f*ck Video

[Saggy]

I am really sick and tired of videos on the internet. I mean, I know everyone else in this great, majority illiterate world really likes videos, and for the most part they're supplemental to a piece of text like a news story so they're okay. However, more and more I'm coming across the situation where someone publishes something on the internet in a video format only, requiring you to sit and listen to their annoying, inane commentary when you could have simply skimmed through a block of text to find the specific information that you need. This has been happening to me more and more when it comes to things like tutorials on using popular software applications, or on tutorials on how to do something on the computer. Granted that in some cases the best format for this is video, command line interface video tutorials do not fall under that umbrella however.

 

I guess at this point everyone is wondering what my problem with video is. You know, "Sag, what's up, it's a quicker and more concise form of communication. What are you, some pretentious asshole that just wants to read everything?" YES I mean no, but kind of.

 

I mean, look, you know why I loved the internet when I first started using it? Because I could put some music on, or put some TV on, and just sit and browse around, skimming text and reading dozens of pages at a single time. I mean, I would literally read sometimes three articles at once, while simultaneously looking up digressing parts of the articles as well. When I needed some technical information, I could open up several tabs ( or windows back in the day...) at once, skim and gleam the information I needed almost effortlessly, and when someone wanted me to read the mundane happenstances of their daily lives, I could do so with ease and a modicum of interest.

 

Now I'll be sitting there trying to listen to some music, and my friend will send me a link to a YouTube video. I will say, "What is it?" and he will say, "Just watch it." I will explain to him that I'm listening to music ( and probably already doing something else ) and can't be bothered to watch it unless I know what it is, at which point he tells me he can't be bothered to tell me what it is, "Just watch it and find out." So I fall for it, watch it, and it's some stupid f*cking video of his little brother singing like a dork or something similar, and an entire thirty five seconds of my valuable time has been f*cking wasted, plundered, and never to be returned to me. Is it so f*cking hard to add a caption to it, so that I could spend 5 seconds deciding, "Hey, I don't want to watch your sissy little brother sing," and go back to what I was doing.

 

 

Honestly it's not so much the actual videos and their technology that bugs me, it's just the way people are using it. The seemingly cold rejection of ASCII and text is slowly starting in the same way that cable news networks replaced the news paper or movies replaced literature. It's not that I can't appreciate a movie over a book or a short news highlight over a trite article in the paper, but the problem lies in two areas A) People are assuming any video is better than any text B) People are wrong.

 

I mean really, the other day I watched a guy give what he thought was an "opinion" on a game on his "video blog". All he had to say was ( and I paraphrase )...

 

"If you don't like the PS3's selection of games, then buy an Xbox instead of playing brand loyalty."

 

However, through all of the stuttering and inarticulate near incoherent driveling of the person speaking, it actually took about 45 seconds for him to force that that out. Though that's not even close to my personal favorite: When a non-native English speaking person opts to record himself instead of just writing, and then has to write out a transcript of what he said because no one can f*cking understand him anyway. Mmm, efficient.

 

Though these are really just the worst examples, there are a lot of people that are perfectly coherent and articulate, and do things in a video format because it's more convenient for them as opposed to writing and editing. I can respect that, but at a certain point, it is really just not needed and only lends itself to a lot of material being published by people who you would otherwise not want to hear from. A shining example of that, could be the 13-15 year old kid comparing his Dell to his Apple Air notebook ( by the way, if you think I'm speaking of a specific video, try searching for something like that in YouTube and witness the horror. Here is a sample: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1-roWW3LoQ)

 

Now if you like to hear pubescent teenagers mumbling and uttering, "Umm" and inane comments about laptops his parents probably bought for him, I guess these types of videos are up your alley. However I can't just pick on young kids, there are an equal amount of 20-40 year old "hacker" types that like to post tutorial videos on how to use Metasploit to "pwn your friend at LAN parties". Do we really need information ( that they just gleamed from a manual or hacker website ) regurgitated and passed on to us by these rejects like a f*cked up version of Telephone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers). I swear I watched one that lasted for five minutes of a guy chain smoking and digressing on to other topics, and I still don't know what his f*cking point was to this day, but it apparently had something to do with why XP was the best operating system ever.

 

 

Putting aside my textual preference and the really terrible examples ( since there's enough bad text websites out there that I could basically say the same things for ), what irritates me the very most is that even when I find a video that i would like to watch in a news program or something of the sort, there winds up being some kind of technical difficulty or format incompatibility. I mean, if you're going to make a news story only available in video, you should try something universally portable like Flash instead of sh*tty ass Windows formats. I can't count how many news publications I've missed because they want me to install a crappy Windows Media Player plug in.

 

My point being that text is universal, and to a very large extent. I mean, putting aside technical issues... What if I were deaf or I spoke Chinese? Then I wouldn't be able to view that information unless there were text for it. I mean, I'm half deaf, and if I have to crank my volume up to ear splitting levels just to hear you, I'm not going to watch it.

