Accept YouTube

[solarnaut]

You say "pushing new mediums into traditional models is not what we should be doing," but your entire lesson is presented as if YouTube were an old fashioned chalk board (which would not have bothered me so much if there was time to read the longer passages). A voice reading the text (reinforcement) would have been easier to learn from. Cute use of the rodent, complete with sound effects.

[MediaPraxisme]

TOUR #1: EDUCATION. Dan pushes us to consider what we might gain from, and how we need to approach, the waning of the strength of the entertainment/education binary. On YouTube, learning comes best from speed, summary, repetition, humor, and the popular. For more, see my blog: aljean at wordpress dot com. Also, you can join the tour by adding comments or video responses. Make sure to label them as part of the tour

[guitarboy22j]

by the way, although we disagree, your video is still an engaging one, and made me think about the issue.

[guitarboy22j]

by the way the video in my favorites about the topic of "concision" is called "Chomsky y las senales de humo".

[guitarboy22j]

I suggest the book "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman. I was assigned it by Stuart McConnell as a Pizter student. The book argues that the problem isn't that t.v. is stupid. Most people accept that. The problem is when people start expecting to get "informed" or educated by a stupid medium, because it sensationalizes important information and the way our culture communicates.

[guitarboy22j]

Its actualy pretty easy to show how television inherently discourages learning. Some big ways are "concision"(in my "favs" is a video on the topic), that tv is "imaged based" so it evokes emotioanl responses not rational(google that for studies done), visual mediums stress the importance of "looks", tone, and attractiveness, so if a journalist, for example, looks attractive and "professional" we believe them, regardless of what they're even saying or expertise.

[guitarboy22j]

First of all, I would like to say thanks for responding, and that I think it is cool that you take this so seriuosly.

My point is that overall, this medium does not encourage learning. Yes, it can be education, such as videos from your class, but would you agree that those are exceptions? I find that mostly YouTube videos and users do not come onot this site expecting to learn. Maybe you see it differently.

[guitarboy22j]

You've got to come at me with some better arguments than "we can learn from it". We can learn from a dicatator, too. Doesn't mean we should have one.

[dallen1eleven]

I do not understand this analogy. I am not arguing that YouTube should be made up entirely of dramatic animals, but I am saying that we should not dismiss those videos out of hand as "solely for entertainment" and thus out-of-bounds for learning. As far as I know we do not dismiss dictators as meaningless, and I am arguing the same should be true for these types of videos.

[guitarboy22j]

Another way that YouTube, as well as television, encourages emotional reponses is its emphasis on images as a way to convey ideas. As evidence studies have been done to find out how much informatino the average television watcher retains after watching t.v. The reponders don't retain the information usually, more often they retain the images and the emotions those provoked.

[guitarboy22j]

The YouTube debate can't be answered in one comment, obviously, but to respond to the statement "we can learn form YouTube". I reject that. One ironic example (as I try to fit this into this box) is that I cannot even respond in less than 500 characters. Its called "concision" and it along, with image-based learning encourages emotional response rather than reason. Television is a perfect example. Sure we can learn from television, but the medium INHERNETLY discourages it. Just like YouTube.

[dallen1eleven]

The 500 character limit hardly limits response, considering YouTube is a video site, and thus "conversation" is presumed to occur through video. And I do not see how television inherently discourages learning. It might not be "traditional" learning, but that is the entire point of my video--pushing new mediums into traditional models is not what we should be doing.

[VannaBlack4u]

But is youtube really that different from other mediums that we consume. All mediums that we consume have reality, comic relief, drama, violence, racial significance and other generally accepted notions of entertainment. Youtube has them all, just like CNN, Disney, the news paper ect...

[MediaPraxisme]

Different from traditional learning, yes. Let's start to detail how: with what styles, for what audiences, with what viewing practices. We've accepted YouTube implicilty BY studying it, now we need to draw conclusions. You argue this effectively, now you need to draw some conclusions.