Friday, March 21, 2014

Unhealthy Trends

There has always been a very negative connotation to the word viral, and yet being a viral video is one of the most celebrated things you can be on Youtube. So why is there that negative connotation with viral? Well a virus is something that spreads very quickly from person to person, giving the viral video it's name. The main difference is that a virus is something that hurts you, while viral videos are often considered harmless. My question is are viral videos actually harmless? What real life impacts have these videos had?

The main reason I've brought up this topic is because of a few viral videos who had some unfortunate consequences. The first group of viral videos that have had really negative effects are challenge videos such as the cinnamon challenge, in which people take videos of themselves swallowing a whole spoon of cinnamon, often unsuccessfully. Some of these videos have a very dangerous nature about them, such as the salt and ice challenge in which salt is placed in the hand and ice is squeezed in that hand. This causes a chemical reaction that leads to a severe skin burn. Or the gallon milk challenge, in which challengers drink a whole gallon of whole milk, often leading to puking pink as the milk wears away the stomach lining. These may seem like rare instances, but a lot of the challenge videos involve ingesting dangerous amounts of something or placing oneself in a dangerous situation.

Another group of viral videos that has been dangerous are the ones that involve public displays. These are ones that create a large commotion in a public place for the humor of watching people try to react. One example is called the two gallon smash, in which members would go to a grocery store, smash two milk cartons together, and lie in the puddle pretending like they had fallen until someone tried to help them up, and then proceeding to slide all over the ground when people try to help them up. This upset grocery stores a lot who started to become less and less sympathetic to the people who did, until arrest became a serious possibility. This was upsetting to the grocery stores for obvious reasons, it created a mess, it wasted milk, it hindered other shoppers, and made their stores look like dangerous places.

The last group is more of just the attitude towards viral videos. People want to be the biggest and best at each viral challenge or pose. The one that most easily comes to mind is the planking fad. People became obsessed with finding the best planking pose and the coolest, funniest, or most dangerous planking pictures. This came to a head when a man was killed after he fell off of the hotel balcony that he had been planking on. It was an absolute tragedy and a warning against this type of behavior, but planking still continues on and on. 

In some ways the online community has created more of an online school playground in which people are competing to get attention through stupid, offensive, or self-harming actions. We need to stop applauding those people who turn our online community into that kind of overly defensive macho competition. Whether this is a situation in which Youtube should use their banning  privileges is a question for another debate. 

Thursday, March 20, 2014

Carefree

I am a little bit fed up with how much people attack "mindless" music, music that doesn't have some deep emotional meaning. I appreciate carefree artforms, art that doesn't take itself too seriously. Some of the greatest moments in culture have come from people just taking a step back, relaxing, and realizing their own extremes. Most recently I have noticed it in movies, songs, and tv.

Many movies, recently, have been mocking their own genres flaws. One of the most prominent examples I can think of is "Cabin In The Woods" which mocked the horror story genre in a hilarious way, that still made sense with the plot. This has peaked in recent years with meta-comedy for action movies (Tropic Thunder), disaster movies (This is the End), cop movies (The Other Guys/21 Jump Street) and spy movies (Get Smart). I absolutely loved all of these movies. It was cool to see how they twisted and mocked their genres, while often remaining true to the tone and plot style of their genres. The Other Guys still had that twist revelatory ending of the ultimate plan after they had been banned from the job, classic cop movie.

I've seen this same trend in songs, more specifically in rap. A lot of my more favorite rap artists are the ones that criticize and mock the rap industry. I've talked about them before but Mac Lethal, Bo Burnham, and George Watsky all criticize the rap industry in many different songs. It makes it so much more interesting than just the common rap music that comes out of that industry.

When it comes to tv, it often happens in humorous shows, yet many times occurs in longer running shows. This can be absolutely hilarious when they mock themselves or their previous habits or qualities. Seth Macfarlane is really wonderful at this, and often exchanges insults between his own shows which is extremely enjoyable to watch.

More often than not, these meta-humor arts are more clever and well thought-out than run-of-the-mill art. They show a remarkable sense of self-awareness and self-acceptance. They allow the writers to explore a whole new variety of jokes on a subject that they know best, themselves. This is what makes meta-humor so enjoyable for me

George Watsky's "One Hundred Words You Could Say Instead Of Swag"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFhM1CoyP7Q

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Business Competition

The first question I would have when approaching this topic would be "what are the major competitors to Youtube". Thinking on it, I would have to say that Youtube thoroughly dominates the video sharing market. I can not think of one other website devoted to streaming user content and only that. It would be interesting to look at if there ever even was any sort of competition for Youtube and what happened to that competition, why isn't it still around? This question would give a more comprehensive history of Youtube, and help us understand why certain aspects of Youtube are the way they are, and what makes Youtube so special and invaluable.

I would also be interested in looking at the hiring process at Youtube. How does Youtube stay on top of the game by hiring the best programmers and designers? How many people are working for Youtube at any one time. Are they programming large changes or simply doing maintenance on the already extremely successful website. This question is of particular value to those who are interested in programming or designing. It can be argued that designing and programming for Youtube is one of the more prestigious positions in the digital age.

Another question I would like to look into is who is the CEO of Youtube, where is their headquarters at.
Youtube has existed for so long in my life, yet I don't know the name of the CEO or any real information about them. Nearly everyone knows of Mark Zuckerberg or Steve Jobs, so why not the CEO of Youtube. I'm sure that his personal background greatly defines the changes he makes and how he runs Youtube. It would be easier to understand some of their business decisions if you understand the man who is making those business decisions.

It is weird sometimes to think of Youtube as a company although it definitely is. It relies on all the same principles that other businesses do, and therefor must follow many of the same practices and techniques. The major difference between Youtube and many other businesses is how different it's setup and output product is from other businesses. This means Youtube is a wonderful example of a business model for the Digital Era, a field of study that is becoming increasingly important and will shape the future of our economy.

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Why Does It Look LIke That

As a large, and very powerful, website, Youtube contains a lot of meticulously placed details. These are there to make the website run smoother, provide a more enjoyable experience, and sometimes to keep the viewer on the website for longer periods of time. In many ways, the things done by Youtube are to help us and make us like the website, but some of it is manipulative as encouraging more watching increases the amount of money made off of ads.

The first obvious thing about Youtube is it's design. It would be interesting to know why they designed it the way that they did. To try and find the reasoning for the relatively simplistic color scheme, or the positioning of subscribe buttons, like meters, and various information about the videos. Everything has a reason, purpose, and effect on the overall experience of the website. There are many courses in website design, and occupations as website designers. These effects matter, and if we could see a breakdown of these reasoning it would not only make us more appreciative, but also better designers ourselves and smarter video watchers.

A lot of the design focuses around achieving Youtube's ultimate goal: get people onto the website watching videos.Some of the things I have noticed personally in the design, and how it achieves it's goal include the homepage showing all the featured videos, the "recommended" videos, the list of related videos on the side, the use of interesting pictures to advertise the videos, to provide a comment section, and many others. I'm sure they have a lot more techniques than I know about. That's why I would want to know, and feel other people should know. If we know the different methods Youtube uses to manipulate us, you can use that knowledge to avoid video traps, and to waste less time aimlessly searching Youtube.

Another thing that would be interesting to look at is the evolution of Youtube. How much it has changed from past design schemes, Just like any other website they go through major reforms, It would be extremely  interesting to see how they accumulated the critique and knowledge to decide those reforms as well. How much they use the comment system in their reforms would be extremely interesting to know, as it would dictate the amount of comments I leave, and how involved I become in contributing my own ideas. A very important ability for a website, as the web is a new and ever-changing media, to be able to adapt to the problems and critiques of their website.

As this information would require some personal stories and knowledge from the designers themselves, this might be one of the hardest research topics I've described this week.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

What makes people famous?

How do the ordinary people on Youtube get to be famous? What characteristics do they share that causes them to explode in popularity and appeal to such a wide variety of people? Does it have something to do with their subject, their creative process, an internal motivation, or somehow just luck that has brought fame to these people.

This is obviously of interest to a lot of people. There are hundreds of thousands of aspiring Youtube stars out there, hoping to reach the goal of fame. They want to know how to succeed, how to appeal to and entertain, a large group of people. The aspects of fame on Youtube apply to every single performer and could provide some tips and advice on how to succeed, although obviously some aspects would be limited to just the online form. The paper might encourage the average person to take up an account and attempt to reach out to others. The idea of using this paper as sort of a guide to achieve fame is more of a practical research paper.

The more conceptual research that could come out of this idea is in what the trends say about our society. The things that make the Youtubers popular shows a lot about what the majority of our society values and enjoys in a performer and a person. It could reveal what topics grab people's attention, a very interesting research point for someone such as a writer, columnist, or reporter.

Youtube might be very interested in this topic, as well as other sharing sites. The research may show some unfairness in the system, how some people might have a more natural advantage over others due to a flaw in the website, something that could be fixed.

Determining what constitutes fame in this situation is very interesting. There are many indicators of fame on Youtube depending on what you want to determine. The like/dislike rating system would give an indication of how well-liked or appealing a certain video is, the same applies to the comment system. Another indication of fame is in the amount of pageviews to a certain video, showing how mass popularity, sharing, and the nature of viral videos affects fame. Since I'm mainly looking at this research as a way to analyze how individual accounts become famous, the most acceptable statistic might be in subscribers, which not only indicates fame but also commitment of those who follow them. However, using all three statistics in conjunction would probably provide the most comprehensive viewpoint.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

How Much Time

Something that has always been a constant complaint or criticism of Youtube is that it is a waste of time and a draw on the focus and work ethic of you the younger generation. As this is pertains heavily to my topic, it really interests me to research. I want to find out how much our generation spends time online as opposed to other decades, or even just the trends in recent years. I would also want to find how much of the time we spend online is dedicated to Youtube, and of the time spent on Youtube what percentage of the videos being watched could be labeled as frivolous or a waste of time.

I'm hoping that this knowledge would help me better understand the exact impacts of Youtube on the daily life of the average teen, and how much it can be considered a detriment to our society. I also want to be able to examine the trends over time to form a good idea of where Youtube and the usage of Youtube will be in several years. It is important to know this, as it could become the basis of a conceptual research into how our generation is different from older generations, or as the basis of a practical research in reducing the amount of time wasted on Youtube or shifting the focus of Youtube videos away from frivolity.

A huge part of what makes this research hard is determining what Youtube videos qualify as frivolous or mere time-wasters. One could argue that a music video is a simple waste of time, while others could argue that it is a valuable look into the styles of artists and helps young aspiring artists be inspired and practice.

Another argument is that time spent relaxing is not time-wasted, merely not spent on work, that relaxation is important. This is why it would be important to specify that by "frivolous" videos I mean videos that don't have a direct connection to becoming a better person or contributing directly to a job or task. As it is a thoroughly subjective piece on the detriment of something a lot of people use daily, it would have to be handled with care and very choice diction to avoid offense. The good news is that the data would be fairly straightforward and rely on math and non-arguable calculations. These solid facts could provide a more credible and believable background to my research paper.

Some sources that I found in a cursory search for data
time spent online: http://www.pewresearch.org/millennials/teen-internet-use-graphic/
online time spent on youtube: http://mashable.com/2012/11/28/social-media-time/
youtube time spent on specific genres:http://youtube-trends.blogspot.com/