 

 

Seriously though, I don't see what people's aversion to text is. I mean, is the general population just collectively illiterate? I know that I won't find a lot of people from this site that agree with me since there's a certain demographic at play here, but I know that in my home town reading is a skill that some are envious of and most regard as tedious. It's kind of a sad thing honestly, but I'm starting to see that dynamic on the internet as well. The idea that, "Yeah, I can read well, but I don't like to," degrades into, "Reading sucks," into, "I don't need to know how to read." Now I'm not saying that YouTube videos are going to cause illiteracy, what I'm saying is that illiteracy causes YouTube videos.

 

 

I suppose as more and more people connect to the internet, and the technology becomes more accessible in both affordability and ease-of-use, there will inevitably be a great reflection between how we share information and entertain ourselves in the real world and how we do so in the cyber-world as well. So to me it's no surprise that the internet is veering toward being less-and-less text oriented and more video oriented--so it is everywhere else in the world. However, we all know ( well maybe not all of us ) that the itnernet started from an extremely basic, text-only format, and only just years ago multimedia was not nearly as popular as it is today. I for one probably would not know how to write and read as well as I can if it weren't for that factor, and I wonder today as people in the past wondered about TV when it ushered in the video format as the defacto information format... Are we going to wind up losing our literary prowess, become a world of dullards whose vocabulary is comprised of buzzwords they heard on the nightly news? For a long time I wondered this myself, and regarded the internet as the force that would prevent it from happening, but now I'm not so sure.

 

We still read newspapers and magazines, I'm not suggesting we don't. However, to meet what end? I would assume that in the beginning days of television, radio and news paper ( or print in general ) were the major players in how people informed and entertained themselves. As TV gained massive popularity, you started to see the dynamic of people saying, "Why read when you can watch it?" and I'm sure anyone that grew up in the 80s or 90s remembers their teachers trying to encourage them to read a newspaper like it was something to be proud of, and thinking about watching the movie version of a book instead of having to read it when there was a book report due. Of course there was also all the clamor of, "Oh, reading is better for you, watching TV will make you retarded," and I'm not quite sure what the general consensus there is, but when you look at the world of today with the internet...which combines both video and text... Well, it becomes kind of clear that a new text vs. video divide is going to begin, and I've got to say that even though I'm totally rooting for text, I think video is going to win.

 

tl;dr

 

I f*cked your sister and she's carrying our love child. We're going to name her Sony Sawyer.

[Slynke]

Find another hobby

[Jaypricemann]

I see where you're coming from. I absolutely hate having to watch videos, especially news. If I want to read an interesting story, I want to read it, not watch it. I don't want to have to sift through all the bullsh*t in the video, instead of a nice Ctrl+F, or just skimming the article. I didn't really agree with all of the article, but most of it, I do have matching opinions with you on.

[Don Garcia]

Put that text in video form.

[Exkabewbikadid]

ICBIRTWT! (I can't believe I read the whole thing)

 

Well I certainly agree that too many things are being recorded that would be better left to text, but really I can't say I've come across too many instances where I had no option other than to watch a video to get the information I wanted. I suppose news stories would be a big target here, but I actually seek most news out on the internet because I can't stand watching it on tv.

 

When looking for game reviews I've noticed that the bigger sites like Gamespot have been doing video versions for a while now, although they always have the written form to coincide with it. This is actually nice to have these options because I typically read the review first and if there is anything that comes across as unclear e.g. glitches, I have the option of watching the review for visual clarification.

 

Youtube is full of retarded dim wits, but I expect that going in. Usually the rating of a video is enough to tip me off that it's not worth my time.

 

 

[Robinski]

The major irony here is that the sort of people who are being negatively affected by this trend of increasingly using videos in favour of text won't read your post at all. Although, I know you know this.

 

It may seem a bit pretentious and high-and-mighty but I do tend to think that, along with the the illiteracy side of things you mentioned, issues always seemed dumbed down in video formats. What I mean is that, if you watch a five minute news report on the internet you're likely to get much less information on the topic than if you read an article on it; it's all down to time and attention spans, people who want to watch a video don't want to spend 5-10minutes doing so but more like 40s-3/4minutes. On the other hand, any article of decent length will take you a good few minutes to read and digest, allowing for more side information to be included aswell, as youve already dedicated a larger amount of time to it.

[Adam Jensen]

I know what you mean. People make more and more stupid useless videos. YouTube is full of sh*t now. Like that kid that played MW2 for 17h straight and then he made a video where he's crying how the game sucks and then he punched the wall repeatedly with his hands until they started to bleed. Useless f*ck should have just jump to his death. Nobody cares, grow the f*ck up douchebag. I like video reviews though. But not amateur reviews. I hate those.

[rubba_dukie]

I'll admit I skimmed through your post only because reading large articles gives me a headache.

Reading text from a page is easier than from a computer screen.

 

There are many stupid youtube videos out there, I'll admit to watching them just to make myself feel more normal.

Hopefully one day the people posting stupid videos on youtube realise how embarrassing they are.

I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years time text forums would be extinct. Instead just someone posts a video about a certain topic and everyone responds with video.

