One-track minds

This post features three ethical dilemmas that have become known to me within the last few days. I thought I’d share them each with you and then allow you to make your own judgments on what the best course of action should be in each case. One of them involves YouTube, but they all, to some degree, involve YOU.

A while back, I joked that the visitors of Disneyland were being treated like second-class citizens. But little did I know how accurate my joking would become. Case in point: there are plenty of rides at Disneyland that us old-timers wish would return. But what happens when you close a Disneyland ride to everyone but a select few? What happens when a particular ride becomes only available to those who are willing to pay more? I’m sorry to say that has just about become a reality.

It involves the monorail, one of the most unique rides in the park. Back in the day, any guest in Disneyland could board the monorail for a short trip through the park, then out of the park over the parking lot (sigh, remember the parking lot?) and to the Disneyland Hotel. Hotel guests could then exit or enter, and then the monorail would head back into the park where we could get off and resume a day at the park. That’s how it used to be, but I’m sorry to say things have changed. On my recent visits to Disneyland, I’ve been unable to get on the monorail, as it was being used for a “one-way” trip to the hotel, and therefore only meant for hotel guests. I live too close to the park to justify staying in the hotel just so I can ride the monorail. A ride has been effectively closed off for me.

Compare this situation to what is going on at the San Diego Zoo. The elephants have been moved to a different location (check out my flickr post to see a bit of it). So what happened to the old elephant enclosure? Well, part of it is now a VIP area. For more money, you can have a little lunch there and have one of the keepers bring out some animals for you to look at up close. As I was riding the tour bus around that area, the bus driver told us that she had to be quiet as we drove past so that she wouldn’t interrupt whatever was going on in that area. Even the bus drivers are having their rights taken away from them so that the zoo can make a little more money. I think that’s similar to what is going on with the monorail.

I’m hoping that none of this is intentional on the part of Disney- but can we really assume that they never thought people might feel a little inadequate because they couldn’t afford a night at the Disneyland Hotel along with their Disneyland tickets? Can we really assume that no little kid would want to ride the Monorail, only to hear their parent say, “I’m sorry, but we’re not allowed to ride the Monorail?” I understand the policy, but I am frankly disappointed with it. It goes right along with charging people to have their names printed on the mouse ears. Despite the benefits to hotel guests, this policy is creating the "second-class citizens" feeling that I joked about earlier.

==================================================

YOUTREACHERY? The Internet was designed to bring information to others. As such, there’s a lot of information out there these days - “too much” as Duran Duran would say. And it’s not just written information, but audio information and video information. YouTube is probably the most popular spot for enjoying “video information.” And while the company seems willing to bend the rules for its viewers, it also seems willing to bend the rules to its own profit.

Here’s part of a great blog posting that sums up “The ethical dilemma that is YouTube“:

I received an interesting e-mail today from someone who had seen a video I posted to YouTube some time ago. It probably was embedded in one of my posts about Soupy Sales, who, sadly, passed away last week. This blog usually gets 200-300 hits per day. On Friday, the number of visitors increased tenfold. That's a tribute to Soupy, of course, that has nothing to do with me.

Anyway, here's the e-mail:
...I have a video that was recorded from television back in 1978......the guest was [someone] I used to work for. Upon [that person's] death, I created a memorial w/photos and such for his family, and also put the interview [into] this. I'd like to put it on YouTube, and have no idea... if I do this, will it be OK? Just a regular guy trying to share this w/the world.....your thoughts? Thanks.

And here's my reply:

YouTube requests that anyone who posts a video on their site be the person who created the video or owns the rights to the video. Everyone ignores this, most especially YouTube itself, which, once you subtract the funny home videos, is an empire built on copyright infringement. Don’t listen to anyone who says “it’s OK,” because it’s not. But YouTube usually looks the other way.

I think many people who post to YouTube, myself included, simply want to share something they have that others might like to see. Legally, it makes no difference whether you post something in order to make money or you’re just looking to share. But reasonable people can draw a distinction between something shared just for the pleasure of doing so… versus something posted in an attempt to capitalize on someone else’s creative work.

YouTube actually sent me an e-mail today about the Soupy video. Incredibly, here's what it said:

"Your video has become popular on YouTube, and you're eligible to apply for the YouTube Partnership Program, which allows you to make money from playbacks of your video.

