Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[groups-yahoo-com]

Steve,

Personally, I think Sony got the PSP aggregation wrong.

They needed an automatic podcatcher. None of this downloading and
watching one video at a time.

You have to be able to automatically cache the videos without any attention.

You shouldn't have to download or browse heavily on the device.

You shouldn't have to manage subscriptions.

You shouldn't have to browse a directory for videos.

You should just be able to pick up the device, scroll through the
latest videos from your friends, most recent first, and click play.

Think blackberry, only not email, video blog posts.  And not private,
but public.  Could be entertainment or news yes, but it's not TV, it
might just as well be a video from a friend's vlog.

Anyway, I'm rambling, but the Nokia N93 and N95 might well accomplish this.

Maybe.

Peace,

-Mike
mefeedia.com
mmeiser.com/blog

On 12/1/06, Steve Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was wondering how the Podcamp West Community Imperialism discussion
> went?  Is there any record of it on the internets? Is there somewhere
> that the discussion is continuing?
>
> Is there a good place that I can go to watch the slow march of some
> DIYers towards DRM love?
>
> Are youtubers having 'video conversations' much these days, ie
> responding to a video with a video of their own rather than text
> comments? Is there anything built into the system, or any other
> system, that makes this sort of thing easy, easy to follow the
> conversation? Yes Im ranting about a video-based discussion board type
> system again, I dont know why, I never get many responses, but that
> still doesnt put me off the idea of combining vlogging with forums and
> realtime video conferencing and getting a strange hybrid. Is it an
> idea doomed to fail, oh I dunno. Why am I talking about this now?
> BEcause this imperialism stuff is something Id like to have a video
> conversation with, but without realtime pressures. And nearly every
> other area of video and the net seems to have moved on in leaps and
> bounds in the last 2 years, wheras this doesnt seem to of. So Im
> thinking of spending my Christmas holiday developing some crude system
> as a proof-of-concept, but I dont know if anybody woould actually use
> it. Will I be wasting my time?
>
> It was the insane films coverage of vlogeurope what reminded me of
> your Cultural Imperialism thoughts, and I wanted to join in those
> conversations, but I missed the even totally. But why should time &
> space be a barrier? And Madge was on about combining time & space data
> with video, which made me want to mashup vlogging and the video
> discussion system idea with google maps and this timeline thing:
>
> http://simile.mit.edu/timeline/
>
> Well theres the random thoughts in my brain today about this stuff,
> who knows if Im making any sense. Potential or poop?
>
> By the way Eric do you still have anything to do with Sony PSP? I see
> there is a camera out for it now, that can do video but only 20 second
> clips? (or did I get that wrong?). The PSP was always an example to me
> of one of the 'under-represented' devices in the vlogosphere, in that
> there are a lot of people with PSPs, but they arent well represented
> here, so it sometimes appears that they dont exist.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows with the friday afternoon waffle
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > As an aside, Mike, the other reason I'm finding the community
> imperialism angle so
> > fascinating, is because I'm timing how slowly a very very VERY
> important chain of events
> > regarding intellectual property, DMCA-friendly and DRM-wanting folks
> (and it's DIY
> > people, not the Big Boys) is barely working its way through the
> usual blogosphere
> > channels--- the most visible and vocal suspects against who'd
> normally speak up about
> > such a thing don't seem to be aware because it originates in a place
> outside the comfort
> > zone.
> >
> > We can start a new thread on that one, but I'm too tired. Heh.
> >
> > ER
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Meiser"
>  wrote:
> > >
> > > On 11/17/06, Eric Rice  wrote:
> > > > I think the term that might be more accurately reflective is
> 'cultural
> > > > imperialism', but
> > > > community was substituted in light of the thinking that we view
> ourselves as
> > > > a community
> > > > more than a culture in most cases? I also adore how inflammatory
> Imperialism
> > > > is as a
> > > > word, but go 10,000 m with your reading, not so much a direct
> literal
> > > > interpretation.
> > >
> > > Great word Eric. Cultural imperialism is exactly what it is.
> > >
> > > I've had a long standing theory one exactly what cultural
> imperialism is.
> > >
> > > Basically in a world with limited means for communication, where the
> > > major forms of communication that shape our society, our culture and
> > > indeed the world, are a commodity such as is clearly the case most
> > > o

