These are nearly-not-quite transcripts of the commentaries I have made in the BlogTalk DownUnder quote prototype.
Why try to define it: what is the rush?
Because it will get populated (as it is) by the microsoft notion of video and blogging. because it will make video in a blog a solid object. Text in a blog is porous, that is the how and why of blogs. We weave into and out of each other, this is the texture of the network. Video if it stays a blob of video is textureless in the context of the network.
The rush is because I could see, in 2000, that this day would come, and when it did people would misunderstand the role and authority of blogging (blogs gain authority via their connectedness) and in turn mistake the ability to be media producers with being video bloggers. What is missing is the “blogging” bit in video. How do i easily quote a part of your entry? This is trivial in text. Why should there be any difference? Both are technically possible.
There is a difference because people can’t conceive of their ‘finished’ video as being make up of parts. Remixes do this, but remixes are not me being able to easily quote you inside of my video. Or my video citing your video and your video knowing about it (trackback). why not? Why can’t we weave video in the same way that we weave words.
Until that moment video blogging will remain vanity video. It is about me, because your video can’t know about my video, and vice versa, without human agency.
Technorati Tags: vlogTheory
Tags:
hypertext,
Vogging