"Once you're approved, making money from your video is easy. Here's how it works: First sign into your YouTube account. Then, complete the steps outlined [at a web address]. Once you're finished, we'll start placing ads next to your video and pay you a share of the revenue as long as you meet the program requirements. We look forward to adding your video to the YouTube Partnership Program. Thanks and good luck! "

Wow! If the video was mine, I might take them up on their offer. But I won’t do that in this case, because there’s no reason I should profit from something I didn’t create. I’m simply sharing something I like; I’m saying have a look, isn’t this great? Oh, I'll make a few comments, but really, this has nothing to do with me, and to turn it into a source of income would be wildly disrespectful to the memory of Soupy Sales – an entertainer I loved.

- Don

http://www.isntlifeterrible.com/2009/10/ethical-dilemma-that-is-youtube.html

I may hold the record for procrastination when it comes to YouTube videos. I’ve been on the site for years, and have still not posted any of my own vids! That will (I hope) change someday, but issues like this have to give me pause. I obviously have some video clips that I’d love to share that I do not own the copyright to. I doubt if any of them will be popular enough for me to get an e-mail about advertising. But what if they are, and what if I do? Something I thankfully don’t have to worry about yet. Something to file in the back of my mind along with cleaning the place, writing the great American novel, visiting more national parks. . .

=================================================

ATTACK OUR EMPLOYEE, GET PAID FOR IT: Back when I worked with the college newspaper, I had to endure a letter from a reader telling me what an idiot I was. That’s part of sharing your ideas sometimes - you have to put up with a lot of idiots who don’t get it. I think most of those who work at newspapers understand this. But what happens when somebody writes something that is critical of a reporter. . .and then that somebody gets paid by the newspaper for doing so? Check out this posting:

The Torrance Daily Breeze ran an unusual advertisement on Sunday. A local condo association bought five pages in the middle of the main news section to deliver a long screed about a bitter power struggle for control of its board.

But that's not what made this ad unusual. It's the fact that the ad singles out for criticism the Breeze reporter who covered the story. The ad's author, Cyd Balque, president of the Scottsdale Townhouses Association, makes repeated references to the reporter, Gene Maddaus. She characterizes his work as sensationalistic and biased.

It is not unusual for someone in the middle of a public controversy to be unhappy with the coverage. It is unusual for a publisher to sell that person an expensive platform ($10,000? $15,000?) to attack the reporter. After all, Balque could have written a letter to the editor. And if the stories were incorrect in some way the paper would have run a correction. On the contrary, the editors ran an editor's note in Sunday's paper saying they stood behind the coverage.

Should the other side in the condo dispute get five pages to vent their concerns? Should other reporters worry about retribution if they take on special interests with deep pockets? What about editorial independence?

http://reporter-g.blogspot.com/2009/10/adversarial-advertorial.html

The ethical dilemma here has to do with the work of the reporters and how that work is perceived by both the reporter and his bosses. I’m sorry to say that many in the newspaper industry consider reporters to be “moneymakers” rather than reporters. They see reporters as helping them make money, not as performing a valuable service. It’s easy to understand how they could “sell out” and allow such an advertisement to be published.

So did the paper do wrong? I think only the reporter himself knows the ultimate answer to that question. Hopefully, the reporter understands where the bosses are coming from, and has no real hard feelings about any of this. On the other hand, if the reporter is upset about it, then we have a big issue. For it doesn’t matter if the advertisement is justified or not - someone is upset. And nobody wants to work for a company that upsets its employees so it can make more money.

Are you listening, Disneyland? YouTube? Torrance Daily Breeze?

The suite life at Disneyland

Most visitors to Disneyland are completely unaware of the fact that they are, for all intents and purposes, peons. They are the lower class. They are the adoring masses who slave for the benefit of the power elite. Hey think about it. All the “important people” there are either big movie stars (Mickey, Donald, etc.) or royalty (Snow White, Cinderella, etc.) or both! This blatant inequality is evident regardless of the fictional characters. First there was “Club 33,” an exclusive dinner club for the upper crust right above the Pirate ride in New Orleans Square. No one is exactly sure how you can join this club. Honestly! Nobody seems to know! Or at least, nobody is telling. Talk about sinister! What do I have to do, bring back Snow White's heart in a box?

