TechTicker
educational technology, eLearning & emerging technology

While online video had existed previously, the inception of YouTube has made it commonplace, easily accessible, and has propelled user generated content into an entirely new sphere of delivery.  This has provided people with a new means of communication that goes a long way to injecting a dynamic sense of human presence into a realm previously dominated by images and text.  It is extraordinarily powerful and offers users a tremendous opportunity to reach out to others.

But having said that, there’s no doubt about it; YouTube can be harsh territory for content creators - especially new ones.

This stark reality seems to result from two key elements that serve to place YouTube in a quasi-reality where traditional norms are not as pronounced or adhered to.  These are: an uninhibited crowd-mentality inspired by YouTube’s massive userbase, and the sense of virtual anonymity afforded by the Internet.

Factored together, these two elements seem to alter or empower individuals’ perceptions of themselves to the point where they behave differently than they would in more traditional social settings.  This is visible both in the sorts of attention-seeking videos that are constantly being uploaded - be they confessional, provocative, or just plain odd - as well as some of the text comments left by viewers.

It’s the text comments that seem to be the harshest.  A poorly produced video or bumbling speaker can find their videos inundated by toxic comments and low ratings.

While seasoned YouTube veterans may have developed a thicker skin through exposure over time, for new users these sorts of comments can be debilitating and even lead them to abandon the application all together.   I’ve experienced this on two different occasions.

The first instance was as a new user and was a turning point in how I perceived YouTube and online video in general.  I had initially turned to YouTube as an experiment to see how things worked.  I’d uploaded some clips of myself playing guitar and singing, and surprisingly they had been met with fairly positive responses.  I hadn’t set out to attract attention, and yet people still watched and in some cases exhibited a vested interest in the clips.  It seemed very odd at the time.

Then I made the ill-fated mistake of doing an unscripted piece to camera and it got panned, badly.  In hindsight the comment wasn’t that big of a deal - something along the lines of “I’ve watched your other clips and was quite impressed.  This is crap.” - but at the time the criticism affected me deeply to the point where I removed the clip and didn’t upload anything new for nearly a year.

In my case this was a lesson that taught me the importance of preparation before hitting record, and it’s not something I’ve forgotten.  In a twisted way I suppose I should be grateful to the person who left me the comment, because most likely I wouldn’t have come to that conclusion otherwise.

Significantly part of the preparation for me is recognising the underlying purposes or objectives for recording and uploading the clip in the first place.  In other words, asking: “What is this meant to achieve?  What purpose does it serve?”

Once your objectives are clear in mind you are much better equipped to ignore the negative comments that come through.  The focus is on how best to achieve your objective; and ultimately assessing why this may or may not have happened.  The good and the bad comments that arise outside of it are largely irrelevant.

The other important realisation I had about YouTube came over time, and that was not everybody is a dickhead.  For every one harsh comment that comes through you tend to receive several nicer ones - or at least more politely worded.  Even more than that though, often times a harsh comment will be knocked back or criticised by subsequent viewers to the extent that some of the really popular video clips will have lengthy threads and arguments between viewers.  In that sense YouTube is developing into a sort of self-governing body in which Yin and Yang equalise over time.

In the context of my most recent contribution to my work-related YouTube account, the fact the only user feedback I’ve received has been negative is irrelevant.  (To date there have been 2 negative comments and a 1-star rating).

My purpose was to answer Duncan Riley’s call for input on what to broadcast about, and I’ve done that to the best of my ability.  The fact somebody payed more attention to the pile of laundry in the background than what I was saying was not nice to hear, but it is just one user’s opinion.  The fact Duncan added the clip to his favourites on the other hand implies my message reached its intended recipient and in that sense served its purpose.

I know I’m not good on camera and in most cases am better served by presenting my thoughts in text, but in this case I had something I wanted to say through YouTube and that was motivation and justification enough.

As one of my uni professors was fond of saying: “Once you know what to think, you’ll know how to act.”

References:

• “RE: What to broadcast about?“, Mike Bogle, YouTube, 13 April 2008

[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1078574&w=425&h=350&fv=intl_lang%3Den-us%26div_id%3Dstewart_swf2399410309_div%26flickr_notracking%3Dtrue%26flickr_target%3D_self%26flickr_h%3D375%26flickr_w%3D500%26flickr_no_logo%3Dtrue%26onsite%3Dtrue%26flickr_noAutoPlay%3Dtrue%26photo_secret%3Dd4c943b7d3%26photo_id%3D2399410309%26flickr_doSmall%3Dtrue] from www.flickr.com posted with vodpod

Speculation has finally given way to reality with Flickr’s launch today of video uploading. User’s now have the option to add video clips of up to 90 seconds and no more than 150 megabytes.

According to TechCrunch:

“The Flickr team, led by Director of Product Management Kakul Srivastava, spent considerable time debating the feature set and user experience internally before launch.”

