>
User generated video on the web and TV part 2
- 8 Dec 06, 04:19 PM
Yesterday we took a look at sites delivering user-generated content aimed at the youth market over both the web and satellite TV. There is a place for this kind of content, but if this is all that represents the future of broadcast, then myself and maybe even some of my peers of a similar, er, vintage, just might look elsewhere for our entertainment. Fortunately, then, there are alternatives, and all thoughts of pipes and slippers can be put on hold for a while yet. Let take a look at them.
GoFish
What is it?
As with the two website reviewed yesterday, offers plenty of short and silly video clips for your amusement. Like other websites, users rate clips and can comment on them.
I did notice that they ran an competition, highlights of which will be broadcast on satellite TV. Described as the 鈥渇irst online video reality show鈥, users were invited to submit video as to why they deserved to go on a five-day date to Paris. Users then voted for their favourites, until two were left. I thought this was pretty clever, as it gave users a focus for what they were producing. And some of the entrants were pretty watchable. If the industry can come up with more ideas like this, then user- generated video may really prove to be sustainable competition to traditional broadcasters.
How accessible is it?
Of all the websites reviewed it is probably the most accessible. Which doesn鈥檛 mean it is accessible, just better than the rest. You can get around the website by searching, or by following most of the links, but clicking on the tags - keywords used to describe the video and bring up similar clips 鈥 won鈥檛 work without JavaScript enabled. Uploading video involves quite a long form, but doesn't seem to present too many problems.
The video is again delivered in Flash, and you can tab through the controls. Voting, however, can鈥檛 be tabbed and is JavaScript dependent, meaning not everyone will be able to use it. And the registration process includes a CAPTCHA, which is an image of text that is invisible to screen reader users.
Usability rating
Three out of five 鈥 not chocolate drops, but not chocolate droppings either.
Current TV
What is it?
We looked at the American version of , but a 鈥渓ocalised鈥 version is planned for the U.K. and Ireland for Spring 2007, with programmes being aired on a BSkyB satellite channel.
Current TV provides altogether more meaty content. There is a mix of user generated content and produced content, and a lot of it looks to be of a good standard. The videos cover subjects from graffiti art to Aids, global warming to the joys of curling. The website鈥檚 users are even generating the adverts. Users vote for the videos they like the best, and the most popular ones are then shown on satellite TV. I think this is a nice element, effectively surrendering editorial control to the users.
How accessible is it?
Well, it鈥檚 a mixed bag. On the plus side, there are access keys and skip links, and you can get around the website by using the search function, or following the links. Even searching with video tagging works. But there are downsides as well. Colour contrast leaves something to be desired, not least dark grey links on a black background on the homepage. The video is delivered in Flash, and sometimes it seemed like the controls could be used with the keyboard, but mostly not.
You don鈥檛 have to register to vote, but again, giving a video the green light to be shown on TV looks impossible for some user groups. The website also uses JavaScript powered pop-up windows to provide additional information about movies which can be an issue. Registration initially appears to be in a pop-up window, but you can also register by going to the upload page, but before you hang the bunting out, it too is dependent on JavaScript and uses a CAPTCHA for verification.
In order to upload a video, you have to install their 鈥淰ideoEgg鈥 software. The process is considerably more involved than for other websites, but as Current TV will pay you for any video aired, it might be worth the effort. The forms look to be relatively accessible.
Overall, though, I must admit that I was a bit disappointed with the accessibility of Current TV. I mean, there is some really interesting content on the website. The video could be made accessible, but isn鈥檛, and I couldn鈥檛 find any videos with closed captions, nor any audio descriptions or transcripts.
When you consider that Al Gore, the former presidential candidate who is the public face of Current TV says that the aim of company is, "the democratisation of the television medium", then it鈥檚 a twice as disappointing that the website isn鈥檛 inclusive.
Usability rating
Two out of five 鈥 more current bun than pan au chocolate
So there you have it. There are already a number of websites out there offering user -generated content, all with slightly different hooks, aimed at slightly different niches, but the one thing they all, sadly, have in common is that they aren鈥檛 especially accessible to all users.
If you take away the users ability to rate video and determine what is aired on satellite TV, for example, it suddenly looks a whole lot less web 2.0 and more like web 1.0. Yet this is precisely one failure common to all of the websites we鈥檝e looked at. All the websites need to be far more inclusive.
The 大象传媒 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
颁辞尘尘别苍迟蝉听听 Post your comment
The most accessible clips are subtitled movie trailers for hearing impaired people here:
And audio described (narrated) clips for visually impaired people here:
Derek
Complain about this post