Stateline on YouTube

johnboy 16 March 2007 22

More to follow as resources become available. Stateline just lead with lengthy story on why watching violence on YouTube is bad M’kay.

Amazingly they referred at length to how in just the last couple of weeks several incidents on YouTube had reached notoriety in Canberra.

And yet they neglected any mention of the website which has been unearthing these incidents and bringing them to public attention, or even asked us what we thought about it.

And to think they had the temerity to lecture about the ethics of watching violence on the internet!


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
22 Responses to Stateline on YouTube
Filter
Order
schmerica_ schmerica_ 5:34 pm 19 Mar 07

Woody – if you have such a problem with the way the site is run, why are you still hanging around?

johnboy johnboy 4:24 pm 19 Mar 07

Wishful thinking WMC, your pathetic bitterness becomes more amusing with every passing day.

Hasdrubahl Hasdrubahl 8:58 am 19 Mar 07

Enjoy a late-night tipple, WMC?

Woody Mann-Caruso Woody Mann-Caruso 10:26 pm 18 Mar 07

so it’s just coincidence that this stuff become an issue from the exact time we started making a habit of putting it up?

It’s not a coincidence. You just linked to what everybody was already talking about, and has been for months. It’s just another sign of your deluded arrogance that you assume because you’ve just stumbled across something, it must be the first time anybody has. I know you like to think you’re the latest Doctorow or Kottke, but let me be the one to break it to you – you’re not. Nobody who’s anybody has ever heard of you or your sites. You posting it around the same time Stateline got hold of it just shows that you’re both way behind the times. Who cares if they got it from you, if everybody else got it last year from their friends?

Do you seriously think you’re the only person who knows how to type “canberra” in the YouTube box, or that people have only just worked out how to do this? My 14-yo niece sent me a link to this little gem five months ago. Looks like it’s got over 12,000 views. Maybe you featured it and I just can’t see it in the link list – how else could it have got that much traffic? I mean, it’s about violence in Canberra and it’s on YouTube, and I’m pretty sure you’re the guy who invented that.

johnboy johnboy 6:29 pm 17 Mar 07

new media new rules, online you have to credit where the story came from.

Anyway to run a process story with a missing chunk of the process is bizarre, but the whole story was fundamentally flawed: “Watching random violence is BAD! Here WATCH SOME MORE!”

Media pundits trying to talk about YouTube constantly miss one of the key features of the technology: the way blogs can find the content relevant to their audience from the vast writhing mass of crap and embed it into their own pages.

DavidM DavidM 6:06 pm 17 Mar 07

Johnboy, if you want RiotACT to have media ‘cred’ (like getting accreditation for sports events, Dendy previews etc), then you have to accept getting treated like another media outlet. Which means, don’t expect your ‘competitors’ to give you a free plug. When was the last time you saw ABC TV going on about how WIN had broken a story, instead of just showing the story as if they’d done it all themselves?

Can’t have it both ways mate.

johnboy johnboy 4:17 pm 17 Mar 07

And canberra media is talking about it because we started talking about it.

Those videos were at least doubling their views on our exposure.

I also liked the massive hypocrisy of Stateline wallowing in violent youtube footage while opining about how bad it all was.

bobbo123 bobbo123 4:05 pm 17 Mar 07

JB..

once again mate.. it’s not all about you or riotact don’t be so precious.

I reckon the stateline yarn was bloody good, accept for a bit too much of canberra grammar kids talking about how to save the world.

All of those kids mentioned youtube, none of them were talking about riotact.

Let’s be honest.. youtube is just the modern version of funniest home videos, with no Toni Pearon.

Kids have always got pissed and had fights, after school, after the show, at the footy.. and yes, after sky fire.. the only difference is, these days they get to put it on the net.

johnboy johnboy 3:32 pm 17 Mar 07

Ahh, so it’s just coincidence that this stuff become an issue from the exact time we started making a habit of putting it up?

Who’d a thunk it?

stan_bowles stan_bowles 2:51 pm 17 Mar 07

“And yet they neglected any mention of the website which has been unearthing these incidents and bringing them to public attention”

YouTube? They mentioned it.

zephyr9673 zephyr9673 2:07 pm 17 Mar 07

You got something to say to the ABC? Say it to the ABC.

Ethics in the media? Hey ethics where you can find them is great, the conversation about violence is more important I think, the ethics of the police using OC spray, the conversation is enough, when we are confronted by the nature of society, good and bad.

Interesting times.