Now, we have word of the Disneyland “Dream Suite”. It's actually a beautiful suite that was apparently once intended to be Walt Disney's apartment in the park. (I thought that Walt's apartment was over the Main Street fire house. Two apartments in the park? Hmmm. One for Walt's wife, the other for Julie Andrews. . .I'M KIDDING, I'M KIDDING!!) Take a look at these awesome pictures of the suite, courtesy of Mouseplanet.com:

http://www.mouseplanet.com/articles.php?art=mm080131av

But how exactly does one get the chance to spend the night in this lavish suite? How much does it cost? Well, for the time being it's FREE- assuming you are very, very lucky and win a night there in their current promotion. Beyond that? Not even the folks at Mouseplanet are sure what this room will be used for. It makes me wonder if this room could be used as a dealmaker. For example:

DISNEY: We want to build another theme park over the freeway.
ANAHEIM: Well, I don’t know. . .
DISNEY: We’ll pay the city a gazillion dollars!
ANAHEIM: Well, I don’t know. . .
DISNEY: We’ll give the entire City Council admission to Club 33!
ANAHEIM: Well, I don’t know. . .
DISNEY: And we’ll throw in a weekend stay at the dream suite!
ANAHEIM: Well. . .okay.

Walt Disney once said “Disneyland is a show.” It certainly is. There are so many things to see and do that you could spend days there and not take it all in. But how would you feel if someone told you that you weren’t allowed to go on a particular ride? And when you asked why not, they said “because only special guests can do that.” By allowing Club 33 and this dream suite, Disney is (perhaps unintentionally) creating an “upper class” in the “happiest place on Earth.” I’m not sure how happy I would be knowing that I wasn’t allowed to enter a certain fine restaurant or check into a certain suite. Disney people, please don’t treat us like trash. That’s not what Walt would have wanted.

CAN YOU PICTURE THAT? : My family rarely if ever used Polaroid cameras. But when they first came out, they created quite a stir. For it was no longer necessary to drop off your film at the store and wait a week (!) or more to get your prints. Amazingly, a print would appear within a few minutes after you took the picture. It would come right out of the camera! True, you couldn’t make copies of it, but there it was! Your own picture within minutes! Amazing!
While checking out Todd Franklin’s “Neato Coolville” blog, I found out that Polaroid camera film is about to “fade away.” No more instant photos! Perhaps in this digital age, “instant” photos have become old-fashioned. But they’re not going away without a last look. Enjoy Todd’s Polaroid photos below:

http://neatocoolville.blogspot.com/2008/02/where-have-you-gone-polaroid.html

YOUTUBE, YEAR TWO: Yep, I'm getting older. It's hard to believe that my YouTube page will be a year old this week. Even sadder when you consider that I still don't have any videos posted! But thankfully, other posters have continued to put up their treasures for us to enjoy. I've only put a few of them in my favorites folder. There are many more, and I would encourage you to do your own search. Here are just a few of the things I've enjoyed in the past year on YouTube:

The "Jedi training academy" at Disneyland

John Denver and "The Lord's prayer"

Seekers concert footage ("Georgy Girl" and "Morningtown ride")

Ed Ames: They call the wind Mariah

Commercial: Sparkletts Water ("Me and Sparkletts water makin' friends!")

Commercial: McDonald's shamrock shakes (remember the Green Grimace?)

Also, it seems that YouTube and Viacom have come to terms with each other. At least there hasn't been much talk lately about shutting down the site due to copyright restrictions. Let's hope we've reached the end of all that. Or perhaps by this time next year, it may not matter, as the "world" makes the transition to digital broadcasting. Ugh! Will we have to convert everything to a new format again? I still haven't copied all my VHS stuff to DVD! Please, oh leaders of the video world, take pity on us. Don't change formats on us every decade! We can only handle so much.

YouTube: Is change good?

MORE MARION. A production photo from the next “Indiana Jones” movie shows the cast standing next to director Steven Spielberg. Among the cast are (of course) Harrison Ford and – a drumroll please - Karen Allen! Marion will return! YAY! For Marion fans like me, this is great news. I suggest the film be titled, “Indiana Jones and the cute girl.” I realize that “cute girl” doesn't have the same feel as “temple of doom”, but girls can get Indy in trouble too, can't they?