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Peter Leppik]

Of course I'm kidding, but a martian reading this group for the first  
time would think that we're inordinately concerned about what  
"videoblogging" is, who qualifies as a "videoblogger" (as opposed to,  
say, "mainstream media posted online"), and what it all means in the  
grand scheme of things.

Me, I just like to play around with my camcorder and Final Cut, and  
maybe sometimes I wind up with something my mother might be  
interested in watching.

 -Peter

On Nov 19, 2006, at 8:15 AM, sull wrote:

> Peter,
>
> VIDEOBLOGGER: One who belongs to the videoblogging group hosted at
> > Yahoo Groups.
>
> Tell me you are kidding.
>
> Trust me, I know what I know to be true ;)
>
> sull
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Steve Garfield]

Hello Peter,

In case you are not kidding, and for those new to the Yahoo!  
Videoblogging group, here is my definition of video blogging:

Videoblogging = Video on a Blog.

A blog entry typically consists of the following:

 * Title - main title of the post,
 * Body - main content of the post,
 * Permalink - the URL of the full, individual article,
 * Post Date - date and time the post was published

Please view my video blog on YouTube:

http://youtube.com/profile_video_blog?user=stevegarfield

So clearly, the people on YouTube are videobloggers.

--Steve

On Nov 19, 2006, at 8:52 AM, Peter Leppik wrote:

> I think the source of your problem is that you don't understand the
> meaning of the words "videoblogger," "videoblogging," and
> "videoblog."  Let me clarify these terms for you, based on what I've
> learned from reading this list:
>
> VIDEOBLOGGER: One who belongs to the videoblogging group hosted at
> Yahoo Groups.
>
> VIDEOBLOGGING: That activity engaged in by videobloggers.
>
> VIDEOBLOG: The end result of videoblogging.
>
> So the fundamental problem is that there's all these people on
> YouTube who clearly aren't videobloggers (by definition), yet they
> engage in an activity which looks suspiciously like videoblogging.

--
Steve Garfield
http://SteveGarfield.com

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[sull]

Peter,

VIDEOBLOGGER: One who belongs to the videoblogging group hosted at
> Yahoo Groups.


Tell me you are kidding.

Trust me, I know what I know to be true ;)

sull

On 11/19/06, Peter Leppik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   Sull:
>
> I think the source of your problem is that you don't understand the
> meaning of the words "videoblogger," "videoblogging," and
> "videoblog." Let me clarify these terms for you, based on what I've
> learned from reading this list:
>
> VIDEOBLOGGER: One who belongs to the videoblogging group hosted at
> Yahoo Groups.
>
> VIDEOBLOGGING: That activity engaged in by videobloggers.
>
> VIDEOBLOG: The end result of videoblogging.
>
> So the fundamental problem is that there's all these people on
> YouTube who clearly aren't videobloggers (by definition), yet they
> engage in an activity which looks suspiciously like videoblogging.
>
> The debate is over what to do about it, Should we (a) reach out to
> these people, invite them to join the videoblogging group, and
> thereby turn them into videobloggers; or (b) make sure people
> understand that--all appearances to the contrary notwithstanding--
> those people aren't videobloggers but something else. "Youtubers"
> maybe.
>
> It is a debate I expect to see continue for quite some time.
>
> -Peter
>
> On Nov 18, 2006, at 9:07 PM, sull wrote:
>
> > I just finished reading this thread with a sorta confused look on
> > my face
> > for most of it
> > And it fitting that the last message here by Charles Hope jives
> > with how I
> > feel.
> > This seems to be a case of over-analyzing a specific perspective of
> > communities who are using video to socialize, create, inform,
> > entertain,
> > insult, inspire etcetera.
> >
> > As for the video. yeah its a good job making a montage of some notable
> > clips and clips that kind of express whats going on at YouTube. Add
> > the sad
> > sounding violin and piano and booya Change the soundtrack to
> > some thrash
> > metal... and you have something entirely different. But whatever.
> > its a
> > good video and thanks for sharing it here, eric.
> >
>  
>