🙂

A story on haw Viacom is making YouTube less useful by attacking all the cool videos.

My opinion is Viacom should affiliate with YouTube so that the videos can be purchased, instead of taking probably the most well targeted advertising you could get.

As to violence, well here the 4th estate is brushing up against the public, convergence in all its brillance.

The cammera is well an truely in the hands of the audience.

And the audience is able to describe what that is like on boards like this.

I love it!

Jey Jey 6:48 am 17 Mar 07

I miss you guys…

VYBerlinaV8 now_with_added grunt VYBerlinaV8 now_with_added grunt 11:36 pm 16 Mar 07

It’s a sad fact Johnboy that as a society we seem to find a way to divert responsibility from the real cause. In this case it was a bunch of asshole kids stuffing around. But the stories have turned into ‘bad parenting’ and ‘violence on the web’. Why can’t it just be ‘asshole kids’?

johnboy johnboy 11:29 pm 16 Mar 07

VYBerlinaV8, I wouldn’t say I’m indignant as much as puzzled by the article.

Personally I would have thought the drunken violence after skyfire was the story and not whether watching it makes you bad.

johnboy johnboy 11:25 pm 16 Mar 07

*sigh* for the mouth breathing WMC (how are your norman vikings going buddy?) kids have been posting this video for some time, what happened two weeks ago was we started going out and looking for Canberra content on youtube and embedding what we thought was interesting.

I don’t know if you saw the Stateline article, I suspect that as usual your comments are ill-informed, but they were talking specifically about content that gained notoriety through us.

In one case ABC radio was giving out our URL to inform discussion of the piece (the Erindale pepper spraying).

Given the staggering number of ABC hits on this site in a day it’s not like they were unaware of the link and it was a huge gaping hole in their story.

In general the story was astonishingly ill informed. Even with high powered computers it takes hours to get video onto youtube, not the instantaneous process they described. Most people take several days to a week to get their stuff up there. The story had a lot of problems like that.

For example the Skyfire fight has still only has ~8,000 views and that’s after heavy national media exposure, so all the kids saying they’d watched it were hardly representative.

VYBerlinaV8 now_with_added grunt VYBerlinaV8 now_with_added grunt 11:25 pm 16 Mar 07

JohnBoy, your righteous indignation is one of the highlights of this web site!

Seriously mate, the site finally seems to be building up some steam – give it time, you will be a media magnate before you know it!

Woody Mann-Caruso Woody Mann-Caruso 10:26 pm 16 Mar 07

Why should they mention The RA? Nobody gives a toss about the middle man. If I saw the news articles, and wanted to watch the videos, I’d want to know where they were, not about some blog that happened to link to them.

johnboy johnboy 8:48 pm 16 Mar 07

Dude, YouTube publish all those stats FFS!

From the page:

Sites Linking to This Video:
353 clicks from http://www.zooweekly.com.au/members/viewPost.php?pid
253 clicks from http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,…
187 clicks from http://the-riotact.com/
115 clicks from http://www.the-riotact.com/
86 clicks from http://the-riotact.com/?p=4465

So maybe it would help if you had any idea at all what you were talking about.

DavidM DavidM 8:30 pm 16 Mar 07

I’m going to address the ‘if they can show war on the news’ question separately because I need to think about it a bit more about replying.

But in the meantime, you say that the Daily Telegraph embedded the Civic fight video but that it got more views from you. Unless you have access to Youtube statistics that the rest of us don’t, how could you possibly know this?

I can see how you can say that the videos you embed get more views than those that you don’t (although there’s no way to know that it’s your embedding that got those higher view-counts, just that it got more views somehow), but how do you know that you got more video viewings than the DT?

johnboy johnboy 8:22 pm 16 Mar 07

On the first point videos we embed get a lot, a lot, more views than video’s we don’t embed.

Kids were watching this stuff before but since we started embedding it people are talking about it in a much bigger way.

As for editorial policy, the racy stuff has all been picked up by other media, the Daily Telegraph even embedded the Civic fight video (but it got more views from us).

We’re not showing porn, or snuff, so I don’t think we can be accused of using “whatever means are available”.

Because we’re a little nimbler than the other media in town we’re able to utilise the technology.

If they can show war on the news I’m surprised if anyone objects to a fight.

Pandy Pandy 8:12 pm 16 Mar 07

Jonboy you do great work of posting interesting Canberra (and dare I should say Queanbeyan?) youtube vids here. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Well I am off to dancing. Seeyas!

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site