Check out the pictures on the official site.

http://www.indianajones.com

===================================================

NEW HOME FOR MUPPETS. Those of us waiting impatiently for the coming Jim Henson exhibit to arrive at a nearby museum soon will have another option. The Jim Henson company is donating several puppets – along with sketches and artwork – to Atlanta's Center for Puppetry Arts. The exhibit will be housed in a wing of the museum that won't be ready until 2012, but when it is, it promises to be a Muppet fan's paradise, featuring puppet characters from several Henson productions. This is great – a wonderful way to allow fans the chance to see the classic puppets up close. A definite thing to look forward to in 2012. Read about it here, along with some links:

http://muppetnewsflash.blogspot.com/2007/07/henson-collection-moves-to-atlanta.html

===================================================

BART AND ART: I do not regularly visit the Christianity Today web page, but a recent web search led me there, and I couldn't help but see that they had a link to a review of the new “Simpsons” movie. “Oh great,” I thought. “They're probably going to have a cow.” Knowing the humor of the Simpsons, I felt that a Christian organization would probably not shower the movie with praise. But I was wrong! The movie actually got a pretty good review. I guess it's because they realize that it's all in fun. That's the kind of attitude that is necessary to enjoy a lot of things. You need to be willing to accept that it is “ridiculous” in order to relax and enjoy it. Homer Simpson, for example, is so absurd as a character that he couldn't exist in the real world. His character is just that - a caricature. You laugh at him because you know that no normal human being would do what he does. The antics of the Simpsons mock just about everybody, and if you're ready to accept that, you'll probably survive the movie.

Blogging pal Fred Hembeck enjoyed the Simpsons movie, but he seems a lot more excited about what he saw in the previews. Bean! Read about it on his “Fred Sez” blog site. You can get there from the “Fred Hembeck's page” link in my links section.

=====================================

YOULOSE? For the five of you who visit my YouTube page - (sorry, I couldn't resist)- you may have noticed that some of the favorite videos are missing. Many YouTube users are switching their videos to “private” in an effort to avoid what may be the demise of “copyrighted” material on the site. One user has actually moved some videos onto a different video site. The loss of such videos may mean big changes for YouTube – changes which I'm afraid may not help the site's popularity.

A few weeks ago, I found a rare clip of Ed Ames (who I will have to do a blog about someday!) on YouTube that I considered putting in my favorites folder. The video was originally posted on a Sunday, and by Wednesday YouTube had removed it. That's not too bad a turnaround when you consider the hundreds (thousands?) of videos uploaded to YouTube every day. They're cracking down, folks, and unfortunately, it may mean the end of the site as we know it. I have to admit that what first drew me to YouTube was the chance to see material from broadcast TV or film that wasn't available anywhere else. I really didn't come there to watch home movies, or parodies. But that's what YouTube will have to become if they eliminate all copyrighted material.

Is there a silver lining? Well, you can still upload your (G-rated) home movies to YouTube, which could double as a place to store your valuable memories. Perhaps this is the chance for us home-movie makers to really shine and present material that can compete with some of the best cartoons/short films out there. YouTube's crackdown may force more innovative videos, but only from those of us who are blessed with the time and desire to do it. That's not too many people. It's just easier to put on an “Electric Company” clip than it is to think of something that's just as good, and then beg your friends to help you film it. If YouTube succeeds in keeping copyrighted stuff out, it will only be a boon to those who are patient enough to create good home movies – and those who are patient enough to watch them.

The other big winners are “web bloggers” and musicians who are able to produce a lot of material that can be uploaded quickly. If the “big names” of music don't want to be on YouTube, it means the little guys may rise to the occasion. It's like what happened at the “Old Fashioned Christian Radio” site. The “big guys” go away, but the small guys take their place. It may become easier for independent artists to make a name for themselves online. It may also create more of a challenge to TV & other media to compete for our attention.

Just this morning, I was going to look at some clips of classic TV material, only to find that those clips (and the poster) were gone from YouTube. If this keeps up, I'm not going to want to visit the site anymore. Why should I when there's nothing there I want to see?

