On oublié de regarder les vidéo buzz de ces 10 dernières années.

Sim, @xuxameneghel se rendeu ao hype e chegou causando, escrevendo em caixa alta e ganhando o apelido carinhoso de #LOUCADOCAPS. Toda a história a respeito do erro de grafia cometido por Sasha, filha de Xuxa, no Twitter, a falta de educação de alguns usuários para com a apresentadora e a defesa da coruja de que a filha foi “alfabetizada em inglês”, você fica sabendo nesse ótimo texto do Mauricio Stycer.

O que apresento para vocês é o amor, o carinho, a dedicação que o fã @Davis_Reimberg demonstrou para a sua “rainha” Xuxa em vídeo para todo o mundo ver e se identificar. Ou não. A versão brasileira do clássico LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE! Com vocês, MEXEU COM A XUXA MEXEU COMIGO!!!!

Muitos usuários do “site Twitter” não entenderam tamanho amor de um fã pelo seu ídolo, o que obrigou @Davis_Reimberg a upar mais um vídeo pedindo Mais Respeito Brasil!!!

É esse tipo de fã dedicado que nossas celebridades twiteiras merecem.

Complete Track List with timecodes:

Billie Jean (Michael Jackson) | Jizz in my pants (Lonely Island) - 0:19 | Wannabe (Spice Girls) - 0:23 | Mario Kart Love Song (Sam Hart) - 0:39 | Over the Rainbow (Judy Garland) - 0:50 | Girlfriend (Avril Lavigne) - 1:00 | No woman no cry (Bob Marley) - 1:12 | Never gonna give you up (Rick Astley) - 1:16 | Harder, better, faster, stronger (Daft Punk) - 1:34 | White&Nerdy (Weird Al Yankovic) - 2:03 | Tribute (Tenacious D) - 2:18 | Numa Numa/Dragostea din tei (O-Zone) - 2:28 | Angry video game nerd (Rolfe & Justin) - 2:42 | Mamma Mia (ABBA) - 3:03 | Smoke on the water (Deep Purple) - 3:37 | A whole new world (Disney) - 3:59 | Let it Be (The Beatles) - 4:14 | Eye of the tiger (Survivor) - 4:26 | Leave Britney Alone (Me / Chris Crocker) - 4:45 | Thunderstruck (AC/DC) - 5:02 | Feel good inc. (Gorillaz) - 5:15 | Metropolis (Dream Theater) - 5:30 | Pokemon Theme - 5:48 | Through the fire and flames (Dragonforce) - 6:00 | Chocolate Rain (Tay Zonday) - 6:09 | Listen to your heart (Roxette) - 6:22 | Hips Don’t Lie (Shakira) - 6:31 | Killer Queen (Queen) - 6:38 | Time is running out (Muse) - 6:55 | When you say nothing at all (Ronan Keating) - 7:14 | Road Trippin’ (Red Hot Chili Peppers) - 7:24 | Power Rangers Theme - 7:33

Batshit Crazier.

I was beginning to have doubts about my sanity when I wrote Batshit Crazy. Now though, all doubt is gone; I’m crazier than a syphilitic Al Capone with mercury poisoning, on 14 hits of acid, while stuck in the Divine Comedy. I’ve come to realize that I have hundreds of different personalities. They don’t have their own names and they mostly know of each others existence, which I take to be a good sign, but it’s still pretty bad.

I started to really wonder and worry after overhearing a mother tell her daughter, “just be yourself, and everything will work out.” Holy increased Lithium intake Batman, if somebody said that to me, I don’t know what the hell I would do. Who I am at any given moment depends on so many factors and contingencies that when multiplied by the possibilities, must be in the hundreds. I would put Sybil to shame in modern psychology folklore.

Maybe the most unusual symptom of my psychosis is how different I am depending on the day of the week. My Tuesday morning self and my Friday afternoon self would not talk to each other if left alone together in an empty room. The only thing those two would have in common would be a mutual hatred of my Saturday night self. But that self wouldn’t care because he rarely remembers anything after uttering phrases like, “Hey lets do tequila body shots off of big Sally!”

It’s not just days of the week that influence who I am either. Some other weird, but for some reason major factors include caffeine intake, whether I’m tired and hungry or sated and energetic, the last time I had sex, the last time I had sex with another person, how close I am to a vacation, even whether the dog rolled around and made me laugh, or shat on the floor and made me frown.

