March 17, 2007

How the candidates fare in the YouTube marketplace of ideas.

The statistics are right there for everyone to see. We don't care much about the official campaign videos they are dumping over there. We want to see them in their unplanned comic moments.
... Clinton's most watched HillCast, titled "Roadmap Out of Iraq," comes nowhere close in popularity to the video showing her singing "The Star-Spangled Banner" off-key at a rally in Iowa. The HillCast has been viewed more than 15,000 times since it was posted on Feb. 17, the out-of-tune moment nearly 1.1 million times since its posting on Jan. 27.
I'd be worried sick about human nature if it were the other way around.

And what we really love is a guy like James Kotecki:
Several times a week, Kotecki, a self-described "political geek" turned YouTube celebrity, advises presidential candidates on their campaign videos -- from his dorm room at Georgetown University....

Kotecki has one recurring message to the candidates and their expensive media advisers: "The Web isn't TV." As in, Web viewers don't expect to be spoken to, they expect to be spoken with. It's a passive experience vs. an interactive one.
"The Web isn't TV." That's profound -- I mean, with respect to YouTube. YouTube looks like just an easy place to put stuff that would be on TV (if only it were way better or paid for or something). What makes YouTube not TV? The searching and sorting mechanisms, linkability, embeddability, displayed statistics and comments, the ability of viewers to put up response videos, like Kotecki's...

Let's watch some Kotecki:

Actually, Kotecki is a little too scripted and artificial for my taste. But I love the idea of this genre, talking back to the campaign videos. If the candidates do what Kotecki wants and talk back to the talk back, it's going to get mighty talky, and the candidates might get suckered into talking too much to people who are really only a sliver of the electorate. So many dangers lie ahead. So many bloggable dangers. Vloggable dangers!

Why, one could vlog advice to Kotecki about how his videos are a little too scripted and artificial. And there's another thing about the difference between the web and TV. You can't tumble into infinite regress on TV.

ADDED: Kotecki stops by the comments and defends himself against the charge that he's too scripted. Here's Kotecki's blog. Whatever I said about taste in vlog-styles, I have to approve of his taste in templates.

Here's Koteck talking with Jeff Jarvis about campaign videos.

21 comments: said...

Please fix spelling: cadidates

Laura Reynolds said...

I don't think you can win, by what shows up on You Tube, etc., but I do think you can lose. "Talking too much" is one way. I really like politicians who do things, not what they say. My attraction to Rudy comes from that.

Hillary is all about talking, gee let's have a conversation. No, lets listen to what you've scripted.

The old saying that character is what you do when you don't think anyone is watching you. I want to know what people say/do when they are not giving a speech

Ann Althouse said...

Thanks for the typo correction. It's so annoying that because it was in the title, it's now part of the permalink!

trifecta said...

My cadidate for worst deliberate changing the subject from the Alberto Gonzales hearings is Ann Althouse.

I would present her with a George Bush autographed box of Kool-Aid mix but sadly Barney absconded with the item.

I think Hillary Clinton obviously is going to lose too. Both Ann Althouse and Dick Morris hate her, plus the teens aren't downloading Hillary Clinton in bikini videos off the youtubes so you know she has lost the trend setters.

I think she should just toss her ginormous campaign account into funding an Ayn Rand center in her mansion that the Chinese funded when Bill gave them all our secrets.

Oh, who got kicked off American Idol this week Ann? I go here to get that kind of news!

dave™© said...


Laura Reynolds said...

Good grief Trifecta! How's junior high treating you these days?

dave™© said...

As I said before I was so rudely deleted, I get a real kick out of Blithering Misogynist Idiot's complete and utter refusal to post about Abu Gonzales or L'Affaire Plame.

Of course, what would a "law professor" have to add to the conversation about such topics?

Delete away, Oh Blithering One!

ShadyCharacter said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ShadyCharacter said...

Ann, are you involved in some new blog scrum with someone?

To Trifecta, Glenn is that you?

To Ron, Mr. Greenwald is that you?

To DaveTM, Glenn is that you? "You a Law Professor" So unintentionally hilarious!

To Blackno1, Mr. Greenwald is that you?

This to shall pass. It'd be cool if you could set up a registration system specific to this blog, though I'd probably be out on my butt pretty quickly I still think it would make it a better blog...

The Mechanical Eye said...

On a blog called Althouse, Ms. Law Professor talks about what she wants to talk about! Outrage! J'Accuse! Remember the Alamo!


AllenS said...

Can you imagine the hell someone had to go through, to potty train dave?

Laura Reynolds said...

Brilliant analysis Ron. All those things you try to mock me with, don't matter to me and don't matter to you about anyone you'd vote for.

Hi, I'm James said...

Thanks for blogging about me! Sorry I'm a bit too scripted for you - I do that to make sure that I cram in everything I want to say into an interesting 2-minute timespan. Nonetheless, I appreciate the post, thanks very much.

Ann Althouse said...

Hi, James. Congratulations on getting a WaPo story about you. i understand the motivation to go more scripted. Keep doing what works for you!

reader_iam said...

Lord, what IS it with people insisting on dictating what others blog about at their own places? I find this perpetually amazing.

You gotta wonder: Do these people go into coffee shops, demand beer and when they don't get it, stage a sit-in?

Perhaps a better analogy: If they know that the owner of a vegetarian restaurant is an omnivore in her personal life, do they vociferously insist that she has an obligation to put steak on the menu? And then start pissing all over the customers in hopes they'll stop patronizing the restaurant?

I mean, what the hell?

Paco Wové said...

"And then start pissing all over the customers in hopes they'll stop patronizing the restaurant?"

Yes, I think so. Because otherwise they're being hypocrites, man.

It's all about speaking TRUTH to Power.

Mortimer Brezny said...

His style is stolen from The Wine Kone. No, I'm not kidding. The Wine Kone is this comedic You Tube sensation who was made the You Tube feature numerous times (i.e., he was featured on its front page). It is obvious to anyone in-the-know that Kotecki is ripping him off.

Mortimer Brezny said...

That's an example. The guy has dozens of imitators.

Randy said...

What I saw was very good. Reminded me of two of my favorite professional reporters & vloggers: Walt Mossberg of the Wall Street Journal and Jeff Jarvis. It was interesting to see James and Jeff talking together, and see how similar their reasonably spontaneous conversation is to their prepared presentations. While I understand how some prefer no script, I think there is definitely room for/a need for prepared presentations such as James is quite capable of delivering.

In a nutshell: Entertaining. Informative. Succinct. Gets my bookmark.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

I thought he was fabulous. Perfect for a YouTube [and also quite polite to the Blogstress]. He might be giving Patrick Ruffini a run for his money as the next blogging political wunderkid.

TMink said...

That one particular kind of troll is perhaps being paid or has marching orders. They take a liberal cause and twist and turn almost any post into a criticism of Ann. These guys and gals fear the center.

It was interesting, at the anti-war protest, someone was quoted as saying that this was a bipartisan war, that you cannot trust the Democratic Congressmen either. That is from the same litter. (Nice pun that!)

You know who they are, lots of attack and accusation, VERY little substance. Every now and then they get in a tiff with someone who can think and get their ass kicked and hush up for awhile or abandon a particular thread. I find them boring, but fun to take occasional pot shots at.

Do they really think that they persuade anyone? That is what confuses me.