--- In [email protected], "J. Rhett Aultman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's a little different-- I volunteered for iTunes. I didn't volunteer > for Heavy. A linkback off of iTunes has never seemed like that big of a > deal to me, and iTunes in no way jeopardizes my mission of not being > commercial and does not jeopardize my relationships with people who give > me free content. > > -- > Rhett. > http://www.weatherlight.com/freetime
Those are good points. The idea of iTunes having linkbacks or whatever never occurred to me. When I joined iTunes, I had never heard of linkbacks or RSS or what-have-you. The only reason I made a blog at all was to line my videos up for inclusion in iTunes. The only information in the blog was a setup for my iTunes descriptions and the videos themselves. Pretty soon, I abandoned iTunes altogether when I realized iTunes doesn't do anything for you at all. It's up to YOU to advertise what you do. After that, I focused on my site, and iTunes is merely an afterthought.... a convenience for people that have/use iTunes & iPods. I don't see it as any different from Democracy or Fireant as far as being able to download collections of videos. The way they choose shows to "feature" is garbage and biased, so there's no benefit in focusing on iTunes at all. I'm looking at it right now. The featured podcasts are by Shorts International, E! Online, VH1, National Geographic, Mod-tv, Veronica Mars and !!!TWO!!! by G4! :/ Now that I'm aware of linkbacks, I'm not interested in them from iTunes, because the odds are infinitesimal that anyone would find my iTunes page through something that iTunes did or advertised. The reason someone would be on my iTunes page is that they clicked on it FROM my site in the first place. Also, I agree with Rhett. I applied and waited three days to see IF iTunes would accept my show! :D At the time, as far as I knew, iTunes was the only game in town, and I was glad to be there. That's completely different from Casey going "oh... all of our videos are being shown with full-screen, animated pre-roll advertisement and flanked by quasi- pornographic chicks with wings that are at least three times the size of our videos that they've shrunk to 280-pixel width!" :D Somebody posted that Heavy was showing a video of his 2-year-old son. Clearly, if they were just pulling the blip feed, they weren't checking to potentially match their advertising / background (really, our videos were the background) selection to the content of the videos. That not only jeopardizes not being commercial and relationships with people that give free content, but makes it look like we intentionally uploaded our videos to MyHeavy. Guys could get in trouble if their wives thought they were posting videos of their young children to "Heavy's Angels"! :D -- Bill C. http://wasteddays.reelsolid.tv
