Author Archives: George Gordon

The Writing with New Media Experience by George Gordon

Leave a reply

Project 1, Updated Think Piece:

YouTube vs. Content Creators

Project 2, Updated Podcast:

Digital Autopsy Episode 1: The Problem with YouTube

Digital Autopsy Podcast Script

Project 3, Flickr Images:

Flickr Album

Image Storyboard

Project 4, YouTube Video:

YouTube vs. Content Creators

Video Storyboard

Project 5, Markup/Markdown:

Website Reflection

Project 6, Twitter:

140 Characters or Less

Tweets Draft

Reflection

Throughout the course, we had to adapt an original 750 word think piece across various new media. Some of these I’ve used before, like making a video or working with HTML, and others, I’ve had to learn for the first time, like making a Twitter account or making a podcast. Ultimately, they were each fun in their own right and proved to bring about new ways of expressing an opinion and ways in which that message could be hindered.

When writing for an online audience, we had to think about how they read differently online than from a book. Our piece had to be tailored to that experience and be short enough that those same people would actually read it, thus the piece had to be limited but still get our point across. Adapting that piece to a podcast gave us the liberty of extending the piece as this was going to be done in an audio format that people will generally assume will take up a bit of time. I was able to include more content than in the initial piece, however, being audio only meant pauses, music, and sound effects needed to be added to the whole experience.

The images were much more difficult, expressing an issue that is of an online nature through pictures made me have to think differently about the whole piece. The video was easier as it is done similarly to that of a podcast, but now has a visual component added to it. This allowed for me to showcase even more of the issue through the images used within the video.

Due to the nature of our fifth project, where we couldn’t work with CSS, only HTML, made it more challenging. I had worked with HTML and CSS in the past and CSS is what allows for the websites to include all these nice effects. HTML only provides a basic structure and not the freedom to have everything look the way you want it to. Then, twitter was a whole new creature, one I had no experience with. Adapting a piece to series of 140 character tweets wasn’t the most difficult thing, however, hashtags and links could be used as these are parts of the medium and allowed to create a more cohesive experience.

I even noticed how the initial think piece grew and changed based on what I was able to say and show throughout the use of alternate medias. The original think piece was wordy and didn’t cover the general topic I was discussing and I believe through adapting to a video and podcast allowed me to go back and add in better content to cover the topic.

Overall, through these projects, I learned much about different ways one can express the same message. Some may be better suited for certain topics or they may be tailored for a specific audience. Twitter can definitely be used as a way to interact with a community and keep the audience updated instantly while a podcast can reach a huge amount of people at different points in their day. Knowing how to utilize various different mediums can help one successfully broadcast themselves to various different audiences. The message may have to be adapted or tailored to the specific medium but they each can highlight something new. There is not one that can clearly be said stands out against the others, but learning to work with more than just one will allow for a better message as a whole.

140 Characters or Less By George Gordon

Leave a reply

This is an archive of the series of Tweets based on the original think piece essay we did for project 1.

 

Due to Twitter having a 140 character constraint, the think piece had to be reworked in order to be sent. While we could use the language of Twitter in order to make our think piece fit more easily into a Tweet, I worked around that as I prefer not writing in that format. It made adapting the think piece a tad more difficult but that was how I wanted this to be done. Because certain parts of the think piece continued ideas that were not present in the Tweets, I had to reword them in order to still get the same message across.

Twitter allows us to hashtags that can be used to connect your Tweets to other people Tweeting about the same thing and due to the issue I was covering already having a specific hashtag associated with it, I used it in every Tweet. This would link to others expressing similar issues or ones who are being directly affected by the Content ID issue. However, the goal was still to reach an audience who had no idea about this issue.

Due to the project constraint of being limited to no more than 20 tweets, the whole think piece would not be covered. The actual think piece could not even cover the whole topic so I decided to add a link to my podcast and a video from Nostalgia Critic that would be able to give much more detail into the issue.

 

There were various responses to the Tweets from the class relating to the topic I had covered and some links to similar issues going on currently. However, I just made this Twitter account for this project and it would make sense for these Tweets to reach a huge audience.

