Re: [videoblogging] Potential Idiot Alert...but, I do still have a question.
Hello, On 4/19/07, geoffdgeorge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, so I put my blogger feed through feedburner. Because the blogger feed is the one I burned, is feedburner now going to analyze the hits and subscriptions I get from both my blogger feed and the new feedburner feed that was just created through the original blogger feed? Is it JUST going to analyze the feedburner feed? I was trying to figure this out myself over at the feedburner website, but sometimes they made it seem like it would be analyzing both and sometimes they made it seem like they would be analyzing just the one. Regardless, I now have a feedburner feed, and it is http://feeds.feedburner.com/youaretired Feedburner will ONLY be able to analyze your Feeburner feed. It will NOT be able to analyze your Blogger feed. (If you want an explanation of why, let me know.) Hope that helps See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ ___ Cars, Motorcycles, Trucks, and Racing... http://tirebiterz.com/
[videoblogging] The Mash Lives
Hello my friends here. I have emerged from the ice here in Rome and put out a new Late Nite Mash, with a little puzzle. It is all in Italian, so maybe someone can help me understand the jokes. Ciao tutti... D
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
i have sat in many editorial news meetings deciding what is going to go into a story. NBC did its job in showing parts of the video on the news. it's not the reporters job to decide what's tasteful or proper it's not their job to protect the public or the victims from anything their only job is to tell the story as accurately and truthfully as possible NBC was in its right to do this just as the families of the victims are right to say how much they hate NBC for doing it and for refusing to go on tv in protest. On 4/19/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I must have missed the conversation on the solutions.. ;-) I think that it has to be more than just citizen media making the changes though. For one because you will have a segment of the population who does not trust real news people. I know most on this list would find that hard to believe but it is true. But I do agree the best thing we can do to force change is to call out things like this. To not watch the programs and to stand up. Which I know most if not all on this list do.we just have to get the rest of the world to change as well ;-) Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, I'm sure no one thinks you do agree with what they've done, Heath. Totally understand your questioning, and you're right to. You said first of all, though, that you didn't think we provided solutions, we just complained about how bad MSM was - and I don't think that's right - I think we talk about the solutions non- stop. And, my own opinion, there are no solutions to it in the pre- internet market. The solution *is* the internet and on-demand media. But now I'm repeating myself for like the twelfth time, so I'll shut up. On 19 Apr 2007, at 23:34, Heath wrote: For the record I don't agree with what the MSM has done and in paticular in deceiding to air the videoI was merely wanting to know how we can change things and how we can make a differance. To be able to discuss things we have to look at multiples angles, talk through situtions.I think those things are important, it's the only way to counter ignorance, IMO... Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: Absolutely positively no fucking way would I air those videos. There was no reason -- NONE -- none other than ratings and the thrill of exclusivity for NBC to do so. Watching them gains us nothing. There is nothing useful in them. The shooter is dead, and really, what else do we need to know? It's beyond obvious he was mentally ill, do we need to see video proof, too? Oh, wait. Yes we do. Because the American television audience is as voyeuristic as they come. Forget that NBC has played into the shooters hands. This is exactly what he wanted, and he got it. He didn't mail the box to police, he mailed it to a television station. Now every angry, dejected, hateful, sullen kid who dreams of blowing away the school gets to see it, too. He wanted to be a martyr and to a small dangerous set, he is. Those tapes should have been held for a certain period of time, so that authorities (whoever they are) could glean from them whatever they needed, and then available to anyone closely related to the tragedy should they wish to see them. Families, friends, counselors. It wasn't wrong for NBC to edit those videos, it was wrong of them to air to air them and to air them so quickly. It speaks volumes that families booked on The Today Show have cancelled their appearances because of the handling of the video. Now NBC has backpedaled and say they're going to be more careful about the remaining footage that they show. Too little too late. I'm disgusted by what NBC has done, and I find the idea that well, of course NBC had to air the videos repellent. Bekah --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Heath heathparks@ wrote: Maybe I missed it but I still have not seem anyone say how they would have covered it. I only see and hear people saying how the MSM is covering it is wrong. So I ask out to the group, you are the news director you have the ablilty to shape how this story is told, how do you do that? I am not trying to defend MSM, what I am asking is how we do it differently, how do you balance it. Or any story for that matter. you mentioned my comment on the right to know vs privacy, I was speaking in general terms and not to this paticular incident. I have no idea how I would feel, maybe I would want to tell people about my son or daughter, maybe I would retreat into myself, I simply do not know. Heath
Re: [videoblogging] new web series, OFFICE 2.0 casting videobloggers in nyc
Sounds fascinating. Been waiting for folks to use this community for things like this. If you wanna be in a vlogvertising endeavor, show up in Williamsburg, Brooklyn this Saturday. 9 a.m. 299 Bedford Avenue. Jan On 4/19/07, mattfeldman78 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I thought it might be interesting to cast videobloggers in some roles for this series. The show centers around the daily grind at Slikstr, a Web 2.0 startup company whose exact business is not quite clear. There will be many interactive elements, including vlogs from characters and meetings in Second Life. Visit http://office.neovids.tv to read more, including the first script. You can also send us your audition directly from your webcam here---http://office.neovids.tv/auditions.html. We look forward to your feedback. Best, Matt site:http://neovids.tv email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] twitter:http://twitter.com/neovids Yahoo! Groups Links -- The Faux Press - better than real http://fauxpress.blogspot.com http://twitter.com/fauxpress [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
Can I just ask a clarifying question... It's seems like conventional wisdom has recommended against using a seperate blip account for each vlog. However, with the new show player, it makes sense to have your content in seperate accounts. Otherwise it's pretty much useless. Heres the question: Is this two weeks comment about a solution to this problem or should I begin to seperate my content into different accounts so I have the option of using the player on one of my sites? Am I right in understanding the best practice has been to have only one account and cross-post to different blogs? thanks all, Andy Dragt www.developinggr.com - a vlog about development in GR, MI www.developinggr.com/house - a vlog about my home renovation... --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two weeks. :) Yours, Mike -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mattfeldman78 Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 3:36 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player Hi, Has anyone found a way to control the order of the episodes within the player? Is this something that Blip is planning on offering? -Matt http://neovids.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi michael@ wrote: Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack BillCammack@ wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Re: [videoblogging] Minor Milestone
