This interesting article from Videogum suggests that 2006 was the golden age of Viral Video. The author sets out a convincing case. 2006 was when YouTube truly exploded as an online activity (and time waster), and the moment before the platform was appropriated by advertisers. There were a lot of fun and quirky videos that appeared. It's reasonable why one would argue this as a golden age.
I'm not sold.
I have a problem with calling any of the videos he cites viral videos. I also have a problem with viral video as an advertising concept.
The Shining mash-up or the Numa Numa guy, or any video of some little kid being kicked in the balls by a donkey--aren't these just videos? They are just on a new platform--a TV with a bunch more tubes? The fact that they were spread--were viral--is the networked distribution methods that the Internet allows. It's not that the videos are uniquely infectious or have some novel magic in them that compells us to share them.
And we've always wanted to share moments in video, film, TV. Consider "I Love Lucy." That Lucy has such mad schemes. And that Vitametavegamin skit was pretty darn funny. I'd love to share it with you . . . Wait a second . . .
That was convenient. But I could also have sent you a video tape. Or acted the skit out. Or described it in writing.
You get the point. Sharing is not novel. The Internet just makes it a bit quicker to share on a mass scale.
So, back to the golden age of viral video: I'd say post 2007. It's OK Go and the Volkswagon dominatrix commercial and LonelyGirl15, not the skateboarding dog. Because the only way a video could even be a viral video is in its use by advertisers, or shameless micro-celebrity wannabes. Without the intention of creating a video that will spread, there's no viral, just video.
That doesn't mean that viral video is a good thing or a good use of an advertisers time. It's the opposite, a poor use of a new media to spread an advertising message and generally a tremendously inefficient one. I learned that from experience. The real bacterium here are advertisers, and marketers, out there who think they're creating a revolution, when they're actually just putting edgier TV spots on a new platform. That's kind of sick.
Pass it on.
Videogum [via Gawker]
I'm not sold.
I have a problem with calling any of the videos he cites viral videos. I also have a problem with viral video as an advertising concept.
The Shining mash-up or the Numa Numa guy, or any video of some little kid being kicked in the balls by a donkey--aren't these just videos? They are just on a new platform--a TV with a bunch more tubes? The fact that they were spread--were viral--is the networked distribution methods that the Internet allows. It's not that the videos are uniquely infectious or have some novel magic in them that compells us to share them.
And we've always wanted to share moments in video, film, TV. Consider "I Love Lucy." That Lucy has such mad schemes. And that Vitametavegamin skit was pretty darn funny. I'd love to share it with you . . . Wait a second . . .
That was convenient. But I could also have sent you a video tape. Or acted the skit out. Or described it in writing.
You get the point. Sharing is not novel. The Internet just makes it a bit quicker to share on a mass scale.
So, back to the golden age of viral video: I'd say post 2007. It's OK Go and the Volkswagon dominatrix commercial and LonelyGirl15, not the skateboarding dog. Because the only way a video could even be a viral video is in its use by advertisers, or shameless micro-celebrity wannabes. Without the intention of creating a video that will spread, there's no viral, just video.
That doesn't mean that viral video is a good thing or a good use of an advertisers time. It's the opposite, a poor use of a new media to spread an advertising message and generally a tremendously inefficient one. I learned that from experience. The real bacterium here are advertisers, and marketers, out there who think they're creating a revolution, when they're actually just putting edgier TV spots on a new platform. That's kind of sick.
Pass it on.
Videogum [via Gawker]
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment