Don't sell merchandise and don't use any copyrighted music without a license. If people buy Lonelygirl15 stuff thinking she is real, they could claim false advertising and sue.
I guess that was smart that he thought that much into, but it still doesnt sit right with me. When I watched the viedos I couldn't help but think how fake it all was.
Really quick here: isn't it false advertising? They made a series of FAKE videos about a girl. It's all scripted... but no one says that out loud... isn't that false advertising?
It was a sly move: Post a video that comments on an already-popular vlogger and piggyback on the existing audience.
Deffinitley a smart tactic, I commend him on his genious ways, he most be a intelligent person, writing skits and planning this all.
But he did persuade her to meet again the next day. It was at a crowded coffee shop – she figured she'd be safe. Beckett showed up alone and explained the plan this way: The project was a sketchbook for a film. If it was a success online, they could go to the studios and use the material as a screen test for both her and the story. That seemed to soften her. This was just a stepping stone to a feature film. She decided to give it a try.
At least that shows that lonelygirl has respect for herself. I don't no anything about these veidos except for what is on here, so I didn't no if she did anything inappopriate and that statement shows she isn't a so called "veido whore".
Her character is also deliberately crafted to target the Web's most active demographics. Nerds geek out on the idea that this beautiful girl lists physicist Richard Feynman and poet e. e. cummings as heroes. Horny guys respond to the tame but tantalizing glimpses of her cleavage. Teenage girls sympathize with her boy troubles and her sometimes-stormy relationship with her strict parents. Early on, viewers started emailing to offer advice and sympathy. Others wanted to talk dirty and discuss mathematical equations.
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...
As Bree, she struck up friendships with people in Sweden, Scotland, Ireland, Portugal, Australia, Mexico, and all over the US.
Thats the difference with having this series on the internet, it is worldwide not only reaching select television networks.
Now Beckett and Flinders had made her sign a nondisclosure agreement and, clearly pleased with themselves, told her that they wanted her to play the lead in what they billed as the future of entertainment.
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.
The title of the video was "My Parents Suck …," and she explained that her religion prevented her from doing things that other kids did. Still, she felt that her parents had gone too far when they said she couldn't go on a hike with Daniel. It was the first time Bree was emotional on camera.
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.
In fact, Beckett and Flinders hadn't even found an actress to play the part.
SO, Lonelygirl15 wasn't sure if this was a scam or not? Did she even look into it first?
It was exactly what her acting coaches at Universal Studios' film program had warned her against: unkempt producer-types hawking shady deals.
THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT JESSICA ROSE that the webcam loves. Her distractingly large eyebrows and small round face are bent and stretched by the fish-eye lens into a morsel of beauty that fits perfectly in a pop-up window. That's not to say she isn't pretty off camera – she is – but every step she takes closer to the cam multiplies and enhances her looks. It's a face made for the browser screen.
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.
As Bree, she struck up friendships with people in Sweden, Scotland, Ireland, Portugal, Australia, Mexico, and all over the US.
> She never offered much information about her character. Rather, she'd research an emailer's
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
A day or two after that, a new user named Lonelygirl15 posted an animated scene of a dinosaur stomping on a house, intercut with Emily's original videos.
good segueway.....pretty inventive and it would get vloggers interested
Emily's fans loved it and offered a deluge of comments, giving Lonelygirl15
instant cred. Viewers praised this funny, creative new vlogger, encouraged her
to keep the videos coming, and signed up to receive her future clips.
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.
. #15
The previous
videos had gotten between 50,000 and 100,000 views after a week,
but this one
logged 50,000 in its first
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.
Goodfried's advice was simple. "If anyone asks point-blank if you're real,
don't answer the question," he said. "Don't lie to people. The answer is no
answer. In my mind, it's the equivalent of not lying. But if people talk to Bree
like she's Bree, that's fair game."
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.
#8
The
previous week, one guy had offered her a part in a movie if she would
use
her
student ID to buy him discounted film at Kodak
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.
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.
(one called her an "attention whore" and another a "video slut"),
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.
But this first clip laid the groundwork for everything that was to come.
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
A
day or two after that, a new user named Lonelygirl15 posted an animated scene of
a dinosaur stomping on a house, intercut with Emily's original videos.
9
The
previous
videos
had gotten between 50,000 and 100,000 views after a week,
but
this one
logged
50,000 in its first
two hours.
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.
"If anyone asks point-blank if you're real, don't answer the question," he said.
"Don't lie to people. The answer is no answer. In my mind, it's the equivalent
of not lying. But if people talk to Bree like she's Bree, that's fair game."
This is kind of like politics. Don't answer the question, avoid it, and no one will get in trouble.
JESSICA ROSE WAS SUSPICIOUS and frankly a little pissed off.
She had come to this organic-tea shop to discuss what she thought was a feature
film called Children of Anchor Cove.
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.
Rather, she'd research an emailer's MySpace page and ask questions about their
life. They responded enthusiastically and helped spread the word about the
amazing new YouTube vlogger named Bree
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.
Don't sell merchandise and don't use any
copyrighted music without a license. If people buy Lonelygirl15 stuff thinking
she is real
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.
Teenage girls sympathize with her boy troubles and her sometimes-stormy
relationship with her strict parents.
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.
The previous
videos
had
gotten between 50,000 and 100,000 views after a week,
but
this
one
logged
50,000
in its first
two
hours.
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.
Rather, she'd research an emailer's MySpace
page and ask questions about their
life.
They responded enthusiastically and helped spread the word about the
amazing new YouTube vlogger named
Bree
.
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.
For Amanda, it was a welcome departure from her day job, where she answered phones and handled the demands of high-powered stars.
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.
It is interesting to see how websites can have value. Often I feel a website doesn't live up to the value the company has. For example Gieco is a popular website, but does it website live up to its popularity. Is it user friendly and information friendly? I believe it is possible to make money off a valued website, which can help any business.
He makes a good point. You have to make something to fit the media medium you are making it for. In terms of writing you wouldn't write a poem for a whole book, unless it was a really long poem.
He wanted to create shows in which the line between reality and fiction is
blurred, where viewers can correspond with the characters and actually become
involved in the story by posting their own videos.
This is an interesting idea that I think internet users will love. Being able to finally interact with what you are watching instead of shouting at the TV with no results is something everybody can enjoy.
"It's a new medium. It requires new storytelling techniques.
The more I kept reading this article the more I undertand, from the beginning I was just kind of freaked out that people could make this huge reality show on the web and it could be fake.
this is true....i mostly watch tv shows online now b/c i miss them on their regular air times. people are so involved in the net now that they would probably embrace a web-based show.
This is a really important point to realize. In this course, we continually talked about how writing technologies are constantly changing. The storytelling mediums are going to continue to change. For example, this is why so many people watch TV shows online. It'll be interesting to see how mainstream this idea becomes in the near future.
To me, this is an example of the cultural lag most of us are experiencing. Executives, typical of the white male dominating elites, are not ready to embrace this new video storytelling technology. Blurring the lines between reality and fiction is groundbreaking storytelling. We participate in interactive video games via our computers, why not interactive storytelling. Again, this whole concept to me is absolutely brillant!
each portal wanted the series to stream on its site only.
Unlike television, where writers sit in a room and come up with a single script,
the Lonelygirl15 team comes up with a general plotline and then sends its
writer-directors out to produce independent but interconnected videos. All the
characters, in essence, have their own show.
Collaborative video storytelling.....who would have thought!
It's enough to keep the operation afloat until they can find a way to take serialized online entertainment to the next level.
The exec responded by walking them through his fall lineup and pointing out that
the network's Web site had great supplemental video material for the season's
upcoming shows.
