Thanks for the compliments and please re-blog away. I'm flattered. My ire at the preponderance of vacuous-ness available on YT notwithstanding, I think it's salutary to remember something that you have alluded to if not explicitly stated: this space is not really mature yet. A crowd attracts a crowd, as you said. Novelty also attracts a crowd. When the novelty wears off, which it must, what will be left? The crowd will want something new and may start to coalesce in unforeseen ways. I can't help feeling that behind many of the "me too" video responses on YT is a hunger for human contact. It appears that some of the most popular and dynamic personalities videoblogging are using it, essentially, as an outreach tool. A lot of the popular videoblogs have an intimacy about them that allows you to feel you've shared some time with a friend. I think about the popularity of things like raves and burning man, the recent pillowfights and websites like meetup.com and I wonder if we won't begin to see more and more "happenings" that are blogged and vlogged as the offline and online social space knit together. We are, after all, social creatures that crave interaction. Whatever happens, we live in interesting times.
Cheers! --- In [email protected], "Mike Meiser" <groups-yahoo- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ha! Great Rant! > > That was well said David. I can tell by the way it reads that was written > stream of conscious by someone with something to say. I love it. I think I'm > going to reblog you if you don't mind. > > My favorite points are as follows. > > "... it's doubtful that even YT with its huge numbers can deliver a real > audience. ...even having a hugely popular video - in the multiple millions > of views -- cannot deliver even a fraction of that "audience" to your next > effort." > > I too have noticed this exact same effect wherever I blog. There seems to be > a HUGE roving mass of people that has no interest in following up or keeping > up on users or feeds. It suggests some sort of long tail or 80/20 rule... > that while there are core groups of friends and media makers that the > majority of traffic is just media consumers skipping from one knee jerk > video to the next. It'd be very interesting to see what kind of bell curve > would be created if you plotted the views on every video on youtube. I'm > guessing the head would be HUGE... but the tail even bigger. > > "The YT statistics appear to be cooked in at least a couple of ways. In > navigating around YT one often manages to "watch" videos twice by accident > by going back in the navigation. Kids put their videos online and refresh > refresh refresh to get to the top of the most watched lists. It's so bad > that there are videos "outing" egregious perpetrators and demonstrating the > effectiveness of the technique. It seems that there are many aspects of the > YT wayfinding experience designed to generate lots of accidental views and > crank up the numbers." > > This is new news to me and extremely interesting. I'm dying to know how > widespread this is. > > "....All of this suggests chaos, randomness, luck, timing and a total lack > of a cohesive consumer behavior." > > Yes, but these are the very elements of success... nothing attracts a crowd > like a crowd. > > What's more they make it quite possibly very easy to stick advertisements > under their noses. I think it's beautiful that youtube will profit off of > your videos and your friends by sticking corporate messages under people's > noses and I suspect that some sort of mass exedus or at the very least a > backlash will quickly begin when people realize the profits youtube is > making off them with no balance, no representation, and no guarentee in > sharing those profits... a form of taxation without representation you might > say. It is definitely a case of nothing attracts a crowd like a crowd. > > ...and best of all... > > "YT is a website where any cute girl under 25 who appears to be not full of > herself is valued, dogs on skateboards are endlessly fascinating, lighting > your farts on fire is high art, and most things displaying sentential logic > or thought requiring more than 20 seconds of attention are doomed. YouTube > is a big bloated chimera." > > Snap! brilliant summation, even if that last sentence is a little harsh. You > can really tell a culture by what it values, and I think you sumed it up > quite well. > > By comparison the open vlogging space I notice is a completely different > space. It'll be interesting to see how the two evolve. > > Peace, > > -Mike > mefeedia.com > mmeiser.com/blog > > On 2/6/07, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Mike M. is correct that YT has only landed a first punch. And it may > > be a big showy punch with no power behind it. The YT statistics > > appear to be cooked in at least a couple of ways. In navigating > > around YT one often manages to "watch" videos twice by accident by > > going back in the navigation. Kids put their videos online and > > refresh refresh refresh to get to the top of the most watched lists. > > It's so bad that there are videos "outing" egregious perpetrators and > > demonstrating the effectiveness of the technique. It seems that > > there are many aspects of the YT wayfinding experience designed to > > generate lots of accidental views and crank up the numbers. In > > addition, the network effects on YT are enormous. If your video > > bubbles up to a spot where people will see it -- like most viewed of > > the day or week list -- it will go on garnering many many more hits > > while often better videos languish. As a result, it's doubtful that > > even YT with its huge numbers can deliver a real audience. I've only > > done a cursory examination, but what I saw suggested a kind of a > > Brownian free for all that looks like a fair extension of the > > behavior of the dogs-on-skateboards and teenie boppers shaking their > > asses crowd. I checked the stats on some of the "other" videos made > > by the people with the most viewed videos. Those "other" videos > > which are no worse than the "most watched" videos and made by the > > same people have a tiny number of views, suggesting that even having > > a hugely popular video - in the multiple millions of views -- cannot > > deliver even a fraction of that "audience" to your next effort. Some > > of my less watched episodes have more views than the less watched > > productions of people with a video with millions and millions of > > views. All of this suggests chaos, randomness, luck, timing and a > > total lack of a cohesive consumer behavior. It suggests a million > > kids with a footprint that looks like multiple millions of kids > > viewing videos that are in front of their faces because those videos > > at the top of the wayfinding experience. It suggests browsing more > > than searching and much more than seeking out and following specific > > artists. It suggests kids (and a few interested adults) sneaking a > > couple of YT vids into their day before mom calls them to dinner. YT > > is a website where any cute girl under 25 who appears to be not full > > of herself is valued, dogs on skateboards are endlessly fascinating, > > lighting your farts on fire is high art, and most things displaying > > sentential logic or thought requiring more than 20 seconds of > > attention are doomed. YouTube is a big bloated chimera. > > > > -David > > > > --- In [email protected], "Jan McLaughlin" > > <jannie.jan@> wrote: > > > > > > Note: YouTube vids have recently begun to appear in Google searches. > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > On 2/5/07, Mike Meiser <groups-yahoo-com@> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 2/4/07, Andrew <andrew@> wrote: > > > > > I agree that Compete is comparing apples and oranges, but it's > > still > > > > > reasonable to assume that they're not far off the mark and that > > YouTube > > > > > and MySpace are the top two sites and of course both are > > relatively > > > > > closed systems (if I search for something on YouTube it's not > > going to > > > > > give me results from MySpace video or vice versa). I think this > > is a big > > > > > challenge because let's say your video is hosted on Blip.tv or > > > > > Revver....assuming Compete's numbers are close even though your > > video > > > > > might show up in an AOL Video or Google Video search over half > > of the > > > > > time people look for video on the internet there is no way they > > are > > > > > going to find your stuff unless you upload separately to > > YouTube and/or > > > > > MySpace and agree to their TOS. > > > > > > > > > > With any web site or blog I've ever been involved in, over half > > the > > > > > visitors discover the site via search engines. How do you deal > > with the > > > > > fact that the main places people are searching and using video > > are > > > > > closed off from the outside? Especially in light of the network > > > > > neutrality issues with MySpace Kent raised recently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess I missed the MySpace issues kent raised. I assume you mean > > > > Kent of AskANinja? > > > > > > > > Overall... precisely. Google is going to refocus google video now > > that > > > > they have youtube into making a neutral video search engine. This > > may > > > > take them six months to relanch a true search engine that can > > search > > > > the entire web of videos regardless of site, or it may take them > > over > > > > a year. However once they do the question is this... > > > > > > > > Will we see an immediate shifting or simply a new understanding > > of the > > > > over 300 video sharing sites and countless independant video blogs > > > > that looks much more similar to the long tail? > > > > > > > > The other question is while this would be TREMENDOUSLY positive > > for > > > > all the smaller hosting companies... i.e. NOT youtube or myspace > > (and > > > > especially independant videoblogs from rocketboom to kitykity) is > > it > > > > going to be a conflict of interest for google now that they're in > > the > > > > content game... or the 'destination' game. > > > > > > > > Will google's purchase of youtube dilute or enhance their ability > > to > > > > be a neutral search site of the ENTIRE web of video? > > > > > > > > So far as I can see Yahoo is grappeling with the same issues. > > > > > > > > It's also interesting to note that "video search" for the entire > > world > > > > wide web is NOT a new thing. Altavista and others have had web > > wide > > > > video search for YEARS... litterally since the start of the web > > and > > > > yet this illustrates how innovation happens so quick it can > > litterally > > > > obsolete whole sectors overnight. > > > > > > > > What most people don't understand is what's driving this > > explosion IS > > > > RSS... RSS is NOT simply a means for piping video... i.e. as with > > > > fireant or democracy. Indeed it's legacy