What would happen... (moratorium on youtube videos)

[hermit]

I've spent a couple of weeks now reading, writing, thinking; and I've noticed something that I find a little troubling. Maybe it's just me? I'd appreciate input/thoughts on this.

There seems to be a lot of youtube material here, specifically as either a conversation starter or a contributor to the conversation.

How much weight is generally given to a video? What's the criteria for a video being worth while, or accurate, or factual?

What would happen if for 30 days, the forum had a moratorium on youtube videos, commenting on anything related to youtube videos, etc?

How much value to we place on it, and how wise is it to be placing that value?

Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts!

[Valerie Villars]

I really don't place much value on the videos. The written word or transcripts are much more valuable, to me.

[Justplain]

The nice thing about a video is that it gives you a pictorial expression of the content. Another good thing is that you can pause it and rewind. Having a visual of a video's subject can help with assessing their believability via verbal and nonverbal expression.

Of course, evidence is evidence, and sometimes visually provided evidence is the most powerful.

Reading is of course very important, a requirement for researching a topic. And having substantial evidence is necessary to make believable assertions. So, videos being a form of evidence, i dont see the value in banishing them.

[ramus]

There was a time when youtube videos were not highly thought of here and that was not all that long ago. I liked it better then.

[Foxie Loxie]

I would say that those who have been "around" a little longer are able to have discernment on which videos to watch. One comes to know which persons present with integrity & which don't. I prefer to see presentations as one can connect with the "human" who is delivering the message & read body language.

For instance, Dave Janda, James Corbett, Lionel & of course, our own Joe!! :sun: Even though I don't like his "salty" language, I find Styxenhammer666 usually presents things with a very clear logic.

To each his own! :highfive:

[Michi]

Videos like YouTube provide a convenient way of exchanging communication.
After all, it's just another way of communication.
Discernment is required no matter be it in writing, by audio or video (or smoke signals :flame: )
There was even a time in the past, when books where considered bad.

[norman]

I'm biased towards "multimedia" because a) I find written text to be a struggle that subtracts from my fluency. b) I've been an audio orientated person all my life. Video isn't really all that important to me except for the times that there are specific things to examine visually. The use of visual accompaniments to an audio narrative, I find, subtractive and or distractive.



Youtube videos that are really only radio gatecrashing the video format to exploit the high visibility of youtube are a thing I'm often exasperated by. I wish there was a high profile web service for audio. Then people wouldn't have to make videos out of their audio material and I wouldn't have to convert it back to audio again at my end.


I much prefer to listen. It's my sweet spot for absorption of information and for aesthetic pleasures. It's my most finely tuned and structurally understood sense, and the least likely to be deceived.


I won't knock the practise of converting real life to text and attempting to convert it back again, but it's not my cup of tea. I'm quite excited about the possibility that newer technologies can give the species an opportunity to bybass such a clunky process and keep things very much up close and tight within the primary senses that evolved for a very long time for that very purpose.


The period of TEXT is really only a short blip in the greater story. It's value as a solid sculptural record is a bit more substantially proven to be of timeless worth, but it's use as a popular medium of expression never really caught on because it didn't tick enough of the right boxes for such a medium. It was actually very divisive. There were those that read a lot, and there were those that didn't, and an expanding gap between them than may narrow again with the appearance of post TEXT technologies.

[shaberon]

I never watch anything.

When someone posts a video, and that's it, I don't pay attention. If you post something about it, I might respond, but mostly am interested in writing. I'm in no position to say get rid of them, but it's not something I use, ever.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

There is a difference between, say, a scripted 'documentary' type video, and a live stream, or pure audio, of an interview or conversation. For example Richard Dolan's podcasts, or Linda Howe's. I continue to find these videos valuable, and would not be happy if they disappeared.

For other content, as Foxie said, it's all about discernment. You don't have to watch what you don't want to watch, nor do you have to believe anything.

Videos may not be everyone's cup of tea. But so long as they stimulate discussion, it's all good (imo).

[scotslad]

With the advent in recent months of video production and video animation software for less than $50, even free and many people using RSSMIX.com to rip news feeds and RSS feeds from other sites - many which do not validate or site their sources. It is very easy to rip, content and also software bots and plugins to search for a keyword and pull & embed video content from youtube, daily motion, vimeo et al into a site- many people are pulling in content without verifying it or even listening/viewing it prior to posting. (yes, i know - many do and want other's opinions)

They simply then manually add a title, description & tags for maximum link bait or have software to do it for them in the rush to get "content" out there and on their site, channel or page. Ironically I watched a YT video on here the other day featuring Denzel Washington about news, content and telling the truth. What he had to say was so true. If you dont read or watch - you're uninformed. If you do then you become misinformed especially if what some presenters or hosts disclose certain facts believing their own spin it can have a "caustic" effect instead of the "cosmic" ego rub and admiration they so desperately want ;) Each new vid often out sensationalising the last and ever eroding the credibility and positioning they once had in the "market".

Sad, but true. Likes mean nothing. Good meaninful comments and debate are what matters. Ironically many "egos" and channels on YT disable comments. Facebook algorithm has changed the way it promotes content - video inc, Linkedin is placing emphasis on video uploaded to its site instead of linking out to other sites such as YT.