one year is a huge deal! On 4/17/07, Mike Moon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I debated posting this, but what to hell. April 12, 2007 was my one year anniversary of vlogging. 188 vlogs in the first year. I say this is a minor milestone, because my goal is a lifetime of vlogs. Special thanks to Blip.TV for hosting, FreeVlog.org for showing me the way, vPIP for making it look pretty, and this group for all the info and deabtes. http://vlog.mikemoon.net/2007/04/minor-milestone.html Mike -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
Ah, yes, multiple playlists. They're on the list. The Show Player is already capable of accommodating up to half a dozen playlists, we just have to build the interface to allow people to configure them. They're coming :) -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jackson West Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:12 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player Rad. I agree with Sull -- been waitin' for multiple playlists. :) JW On 4/19/07, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two weeks. :) Yours, Mike -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mattfeldman78 Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 3:36 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player Hi, Has anyone found a way to control the order of the episodes within the player? Is this something that Blip is planning on offering? -Matt http://neovids.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To:
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
heath, i agree with you that there are no answers and this is just a tragedy. but again, it's not the reporters job to be empathic, just to report. having worked in a newsroom for 5 years, this was a hard lesson for me to learn. On 4/20/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the problem is that it is going beyond simple reporting and going into the realm of explotation. Cound the same story have been told without showing the videos? Probably and while I agree that a reporter's job is to report on the news, I personaly feel that the job of the editor is to weigh and to look at all angles of a story and then deciede what should be done. The problem always comes from is that you will always have people who want to look for answers, to understand why something happened. Were there clues, could we have prevented this, what's wrong with his parenets, why wasn't he stopped or jailed and so on and so on. The sad fact is MOST times there are NO answers. Life happens, (I am not saying that to sound cold or unfeeling, if you have seen any of my videos, you should know I am nothing like that) But what I mean is that things will always happen that we do not understand. Sometimes you can gain knowledge by digging or finding out information but a lot of times it's just random. Me, personaly I would not have run it. I would have found a different way to tell this part of the story because even though I do believe you have to report the news I would like to think we can report the news and still have some remaing empathy. Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Irina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i have sat in many editorial news meetings deciding what is going to go into a story. NBC did its job in showing parts of the video on the news. it's not the reporters job to decide what's tasteful or proper it's not their job to protect the public or the victims from anything their only job is to tell the story as accurately and truthfully as possible NBC was in its right to do this just as the families of the victims are right to say how much they hate NBC for doing it and for refusing to go on tv in protest. On 4/19/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I must have missed the conversation on the solutions.. ;-) I think that it has to be more than just citizen media making the changes though. For one because you will have a segment of the population who does not trust real news people. I know most on this list would find that hard to believe but it is true. But I do agree the best thing we can do to force change is to call out things like this. To not watch the programs and to stand up. Which I know most if not all on this list do.we just have to get the rest of the world to change as well ;-) Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, Rupert rupert@ wrote: No, I'm sure no one thinks you do agree with what they've done, Heath. Totally understand your questioning, and you're right to. You said first of all, though, that you didn't think we provided solutions, we just complained about how bad MSM was - and I don't think that's right - I think we talk about the solutions non- stop. And, my own opinion, there are no solutions to it in the pre- internet market. The solution *is* the internet and on-demand media. But now I'm repeating myself for like the twelfth time, so I'll shut up. On 19 Apr 2007, at 23:34, Heath wrote: For the record I don't agree with what the MSM has done and in paticular in deceiding to air the videoI was merely wanting to know how we can change things and how we can make a differance. To be able to discuss things we have to look at multiples angles, talk through situtions.I think those things are important, it's the only way to counter ignorance, IMO... Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: Absolutely positively no fucking way would I air those videos. There was no reason -- NONE -- none other than ratings and the thrill of exclusivity for NBC to do so. Watching them gains us nothing. There is nothing useful in them. The shooter is dead, and really, what else do we need to know? It's beyond obvious he was mentally ill, do we need to see video proof, too? Oh, wait. Yes we do. Because the American television audience is as voyeuristic as they come. Forget that NBC has played into the shooters hands. This is exactly what he wanted, and he got it. He didn't mail the box to police, he mailed it
[videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Irina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: heath, i agree with you that there are no answers and this is just a tragedy. but again, it's not the reporters job to be empathic, just to report. having worked in a newsroom for 5 years, this was a hard lesson for me to learn. The material goes through editorial before publication. It is the editors job to decide what is appropriate to print. -- Enric -==- http://cirne.com On 4/20/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the problem is that it is going beyond simple reporting and going into the realm of explotation. Cound the same story have been told without showing the videos? Probably and while I agree that a reporter's job is to report on the news, I personaly feel that the job of the editor is to weigh and to look at all angles of a story and then deciede what should be done. The problem always comes from is that you will always have people who want to look for answers, to understand why something happened. Were there clues, could we have prevented this, what's wrong with his parenets, why wasn't he stopped or jailed and so on and so on. The sad fact is MOST times there are NO answers. Life happens, (I am not saying that to sound cold or unfeeling, if you have seen any of my videos, you should know I am nothing like that) But what I mean is that things will always happen that we do not understand. Sometimes you can gain knowledge by digging or finding out information but a lot of times it's just random. Me, personaly I would not have run it. I would have found a different way to tell this part of the story because even though I do believe you have to report the news I would like to think we can report the news and still have some remaing empathy. Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Irina irinaski@ wrote: i have sat in many editorial news meetings deciding what is going to go into a story. NBC did its job in showing parts of the video on the news. it's not the reporters job to decide what's tasteful or proper it's not their job to protect the public or the victims from anything their only job is to tell the story as accurately and truthfully as possible NBC was in its right to do this just as the families of the victims are right to say how much they hate NBC for doing it and for refusing to go on tv in protest. On 4/19/07, Heath heathparks@ wrote: I must have missed the conversation on the solutions.. ;-) I think that it has to be more than just citizen media making the changes though. For one because you will have a segment of the population who does not trust real news people. I know most on this list would find that hard to believe but it is true. But I do agree the best thing we can do to force change is to call out things like this. To not watch the programs and to stand up. Which I know most if not all on this list do.we just have to get the rest of the world to change as well ;-) Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, Rupert rupert@ wrote: No, I'm sure no one thinks you do agree with what they've done, Heath. Totally understand your questioning, and you're right to. You said first of all, though, that you didn't think we provided solutions, we just complained about how bad MSM was - and I don't think that's right - I think we talk about the solutions non- stop. And, my own opinion, there are no solutions to it in the pre- internet market. The solution *is* the internet and on-demand media. But now I'm repeating myself for like the twelfth time, so I'll shut up. On 19 Apr 2007, at 23:34, Heath wrote: For the record I don't agree with what the MSM has done and in paticular in deceiding to air the videoI was merely wanting to know how we can change things and how we can make a differance. To be able to discuss things we have to look at multiples angles, talk through situtions.I think those things are important, it's the only way to counter ignorance, IMO... Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: Absolutely positively no fucking way would I air those videos. There was no reason -- NONE -- none other than ratings and the thrill of exclusivity for NBC to do so. Watching them gains us nothing. There is nothing useful in them. The shooter is dead, and really, what else do we need to know? It's beyond
[videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the problem is that it is going beyond simple reporting and going into the realm of explotation. Cound the same story have been told without showing the videos? Probably and while I agree that a reporter's job is to report on the news, I personaly feel that the job of the editor is to weigh and to look at all angles of a story and then deciede what should be done. I see that is correct. And there is a problem of a lack of editorial control and judgement in current mass media. (There's a significant discussion that can be had on that.) The problem always comes from is that you will always have people who want to look for answers, to understand why something happened. Were there clues, could we have prevented this, what's wrong with his parenets, why wasn't he stopped or jailed and so on and so on. The sad fact is MOST times there are NO answers. Life happens, (I am not saying that to sound cold or unfeeling, if you have seen any of my videos, you should know I am nothing like that) But what I mean is that things will always happen that we do not understand. Sometimes you can gain knowledge by digging or finding out information but a lot of times it's just random. There is an answer to this and it is evil. Not evil in a mystical, spiritual or religious sense. But evil as the destruction of life. Cho could only kill so many people the rest he could only terrorize with images, text and video. Terrorize in controlling people through fear, thus limiting their choices and freedom. To disseminate centrally through mass media Cho's material is to further his intent to control and destroy life, to create evil. That is the answer I see to what he did and why it doesn't make sense to mass market Cho's media. -- Enric -==- http://cirne.com Me, personaly I would not have run it. I would have found a different way to tell this part of the story because even though I do believe you have to report the news I would like to think we can report the news and still have some remaing empathy. Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Irina irinaski@ wrote: i have sat in many editorial news meetings deciding what is going to go into a story. NBC did its job in showing parts of the video on the news. it's not the reporters job to decide what's tasteful or proper it's not their job to protect the public or the victims from anything their only job is to tell the story as accurately and truthfully as possible NBC was in its right to do this just as the families of the victims are right to say how much they hate NBC for doing it and for refusing to go on tv in protest. On 4/19/07, Heath heathparks@ wrote: I must have missed the conversation on the solutions.. ;-) I think that it has to be more than just citizen media making the changes though. For one because you will have a segment of the population who does not trust real news people. I know most on this list would find that hard to believe but it is true. But I do agree the best thing we can do to force change is to call out things like this. To not watch the programs and to stand up. Which I know most if not all on this list do.we just have to get the rest of the world to change as well ;-) Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, Rupert rupert@ wrote: No, I'm sure no one thinks you do agree with what they've done, Heath. Totally understand your questioning, and you're right to. You said first of all, though, that you didn't think we provided solutions, we just complained about how bad MSM was - and I don't think that's right - I think we talk about the solutions non- stop. And, my own opinion, there are no solutions to it in the pre- internet market. The solution *is* the internet and on-demand media. But now I'm repeating myself for like the twelfth time, so I'll shut up. On 19 Apr 2007, at 23:34, Heath wrote: For the record I don't agree with what the MSM has done and in paticular in deceiding to air the videoI was merely wanting to know how we can change things and how we can make a differance. To be able to discuss things we have to look at multiples angles, talk through situtions.I think those things are important, it's the only way to counter ignorance, IMO... Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: Absolutely positively no fucking way would I air those videos. There was no reason -- NONE -- none other than ratings and the thrill of exclusivity for NBC to do so.
[videoblogging] Re: new web series, OFFICE 2.0 casting videobloggers in nyc
Sounds like a fun project Too bad I'm mostly in DC these days. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jan McLaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds fascinating. Been waiting for folks to use this community for things like this. If you wanna be in a vlogvertising endeavor, show up in Williamsburg, Brooklyn this Saturday. 9 a.m. 299 Bedford Avenue. Jan On 4/19/07, mattfeldman78 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I thought it might be interesting to cast videobloggers in some roles for this series. The show centers around the daily grind at Slikstr, a Web 2.0 startup company whose exact business is not quite clear. There will be many interactive elements, including vlogs from characters and meetings in Second Life. Visit http://office.neovids.tv to read more, including the first script. You can also send us your audition directly from your webcam here---http://office.neovids.tv/auditions.html. We look forward to your feedback. Best, Matt site:http://neovids.tv email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] twitter:http://twitter.com/neovids Yahoo! Groups Links -- The Faux Press - better than real http://fauxpress.blogspot.com http://twitter.com/fauxpress [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
But the problem is that it is going beyond simple reporting and going into the realm of explotation. Cound the same story have been told without showing the videos? Probably and while I agree that a reporter's job is to report on the news, I personaly feel that the job of the editor is to weigh and to look at all angles of a story and then deciede what should be done. The problem always comes from is that you will always have people who want to look for answers, to understand why something happened. Were there clues, could we have prevented this, what's wrong with his parenets, why wasn't he stopped or jailed and so on and so on. The sad fact is MOST times there are NO answers. Life happens, (I am not saying that to sound cold or unfeeling, if you have seen any of my videos, you should know I am nothing like that) But what I mean is that things will always happen that we do not understand. Sometimes you can gain knowledge by digging or finding out information but a lot of times it's just random. Me, personaly I would not have run it. I would have found a different way to tell this part of the story because even though I do believe you have to report the news I would like to think we can report the news and still have some remaing empathy. Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Irina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i have sat in many editorial news meetings deciding what is going to go into a story. NBC did its job in showing parts of the video on the news. it's not the reporters job to decide what's tasteful or proper it's not their job to protect the public or the victims from anything their only job is to tell the story as accurately and truthfully as possible NBC was in its right to do this just as the families of the victims are right to say how much they hate NBC for doing it and for refusing to go on tv in protest. On 4/19/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I must have missed the conversation on the solutions.. ;-) I think that it has to be more than just citizen media making the changes though. For one because you will have a segment of the population who does not trust real news people. I know most on this list would find that hard to believe but it is true. But I do agree the best thing we can do to force change is to call out things like this. To not watch the programs and to stand up. Which I know most if not all on this list do.we just have to get the rest of the world to change as well ;-) Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, Rupert rupert@ wrote: No, I'm sure no one thinks you do agree with what they've done, Heath. Totally understand your questioning, and you're right to. You said first of all, though, that you didn't think we provided solutions, we just complained about how bad MSM was - and I don't think that's right - I think we talk about the solutions non- stop. And, my own opinion, there are no solutions to it in the pre- internet market. The solution *is* the internet and on-demand media. But now I'm repeating myself for like the twelfth time, so I'll shut up. On 19 Apr 2007, at 23:34, Heath wrote: For the record I don't agree with what the MSM has done and in paticular in deceiding to air the videoI was merely wanting to know how we can change things and how we can make a differance. To be able to discuss things we have to look at multiples angles, talk through situtions.I think those things are important, it's the only way to counter ignorance, IMO... Heath http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com, missbhavens1969 missbhavens1969@ wrote: Absolutely positively no fucking way would I air those videos. There was no reason -- NONE -- none other than ratings and the thrill of exclusivity for NBC to do so. Watching them gains us nothing. There is nothing useful in them. The shooter is dead, and really, what else do we need to know? It's beyond obvious he was mentally ill, do we need to see video proof, too? Oh, wait. Yes we do. Because the American television audience is as voyeuristic as they come. Forget that NBC has played into the shooters hands. This is exactly what he wanted, and he got it. He didn't mail the box to police, he mailed it to a television station. Now every angry, dejected, hateful, sullen kid who dreams of blowing away the school gets to see it, too. He wanted to be a martyr and to a small dangerous set, he is. Those tapes should have been held for a certain period of time, so that authorities (whoever they are) could glean from them whatever they needed, and then available to anyone closely related to the tragedy
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Scripting News: 4/18/2007
Of course, if the mainstream media weren't reporting on it, how many of us would know about it at all? We would all know about it as stories disseminate quickly on the net. The better question to pose is, how many of us would feel inundated with the redundant prone coverage? New information on a story needs to be reported on. But as we all know, MSM likes to saturate their broadcasts with repetitive audio/visuals and slurp in all the usual suspected Reasons Why. Serve it while its hot! They call in the experts to get their latest audible clip circulating within the conversation and at the end of the day, the numbers look good. Advertisers are pleased. Everybody loves a big story. Afterall, the Iraq war has lost its luster and the casualties over there have become normalized to some extent at least in relation to our culture's attention. So it seems. I am referring to the casualties, not the politics. Obviously everyone is READY for politics. Now, I have been a non-subscriber of TV for a over a year now so the only content I get is what I voluntarily go grab on the net or newspaper. So inundation and disappointment of MSM mostly eludes me now. To those that have TV, my only suggestion is to leave it off as often as you can. As for the issue of Winer and Videoblogging the whole discussion gives me a bad taste. It's a waste of time. It really is. In a nutshell. People are sick in this world. Any enabling technology that exists -for the people- will ultimately expose such sick people. Utterly unavoidable. Reputations of technology do not exist. People who use technology are not defamed. Sull On 4/20/07, Justin Kownacki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The real problem isn't people doing stupid things for attention -- that's always existed and always will. The problem is in the general public paying attention. If we were less of a gee whiz culture, these people wouldn't be getting our attention in the first place. Of course, if the mainstream media weren't reporting on it, how