may be it's ability to > > share > > > > and enhance tremendous amounts of semantic metadata on media. It > > may > > > > represent if it doesn't already in the blogging world, i.e. with > > > > technoratti, a new more social way of making the web work as > > opposed > > > > to the technology driven means that have been employed google... > > i.e. > > > > page rank... and the technological means that are still being > > > > experimented with like voice recognition in audio podcast and > > videos. > > > > > > > > Anyway, it's all a brave new world and I really, really don't > > think > > > > we've scratched the surface of it. > > > > > > > > I would say youtube landed the first big punch. Let's acknowlege > > that > > > > just to get over it... but that its success is by NO means a > > knockout > > > > punch... it is merely the first salvo. > > > > > > > > Peace, > > > > > > > > -Mike > > > > mefeedia.com > > > > mmeiser.com/blog > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike Meiser wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Precisely. Well said mike. > > > > > > > > > > > > I completely agree. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have one question. Does the fact that we're comparing > > apple's and > > > > > > oranges mean this thing still hasn't even shaken out the > > winners and > > > > > > loosers yet? > > > > > > > > > > > > To me it would seem to indicate there's a lot more terretory > > yet to > > > > cover. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Mike > > > > > > mmeiser.com/blog > > > > > > mefeedia.com > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/3/07, Mike Hudack <mike@ <mailto:mike%40blip.tv>> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Compete's numbers are even worse than Alexa's, which are > > themselves > > > > very > > > > > > > often demonstrated to be false. Compete's methodology is > > inherently > > > > > > flawed > > > > > > > on numerous dimensions. If you have any doubt about this > > look back > > > > > > to the Ze > > > > > > > Frank/Andrew Michael Baron disagreement as just one of many > > > > examples. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That said, I'm not sure I disagree with the conclusions in > > general. > > > > The > > > > > > > funny thing is that Compete is comparing apples and > > oranges. Google > > > > > > Video is > > > > > > > rapidly transitioning into a discovery engine that doesn't > > host. No > > > > > > one I > > > > > > > know (other than Yahoo employees who are forced to) uses > > Yahoo Video > > > > to > > > > > > > host, but tons of people use it to find new videos from > > sites all > > > > > > over the > > > > > > > Web. AOL carries tons of commercial content. This is like > > comparing > > > > > > ebay and > > > > > > > amazon traffic in 1997 and saying "Amazon is winning! > > Amazon is > > > > > > winning!" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > <[email protected] <mailto:videoblogging% > > 40yahoogroups.com > > > > >> > > > > > > > To: Yahoo Videoblogging Group <[email protected] > > > > > > <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > > > > > Sent: Sat Feb 03 17:43:45 2007 > > > > > > > Subject: [videoblogging] Top Video Sites in December 2006 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NewTeeVee posted a list of the leading video sites > > according to > > > > Compete > > > > > > > data for the month of December 2006. Here's how the top > > five break > > > > down: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > YouTube 41.1% > > > > > > > MySpace 19.3% > > > > > > > Google 10.2% > > > > > > > AOL 6.2% > > > > > > > Yahoo 3.6% > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can read the full list at > > > > > > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/newteevee/~3/85628611/ > > > > > > <http://feeds.feedburner.com/%7Er/newteevee/% 7E3/85628611/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What's interesting is that Revver doesn't even show up in > > the Top > > > > 20. > > > > > > > NewTeeVee does point out that Compete is relatively new and > > could be > > > > > > > under-reporting numbers. Still, that's interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > Creative Director, The World's Angriest Puppets > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Email: andrew@ <mailto:andrew%40angrypuppets.com> > > > > > > > Web: www.angrypuppets.com > > > > > > > Blog: puppetvision.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > Need personalized email and website? Look no further. It's > > easy > > > > > > > with Doteasy $0 Web Hosting! Learn more at www.doteasy.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > ------- > > > > > > > > > > > >No virus found in this incoming message. > > > > > >Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > > > > >Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.24/668 - Release > > Date: > > > > 2/4/2007 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > Creative Director, The World's Angriest Puppets > > > > > > > > > > Email: andrew@ > > > > > Web: www.angrypuppets.com > > > > > Blog: puppetvision.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > Need personalized email and website? Look no further. It's easy > > > > > with Doteasy $0 Web Hosting! Learn more at www.doteasy.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > The Faux Press - better than real > > > http://fauxpress.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