  • Your Tweets earned 1.5K impressions over this 13 day period.
  • Tweet 17 and 18 had the most impressions.
  • 14 Likes, 13 Replies, 1 Retweet, and 3 Link Clicks.
  • Engagement rate was 0.2%

 

Markup and Markdown by George Gordon

Leave a reply

Knowing the basics of HTML is something beneficial to us, either to put on a resume or because it will be something we will work with in our future careers. For this project we worked with markup and markdown, both work with HTML but provide different ways of tackling them. With markup, we need to know how to structure HTML and learn its terminology in order for it work. Markdown does the markup for us, we just need to input the commands and we can get it converted.

Markup would be more beneficial if we were designing a website ourselves. Once you know the language, you can create whatever you would want and place your content in whatever format you deem would be the best to get your message across, however, with more control comes a more time consuming process. Markdown simply takes your text and commands and converts your content to fit a design that is already created. This would work well if you were creating content for a website that is already created and you simply need to add it in. It is a much faster process but it comes with limitations of having significant less control over the design.

With HTML, you have to consider a visual design to go along with what you have written. You have to create a layout, think about color schemes, and work with the limitations of HTML. You also have decide on whether you will include images, video, sources, links, or any other type of media along with your piece. Having a plain page with only text may not be the best way of getting your message across.

However, HTML alone does not provide the most control over a website either. Without the use of CSS, much of the design elements must be left out. HTML provides the structure of a website but CSS allows for the visual elements to be incorporated. Since the project limited our use to only HTML, the page I created could only be manipulated to a certain extent. I noticed that across Edge, Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome I had no complications based on what browser was being used to display the website.

YouTube Vs. Content Creators Video by George Gordon

Leave a reply

This video goes over the issue of content ID and fair use plaguing content creators on YouTube currently.

For the purposes of this project not much had to done in terms of audio aside from redoing the outro to fit to the resources available on YouTube. The main purpose of this, just like the think piece and podcast, was to bring awareness to this issue. However, because this is on the very website where the situation is currently happening, there are a plethora of videos covering this topic and I feel like the video has less of an effect because of it. It could work as a supplement to the podcast on the other hand.

The actual creation of the video was rather simple, reworking the script was not too hard and the story boarding helped visualize my ideas for actual use. Video is a medium that needs much more work done to it than a podcast.

I omitted an intro because this video can get straight to the point through visuals and is not needed when the topic is stated in the title unlike a podcast which has a theme that would need to be explained and what the episode would cover.

I have made videos in the past, none like these as they mostly mashup videos however, so I knew the process of making and editing a video. Even with this knowledge, I still had to learn how to use the new software I used and that took up various hours and then the actual editing for the video was time consuming. It made me understand when YouTubers say they can only make 1 video a week. I spent about 10-12 hours working on this video and it’s only 6 minutes long, I can only imagine videos that are over 30 minutes or more, especially when heavy editing is involved.

YouTube Images by George Gordon

Leave a reply

https://www.flickr.com/photos/139370553@N07/albums/with/72157665861661762

These are the 7 images that I believe capture what the original think piece was about. Each have their own title and description directly from the think piece.

For the images, I had to think of ways to showcase an issue that is entirely digital which brought about a set of issues. However, I believe that I was able to bring together a mixture of literal and some metaphorical photographs. Thankfully, the ability to include segments from our think piece will allow for some of these images to be better understood from the audience I am aiming for. Instead of having to rely solely on my ability to create a photograph that encapsulates the whole issue, I was able to explain it with the think piece I created.

For the most part, the photographs taken were done with idea of not having to edit much, it would be much simpler to have photos that, ideally, capture the message without the need for additional tampering. The software available to us to edit photographs is extensive and powerful, but it also comes with price of being something a bit more complicated to learn or master.

Translating a written piece into something that is entirely compromised of photographs, which is something I do not have much experience with, proved to be challenging. Many ideas, mostly the metaphorical ones, had to be scrapped due to limitations of weather, time, people, or environment.  In the end, I am not too sure if this venture was successful, but I aimed to do the best i could do with time and equipment available.

 

Digital Autopsy Podcast by George Gordon

8 Replies

The main goal for the podcast, Digital Autopsy, is to bring awareness to internet related issues and hopefully get people involved. In the first episode, we deal with the fair use issue on YouTube that is becoming a huge problem for content creators lately.

A plus of working on this podcast was that there was less constrains placed on it. For the think piece, we were limited to 750 words and that meant only a certain amount of information could be brought up but with the podcast, we are able to elaborate due to it being an auditory experience. Thanks to the use of music, adding in some more content can work rather well, however, with more content there needs to bridges and pause to allow listeners to catch their breath. As well as, adapting your voice to sound well and have a consistent tone.

Making a podcast also brings in the issue of music licenses, as we cannot just use any sound effects or music as those are protected under copyright. Overall, the work that was done was rather simple, the only issue was recording as getting into a silent area was rather annoying. If anything, the podcast allowed for to be done than what could be done in the think piece itself.

The audience I aimed for was general as it was more of an awareness-raising podcast thus the content couldn’t be too technical and be understandable to those who would have no idea these issues existed.

YouTube vs. Content Creators by George Gordon

Leave a reply

Updated Think Piece:

YouTube vs. Content Creators

YouTube does not help its content creators, the people who made the site what it is today.

Content ID is an automated system that only searches for material that has been submitted by rights holders and issues copyright strikes against channels. However, YouTube does not verify any copyright claims, they simply give channels strikes with any information or notification.

Content ID has been causing issues for content creators on YouTube since its implementation. In an article for Electronic Frontier Foundation, Amul Kalia said: “The problems with Content ID have always been in the news over the years, but lately have become more common, even comically so.”

Un-fair Use

Many creators are having their videos taken down and losing their monetization, which many of these creators rely on, because of copyright strikes. The Content ID system is there to defend YouTube against lawsuits, but at the expense of content creators, as it affects them on a large scale. A few examples of these are the Nostalgia Critic’s and I Hate Everything’s channels who were given false strikes for using footage of movies they were reviewing.

According to Stanford University, “Most fair use analysis falls into two categories: (1) commentary and criticism, or (2) parody.”

Then, by definition, the videos by these channels fall under fair use. However, YouTube allows these videos to be taken down regardless and those who make the claims will suffer no penalty for false claims. The channel, however, will still lose its privileges.

YouTube Support? Ha!

Now, this wouldn’t be an issue if YouTube offered better support that what it currently does. Various channels, such as Your Movie Sucks, and A Dose of Buckley, have made videos on this situation regarding fair use and explaining in detail about the process they go through.

YouTube has a three strikes clause, if a channel has three videos taken down the channel is deleted, regardless of the legitimacy of any claim. If a channel does have a strike, the only help they receive are automated emails and no other means of contacting YouTube; there is no human interaction of any kind.

Creators can, however, issue a counter claim, but must do it in 200 characters or less and attach their contact information in case the rights holder decides to sue them. On top of this, channels can only counter three claims at a time, even if they have over three videos with claims and if they decide to counter three at once and they all come back with takedowns, the channel will be deleted.

In 2013, YouTube issued a statement, which people assumed would be notification of them doing something to rectify the Content ID issue, but YouTube simply defended the program.

As a response to YouTube’s statement made that year, in an article for Kotaku.com, Stephen Totillo said “You won’t see an apology here. You won’t see a change in policy. You’ll see support for the Content ID system that’s been more broadly unleashed on the reviews, features, Let’s Plays and other video pieces created by YouTubers and watched by millions of gamers.”

If anything, YouTube has only allowed for this system to be abused by rights holders.

Community to the Rescue!

Until something is established to defend creators, the YouTube community is doing their best to be active and vocal about the issue in order to help their favorite channels. However, these are channels with thousands or millions of subscribers, smaller channels will have virtually no defense.

Just recently, the Nostalgia Critic uploaded a video regarding the fair use issue on YouTube, where he created, #WTFU. Many other channels have been using that hashtag to be vocal about the struggles they are going through. As for some reason, the system has been issuing strikes much more frequently as of late.

Sooner or later, another website will come along, one that actively defends its user base and YouTube will simply be forgotten.

Works Cited

Kalia, Amul. “Congrats on the 10-Year Anniversary YouTube, Now Please Fix Content ID.” Electronic Frontier Foundation. 2015. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Perez, Sarah. “YouTube Says It Will Offer Legal Protection Of Up To $1 Million For Select Video Creators Facing DMCA Takedowns.” TechCrunch. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Stim, Rich. “What Is Fair Use?” Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center What Is Fair Use Comments. 2013. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Totillo, Stephen. “Here’s YouTube’s Reply To Angry YouTubers About This Content ID Mess.” Kotaku. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

 

Original Think Piece:

YouTube vs. Content Creators

YouTube does not help its content creators, the people who made the site what it is today.

Content ID is an automated system that searches for copyrighted material that has been submitted by rights holders and issues copyright strikes against channels. However, YouTube does not verify any copyright strikes.