======================================================

This blog is quickly turning into the “Mister Rogers story,” but I can't resist letting you folks know about a new production in the works. A fellow named Benjamin Wagner was lucky enough to visit with Fred Rogers at his summer home on Nantucket Island. Their friendship – and a certain conversation in particular - has inspired a documentary that is scheduled for next year titled “Mr. Rogers and me.” (Apparently no relation to “Roger and me.”) Judging from the preview, this film should be something very enjoyable and a fine tribute to Fred. You can learn about the show at the site below, which has a link to a blog about the making of the production.

http://www.benjaminwagner.com/news/mrrogers.html

I'm on YouTube. . .sort of

I’m pleased to announce the beginning of what I hope will be a beautiful friendship between YouTube and I. Announcing “The other side of the island” YouTube channel!

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=sesameguy2000

When you go to the site, you will probably notice that at the moment, I have no subscribers. There’s a very good reason for this. I have no videos. :)

Not yet, anyway. At the moment, my YouTube page is just a way of showcasing certain things I’ve seen on YouTube and would like others to see as well. It’s a chance for me to point out clips that I think are noteworthy. YouTube experts like sawing14s and mstatz have been posting clips that are worthy of note for several months now. You can see the ones I wish to showcase in my list of favorites on my “channel.” (“Channel” is YouTube lingo for my main YouTube page.)

My list of favorites will not be static. If I see another clip I like, I’ll probably add it to the favorites - and delete one of my old favorites. That’s not because I don’t like it anymore, that’s just to make room for current clips. I would like you to be able to click on exactly the clip you want from my front page, without having to search through several thousand pages to find the clip I‘m referring to.

Here are the first eight favorite clips that I’d like to present:

1. Gimme Five. Now THIS is classic! Perhaps you needed to grow up with Sesame Street in the 1970s to understand how special this is. David, Bob, Gordon and Luis join forces as “The Lovers of Five” to sing the praises of their favorite number. And not only is it ridiculously fun, but they sound great as they sing together!

2. Grover the Waiter: The Big Hamburger - Classic Sesame Street clip with Grover offering two sizes of hamburger to “Fat Blue.” (Dang, we need to give that guy a better name. Let’s call him “Mr. Johnson,” since that was his name in the singing telegram skit, okay?) Anyway, this is a great example of Sesame St. humor. As you watch the skit, you immediately begin to sense where the joke is going. But even though you know the punch line ahead of time, it doesn’t detract from your enjoyment of the skit. This is one of the more memorable “Grover as waiter” skits.

3. Mr. Rogers Farewell - Mister Rogers recorded a series of brief promos for PBS, and this is one that I had not seen before. It seems to be directed toward those of us who grew up with him, and it is something very special indeed. (By the way, other cast members like Betty Aberlin and Charles Aber also recorded promos for Mister Rogers. Anybody have any of those?)

4. Big Blue Marble Intro. - This is what video collecting was meant to be! Here’s a clip that I thought nobody else in the world would ever know existed!

If you ask somebody what “Big Blue Marble” was, you’ll probably run into few people who actually remember the show. If you ask them to sing the theme song, they’ll begin, “The Earth’s a big blue marble when you see it from out there. . .” But then if you stop them, and ask them to sing the OTHER theme song from “Big Blue Marble,” they’ll say, “What the (bleep) are you talking about? There was no other theme song from Big Blue Marble!”

But there was. And here is the clip to prove it. And although I do like the original theme, this second version is actually a nice song. It’s rare clips like this that make video collecting a personal joy. Here are the lyrics as best as I can transcribe them:

Closer, growing closer.
Perspectives start to change, things look a little strange
As we get closer.

Closer, getting closer.
No need to be afraid, our troubles start to fade
As we get closer.

Together is a word we must learn to understand
If we ever want to get to know each other better.
Together is a word that holds tomorrow in its hand
And tomorrow’s just another day to get together
And get closer
Closer
Closer
Closer. . .

5. Ernie & Bert role reversal - A unique clip of Ernie trying to imagine what life must be like for Bert. It demonstrates a little bit of empathy from our friend. It’s also one of the longer E&B skits, clocking in at over 4 minutes. YouTube is actually a great venue for showcasing Ernie and Bert, because most of their sketches are relatively short. In fact, the YouTube system could present a great opportunity for Sesame Workshop to showcase some of their classic clips. Are you guys listening? :)

6. Ernie makes Bert a soda - What a great clip! A rare scene of E&B outside their apartment, and a funny skit to boot. “What are friends for, Bert?” Watching this one skit could turn someone into an E&B fan. A must-see!