I think that Beckett is on to something, but the TV world just isn't ready for it yet. I think that we may see shows similar to "Lonelygirl" soon, because people want to be involved and participate in what they watch. Why do you think that shows such as Dancing with the Stars and American Idol are so popular? It's because everyone gets to be their own judge in a way. Also, they develop "relationships" with the contestants. They want their favorite singer to win or their least favorite to get booted off. Successful shows such as these are highly interactive.
If it couldn't be shared – if hard borders were put around it – how different
was it from TV?
I think that this feature is what made so many people interested in it before, and led them to be currently interested. There were no boundaries with this show. It's creators were free to do whatever they wanted with the show. This is part of what made it different from an ordinary television show.
So, Internet as a writing space remediates early TV as a writing space, which was at the time remediating radio as a writing space. Only later did innovations for each particular space come to exist.
The way the networks look at the Internet now is like the early days of TV, when
announcers would just read radio scripts on camera.
f
it couldn't be shared – if hard borders were put around it – how
different
was
it from TV?
If
it couldn't be shared – if hard borders were put around it – how
different
was
it from TV?
If this was going to be the first successful Internet TV
show, they felt it needed to embrace the medium
It must have been a tough choice for the creators to trade a deal for the freedom to screen their shows wherever they want, but it only makes sense. The designed the series for a writing space that was based on sharing, so signing exclusively with a website would defeat the point.
Flinders can't write and film them all, so new writer-directors have been hired
and paired with actors playing the new characters.
Interestingly enough, while this separate collaboration doesn't happen in TV or film, it does happen with longer book series. For example, Star Wars books are authorized by George Lucas but written by multiple people. Sometimes single series within that larger group are written by different authors.
What's needed, he says, is content that's built specifically for the Web. It
doesn't need to be lit like a film – that would make it feel less real.
Oddly enough, this idea contradicts the remediation theory. Instead of saying, "it's like film, only [insert difference here]," they're saying it's unike film.
Beckett
tried to explain to the executive that the central theme of online
entertainment
was interactivity, as opposed to the passivity of television.
There's a big difference here before the standard of television and today's internet. Interativity is a lot more involving, and a person can grow more emotionally attached as opposed to the "passivity of television." Emotional attachment equals addicted viewership, which equals popularity and success of the show. It's really an ingenious new medium for the entertainment industry to consider.
I do not thing it's a good idea to blur reality and fiction. As we saw in "A Rape in Cyberspace," problems arise when you mix VR and RL.
9
Unlike
television, where writers sit in a room and come up with a single
script,
the
Lonelygirl15 team comes up with a general plotline and then sends its
writer-directors
out to produce independent but interconnected videos. All the
characters,
in essence, have their own show.
That's an interesting concept to consider when you think about it. By having separate vlogs, you're able to give separate points on view on different "issues" going on in the characters lives, and it makes the audience feel like they can relate even better. Some movies give you the first-person-point of view, so you know exactly what one person is thinking (like Bree), but you don't know the mind of the other characters (like Daniel). By giving them their own "spotlight," the viewers can form a greater attachment and interest in the stories presented.
13
They don't have a
big TV deal, or even a big Internet deal, but they're convinced that what
they're doing is important anyway.
And they're still here, in Flinders' bedroom. Rose leaps onto the bed and
jumps up and down.
Even after people realized that the story was fictional, they still retained their viewership, and that really testifies to the success they had. But even then, Beckett and Flinders didn't choose to "sell out" on the idea; they've kept it as they intended it, and I think that's a pretty important thing to observe. They didn't try to modify it to fit onto the big screen so that they could earn even more money from it.
This Web series not only looks different, it's made differently than other filmed entertainment.
They don't have a big TV deal, or even a big Internet deal, but they're convinced that what they're doing is important anyway.
outing benefited from the publicity surge and pushed a few of Lonelygirl15's clips close to the million-viewer mark.
Emails flooded in – Amanda now responds to roughly 500 a day. The show has a reliable viewership of 300,000 per video, and the team posts two, sometimes more, each week.
It didn't seem to matter whether she was real or not in the end. People wrote to her and contacted her regardless, and now she i watched more than ever. People become angered at being tricked, but fascinated all at once.
The concept that this is a whole new form of entertainment seems totally spot on. People treat YouTube differently than they do television. It kind of seems like an evolved reality show phenomenon.
This study examines the relationship between use of Facebook, a popular online social network site, and the formation and maintenance of social capital. In addition to assessing bonding and bridging social capital, we explore a dimension of social capital that assesses one's ability to stay connected with members of a previously inhabited community, which we call maintained social capital. Regression analyses conducted on results from a survey of undergraduate students (N = 286) suggest a strong association between use of Facebook and the three types of social capital, with the strongest relationship being to bridging social capital. In addition, Facebook usage was found to interact with measures of psychological well-being, suggesting that it might provide greater benefits for users experiencing low self-esteem and low life satisfaction.
Everyone, in the back of his mind, wants to be a star," Hurley asserts for
probably the quadrillionth time, "and we provide the audience to make it happen.
Just by looking at this quote we can see why Youtube is a success. It is true that most people want to be a star and to give them a chance is going to be a hit. Unfortantly, if you watch Youtube you can see that some people should not ever be stars.
I wonder if youtube will soon be a new recruitment tool for talent agencies. It is afterall a compilation of many different people exhibiting different talents in some aspects.
Fragmentation has decimated audiences, viewers who do watch are skipping commercials,
YouTube very much is like this. People make the weirdest videoes for people just to watch them. I have seen some videos where people were just singing or dancing around in their bedroom.
This is what makes Youtube so interesting, alot of it is real stuff with no acting or script involved with the added bonus that others can view your work
The question is if there is a danger in this. One of the kids I nanny for is fascinated with The Wiggles. When looking for a Wiggles video for him on YouTube, I cam across a family video of two little kids getting Wiggles toys for Christmas. It may be cute to send this video to the family's friends and relatives, but should the whole world have access to it, too? Everyone tells young people to protect their identity on the Internet, but then YouTube provides unlimited access to so many otherwise-personal videos.
NBC used Yahoo to premiere Heroes and AOL to offer sneak previews of its Twenty Good Years and Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. And the brand-new CW Network celebrated its debut by posting for free Runaway and Everybody Hates Chris on MSN. Counting cable, dozens of networks are now making programs available online.
This is a nice way for people to learn another technology, rather than doing the same thing all of the time, which is just watching the television. Maybe adults of an older generation would like to learn this technology.
He insists he can't quite recall, you know, the $1.65 billion moment.
Yea, you would think that would be the first thing that the founder of U-tube would know. What started your bussiness off is usally an important detail to remember
it is easy to see how something like this could happen- you start posting funny videos of your friends, they post of theirs, you open it up, and you have a movement...
"#2
Everyone,
in the back of his mind, wants to be a star," Hurley asserts for
probably
the quadrillionth time, "and we provide the audience to make it happen.
"
We discussed in class why people would want to be on Youtube. This quote here is a great example. People want their five minutes of fame. They think that because other people are watching their videos they are star because they are entertaining them.
Third-millennium humanity has demonstrated an interest in sifting through
millions of pieces of crap produced by total strangers to discover a few gems –
some accidentally entertaining ("Boom Goes the Dynamite"), some breakout
performances from the previously obscure ("Treadmill Dance"), and some
explorations of a new art form crackling with genius (Ze Frank, Ask a Ninja, and
the guys behind Loneygirl15.)
Sifting through the millions of piences of crap enables us to accidentally come upon such gems as "Boom Goes the Dynamite", "Treadmill Dane", and Lonelygirl15. Users could possibly feel a sense of discovery when finding such unique entertainment. It's like being on your own personal entertainment expedition.
