Comments on: Web 2.0 and Self-Image

By: Elizabeth Clark

Elizabeth Clark — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 16:11:44 +0000

I have to agree with Kelly: I read faster than I can listen–or someone can talk. In addition, with text, I can skim through a blog post quickly and slow down when and if I get to an interesting part. I can’t do that with a podcast, which is why I usually don’t listen to them, or a video blog.

By: Kelly in Kansas

Kelly in Kansas — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 12:37:07 +0000

I read faster than I listen – plus, video usually requires audio and I’m not always where I can have the audio going. There’s certainly a place for video blogging but I believe that text isn’t going away – especially given the multiple applications of hypertext and other linkages to off-site and/or related information. In other words, the user determines his or her own path. Right now, that’s much more difficult in video although I imagine it will be possible before we know it – but it would probably still take text to scan through and/or organize video to do this.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:25:02 +0000

So, call me shallow, but I get a picture in my mind of how a blogger “Looks” by what they are posting, and I have been adversely affected a few times when I see a picture of them. I may take them less seriously after seeing them and dismiss what they are saying. I’m not proud of this…but I think it is a very real and human response. I guess it could work the other way too, but I haven’t found that to be true.
It is a real concern in the weight loss blogging community because so many people are used to being judged for their personal appearances in the real world and feel empowered by being judged by their thoughts and opinions absent that the filter that would be applied to their message if their physical appearance was added to the mix.
I think there is a place for vlogging…but I’ve seen some that are messy and unorganized and they are a waste of time. I find myself wishing for a well written post instead.

By: Bryan Alexander

Bryan Alexander — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:32:45 +0000

Pix definitely increase interest. I used to teach folksonomies with del.icio.us – never again. Flickr does the job, with pictures of kittens etc.

Video… I’m not sure. Embedded/linked video probably falls under the header of images, for appeal.
One’s own video work? That takes a lot, lot more time to do, and for results which aren’t that long (or perhaps impressive). Podcasting’s a lot easier to do.

I think a pleasing visual self-representation counts for a lot. We know “lookism” is powerful (one of the central truths of _Frankenstein_), and it probably operates in Web 2.0.

By: Sarah

Sarah — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:22:40 +0000

Here’s another thought on video blogging – how can it fit into a person’s workday? I know I am not alone in that I read blogs on my lunch hour or in between tasks at work. It’s easy to sneak in a bit of text reading. Watching a video is more of a challenge. The video content has to be pretty darn good form me to use my “real” free time to watch.

By: Chris Eller

Chris Eller — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:41:41 +0000

Good thoughts. One has to wonder just how much influence appearance has on the reception of information by others. Does a blogger/vlogger need to be simply non-repulsive to keep, sustain and build readership/viewership? Or will Kathy Ireland be the only truly successful vlogger in the world?