I dont feel like that issue does any harm to the argument that people are the future of media. Its not going to be won or lost in an argument anyway, the viewers will decide by voting with their eyeballs.
Depending on how you look at it, its now almost become accepted by the large corps themselves that mainstream media is going to become a bit of a redundant term. The huge audiences of the past have already been eroded by increasing TV channel choice, and the internet accelerated this further. But yes the actual definition of mainstream can be complex, depending on how you take it videobloggers, youtubers etc are either mainstream or definately not mainstream. See the wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream "The boundary is vague. Mainstream suggests middle-of-the-road and implies commercial viability, sometimes implying that the commercial viability is tantamount to a loss of artistic creativity." but also "Mainstream pressure, through actions such as peer pressure, can force individuals to conform to the mores of the group (e.g., an obedience to the mandates of the peer group). Some have stated that they see mainstream as the antithesis of individuality." So I dont think you'll find everyone agreeing that an important mission is that videobloggers be considered mainstream, as it is something to be avoided to some people. Id avoid it because for me it usually comes to content being brought down to the lowest common denominator. Meanwhile there are more news stories about Amandas new show popping up, some of which will probably inadvertantly pour more fuel onto the fire, but some are covering the issues faced by crossing to the mainstream etc: http://tinyurl.com/y45hxt http://tinyurl.com/y7uh8p (scroll down a bit) http://tinyurl.com/y7qstt (a slightly older article that I missed previously) Oh and heres an article thats by that Scott Kirsner whose book was mentioned on this list the other day. It covers the idea that amateurs are going to face increasing competition online from mainstream media, amoungst other things. I partially agree with it but think it may be overstating things a tad: http://tinyurl.com/y2o3bf Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Ron Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry Amanda, please don't think I'm piling on you. > > It's just that a straw broke the camel's back. > > Why must people keep talking about the MSM... > > As if it's mainstream! > > It's a Corporate Media, and there's nothing 'Mainstream' about it. > > Mainstream media would have 5 second commercials and freedom to > download and distrubute. > > That term, Mainstream Media, or MSM gives them far too much credit, > and does us a disservice by placing us and Responsible Media Outlets > in the 'outside the mainstream' category. > > Using the term MSM and Mainstream media putting us in poor position > to argue that we, PEOPLE, are the future of media. > > I'm glad you got a shot, Amanda. It must be awesome. > > Sorry about your business issues, all of you, but PLEASE stop calling > it the MSM. > > Cheers, > Ron
