Development Cooperation Handbook/The video resources linked to this handbook/The Documentary Story/The wonders of YouTube channel
The wonders of YouTube channel (and of social networks)
As the work was on progress the team continued to upload the videos on our YouTube Eugadproject channel. Which gradually became more and more numerous?
On the side of the “quantity” we were quickly demonstrating the results of our work. And this was helping us to easily satisfy the formal requirement of our contract with the EU Commission. The choice of broadcasting through Internet was revealing a cheap and efficacious way to share the knowledge we were collecting.
However simply putting separate videos in the channel repertory was not sufficient. It was also necessary to discover a system for presenting the videos with some sort of logical sequence. Separate interviews do not make a story.
Here is where it came in help, once again, the WIKI. As we had prepared the 10 pages of the major issues we were facing, we could put the videos with the specific answers into the “issues pages” and compare there the different opinions of different stakeholders from different cultural background.
Then as we were preparing the various pages of the on line manual, we could add videos with the testimonials experiences that were enlivening the otherwise too theoretical subjects.
What the WIKI was not giving was a sense of ongoing activity. In fact the WIKI appears as a sort of library, where new and old books get collected without a chronological order. You can use the WIKI tools to find out the latest additions. But that is something for experts. We needed some sort of window where the work was being presented in a sequential order, with the latest additions on the top, while giving a sense of work in progress.
We first started using a blog. But it never worked well. The blog in itself creates a different web site and it was becoming a sort of duplication with the wiki without a clear understanding of why two web sites are needed and what is the difference amongst them.
The solution came with a Facebook page. We could then add in Facebook the links either to the videos, or to the playlists or to the WIKI page, without losing a sense of unitary progression. Trough Facebook was also possible to mobilize the support of those who were supporting our project, who helped in disseminating the information by sharing our Facebook links on their own network of friends and groups. So the videos started being shared even before we had used them for our planned documentary. It was a very different way of using internet that the one that is mainly being used by the broadcasting companies which simply publish in the Internet only the material after is being aired in the television. And they use the same material, repeating it on the web, as a sort of smaller screen useful for replay the contents in case you were not in front of the TV at the time the real thing was aired.
The interaction between internet and TV is still at a very initial stage and I think there are a lot of little used opportunities. Different media need to enable each other, dialogue, synergize; not to compete. And not to repeat the same content here and there. We have been trying not to be redundant, but to create a communication platform which is a unitary event, where the different media all have something different to say, where are all necessary and where the whole message is conveyed by their global interaction. As in a sort of concert with different music instruments, but a unitary composition.
On the one side internet channel has been allowing us to bypass the filters of information gatekeepers. On the other side it has allowed a broader participation to the preparation of the media product, where the spectator was helping us to produce and distribute the product.
Two years later when observing the analytic of YouTube I found that among the 10 videos most viewed in videos on our YouTube channel there was a certain Dilip Kumar and a certain Kabir. I had not through these interviews at all; however they were amongst the most viewed? Who were them? I t turned out that one was one of the partners of Dilip Kumar in the Jharkhand project, the other was the principle of the Rajghat School of the Krishnamurti Foundation story. They were both interviewed in Hindi on many issues but only a flash statement was used in the edited story. Still, in a mysterious way, they had been found by the internet viewers and were promoted virally. The power of the net! So went to listen to them carefully! They were good! They need to be given more space in the edited stories and in the online manuals. Thanks net community for telling us the value of something that we did not notice!