Despite my OP on the Streamys being rather negative, and my tendency to be 
negative and unproductive in general, I still care rather a lot about this 
industry. We are well beyond the era where I would get caught up in fears that 
the industrial aspirations of some would harm the non-industry side of vlogging 
andits non-commercial potential for humans. We got through the era of insane 
hype and buzz, we avoided the potential tyranny of the first generation of 
would be new media moguls with their studio or network aspirations. We avoided 
the spectacle of seeing everybody sell out or go insane with product placement 
etc.

Unfortunately most of those things were avoided due to stupid failures on the 
part of various people and companies that believed too much in the hype, had no 
clue what they were doing, or just went in the wrong direction. This may not 
have had too detrimental an effect on the industry if everything else had been 
in place to make the industry succeed and grow on the scale people expected it 
should, and if existing media were unable to harness internet distribution for 
themselves within a reasonable timeframe. But that hasnt been the case, it was 
always going to be a steep uphill battle, with everything from sponsorship to 
promotion to audience numbers and show budgets. Time, innovative solutions, a 
lot of talented people working well together, and plenty of good luck were 
needed, along with the creation of some vehicles to carry this stuff onwards. I 
dont think this has happened, there are talented people with passion and some 
useful companies and services, but as an outsider it doesnt look like the 
vehicles that have been built are really fit for purpose. 

There is no way that I am well-informed enough to really know if the 
International Academy of Web Television is effective, how it works, what it 
even is in practical terms, and I am out of date regarding what other 
partnerships/institutions may have been formed to further the industry. But 
this trainwreck of a Streamys makes me want to know.  I know that if it was 
down to me I would overreact, assume the brands and institutions involved with 
the streams are soiled to an extent that apologies and 'will do better next 
time' is not enough, press the self-destruct button, start again with something 
untainted whilst taking account of the lessons learnt from the past. I dont 
know who or how many, but somewhere there are people or companies that should 
never be allowed near the image of the industry again, they dropped a ball that 
was so important they should not get a second chance.

Personally I feel that one possible way for the industry to differentiate and 
succeed, now that the traditional media are reaching internet eyeballs, is to 
play on other aspects and potential advantages of being on the web. Its way 
easier said than done, but surely the internet gives people ways to organise 
differently to the old models, ways to come together and achieve something 
without passing responsibility for a few people or entities that may stumble, 
ways to harness the very thin line between creators and viewers that exists on 
the web. Not easy, plenty of perils and downsides, but Im surprised new 
structures havent been experimented with.

Cheers

Steve Elbows 
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Quirk <qu...@...> wrote:
>
> Hulu, Netflix, Youtube, Blip, Vimeo, a hundred other web video service
> providers, and thousands of web video producers would disagree. I've been
> making a living doing web video production and editing for the past two
> years. It's still fledgling, but it's an industry.
> 
> And yeah, this was bad for everyone involved. People are rightfully pissed.
> 
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:15 PM, brook hinton <bhin...@...> wrote:
> 
> > A thought re "bad for the industry"
> >
> > There is no "industry".
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply via email to