Speculation had be rife regarding whether Flickr Video would go head to head with YouTube for control over online streaming media, however given the tool’s current 90-second cap it’s clear that Flickr has something different in mind - at least for the moment.  This seems to be re-inforced by the fact videos are featured side-by-side with still photographs.  Flickr seems keen to not differentiate between the two.

As TechCrunch continues:

“The goal is not to have people upload long videos or clips of copyrighted material. To reinforce that, videos can be only 90 seconds in length and 150MB in size (however these limitations may be changed later, Srivastava says).”

The Flickr Video Help site phrases things differently however, saying:

“We’re not trying to limit your artistic freedom, we’re trying something new. Everyone has endured that wedding video, where even the bride will fast-forward to the “good bit.” In fact, even Tara at FlickrHQ hasn’t made it past the first 90 seconds of her own wedding video.”

From a media quality standpoint the video image is crystal clear, and the media player that delivers the embedded clips is very unobtrusive.

As Webware notes:

“The system has been designed to scale any clip you can throw at it, including high-definition from high-end point-and-shoot cameras or your HD-capable camcorder. The one noticeable difference from competing services is the frame rate. Flickr videos are capped at a measly 12 fps, which is half the speed of film cameras, and a fourth of the frames captured by modern consumer digital cameras. If you have any fast-moving footage, it’s going to look like it’s come from an aging cell phone–which is unfortunate, because once you notice it on one video, you’ll notice it on all the rest.”

At the risk of seriously embarrassing myself I’ve uploaded this particular video to demonstrate the video quality users can expect from Flickr Video, and the user interface of the player.  Given the 90 second cap, it’s the only clip I had on-hand at the time; but in the interests of proper documentation I had to include something.  So goes the dedication of at tech blogger
References:

• “At last, Flickr adds support for video“, ZDNet, 8 April 2008
• “Flickr launches video hosting“, Webware, 8 April 2008
• “Yahoo extends Flickr with video“, CNet, 8 April 2008
• “Flicker Video Launches - A Unique Experience“, TechCrunch, 8 April 2008
• Flickr Video Help site
• “Lady Bugs Picnic“, Mike Bogle (acousticdad), Flickr

Call it a means to fuel (or decimate) the ego, to better target a demographic or market niche, or merely an interesting tidbit of numerical information, YouTube’s launch today of a detailed statistics tool has given users a great deal of insight into where their clips fit amongst the video viewing masses.

Via Official Google Blog (”Insight into YouTube videos“, 26 March 2008):

“…uploaders an see how often their videos are viewed in different geographic regions, as well as how popular they are relative to all videos in that market over a given period of time. You can also delve deeper into the lifecycle of your videos, like how long it takes for a video to become popular, and what happens to video views as popularity peaks.  For now, you can find currently available metrics by clicking under the “About this Video” button under My account > Videos, Favorites, Playlists > Manage my Videos.”

From a learning and teaching standpoint, with educators increasingly turning to YouTube and other online video streaming services as ways to not just locate content, but share their own, these statistics could provide valuable insight into the minds of their students.  For example, educators might determine which subjects students found the most interesting versus the least, compare like topics over the course of several sessions, or determine trends in study habits.

In an ideal world, viewing statistics might even be combined with qualitative feedback gathered via user comments, classroom discussion and student evaluations to provide examples of teaching quality that could be fed into promotional criteria.

Educational use of streaming video in such a public sense is still relatively new however, so it will be interesting to see what real use cases emerge from online video streaming services like YouTube.

On a personal note, I’m not nearly popular enough on YouTube to derive tremendous benefit from this tool, but I do find it interesting to see that my viewers originate primarily from the United States and Western Europe.

As testimony to my uncoolness, on the Popularity Scale where 100 represents the top clip in the region and 0 is…well…not, my rating is 0.35.

Guess I won’t be quitting my day job any time soon…

References:

• ”Insight into YouTube videos“, Official Google Blog, 26 March 2008)

I normally try not to buy into the rumour mill, but this is a story that just won’t go away. Furthermore, I’m really hoping it proves to be true.

As is being reported by a number of different online tech publications, most notably CNet News.com and TechCrunch, Flickr is allegedly slated to enable video sharing sometime in April.

Via TechCrunch:

“…rumors are flying that Yahoo intends to integrate video into Flickr very soon, perhaps in the next three weeks. Part of the delay may have been a long internal debate about how to make Flickr Video special and distinct from what YouTube already offers. They apparently have come to some product decisions, and will be making an announcement soon.”

It’s not surprising that YouTube is immediately brought into the discussion. With YouTube and online video virtually synonymous these days, how could you not mention them honestly. Yet while there is a fair amount of overlap in the user-bases of both applications, I see some distinct differences that are worth bearing in mind.

For example, depending on how Flickr envisages and implements their video service, support for video downloads could be extremely significant. This is why I’ve always favoured Google Video over YouTube. Google Video offers the option to download Video iPod/Sony PSP instances, whereas no such functionality exists on YouTube. There are of course a whole slew of applications that facilitate this activity - legal or otherwise - but the fact remains there is no native functionality in YouTube.

