THIS GUY. And probably some of you too.

I came across the following video, http://www.break.com/index/we-didnt-start-the-viral.html on Digg today. I’m kind of a Billy Joel fan so I decided to watch it. How many of those videos do you guys recognize? I knew a saddeningly high %.

Anyway I posted that mainly because I thought a lot of you would appreciate it.

This brings me around to my topic for the week. Notice the Judge Judy post on someone’s previous entry “no longer exists.” It irritates me that companies like Viacomm bitch and moan and freak out about their “content” being posted on the internet. Its kind of along the same lines as “This telecast of the National Football League is for the express use of our viewers only… any reproduction or discussion of the game is prohibited.”

Why does it matter?  Yes yes I know advertising. And yes yes, I know DVD sales. But to me, watching the highlights of John Stewart on Youtube is the same freaking thing as watching the highlights of John Stewart on Comedy Central. Is DVRing a television show, skipping the commercials,  and only watching x par of y show any different?

I’m glad we spent a lot of time talking about video, like the viral video I posted, because I think it raises an interesting point. WTF does it really matter who’s site the content is on? They aren’t saying “this is MY CONTENT, MINE!!!!!” they’re saying this is “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.” In fact every time I watch a funny clip of a show online, if I’m not already watching that show, I usually say to myself, “SELF I should watch this show (Thanks Emeril.) It just really strikes me as being a dated practice from a dated industry who need to figure out a way to get themselves into the 21st century before their companies dry up and go out of business.