-- 
Sull
http://vlogdir.com (a project)
http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
http://interdigitate.com (otherly)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Peter Leppik]

Sull:

I think the source of your problem is that you don't understand the  
meaning of the words "videoblogger," "videoblogging," and  
"videoblog."  Let me clarify these terms for you, based on what I've  
learned from reading this list:

VIDEOBLOGGER: One who belongs to the videoblogging group hosted at  
Yahoo Groups.

VIDEOBLOGGING: That activity engaged in by videobloggers.

VIDEOBLOG: The end result of videoblogging.

So the fundamental problem is that there's all these people on  
YouTube who clearly aren't videobloggers (by definition), yet they  
engage in an activity which looks suspiciously like videoblogging.

The debate is over what to do about it,  Should we (a) reach out to  
these people, invite them to join the videoblogging group, and  
thereby turn them into videobloggers; or (b) make sure people  
understand that--all appearances to the contrary notwithstanding-- 
those people aren't videobloggers but something else.  "Youtubers"  
maybe.

It is a debate I expect to see continue for quite some time.

  -Peter

On Nov 18, 2006, at 9:07 PM, sull wrote:

> I just finished reading this thread with a sorta confused look on  
> my face
> for most of it
> And it fitting that the last message here by Charles Hope jives  
> with how I
> feel.
> This seems to be a case of over-analyzing a specific perspective of
> communities who are using video to socialize, create, inform,  
> entertain,
> insult, inspire etcetera.
>
> As for the video. yeah its a good job making a montage of some notable
> clips and clips that kind of express whats going on at YouTube. Add  
> the sad
> sounding violin and piano and booya Change the soundtrack to  
> some thrash
> metal... and you have something entirely different. But whatever.  
> its a
> good video and thanks for sharing it here, eric.
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[J. Rhett Aultman]

sull wrote:

>This seems to be a case of over-analyzing a specific perspective of
>communities who are using video to socialize, create, inform, entertain,
>insult, inspire etcetera.
>  
>

Wait...overanalysis of small amounts of social behavior until it looks
like peasants are storming the Bastille?  In this group?  Say it a'int so!

--
Rhett.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[sull]

I just finished reading this thread with a sorta confused look on my face
for most of it
And it fitting that the last message here by Charles Hope jives with how I
feel.
This seems to be a case of over-analyzing a specific perspective of
communities who are using video to socialize, create, inform, entertain,
insult, inspire etcetera.

As for the video.  yeah its a good job making a montage of some notable
clips and clips that kind of express whats going on at YouTube.  Add the sad
sounding violin and piano and booya Change the soundtrack to some thrash
metal... and you have something entirely different.  But whatever.  its a
good video and thanks for sharing it here, eric.

Oh yeah one more thing.  Does anybody remember when webcams were first
popular?  It goes back a while now.  8 years or more maybe.   Well, just see
this wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuseeme

Point is, webcam revolution already happened and it was about connecting
people (for good or bad) across the world using video.  YouTube has ALOT of
webcam video.  It always comes back to hwo YouTube made it more accessible
and easy and how technology advacned to allow for this.  Webcams are
obviously very useful and important.  Its part of the new phenomena of
Internet Video but Videoblogging is more than webcams.  Much more.  And
Videoblogging is more than viral video clips.

