Sorry Wayne for the pun. Hope you don't mind.
The P:C is for Pros and Cons. Many, many, many many many many many, many magicians complain about exposure. This thread will look at the issue, but I feel in a different way.
First, about stopping exposure. While I'm as much for this as anybody, I'm also a realist.
It is my belief that exposure will never stop. Yes, the internet has made it worse, with some sites in particular. But realistically? When there is a will, there is a way. YouTube simply has too much material to run through to cull out exposure. Other sites can simply change their domain name. All of these petitions and such may mean well, but they can't change much. If YouTube moderated incoming videos, they would still have a huge backlog, both of old videos and new ones. And individual sites are nearly impossible to stop, because you have to go to the ISPs, who tend to not take responsibility for the content.
But on the bright side, exposure is actually beneficial to our art. If exposure was not the problem it is, many effects would not be in existence, and the art would not be moving ahead in the leaps and bound that it is.
Think of it as the war between cryptographers and analysts. As soon as one cipher is cracked, a new one must be created. When that one is cracked, another springs up. And eventually, when some ciphers are so old that nobody remembers them, they can be used every now and then to blindside the analysts.
And who is to say that exposure is any different than, say, posting music on the internet? Guitar tabs, concerto scores, the principle is similar to be sure.
That's all I have right now. I know this will be a hot topic, so debate away.
Catch you on the flipside!
Tim
The P:C is for Pros and Cons. Many, many, many many many many many, many magicians complain about exposure. This thread will look at the issue, but I feel in a different way.
First, about stopping exposure. While I'm as much for this as anybody, I'm also a realist.
It is my belief that exposure will never stop. Yes, the internet has made it worse, with some sites in particular. But realistically? When there is a will, there is a way. YouTube simply has too much material to run through to cull out exposure. Other sites can simply change their domain name. All of these petitions and such may mean well, but they can't change much. If YouTube moderated incoming videos, they would still have a huge backlog, both of old videos and new ones. And individual sites are nearly impossible to stop, because you have to go to the ISPs, who tend to not take responsibility for the content.
But on the bright side, exposure is actually beneficial to our art. If exposure was not the problem it is, many effects would not be in existence, and the art would not be moving ahead in the leaps and bound that it is.
Think of it as the war between cryptographers and analysts. As soon as one cipher is cracked, a new one must be created. When that one is cracked, another springs up. And eventually, when some ciphers are so old that nobody remembers them, they can be used every now and then to blindside the analysts.
And who is to say that exposure is any different than, say, posting music on the internet? Guitar tabs, concerto scores, the principle is similar to be sure.
That's all I have right now. I know this will be a hot topic, so debate away.
Catch you on the flipside!
Tim