Michael Verdi

Excerpted from Richard BF’s post:
As you can see, the lines between various definitions are blurred, and in many cases are either contradictory or redundant. They span from big media’s interpretation that everything is a videoblog, through to Adrian Miles, who says vogging is a very specific form of hyperlinked media content, and everyone in between who has their own definition.

For every definition, there’s the tendency to virally include other examples. Is this a videoblog, is that a videoblog, “but that means this videoblog must also be a videoblog”… and in the same way that the lines between genres are blurred so are those of my definition of videoblog.

There are some videoblogs which fall outside of my definition, which probably are videoblogs, and some which fall inside my definition which probably aren’t. Where we cannot objectively draw the line, I’m suggesting that we subjectively draw instead upon the spirit of videoblogging:

Individuals creating personal media of a new genre and form, not being controlled by big media, and not simply reproducing that which is traditional in big media, such as television and movies.

So, for the sake of a definition, this is roughly what I think a videoblog is:

Short, personal, not for profit, mostly non-fictional, video on the web. Snapshots of life.

The last part is important. Last year I tried to popularise the term instant videoblogging. The idea being that videoblogs are created on a whim, not preplanned, just snapshots of life. I still believe this to be an important aspect of videoblogging.

Comments Closed – Read and comment on the original post.