Partly political broadcast!

Ever since he launched WebCameron a couple of years back I've keep an interested eye on how Cameron and the Conservatives are using the media. I'm typing this while watching Cameron Direct live from Plymouth. This isn't the first of these events but it's the first I've looked at.

I could comment on how it's obvious that the Conservatives are pushing his strength as a speaker who doesn't need a script - unless these events are an extremely elaborate hoax! But I'm not a conspiracy theorist, nor yet a political commentator. So let me comment on what caught my eye.

Selfcast. I'd not seen that name before but I instantly knew what it was about. Here is a site that let you sign up and stream live with little more than a webcam. Imagine YouTube but for streaming video. There are live text comments flying in as he's talking, there's a form for emailing in questions. It also seems to archive previous streams.

I know this isn't the only site doing this but it has an instantly likable interface. I'm very tempted to try it out!

Stream it...

Much has been said already about Sarah Meyers' exclusive that, the now Google funded, YouTube will unveil its own live streaming functionality this year. As vague news goes this is up there with the best of them. A broad concept and ten months of 2008 in which to make good on a throw-away comment. Hardly a strategic announcement!

But, IF they do deliver will it work? What YouTube has going for it over any other streaming start-up is consistent, and high, levels of traffic. As live streaming is time specific you want to know there are going to be people around to watch what you're broadcasting. For this reason alone I see no reason my YouTube won't dominate this area of online video by the end of 2008.

Technological pragmatism...we can but should we?

I picked up a book called Five Big Ideas by Mal Fletcher. I've not finished it so don't read this as a review - or an endorsement! - but the first ideas he addresses is Technological Pragmatism. He questions the common premise that because we can do something we should do it. It's right to question.

Sometimes it's also right to do the things we can do because we can do them. Today I was at a conference that was supposed to be webstreaming to a select group of satellite centres. At least one hadn't realised this service was availble to them. Why? Because although conference streaming is easily done it sometimes isn't for a confused assortment of reasons. If it was simply the case that every conference was streamed people would anticipate the service. When it's here and there, open assess and then secret access users get lost or left behide, so everybody loses out.

We can but should we? Let's answer the question and then be clear and consistent.