Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Web Video This is a story, for me, about media and that's how I'd like to discuss it. This to me is a story about new modes of information rising up against new. The initial story was to be aired on broadcast media, so 83 edits involving lawyers were required. With the web, they can produce their own point of view and mass distribute it. This is another form of the 'Arab Spring' at play, but our dictatorial institutions are not governments, they're our broadcast media. We fight against them with anecdotal information, narrowcasting and viral videos. I'd like to hear what people think about the strengths and weaknesses of both types of information exchange, as demonstrated in this case. This thread is not for discussing the content of the case - start your own discussion in *health* if you want to discuss it. Falsifying news isn't against the law - which means broadcast news or on the internet one would think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Huh? I think this already has an existing thread. Gee, was hoping for some Canadian content! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Huh? I think this already has an existing thread. Gee, was hoping for some Canadian content! Really ? Sorry about that can you post a link please ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Really ? Sorry about that can you post a link please ? http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=2076&st=0&p=29950entry29950 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Hmmmm... no I don't think this is the same. That thread is more general - I'd like to compare viral vs broadcast media here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Hmmmm... no I don't think this is the same. That thread is more general - I'd like to compare viral vs broadcast media here. You want to compare...not contrast... viral vs. broadcast media? Seems unclear and not altogether different from the previous media thread(s). The Monsanto-Fox story has been beaten to death in several MLW threads.....not sure of the relevance here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 You want to compare...not contrast... viral vs. broadcast media? Seems unclear and not altogether different from the previous media thread(s). The Monsanto-Fox story has been beaten to death in several MLW threads.....not sure of the relevance here. Ok - well not the one you linked to. It's making the rounds again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Ok - well not the one you linked to. It's making the rounds again. Then we can start right there....viral media can have an extended shelf life that loses context and relevance. Sometimes it ceases to be informative. Audiences don't watch old "The National" broadcasts unless they dig for them on the CBC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Then we can start right there....viral media can have an extended shelf life that loses context and relevance. Sometimes it ceases to be informative. Audiences don't watch old "The National" broadcasts unless they dig for them on the CBC. That's a good start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin This says the incident happened in 1997 - why is it back ?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 That's a good start. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin This says the incident happened in 1997 - why is it back ?!? You said no specifics....just medium attribute comparisons. Some of these are recycled by interests that want to leverage the new found social media. Bovine milk scares are so....'90's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 You said no specifics....just medium attribute comparisons. Some of these are recycled by interests that want to leverage the new found social media. Bovine milk scares are so....'90's. What was the spark to ignite the haystack though ? Just somebody said 'I"ll post this' ? And it went around ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 What was the spark to ignite the haystack though ? Just somebody said 'I"ll post this' ? And it went around ? Yes....I could post a YouTube video of the JFK assassination (Zapruder 8mm film) and some yahoos would tear off on yet another conspiracy theory campaign. What is old becomes new, but you gotta have "video". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Traditional media, like when this piece was produced, could control a message to the masses if their sponsor wants them too. Lawyers, lobbyists, money spent to keep the image that the they want the public to see. The amount of revisions clearly showed their goal in minimizing this peice and the real impact it would have on their bottom dollar, and the media company losed out on advertising dollars. So it's in both their best interest to change the story to fit their narrative. Mass corporate media can spread a message where not many will dispute it's statements. I am not too sure what to make of viral media, which is usually a digital internet format. There is a lot of them out there, but I am not sure they are meant to get a meaningfull message out. Kid Falls Off Bike gets 42 million hits. If the content is done right, and compelling and factual, people tend to listen and will say hey, this is important and spread it around. Maybe the viral media is not the same stuff the others are watching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.