And what if, as a bonus, the medium were able not merely to command eyeballs
for marketers but to target content especially relevant to what the marketer is
selling?
When discussing target content relevant to what the marketer is selling, personal information is getting collected and data possibly being manipulated. Nonopticon surrounds us.
Until now, advertisers have underwritten mass media to reach mass audiences.
Indeed, they've paid increasing premiums for the opportunity as audiences have
shrunk, because even in a fragmented media world, the largest fragment – network
TV – is the most valuable. But now they realize that they are losing not only
mass but critical mass.
I think more money is now put into online advertisements than TV advertisement. Is it fair to say that the computer is almost (that is in popularity and phenomenon (sp?)) as big of a pop culture invention as the TV was in the 50s?
Altogether, this stuff constitutes a bottomless reservoir of short-form video
content for others to siphon off if they choose
. #7
Fragmentation
has decimated audiences, viewers who do watch are skipping commercials,
advertisers are therefore fleeing, the revenue for underwriting new content is
therefore flatlining, program quality is therefore suffering (Dancing With
the Stars. QED), which will lead to ever more viewer defection, which
will lead to ever more advertiser defection, and so on.
I agree that advertisers are having trouble with televison. With TiVo and DVRs becoming more affordable, there is almost no need to watch commercials. They make it so easy to skip through a commercial while watching a program. I have recently noticed that advertisers are responding to this by creating more comical and appealing commercials. There are some commercials that I actually like viewing now.
Because, at least until recently, the Internet has lacked both the riveting
content and ad space inventory to absorb it.
Yes...until recently. Now, there is limitless space on the Internet. Highly viewed websites such as MySpace, Facebook, and You Tube have provide great outlets for companies to advertise. These sites are often viewed more frequently than most television shows, and they are often unavoidable. You can get up, get a snack, or use the restroom during a commercial break on television, but you can't click off an advertisement or an icon while its on a webpage.
#4
Lots
of people can now watch themselves on sort-of TV, which is pretty fun in itself.
The bonus is that others want to watch them, too
This seems to be reflective of everyone's desire for "15 minutes of fame." The internet is making that a reality. The question is whether or not this is a good thing. Yes, it is easy and possible. It is revolutionizing our culture, and people constantly want to search and discover interesting morsels of entertainment. But is it becoming an obsession, especially with some people? With the huge number of broadcasts daily, it makes you think so.
I would personally never put a video on Youtube. However, I have to admit that some of them are extremely funny. This also makes me think, though, of our discussion in class how some jobs look at internet sites and if they see you on them, they are less likely to hire you. So, it just goes to show that we have to be careful with how we portray ourselves.
The networks say these are measures to promote the broadcast versions of their
shows. The overwhelming probability is that the opposite is true, which bodes
poorly for those invested in the status quo. One victim is local affiliates,
which get a big chunk of their revenue from selling commercial space within
network programs. The Internet, needless to say, bypasses them.
We are in an age of technological advancement. The culture is saturated with it. If networks want to appeal to the generations that have grown up using this technology and prefer it as a mode of entertainment and communicaiton, then the smart business action to take is to begin expanding toward internet broadcasting. The standard television is no longer the central figure in the entertainment and news world, and in order to keep up with it, the networks have to "go with the flow."
I completely agree with this statement. I personally watch alot of shows on DVR, especially American Idol because I can't stand how they draw out the show with commercials every five minutes. Advertisers have to adapt to the changing marketplaces or else their products will suffer.
I completely agree with this statement. I watch most shows on DVR, especially American Idol and fast forward through the commercials. They draw out these shows and make the commercial breaks longer and longer.
NBC used Yahoo to premiere
>
Heroes
>
and AOL to offer sneak previews of its
>
Twenty Good Years
>
and
>
Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
>
.
>
>
Eventually the technologies will merge fully. You won't have a television and a separate computer. You will have everything all in one. Comcast digital cable has numerous music stations. Look at On Demand, you get to pick and choose when and what you watch. It will all meld together. Instead of previews to programs, it will be whatever you want to see whenever you want to see it. Your TV/Computer will do everything.
put fall premieres of shows like Smith and The New Adventures of Old Christine on Google Video
This is what motivated much of the Writer's Guild strike. The writers wanted to have a share of online revenue when their shows are downloaded, like royalties.
#14
Fragmentation
has
decimated audiences, viewers who do watch are skipping
commercials,
advertisers
are therefore fleeing, the revenue for underwriting new content is
therefore
flatlining, program quality is therefore suffering
Fragmentation has decimated the audiences of the big networks, but it's also been the reason so many new channels have been created: Animal Planet, the cooking channel, the sci-fi channel. And viewers watching these channels have special interest in the subject, so they are more likely to actually watch the commercials. So it's mostly the bigger networks that are suffering, which explains why there are so many reality TV shows on the major channels now. While they aren't "reality," they don't need a script so much as a situation.
dozens of networks are now making programs available online
Yes, a lot of shows are available online anytime, and also on Comcast. So, the big corporations are tryng to deal with the fragmentation. The problem with that is that it's still not exactly interactive, which is the thing people love about YouTube. This still doesn't address the issue that everyone wants to be a star.
I think the fact that many TV shows are now available online is a good sign. The greater U.S. population has been using the Internet for awhile. By putting TV shows online, it shows a good meshing of the two media outlets.
A recurring theme we've talked about in ITW is how some people are hesitant toward change. The want to keep the status quo shows this hesitantion, despite the overwhelming popularity of YouTube.
advertisers have been broadcasting themselves for decades and would very much prefer the status quo. The good news is that the status quo isn't long for this world.
I agree this content is funny and entertaining, but there is social relevance. What do you think will be our legacy when all this is found 50 or 100 years in the future?
Everyone,
in the back of his mind, wants to be a star,"
Hurley asserts for
probably
the
quadrillionth time, "and we provide the audience to make it
happen.
"
He insists he can't quite recall, you know,
the $1.65 billion moment.
He's turning right around in a few hours; he's stuck in yet one more conference
room, and his eyes
stuck in yet one more conference room, and his eyes have the vacant look of
someone whose body ha
he's stuck in yet one more conference room, and his eyes
CHAD HURLEY SAYS HE DOESN'T REMEMBER. It's two weeks before the
announcement of the Google acquisition, and he has just flown the red
Everyone,
in the
back of his mind, wants to be a star,"
Hurley
asserts for
probably
the
quadrillionth time, "and we provide the
audience to make it
happen.
"
I find it amusing that Hurley mentions this. We actually discussed this in Creative Writing on Monday. The teacher asked who in the classroom wants to be famous. To my surprise there were only a few of us who raised our hands. As much as I want to be a star though, I wouldnt find posting a video on youtube very successful.
But what if there were a means to approximate the reach and mesmerizing power of
television online?
The way technology is quickly growing and moving I don't see anything getting in its way. I see the computer replacing other medias.
Third-millennium humanity has demonstrated an
interest in sifting through
millions
of pieces of crap produced by total strangers to discover a few gems –
some accidentally entertaining ("Boom Goes the
Dynamite"), some breakout
performances from the previously obscure
("Treadmill Dance"), and some
explorations of a new art form crackling with
genius (Ze Frank, Ask a Ninja, and
the guys
behind Loneygirl15.)
If so many people view "You Tube" it must say something about its entertaining value. I am one of those people who shifts through "You Tube" and I have come across many interesting ones.
connection to his nervous system. In a word, the dude is fried. Never mind that
he's the cofounder of the Next Big Thing and poised to be a total
I think the advertisers do that. Look at the sig-in page for myspace. It is a virtual billboard. Any given day the entire sign-in page is a new advertisement. Sometimes it is a movie. The other day it was an entire page devoted to crest toothpaste. Once you are on the site, the sidebars are bombarded with schanging advertisements. Vans shoes one minute then after refreshing the page, it is some other product. Maybe we don't pay that much attention or ever click on the link. I know I never do. But clearly the advertisers have achieved at least some of their purpose because I remember seeing thier ad.