I like the "thanks" feature on here - almost like a self-regulating community trust score. I also get the funny feeling that this community whilst it doesnt suffer fools gladly, and contains many fans and researchers of "fringe" / alternate content who have a real sense of value, trust and common sense.

Video is one of the most powerful communication mediums for in NLP terms - it appeals to the "visual", "auditory" and "Kinesthetic" channels allowing people to be "authentic" in their piece to camera instead of just voice overs, powerpoint walk thrus and manipulated photoshop pics.

Yet it is the narrative in the comments and feedback of many of these vids (and not necessarily) the vids themselves which is the real eye opener and often resonates with you aligning your head, heart and gut as you nod finding yourself often agreeing with the comments and not necessarily the content -
For me, I think a video can be very good for distlling content quickly and getting it out there, but as we all know with the power of Gimp & photoshop photographs can be manipulated, video animations can be created and PDFs can be manipulated (inc. president birth certificates).

Maybe a dedicated video thread could be a good idea/test for 30 days for people to add if they want comments or feedback on a vid - don't know, not sure.

Hoping my wee rambling makes some sense.

;)

[Michi]

Yet it is the narrative in the comments and feedback of many of these vids (and not necessarily) the vids themselves which is the real eye opener

That I have observed my selves too. In the comments of vids one can sometimes find gems and other viewpoints which help to discern the content.
Very good points you made!
:thumbsup:

[Daozen]

Videos are fine as long as:

1) You give a brief synopsis of what's going on.

2) You cue it at the best place for viewers to understand what's happening.

A transcript would be cool, but is not always possible.

[Bubu]

I've been here long enough to know that in most cases its a waste of time. when you stay longer you will know at once which ones to ignore

[Foxie Loxie]

:laugh::laugh: Good one, Bubu!!!

Anything going on in your part of the world that is interesting?!!

[hermit]

I would say that those who have been "around" a little longer are able to have discernment on which videos to watch. One comes to know which persons present with integrity & which don't. I prefer to see presentations as one can connect with the "human" who is delivering the message & read body language.

For instance, Dave Janda, James Corbett, Lionel & of course, our own Joe!! :sun: Even though I don't like his "salty" language, I find Styxenhammer666 usually presents things with a very clear logic.

To each his own! :highfive:

So how do you discern?

*edit*

FYI, this is actually my second incarnation here at Avalon. I was a long time member up until I got myself kicked out for being antisocial. ;)

[hermit]

Good thoughts here so far!

My concerns aren't necessarily with content, or presentation. I'm an avid podcast subscriber, and I've noticed that one particular podcast I subscribe to started out really low quality in terms of production, but had really good quality information and interviews.

My concern is with the frequency of the format being used, and presented. (Maybe concern isn't the best word to use--curiosity?)

Is youtube a lazy way to research, is it a component of research, is it something that has to be used with other forms of research?

Is using youtube the equivalent of reading an academic paper?

If so, do we need to attach the same level of scrutiny we'd use with an academic paper?

Are youtube videos giving us an out from doing the actual hard work?

And, even if it's taking some of the work out of it, is that a good thing?

Case in point! Would we have taken Bill and Kerry any more or less seriously if they just posted someone else's videos? :D

[norman]

Are youtube videos giving us an out from doing the actual hard work?




The greater dynamic is that 99% of the population are not researchers at all. Not in the real sense. They just need a prod to wake them up.


Most people can't and shouldn't do the "hard work". People should get on with the things that need doing. Hanging around forums like this one can give the impression that everyone on earth should be a researcher. That's simply ludicrous, and we don't need a world like that. If the news media was doing the right thing, that would suffice for a huge majority of the population.


The explosion of YT chanels waffling on about stuff that sounds about right, IS an issue. It's become a new social club.

[Ascension]

The explosion of YT chanels waffling on about stuff that sounds about right, IS an issue. It's become a new social club.

Yes, but...


They just need a prod to wake them up.

Doesn't you tube serve that function for people raised on video games, television, visual media? There is valid, thought provoking material in video form. It's not all garbage.

[norman]

I agree Ascention, but it's becoming a sink hole for people's life energies. It'd be far better to have mainstream media flipped over into something true and genuine that puts together very concise information that people could watch for half an hour a day and get on with their lives for the rest of their time.

[ghostrider]

The younger crowd could prefer video and us older mizers ( made up term meant to be funny) could prefer reading over videos ... I personally like to read first, satisfy curiosity later with video ... I guess video puts the bow on the box ... it's good to step away from everything once and a while , no youtube videos for a week/month will stimulate creative and critical thinking ... this is why people feel refreshed after spending time in nature , fewer people fewer fluidal forces bombarding you , critical thinking has a clear path ... balance in all things is always good... interesting thread BTW...

[Pam]

There is a difference between, say, a scripted 'documentary' type video, and a live stream, or pure audio, of an interview or conversation. For example Richard Dolan's podcasts, or Linda Howe's. I continue to find these videos valuable, and would not be happy if they disappeared.

For other content, as Foxie said, it's all about discernment. You don't have to watch what you don't want to watch, nor do you have to believe anything.

Videos may not be everyone's cup of tea. But so long as they stimulate discussion, it's all good (imo).

I think that any video presented needs commentary or better yet, analysis by the person presenting it. Simply posting a video with no explanation is a sort of laziness and I bet I have done it at some time.