Exactly! This particular usage reminds me of how people in early photographs sat as if they were in a painted portrait or early television programs that were produced to look exactly like theatre (complete with cast taking a bow to the camera at the end). Personally, it doesn't interest me, I am more inspired by forms that push boundaries of content. However, it is an important part of the story. Many people will take to it for exactly the reasons I don't. The familiarity of it's style allows them to be comfortable with something they might otherwise find too confusing or weird. There is room and need for more of all of it, but good to make clarifications. --- In email@example.com, "Andreas Haugstrup" < videoblog@s...> wrote: > On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:04:58 -0500, Joshua Kinberg <jkinberg@g...> > wrote: > > > This *IS* different. Don't be blinded simply because it uses the > > convention of a "news" show. > > We're talking past each other. I'm talking from a purely media > perspective. Distribution is not something that has an impact of the media > genre. I have already agreed that rocketboom *is* a new way of using tv, > and it might have a big impact there (time will tell). However that's not > what I'm talking about when I say that rocketboom is not a new media. > > From a media genre perspective there is nothing new. It is not a new > media, it is old media distributed in a new way. > > - Andreas > -- > <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/> > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.