Wired Magazine’s article about the YouTube “lonelygirl” phenomenon, “The Secret World of Lonelygirl,” is full of revealing detail. But in the end it’s a paean to deception — the hoodwinking of folks as part of a business plan.
The article’s near-endorsement of the tactics lends Wired’s own credibility to the deceivers. Was that the intention? I hope not.
on Nov 19th, 2006 at 5:26 pm
[…] Meanwhile, over at the Centre for Citizen Media, Dan Gillmor has criticised Wired’s story, saying “it’s a paean to deception — the hoodwinking of folks as part of a business plan.” […]
on Nov 20th, 2006 at 10:22 am
What I found most depressing about the LonelyGirl phenom was how many media critics let their infatuations lead them beyond what their sensibilities might have told them: most notably Jon Fine of Businessweek, whose writing on LoneleyGirl was at a surprisingly un-objective level.
What the Wired article doesn’t discuss, and is perhaps the hardest to track, was the conversations across the blogoshpere that questioned the veracity of LonelyGirl–and there were many, not “some,” including a great one at LostRemote.com. Lots of web savvy folks could literally see that the videos were far too slick, the girl obviously not 15 (certain facial attributes give away age), and the music too carefully choreographed for it to be anything but product.
That the influential mainstream media pundits fell for it is what’s not just disturbing (they seemed to refuse to listen to anyone but themselves) but infuriating.