7. Sesame Street: Keeping the park clean - This clip may not look like much to the average viewer, but it is one of the classic clips from Sesame Street that I had been seeking for years. I’m so glad somebody posted this. Enjoy the beautiful music.

Does anybody know what the beautiful music in this film is? It sounds like a classical piece by Bach or someone like that, but for all I know it was just something specifically written for this film. Please listen to this piece, and if you DO know what it is, please send me a message at mailto:sesarognosp@yahoo.com, but take out the “nosp” from my address before you do.

8. Friends: Underwear promo - What the world needs now is more pictures of Courteney Cox Arquette in her underwear. Actually, this promo kind of set the stage for the entire series. It was a series that was designed to titillate without being too graphic. Many people spent the next ten years waiting for another underwear scene. And they weren’t entirely disappointed! Among other things, we got to see Courteney in a tight cat suit (rowr!) and a red bikini top. No offense is intended here. But it does seem like Courteney is still playing to essentially the same crowd with her new show “Dirt.” It’s basically a more gritty & graphic version of “Friends.” I’m hoping for a bondage scene next. That would make my life complete. I say she gets tied up within the next two years. (assuming the show is still around). Are we taking bets? :)

When I see a clip that I’d like to showcase, I’ll let you know in a blog posting, and point you back to my YouTube channel, where you can watch it. Since these clips aren’t mine, I am unable to trade them with you via the Internet or any other way. You would have to rely on your “YouTube” download or contact the original poster of the video.

“But where are YOUR clips?” you cry. Well, I’m very much still in the dark ages over here, and I find myself usually working with a very slow Internet connection or a very slow computer or both. It doesn’t make it easy to upload or download huge files. Perhaps later on when things improve, I can add some of my own stuff, but until then, I’m very glad to be able to show what others have done. And actually, in most cases, I can’t improve on what others have already posted.

As you know, YouTube is currently going through some disagreements with Viacom & others who feel that they are infringing upon copyright. In a sense, the outcome of all this could change not just YouTube, but the way we collect data from the Internet. It’s too early to guess what will happen. I’m hoping that both sides will be happy, but I’m especially hoping that the web-surfing public will be happy. Because if they’re not, then neither side really wins.

Who knows? Maybe YouTube is the beginning of real high-quality video sharing over the Internet. Maybe someday we’ll be downloading stuff that looks as nice as the highest-quality video. That day is not today. But until then, we’ll keep YouTubing.
Is that a new verb? Hey, “googling” is, isn’t it?

=============================================================

For a brief introduction to YouTube and a list of what you’ll need to view the videos, check out this post:

http://heroshaven.blogspot.com/search/label/YouTube

==============================================================

A funny thing happened when I visited the United States Post Office web page this week.
(www.usps.gov) My computer began to make this funny beeping noise. Oh no - what is Windows up to now? What stupid program is it trying to run? Well, the beeping noise continued, and it began to sound very familiar. My suspicions were confirmed when who should crawl across the web page but R2-D2!

Here, courtesy of TheForce.net, is the press release:

"WASHINGTON, D.C. & SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. – Tomorrow morning in neighborhoods and street corners not so far, far away, hundreds of official U.S. Postal Service blue collection boxes will be transformed into look-alikes of Star Wars character R2-D2 to promote an exciting new adventure on which the Postal Service is embarking with Lucasfilm Ltd.As the legion of Star Wars fans around the world first learned 30 years ago, R2-D2 is the feisty astromech droid who embodies the trust and dependability for which the Postal Service is so renowned.The R2-D2 collection boxes will temporarily replace boxes in highly visible locations across the country. Customers can, of course, drop mail into them just like any other of the 280,000 collection boxes, but there’s a striking difference visually: Not only do the R2-D2 boxes look like the ever-popuar Star Wars character, they feature the address of a website that gives clues about the real meaning behind this unprecedented promotion — uspsjedimaster.com.More details about the promotion will be announced March 28. Look for the R2-D2 mailbox near you… until then, “May the Force be with you.”

