Mike Slone has made some excellent comments come criticisms about vogging at mikeslong.org. Perhaps the most trenchant criticism Mike makes is:
I won’t go into all the details now about what I don’t agree with, but one of the things that makes blogging “blogging” is that it is easy to do and something that the majority of people already online can learn to do with very few technical barriers.
Absolutely! I think given the status of blogging in early 2004 it is very easy to overlook some important points about blogging, which directly influences what I think vogging ought to be, or at least how it ought to be.
Prior to the rise of blogger, and shortly afterwards the various other blog orientated systems, it was extremely difficult for any average author, even with substantial HTML skills, to write a blog. This is because blog authoring tools are Content Management Systems (CMS’s) that all rely on backend database processing, templates, cgi scripting and the like. They do this so that it is trivial for the majority of wannabe bloggers to: write an entry; collect, bookmark and annotate any other url; archive permanently with a valid url all entries; automatically link to these entries from other pages; include images in their work; link to other blogs; collate or check links to your own blog; to provide metadata in the form of categories; and so on. In other words blogging tools are quite specific CMS environments that facilitate all this and make the technical side of reasonably complex site management trivial. (It helps that much of the information architecture issues that always accrue to CMS projects have been largely solved via the generic conventions that blogs rapidly developed over the last 3 years.)
The same ought to be the case with vogs. So yes, at the moment to make a vog requires quite a bit of technical expertise, but only because the tools for vogging are not yet available. The architecture is available – for example QuickTime has a full set of Java APIs available so it is technically feasible to author a video blogging tool that, for instance, would let you: upload video; nominate a poster frame; make a poster movie to embed from that frame; allow you to specify standard options like volume, controller visible, looping. It would also be technically possible to then write a tool that also let this video become interactive (Ezedia for example have a simple drag and drop QuickTime program, this isn’t much good for vogging, but my point is that you could make a program specifically for vogging, the technical architecture is already there, it’s just that no one’s done it yet), so that it might link to other videos (other vogs), it might quote other vogs, or it could be as simple as letting you click at a certain point to then load another vog, in the same way that a blog consists of multiple and dense links and it is common to move between several while reading.
Blogging, inspite of photo and audioblogs, is primarily a text based activity. The advantage of this is that most of us, and certainly pretty much everyone interested in blogging, is text literate. We know how to write and we can learn how to write in this environment. Combined with simple web based interfaces (forms and buttons) it is possible to write and publish online – the technical threshold has been rendered trivial. As a consequence blogging has been able to evolve as a rich and broad genre rapidly because it appropriates existing and deeply understood literacies. This is not the case with vogging. Outside of those who actively make film or video, the majority of people don’t ‘narrate’ with time based images on a regular basis, but just as in writing the conventions are straightforward and easily learnt. Now, blogs worked because we are all print literate and had had several years of being immersed in HTML, CSS, hypertext or web design, and so on. Our print and web literacies gave us the skills needed to work out the what, how, and why of blogging and to develop the idea of networked literacy and writing. This is not the case with vogs. Most simply, blogs are networked writing, which is not writing published on the network, similarly vogs are networked video, which is not video published on the network. The difference is that the tools exist for the former, and not the latter. With the rise of video editing to the desktop video literacies will develop, people will put them online, just as we all wrote homepages six years ago. The next step, as blogs show, is something else again. Make the tools, and people will come.
The vog project then is about this. A series of sketches to explore the things that networked video can do beyond embedding an image and synchronised soundtrack on a web page. It is a video literacy in the same way that I’d argue blogs are a networked text literacy.
Tags: Hypermedia Theory, hypertext, tools, Vogging