Everyone's talking about the New York Times article that says that blogging can kill you. Long hours, high stress and lack of exercise all contribute to a potentially unhealthy job situation. Recently one popular blogger died and another suffered a heart attack.
I think blogging is like anything else. You can get hurt or injured by anything. I think the article crazy and people need to start focussing on more important things.
It is nice to see a singer, song writer and poet be recognized. Some may not like Dylan's music or style but I think that having someone lik ehim in the writing community has been beneficial.
Dylan, the most acclaimed and influential songwriter of the past half century, who more than anyone brought rock from the streets to the lecture hall, received an honorary Pulitzer Prize on Monday, cited for his "profound impact on popular music and American culture, marked by lyrical compositions of extraordinary poetic power."
This is my brother's photography website. He has been involved with photography all my life and I have become to appreciate the art. He enjoys all types of photography but he mostly does band photography. He is a popular name in the Hardcore music industry of Philadelphia.
My brohter knows a great deal about how technology can take a hold of your life. He begin taking pictures with a manual camera, but his photography has stemmed to digital. He is constantly researching and finding new technologies that can benifit his art. He feels hardcore music and band photography don't get the credit they deserve. Technologies, like the Internet, lets bands and hardcore music expose their talent to the world and open peoples eyes to something different.
CnEt and Yahoo are working together to produce news, blogs and reviews. The partnership will hopefully bring popularity and help sell products. It was a big agreement and win for CNET.
There are constantly ads across the internet that we are exposed to. Many organizations say they are doing it to make news and the consumer happy, but I think they are really looking for a profit. How many ads do we really see when we surf the net? Its alitle scary to think about, because I'm probably being influenced by htem without even knowing.
A site for teachers, parents, and young readers, Children's Book Radio posts podcasts with authors of popular and classic children's books. Great way to gather a list of books for a classroom library and learn background about specific titles and authors.
The Enterprise Platform study aims to provide a detailed market evaluation and to include market statistics, insightful observations, historical data, information verified by industry, and forecasts with an acceptable set of methodology and assumptions. The Enterprise Platform research also helps to explain the complexities of the global Enterprise Platform industry, layout the market segments by defining and evaluating them and forecast the global market size. Worldwide Enterprise Platform market also covered Key Points covered are - Drivers, Restraints, Opportunities, Market Revenue, Trends Shares, vendor profiling, manufacturers or Players (Salesforce, Kaltura, Voxeo, TigerText, Unify, IBM, SAP), identification of local suppliers, popular business strategies, besides prominent growth hub, that collectively outputted advantageous Returns.
The Virtual Data Room (Software) research also helps to explain the complexities of the global Virtual Data Room (Software) industry, layout the market segments by defining and evaluating them and forecast the global market size. Worldwide Virtual Data Room (Software) market also covered Key Points covered are - Drivers, Restraints, Opportunities, Market Revenue, Trends Shares, vendor profiling, manufacturers or Players (IDeals Solutions Group, Citrix Systems, SecureDocs, Safelink Data Rooms, ShareVault, CapLinked, EthosData, IdrShare, Sterling, Intralinks, HighQ Solutions, SmartRoom), identification of local suppliers, popular business strategies, besides prominent growth hub, that collectively outputted advantageous Returns.
The Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) study aims to provide a detailed market evaluation and to include market statistics, insightful observations, historical data, information verified by industry, and forecasts with an acceptable set of methodology and assumptions. The Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) research also helps to explain the complexities of the global Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) industry, layout the market segments by defining and evaluating them and forecast the global market size. Worldwide Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) market also covered Key Points covered are - Drivers, Restraints, Opportunities, Market Revenue, Trends Shares, vendor profiling, manufacturers or Players (Accenture, EXL Services, Genpact, McKinsey and Company, Moody's Investors Service, Mphasis, RR Donnelley & Sons Company, Wipro Limited, HCL), identification of local suppliers, popular business strategies, besides prominent growth hub, that collectively outputted advantageous Returns.
Thats a lot of money to earn just for a home made video. I wonder if this means that TV shows that feature funny home made videos are a thing of the past.
Garfield here is being a bit coy--he means that Google paid YouTube $1.5 billion; the kitten owner didn't get anything but lots of aaaawwwwws.
It features a courageous but overmatched freshman named Brian Collins presenting the worst sports-highlight rundown in human history, culminating in the worst sportscaster catchphrase ever conceived: "Boom goes the dynamite."
I completley agree..it was actually hard for me to watch because I felt embrassed for him! The only time that he actually did sound sure of himself was when he used his very creative phrase of "Boom goes the dynamite".
Until about five minutes ago, remember, almost all video-entertainment content was produced and distributed by Hollywood. Period. That time is over. There was a time when advertisers could count on mass audiences for what Hollywood thought we should be watching on TV. That time is all but over.
The price tag for YouTube, just to put the investment in perspective, is what Target paid for 257 Mervyns department stores and four distribution centers in 13 states
I guess valueing Facebook at $15 billion is a bit too much, too, then? That's what Microsoft valued Facebook at when it bought a less than 2% share....
I can see why Youtube is worth what it is - the flow of information is so consistent and phenomenal...I guess no matter what, it's going to be worth a lot
Jarvis calls the phenomenon "exploding TV," and YouTube is exploding faster than anything else:
And there they are, in the bedrooms and dorms and cubicles of the world, uploading their asses off, more than 65,000 times a day on YouTube alone.
Youtube is also like the fascination people have with blogs, it is a way to get your ideas, opinions, views, and anything else that you, yourself, produce out into the world. Youtube lets you publish for the world to see!
But don't sell Google short. Not long ago, all it had was a search algorithm and a cool logo. Now, after reinventing online advertising, it has revenue of $9.3 billion a year and good reason to believe that neither of those daunting prerequisites is out of the question.
That is unbelievable that google is making that much money a year. What did people do before Google was invented, I guess I can not even imaigine a life with out Google anymore. No body even thinks to use a paperback dictionary or go to the libarey to find information, not when you have such an easy resource like Google ready at all times.
I could never sell Google short. Google is my go to website for EVERYTHING. I use google to search at least twice a day. I use Gmail as my second source of e-mail. I use Google calendar to keep myself organized. I now use Googleblog for one of my classes. I even use the scholarly journal search engine. It's convenient and i always find what I'm looking for.
Type in "sweet tired cat" and watch a drowsy kitten dozing off. The
clip, which was viewed nearly 2 million times in two weeks, is 27 seconds of
such concentrated cuteness that you might actually have a stroke and die. It's
that excruciatingly adorable.
And, as it turns out, extremely valuable. Google – as you may have read in
every publication, online and off, in the entire freaking world – just
paid #3
$1.65
billion in stock to be the cute little kitty-cat's home.
This is rediculous. I do not know why everyone is making such a big deal about a cat falling alseep. Yeah the cat is cute but still to be watched 2 million times in just two weeks....what are people doing on their time off!?!
I find it interesting to see what some people spend their money on. $1.62 billion could be used for so many more productive things and could help so many people in need, yet they spend it on a video of a cat?
I thought this video was adorable and I'm not even a fan of cats. It's nice to watch something that wasn't rehearsed and is just naturally entertaining. This video is what I call short and sweet.
#6
And
there they are, in the bedrooms and dorms and cubicles of the world, uploading
their asses off, more than 65,000 times a day on YouTube alone.
"If you aren't posting, you don't exist," says Rishad Tobaccowala
I dont see why someone can say if you are not blogging you do not exist. People have other things to do. Some people enjoy technology and blogging and posting and others dont. Just because someone doesnt like to blog doesnt mean they are not living. Maybe they are more private or scared to post informtion.
from a standing start about a year ago to more than 100 million videostreams a
day. It was on YouTube, not Saturday Night Live, that the world
fell in love with "Lazy Sunday." It was there that we found ourselves smitten,
intrigued, and ultimately betrayed by Lonelygirl15. And it is there that more
than 65,000 videos go every day, their creators posting what they think are
video clips but that are also improvised explosive devices laying waste to the
old order.
I think that facts are amazing about how many people are watching these videos. 65,000 videos is crazy I dont see how people can keep up with adding videos or even just watching them on their spare time.
This comedian preformed this dance at the class of 2011 freshman orientation! He was hilarious and told us to check out his website AND search him on youtube.
I think this video is brilliant because it's original, entertaining, and shows real talent. Videos like this one is worth sharing but you have to sort through hundreds and hundreds of pointless ones to come across one worth your time.
"Noah takes a photo of himself everyday for six years." A time-lapse documentary
of Noah Kalina over 2,356 days, it's a little thin on plot, but it nonetheless
racked up more than 3 million views in six weeks.
I think this is a very interesting video, When watching this clip it looks like the room is spinnig back and forth. I have also noticed that he doesn't wear very bright colors and he never smiles.
This is odd. I don't understand the point of do this. I cannot believe that it was viewed by that many people in six weeks. Why would someone find this cool, I find it weird.
I agree that this is horrifying and cruel, but I'm not sure about the hilarious part. I literally cringed for most of the video and had to turn it off after a minute or two. The look on that poor guy's face! It's amazing to see what kind of videos are posted, and I can't even imagine what it must be like to be the person millions of people have laughed at mercilessly.
I agree that this is horrifying and cruel, but I'm not sure about the hilarious part. I literally cringed while watching it, and had to turn it off after a minute or two. The look on that poor guy's face! It's amazing to see the kinds of videos people post. I can't even imagine being the person that millions of people watch and laugh at mercilessly.
This is why people step on the train of you tube. They want to make something out of them self by stepping out into the world and I mean the whole wide world. Maybe they think something bigger and better will come out of the video or posting.
I only watch videos that are pointed out to me on YouTube, but I never just go searching for videos. This one was hysterical. I have to admit I laughed aloud when I saw it. But then when I think about it, why does someone take the time to make these videos and post them? Yes it's funny, but you definitely have way too much time on your hands to make silly videos like these.
I completely disagree. I have not posted a thing on youtube or virtually anywhere except for this classroom module but I still exist, and the world isn't going to end just because I don't post.
I found these statements very though provoking. It was previously thought that to exist you needed to make your presence known to mainly those people around you but now with the changing technology has it become necessary to make yourself known to millions of other people you may never directly talk to or meet?
But
don't sell Google short
"Noah
takes a photo of himself everyday for six years."
#1
It
features a courageous but overmatched freshman named Brian Collins presenting
the worst sports-highlight rundown in human history, culminating in the worst
sportscaster catchphrase ever conceived: "Boom goes the dynamite."
#2
It
is horrifying. It is cruel. It is hilarious.
That is truly ashame. The more he read or attempted to read, the redder his ears became. I like to laugh at people just as much as the next person and, quite honestly, sometimes even more. I can appreciate being irreverent, but this was just too painful to watch. I hope his parents don't ever get to watch this or view the mean spirited comments.
I personally did not find this to be hilarious at all. I felt so bad for the guy but it's admirable that he continued with it (knowing that he messed up and wasn't doing well). In situations like these, I put myself in the other person's shoes, which I think everyone should do, and then I bet they wouldn't be laughing.
Judson Laipply's seamless sampling of footwork to 30 songs, from Elvis to
'NSync, pretty much is.
This video definitely brought me back to the days of my middle school dances. However, what is even more hilarious is how many of these dances I still saw recently at my cousins sweet sixteen.
It's funny that they referenced this particular video. I actually met Judson Laipply, we booked him for freshman orientation this past summer. His act was awesome and really captivated the audience. I also remember hims specifically addressing the fact that you could find this video on youtube and directing the freshman to the site.
I just made a comment about how I saw him at freshman orientation! Then I read this comment, we said the same thing!
19
Until about five
minutes ago, remember, almost all video-entertainment content was produced and
distributed by Hollywood. Period. That time is over. There was a time when
advertisers could count on mass audiences for what Hollywood thought we should
be watching on TV. That time is all but over
It's about time that Hollywood and the media elite realize that they do not have the monopoly on video-entertainment. You-Tube provides a great outlet for amateur singers, comedians, writers, and interactive storytellers. It's all part of the technological evolution, which is a force that appears to be unstoppable.
Noah
takes
a photo of himself everyday for six years."
Interesting. I think he aged well in six years! The same eye contact, same facial expression, and the gloom and doom music were weird. I don't there there was enough contrast in the environment to appreciate the subtle changes.
I really saw no point for this video. I've seen videos similar to this one that show women during their gestation period with the same concept, a picture is taken once a day everyday. That at least would be a cute keepsake for the parents and child but this video has no purpose, I kept watching it, hoping it would get to a point but it never did.
Isn't this what most of YouTube is? People, particularly young adults flooding sites like Youtube with obnoxious videos of themselves singing and dancing - sometimes both? I should know...I'm on there.
I couldn't help but laugh histerically at this video because I know how it feels to be put in the spotlight and freeze all of a sudden. I was in my first pageant my senior year of high school and when I went up for the question, I didn't understand it, so I just kind of stood there, stared at the person who asked me, couldn't make my mouth move and just walked away. Looking back it was hysterical, but at the time I was mortified. This poor guy, he's doing good, he just needs to boost his confidence! He's so stressed!
When you put together a million humans, a million camcorders, and a million computers, what you get is YouTube.
I absolutely love this line! It reminds me of the original idea for YouTube and its use. Despite it now being commonly used in educational settings, let's face it - many still use YouTube simply for fun, for sharing, and for expression.
This sentence really sums up what has led to the success of YouTube. It has revolutionize the way that people think and act. We are a "YouTube" society. We love posting our own videos and watching videos that others post. We use it for entertainment purposes and educational purposes. YouTube has become a major part of many people's lives all over the world.
So why is it worth nearly six times the gross domestic product of Micronesia?
It is astounding to actually sit down and think about how much of a "You Tube" country we've become. I, like many others around the world, have probably spent hours in my lifetime searching and exploring videos on You Tube. It is becoming almost a second nature where we have grown to "just go to You Tube" or "just have to see this video." It is really changing our lives.
Google has recently bet the equivalent of 257 Mervyns stores that the rise of video-sharing is more than just the latest rage.
In thinking about how much video-sharing has become mainstream, one could compare it to blogging. Just a short while ago, blogging was this 'new' thing for teenagers and young adults, that eventually became a common practice (just look at how many people have a Myspace even, let alone sites dedicated just to blog posting). I think now video-sharing is taking this same path, with more and more people finding it commonplace.
"The simple, wonderful, delirious fact is that people like you and me can now make and share content."
In 2006, Time magazine named YOU as their person of the year. This was in reference to the online boom of sharing, whether through social networks, blogs, or videos. The article talked about the new generation of computer users and their reasons for wanting to share their personal moments so freely. I am still wary of putting everything out there, but I do have pictures on MySpace.
Youtube.com is enabling everyone to gain their 15 minutes of fame. You don't have to be on television anymore, you just need a camera and internet access and you could become a celebrity.
the hitherto futile aspirations of the everyman to break out of his lonely
anonymous life of quiet desperation, #11
to
step in front of the whole world
and #12
be
somebody
, dude.