 

Sure it's easy to sit and mong out on youtube while watching videos. It's fun to sit down and read a book, a magazine, a newspaper even. Then I don't have some youtube twat's voice running through my head, just my own.

 

[Rebel]

I hardly watch a lot of videos online. The most I probably watch are news stories and that's only if I can't be arsed to read the actual article. But I hardly ever pop my head into Youtube just because I don't have the urge to sit down and watch a bunch of videos just because I can. I only pop my head in when it comes to me wanting to know sh*t for a game. Which then they really are a lot more helpful than reading through a bunch of text.

 

When it comes to tutorials I prefer the writing with the pictures in so that you can still visualise what's going on. I find that a lot of tutorial videos are really hard to actually see what the hell is going on or the person doing the tutorial pretty much whispers which means I need to turn my speakers way up.

 

I have a couple friends who send me links to videos while on msn and I'm exactly the same I don't want to watch it if it isn't going to be interesting. I'll ask what its about and they'll just say ''Just watch it and find out'' That really does piss me off.

 

Honestly though, if you find videos on something you're looking at and really don't want to watch it then use google and find a written one. Its not hard.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

i understand your frustration and annoyance more than one kind of medium is unavoidable once the emergence gets moving.

 

The problem with the whole thing is far deeper than literacy and illiteracy, though, yet the latter has much to do with the whole problem.

 

Seriously, most people are lazy and have grown accustomed to low brain activity of passive learning vs high brain activity of active learning. That is the difference between reading and video.

 

So, in essence what you are saying is that your development and continuation with high brain activity through the use of you literacy has found the proverbial slug of low brain activity mediums and technological information sources more of a burden than an asset.

 

In the past similar yet not as plentiful feelings and thoughts past the minds of the sages when the circus, taverns, wenching, theater and even the bard seemed like a waste of time to the avid reading sage behind shelves and stacks in a jungle of hand written books!

 

High brain activity stimulates critical thinking and problem solving while low brain activity stimulates, for the lack of a better way of putting it, being along for the ride and saying,"Wwheeee!".

 

Laziness is a curse for many and sometimes we have to stoop to finding a happy medium to pass information along....

 

Sad, I know.

 

 

The added edits are blackened in spoiler fashion. If you take offense easily then just leave it alone.

Edited November 28, 2009 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[unopesci]

But I don't have a sister...

[poopskin]

I love text an video, but i like text a bit more. i'm actually trying to read through the 1,600-page long Windows Vista Resource Kit right now!

[Rhoda]

I have no problem with videos, even popular videos. Videos that accompany a news-story, they're fine too; usually it's in the case that you have something to read after watching a minute-or-two long dramatization on the article.

 

However, when it's in the case that the entire story is condensed into a video, that is a problem. They're usually poorly edited, riddled with bad sound quality and drags more than pedaling a bike through hummus.

 

Also, why do people with the most annoying voices seem insistent their podcasts and video blogs over YouTube are the "ones to watch"? That's always got me.

[Otter]

Heh, f*ck that. My career is based on video, and for the most part, web video. High quality video on the internet was a holy grail for ages.

 

Now, I can't comment on your nostalgia for the gold old days, but I can mention that video is still really in its infancy on the web. There are some old conventions that are just hard to evolve from - a trackbar, for instance. Or confining video to a little square or rectangle.

 

Anyhow, good luck coping with the now, Kenny.

[3niX]

Well...

 

But I don't have a sister...

Me neither.

 

 

 

 

As far as I remember, internet has always been full of retarded stuff.

Retarded articles, guides, chatrooms, videos, sounds... you name it, we got it.

 

You just tend to notice it more nowadays.

 

I find it quite simple... if the info aint any good for you then ignore it.

For example, Ive blocked plenty of people (even close friends) on MSN just because they have had nothing wise to say and just spam. Its a question of... info being available to you, not you being available for the info.

[SanAndreasManiac]

the title reminded me of this

 

sorry for posting a video , would be harder to sing that song myself by text

 

 

ON: well, the text language being mudered by videos is what TV and Youtube are based on, and what makes people so dumb, think of Homer Simpson, he's a perfect example

TV stole a lot of reading from books, Internet came to revert that, since it startd text only, but then Youtube came and.....

that video situation is even worse for who is a slave user of slow dial-up internet, needless to say, it's a pain in the ass to lose hours of lifetime to load a single video about how to to write "Mississippi"

Edited November 28, 2009 by SanAndreasManiac

[ghost of delete key]

Hey, Sag-

 

There's still always Usenet!

[Xeon]

Since I'm constantly listening to music when I use the internet, I hate any site with noisy flash content, or people linking videos. Having to pause my music every 5 seconds isn't something I like; part of why I hate using Skype or voice clips on MSN. I'd be perfectly content with nothing but text. Edited November 30, 2009 by Xeon 

[Mark]

One theory I have for user generated videos is the fact that the majority of people that do them are pretty much just monkeys on typewriters anyway. Why type using spelling, punctuation and grammar when a video of you saying "Well...you know...uh...you know what I mean" takes the original author a fraction of the time and is less taxing on their little brain.

 

We need to protect our poor subspecies before it's too late!