many of us would know about it at all? The upside? The more stupidity is posted to the web, the less time we all have to look at it. Eventually, we become desensitized, and then the stakes for our attention raise -- again. Recent Activity - 7 New Membershttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJnODI1ZWRjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODA1NjY2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTU1NDAyMQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJycwRzdGltZQMxMTc3MDc5Nzg0 - 3 New Linkshttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/links;_ylc=X3oDMTJodWs3dm1yBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODA1NjY2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTU1NDAyMQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bGlua3MEc3RpbWUDMTE3NzA3OTc4NA-- Visit Your Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaXY2ZzV1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyODA1NjY2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTU1NDAyMQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzExNzcwNzk3ODQ- SPONSORED LINKS - Individualhttp://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkN25vaTIwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzEEZ3JwSWQDMTI4MDU2NjYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTU0MDIxBHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTc3MDc5Nzg0?t=msk=Individualw1=Individualw2=Individual+counselingw3=Individual+health+planw4=Individual+income+taxw5=Individual+income+tax+returnc=5s=132g=2.sig=yXas2gOCx2ryEsBih067Ww - Individual counselinghttp://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkY21xNTNxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzIEZ3JwSWQDMTI4MDU2NjYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTU0MDIxBHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTc3MDc5Nzg0?t=msk=Individual+counselingw1=Individualw2=Individual+counselingw3=Individual+health+planw4=Individual+income+taxw5=Individual+income+tax+returnc=5s=132g=2.sig=yO-t9-v0D93UF70blMCxpA - Individual health planhttp://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkdXJncHVsBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzMEZ3JwSWQDMTI4MDU2NjYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTU0MDIxBHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTc3MDc5Nzg0?t=msk=Individual+health+planw1=Individualw2=Individual+counselingw3=Individual+health+planw4=Individual+income+taxw5=Individual+income+tax+returnc=5s=132g=2.sig=wXFwbY_BAxoq2bv9JMIluw - Individual income taxhttp://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkcHJtdnBjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzQEZ3JwSWQDMTI4MDU2NjYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTU0MDIxBHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTc3MDc5Nzg0?t=msk=Individual+income+taxw1=Individualw2=Individual+counselingw3=Individual+health+planw4=Individual+income+taxw5=Individual+income+tax+returnc=5s=132g=2.sig=U0NxPlZ6uri1ECJoeJIcvA - Individual income tax returnhttp://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJkMXFzNmV1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzUEZ3JwSWQDMTI4MDU2NjYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTU0MDIxBHNlYwNzbG1vZARzdGltZQMxMTc3MDc5Nzg0?t=msk=Individual+income+tax+returnw1=Individualw2=Individual+counselingw3=Individual+health+planw4=Individual+income+taxw5=Individual+income+tax+returnc=5s=132g=2.sig=Jc5hlOlOftCAmUIk9lqdYg Yahoo! HotJobs Career change time?http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12it0hkc8/M=493064.9803220.10510213.8674578/D=groups/S=1705554021:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1177086984/A=3848547/R=0/SIG=10o5tjndh/*http://www.hotjobs.com Explore companies and new
[videoblogging] Re: Scripting News: 4/18/2007 (moving off topic)
I referenced this discussion briefly in a recent blog post, http://www.orient-lodge.com/node/2262 Especial hat tip to whomever it was that pointed out Kevin Whitrick's suicide in a video chat room. Aldon
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
I don't know... What was gained by showing the footage? What did it really have to do with the story? I agree that reporters have no right to decide what is tasteful and proper, but they should not be adding salacious content to improve ratings either, which is exactly what happened with that orgy of psychopathic narcissism that ran wall to wall on the TV. The excuse It gives us a look into why this happened. is totally bogus. The dude was a sociopathic misfit who wanted people to pay for his misfortune. We didn't need the breaking news freakshow to know that Gates was a looney and fucked up. We didn't need the nearly live freakshow with Dahmer. We didn't need the freakshow with OJ, although we got it. What's the difference between the 3 examples here? No more accountability to the public good, and slavish devotion to profit. We don't have a right to see his 'manifesto', and NBC did not have the obligation to publish. It was a choice - a choice that was guaranteed eyeballs. It was titillating pornography, designed to grab and hold eyeballs, not unlike what Rupert was saying in an earlier post. To take this a bit further... The idea that the media HAD to be allowed in the OJ Simpson trial was total bullshit too. We, as a people, have no right to watch criminal court cases on TV. If you want to follow the trial live, get your ass down to the courthouse and sit there and watch it. Of course there are things that must be televised to the nation, but those are things that have direct impact on our civil duties and civil rights. Putting the deepest, darkest hate filled diatribes of mass murdering sociopaths does not have an impact upon our cicil duties civil rights, unless of course you are televising a Bush War Rally. I'm tired of the corporate media crying about their right to do this and that based upon the specious argument that 'the public needs to know'. They don't give a shit about the public knowing. Why can't they just be honest and say,This is going to make us a boatload of money and give us enhanced market share. We're going to do this because it is good for us, and you can't stop it because our organization has all the rights (and more) of any US citizen. Oh, my that would be refreshing! And Heath, I did pose some solutions to our media problem, but it seems as if, like usual, those solutions don't exist. Why is it that people who demand solutions never seem to realize when they are being offered one? (not attacking you personally, Heath... It's just a trend I've had experience with.) I remember in the run up to our invasion of Afghanistan, which I was against, BTW, not because I am some peacenick pacifist, but because I didn't see how attacking a dirt poor country and installing the very people we created the 'Afghan Trap' to stop (and destroyed a country in the process) into positions of authority was not only a stupid idea, but it was morally wrong. The warmongers hammered over and over,All they offer is naysaying. Where's the solution? Well the solution was offered, ironically by the Taliban. They offered to give up Osama to an international tribunal. We shit on that idea because it was not an option. Getting the guy that allegedly masterminded the plot into the hands of a responsible international tribunal or court, simply was not a solution. Going to war, bombing civilians, further destroying an already impoverished country and whacking an extremely delicate regional situation was the only solution. An international police effort was not a solution. Taking up the Taliban on their offer was not a solution. Actually protecting our borders was not a solution. The only solution was war. Now one could make the argument that they were bad solutions; bad ideas, but that's not what happened. The left was offering nothing but naysaying. I think this dovetails nicely, Irina's observations and yours, Heath, and that is disappointing. It's all the same stuff, over and over. Did the American people really need to see the twin towers falling a gazillion times? Of course the corporate media have the 'right' to show it, although I suppose one could argue that it was akin to yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater... They have the right to do so because corporations enjoy the same rights as US citizens, although they have none of the responsibilities, and they can't die. Hell, we can't seem to find the strength as a people to stand up and dissolve them for something as horrible as killing thousands of people, destroying our food supply, poisoning our environment, and selling out our country. And that's what we're talking about here. Did we really need to see the OJ trial for months on end? If so, then don't we need to see things like the market based reprecussions of burning our food for fuel? What about our ever increasingly poisoned food supply? That might be something people
