Want some indigestion and entertainment? Look no further than YouTube chefs. Courtesy of Mike VideoEditGuy, it’s Time magazine explores chefs — ranging from a 95-year-old lady who grew up in the depression to a head-banging vegan chef. And Harley, the EpicMealTime guy who gives “Man vs. Food” a run for its calories. Who hasn’t heard of candy pizza?
Finally don’t forget the drunk chef, Hannah Hart, who is aided by the “fiery courage” of alcohol. She tried to quit after 1, then 3, then 5. Seems it became an addiction…
Okay I forgot I had a blog again. The past two weeks have included trips to (in sequence) Virginia, Minneapolis, NYC, Washington, D.C. and NYC again.
Enough about me. Let’s focus on YouTube today, since it’s turned 6 (that’s a near-death 94 years in TechCrunch years). If you missed the comment stream on my last post, you’ll want to catch up. It’s steamy, and Sukatra’s on a Charlie Sheen tear.
And after this humble attempt at “aggregation,” stay tuned for my patented “synthesis” below… what all this means to a changing ecosphere-marketplace-ecosystem-valuechain-universe.
YouTube is going mainstream with musician chart-toppers exceeding the once amateur-only club. Alas, the site is a free jute box rivaled only by Limewire in the day.
YouTube is embracing its new role, hoping attracting familiar faces will attract a larger base of “regulars,” who until now have chosen their own weblebrities.
Still, amateur hour isn’t over… especially if you’re a quasi professional. While no YouTube star has yet jumped mainstream with any endurance or consequence, we may see that change in 2012.
Most importantly, albiet somewhat tangental, what the hell happens to the sales of my “Beyond Viral” if Borders goes bankrupt? Perhaps you can find a local Borders that’s folding, and snatch a discounted copy of the book. Be sure to take a photo and let me know.
This post has been brought to you by the letter S. Big S.
YouTube has launched its answer to Hulu. Fred is doomed. Alf is back. The new sections are “shows” and “movies,” and involve content from Sony, CBS, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, BBC, and independent film studio Lions Gate Entertainment.
It’s hard to avoid Strike.tv in conversations or a story about new shows. And I’ll admit that I first tried not to like any of it, but I’m now trying to embrace the genre. I’m not there yet.
There are a few things that are unnerving about the increasing proliferation of quasi-professional online videos, even though the acting, production and writing is far 98% of YouTube videos.
Because the quality is so much better than typical online-videos, I feel obliged to regard at it as low-class television instead of clever online-video.
The 30-second prerolls set the bar higher than most can reach. Furthermore, many shows start with a Strike.tv bumper, and credits (like the one below). The ads eventually calm down (not every video), but a new visitor has no way to know that.
It’s hard to know what’s popular or rated highly on Strike.tv, since it’s not very interactive. Many episodes have no comments, and the site doe little to foster a sense of community that is the backbone of YouTube. Commercial parodies like “Real Man Beer” or “Koolaid Sex” are just… flat.
The site makes it hard to find a show, then track to the director to see what else he/she has done. You either need to search by actor, director or show. If we like something about a show, it’s not easy to find or “subscribe” to future work by that person/production.
I like knowing how much of a video is left without having that obstruct the image. The timeline appears only when you mouseover. So when you find shows like this OnStar parody (which starts well, but the second episode became a deal killer), you’d like to know how much more of the predictable “evil OnStar” you must endure before claiming you “gave it a chance.”
I do like how when you select a show, it’s rather easy to identify the first episode, and progress through them to “catch up.”
And every once in a while I’m pleasantly surprised. Watch the acting of this “Faux Baby” episode, and you’ll talent that deserves a wider audience. Especially with the missing laugh tracks. Just watch out for ads and credits that sometimes equate to 10 minutes of introduction for a 30-minute sitcom.
Slowly the top 100 YouTube “most subscribed” channels are professional content providers. But sxephil (a YouTube amateur who blogs about daily news) maintains that the amateurs “are the future” and YouTube should pay more attention to them, rather than become a Hulu.
I explore this debate in my video today… Also note a new trick I’m experimenting with at the end of the video. I run a few seconds of black and then add some links to other videos that are related or that I want to promote. You won’t see those unless you have “annotations” turned on.
A few of the links at the end of this video aren’t mine. But this technique is a smart way to keep people viewing your content, rather than selecting the random video that might appear over the player as “related.” One of the easiest things to do when you’re lost in a YouTube binge is select the next video it recommends.
So whatya think? Amateurs versus Pros. What’s ahead?
A recent study shows that the shrinking percent of US citizens that don’t watch online-video regularly are more likely (by 45%) to be boring than their video-watching counterparts. This study, mind you, is based not on a significant N or any official methodology. It’s just based on my own experience.