My multiple personalities can be observed when I meet someone new or when I’m with an old friend. It’s weird because if I was on a first date, I wouldn’t make jokes about the time I snorted blow off a stripper’s ass in Vegas. It was an entirely different personality that did that to begin with. But then after a week or two of knowing someone I seem to shift into more of a relaxed, even a fart friendly persona. Come to think of it; all the women in my life must have known how nuts I am because they’ve all mentioned that ‘I’ve changed’ at some point. Then again though, they did too; nobody forgot to check the toilet paper supply before dropping a deuce during the first week. Did they? They must have all been as Britney as me.

I have different persona’s come out when I’m around strangers as well. I slip into a certain character when I’m pitching something to someone, or meeting potential in-laws for the first time. But I am completely different person if I meet someone at a football game or in a bar fight. It’s like I don’t even know who I’ll find looking back at me in the mirror sometimes.

Lately I’ve noticed that the rate of my decline into dementia is accelerating. Any little thing will drive the previous personality back into the shadows and bring a new one forth. I can change on a dime. I can change just from finding a dime. For instance, right before having sex I’m really excitable, alert, horny, I even have an elevated heart rate and blood pressure. Then as soon as I’m done…BAM, I’m lazy and mellow. When I quit smoking, most of the me’s wanted to quit but a few didn’t. A few me’s still thought they were the cool rebel who would walk a mile for a camel. Then I’m arguing with me. One time I had to repudiate myself for taking me to Atlantic City while drunk. At other times if I’m sentimental, even a song can change me.

Now, I’m lost when it comes to important decisions. Are we going to move back to the US in October? Holy Jim Jones, what voice should I let decide that one? I’m worried that I’ll start bringing out the wrong persona at the wrong time. What if I bring the “Hey let’s do tequila shots off of big Sally!” to meet the in-laws? What if I bring the ‘middle of a Steeler game’ me to a meditation class? I’ll get myself hurt if I bring my just after sex self to my next UFC cage fight. 

I’m thinking of going to psychiatrist but after I tell her that I’m nervous, she’ll tell me “just be yourself,” and then inevitably I’ll snort blow off of her ass. See my problem?

Another funny episode of Tosh.0 aired last night, and I’m compelled to write about it because this is the kind of hilarious original content that Comedy Central should be making more of. “Is it Racist?“, Asians doing Christopher Walken impressions, Chris Crocker (the ‘Leave Britney Alone!’ kid), and forcing the audience to watch Two Girls One Cup all in the same episode? Great television. And as I mentioned back in May, it saves me from wasting my own time trying to sift through the garbage on YouTube to find the hidden gems. Keep up the good work Tosh & Crew. As for Comedy Central, renew the show! For fuck’s sake, how many seasons did you give Carlos Mencia?

UPDATE – In case you were wondering what the answer is, Mind of Mencia was on for four seasons and a total of 45 episodes.

“LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!”

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Zobaczcie na 0:58 min.

I kto by pomyślał że ten filmik ma prawie 27 milionów wyświetleń

I’m going to stray quite a ways away from the usual stuff on RTGD, because it’s just too hard for me to ignore.

Perez Hilton, the highly popular and snarky blogger, apparently was attacked by the road manager of the Black Eyed Peas, after a verbal confrontation between Perez and Will.I.Am, a member of the group. Will was allegedly sticking up for Fergie, who is the female lead of the group and also a fairly common target of Perez’s on his website.

Perez escalated the argument admittedly by calling Will two highly explosive words, both starting with F, and one used derogatorily to describe Perez’s sexuality. This was done in front of about 200 people in front of a club, and then Perez got popped in the eye with a punch, reportedly by the road manager.

Predictably, Perez is taking full advantage of the situation, releasing a tear-filled 11-minute video that makes that dude’s “Leave Britney Alone!” video seem calm and collected. I found the whole thing highly amusing, but also a sad statement towards… well, just about everything in our society’s pop culture appetite.

I used to find reading Perez’s website enjoyable, if only to get the scoop on celebs and chuckle at the gossip. Yet I finally had to cut all those sites off cold turkey after it just became to ridiculous to read and believe all the things that were being written on the net, most of them with little credibility behind them. Listening to 45-year-old ladies take the things being written and perpetuating them as truth… not good.

Anyway, here’s a good SFW snippet of the Perez Hilton video, for your enjoyment. I’ve heard plenty of people talk about Karma, Perez deserved it, etc. I just hope that this incident is the tipping point and from here on out he’s much less popular. That’d probably hurt him more than a little welt under his eye.

