Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Video blogging history/evolution

Expand Messages
  • Jay dedman
    ... By the way, are there many people in Lithuania who are posting videos online? If so, can you send any links? Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com
    Message 1 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      > What connects to YouTube community, I think that those who started blogging
      > didn't feel the real "joy" of the video blogging start, like felt you people
      > (I guess), who had began from technical issues, and ending with
      > philosophical. In a sense, Youtubers' generation had everything "put on the
      > plate"..

      By the way, are there many people in Lithuania who are posting videos
      online? If so, can you send any links?

      Jay


      --
      http://ryanishungry.com
      http://jaydedman.com
      http://twitter.com/jaydedman
      917 371 6790
    • Patrick Delongchamp
      Ah, the good old Wikipedia Vlogging article. It actually got nominated for deletion years ago due to a lack of reliable sources. I decided to clean it up and
      Message 2 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Ah, the good old Wikipedia Vlogging article. It actually got nominated for
        deletion years ago due to a lack of reliable sources. I decided to clean it
        up and begin contributing sources to it and I managed to change the outcome
        of the vote. Let's just say it was a..uh..thankless job. :)

        I haven't contributed to it in years though and I agree that it has gone to
        shit. Pardon my merde. Let us know what you find.

        oh and watch out for Godwin's Law around this here town.

        pd

        On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:26 PM, gintaras.miskinis <
        gintaras.miskinis@...> wrote:

        > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > Jay dedman <jay.dedman@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Unfortunately, "reliability" has been a point of contention. Some in
        > > this group may remember the dramedy trying to write the wikipedia page
        > > for videoblogging. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videoblogging
        > > Newspapers/magazines must write about it for it to be "reliable".
        > > Makes a certain kind of sense. You got to capture the mainstream to be
        > > recognized. It's like a vetting process.
        > >
        > > Ive also learned that the "history of videoblogging" is wide and
        > > varied depending on what community you look at. This group has its own
        > > specific timeline that differs from people who began through Youtube
        > > exclusively.
        > >
        > > I can scan the chapter I wrote in my book if you'd like and email it to
        > you.
        > >
        > > Jay
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --
        > > http://ryanishungry.com
        > > http://jaydedman.com
        > > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
        > > 917 371 6790
        > >
        >
        > Thank you for your reply too. It's an honor for me to be contacted from the
        > book author :)
        >
        > I made some thinking after I had read your shared thoughts and just have to
        > agree: it is sad, that sources, which are not mainstream, cannot be
        > trusted..well, officially.
        >
        > But on the other hand, a year ago, when I was writing a term paper about
        > "video blogging evolution" I used your mentioned wikipedia link, and this
        > year, I thought that I could use my a year ago written info in the final
        > paper, and when rechecked wikipedia - saw, that most of the facts where
        > different then I had found a year ago...it was experience from practical
        > side on my own..
        >
        > What connects to YouTube community, I think that those who started blogging
        > didn't feel the real "joy" of the video blogging start, like felt you people
        > (I guess), who had began from technical issues, and ending with
        > philosophical. In a sense, Youtubers' generation had everything "put on the
        > plate"..
        >
        > However, I would be very grateful if you could scan your mentioned chapter
        > and send it to me (to this yahoo mail if possible). You would help me a lot.
        >
        > Thanks again and sorry for my English.
        >
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Rupert
        Cue mass googling of Godwin s law. That s funny. I liked this from the Wikipedia entry for Godwin s law: In a Christmas Day review of The Spirit, New York
        Message 3 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Cue mass googling of Godwin's law. That's funny.
          I liked this from the Wikipedia entry for Godwin's law:
          In a Christmas Day review of The Spirit, New York Times movie critic
          A.O. Scott suggested that "a similar axiom" to Godwin's Law, "applied
          to Hollywood, would stipulate that every movie star must eventually
          dress up in a German military uniform."


