Saturday, February 17
2007 fans, plans & meanderings
I'm not too sure just why the topic of UK outdoor blogging has gained such a momentum recently, but I'll be interested to see how it rides. No doubt it will blow itself out when the topic palls. Then again perhaps we bloggers are just becoming too incestuous for our own good, reading and commenting on each others blogs as we do.
But if this pulls in new readers who join in the general debate I can't see that as a bad thing.
Anyway I hope we get to a conclusion soon because its way past time for my 2007 trip planning and all this blogging is getting right in the way
;-)
Maybe the recent influx of new bloggers has created a bow wave which just needs riding for the moment?
Meanwhile Atkoman has been playing with an innovative idea on the presentation of his blog, which may again be another signal of the general approach to trying ideas around the blog/podcast format.
Hhhm . Now there's a thought. Are we moving towards an on-line magazine format, multi-media, multi-contributor, without the overheads of staffers, offices and reportage? We decide what goes in, or not. That would also fit in with the advertising model that some commenters have referred to (and thanks BTW for leaving the comments - the feedback makes it easier to keep on a posting and fuelling the debate constructively)
Check out the report in today's Times about the fall in lad mags circulation and more interestingly the launch of on on-line alternative - Monkey from Dennis Publishing. Food for thought.
As for me, I've one or two thoughts myself over blog format, but I should get the 'Rock n Roll' theme out of the way first before I start down that avenue.
Comments:
I definitely want to try out some more blogrammes. Taking the format of a tv programme, but using YouTube (or similar clips) to assemble your programme. I've tried selling the format to a mate who is a local history researcher and has worked in television.
Not really, just meta-media, using the web as an archive of stock footage to construct a programme about a single place (eg Stornoway) or a year (eg 1939). The media is the message.
Rrr - I get it now. A great idea to use stock footage, and then it's an edit job. But surely there's footage rights in the mix somewhere?
Now we are starting to get into the territory of 'rights' and I think it needs to be made clear who owns what, and how much (or not) they want, if you use it!
For example is you use someone's content and it portrays them or someone else in a bad light, then you could get sued for slander!
If you take a photo, or shoot a video or record some audio it belongs to you. But what if the person or property you capture in the process doesn't want to be published?
What if someone copies and pastes the content of this blog into something commercial and gets money for it. Are you going to ask for some money John?
For example there's no copyright or permission information on this blog, so you are potentially wide open ....
This is where it starts to get sticky ;-)
#
posted by 
: 19/2/07 11:34 am
Sorry wrong! Just seen that line at the bottom.
Shouldn't it be at the top?
#
posted by : 19/2/07 11:35 am
(copyright protected)
Blimey Bob - you're tripping me into a state of near paranoia.
;-)
(copyright protected)
I'd agree we need to be careful. There's been at least one blogger I can think of whose work has been wholesale cut/pasted into a UK national newspaper at least twice, with little acknowledgement or compensation. And he was a copper!
My approach has always been based on general politness. Acknowlege your sources, and expect the same in return. If you cock up, say so and fix it.
To date my meanderings have not been abused, and I'd probably be amused if they were, but then this is not my livelihood or an income source. Its the principle not the cash that would get my goat
And in case I do get truned over that's what my secret honey bear breeding programme is there for. You'd better wikepedia that reference it'll make sense, trust me lol.
(copyright protected)
.....and having just checked your site I can see you're definitely on the ball with this one!
"..Unauthorised content use will be invoiced at £10 per word and £1000 per image, audio or video file or part thereof"
[Hmm, better err on the safe side here - this guys one sharp cookey lol: all rights reserved by bobC - http://www.backpackinglight.co.uk]
Blimey - you can pack up the daytime job on those rates!
;-)
(copyright protected)
Post a Comment
<< Home
But if this pulls in new readers who join in the general debate I can't see that as a bad thing.
Anyway I hope we get to a conclusion soon because its way past time for my 2007 trip planning and all this blogging is getting right in the way
;-)
Maybe the recent influx of new bloggers has created a bow wave which just needs riding for the moment?
Meanwhile Atkoman has been playing with an innovative idea on the presentation of his blog, which may again be another signal of the general approach to trying ideas around the blog/podcast format.
Hhhm . Now there's a thought. Are we moving towards an on-line magazine format, multi-media, multi-contributor, without the overheads of staffers, offices and reportage? We decide what goes in, or not. That would also fit in with the advertising model that some commenters have referred to (and thanks BTW for leaving the comments - the feedback makes it easier to keep on a posting and fuelling the debate constructively)
Check out the report in today's Times about the fall in lad mags circulation and more interestingly the launch of on on-line alternative - Monkey from Dennis Publishing. Food for thought.
As for me, I've one or two thoughts myself over blog format, but I should get the 'Rock n Roll' theme out of the way first before I start down that avenue.
I definitely want to try out some more blogrammes. Taking the format of a tv programme, but using YouTube (or similar clips) to assemble your programme. I've tried selling the format to a mate who is a local history researcher and has worked in television.
Not really, just meta-media, using the web as an archive of stock footage to construct a programme about a single place (eg Stornoway) or a year (eg 1939). The media is the message.
Rrr - I get it now. A great idea to use stock footage, and then it's an edit job. But surely there's footage rights in the mix somewhere?
Now we are starting to get into the territory of 'rights' and I think it needs to be made clear who owns what, and how much (or not) they want, if you use it!
For example is you use someone's content and it portrays them or someone else in a bad light, then you could get sued for slander!
If you take a photo, or shoot a video or record some audio it belongs to you. But what if the person or property you capture in the process doesn't want to be published?
What if someone copies and pastes the content of this blog into something commercial and gets money for it. Are you going to ask for some money John?
For example there's no copyright or permission information on this blog, so you are potentially wide open ....
This is where it starts to get sticky ;-)
For example is you use someone's content and it portrays them or someone else in a bad light, then you could get sued for slander!
If you take a photo, or shoot a video or record some audio it belongs to you. But what if the person or property you capture in the process doesn't want to be published?
What if someone copies and pastes the content of this blog into something commercial and gets money for it. Are you going to ask for some money John?
For example there's no copyright or permission information on this blog, so you are potentially wide open ....
This is where it starts to get sticky ;-)
#
posted by : 19/2/07 11:34 am
: 19/2/07 11:34 am
Sorry wrong! Just seen that line at the bottom.
Shouldn't it be at the top?
Shouldn't it be at the top?
#
posted by : 19/2/07 11:35 am
: 19/2/07 11:35 am
(copyright protected)
Blimey Bob - you're tripping me into a state of near paranoia.
;-)
(copyright protected)
I'd agree we need to be careful. There's been at least one blogger I can think of whose work has been wholesale cut/pasted into a UK national newspaper at least twice, with little acknowledgement or compensation. And he was a copper!
My approach has always been based on general politness. Acknowlege your sources, and expect the same in return. If you cock up, say so and fix it.
To date my meanderings have not been abused, and I'd probably be amused if they were, but then this is not my livelihood or an income source. Its the principle not the cash that would get my goat
And in case I do get truned over that's what my secret honey bear breeding programme is there for. You'd better wikepedia that reference it'll make sense, trust me lol.
(copyright protected)
.....and having just checked your site I can see you're definitely on the ball with this one!
"..Unauthorised content use will be invoiced at £10 per word and £1000 per image, audio or video file or part thereof"
[Hmm, better err on the safe side here - this guys one sharp cookey lol: all rights reserved by bobC - http://www.backpackinglight.co.uk]
Blimey - you can pack up the daytime job on those rates!
;-)
(copyright protected)
Post a Comment
Blimey Bob - you're tripping me into a state of near paranoia.
;-)
(copyright protected)
I'd agree we need to be careful. There's been at least one blogger I can think of whose work has been wholesale cut/pasted into a UK national newspaper at least twice, with little acknowledgement or compensation. And he was a copper!
My approach has always been based on general politness. Acknowlege your sources, and expect the same in return. If you cock up, say so and fix it.
To date my meanderings have not been abused, and I'd probably be amused if they were, but then this is not my livelihood or an income source. Its the principle not the cash that would get my goat
And in case I do get truned over that's what my secret honey bear breeding programme is there for. You'd better wikepedia that reference it'll make sense, trust me lol.
(copyright protected)
.....and having just checked your site I can see you're definitely on the ball with this one!
"..Unauthorised content use will be invoiced at £10 per word and £1000 per image, audio or video file or part thereof"
[Hmm, better err on the safe side here - this guys one sharp cookey lol: all rights reserved by bobC - http://www.backpackinglight.co.uk]
Blimey - you can pack up the daytime job on those rates!
;-)
(copyright protected)
<< Home
All site material © John Hee - ask before you snatch