Zac Efron’s disheveled and yet ‘perfectly arranged at all times’ long locks, will make a cameo appearance in Entourage for HBO. Efron shot his scenes in LA on Tuesday morning for the TV show that parodies the inside workings of show biz. Hollywood celebrities and entertainment news is always hot on Horiwood.Com.

Here’s 10 Hot Posts Right Now in the City of Angels.

1. JOHNNY DEPP IS AN ISLAND LAD CHILLAXER

2. EMMY ROSSUM TWEETS ABOUT HAVING JON & KATE NIGHTMARES

3. THE PERSON HAVING THE MOST TROUBLE SEEING CONAN OBRIEN IN LA IS…

4. JAY LENO BOUNCES BACK ON SEPTEMBER 14

5. AFTER BRUNO, EMINEM TEAMS UP WITH JAY-Z

6. MEGAN FOX LOVES HER SOME BEYONCE FASHION STYLE!

7. TWILIGHT LOOKS TO THE FIRST NATIONS INDIAN SISTERHOOD TO GIVE THE FRANCHISE NEW CASTING BLOOD FOR ECLIPSE

8. MEN WHO ARCH THEIR EYEBROWS?

9. HEIDI’S CRYING PAID OFF: SPENCER AND HEIDI EXIT “GET ME OUTTA HERE” SHOW!

10. BEATLES UNITE TO AMP UP THEIR XBOX GAME

With a crying fit that was only rivaled by Chris Crocker’s “Leave Britney Alone”  youtube viral sketch of last year, Heidi Pratt’s outburst of ‘real’ tears paid off.

Spencer Pratt and Heidi Montag are already exiting I’m A Celebrity Get Me Outta here and will be back in LA just after Midnight, Tuesday am. A Baldwin brother is set to replace the Pratt newlyweds.

So if they can’t hack playing a ‘real’ celebrity in a real reality TV show format (unlike The Hills) that they singed up to play, does this mean they don’t want to be celebrities anymore in the fame game anymore? For real?

I mean, for all the criticism she takes with a smile, even Lindsay Lohan would have lastest longer than these two. A pathetic effort guys! For all the time you hog in magazines, that’s really disappointing! Anyway, welcome back to LA!

Hello people watching faux Upper East Side Societors on a show not named Gossip Girl, heart nibbler here.

Last week “New York’s Finest” got “makeovers” and posed with “lights.”  This week J barked at the girls in what may be his best drag look in the show ever.

That is the last I will mention about J’s runway teach.  Let’s gossip about the real stars, the girls you’ll see again and again…on Oxygen, at least.

Allison is still on the program, much to the delight of (Rules 1 and 2).

Behold Allison’s looks before and at J’s “charm school” and panel:

I think Allison is channeling Angelica from Rugrats. Not All Growed Grown Up, Rugrats. Next week: Samantha Potter shows Allison how to wear her hair in pigtails!

A newcomer to the show’s spotlight is Teyona. Let’s look at her new jank weave.

Tyra only gives her girls the finest in weaves…and keeps the very finest weave for herself.

Last week, Aminat quoted Chris Crocker (“Keep it cute or put it on mute”) in confessional.  (More on Crocker’s butthurt @ fourfour.)  This week’s clichéd Aminat saying was “Don’t check yourself out until Tyra checks you out.”  I didn’t realize I was watching a very special episode of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. I mean, not until Nijah did this.

(I’m guessing Allison suggested that in the Truth or Dare bowl.)

I feel bad for London. I have a feeling that Tyra will exploit her fatherless and bulimic background for this cycle or her talk show.  For now, relish in this week’s London moments, part of the “comic” series (previous “comics” are here, here and here).

(Um, after three hours I forgot to upload the comix, but here they are now.)

(The following was added 4/25/09.)

Immediately after the Greatest Picture in the History of ANTM (screw you, judges, and stop hating on London)

and a CoverGirls in Action bit with Bianca, a One Tree Hill promo made with The Sims aired.  And it was not made by a fan, ahem, random-ass Videogum comment.

I blame London.

On a somber note, something was off with the Jill Stuart runway show.  Was it the wastebasket filled with “trash” at the runway entrance? No, that’s something some insane staffer at ANTM came up with.  Same with the fire hydrant, walking sign, street light and the bags (hello, Chanel on steroids!).  Ann Shoket?