This is a mixed blessing. In the movies, R2-D2 is the most reliable droid you could ever hope for. But as George Lucas will tell you, working with R2 is not always a bed of roses. He often bumps into walls, or doesn’t move when you want him to. For the sake of all our mail, let us hope that neither rain, nor snow, or jawa attacks prevent R2 from his appointed rounds.
Now if only the folks from “Star Trek” get into the act. Then we’ll be able to “beam up” our mail! :)

A year (more or less) of YouTube

It’s been about a year since the “YouTube” web site began to catch on with the web surfing public. And it’s been quite a trip, with many people blogging by video rather than by text. I’m not on Youtube yet, but being a video collector, I can see its appeal.

Most Youtube videos are required to be ten minutes long or less. While that’s not enough time for a “real” movie, that’s more than enough time for a casual web surfer to enjoy a short clip. And there’s a lot of programming that lends itself to short clips - commercials, Sesame Street, cartoons . . . Wait, did someone say “Sesame Street?” Yes, folks, some kind Sesame collectors have put up some great clips from their collections on Youtube, and it’s been fun to watch them again. One gentleman has been posting a few Sesame clips that were originally from my collection, and I’m glad to have had a (very) small part in sharing them with others (He does all the hard work, I just gave him the clips).

The files download to your computer rather easily as long as you have three main things: The “flash” program installed (you can download it for free), a reasonably fast processor (my five-year-old computer had some issues with Youtube) and a super-fast Internet connection. YouTube on dial-up still works, but as you can imagine, it is very slow. I wouldn’t want to wait around to download a ten-minute Youtube video with dial-up unless I had an afternoon to spare, which most of us usually don’t.

Unfortunately, the system can be (and is being) abused. There’s a lot of crap on Youtube that young people (or any people, for that matter) probably shouldn’t see. They make an effort to keep things relatively clean, but as it is written, “seek and ye shall find.” Youtube is a site that most careful parents would probably want to block from their kids. That’s a shame, because a system like this has the potential to bring a lot of kid-friendly material as well.

Here’s a list of just some of what I’ve seen posted in the past year:

The long-lost Sesame Street “trash in the park” music short (a favorite)
Green Grover & monsters play “first & last” (Circa 1969)
Ernie writes a story (the clip from “Forest Gump”)
Michael Crawford’s farewell at his last “Phantom of the Opera” performance
Clips from “Return of the Ewok”
Bob, Gordon, David & Luis sing “Gimmie Five!”
Partridge Family Rice Krispies ad
The “Friends” underwear promos
Cookie Monster PSA from late 1970s
Jack-in-the-Box clown blows up (from early 1980s)
John Denver raisin bran commercial
Sylvania TV ad with Will Lee (Mr. Hooper)
Carpenters - “Thank you for the music”
Arcadia - “Goodbye is Forever”
Star Wars drunk driving PSA
Some idiots dressed as Pac-Man characters running through a library

Note that some of these clips are no longer available. There’s another fault of Youtube. If someone takes it down, it’s gone. You have to download the clips to your computer, and while there apparently is a way to do it, Youtube is not publicizing it, and it may not be worth it for the casual web surfer.

So why not just trade ALL video over the web now? Well, if you compare the video quality of your average YouTube video to the DVDs and tapes in your home video collection, I think you’ll find that the DVDs and tapes come out on top. Even the very clear Youtube clips wouldn’t look so great if you blew them up big enough to show on your wide screen TV at home.

The method I use to save the videos I like is definitely not perfect, but it “works for me,” as they say. I set up a video camera in front of the computer screen and turn up the volume on the speakers. Primitive, huh? (It reminds me of the days when I would put my tape recorder next to the speaker on my beautiful blue monophonic Lionel record player.) But if you want to watch a Youtube clip on your regular TV, I think for right now, this is one of the easiest ways to do it. I end up with a “video-friendly” copy rather than a computer file.

So YouTube is a lot of fun, and a step forward in video sharing. Still, I’m hoping for a day in the future when good quality video will be able to be downloaded from the web without much hassle. We’re already practically there when it comes to music, so can good video sharing be that far away?

===================================================

Just a slight update for die-hard Carpenters fans - that gathering in Downey has been rescheduled for 2008. That gives you another year to save up for the $100-plus ticket. :) Also, some museums have scheduled that “Jim Henson” exhibit for 2008. If they move the Princess Diana celebration to 2008, I may have to delete that January 1 post.

Check out the “Classic Sesame Street” section at the Muppet Central forum (in the links section) for an ongoing list of Sesame St. clips on Youtube.