YouTube simply gives channels strikes with no information or any notification. The system is there to defend YouTube against lawsuits, but at the expense of content creators.

In an article for Electronic Frontier Foundation, Amul Kalia said “The problems with Content ID have always been in the news over the years, but lately have become more common, even comically so.” Content ID has been causing issues for content creators on YouTube since its implementation, mostly in regards to fair use violations.

Un-fair Use

Many videos are being taken down, losing their monetization, which many of these creators rely on, because of copyright strikes. A few examples of these are the Nostalgia Critic’s and I Hate Everything’s channels who were given strikes for using footage of movies they were reviewing. This is affecting various content creators on YouTube on a large scale.

According to Stanford University, “Most fair use analysis falls into two categories: (1) commentary and criticism, or (2) parody.”

By definition, the videos by these channels fall under fair use. However, YouTube allows for these videos to be taken down and those who make the claims will suffer no penalty for false claims; the channel will still lose its privileges however.

YouTube Support? Ha!

Now, this wouldn’t be an issue if YouTube offered better support that what it currently does. Various channels, such as Your Movie Sucks and A Dose of Buckley, have made videos on this situation regarding fair use and explaining in detail about the process they go through.

The only help they receive are automated emails and no other means of contacting YouTube; there is no human interaction of any kind.  They can however, issue a counter claiming but, must do it in 250 characters or less and the rights holder can now legally sue them. Channels can only counter three claims at a time and if all three are not resolved, the channel will be deleted, meanwhile their videos cannot be monetized.

In 2013, YouTube issued a statement, which people assumed would be notification of them doing something to rectify the Content ID issue, instead YouTube defended the program and that was all.

In an article for Kotaku.com, Stephen Totillo said “You won’t see an apology here. You won’t see a change in policy. You’ll see support for the Content ID system that’s been more broadly unleashed on the reviews, features, Let’s Plays and other video pieces created by YouTubers and watched by millions of gamers,” as a response to YouTube’s statement made that year.

If anything, YouTube has only allowed for this system to be abused by rights holders.

Community to the Rescue!

Creators can resolve the claims themselves but cannot do anything about the larger issue. Thankfully, their fan bases and the YouTube community are very active and vocal about this Content ID system and can push to help the channels.

However, these are channels with a huge following who are willing to help. Smaller channels or those who just starting up will have virtually no defense. Especially against the powerful corporations who file these copyright claims.

YouTube issued another response in 2015, stating they will help certain channels with false claims, however, this would only apply to big name channels and only those situated in the U.S. Again, leaving the little channels to fend for themselves.

Right now, content creators and the community are doing as much as they can to fight against the Content ID system and the website that has turned its back against them. As for some reason, the system has been issuing these strikes much more frequently as of late.

Sooner or later, another website will come along, one that actively defends its user base and YouTube will simply be forgotten.

Works Cited

Kalia, Amul. “Congrats on the 10-Year Anniversary YouTube, Now Please Fix Content ID.”                         Electronic Frontier Foundation. 2015. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Perez, Sarah. “YouTube Says It Will Offer Legal Protection Of Up To $1 Million For Select Video               Creators Facing DMCA Takedowns.” TechCrunch. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Stim, Rich. “What Is Fair Use?” Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center What Is Fair Use                             Comments. 2013. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Totillo, Stephen. “Here’s YouTube’s Reply To Angry YouTubers About This Content ID Mess.”                   Kotaku. Web. 11 Feb. 2016.

Reflection

For this think piece, my goal was to reach those who have no idea of the situation on YouTube right now. The issue here is of a much larger scale than simply on YouTube, however, I decided to focus solely on YouTube as I have seen many YouTubers I watch go through this problem with Content ID and fair use law. The only way to combat what is going on YouTube and the issue of creators having their content removed from the web is by being vocal about it and fighting against it. Maybe this can spark someone to get involved and help out these creators.

I can definitely see how blogging can be a useful way of bringing certain issues to the attention of others. Blogging can let us have a chance to get our word across, something that would be much more difficult if you spread it through word of mouth or letters. This is a much more accessible medium. Of course, you would need to build a credible foundation in order to gain a legitimate following.

I went about creating this think piece by focusing mostly on the limitations, as this would shape how much I would be able to write. I did the works cited page first and framed the piece around that. One thing I noticed was how the piece shifted as I wrote it, the initial concept wasn’t what it is now, it went from having no idea, to developing and executing one.