TechFold - Bold tech & web commentary

10 Responses to “Why I Don’t Like Video - My Brain is a Mini-Google, Yours is Too”

1. David Dalka | May 22nd, 2007 at 4:57 pm
   

   I used to think this too. Now every once in a while there is a video when kept short or edited, that I do like.

2. Joel | May 22nd, 2007 at 8:48 pm
   

   I couldn’t agree with you more. It’s always been something that I never personally understood. And I see so many startups revolving around online video. I always figured I was in the minority.

   It does have a lot to do with how and why you get information online. If you have to deal with a lot of information that requires critical analysis (such as going through the daily deluge of web 2.0 site launches and acquisitions) then video just doesn’t do you much good. People who are just casually browsing information or looking to be entertained will probably have more time to invest in video.

   I guess it’s the difference between reading the paper and watching cnn. Though reading a paper is probably more in line with the way your brain (and my brain) analyzes information, I bet you still watch headline news from time to time (I know I do).

   As a side note, I dunno how much I’d use video with annotated or tagged sections. By the time I’ve read the summary and gotten the gist of it…I’m ready to move on to the next piece of new information. I guess if it was particularly interesting I would invest the time to view the relevant video sections but that would probably be rare.

3. vaspers the grate | May 22nd, 2007 at 11:52 pm
   

   I agree. Text is still the most efficient means of information dissemination and revolution.

   Podcasts and video are focus intensive and time consuming.

   While a little multi medi can make you more humanly present, nobody wants to slog through all that mess just to find the gems.

   Interviews are awful modes of information. Manifestoes are much better.

4. Rod | May 23rd, 2007 at 12:08 am
   

   @david - I agree- I think if I could bring myself to do so, I’d find a number worth watching.

   @joel - good call on usage scenarios/workflow. Agreed that there’s a place for video in casual scenarios, though oddly I don’t actually have cable, and as such rely 100% on Digg for my daily news, which I’m sure keeps me up to speed with everything important going on ;o)

   @vaspers - “focus intensity” is an interesting metric - sounds like a good thesis topic for someone - what focus intensity is required to get a certain level of recall from different media? Huzzah for manifestos!

5. David | May 25th, 2007 at 8:37 am
   

   Rod, I think you’re right on the money, as are the comments, but I’d be interested to know your age. I’m guessing it’s in the age 30-40, demographic, forgive me if I made you older than you are. The reason why I say that, is that there’s a whole generation that is used to getting their content through video. When they do use language it’s reduced to OMFG, ROFL, TTY, or using non-letter characters to simulate text \/\/()\/\/! That’s interesting because it does make you part of the “in” group but it doesn’t really disseminate information too well. It relegates text to the realm of Nike, Fubu, or whatever else the “cool” kids wear. I wonder, if you could get a coherent answer from some high school kid, would they say the same?

6. Rod | May 25th, 2007 at 8:50 am
   

   @David - good call on the demographic disconnect. I’m 30, which I agree puts me in a different segment than the intended consumer for much of the video on the net.

   Its seems that the next generation, for all its hyper-activity, is also fundamentally passive: content to sit and have material fed to them, as opposed to actively consuming it, as you and I do.

   That’s somewhat alarming…

7.   My brain is Google, if you’re reading this, so is yours. — Project-D | May 25th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
   

   […] read an interesting blog post today about video/text. If you don’t care to read it, I’ll give you the quick version. […]

8. vaspers the grate | June 5th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
   

   No, the next gen is not passive, not at all friend. It’s very participatory. It’s multi-interactive.

   The next gen is into Twitter, blogs, any kind of sharing sites and online social/professional networking communities.

   Participatory, not passive. The 30 yr. and older crowd is the passive group, from TV to church pulpits, the old skool is the more lethargic demographic.

   I’m over 30, but my heart is with the younger set. For the first time in human history, the youth are teaching their elders about new technology.

   The next gen will not sit still and be spoonfed anything. They want to comment, reply, edit, remix, mashup, and re-purpose. They are far more active and interactive, more social, more activist.

   that’s how I see it.

9. Odiogo Ties together blog posts and Podcasts « TechFold | June 8th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
   

   […] that given the choice would rather listen to than read blog posts. Personally, its not for me; refer to my feelings on vlogging for further explanation. As to whether there’s a larger market - train commuters who want to take some blogs with […]

10. Rod | June 8th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
    

    Vaspers - I hear what you’re saying. It seems like a weird, semi-contradictory sort of thing: on one hand, the myspace generation is very participatory, as you describe; on the other, they seem content to slurp up content indiscrimately - video, American Idol, whatever. If possible, they want to be spoonfed opportunities to participate? Like what George Lucas is doing with the starwars franchise.

    http://techfold.com/2007/05/24/how-george-lucas-missed-the-boat-again/

    Anyway, its fun to try and draw big inferences from people’s content-consumption preferences. At the end of the day, I still don’t like video! Harumph!

Leave a Reply