Yeah, it’s Ann Shoket.

You know you love me,

xoxo

nibbler

(Updated with slight corrections 4/25/09.)

Under 18’s or those of a mild disposition beware. This Britney lover swears. Rather a lot.

An oldie, but a goodie…

Iain Morrison is a senior marketer in the British Tourism Industry. And thinks that this is almost as funny as Britney’s famed UK X-Factor appearance…

YouTube.

It has almost become a verb, like Google. By verb, I mean many of us say, when discussing a topic, “Oh, I will just Google it.”  Google, the company, is also a verb.  YouTube is almost there as well, if not already there.  I have heard many people say, “YouTube cellphone popcorn,” to a friend.

The company actually was founded just about four  years ago in California by three PayPal employees wanting to share videos with one another via the computer.  One missed out on a party and wanted to see some video of it, so they quickly came up with a video sharing software.  You can read about all the rest of the history at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youtube.

Only a year later, Google saw the investment and purchased it for $1.65 billion dollars.  Wonder if those three guys still work?

I am amazed at the power of YouTube.  It captures every celebrity’s mistake, allows anyone to talk about anything and has the power to turn a nobody into a star.

Names like Savannah Outen and Lisa Lavie are two that come to mind.

This is one of Savannah’s first videos, posted over a year ago.  She is now on tour, has an album, a web site and close to three million subscribers.  For her debut single, she even shot a music video here in Nashville at Belmont’s campus.

The same thing with Lisa Lavie.  (I already bought her CD on iTunes and I highly recommend it.)

Now, obviously, both of these women have great talent.  What about those YouTube celebrities who have NO talent.

Who can forget Chris Crocker and the “Leave Britney Alone” video?  Don’t get me started on the insanity that is him.  I won’t even put his video on here because of vulgar language, but you have probably seen or heard of it.

How does this all apply to advertising or social media?  We all know that YouTube can skyrocket anybody into a global phenomenom, but how can it do it for a business?

Speaking of cellphone popcorn.

This is an advertisement made by a Bluetooth Headset manufacturer after the video blasted all over YouTube of four college students using four cell phones to pop kernels of popcorn just by making the phones ring.  It was all a hoax, but the video received millions of hits, plus hundreds of people making vidoes of themselves trying to do the stunt.  I am assuming that Cardo Wireless, the manufactuerer of the headsets have taken the video down, but did get some great PR from it, plus very little money was used by the company to produce the video.

So, the questions still remains, how does a business effectively use YouTube for social media purposes?

Online Queer &Transgender Vlog Communities and the Commercial Implications of YouTube’s “Don’t Be Evil” Policies


LITERATURE REVIEW
by Catherine McGowan
The New School
M.A. Media Studies Program
Understanding Media Studies
Prof. Shannon Mattern
TA Todd Kesselman


Bloggers, video bloggers, and “user co-creators” and the communities they represent have only recently been examined ethnographically, qualitatively, and empirically (Lange 2007; Regan and Revels 2007; Lenhart and Fox 2006; Faulkner and Melican, 2007). Video blogging ( “vlogging”) is a relatively nascent phenomenon of social networking and blogging where little scholarship exists – sometimes only as a sidenote. Nevertheless, scholarship about blogs, popular subcultures, and Internet communities are part of a larger interdisciplinary discourse. This discourse is complicated by the ever-changing nature of the Internet, its accessibility, and development of new platforms at an ever-increasing pace.  Even so, the rapidity of change and the flux at which the Internet operates should not discourage or inhibit research, because of the very nature and content the Internet provides, specifically when it involves identities and communities on the fringes. Arguably, digital ethnography, as examined by Murthy, engages feminist and critical theories of dialogic and discursive methods that make the examination of video blogs essential to feminist (or postfeminist) and critical scholarship (2008: 846).

This literature review attempts to understand what previous scholarship has contributed to video blogging studies and where there is room for more inquiry, within the context of YouTube vloggers identified as queer and transgendered (“trans”), although these identifiers are not one in the same.  By focusing on a politically and socially marginalized community (communities), we can examine ways in which the structure of YouTube inhibits and/or promotes community, identity, and resistance to homophobia among trans-youth vloggers.

Additionally, this review begins to explore further questions:  How are power dynamics between textual reader (viewers), writers (vloggers), and institutional owners (YouTube) complicated when it involves trans-identified youth producing content?    In what ways are vloggers in control of their own content and in what ways are they exploited?  How can these trans-vloggers regain agency and resist “haters” via new modes of creation or possibly new institutions of exchange (Lange 2007: 41)?

