January 13, 2006
Blogger Launches 'Media Diet'
We all use the internet for any number of purposes -- reading great blogs; shopping; looking for housing, jobs, and dates; and pornography. But one inventive blogger is going to take internet use to the extreme -- he's going to use it exclusively for all his media needs for the next 30 days.
David Panarelli, an Arlington-based graphic designer and blogger, today announced in a press release that he was starting a "media diet," which he described as such:
An otherwise heavy consumer of television and radio, Panarelli seeks to explore the recent trend toward video and audio offerings on the Internet. In place of television, he will watch vlogs (video podcasts), video-oriented websites, and downloadable television shows. He will turn off his radio in favor of podcasts, online broadcasts, and MP3s.And the point of this strange yet mildly intriguing project?
Over the course of the month, Panarelli will seek answers to questions concerning the consumption of Internet-based media in the mass market: Can the average American be satiated through Internet media alone? Will a television show still be desirable if one has to purchase each episode? Are amateur vlogs engaging enough to replace television? How does one's morning and afternoon commute listening habits differ when podcasts replace drive time radio?Panarelli kicks off the diet on Sunday, January 15, and, as expected, will be blogging about it.
|
Advertisement: DCist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Hmm. Aside from TV (precious, precious TV), I wonder how many blog readers are already on this "media diet"? I know I already get all my news and non-video media over the internet. This experiment sounds a bit lame to me.
That's what I was thinking, Tom. I'd miss the sports, but other than that, this is my normal life.
Now, give up a computer, and this becomes wholly different.
NEWSFLASH: Lots of stuff is available on the Internets. Next at 11.
I've been on this diet since I moved into my new place. I don't own a television or a radio, so I get all my news via rss feeds in Firefox, I listen to news podcasts on my iPod while walking to work and watch the "news" on sites like onegoodmove and crooksandliars. What about TV or movies? I download The Office and Desperate Housewives through iTunes and rent exclusively through Netflix, and all this is done on my Mac. It's cheap, it's easy and it's efficient.
He should incorporate a current events pop quiz to see if his views are slanted or based on less than accurate info.
Sort of like how FOX News views tested got a lot of facts wrong.
This seems rather pointless. I have two jobs, so I'm never in front of a TV. I get ALL my news on the internet. I hate the radio and listen to my iPod when I drive. When I miss General Hospital, I just go online to read the recap! When I was on overseas travel a few months ago, I downloaded the Lost and DH episodes I missed from iTunes.
Come to think of it though, I bet purchasing all my favorite TV shows would be cheaper monthly than my cable bill.
David from OpenTheWindow.net here.
First off, thanks for commenting-- as a regular DCist reader, I really appreciate the dialogue.
The comments so far reflect a trend I noticed once I announced my plan to a few friends and family: there is a subculture of Internet-exclusive consumers, prevalent among bloggers and blog readers. Avid blog readers like us really make up a very slim, media-savvy portion of our total population, and Internet-exclusive consumers are just a fraction of that.
I encounter people daily who have never read a blog, don't really know what a blog is, or just don't give a crap.
I decided to do this for a few reasons.
1) TVoIP has potential as an avenue for content delivery in the future of media convergence but there are still some major hurdles involved, both technically and creatively.
2) How will I deal with events that I am used to watching live, especially sports , local news, or the State of the Union Address?
3) Does watching TV on a 3-inch quicktime window suck to the point where I would rather not watch anything?
4) Similar to alexandra's comment above, what are the financial implications?
Love it. Hate it. Either way, I'm more curious than anything else. I know I'm not the first to do this, but there are questions out there that remain unanswered. Lets see where it goes!
I think the only discovery this guy will make is how easy it is to bore his friends:
"Hey David, want to go to the Drafthouse to catch a movie?"
"Can't. Remember my 'experiment'? No, not the one when I soaked my OED in LSD. The NewMedia Diet. Like regular diet -- and exercise -- it'd be a real personal revolution to try out and learn more! Anyway, I can't see a movie in a brick-and-mortar theater...only via the net. Hey! Want to come over and watch the BitTorrent progress bar while I download 40-Year-Old Virgin? It's already at 6% with only 129:32:14 remaining!"
"Shit, man...I would but there's this grass growing through the cracks in a freshly painted boardwalk. That's double the viewing pleasure!"
"I am away from my computer right now."
DCist, please stop the shameless plugs for stupid blogs. This 'experiment' sounds like a fourth grader saying 'hey look at me, look what I can do'.
There are plenty of worthy political/sociological studies about how extensive use of the internet as a source of information and entertainment has affected they way people think. This is not one. Seriously, this post is really bad.
How will you deal with watching the State of the Union on the Internet?!?!?
... I *only* watch/listen to/read the text of sotu's on the Internet. The bullshit that dribbles out of potus' mouths is maddening enough with the ability to skip past the fucking 188383858765 pauses for applause, (or better yet, just reading "applause") -- I feel bad for the suckers watching it on TV.
** before you holler about the Internet not being around long enough for to only consume sotu's on the Internet, keep in mind I was only born in 1984**
What would be a much more interesting blogging experiment, which would also say a lot more to old (or just unwired) people about just how important the Internet is to today's world, would be for an 18-30 year old urban professional to go a month WITHOUT it. We get our news, our jobs, our porn, our regular contact with our friends, our directions, our phone numbers, our information about entertainment, our music... our everything from the Internet. I want to see someone give it all up and still get along. How would he blog about it, you say? I vote he sits down and writes a good ol' pen and paper diary about it, and his bff uploads the pdfs daily.
I completely agree with Karen. I'm a college freshman and I don't own a TV or radio. The Internet is my sole source of... everything, pretty much. I mean, I still have regular contact with people, and I have a strong social life outside the Internet, but I even met my current roommate online, and I spend a good deal of my time reading news/blogs online, using AIM, and listening to iTunes. I don't know what I'd do without a computer.
Karen, Meredith,
We actually all agree.
The Internet is important. It's amazing how useful, if not downright vital, it is. The question at hand is more along the lines of "Can the internet deliver content that can substitute within the model already created by TV?" And thinking in the long term, what does this mean for the future of media convergence?
I know a lot of stuff (like the SotU) is available online. I know it's possible to not watch TV or listen to the radio. But that's not the point.
The point is: what's the difference? What are the differences in the experience? And what happens if your existing media habits revolve around the old way? See you on the blog!
Bo-ring.