          On 1-Apr-09, at 11:44 AM, Patrick Delongchamp wrote:

          > Ah, the good old Wikipedia Vlogging article. It actually got
          > nominated for
          > deletion years ago due to a lack of reliable sources. I decided to
          > clean it
          > up and begin contributing sources to it and I managed to change the
          > outcome
          > of the vote. Let's just say it was a..uh..thankless job. :)
          >
          > I haven't contributed to it in years though and I agree that it has
          > gone to
          > shit. Pardon my merde. Let us know what you find.
          >
          > oh and watch out for Godwin's Law around this here town.
          >
          > pd
          >
          > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 2:26 PM, gintaras.miskinis <
          > gintaras.miskinis@...> wrote:
          >
          > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging
          > %40yahoogroups.com>,
          > > Jay dedman <jay.dedman@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > > Unfortunately, "reliability" has been a point of contention.
          > Some in
          > > > this group may remember the dramedy trying to write the
          > wikipedia page
          > > > for videoblogging. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videoblogging
          > > > Newspapers/magazines must write about it for it to be "reliable".
          > > > Makes a certain kind of sense. You got to capture the mainstream
          > to be
          > > > recognized. It's like a vetting process.
          > > >
          > > > Ive also learned that the "history of videoblogging" is wide and
          > > > varied depending on what community you look at. This group has
          > its own
          > > > specific timeline that differs from people who began through
          > Youtube
          > > > exclusively.
          > > >
          > > > I can scan the chapter I wrote in my book if you'd like and
          > email it to
          > > you.
          > > >
          > > > Jay
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > --
          > > > http://ryanishungry.com
          > > > http://jaydedman.com
          > > > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
          > > > 917 371 6790
          > > >
          > >
          > > Thank you for your reply too. It's an honor for me to be contacted
          > from the
          > > book author :)
          > >
          > > I made some thinking after I had read your shared thoughts and
          > just have to
          > > agree: it is sad, that sources, which are not mainstream, cannot be
          > > trusted..well, officially.
          > >
          > > But on the other hand, a year ago, when I was writing a term paper
          > about
          > > "video blogging evolution" I used your mentioned wikipedia link,
          > and this
          > > year, I thought that I could use my a year ago written info in the
          > final
          > > paper, and when rechecked wikipedia - saw, that most of the facts
          > where
          > > different then I had found a year ago...it was experience from
          > practical
          > > side on my own..
          > >
          > > What connects to YouTube community, I think that those who started
          > blogging
          > > didn't feel the real "joy" of the video blogging start, like felt
          > you people
          > > (I guess), who had began from technical issues, and ending with
          > > philosophical. In a sense, Youtubers' generation had everything
          > "put on the
          > > plate"..
          > >
          > > However, I would be very grateful if you could scan your mentioned
          > chapter
          > > and send it to me (to this yahoo mail if possible). You would help
          > me a lot.
          > >
          > > Thanks again and sorry for my English.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • ~ FluxRostrum
          howdy Gintaras, what is sad to me (as someone who video Blogs documentary/news pieces) is this line of thought (which is not unique to you) that mainstream is
          Message 4 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            howdy Gintaras,

            what is sad to me (as someone who video Blogs documentary/news pieces)
            is this line of thought (which is not unique to you)
            that mainstream is trustworthy and independent is not.

            " it is sad, that sources, which are not mainstream,
            cannot be trusted..well, officially."
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            If mainstream was trustworthy I would NEVER have been a video blogger.
            It was the main reason I choose to do this.

            You might want to be as skeptical of the mainstream as you are of independents.

            MAINSTREAM is controlled by the major corporations of the world and they give information biased to benefit their corporations at the cost of the truth and they will DENY this until death much like politicians.

            Independents Media sources are also biased but not toward the Corporate agenda.
            They are more openly biased, like an advocate.

