For example, back in the day, for a artist to get well known, they would have to be the lucky ones. I'm not saying that all the famous singers right now are just lucky, of course they have talent, but think about it, there are so many people out there that we never herd of that could probably sing as good or better.
A line from one of Jadakiss's songs titles Why, he says this "Why is a brother up North better than Jordan That didn't get that break." And I don't want to take away from Jordans glory, but Jadakiss could be right. A singer right now was found on youtube and just got signed, Alyssa Bernal. Its so easy to scout for talent now. We went from scouting events to just going online and searching for it. I believe that Web 2.0 and having youtube being so miscellaneous was Alyssas break.
The good ol days haha
I saw a connection in what Wienberg was saying and what Tim O'Reilly has said in his "what is Web 2.0" article. The connection was how Tim was talking about how other applications evolved into web 2.0, like for example mp3.com to napster, or personal website to blogging. I thought of this when I was reading what Wienberg was saying about how being miscellaneous is how these new web 2.0s got big in the first place. It makes sense, I'm sure that the New York Times are still read a lot even online, but when Wikipedia was being read more then that, you know that being miscellaneous is the right way to go.
"Many people now understand this idea in the
sense of “crowdsourcing,” meaning that a large group
of people can create a collective work whose value
far exceeds that provided by any of the individual
participants."
This quote is from the article Web squared, and it reminded me of how Wienberg was talking about gatekeepers. That was the limitation of having experts going through all the papers and choosing which ones would make the cut to get published. But just like what Tim said, "Users add value," and being able to post everything online is catering to everyone online. Its so easy, and its using the "long tail" really well that Chris Anderson talks about because the chances of someone being interested in your post, tagged photo, and other things is very high, even if its just one more person.
I agree with you, YouTube, other applications like it, and the web in general are making it super easy to discover talent, whether it's real or not, and expose it. Susan Boyle is another great example, nobody here in the United States heard of her until a video of her performing hit YouTube, then she became a sensation, both here and abroad. I just hate it when those people without any real talent hit it big on YouTube. Some are pretty funny though, like the "Bed Intruder Song" with that Antoine guy. Sweet pic of MJ and Payton.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite part of your blog was the part about Jordan and looking for new talent. It seems like people are starting to use the internet for jobs even when they are not looking for a job. From Beiber to that kid who lip syncs katy perry songs, a ton of people are getting careers just from uploading video's on the web. During this last winter break I was talking to my aunt about LinkedIn, she helps with internships here for the comm school, and we ended up having a long conversation about how resume's in general are becoming digital and that it is not going to be long until all resume's and applications are done that way. Juts something to think about.
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a really great point about artists being discovered on YouTube. Just look at Justin Bieber - he's the poster child for YouTube success. His success is in large part thanks to the users and exemplifies everything that Web 2.0 stands for. If it weren't for the millions of views his videos had, there's a pretty good chance Diddy never would have discovered him. I'm sure the same is true for Alyssa Bernal. When users USE the application, it tells people what the masses are watching and what is appealing to them right now. It all comes back to both O'Reilly and Weinberger's points that users are in control of content. I think that's what makes today's society unique - the people actually DO have a say and each opinion actually does matter!
ReplyDeleteGreat examples (and I love the use of photos, it makes my reading so much more pleasurable!) You do a nice job drawing connections between the readings. The importance, or lack of importance of gatekeepers says a lot about Web 2.0 (and/or Squared) and about the new orders of order Weinberger calls our attention to. Thanks.
ReplyDelete