I agree with this statement. We are living in a world where we are quite self-centered. You Tube, MySpace, and Facebook provide great examples. We love to post pictures of ourselves for others to see and share with others "how great the party was last weekend". Really, if you think about it, the Internet does provide many with a moment in the spotlight. Even large companies are aware of this by using You Tube videos for advertising purposes. They are much cheaper than paying actors or people to come up with commercial ideas and scripts. Instead, they can underpay people on You Tube to make a much greater profit, without the people even realizing it. They're just happy that their video is on TV.
This relates to the readings we did for Tuesday, too, specifically "We Are the Web." I'm curious what the sample population was. Considering how many people have blogs, YouTube accounts, webpages, and accounts on other subject-specific websites, I would think 38% was rather low. I wonder if they surveyed peope in general, or people using the Web.
including, but not limited to, a reallocation of the $67 billion that advertisers spent on TV in the US last year.
This made me think of the recent switch of political advertisements and commercials shown on tv to now being formatted and constructed to be soley used for youtube and geared towards the youtube audience. Recently, Obama created a video that has received millions of views on youtube and in my opinion it is one of the most influential and most well made political advertisements I've ever seen
Plus, it's excruciating! I felt so bad for him that I just wanted to turn the thing off! It has to be so embarrassing! But instead of eventually forgetting about it--or hoping you can forget about it--YouTube makes it public! It makes embarrassing moments that much more horrifying, and I can't understand how people can get such pleasure out of someone else's pain. It's kind of like a visual gossip center on the web, and though some postings are completely innocent (like the sleeping kitty), others are just plain cruel.
This seems like it would be something that would be very stupid to do I would like to know who some of the people are that viewed this to ask them why!
I think youtube IS worth a lot of money. Why? Cheap entertainment.... it's ridiculous but it is true
the hitherto futile aspirations of the everyman to break out of his lonely anonymous life of quiet desperation, to step in front of the whole world and
be somebody
>, dude.
I think this is why Youtube is very alluring to kids and teens. The idea of fame really gets to them. I've seen it personally, and I worry that it is dangerous for them... But the allure of fame is one we can't fight easily against
THAT is just scary. What ever happened to "I THINK therefore I am"?!!! Why is it we need to exist to random people that don't exist in our consciousness in order to BE SOMEBODY? It's silly and stupid.
This is funny because I just added this to my other blog. I love this guy's moves! He almost does the Fresh Prince of Bel Air dances better than Will and Carlton.
It's just a little outtake from a Ball State University campus TV newscast
I feel so bad for this poor guy. It goes from bad to worse. I know what its like to get tongue-tied but the trick is to stay calm. The moment he felt embarrassed he just messed up more and more. Poor guy.
I'm not sure I would go as far as to claim this. Yes, video-sharing and such is and will continue to have a major impact; however, I think watching TV has become too much of a social force with the general American population to say that it is on the brink of ending. New innovations, such as YouTube, may become popular quickly but this does not mean socially-ingrained innovations, such as the 'blue light' of TV, will disappear quickly.
Ithought this would have been more interesting if the background would have told a story, kind of like a personality stuck in time in his surroudings. Especially since his expression never changed, it might have added a little more for me than just watching his hair change.
Search around some more. Type in "
evolution of dance,"
which has got
nearly 35 million views in six months. You wouldn't think "Ohio motivational
speaker's grand finale" would equal "mesmerizing," but
Judson Laipply's seamless sampling of footwork
to 30 songs, from Elvis to
'NSync,
pretty much is.
Just as any writer submits work to be published, Youtube can be seen as the 21 century's publishing through video. It is about making yourseld known and sharing your creativity with others. However, not all videos deserve to be credited as creative and meaningful.
This sort of evokes the idea of the machine and the person and how they are one in some ways. The idea that we teach the machine. I also find the idea that you must post to exist in the world. Do we really need to post all our ideas on the internet in order to have an identity?
"Boom goes the dynamite." It is horrifying. It
is cruel. It is hilarious.
Wow. This was hard to watch! I feel bad for him...but it looks like he did not prepare at all and actually should not continue on in the sportscasting world.
This was adorable. Everyone should watch "The Mean Kitty Song" video because it is really funny. Anyone who has ever had a kitten will appreciate this video.
This relates to the digital world, but this does not mean that one does not exist outside of that world. This is where I think people are getting confused with what reality really is.
Or
try the accurately titled "Noah takes a photo
of himself everyday for six
years."
A time-lapse documentary of Noah Kalina over 2,356 days, it's a little
thin on plot, but it nonetheless racked up
more than 3 million views in six
weeks.
This was probably the worst video I've ever seen. I can not believe 3 million people actually watched it. How boring. I tried to think of how it would be if I were to take a photo everyday and I think I would actually try to look good for each one and maybe switch up hairstyles and makeup.
You'd better also see "Numa
Numa," which stars a chubby young man in his New Jersey bedroom lip-syncing
to an insipid but weirdly fetching Romanian pop song
HAHA...That video was actually funny. I actually saw this one before. I don't watch many you tube videos so I was surprised to see one in this article that I have seen before. I have always wondered do people get paid if their video gets viewed a certain amount of times?
"If you aren't posting, you don't exist," says Rishad Tobaccowala, CEO of Denuo,
a new media consultancy. "People say, 'I post, therefore I am.'"
I didn't even know what a blog was until last semester when I had to do them for Intro to Advertising... according to Mr. Rishad Tobaccowala I didnt exist. Maybe I still dont exist in his eyes because I have never posted anything on Youtube, I barely watch the videos. I can not believe how serious people are these days about the internet. IDK maybe I am missing something....but reality is not inside the computer.
Type in "evolution of dance," which has got nearly 35 million views in six
months.
I can see way it received nearly 35 million views. It is hysterical. I can remember dancing to these songs and making a fool out of myself. It was great fun.
I can understand why it received nearly 35 million views. I think it is hysterically funny. I can remember dancing to these same songs and making a complete fool of myself. I loved it.
I can understand why "evolution of dance" has gotten nearly 35 million views in six months. It is hysterically funny. I remember dancing to these same songs. I acted like an idiot and loved every minute of it.
aspirations of the everyman to break out of his lonely anonymous life of quiet
desperation, to step in front of the whole world and
be somebody
Everyone longs for their moment in the limelight, their two minutes of fame. It reminds me of the people who try out for "American Idol." They do it for a chance to be on TV. They don't care if they sound horrible. They are like the guy in the "Muma Muma video.
Everyone is looking for their two minutes of fame. It reminds me of the people who try out for "American Idol," they have no talent. They just want to be noticed, like the guy on the "Muma Muma" video.
Everyone is looking for their 2 minutes of fame. It reminds me of the people who try out for the TV show, "American Idol,"they have no talent. They just want to view themselves on TV. The guy on the "Muma Muma video probably did it for his small minutes of fame.
OK, guess. But that guesswork begins in a very special, very poignant, and potentially very lucrative place: the hitherto futile aspirations of the everyman to break out of his lonely anonymous life of quiet desperation, to step in front of the whole world
This part about anonymous life made me think about Sherry Turke's article, "Who am We?" and the idea that people use anonymity as a disguise. People can be something they are not and take on a whole new identity, whether in a blog or a game.
I think videos liek this are good for the internet because they are used as entertainment. I don't think that they are misleading in anyway.
YouTube's fixed assets pretty much consist of a video interface and a cool retro logo. So why is it worth nearly six times the gross domestic product of Micronesia?
I personally don't have a problem with youtube making money. I think it is a great source of entertainment and it doesn't mislead viewers as much as other sites. It is all up to the poster. If you post a video on youtube it is your credability. Its like anyone discovering a new invention, I say good for them. It was a good idea and many people enjoy using the site.
You'd better also see "Numa Numa," which stars a chubby young man in his New Jersey bedroom lip-syncing to an insipid but weirdly fetching Romanian pop song. Or, what the hell, live dangerously. Type in "sweet tired cat" and watch a drowsy kitten dozing off. The clip, which was viewed nearly 2 million times in two weeks, is 27 seconds of such concentrated cuteness that you might actually have a stroke and die. It's that excruciatingly adorable.
It is interesting to see how our entertainment spectrum has changed. Technology has evolved and now allows us to watch videos and tap into the lives of others. Sometimes i sit back and think how my grandmother and dad felt when the telvision first came out. What were they thinking when they could view all sorts of stories. Are their feelings anything different that what we feeling after we watch our youtube videos.
t was there that we found ourselves smitten, intrigued, and ultimately betrayed by Lonelygirl15. And it is there that more than 65,000 videos go every day, their creators posting what they think are video clips but that are also improvised explosive devices laying waste to the old order.
When I watched this, I couldn't help but think of the scene in "Napoleon Dynamite." Still, I thought it was pretty interesting how he really did show a kind of chronological "evolution of dance."
The whole idea of "being somebody" on YouTube brought to mind those six girls and two boys in Florida who attacked another girl on video. When I first read that news story, I was appalled by their behavior and curious as to whether the concept of Internet fame had desensitized them to their deplorable actions.
I have been watching Sportscenter since I was born. This is by the far the worse commentating job I've ever seen. He was only a freshman but come on! They left him out to dry, it should have been stopped after the "dynamite" comment.
Youtube is the best website ever created. If my friends and I are bored Youtube is always there with ridiculously funny clips to keep our amusement for hours.
Type in "sweet tired cat" and watch a drowsy kitten dozing off. The clip, which was viewed nearly 2 million times in two weeks, is 27 seconds of such concentrated cuteness that you might actually have a stroke and die. It's that excruciatingly adorable.
I get that this is cute. I will grant that. But what is the point? I don't understand why so many people watch this video. At least the Numa Numa guy is entertaining.
Ok, this guy is really creepy. Who thinks to take a picture of themself everday for 6 years. Who has that much free time and dedication. More importantly, who thinks this is interesting? I think it is a great idea for a child to chronicle growth, but this is weird.
But that guesswork begins in a very special, very poignant, and potentially very lucrative place: the hitherto futile aspirations of the everyman to break out of his lonely anonymous life of quiet desperation, to step in front of the whole world and
Just like blogs have made writers publishers, YouTube has made the average person a film maker. Think about, everyone looks for their 15 minutes of fame. YouTube grants them access to the entire world. I'd say that gives them more than 15 minutes.
A recent Accenture study of 1,600 Americans found that 38 percent of respondents wanted to create or share content online.
There are plenty of people, myself included, who have this creative side. This need or desire to "make" something meaningful. For me, it is to write. Most of us don't think we have an outlet for our creativity because, afterall, we are not gifted writers, film makers, and thespians. YouTube gives us an outlet to express ourselves. I believe that is why YouTube and, for that matter, blogs, have taken on a life of their own. It is a catalyst for creativity for the every day person.
I believe that one day Youtube might take over the TV. I personally have heard my mom saying she wishes she could just watch Youtube on TV. This would also allow companies to put commercials inbetween videos.
Wait. You haven't seen it? Ohhhhmygosh! I'll email you the link."
I have experienced this exact scenario, and felt pressured to spend more time browsing videos on youtube rather than flipping through channels on television. It is simply more entertaining. And if you are not up to date on the latest videos you are often lost in conversation with peers.
youtube is great b/c it does have the short clips which you can send to people....they can watch it then or save the link for another time....it is simply more convenient
I have to admit, I am right there with everyone watching these and if someone sends me a link, I will watch and pass it on everytime. But what are we saying about quality and art with all of this? Has the world so changed that we can only find ourselves within the little eye on the top of our computers?
I definetly agree with the fact that You Tube will survive, so many people watch You Tube, it's unbelievable. My boyfriend for one gets on my computer and watches a few You Tube videos everytime he comes over. I've even seen my brother and friends put You Tube videos on their My Space and another is I've put You Tube on my blog site.
YouTube is basically going under the assumption that there's this community in
place to blindly create content on YouTube's behalf without much in the way of
compensation."
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.
What Uncle Miltie and the Super Bowl and Survivor have always
offered is something to talk about at the water cooler, at the nail salon, or on
IM.
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.
For instance, if you are, say, Meow Mix, and you bought ads adjacent to
cat-related videos, how surprised and disappointed you might be to learn you
have sponsored a YouTube video uploaded by someone named mrwheatley and titled
"exploding cat." Or the one from qu1rk89 titled "exploding cat." Or this one:
"ma907h eats dead cat," which shows a guy … oh, never mind.
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.
Will advertisers risk associating themselves with violence, pornography, hate
speech, or God knows what lurks out there one click away?
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.
#2
Will
advertisers risk associating themselves with violence, pornography, hate
speech,
or God knows what lurks out there one click 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.
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.
Advertisers and brands are enormously risk averse,
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.
Supan insists that YouTubers have done an excellent job of policing their own space
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".
Will
advertisers risk associating themselves with
violence, pornography, hate
speech,
or God
knows what lurks out there one click away?
Will
advertisers risk associating themselves with
violence, pornography, hate
speech,
or God
knows what lurks out there one click away?
"
Advertisers and brands are enormously risk
averse,
"
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.
And with a $177 billion total domestic ad budget at stake, nobody wants to be
monkeying around.
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!!
And prosper, despite everything, for one overriding reason: 100 million streams a day.
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?
"What it has going for it is its sheer size. In a fragmented world, there is a need for community and a need for massness."
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.
"There's still a desire to have a shared cultural context. We hunger for things we can discuss."
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.
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.
but also to make much of it available to amateur video makers in exchange for a
split of ad revenue.
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".
What Uncle Miltie and the Super Bowl and
Survivor have always
offered
is something to talk about at the water cooler, at the nail salon, or on
IM.
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.
As for Sacerdoti's so-called postroll ads, even the most self-satisfied marketer
wants to know who in the world would stick around to watch – or, more to the
point, who can prove that anyone did.
This brings up a good point. I do not know of many people that would stick around for a commercial after the video. I usually am ready to click on the next video after the one I am watching is done.
Wait until their commercials make it onto YouTube and hope they go viral.
Because many people watch the Superbowl only to see the commericals uploading them onto youtube would increase even more the use of the internet instead of television cable.
When I am watching a video...I don't care for the advertisement even if it relates to the video I am looking at. I usually just want to watch what I have to and then close it out.
As for Sacerdoti's so-called postroll ads, even the most self-satisfied marketer
>
wants to know who in the world would stick around to watch – or, more to the
>
point, who can prove that anyone did.
>
An the audience today is mostly a younger crowd that is geared more towards technology and watching veidos on computers, what a difference in only five years.
YouTube actually encourages this – so long as the free posts are accompanied by paid versions.
I like the idea that U-tube is welcoming to let others use their site to post commericals
A lot of those upload monkeys have a nasty habit of posting clips from TV shows or enhancing their clips by adding music tracks – which, of course, are somebody else's property.
I just finished reading the article assigned next week about plaigerism. It is true that many individuals think that just because it is on the internet and free access does not mean it is free to use. There are a lot of consequences that come along with stealing other peoples work.
Even though these things (music and photos) arent of the person's creation it is something the person admires and they just want to promote it on his/her page.