Anyway.  I still dont understand the whole point of this thread but thats
fine.
I've always felt that YouTube is perfect first step to videoblogging...
getting comfortable with the idea of putting video out there and using
cameras and services/software and for those who want to take things more
seriously, they would get their own site and start blogging.  Thats why I
never hated YouTube for existing... and didnt agree with those who felt it
would cause  anegative impact on so-called "videoblogging".  It's all good.
It's all relative.

sull






On 11/18/06, Charles Hope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> "Eric Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Videoblog Community" should be ALL including YouTubers, MySpacers,
> people who might
> > not be aware of DV, RSS, etc
> > Possible reality: Videoblog Community = This Yahoo Group (The
> Vloggies jumps right out
> > at me one this one)
>
> How are they part of our vlogging community if you have to send us a
> link to notify us of their existence? Clearly, they are part of a
> different vlogging community. Is this a problem?
>
> Maybe about a century ago all the car drivers of Boston once knew each
> other. But when thousands of cars flooded the streets, these new
> drivers did not join the gang of initial pioneers in any sense. They
> just drove to work. Imperialism?
>
>  
>



-- 
Sull
http://vlogdir.com (a project)
http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
http://interdigitate.com (otherly)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[groups-yahoo-com]

Wow, that I just read like 8 responses from Eric and one from Steve.

Steve's concept, I don't subscribe to vlogs, I subscribe to people is
exactly the same thing I'm saying. Perhaps it even put it in a better
way for general understanding.

Steve says, "I subscribe to people, not vlogs"

Peter says, "vidoeblogging isn't about viral video, it's about
connecting people"

I say, "videoblogging isn't about simple entertainment, it's about
inter personal communication  that just so happens to be public"

All these basically mean the same thing. And actually I think there
seems to be a lot of cohesion and aggrement on the subject today.

Let's call it more understanding, and good debate. Makes me happy.

Truth be told I wanted to respond to every single eric rice email, but
I'm going to have to pick a few.

More to come.

-Mike
mmeiser.com/blog
mmeiser.com

On 11/18/06, Steve Garfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And you end up on my point, "but it's a about Tony, baby."
>
> Videoblogging is people.
>
> I subscribe to people.
>
> Many video networks have categories for all types of shows, but leave
> out the 'people' category.
>
> Look at http://network2.tv/
>
>  * All Shows
>  * Arts
>  * Business
>  * Cartoons
>  * Comedy
>  * Culture
>  * Education
>  * Entertainment
>  * Family
>  * Film
>  * Food
>  * Games
>  * Health
>  * Instructional
>  * International
>  * Local
>  * Music
>  * News
>  * Politics
>  * Society
>  * Sports
>  * Technology
>  * Travel
>
> I asked them to add a people category and they have it in the queue.
>
> My vlog has videos that fit in a few of these categories, but how
> would you categorize it with choices liek these?  You can't.
>
> It really belongs in a 'people' category.  That's why I made
> suggestions for the vloggies to recognize people and specific videos
> instead of shows.  That would have been more inclusive of the YouTube
> vloggers.
>
> --Steve
>
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Eric Rice wrote:
>
> > Networks. Talkin' about themselves, when it should be about the
> > show or content.
> > More people know about BoingBoing than Federated Media.-- Good
> > Throw in the Pod* networks, you might now a couple major shows, but
> > hear about the
> > network more-- Bad
> > Heh, I got into the TV show LOST, way after everyone. I couldn't
> > tell you what network it
> > was on, cuz well, it's not about them, it's about LOST. Like the
> > Sopranos. HBO, great, I can
> > tune my TiVO, but it's a about Tony, baby.
>
> --
> Steve Garfield
> http://SteveGarfield.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Steve Garfield]

And you end up on my point, "but it's a about Tony, baby."

Videoblogging is people.

I subscribe to people.

Many video networks have categories for all types of shows, but leave  
out the 'people' category.

Look at http://network2.tv/

 * All Shows
 * Arts
 * Business
 * Cartoons
 * Comedy
 * Culture
 * Education
 * Entertainment
 * Family
 * Film
 * Food
 * Games
 * Health
 * Instructional
 * International
 * Local
 * Music
 * News
 * Politics
 * Society
 * Sports
 * Technology
 * Travel

I asked them to add a people category and they have it in the queue.

My vlog has videos that fit in a few of these categories, but how  
would you categorize it with choices liek these?  You can't.

It really belongs in a 'people' category.  That's why I made  
suggestions for the vloggies to recognize people and specific videos  
instead of shows.  That would have been more inclusive of the YouTube  
vloggers.

--Steve



On Nov 17, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Eric Rice wrote:

> Networks. Talkin' about themselves, when it should be about the  
> show or content.
> More people know about BoingBoing than Federated Media.-- Good
> Throw in the Pod* networks, you might now a couple major shows, but  
> hear about the
> network more-- Bad
> Heh, I got into the TV show LOST, way after everyone. I couldn't  
> tell you what network it
> was on, cuz well, it's not about them, it's about LOST. Like the  
> Sopranos. HBO, great, I can
> tune my TiVO, but it's a about Tony, baby.

--
Steve Garfield
http://SteveGarfield.com

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Mike Meiser]

On 11/17/06, Eric Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the term that might be more accurately reflective is 'cultural
> imperialism', but
> community was substituted in light of the thinking that we view ourselves as
> a community
> more than a culture in most cases? I also adore how inflammatory Imperialism
> is as a
> word, but go 10,000 m with your reading, not so much a direct literal
> interpretation.

Great word Eric. Cultural imperialism is exactly what it is.

I've had a long standing theory one exactly what cultural imperialism is.

Basically in a world with limited means for communication, where the
major forms of communication that shape our society, our culture and
indeed the world, are a commodity such as is clearly the case most
obviously with television there is a draw toward the center... the
creation of a "popular culture" as these systems fundamentally lack
the capacity for the wide depth and breadth of societal and cultural
viewpoints.

Call it cultural hegemony if you will.

I would go on to theorize that the internet has caused a HUGE growth
in capacity for diverse communications, and that as it becomes the
dominant medium for global communications this radical increase in
capacity changes the game entirely.

The problem is that businesses like still function as if in a world
where capacity was a fundamental commodity. Because of this they build
vertically integrated businesses instead of thinking horizontally.

The exeption to this has been the search engines. Google probably
being the best example. Technoratti being another.  (Mefeedia.com
still another)

Instead of trying to take a traditional vertical slice of the
marketplace like say a newspaper or a magaine or a TV station would...
these horizontal thinkers thought of taking a horizontal slice.
Technoratti's being the entire blogosphere.

Oh, lastly, we did not choose to be inoperable with youtube.

It is youtube who chose to be inoperable with us.

I just wanted to make this clear.

Oh, and one more thing, Youtube is slowly coming out to play. There
are thousands of youtube feeds and youtube users on mefeedia now.