Whether this is meant to force users to continue to return to the site to imbibe their daily dose of advertisements, curb the spread of illegally uploaded material, or perhaps some other reason is unclear. Regardless, the absence of a download option has always been a huge strike against YouTube for me. I also don’t see how this is a developmental oversight.

Comparing video delivery and photo delivery is like comparing apples and oranges of course, but the fact remains that Flickr makes downloading content very easy. You give the users a suite of different access and download options and let them decide. I see no reason why this should be any different with video.

More significant that that though are the fundamental differences in community mentality that surrounds each application. This is more of a tangential consideration from an application perspective, and yet it’s still quite relevant for users trying to decide which service to use. To me YouTube is geared towards content you want to share with masses of people; Flickr is for more personal content.

YouTube is an arena rock concert, much like Woodstock; Flickr is an intimate acoustic show in a coffee house. The user mentalities are vastly different between the two services.

This more than anything is what Flickr needs to focus on when considering their video service. With Flickr you can still discern a sense of self amongst the user base which could yield some really valuable interaction. With YouTube you see a crowd mentality that can propel a video to millions of hits in a matter of months, but that can also produce some pretty nasty characters.

I don’t upload family material to YouTube for this reason - at least not publicly. With Flickr Video, I’d be more inclined.

References:

• “Flickr Video beta due in April“, CNet News.com, 16 March 2008
• “Video Coming To Flickr Soon. Really.” TechCrunch, 16 March 2008

Via Faces of Web 2.0 (”Odiogo translates your blog posts into podcasts“, 22 February 2008) I’ve just discovered the amazing Odiogo (pronounced “audio-go”).

Odiogo is an amazing innovation which enables you to have your text-based blog posts automatically translated into spoken audio recordings. The posts are then made available online as streaming audio or MP3 download.

In light of its feed-based nature, the recordings are also recognised by media players such as iTunes, Juice, and Windows Media Player. So your readers now have the option of listening to your posts on their way to work, and not just reading them.

Interestingly, the recording featured on Odiogo’s website pitches the tool as a way to avoid getting in trouble in the office for spending too much time browsing blogs and websites. I suppose I can see Odiogo’s relevance in that respect, but it’s arguably selling the tool short. To me its uses are far more valuable than that.

First and foremost are the accessibility considerations. Despite the fact screen readers and proprietary text-to-audio translation software are quite sophisticated these days, it is difficult to say how widespread their use is. Additionally I haven’t looked into the prices of these sorts of technologies, but I would hazard a guess that they aren’t cheap.

Use of Odiogo not only replicates the value of screen readers, it does it for free and incorporates popular RSS delivery methods that enable subscribing by podcasts or RSS aggregators.

Secondly there is the convenience factor. For some - particularly auditory learners - the option to sit back, close your eyes and listen to a recording is far preferable to reading the same content in text on a computer screen. Furthermore, anyone who has spent too much time online will tell you that computer monitors are not exactly easy on the eyes after a while.

From a content delivery standpoint Odiogo empowers webmasters and bloggers with the ability to expand their potential reader-base to an entirely new niche - and it does so without impacting upon the traditional textual delivery method.

Use of this service is incredibly easy. Simply visit Odiogo and enter your blog feed and email address at the top of the screen. After undergoing a quality control screening process you are sent two links:

• An enriched audio feed - which features your standard text-based blog post along with unobtrusive links to download or stream the MP3 file for each post; and
• Odiogo Control Page - This features the links to your latest files, several different options to share the feed, subscribe to the podcast in a media player, add to a website (e.g. iGoogle), or even stream all posts.

Tools are also provided for further integration into your blog. In the case of Wordpress users, Odiogo provides a plug that displays a listen button above each post.

Unfortunately the fact this blog is hosted on Wordpress.com means I can’t take advantage of this plugin, however I have burned my feed using Odiogo and will make audio recordings available for all future posts.

I’ll be including the feed link as a new option in the menu. You can also access this information below:

• Audio Enriched RSS Feed: http://podcasts.odiogo.com/tech-ticker/podcasts-xml.php
• Odiogo Control Page:
  http://podcasts.odiogo.com/tech-ticker/podcasts-html.php

References:

• “Odiogo translates your blog posts into podcasts“, Faces of Web 2.0, 22 February 2008
• Odiogo - http://www.odiogo.com/

WTF? iTunes v7.5 has added indexing of Ring Tones? An obvious ploy to fuel further consumer expenditure no doubt ­ and a thinly veiled one at that. I call it exceptionally silly. It’s not like I’m going to listen to endless repeats of the sound of my boss calling on the train ride home. Better yet let’s create a play list of my top 10 to help rock me off to sleep at night. Ugh…

I don’t see how this serves the user’s interests in the least ­ - only the vendors, by enabling DRM management.

Ring tones, how you mock me so!