YouTube refused to sell ads appended to either end of a video
I think a lot people come on youtube to watch highlights of their favorite show and not be distrubed by commercials. Everywhere we go we seem to see ads and this is the one place you wouldnt get any annoying breaks or pop ups. I think it would be stupid to start.
they have such a broad audience...my dad is hooked and it seems as though everyday my mom is showing me a funny video that her sister sent her...my brother watches tv shows and my cousin posts videos. it is universal
So what about "Evolution of Dance," for instance? To put together this medley,
did Laipply license 30 songs?
The guy that created "Evolution of Dance" came to Rowan and spoke to us about this. He did have to receive copy right license I believe. The law is the law. The internet is not a "free for all"
What if someone else videotapped his performance and posted it on youtube, could he get in trouble for that if he didn't get permission to use those songs?
"I think its the beginning of the end of youtube as we know it," wrote a poster named SamHill24. Another, Link420, declared simply, "ITS OVER!!!! youtube is screwed."
This was interesting because as we have seen in the history of new technologies there are always many who are just not comfortable with change. As the past has shown, opposition does not always indicate whether something will succeed
I want to ask if this is even possible, but then again, look at where we are. Technology is never-ending, and there's no doubt that there will someday be a breakthrough. The question is only when.
AS SOMEBODY ONCE SAID, 100 million people can't be wrong. They
can, however, be useless. It turns out that success is 1 percent inspiration, 99
percent monetization.
Media reflects the desires and whims of the audience. YouTube already has this, but when there's a sharing attitude prevalent that doesn't restrict the everyday, ordinary Joe Shmoe from posting, it's hard to come up with profitable ideas. No one wants to see commercials; that's why internet clips are so popular! People post what they want to see how they want to see it--and they don't stick in a 30-second add for cookies with it!
This statement kind of made me laugh. It is totally true. I guess if so many people are using Youtube, it obviously can not be wrong. Also, I think how they are called useless is funny. As long as people are enjoying the videos, then who cares if they are useless? In their own minds they are successfull and that's all that matters!
#11
A
lot of those upload monkeys have a nasty habit of posting clips from TV shows or
enhancing their clips by adding music tracks – which, of course, are somebody
else's property.
This is a major problem. There is a code of ethics that needs to be followed, but a lot of people don't care about that. Maybe some don't realize what they're doing, but still, it's illegal. We inherently accept that lying is wrong, that stealing is wrong, that plagerism is wrong. What's the difference between that and breaking copyright laws? Is that some sort of "golden opportunity" that people can ignore? No! But maybe they just figure they won't get caught. Few others appear to.
I'm suprised YouTube users (and people in general) aren't against this. For that matter, maybe I should phrase it as more people not publically being against this. It seems very sneaky to me to encourage this behavior, especially considering the ethical implications.
YouTube
refused to sell ads appended to either end of a video
It's true, most people probably won't watch ads after the vdeo. I can't speak for anyone else, but I usually wont even watch the credits. Maybe if video makers did what filmmakers do now, have a bonus scene after the credits. You would see a video, the credits, a short ad, and final a bonus scene. A lot of people still wouldn't watch, but it's a possibility.
Which may suit the users just fine. One of the biggest obstacles to advertising
success is the damage that success could inflict on the YouTube experience, till
now an oasis of relative noncommercialism in a world of brand inundation
It's a good point. A lot of YouTube videos make use of copyrighted material, and although they credit the original creators, users seem paranoid about what the companies will do to them. By opening the site up to advertisers, it becomes even more likely that the big companies will start censoring what users can post.
But speculation abounds that copyright holders have just been waiting for
someone with deep pockets, such as Google, to acquire YouTube, whereupon the
lawsuits will fly.
This is exactly the fear of users. They use songs and video clips, and even though they aren't making money for their videos and most of the users do credit the original artists, they know that big companies can come along and tear their work down. Which isn't fair, when you think about it. All art is influenced by other art. In previous generations, it was okay for kids who became artists to begin by tracing and kids who became writers to begin copying other writers' styles, and kids who became directors to use action figures and a script drawn from other scripts. It's how people grow and discover who they are and what they want to say.
one killed aborning by copyright infringement issues
Photobucket,
"we are at the very, very beginning of online video."
Yet Zuckerberg was at the beginning of the social networking when he started Facebook and now look at what has come from it. If anything, it is likely that YouTube had a more direct startup (its target audience was not initially as limited as Zuckerberg's). Despite being at the beginning of online video, YouTube is becoming a social norm.
One of the things I find most annoying with TV shows online is the pseudo-commercials they include while loading and throughout the programs. If YouTube started using pre-video commercials, I personally would probably use the site less.
If they have to run an ad, I think it should be done at the end or at least have the option to skip it. I think having it at the beginning sometimes hurts things in the end because people are impatient and they may just skip to another video or site else that does not have the ad first.
This is rather true. Sure, Google is a billion dollar company now, but what will happen five years from now? We live in a world where everything is constanly changing. Technologies are being upgraded and replaced. New companies are putting old ones out of business in a matter of months. No one can predicat anything in the digital revolution.
This is rather true. Sure, Google is a billion dollar company now, but what will happen five years from now? We live in a world where everything is constanly changing. Technologies are being upgraded and replaced. New companies are putting old ones out of business in a matter of months. No one can predicat anything in the digital revolution.
But even 100 million daily streams and $1.65 billion into the evolution of
this species, how it will actually thrive is a mystery.
"If anybody tries to answer that question
This is rather true. Sure, Google is a billion dollar company now, but what will happen five years from now? We live in a world where everything is constanly changing. Technologies are being upgraded and replaced. New companies are putting old ones out of business in a matter of months. No one can predicat anything in the digital revolution.
It, too, was a peer-to-peer revolutionary –
one
killed aborning by copyright infringement issues
.
I have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
.
It, too, was a peer-to-peer revolutionary
–
one
killed
aborning by copyright infringement issues
.
have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
It, too,
was a peer-to-peer revolutionary
–
one
killed
aborning
by copyright infringement issues
.
I have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
It, too,
was a
peer-to-peer revolutionary
–
one
killed
aborning
by
copyright infringement issues
.
I have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
It,
too,
was a
peer-to-peer
revolutionary
–
one
killed
aborning
by
copyright infringement
issues
.
I have never thought about this before. This YouTube revolution is very similar to the Napster craze. People who use YouTube post television shows, music videos, songs, and commercials for anyone to access. This really isn't much different from the concept of Napster's music sharing. In fact, YouTube can probably bring up more infringement issues, because it crosses over a wider range of genres.
The second big issue is the nightmare of protecting intellectual property. As
eager as Madison Avenue is to push stacks of chips online, in the back of its
mind is Napster.
It,
too,
was a
peer-to-peer
revolutionary
–
one
killed
aborning
by
copyright infringement
issues
.
Nobody wants to invest only to see the fledgling industry paralyzed with
litigation, regulation, or legislation. And it is not an idle fear.
I think that protecting intellectuall property is important, very imporatnt.I feel in a way that youtube is like limewire because you get to go on there and look up msuic for free; in the porcess, msuicians and artist alike aren't paid and the rights to their music are completely dimissed.
Actually, that's an easy one: Procter & Gamble would be ecstatic
Procter&Gamble is probably the biggest distributor of products, from household products to prescription drugs. This fact makes it a highly advertised company. I guess this would make them very ecstatic.
Putting a commercial in the beginning of the video may discourage the viewer from watching it. Is there some way the commercial can come in the middle? Or is that technically impossible? Maybe force the viewer to watch it?
The idea of intellectual property and copyrighting is something that we discussed in our other two modules, so I found it intriguing that it continues to be such a sticky area. Also, the concept behind lawsuits being driven by the amount of money the company running the site has shows how it may all just be about wealth.