-Mike
mefeedia.com
mmeiser.com/blog

> ER
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > You got me looking at the word Imperial and what it actually means. It
> > really applies to countries, but tracing the term back further I guess
> > you are basically meaning human power, the way people get it, and the
> > effect it has on others, those without power?
> >
> > If so, I find it interesting that people gaining power does not
> > necessarily say anything about their moticves or how much good they
> > are doing. Someone who is doing stuff to help others, whether it be
> > doing workshops, books, whatever, is likely to gain personally on a
> > number of levels, including power. Whether the power goes on to
> > corrupt them in some way, whether they are uncomfortable with the
> > power and seek to diminish it, or not use it, that comes down to
> > chance and genetics as much as ideology and anything else.
> >
> > Id love to know more about what you are meaning, and how you think
> > things could be any different, given that we work with the human
> > nature we've got, not the nature we much yearn for.
> >
> > When it comes to video communties, Ive always been interested in
> > whether text forum concepts could be merged with video, but with a new
> > angle that avoids clumsiness, sort of a cross between forums, instant
> > cha, mailing lists, blog vlogs, youtube clips and live internet chat.
> > almost like an equivalent of mobile text messaging but with video
> > between larger groups. Thats where Id hope to see something resembling
> > the idea of 'community'. I also love show type vlogs but I dont expect
> >  it to satisfy the human social itch in as broad and 'community' a sense.
> >
> > Steve Elbows
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Rice"  wrote:
> > >
> > > This weekend at PodCamp West, I'm part of a discussion about
> > Community Imperialism in DIY
> > > Media, because frankly, I believe the state of 'communities' is crap.
> > >
> > > It's been a rough week, seeing everyday people invoking the DMCA,
> > requesting DRM to
> > > protect content; open source getting attacked; watching the word
> > 'community' get thrown
> > > around when it means 'our silo'.
> > >
> > > And then I saw this. A 10 minute video that damn near had me in tears.
> > >
> > > Do you consider them videobloggers? I do.
> > > And since they aren't aware of THIS community, I will completely
> > step outside any jurisdiction
> > > and award them all a Vloggie Award. They deserve it, too.
> > >
> > > http://www.ericrice.com/blog/?p=208
> > >
> > > ER
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Mike Meiser]

Is it just me or are their some urls missing in the email from scoble?

BTW, We have a complete guide to the 2006 vloggies winners on mefeedia also.

http://mefeedia.com/lists/46/

It includes direct links to the vlogs and their feeds for your convenience.

There was no officially published list though, so let me know if there
are any errors or omissions.

Peace,

-Mike

On 11/18/06, Robert Scoble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Our main Vloggies page is an abortion. If it weren't for Google I wouldn't
> have been able to find it either. But, there is a link there. Heheh.
>
>
>
> We just hired a designer away from Yahoo, so hopefully this improves.
>
>
>
> Either way, I just will cover it on my blog and you'll all find it anyway,
> right? Heheh.
>
>
>
> Robert
>
>
>
>   _
>
> From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Bill Cammack
> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:25 PM
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community
>
>
>
> Oh. I see. :)
>
> Good coverage, too. I've never seen that because I didn't see a link to that
> page from the
> main page.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --- In videoblogging@ 
> yahoogroups.com, "Robert Scoble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >Now that you mention The Vloggies, how come http://vloggiessf.
> >  com> com was never updated
> > with A) the winners, and B) any coverage of the event, whatsoever?
> >
> >
> >
> > The coverage and winners' list was on the Vloggie blog:
> > http://vloggies.  wordpress.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > But, we could have done a better job. It's just that the blogosphere
> covered
> > it so well that we just didn't think to come on afterward and cover it.
> >
> >
> >
> > Robert Scoble
> >
> >
> > ###
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Mike Meiser]

On 11/17/06, Adam Quirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/17/06, Steve Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >   And for all my love of video, Ive always been to shy to say any of
> > these sorts of things in video, too self-concious to even have a
> > personal text-blog, so I spew the words here on this sort of group,a
> > nd its probably a mismatch, but somehow I find safety in numbers (of
> > people).
> >

> I have a hard time with that too, can't talk straight into the camera so I
> have to find alternate routes.
> Your words are always welcome and insightful.
>
> Especially that previous post you just made about Youtube helping with
> loneliness.  If it can help somebody feel less alone, that's a pretty big
> fucking deal.
>
> I'm a recent convert.  Long live the Youtubers (but not necessarily
> Youtube).

Well said Adam!

And Steve, you pretty much describe me too. It's no secrete that I'm
ironicly not very interested in shooting my own life an putting it
online... or for that matter even a fan of editing and playing with
video.

Very ironic, but by no means a contradiction at all.

I love art in all it's many forms and in this culture is tremendously
avanteguard explorations of media.

I also love design and information architecture, media and media
theory and sociology, and culture.

Which is to say, I love how design, info arch, and changes in media
can change culture and society.

Videoblogging is the binding element to all these interests.

-Mike

>
> AQ
> thepan.org (was broken but now is fixed, sorta)
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Robert Scoble]

Our main Vloggies page is an abortion. If it weren't for Google I wouldn't
have been able to find it either. But, there is a link there. Heheh.

 

We just hired a designer away from Yahoo, so hopefully this improves.

 

Either way, I just will cover it on my blog and you'll all find it anyway,
right? Heheh.

 

Robert

 

  _  

From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Bill Cammack
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:25 PM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

 

Oh. I see. :)

Good coverage, too. I've never seen that because I didn't see a link to that
page from the 
main page.

Thanks.

--- In videoblogging@ 
yahoogroups.com, "Robert Scoble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Now that you mention The Vloggies, how come http://vloggiessf.
>  com> com was never updated 
> with A) the winners, and B) any coverage of the event, whatsoever?
> 
> 
> 
> The coverage and winners' list was on the Vloggie blog:
> http://vloggies.  wordpress.com/ 
> 
> 
> 
> But, we could have done a better job. It's just that the blogosphere
covered
> it so well that we just didn't think to come on afterward and cover it.
> 
> 
> 
> Robert Scoble
> 
> 
> ###
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

RE: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Robert Scoble]

>Now that you mention The Vloggies, how come http://vloggiessf.
 com was never updated 
with A) the winners, and B) any coverage of the event, whatsoever?



The coverage and winners' list was on the Vloggie blog:
http://vloggies.wordpress.com/ 

 

But, we could have done a better job. It's just that the blogosphere covered
it so well that we just didn't think to come on afterward and cover it.

 

Robert Scoble


###

 

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Adam Quirk]

On 11/17/06, Steve Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>   And for all my love of video, Ive always been to shy to say any of
> these sorts of things in video, too self-concious to even have a
> personal text-blog, so I spew the words here on this sort of group,a
> nd its probably a mismatch, but somehow I find safety in numbers (of
> people).
>







I have a hard time with that too, can't talk straight into the camera so I
have to find alternate routes.
Your words are always welcome and insightful.

Especially that previous post you just made about Youtube helping with
loneliness.  If it can help somebody feel less alone, that's a pretty big
fucking deal.

I'm a recent convert.  Long live the Youtubers (but not necessarily
Youtube).

AQ
thepan.org (was broken but now is fixed, sorta)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The other videoblogging community

[Paul Knight]

On 17 Nov 2006, at 23:40, Steve Watkins wrote:

> Also quite a number of them seemed to be English or British, and I
> wonder if they could of been influenced by the fact that we've had
> quite a few TV shows over the years that have featured 'ordinary
> people' who are given a videocamera and make a video diary. Obviously
> television imposes more constraints, but the end results often had a
> simialr sort of intensely personal, intimate, connection between
> viewer and the person pouring out their soul to the lens. I do not
> know how much any UK TV versions of such things could of influenced
> people really, and I dont know whether there have been many
> widel-watched TV equivalents in the USA over the years, so I dunno how
> wrong I am, just rambling really.

I am thinking that this whole concept is a little behind over here,  
so much so that it is only just recently that Youtube has been  
mentioned on Mainstream TV and Radio and it seems any kid with a  
mobile phone and computer can access myspace, there is also the time  
element over here, it is still really uncool to spend a lot of time  
in front of the internet rather than being in front of the TV.  Also  
video blogging over here, ie putting video onto a site, requires that  
the person has a super inflated ego, something that is not so  
British, we being the reserved sort.  And you are right, over here  
Reality TV rules, top shows include BIg Brother, I'm a Celebrity Get  
Me Out Of Here, Wife Swap etc.  So there must be some sort of  
coalition between the two.  However some news in, Channel 5 news is  
now asking for Your News, a segment for the end of the evening news  
where budding journo's with video cams or mobiles can shoot a piece  
of video informing of some local news to them, these are exciting  
times for us British, pity no one will read this or comment.

Paul Knight
  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]