Statistics

Currently, there are over 50 million blogs, with 100 million videos being uploaded on YouTube daily, over 13 hours a minute (Faulkner and Melican 2007: 51; Rosen 2008: 52).  According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project (PIP), 15% of the respondent bloggers video blogged (Lenhart and Fox 15).  If the research holds true today, two years later, then there are approximately 7.5 million vloggers, roughly the population of the entire city of London. Nevertheless – this estimate remains a questionable guess.

Even in two years since the PIP studied bloggers, a lot of the data seems irrelevant and not reflective of current trends in video blogging.  For example, in 2006 LiveJournal was rated the most popular blogging tool of those surveyed, however, new networks for video bloggers, like YouTube or WordPress did not make it on the list (Lenhart and Fox 14).

Theoretical Approach: Researching Online Vlogs – Theories, Questions, and Implications


Henry Jenkins argues in Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers that “theory production is simply one subcultural or institutional practice among many” (2006: 13).  He asks whether an academic approach to studying fan culture, popular culture, and subcultures can adequately understand and describe these groups in an affective way (2006: 27).   Applied to vlogging, communities are in constant communication, of exchanging ideas, and engaging in dialogues.  These dialogues are in their nature participatory and invite often a dialogue among insular or largely exposed groups.

Jenkins’ studies employ dialogic methodologies that engage and incorporate fans’ responses into his work(2006: 31). He talks about “intervention analysis” approaches to research, where academics can act as amplifiers to a communities problem/issue and provide an intermediary function between institutions not in current communication with the other (2006: 33). The potential for video diaries or blogs to exchange the anthropological method of “reflexivity” with “reflection” through video narratives acting as “prosthetic extensions” of ourselves further challenges an entrenched dichotomy between researcher and “subject” and provides a mirror tool into our own desires and the imagined desire of the narrators ( Holliday 2004: 50, 52 – 5).

Vaidhyanathan points to a “dearth of cross-disciplinary scholarly work that might expose each side of campus to the most interesting minds on the other” and stresses, that within an interdisciplinary framework of Critical Information Studies (see attached Mind-Map), scholars can reach a wide audience and begin a larger conversation about the issue at hand via ‘code-switching’ (jargon light prose) (2006: 301).

Postfeminist theorists also struggle with creating a theoretical framework or canon, due to its own historically ambiguous and contradictory works (Gerhard 2005:39). Rather than being an obstacle, McRobbie sees these contradictions as opportunities where feminism “must face up to the consequences of its own claims to representation and power and not be so surprised when young women students decline the invitation to identify as a ‘we’ with their feminist teachers and scholars (2007: 30). Projansky calls this moment a “both/and” approach to postfeminism as opposed to an “us/them”, where within postfeminism exists inherent contradictions, “simultaneously feminist and antifeminist, liberating and repressive, productive and obstructive of progressive social change” (2007: 68).

Similarly then, an analysis of trans-identified youth vloggers on YouTube cannot claim a universality for multiple reasons. If one were to do so, such research would fall into the second-wave feminist concept of “collectivity”, where racially, ethnically, and sexually divergent voices are trivialized for a political purpose called “sisterhood” (Sanders 2007: 84).  Second, a claim of universal meaning runs the risk of objectifying the vlogger’s text as a written object subject to voyeurism and exhibitionism (Gurak and Antonijevik 2008: 64).  Third, Murthy warns against the ethical ambiguities of conducting online research, and more so of marginalized groups (2008: 841).    Such complications, again, should attempt to be resolved (or not resolved but examined), so these communities are not further marginalized by institutional agendas, but resolved in a sometimes contradictory or at least temporal way, or what Vaidhyanathan calls “multiple complimentary methodologies” (2006: 293).

Some Implications of Queer Video Blogging on YouTube/Google


During a recent “Intelligence Squared” debate over whether Google violates it’s “Don’t Be Evil” motto, Critical Information Studies scholar Siva Vaidhyanathan pointed out the “Seven Deadly Sins” of Google, including the “sloth” sin, where, he states,
Google makes money off of our work. We blog, we put our … cats on skateboards and record them for videos. We do all of this work, and then Google harvests our work, runs all of this content through its computers, spits it back out at us, with almost no actual value added and what they end up getting is a tremendous amount of money, based on free-riding (Donovan 25).