            Solidarity,
            ~FluxRostrum

            homebase
            http://Fluxview.com

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            current project
            http://MobileBroadcastNews.org

            ~~~
            NOTICE: NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor protection.
            ~~~


            --
            Powered By Outblaze
          • gintaras.miskinis
            Hi, I totally agree with you. My words, that you cite is the attitude of my paper s chief and even university, because when student writes a scientific work,
            Message 5 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi,

              I totally agree with you. My words, that you cite is the attitude of my
              paper's chief and even university, because when student writes a
              scientific work, he must use, well, let's say the mainstream media and
              (or) scientific literature . In this case, as I've been searching for
              history events in video blogging, I haven't found any (except Jay
              Dedman's) "trusty" sources, that I could use like: "one author says,
              that video blogging started that way, that year, etc.", "second author
              says, that video blogging started absolutely not like that, like said
              first author" - that's called information sources analysis (of
              literature/journal's/posts). In this case, I just cannot compare, cite
              "forum posts" and put them in bibliography list, which is very
              formal...For me, as student and citizen, it is no difference: is it
              mainstream or not. In mainstream I can hear "the official side" of the
              fact/topic, and in the blog I can find the "backstage" of the same
              fact/topic, and the information I find on the blog, is up to me - to
              trust or not (search for more info, etc.).

              However, tomorrow, I'm going to meet my chief, and we will discuss about
              that, and the results of "trustworthy and not sources" I will write
              here...Thanks for posting !

              --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "~ FluxRostrum" <FluxRostrum@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > howdy Gintaras,
              >
              > what is sad to me (as someone who video Blogs documentary/news pieces)
              > is this line of thought (which is not unique to you)
              > that mainstream is trustworthy and independent is not.
              >
              > " it is sad, that sources, which are not mainstream,
              > cannot be trusted..well, officially."
              > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              >
              > If mainstream was trustworthy I would NEVER have been a video blogger.
              > It was the main reason I choose to do this.
              >
              > You might want to be as skeptical of the mainstream as you are of
              independents.
              >
              > MAINSTREAM is controlled by the major corporations of the world and
              they give information biased to benefit their corporations at the cost
              of the truth and they will DENY this until death much like politicians.
              >
              > Independents Media sources are also biased but not toward the
              Corporate agenda.
              > They are more openly biased, like an advocate.
              >
              > Solidarity,
              > ~FluxRostrum
              >
              > homebase
              > http://Fluxview.com
              >
              > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              > current project
              > http://MobileBroadcastNews.org
              >
              > ~~~
              > NOTICE: NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Due to Presidential Executive Orders,
              the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning,
              warrant, or notice. They may do this without any judicial or legislative
              oversight. You have no recourse nor protection.
              > ~~~
              >
              >
              > --
              > Powered By Outblaze
              >
            • gintaras.miskinis
              ... Just wanted to add, that a qualitative/trusty source, is a source which is written by a scientist or other person who is accepted by the society, i.e. has
              Message 6 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "gintaras.miskinis" <gintaras.miskinis@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hi,
                >
                > I totally agree with you. My words, that you cite is the attitude of my
                > paper's chief and even university, because when student writes a
                > scientific work, he must use, well, let's say the mainstream media and
                > (or) scientific literature . In this case, as I've been searching for
                > history events in video blogging, I haven't found any (except Jay
                > Dedman's) "trusty" sources, that I could use like: "one author says,
                > that video blogging started that way, that year, etc.", "second author
                > says, that video blogging started absolutely not like that, like said
                > first author" - that's called information sources analysis (of
                > literature/journal's/posts). In this case, I just cannot compare, cite
                > "forum posts" and put them in bibliography list, which is very
                > formal...For me, as student and citizen, it is no difference: is it
                > mainstream or not. In mainstream I can hear "the official side" of the
                > fact/topic, and in the blog I can find the "backstage" of the same
                > fact/topic, and the information I find on the blog, is up to me - to
                > trust or not (search for more info, etc.).
                >
                > However, tomorrow, I'm going to meet my chief, and we will discuss about
                > that, and the results of "trustworthy and not sources" I will write
                > here...Thanks for posting !

                Just wanted to add, that a qualitative/trusty source, is a source which is written by a scientist or other person who is accepted by the society, i.e. has a expertise in branch. As I see, he must at leased published a book? (nonsense). Anyway, starting to get a headache of this unique case...
              • Rupert
                Truth is a dead tree. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Message 7 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Truth is a dead tree.

                  On 1-Apr-09, at 1:18 PM, gintaras.miskinis wrote:
                  > Just wanted to add, that a qualitative/trusty source, is a source
                  > which is written by a scientist or other person who is accepted by
                  > the society, i.e. has a expertise in branch. As I see, he must at
                  > leased published a book? (nonsense). Anyway, starting to get a
                  > headache of this unique case...
                  >



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Rupert
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEaHyzbqTA ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  Message 8 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEaHyzbqTA

                    On 1-Apr-09, at 1:35 PM, Rupert wrote:
                    > Truth is a dead tree.
                    >
                    > On 1-Apr-09, at 1:18 PM, gintaras.miskinis wrote:
                    > > Just wanted to add, that a qualitative/trusty source, is a source
                    > > which is written by a scientist or other person who is accepted by
                    > > the society, i.e. has a expertise in branch. As I see, he must at
                    > > leased published a book? (nonsense). Anyway, starting to get a
                    > > headache of this unique case...
                    > >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Patrick Delongchamp
                    ...explain ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Message 9 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      ...explain

                      On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Rupert <rupert@...> wrote:

                      > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEaHyzbqTA
                      >
                      >
                      > On 1-Apr-09, at 1:35 PM, Rupert wrote:
                      > > Truth is a dead tree.
                      > >
                      > > On 1-Apr-09, at 1:18 PM, gintaras.miskinis wrote:
                      > > > Just wanted to add, that a qualitative/trusty source, is a source
                      > > > which is written by a scientist or other person who is accepted by
                      > > > the society, i.e. has a expertise in branch. As I see, he must at
                      > > > leased published a book? (nonsense). Anyway, starting to get a
                      > > > headache of this unique case...
                      > > >
                      > >
                      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • gintaras.miskinis
                      ... There aren t many, actually. Written blogs are really popular, but video - hm...There are some: http://marketingasinternete.wordpress.com - about
                      Message 10 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > By the way, are there many people in Lithuania who are posting videos
                        > online? If so, can you send any links?
                        >
                        > Jay
                        >
                        >
                        > --
                        > http://ryanishungry.com
                        > http://jaydedman.com
                        > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
                        > 917 371 6790
                        >

                        There aren't many, actually. "Written" blogs are really popular, but video - hm...There are some:

                        http://marketingasinternete.wordpress.com - about marketing on the internet. In my opinion not very professional, because there are a lot of twaddle and not much valuable information.

                        http://www.zuokas.lt/category/video-kronika/page/2/ - some video posts of Lithuania's famous politician. Videos are uploaded very irregularly (what is common for all lithuanian video bloggers if we could name them like that).

                        http://www.skamp.lt/ - music band blog. Actually, there are quite qualitative videos that I liked.

                        http://www.zipfm.lt/putiklis/?laid-pava=2&kate=9&paie-zodi=&fail-tipa=-1 - local dj's and radio show manager's video blogs.

                        Last year, I also tried to put some entries on our local country's "youtube", and observed the reactions, which wrote in my paper..But I cannot call it a successful project. Just a few videos:
                        http://www.videogaga.lt/user/bwoy.

                        Briefly, I can say, that there are no professional video blogers (maybe except skamp.lt) in our country, that I could name even waken up in the middle of the night and that those blogs would be at least regular...
                      • Jay dedman
                        ... To me, this is what it s all about. We can email back and forth like this in text....but now we can actually see your face and hear you talk. If you took
                        Message 11 of 24 , Apr 1, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > Last year, I also tried to put some entries on our local country's
                          > "youtube", and observed the reactions, which wrote in my paper..But I cannot
                          > call it a successful project. Just a few videos:
                          > http://www.videogaga.lt/user/bwoy.

                          To me, this is what it's all about. We can email back and forth like
                          this in text....but now we can actually see your face and hear you
                          talk. If you took your camera outside, you could introduce us to your
                          family and your world. As cheesy as it sounds, that's really the big
                          deal here. It can be as revolutionary as we want it to be.

                          Jay





                          --
                          http://ryanishungry.com
                          http://jaydedman.com
                          http://twitter.com/jaydedman
                          917 371 6790
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.