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
yes, i am taking an extreme view for sake of argument and of course i would have been a horrible crime reporter had i been incapable of empathy. however, i firmly believe that reporters deliver information as it happens and it would have been unjournalistic of them not to show the public the information they had on cho, including parts of the tapes. On 4/20/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From Wikipedia Empathy (from the Greek åìðÜèåéá, to make suffer) is commonly defined as one's ability to recognize, perceive and directly experientially feel the emotion of another. As the states of mind, beliefs, and desires of others are intertwined with their emotions, one with empathy for another may often be able to more effectively define another's modes of thought and mood. Empathy is often characterized as the ability to put oneself into another's shoes, or experiencing the outlook or emotions of another being within oneself, a sort of emotional resonance. From the artile Irina posted Scott North, reporter and assistant city editor for The Herald ( http://www.heraldnet.com/) (Everett, Wash.), adds: In the race to get it first, don't forget the long view. It often helps to think less about gathering fact and more about creating relationships. Some of the most insightful stories won't be told for days, weeks, months or, in some cases, years. Just thought it was interesting, while Scott may not be suggesting empathy in the purest sense, it sounds like elements of it, because you can not build a relationship without having some sort of bond. but maybe that's just me. Heath http://batmangeek.com -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
Wow! Preach it Rupert. You made me feel all warm... You are approaching Elbow-ian status in my eyes. ;-) Thanks for your compassion and clarity. We just need a couple million more of you... Cheers, Ron Watson Pawsitive Vybe 11659 Berrigan Ave Cedar Springs, MI 49319 http://pawsitivevybe.com Personal Contact: 616.802.8923 [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the Web: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com http://k9disc.blip.tv On Apr 20, 2007, at 12:32 PM, Rupert wrote: It's the question of what's Journalistic that's the big thing for me. I think it's held up as this glorious unassailable thing - as if it's a part of our countries' constitutions - but i think it's deeply flawed and broken. This is a really, really big subject, but I have serious reservations about the way that journalists use principles like Truth and Objectivity to justify doing things that the majority of people find unacceptable. I think it's very dangerous to the moral fabric of our society. I think one of the potential benefits of citizen journalism is that it can afford to be more humane. The overwhelming majority of people i've talked to and read in the last couple of days have said how wrong and disgusting and unnecessary and unnewsworthy and even potentially harmful it was to release those tapes. They don't think it was the 'duty' of NBC to release them. They think that that's bullshit politician-speak justification and pretext to cover the fact that in the end, they prioritised financial gain over morals. They couldn't afford to be Good. I'm just doing my job, regardless of morals and humanity, is not an excuse that goes down terribly well with most people, post WW2. We ALL have a responsibility to apply our moral judgement to everything we do, and morally question what we are told to do by others. i don't know the figures in the States, but in this country the two least respected professions (as found repeatedly in polls) are journalists and politicians. even parking wardens get a better rating. i personally think that a lot of that has to do with a perception that journalists leave their humanity and compassion at the door when they go into work. And that although one might think that this would lead to a clear and unbiased view of the world (as is touted), it actually exposes them to moral corruption, because they're not allowed to use their moral judgement, empathy, compassion, humanity in a corporate environment that is motivated entirely by the quest for audience and profits. You said it's a hard lesson to learn. Isn't that because it's unnatural, because it goes against the grain of what it means to be a responsible compassionate human being? It's being learnt in the name of some cold intellectual principles that are supposedly a crucial part of our system of political checks-and-balances, even though your employers ultimately have no principles. Added to which, journalists' employers are deep in bed financially with those people they're supposedly there to protect us from. As a journalist, you've got to be careful with that kind of stuff. It exposes you to being happily played by your employers, exploiting morally questionable stories with a human cost for financial gain, and rationalizing it on the pretext that The Truth Must Always Out For The Health Of Our Society. You only have to look at the wasteland of modern American news media to think, Hang On, I thought they said this was a great and noble profession which is there to save us from the lies, corruption and tyranny of our rulers. Was that a joke? In this context, when i hear journalists using great principles to justify doing morally questionable things like releasing those tapes in the name of The Holy Truth and The Newsworthy Story, i often feel that it devalues both the principles and the profession. And I hope that the arrival of more non-professionals and independent people with local, personal agendas will inject a good dose of humanity into our media. I think as many people will appreciate that as the minority who are sucked into rolling news's addictive storytelling and deferral of gratification soap opera style journalism, masquerading as Telling It How It Is. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 20 Apr 2007, at 15:15, Irina wrote: heath, i agree with you that there are no answers and this is just a tragedy. but again, it's not the reporters job to be empathic, just to report. having worked in a newsroom for 5 years, this was a hard lesson for me to learn. On 4/20/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But the problem is that it is going beyond simple reporting and going into the realm of explotation. Cound the same story have been told without showing the videos? Probably and while I agree that a reporter's job is to report on the news, I personaly feel that the job of the
[videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's the question of what's Journalistic that's the big thing for me. I think it's held up as this glorious unassailable thing - as if it's a part of our countries' constitutions - but i think it's deeply flawed and broken. Accurate information is essential for a citizenry in a democracy. It is flawed, but to say it is deeply flawed is overstating in the opposite direction of being a glorious, unassailable thing. Journalism has developed with democracy and technology in the U.S. Every institution is flawed and that is the nature of life and reality. Institutions counter balance each other and adjust. To seek perfection is the biggest error. This is a really, really big subject, but I have serious reservations about the way that journalists use principles like Truth and Objectivity to justify doing things that the majority of people find unacceptable. I think it's very dangerous to the moral fabric of our society. Morality and objectivity are not incompatible. And an argument for objectivity that is missing an ethical component is not complete objectivity. Objectivity includes the value of life which is an ethical domain. I think one of the potential benefits of citizen journalism is that it can afford to be more humane. The overwhelming majority of people i've talked to and read in the last couple of days have said how wrong and disgusting and unnecessary and unnewsworthy and even potentially harmful it was to release those tapes. They don't think it was the 'duty' of NBC to release them. They think that that's bullshit politician-speak justification and pretext to cover the fact that in the end, they prioritised financial gain over morals. They couldn't afford to be Good. Morals and financial gain aren't necessarily in conflict. It is not always a zero-sum game. -- Enric I'm just doing my job, regardless of morals and humanity, is not an excuse that goes down terribly well with most people, post WW2. We ALL have a responsibility to apply our moral judgement to everything we do, and morally question what we are told to do by others. i don't know the figures in the States, but in this country the two least respected professions (as found repeatedly in polls) are journalists and politicians. even parking wardens get a better rating. i personally think that a lot of that has to do with a perception that journalists leave their humanity and compassion at the door when they go into work. And that although one might think that this would lead to a clear and unbiased view of the world (as is touted), it actually exposes them to moral corruption, because they're not allowed to use their moral judgement, empathy, compassion, humanity in a corporate environment that is motivated entirely by the quest for audience and profits. You said it's a hard lesson to learn. Isn't that because it's unnatural, because it goes against the grain of what it means to be a responsible compassionate human being? It's being learnt in the name of some cold intellectual principles that are supposedly a crucial part of our system of political checks-and-balances, even though your employers ultimately have no principles. Added to which, journalists' employers are deep in bed financially with those people they're supposedly there to protect us from. As a journalist, you've got to be careful with that kind of stuff. It exposes you to being happily played by your employers, exploiting morally questionable stories with a human cost for financial gain, and rationalizing it on the pretext that The Truth Must Always Out For The Health Of Our Society. You only have to look at the wasteland of modern American news media to think, Hang On, I thought they said this was a great and noble profession which is there to save us from the lies, corruption and tyranny of our rulers. Was that a joke? In this context, when i hear journalists using great principles to justify doing morally questionable things like releasing those tapes in the name of The Holy Truth and The Newsworthy Story, i often feel that it devalues both the principles and the profession. And I hope that the arrival of more non-professionals and independent people with local, personal agendas will inject a good dose of humanity into our media. I think as many people will appreciate that as the minority who are sucked into rolling news's addictive storytelling and deferral of gratification soap opera style journalism, masquerading as Telling It How It Is. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 20 Apr 2007, at 15:15, Irina wrote: heath, i agree with you that there are no answers and this is just a tragedy. but again,
[videoblogging] Re: Our Apple TV Settings
Thanks Brad! I'll check those out and see whats up. Rev. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Brad Hood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can tweak bit rates and set multi-pass options in mediacoder. For reason I'm ignorant of, h.264 AVC 3-pass exported from the Mediacoder front-end will not display in my browser under quicktime alternative plugins. It's displays fine with ffdshow, VLC and GOM player. It would have been great for preparing video for web sharing, but Blip.TV didn't seem to read these either, transcoding only the audio into the FLV container. I couldn't tell you if Apple TV can play Mediacoder AVC.mp4 3-pass files. Another front end to try is Super, but I'm not familiar with it yet. Both free transcoding front-ends can be found at majorgeeks.com. -Brad http://homercafe.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Chumley metaflibble@ wrote: Thanks for the suggestion Brad, unfortunately my DV output renders are 25-30 gig so the 2 gig input limit is a no go for me. Rev. Chumley http://www.cultofuhf.com ]--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Brad Hood anunnaki@ wrote: MPEG Streamclip, free download, has an ipod setting with options for multipass and bit-rate limiting. I like it, but I have no ipod to test it out. MPEG Streamclip has a 2-gig input limit, fine for joining and transcoding from VOB, if you have DVD sources for your COUHF show. I run into trouble with my AVI exports from Virtualdub. Uncompressed RGB allows me up to 90 seconds or some-such. I get 9 minutes from Panasonic DV codec. However, transcoding to XviD at best quality could be suitable as an intermediate on the way to h.264 for your feature length movies. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Chumley metaflibble@ wrote: My bad Steve, yeah your right its low-complexity instead of simple. Now that we have our words right again I ask the community, does anyone know of a good transcoder that handles the low-complexity h.264 MP4 conversions (640x480 ipod compatable with bitrate manipulation) on the PC? I've tried Videora, but the darn thing loses sound sync so bad that its almost worthless. I would appreciate any tips all, I really would like to be able to go 640x480 with my next episode. Rev. Chumley http://www.cultofuhf.com
[videoblogging] Re: MSM (was Scripting News: 4/18/2007)
Can you pretty much guarauntee that nobodies brain at NBC was secretly spinning with excitement when they realised what theyd got? I assume a strange mix of excitement, horror, amd moral confusion, faces humans at times like those. I bet it was much the same with the Iraq torture photos, horriffic and sickening, yet a prize. Not everyone is that cynical, but just as there are some people that cynical onthe outside like me, criticizing, there will be some cynics in the media institutions in question. Also humans are very good at justifying their actions. This happens all the time, its clearly a natural part of being a concious being, though the ability to wrap uncomfortable truths into a safety blanket of justification, in order to stay sane and believe in oneself, probably happens mostly on a subconcious level, in order to be effective. Do we think many of the monsters of the 20th century thought of themselves as evil? More likely just like Mondays killer, they had their justifications which they may genuinely have believed, and the same will be so for the journalists in this case. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Irina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: like i said, having sat thru editorial meetings, i can pretty much guarantee you the decision for NBC to release parts of those tapes had nothing to do with money. the currency in editorial meetings is information. i agree that there is ego involved in having more information than your competition, but in this case NBC did nothing to get the information so it was not really theirs to claim.
[videoblogging] Re: Potential Idiot Alert...but, I do still have a question.
Thanks, Charles. I wouldn't mind an explanation if you've got the time and it's not too complicated. If you don't, though, then that's cool too. Geoff --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, On 4/19/07, geoffdgeorge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, so I put my blogger feed through feedburner. Because the blogger feed is the one I burned, is feedburner now going to analyze the hits and subscriptions I get from both my blogger feed and the new feedburner feed that was just created through the original blogger feed? Is it JUST going to analyze the feedburner feed? I was trying to figure this out myself over at the feedburner website, but sometimes they made it seem like it would be analyzing both and sometimes they made it seem like they would be analyzing just the one. Regardless, I now have a feedburner feed, and it is http://feeds.feedburner.com/youaretired Feedburner will ONLY be able to analyze your Feeburner feed. It will NOT be able to analyze your Blogger feed. (If you want an explanation of why, let me know.) Hope that helps See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ _ __ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ _ __ Cars, Motorcycles, Trucks, and Racing... http://tirebiterz.com/
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, andydragt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I just ask a clarifying question... It's seems like conventional wisdom has recommended against using a seperate blip account for each vlog. However, with the new show player, it makes sense to have your content in seperate accounts. Otherwise it's pretty much useless. Do you have a link to this conventional wisdom? I have four blip shows because they have nothing to do with each other. To post everything to one show would be completely disruptive. With the new blip player, I have all four shows on one page... each show having its own episode guide. If someone wants to see something larger, they click fullscreen in any of the players. Heres the question: Is this two weeks comment about a solution to this problem or should I begin to seperate my content into different accounts so I have the option of using the player on one of my sites? Am I right in understanding the best practice has been to have only one account and cross-post to different blogs? thanks all, Andy Dragt www.developinggr.com - a vlog about development in GR, MI www.developinggr.com/house - a vlog about my home renovation... Unless all of your videoblogs are about the same topic, the way blip has been in the past, I think it's better to have one show for each of your topics. If people tune in to your show about development, they won't necessarily be interested in videos now and then about home renovation. OTOH, it depends how you're using blip as a host. If you never direct people to your blip pages, then it makes sense to only have one blip account and let your blog handle separating them into categories and feeds. I'd be interested to hear why someone thinks it's better to have one blip account with four unrelated topics in it than to have four focused blip accounts. -- Bill C. http://BillCammack.com (all four players) http://reelsolid.blip.tv http://ems.blip.tv http://thelab.blip.tv http://masamibillshow.blip.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Two weeks. :) Yours, Mike -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mattfeldman78 Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 3:36 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player Hi, Has anyone found a way to control the order of the episodes within the player? Is this something that Blip is planning on offering? -Matt http://neovids.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi michael@ wrote: Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack BillCammack@ wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I
[videoblogging] Re: The Mash Lives
Welcome back! :D --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, danielmcvicar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello my friends here. I have emerged from the ice here in Rome and put out a new Late Nite Mash, with a little puzzle. It is all in Italian, so maybe someone can help me understand the jokes. Ciao tutti... D
[videoblogging] Re: Scripting News: 4/18/2007
Dave Winer wrote this post: Vlogging comes to mass murder Share your thoughts with him. I did. --Steve -- Steve Garfield http://SteveGarfield.com Greetings and salutations, I think this is my first post to the group and I should have started earlier on a less distressing topic. I posted a response at http://blog.john-paxton.com/2007/04/19/a- chroma-keyed--massacre-project--away--vlogging-a-dead-horse.aspx which to summarize came out as. I can't think that this would ever be a reasonable way to think and live your life trying to work out . What cause is being advanced here that couldn't be leveled at the station covering Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby? Maybe Zapruder was a nascent vlogger ? Could bic and moleskine wouldn't be complicit in had he been more into good penmanship? Were the murderers of Daniel Pearl vlogging? Hopefully my argument ad absurdum is bugging you as much as it did for me to type it. ...Way too many groups are taking the foreground events and contextualizing , ne compositing it, to fit their own interests, agendas or regular subject matter. To date it doesn't appear that the murderer posted it to the myriad of video sites, blogs, a personal webpage of did anything other than use OLD methods ( relatively in the case of Quicktime) to MAIL material. Gee let's go after Franklin now for touting the post office not knowing the evil it could be used for His methods were akin to a PR agency which may tell Bill Hicks fans more than they need to know. I hope to get an intro in and something of a happier not in the near future. Regards John
[videoblogging] vloggers make great things
I think this is a vlog. Maybe it is, the authors call it a video podcast. So wanna see and listen to Arcade Fire playing Neon Bible in an elevator? All of them? I love vlogs http://www.blogotheque.net/article.php3?id_article=2867 more concerts here http://www.blogotheque.net/article.php3?id_article=2867 about les concerts a emporter http://www.blogotheque.net/article.php3?id_article=2867 Its French. Bless´em. Miguel.