What are the implications of Google using queer content for financial gain, and what are these examples?  One example would be Michael Buckley’s Entertainment Show, “What the Buck?!”, on YouTube.  Michael Buckley is part of YouTube’s relatively new Partnership Program, where famous “Tubers” get financial compensation for adsharing (Buckley 2008). Sponsored YouTubers become active leaders in the YouTube community, often performing acceptable forms of constructed identity. Michael Buckley’s weekly videos are recaps of that week’s celebrity and TV gossip, news, and parodies, compliments of the flamboyant and never serious, stereotypically affluent gay white male – a result of what Gerhard calls “queer visibility” where there is an “increasing recognition of lesbians and gay men as recognizable comedic and dramatic ‘types’ (2005: 42).  Whereas, another YouTube celebrity, Chris Crocker of “Leave Britney Alone!” fame, who self-identifies as transgendered, claims he was not invited into the Partnership program (Crocker 2008).  Such complicated narratives of internet rivalries and discrimination are unclear and subjective, however, the decision of YouTube to favor one queer voice over another brings to fore an important question about Google’s policies – is Google favoring more normative, non-confrontational, socially acceptable, and financially advantageous queer identities over ones which are less so?

Esther Dyson would think not.   Described by Murthy as  a “utopian ‘cyber-guru’”, Dyson argued in a more Internet “techofundamentalist” rhetoric at the Intelligence Squared debate, describing Google as a means to “erode the power of institutions over people, while giving to individuals the power to run their own lives” (Murthy 841; Donovan 20).  But, when a company like Google controls over 63% of global Internet searches in addition to owning multiple formats of online social networks including YouTube, Blogger, Picasa, and Orkut (Rosen 2008: 52), it bears to continue asking this question.
Other theorists would warn against the proliferation of Google’s content control.  Clay Shirky in his July 2008 TED Talk, reminds us to be aware of the institutional aspects of social networks, and their socio-economic effects.  By providing an institution meant to share, collect, and distribute content, social networks (like Flickr and YouTube) are creating hierarchically managed institutions – complete with management, legal counsel, and us, the content producers, where we (the public) are relegated at the bottom rungs of decisions and agency (Shirky 2005). In the context of the trans-queer community and what The Advocate coined the “Homophobosphere” – “haters”, homophobes, and intolerance will exist as long as free speech does (Lange 2007: 43;Doig 2008: 7 ¶ 7).  But what’s missing yet is a discussion on how Google’s willingness to “bring its own open culture to foreign countries while still taking into account local laws, customs and attitudes” (Rosen 2008: 53).  What is the implication of  Google’s censorship on young transgendered Tubers based on homophobic governmental institutions, as was the case in Turkey (Rosen 2008: 51)?  By censoring some material that is unacceptable to certain states, while financially rewarding others, what message does that send to vloggers?

According to Lange, it becomes advantageous for vloggers to create content that is institutionally preferential in order to gain attention and financial compensation for their work. She goes onto ask about the participatory complications of monetizing sociality and whether that should be or is the purpose of content providers (2007: 45).  If YouTubers are getting paid for preferred airtime, suddenly we run the risk of creating socialized financial incentives that encourage a particular type of behavior. Because users are provided preferred airtime on YouTube, the site no longer becomes a ‘semiotic democracy’ (Vaidhyanathan 305), but rather preferential.

So what?  That’s capitalism, some would argue. Such lack of visibility or preferential treatment has been a common practice among major record labels that decide who gets airtime – often financially and culturally dominating independently produced and distributed music and ideas (Feigenbaum 2007: 140).  When talking about the implications of  social networks, Surowecki says that the “more tightly linked we are, the harder it is to remain independent,” which becomes further complicated by how these networks are controlled, how they socialize, and whose voices they favor (2008).  As a “postfeminist” – and I would argue queer discourse – it is important to look at the implications of corporate preferential treatment of social content that is removed for its queer (meta)textuality.

Jenkins would argue that media’s future relies on an “uneasy truce” between commercial interests and “grassroots intermediaries, where a message gains visibility only if it is deemed relevant”.  He encourages people to continue blogging because the sheer numbers will help “redefine the public perception of new media and to expand their influence” (2006: 180-1).  Additionally, more positivist thoughts would argue that the invitation to participate in video blogs, and by creating shows which demand an audience, vloggers demonstrate their relationship and identification with a larger community, where fans can be active participants in the community (Faulkner and Melican 2007: 62).

