Re: [videoblogging] Re: RocketBoomSucks
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:54:32 -0800, M. Sean Gilligan <seanlist@...> wrote: >> Its precisely the fact that its a different distribution model that >> makes it different from (and in competition with) television. TV is >> simply a distribution method for video. But its a tightly controlled >> one that leaves little room for independently produced content. > > The distribution mechanism (media) affects the message. TV "shows" are > typically 20 or 40 minutes long (to fill 1/2 hour or 1 hour timeslots > with commercials.) Rocketboom is very much like television, but is > different in, at least two ways: > 1) It recognizes that Internet/blog distribution calls for short "shows". > 2) It is "independent" Yeah, I knew I should've elaborated. When I said "tv" I should've said single linear audio-visual media. Short movies, feature films, news broadcasts, animal documentaries, music videos, rocketboom, most videos posted online so far, the playboy channel, superbowl commercials, your wedding video, the Zapruder film and America's funniest home videos are all the same media. They share the same basic language. That's what I mean when I say rocketboom is not a new media - it's old media distributed in a new way (and not all that new - Denmark's Radio and Danish TV-2 have been publishing streaming on-demand shows for a very long time). > This brings me back to one criticism/comment about RocketBoom. To me, > it has a "corporate feel". I suspect, this may have been what struck a > nerve with Shannon. Actually that's the part I like the best about Rocketboom. Who says we should sound like amateurs when making video? :o) Rocketboom has struck me as a well-produced, funny satire (at least the last two shows). I like how it compliments my other tv intake (I don't like the 18 meg download for two and a half minutes though). - Andreas -- <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.