dimishes artists like this. And i must admit, i will watch the stuff on Youtube for hours at a time, but i never see these clips as anywhere near the quality of a seasoned film maker.

These videos could produce very specialized advertising. Those that would pose these types of videos can be targeted by morally ambigious advertisers for very specific products or services. That is scary.

I know there is a lot of risk when advertisers associate themselves with violence, porn, etc... but the truth is, is that is what sells and gets the most attention. People don't wanna hear boring, everyday issues. They want drama, and lots of it. So, if that means incorporating violence, hate, or God, then I bet they will.

Is this really true though? A few paragraphs before, the article talks about the futile attempts to remove copyrighted material from YouTube. If the users are okay with posting videos that result in copyright infringement, are we really to be believe that there is not a good number of people trying (and probably succeeding, at least on some level) to post violent, pornographic, obscene, etc videos on the site. If I were an advertiser, I'd be very hesitant to post my product where the users are "policing their own space".

I'm not sure what advertisers will do about this. However, I do believe that someone will be able to find a way to reasolve this issue. There is no way that a cat food company would let their product be associated with animal cruelty.

Everything has to be about money. No wonder it will take them so long to figure something out, even if it is really important, because one mess up could cost them billions. I hate that our world revolves around money!!

Youtube isn't going anywhere, it really has only JUST begun. It will advnce just as technology keeps advancing and could someday replace television altogether. Or maybe something better than Youtube could come along?

Again, I feel that this comes back to the concept of community. True, we sit at computers by ourselves, and it is a lonely or individual act. However, the need to feel a part of something while we're engaging in this personal act shows how much people enjoy being a part of something.

Which is why Youtube is so convenient; we DO long to discuss things and engage. Youtube is just another way to do that and it makes discussion it easier.

Which seems like a logical and smart action.

I like it when there are member ratings on items. I do not see any harm in it. It would help other viewers and it would help the advertisers. It would be the viewer's choice to participate.

This sounds like an interesting compromise. It still allows for creativity and no legal toes are stepped on. The only thing I would worry about is the details on the "split of ad revenue".

It is what all mass media banks on. Our human nature and our desire to laugh at someone or to question or speculate about something, like who is going to be the next on "Survivor" to win a million dollars.

I think until customrs object, advertisers will associate themselves with whatever is going to sales. We have seen over and over in other media such as TV and radio that an advertiser will pull something when there is a public outcry. Where is there barometer before that? I think it''s in their pockets and their bank accounts.

Humans love ANYTHING that gives us something to talk about. Youtube sparks conversations. What is cool about it is if someone hasn't seen a certain video, it is so easy to look up. The viewer can go back and view it whenever.