But, positivist thinking about community building and engagement comes with a price, says Lange (2007: 47).  When Faulkner and Melican conclude that vloggers are “more than simply interesting…they represent a potential market” it seems the price is a way to commodify a potentially politically and transformative community into a consumer community (2007: 63).

Such commodification of content is not new to independent content producers like vloggers. Feigenbaum quotes zine writer Stacy Thompson who wonders if there’s a political potential to “feminist punk agendas” when producing within corporate venues (2007:146). By creating products of political discourses within the context of corporate owned media, specifically social networks and YouTube, Feigenbaum rightly asks whether real transformative political work can be accomplished.   By providing the example of Le Tigre’s (former band leader of Bikini Kill and riot grrl matriarch Kathleen Hannah) major label record deal, Feigenbaum states that “the band’s corporate backing forces those who consume and engage with its punk feminism to renegotiate the linkages between economic production and political articulations” (2007:148).  Nevertheless, Feigenbaum points to the continuing ingenuity of young feminists interested in building community “without signing corporate labels or selling shampoo” (2007:148).

Identity and Community Formation (or Destruction) Among Trans-Identified Vloggers: A Postfeminist Analysis

“While growing up transgender can still be a very isolating experience, the world seems a bit smaller to trans kids thanks to the vlogs” – “TransTube” The Advocate (2007)

Blogs are a way to understand human desire, community, and places in time.  With the Internet’s relative new and quickly developing medium, comes loaded with nonverbal behavior, community development, and a breakdown of social and geographic barriers.    Blogs begin to represent a new medium where massive amounts of personal information are being shared publicly, shifting and ambiguously redefining boundaries of personal and private, where singular and group identities are formed (Gurak and Antonijevik 2008: 62 – 64).


While the potential positive nature of bringing the personal to the public sphere, as many argue is the case for trans-youth finding community via the web, not all people agree that “Web-mediated feminist activism” is a positive thing, stating that web interaction reduces activism to the bedroom site of cultural production and collective action is proportionately reduced as bedroom production increases (Eliscu, 96; Kennedy 2007; Feigenbaum 145).  In fact, it can become potentially damaging or unproductive when the community has no outlet outside of the web environment (MacDougal 2005: 579).
Faulkner and Melican examine concepts of the imagined self in relation to the content producers audience by interviewing vloggers internationally (2007: 52). Despite the 2006 PIP’s findings that over 50% of bloggers produced content for personal reasons, Faulkner and Melican assert evidence of “increasing amounts of online content posted with the express intent of advancing the poster’s entrepreneurial interests and/or their careers in creative fields” – otherwise known as “proteurs” (2007: 53). Proteurs see online videos as a way to build an audience often thinking self-consciously about their produced material, what Ong calls a “secondary orality” where we are “group-minded self-consciously and programmatically” (1982: 66).   Such group oriented affects on community need to be examined to better understand the dialogue between vloggers and their perceived audiences.

Room for Growth and Research Analysis

Many important works were left out of the literature review, due to lack of time and practice.  More attention to important queer and gender theories is needed, including Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble, Michael Foucault’s History of Sexuality,  would help better define identity theory and politics of queers within the framework of media.
Attached is a Mind Map as suggested by Shannon Mattern in “Literature Review Tips”.  This Mind Map traces the important works cited in Vaidhyanathan’s comprehensive bibliography of important works in Critical Information Studies, which is where I would like to further explore some key concepts.


