I thought earlier today that Irina should have been organising the Streamys. Now I realise that Irina & Rox is the dream team. Someone should tell them.
On 15 Apr 2010, at 23:57, Roxanne Darling wrote: > Irina: agreed on the dubious pay for play and "it feels good to be > recognized for hard work." > Rupert: agree that having more women involve might have helped and > tech > should have been the "given." > Quirk: "People are rightfully pissed." Yeah. > Mark: Disrespecting the audience is a clear problem, I agree. If you > are > going to make it R-rated, it's your choice, though you better pre- > announce > that. > > As a group, internet video has so much potential. But many of those > who are > inspired to take the lead on these things also seem to have serious > issues > with maturity and basic event promotion competence. I produced a > podcamp > here in 2008 - over 400 attended live and thousands more via > livestream. > There were no streakers or swear words and wow what a great time we > had! > Aunties were blogging by the end of the 2 days and our tag hit #1 on > Twitter > and Flickr - from a big crowd of newbies. We did no traditional > marketing or > advertising - all via social networks and WOM. So I know this can > all be > done using the tools we love and sharing the ideas we know are > relevant and > in demand. > > I detached from being part of the in crowd years ago, both because > of the > geographical isolation in Hawaii (I just can't drop in to the LA and > NYC > meetings and those crowds seem to forget there are others who don't > show up > in the F2F events) as well as not fitting in one of the mainstream > categories. Surely our 4+ years, 760 episodes, nearly 3 M views, and > literally saving a few lives has a place somewhere? :-) > > Often a big fail can open things up for enlightenment. I'm putting > my vote > in that direction. > > Now, onto brighter and happier thoughts! > > Love, > > Rox > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Irina <irina...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> chance's story showed that charging nominees for participation is a >> dubious >> undertaking -- since without nominees there would be no industry >> and no >> "award show" in the first place. second of all, making anyone feel >> left out >> (since this is the web, which is pretty much an all-inclusive type of >> environment) with special entrances and seating is another weird >> idea. >> >> work on getting sponsors to pay for things so people dont have to. >> thats >> what sponsors are for. ergo, free food and liquor if i can help it. >> >> trust me, people brought their friends and kids to the vloggies and >> the >> winnies too. because its fun. and because it feels good to be >> recognized >> for >> hard work. >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Rupert Howe >> <rup...@twittervlog.tv<rupert%40twittervlog.tv>> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars. LA & NY people >>> consolidating their power. >>> >>> And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole >>> thing reads like a Greek tragedy. Pride before the fall. I mean, he >>> *really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his >>> friends and colleagues... and their children?! WTF. >>> >>> And I can't agree with the "It's terrible for the industry!" people. >>> It will be *good* for the profile of web video, not bad. I've seen >>> enough intentionally controversial and offensive theatre in London >>> and >>> Edinburgh to know that controversy drives box office success, mass >>> media interest and general awareness. Even if the show itself is a >>> train wreck. >>> >>> So - it might be bad for the reputation of Tubefilter and the >>> producers and the chances of getting sponsors for next year's >>> awards - >>> but not bad for web TV. More people will hear about web shows now - >>> in the knowledge that there was a big Awards ceremony for them. >>> >>> In everything I've read, everyone's giving them a pass on the tech >>> problems and castigating them for the tone. Come on. >>> >>> They should be more ashamed of the tech problems than the poor >>> taste. >>> >>> I mean, they were obviously *trying* to be 'edgy'. They got what >>> they >>> wanted, like ego-crazed geek frat boys. The whole thing reeks of not >>> enough women in charge. What a surprise. >>> >>> But surely the one thing that should have been *flawless* is the >>> technical delivery. >>> >>> It's not that hard to get sound right. You just have to hire a live >>> event sound engineer who knows what they're doing - and a live >>> broadcast mixer & director & engineer who know what they're doing (I >>> mean, it's LA, for God's sake). >>> >>> And do rehearsals and sound checks. And if you can't do proper >>> rehearsals in the venue, don't use the venue. If they were expecting >>> 750,000 viewers, it should have been ALL about the flawless live >>> streaming of the content and perfect sound, surely - not about >>> ohmygosh the Orpheum Theatre and the self-satisfied LA types in the >>> room? >>> >>> And above all, given that it's about web video, it should have been >>> short. >>> >>> Rupert >>> http://twittervlog.tv >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12 Apr 2010, at 23:17, elbowsofdeath wrote: >>> >>>> So I hear the Streamy's this year were a disaster in several key >>>> ways and have gotten all the wrong sort of attention as a result. >>>> >>>> There is some concern that it has damaged the image of the >>>> 'industry', although it may be easy to overstate this point. It >>>> certainly didnt help, but the 'industry' has enough other problems >>>> too, although anything that harms potential sponsorship by >>>> appearing >>>> to confirm potential sponsors worst fears (eg uncontrolled juvenile >>>> amateurish smut tarnishing their brands) sounds bad to me. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately there is a part of me that is wildly entertained and >>>> amused by the streamyfail, considering it to be some kind of >>>> justice >>>> on a certain level. This isnt fair, as no doubt lots of blameless >>>> hard working people have been hurt by the streamyfail, but I >>>> suppose >>>> its a natural consequence of my disdain for the way some of the >>>> more >>>> visible parts of the 'industry' went, shoddy emulation of the >>>> existing media. What better way to symbolise two worlds colliding, >>>> and so much wasted potential, than to have a slick awards show >>>> humbled by technical glitches and naked people. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Steve Elbows >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------ >>> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> http://geekentertainment.tv >> >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> >> >> > > > > -- > Roxanne Darling > "o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian > 808-384-5554 > Video --> http://www.beachwalks.tv > Company -- > http://www.barefeetstudios.com > Twitter--> http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
