Will never surrender ;-) Loiez ( from France) be continued
Le 7 mars 07 à 22:57, Sarah Szalavitz a écrit : > Hey, > > Have you heard that France is trying to ban citizen journalism? Its > unbelievably draconian... > > > My college roommate wrote this--and I'd love for y'all to read it > (and weep > unfortunately) and digg it! > > http://www.digg.com/politics/ > France_Bans_Citizen_Journalists_from_Reporting_Violence_Makes_US_Look_ > Good > > > Thanks! > > cheers, > Sarah > > > >> From: "David King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com >> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com >> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: blog vs youtube & myspace >> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 15:24:12 -0600 >> >> That's what I think, too - so that's cool. I'm so completely >> amazed that >> this is still so new - what will it look like in 2008? >> >> Who knows - but it'll sure be fun to see. >> >> David >> >> On 3/7/07, sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> David, >>> >>> Steve W. pointed out a thread from last summer (also initiated by >> Peter). >>> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/message/47091 >>> >>> It doesnt have to be an either/or scenario. Though it certainly >>> can be >> for >>> some. >>> I have always said to use the YouTubesque services to your >>> benefit if >>> needed >>> and to also maintain your own controllable space (site/blog/domain). >>> Everyone is different and most people on this list, at least i can >> assume, >>> DO have their own sites and do not only rely on any service, not >>> even >>> blip. >>> It is a mix of being more serious, dedicated, savvy and adoptive of >>> "grassroots" type of technologies. >>> I dont know of anyone here who only has a myspace page, a youtube >> profile >>> and a flickr account. >>> Most take it the next level. >>> >>> sull >>> >>> On 07 Mar 2007 12:31:26 -0800, David King >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<davidleeking%40gmail.com>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Carter (I think) said: >>>> >>>>> But if I want to have conversations using video content as the >>>>> starting point, I wouldn't think of YouTube. >>>> >>>> Help me out here - why is it an either/or thing with using >>>> Youtube for >>>> conversations? I'm not getting that. Because Youtube works >>>> basically >> the >>>> same as any other video hosting service - you can still embed your >>> youtube >>>> videos on your real blog, and basically ignore the youtube part >>>> of it. >>> You >>>> still get your videoblog's rss feed, and you still get your >> videoblog's >>>> comments... >>>> >>>> Other than the video ownership thing and downloading, what's the >>>> diff? >>>> >>>> david >>>> >>>> So you can still do rss >>>> >>>> >>>> On 3/7/07, Steve Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <steve%40dvmachine.com><steve%40dvmachine.com>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Cheers. I think I still use the hammer too much myself, even >>>>> though >> I >>>>> have other tools available! >>>>> >>>>> Youtube was not the obvious candidate in my mind when talking >>>>> about >>>>> video conversations here in the past, but as they have a critical >> mass >>>>> of users, and at some point added the video responses feature, it >> was >>>>> the first big instance Id seen of this stuff actually happening. >>>>> >>>>> Forums/messageboards were where I cut my net communications >>>>> teeth in >>>>> text, and so Ive ocasionally waffled here about how I wanted to >>>>> see >>>>> video fused with the messageboard way of things. I wondered how it >>>>> would be done, whether people would actually use it. Im still >>>>> wondering because things havent reached that stage yet, but at >>>>> least >>>>> there are a few services out there such as yours, and youtube >>>>> has at >>>>> least stuck its toe into the water. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway I would like to think that there'd have been more people >>>>> joining in this conversation if it were happenign a year or 2 >>>>> ago, I >>>>> dunoo, it seems harder to have a long conversation about what >> features >>>>> people dream of these days, perhaps because people basic needs are >>>>> already satisfied. All the same I hope there are actually a >>>>> mass of >>>>> people passionately excited about all these sorts of alternative & >>>>> extra uses for video on the net. I like shows and everything else >>>>> thats happening but I yearn for the days when there was a chance >> that >>>>> any day you coudl logon and find some individual has created some >>>>> funky tool, that whilst primitive shows the potential of the >>>>> future. >>>>> It felt like there were no frontiers, now much talk seems to >>>>> centre >>>>> around re-crossing the frontiers that the mass media previously >> filled >>>>> with concrete, but I fear far too much replication of TV and >>>>> the old >>>>> ways, leading to mothing different enough to truly stir my >>>>> passions. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway I definately agree with others that its pretty essential >>>>> that >>>>> your comment system be built into the embedded player. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Steve Elbows >>>>> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com >> <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging% >> 40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, >>>>> "caroosky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve, >>>>>> Great observations, especially the fact that we are each experts >> in >>>>>> finding differences. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm sure you've heard the phrase, "If the only tool you have in >> your >>>>>> kit is a hammer, every problem you encounter starts to look >>>>>> like a >>>>> nail." >>>>>> >>>>>> As someone spending a great deal of time thinking about how to >> build >>>>>> social tools, I'm perhaps all too quick to criticize YouTube's >>> hammer >>>>>> (in this case, their comment feature). In doing this, I'm not >> about >>>>>> to criticize content creators who use YouTube for what it does >> best: >>>>>> getting video up on the web and available to a massively large >>>>>> potential audience. I put things on YouTube when that is my goal. >>>>>> When I want to have more control over my files, and need to use >> the >>>>>> content in many different ways, I've found blip.tv to be an >>>>>> indispensible tool. >>>>>> >>>>>> But if I want to have conversations using video content as the >>>>>> starting point, I wouldn't think of YouTube. This is partly >> because >>>>>> of an admittedly snobbish opinion of the quality of conversation >>>>>> taking place there, but it's also because I don't think the >>> commenting >>>>>> system they have deployed is good for much else beyond the quick >>>>>> drive-by style comment. This snobbery does not extend to content >>>>>> creators, though. >>>>>> >>>>>> And while I'm making admissions, I will additionally confess that >> I >>> am >>>>>> wildly idealistic about how our collective community of content >>>>>> creators can mold and shape the fabric of the internet, as >>>>>> well as >>> the >>>>>> discussions taking place not only in this medium, but offline as >>> well. >>>>>> But as a builder of tools, I try (although I probably don't >>>>>> always succeed) to just build something cool, and then let others >>> tell >>>>>> me how they prefer to use it. I am often surprised to learn the >> ways >>>>>> that people are using a tool for an advantage I never would have >>>>>> imagined in a hundred years. The creativity of others is >> inspiring, >>>>>> to say the least. >>>>>> >>>>>> And much of that inspiration is viewable on YouTube. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> Carter Harkins >>>>>> http://crowdabout.us >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --- In >> videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging% >> 40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging% >> 40yahoogroups.com>, >>>>> "Steve Watkins" <steve@> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There was some talk in this group about youtuber's that I >> thought >>>> was >>>>>>> a bit snobbish a while ago, because it made me rant, but it was >>>>>>> probably only mild and it can be hard to seperate criticism of >> the >>>>>>> service with those using it sometimes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But on a certain level I would not be surprised if the 'brand >>>>>>> repputation' of youtube can heavily influence the reputation of >>>>>>> someone posting there. I could forsee plenty of exceptions, a >> show >>>>>>> that gets enough attention will be talked about in terms of >>> itself, >>>>>>> that its on youtube is incidental. And this just re-inforces the >>>> fact >>>>>>> that one off clips, copyrighted stuff, other popular 'viral' >>> videos >>>>>>> without a strong identity of their own are what will link most >>>>>>> strongly to the word 'youtube'. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If there is any snobbishness around, I suppose its bourn from >> some >>>>>>> peoples high expectations and ideals about what videoblogging >>> would >>>> be >>>>>>> used for. What I could describe as the 'liberal intellectual' >> wing >>>>>>> could understandably make such noises sometimes. Reminds me of >> the >>>> old >>>>>>> days of British broadcast television... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> First there was the BBC, which was (and remains) very >>> paternalistic. >>>>>>> Lots of corporate agenda's focussed on their role in society as >> a >>>>>>> public service, and lots of intellectual thinking on how the >>> medium >>>>>>> could be used for the masses to better themselves. Resulting in >>> lots >>>>>>> of high-brow programming that could be a bit stuffy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then along came the first commercial channel, ITV, which didnt >>> mind >>>>>>> putting on lots of cheap popular entertainment, which got very >>> high >>>>>>> viewing figures, gave a lot of people what they wanted, but was >>>>>>> regarded by the aforementioned BBC patriarch's as 'vulgar'. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess its not a new phenomenon, and 'class' still matters, >>>>>>> unfortunately, no matter if everyone pretends it doesnt mean >>>> anything >>>>>>> anymore. vlogtellectuals vs youtube, bbc vs itv, music hall vs >>> opera >>>>>>> and stuff like that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Plus humans are dead good at noticing differences. What >> seperates >>>> us, >>>>>>> why are they different, they seem like a different tribe. Even >>>>>>> something like using webcams as the norm rather than DV cams can >>>>>>> create a funny sort of divide and noticable difference. I have >> to >>> be >>>>>>> careful here too because class may play a role in that - for >>> poorer >>>>>>> humans, webcams are a lot more accessible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyway I just cant use the word youtube as one blanket >> description >>>> for >>>>>>> content type anymore. There seems to be 3 or 4 very different >> ways >>>> of >>>>>>> using youtube. Much of the actual community/social aspect of it >>>> seemed >>>>>>> extremely similar to social networking sites, with the same age >>> bias >>>>>>> and some underlying sense of a lot of youthful energy , directed >>> at >>>>>>> the sorts of things young people focus on. So I was extremely >>> happy >>>> o >>>>>>> see how popular that old uk bloke is on there, geriatric1927 or >>>>>>> whatever his handle is. Yes there are quite a lot of people past >>>> their >>>>>>> teens and 20's on there, but Im sure age is one imbalance that >> has >>> a >>>>>>> marked effect on youtube, its certainly responsible for many of >>> the >>>>>>> awful text comments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Steve Elbows >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- In >> videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging% >> 40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging% >> 40yahoogroups.com>, >>> >>>>> "Bill Cammack" <BillCammack@> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- In >> videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging% >> 40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> >>> >>>> <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, >>>>> "Mark Day" <markdaycomedy@> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Q: Why are videobloggers like mainstream media executives? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A: They both look down on people who post videos on YouTube. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually, that's unfair. To mainstream media executives (ba >> - >>>>> dum - >>>>>>>> bing!) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's funny, as we like to say in comedy, because it's true. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just some food for thought. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mark Day >>>>>>>>> http://markdaycomedy.blip.tv >>>>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/markdaycomedy >>>>>>>>> http://www.myspace.com/markday >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For the most part, I agree with your generalization. Of course >>>>>>>> generalizations don't apply to everyone and perhaps not even >>> most >>>>>>>> people, though one could gather from the conversations that go >>> on >>>> in >>>>>>>> this group that you would be correct. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> YouTube is a vehicle... an arena. Nothing more and nothing >> less. >>>>>>>> There are people that have technical issues with YT and >> complain >>>>> that >>>>>>>> they're a closed environment. That really doesn't have >> anything >>>>> to do >>>>>>>> with the posters, because it's not their choice. They're not >> the >>>>>>>> management. YouTube just happens to be an easy way to put >> video >>> on >>>>>>>> the internet and distribute that video to a lot of people, >>>>> practically >>>>>>>> immediately, and TOTALLY for free (assuming you already have >> the >>>>>>>> computer equipment / camera). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unfortunately, the same thing that makes YT easy to get >> involved >>>>> with >>>>>>>> makes it a source of endless buffoonery. The signal/noise >> ratio >>> is >>>>>>>> outlandish. Unfortunately for the prospect of YT being >>> 'accepted' >>>>>>>> outside of its own walls (not that it needs acceptance at >> all), >>>>>>>> there's so much garbage on it that it's not likely that the >>> casual >>>>>>>> observer coming into contact with YT by accident is going to >> see >>>>>>>> something that endears them to the site. Well... Unless you >>>>> count the >>>>>>>> fact that there' so much pirated material on YT, but that's >> not >>>> what >>>>>>>> this discussion is about. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hopefully, with the successes of "shows" like Lonelygirl15 and >>>>>>>> LisaNova, the YT environment will evolve into more than >> sending >>>>> video >>>>>>>> chats back and forth and making comments about them. I think >>>>> that's a >>>>>>>> really valuable use for YT, but the opportunity is there for >> the >>>>> same >>>>>>>> people to apply themselves creatively and develop their >>> abilities >>>> at >>>>>>>> broadcasting and communication, if that's what their goals >> are. >>>> For >>>>>>>> some people, it's just easier to make videos and watch them >>> online >>>>>>>> than go to the mall and meet people, so that's what they do. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, there are people developing characters and creating >>>>> situations to >>>>>>>> portray them in and making up comedy skits and stop-motion >>>>> videos and >>>>>>>> all kinds of interesting, intelligent, progressive and VERY >>>> TALENTED >>>>>>>> stuff. Unfortunately, there's no way to find those except for >>>>> trial & >>>>>>>> error. In 'defending' what's creative about YT, you also have >> to >>>>>>>> defend what isn't creative, because there's no distinction. >>>>> There are >>>>>>>> director accounts, but that doesn't mean that those channels >>>>> have been >>>>>>>> held to any standard of quality, content-wise or >>>>>>>> production-value-wise. It's like saying someone's a good >>>> basketball >>>>>>>> player because they're on the varsity team, but you don't >>>>> mention that >>>>>>>> they ride the bench and never set foot on the basketball >> court. >>> :) >>>>>>>> They get to wear the jacket, though. Everyone on YT is wearing >>> the >>>>>>>> same jacket. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Meanwhile, you have people learning to put video on the >> internet >>>> out >>>>>>>> in the wild. No walled garden. No guaranteed visibility. No >>>>> social >>>>>>>> network to ping-pong your video around causing more views. No >>>>> "video >>>>>>>> response" so you can automatically piggyback on a video that >>> gets >>>>>>>> viewed literally a million times. No ability to leech off of >>>>> the top >>>>>>>> subscribed people/groups in the community just by mentioning >>> their >>>>>>>> names in the titles of your videos. No arbitrarily decided >>>>>>>> "featuring" of your video....... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There's going to be a certain amount of "looking down upon" by >>>>> people >>>>>>>> who are doing MORE towards people who are doing LESS. It's >> just >>>>>>>> natural. MLB players look down on AAA players. AAA players >>>>> look down >>>>>>>> on little league players. World Cup soccer players look down >> on >>>> the >>>>>>>> local American teams. NFL players look down upon CFL players. >>>>> People >>>>>>>> making movies in Hollywood look down on independent filmmakers >>>>> without >>>>>>>> the budget even to get someone to score their film properly. >>> Does >>>>>>>> this mean that CFL players can't make it to the NFL? No. It >>>>> doesn't >>>>>>>> mean that independent filmmakers aren't going to make it to >>>>> Hollywood >>>>>>>> or make a film that has more value and integrity than films >>>>> currently >>>>>>>> being produced in Hollywood. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There's no doubt that there's SOME quality on YouTube. :) The >>>>> problem >>>>>>>> is that without the ability to separate the "YT Elite" from >> the >>>>>>>> garbage, all of youse have to stand together when someone >>> chooses >>>> to >>>>>>>> evaluate the site as a whole. When someone posts a video of >>>>> some lady >>>>>>>> slipping on a banana peel and gets 100,000 views for that on >>>>> YouTube, >>>>>>>> that doesn't make them a good filmmaker. If they stole the >>>>> video from >>>>>>>> somewhere else, they're less than that. There's no regulation >>>>> and no >>>>>>>> quality control. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's like having your GED <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GED>. >>>>>>>> Basically, you can opt-out of High School and take a test. If >>> you >>>>>>>> pass that test, the government will agree that you have enough >>>>>>>> knowledge that you WOULD HAVE graduated High School if you had >>>>>>>> bothered (or been able, in some circumstances) to go. :D Are >>>> people >>>>>>>> with GEDs looked down upon? Yep. Does it mean they can't do >>>>> the job >>>>>>>> you're hiring for? Nope. They might be the best applicant for >>> the >>>>>>>> position. However, they're still going to be categorized with >>>>>>>> alllllll the rest of the people that walked through the doors >> of >>>> the >>>>>>>> emploment office with evidence that they passed one test on >> one >>>> day >>>>>>>> instead of going to High School and graduating like everyone >>> else. >>>>>>>> Even if you dropped out of High School to get a job to help >> your >>>>>>>> mother pay the rent, you're going to be stigmatized along with >>> the >>>>>>>> kids that spent all day smoking pot and ditching class..... >> Same >>>>>>>> thing with YouTube. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Bill C. >>>>>>>> http://ReelSolid.TV >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> David King >>>> davidleeking.com - blog >>>> http://davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog >>>> >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sull >>> http://vlogdir.com (a project) >>> http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog) >>> http://interdigitate.com (otherly) >>> >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> David King >> davidleeking.com - blog >> http://davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog >> >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more….then map the > best route! > http://maps.live.com/?icid=hmtag1&FORM=MGAC01 > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -------------------- > ~--> > Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email > design. > http://us.click.yahoo.com/kOt0.A/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ~-> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/kOt0.A/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/lBLqlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