References

Doig, W. (2008). “Homo•phobo•sphere”. Advocate, (1002), 28-31.
Eliscu, J. (2007). “Kids coming out on YouTube”. Rolling Stone, (1037; 1037), 96-96.
Faulkner, S., & J Melican. (2007). “Getting Noticed, Showing-Off, Being Overheard: Amateurs, Authors and Artists Inventing and Reinventing Themselves in Online Communities”. AnthroSource, Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, Retreived on November 15, 2008 from http://www.anthrosource.net, 51-65.
Gerhad, J. (2005) “Sex and the City: Carrie Bradshaw’s queer postfeminisms”. Feminist Media Studies, Vol. 5, No. 1. Routeledge.
Holliday, R. (2004) “Reflecting the Self” Picturing the Social Landscape: Visual Methods and the Sociological Imagination. Knowles, K. and P. Sweetman (Eds.). London: Routelege.
Gurak, L. J., & S. Antonijevic. (2008 September). “The psychology of blogging: You, me, and everyone in between”. American Behavioral Scientist (vol. 52, no. 1), 60 – 68.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Fans, bloggers, and gamers : Exploring participatory culture. New York: New York University Press.
Kennedy, S., (2007). “TransTube”, The Advocate. http://www.advocate.com/issue_story_ektid42754.asp
LANGE, P. G. (2007). “Searching for the ‘You’ in ‘YouTube’: An analysis of online response ability” Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings, Retreived on November 15, 2008 from http://www.anthrosource.net
Lenhart, A., & S. Fox. (2006) Bloggers: A portrait of the Internet’s new storytellers. July 19, 2006. Pew Internet & American Life Project
Macdougall, R. (2005 December). “Identity, electronic ethos, and blogs: A technologic analysis of symbolic exchange on the new news medium”, American Behavioural Scientist, v. 49(4).
McRobbie, A. (2007) “Postfeminism and Popular Culture: Bridget Jones and the New Gender Regime”. Interrogating postfeminism : Gender and the politics of popular culture(2007). Tasker Y., Negra D. (Eds.), . Durham: Duke University Press, 27 – 39.
Murthy, D. (2008). “Digital ethnography: An examination of the use of new technologies for social research” Sociology vol. 42(5), 837 – 855.
Ong, W. (1982) “Orality, Literacy, and Modern Media”, Orality and literacy: the technologizing of the word. New York: Methuen.
Projansky, S. (2007) Mass Magazine Cover Girls: Some Reflections on Postfeminist Girls and Postfeminism’s Daughters. Interrogating postfeminism : Gender and the politics of popular culture. In Tasker Y., Negra D. (Eds.), . Durham: Duke University Press, 40 – 71.
Rosen, J. (2008, November 30). “Google’s Gatekeepers: Nicole Wong and her colleagues decide what the world can see on YouTube.  Are they also determining the limits of free speech?” New York Times Magazine.
Vaidhyanathan, S. (2006). Afterword: Critical information studies. Cultural Studies, 20(2), 292-315.

All I’m saying is to take a few minutes to listen to what Chris Crocker has to say.

Word.

Laters.

Depuis le début de la crise économique, à chaque JT, chaque reportage, chaque article de presse, les journalistes se sentent obligés de citer la chouette chanson d’Alain Bashung « Ma petite entreprise ».

- « Les vacances ne connaissent pas la crise »

- « Les PME ne connaissent pas la crise »

- « Sarkozy ne connaît pas la crise »

- « Untel ne connaît pas la crise »

- …

On a compris, c’est un super titre qui colle avec l’actu… Mais please, leave Bashung alone ! Sinon c’est moi qui vais la faire, la crise.

Allez, un petit plaisir en hommage :

Autunno fresco di novità musicali questo! SI, perchè oltre all’atteso ritorno della principessa del pop (qui l’anteprima del nuovo singolo Womanizer) è in arrivo qualcosa di più sconvolgente, più rozzo e trash. Infatti da ottobre sarà in rotazione sulle radio americane (non mi è dato sapere se sbarcherà in italia) il nuovo singolo di Chris Crocker, noto fan di Britney con qualche rotella mancante, nonchè idolo del nostro blog (…come no!).

Crocker, l’uomo ambiguo degno sostito del Kaulitz, sarà ben presto ufficialmente donna, cosa che non avrà sicuramente grandi conseguenze visto l’aspetto e il comportamento altamente femminili del personaggio!

Il nuovo singolo, Mind In The Gutter, non è niente male e ricalca molto lo stile di Britney (voce metallica, … voce metallica). Se il singolo non dovesse aver buon successo, qui a Gossip Style siamo tutti pronti per un nuovo pianto isterico alla Leave Britney Alone! La canzone la potete ascoltare qui sotto…

Grazie alla Kikka, per le vitali informazioni!

O meme de hoje é sobre o vídeo Leave Britney Alone…

Leave Britney Alone

Resumindo, é mais um vídeo taxado de Emo, neste caso com Chris Crocker reclamando, chorando e pedindo para as pessoas deixarem Britney Spears em paz, numa espécie de fúria de fã que idolatra sua “musa”.

Se segurem em suas cadeiras e assistam o máximo que conseguirem.

Original:

Fat Brittany – Leave Chris Crocker alone:

Leave Britney Alone – Trance Remix:

Seth Green – Leave Chris Crocker alone:

Spongebob Squarepants – Leave Britney Alone: