Could this be the most pointless thing ever? Probably not. But it’s a massive folly of some description.
Someone has spent a whole heap of money creating a video based ‘human face’ to a search engine. Type in your search and Ms Dewey makes pointless and irrelevant quips. Then you get a badly presented list of search returns.
It’s got to be a marketing campaign for something. No one else would waste money in such a stupid fashion ;-)
Asi who writes the excellent No Man’s Blog left a comment yesterday about the fact that slating YouTube is very much the in-thing to do right now. And he left me a link or two.
Having read a bit more around the topic it seems to be shaping up into an interesting-ish debate. There seems to be a few camps forming, broadly lovers, doubters and haters. I think I’m a lover / doubter fence-sitter. And here’s why:
I love YouTube because…
It’s made online video easy and accessible. No hassle with special software.
It’s easy to upload stuff in almost any format.
It’s set the bar for quality at an attainable level for most people.
Access to amazing things that have been languishing in archives.
As far as I’m aware they were one of the champions of portable video (i.e. you can take it and embed it anywhere you like).
The community is there (if you want to engage with it), you can almost ignore it if not and just use it to host your clips.
It feels like it ‘gets’ its place on the web.
I doubt YouTube because…
There’s a lot of complicated rights issues that make my head hurt.
Lots of big established companies feel threatened, even if they do deals with many of them, there’ll still be plenty left out in the cold, looking for their payout.
Lawyers like making money.
A thought: Assuming that the YouTube community is a big part of its value. How much do YouTube users (viewers and publishers) love YouTube? If it came to a massive legal battle how much would people pay to save it? What’s the perception of value of unlimited (arguably low-grade) video entertainment?
Would people chip-in $5 each, $10 or $50? Or would we hear the plops of millions of video-rats diving into the sea as the good ship YouTube sinks? (And I’m not saying it will, just to be clear…)
Communities didn’t really act in any meaningful way when Napster and Audiogalaxy were shut down a few years ago. But in those cases the legalities were much more obvious. And the communities far more niche, and (from memory) smaller.
I’d quite like to see ‘The Entertainment Industries of the World’ vs ‘The People of YouTube’ as a court case.
Reminds me of the Star Guitar video for the Chemical Brothers by Michel Gondry. I’m not sure if the music almost sounds similar too, or whether that’s just associations in my brain.
One of my favourite videos of all time. So effortless and simple on the surface, but so damn complex underneath.
Feels like the top one had the music edited for the video, and the bottom one is obviously the other way round.
Great list of the Top 10 Best Presentations Ever, a pretty tough list to compile and they’ve done a nice job. There’s a few in here that I’ve seen before, and a few that I haven’t.
As an aside I’m stunned almost daily at how much amazing video content is becoming freely available online. Martin Luthor King’s “I have a dream” speech in full is just one of those things. It’s starting to feel like pretty soon we’ll have access to a complete archive of the most interesting moments in film.
Following on from the Darknet post the other day, here’s some more on piracy in Sweden (and beyond). This 30 minute film gives a view of the P2P landscape (and especially the ‘bust’ on PirateBay – a major bittorrent site).
Obviously, given the group that produced the film, it’s coming at the argument from a certain direction. But there are some interesting bits in there.
I was surprised at the power that Hollywood has over the US government, and subsequently the lengths that they went to in order to ‘persuade’ the Swedish government to act against Pirate Bay. The backlash that this has generated in Sweden was also interesting, it would appear that many people are enraged by the US interfering and overturning domestic policy (which ultimately has led to the Pirate Party getting massive exposure and a sizable following).
I think the argument that’s put forward in the film that was most interesting talks about the fact that historically musicians were against recorded music, and the film industry was against VCRs. Both groups eventually turned these threats into revenue streams.
One commentator in the film recounts a Chinese proverb along the lines of:
When the wind rises, some people build walls. Others build windmills.
The ancient Chinese didn’t mention the fact that millions of others rush around looting stuff for free in all the confusion, but I guess that’s a much more modern predicament.
When I finished watching the film I didn’t end up feeling like my mind had been moved in either direction. It just made it clear that there really is a war going on, and there’s 2 groups of people who are determined to do things their way until they have to stop… But I did feel that one group was perhaps slightly more innovative and responsive than the other, no prizes for guessing which one.
Yoga Today – Start each day with a new Yoga lesson (for free). That sounds nice doesn’t it… If you’re using a PC you can get the lessons in HD, if you’re on a Mac they’re in lower res iTunes format.
If only i could figure out a way to rig up a video iPod on some kind of helmet style attachement so I can see what’s going on when I’m upside down and inside out.
I was leafing through a copy of American GQ and I spotted a short article on a video that’s become an online phenomenon. A French art film of someone driving through Paris at breakneck speed. Made with no post production or additional sound effects this is one of the greatest driving films I’ve ever seen.
There’s lots of debates about the top speed of the car (experts say max 140km/h, the director reckons 200km/h), and the make of the car (a Mercedes or the director’s Ferrari). Wikipedia has lots on the topic.
Regardless, it’s a stunning 10 minutes of footage.
The above image is blatantly stolen from the excellent DigitalAgency blog. But short of retyping the whole thing I couldn’t think of any other way of doing it.
It’s from the D&AD Student Annual, written by Tony Davidson (Creative Director at Wieden + Kennedy London) and it starts off well. It’s positive and upbeat, and the sentiments behind it are all bang on. But I read it a second time, and a third time (by the fourth read I started to feel like an oddball so I stopped).
The first 1/2 of it I couldn’t agree with more. It’s all pretty much fact. Fact that the most recent Ofcom report backs up almost to the letter. And it’s not just ‘our industry’ that’s running scared. The telecoms industries, broadcast media, publishing (books, films , music, videogames), and many others besides are trying to decide whether this is the most exciting thing that ever happened, or the thing that’s going to kill them.
However, halfway through it starts to make me a bit angry. Maybe I’m just touchy and I’m not reading it right.
But to suggest that it’s only now that ‘ideas’ people are getting involved with digital sounds really arrogant and is blatantly incorrect. If there was nothing good online why are there so many people there now. They’ve not been holding off for a bunch of ideas people to come and create good content.
The underlying (and slightly sinister) message is that because we all use computers now, we should all be able to create effective and interesting digital things. Which doesn’t work for me at all. It’s like saying that an agency like Poke should be able to come up with great TV ideas because we sometimes watch television. (We can’t and don’t by the way).
And yes, we are looking at a similar set of creative qualities. But there are more of these qualities than there were before. And I do sincerely believe that there are ‘digital people’, not people who speak in zeros and ones. But people who get it. People who live, play and create in this new world.
I guess the big question for all of us is where ‘digital creativity’ comes from. And how the organisations who deliver this creativity should be structured (or not). Is it the role of traditional agencies as we know them? Where ‘creatives’ generate ideas that are fed to craftspeople who produce stuff to fill media spaces (whatever shape or size they might be)? I think there’s a bit of that going on right now. But it’s the part of the industry that spends its days talking about advertising formats and the latest cyber-lions.
Personally that’s not what excites me. I’m excited by the notion of broad integrated teams working together to explore creativity across the board. Creativity in ideas, technology, craft, copy, interaction and experience (as well as stuff that we don’t even know about yet). If you look at where the real pockets of digital innovation are happening, they’re in the companies and organisations that are employing rapid development methodologies, with tight teams of extreme talent working towards common goals that they all passionately believe in.
These people aren’t just developing bits of communication, they’re developing new products, new businesses, new companies and new industries. They’re creating new ways for people to communicate and consume. They’re building software that can fundamentally change peoples’ lives.
That’s the kind of creativity that makes me want to go to work in the morning.
I liked Clerks when I first saw it. I liked its low-budgetness, especially the fact that the store in the film had a broken shutter (to hide the fact that the only time they could afford to film the interior was at night when it was closed).
So I was pleased to hear what they’d been doing to promote Clerks 2. They’ve been video-blogging the entire making of the film (I’ve missed 45 weeks of it!) and they’ve got the names of the 10,000 MySpace friends of the film in the credits.