Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

Right move! plus if you are a reader of his blog he insulted you too. funny how oldmedia don t have a clue of the invisible crowd of the web.

Applause for asking to be dropped. That guy went on a 'trip' and needs be smacked around.

59 bloggers, 58, 57, 56...

He started the process correctly, by contacting high-profile bloggers asking for interviews. He assembled a pretty good list, and then blew it with the stupid reaction to Chuck's email.

While I am not going to step into this pissing match - as it's noe of my business - I am also not going to prematurely eject myself from John Hart project, I will wait and see what happens and if Mr. Hart proceeds to shit all over what Chuck has accomplished then I will take action and ask to be removed from his list and also refuse to be interviewed. But I believe in gving people a second chance and realize that Mr. Hart may have made a simple mistake. he still has time to redeem himself. It's his choice.

I'm ever-so-grateful Dr. Dave.
I wanted to just make sure everyone knows I'm completely neutral about his film and who is in it. From the start I've wished him success with his project, and was just asking him to refer to it by the name of his film. He seems to have taken down most of his site now, and all references to "Blogumentary" are gone, so I think he's on the right track now. Thanks to you guys I'm sure.

I'm with Cameron on this one. I'll keep a sharp eye on this issue and see what develops. If this pissing contest escalates into a legal war, them I will withdraw and ask my readers to steer clear of this guy.

Cameron and Deborah, Sure, anyone can be forgiven if they set right what they've done wrong.

Do we think he understands that the blogosphere is better represented by its reaction to his attempt to throw his "weight" around -- and by bloggers like Chuck -- than by his slice of 59 upper-listers?

Chuck, what was the nature of the legal threat you referred to on your site? Was he trying to lay claim to the "blogumentary" name? I e-mailed him asking for his side, which I'd like to hear before making a decision about whether to participate.

59 bloggers of blog on the list
59 bloggers of blog
take one down and pass the word around
then 58 bloggers of blog on the list

Andy: I'll email you.

Wow -- This will probably have implications for establishing credibility and building trust with potential interviewees for citizen journalists.

As a citizen journalist doing an investigative documentary, I realize that not having much institutional credibility can make it tricky to gain access to sources. Being independent means that I have to cultivate my own credibility and social capital.

It's sticky scenarios like this that interviewees want to try to avoid from getting trapped into.

In my case, I was lucky that the potential interviewee would just not return my phone calls, but this is a bit more of a PR nightmare for John Hart for you to publicly back down from the interview and by questioning his character and integrity.

It'll be a new ball game when everyone is a citizen journalist and trying to gain access to sources. Sources will have to find ways for testing the credibility and trust of these citizen journalists.

I discuss some more lessons for citizen journalism and unresolved ethical and legal issues that this scenario has here.

David Weinberger said: the blogosphere is better represented by its reaction to his attempt to throw his "weight" around -- and by bloggers like Chuck -- than by his slice of 59 upper-listers

You wouldn't be able to call us "upper-listers". We were selected specifically because we were "small", but still managed to have a radical impact on a big, public issue. I think we are a pretty good example of the newest, smallest blogs having a lot to contribute.

I don't know anyone involved - and most of you would dismiss me as an "unknown". But I do have the advantage of a more objective viewpoint since I'm NOT dazzled by anyone's so-called "reputation" online. I don't care who's big and who's more influential. So I'll just throw this into the mix: it sure looked like a lot of tonnage (unsolicited emails and all) was coming from a guy named Nathan - a friend of Chuck's, I take it. "Needs to be smacked around" sounds just as professional and friendly as Hart.

So tell me again: who was throwing their weight around?

It all came across like a good ole fashioned pissin' contest to me...

I'm sorry, I just see two guys having a fight; one says "I did this" the other say "he did that". Who is to say who is right?

I am surprised everyone is so quickly to choose sides.

Well, I could hire a computer forensics expert to verify that the emails I posted are true, but I can't exactly afford that...

I also think it's natural to "side" with a person who has gained credibility and respect through his work and interactions with others, rather than someone who pops up out of nowhere, then proceeds to lob insults and threats.

But, of course, I'm biased. :-)

You know what, Chuck? As far as I'm concerned, you have zero credibility or respect from me. To me, you're just some guy with a huge ego who just screwed me out of some nice free publicity, all over the use of one word that you couldn't bother to have trademarked. Thanks a bunch. I hope it was worth it to you.

Ahh, Jason.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I just got done leaving a comment on your site. Check it out and let me know what you think. This isn't so much about trademark as being a reasonable, respectful person on this planet.

Sorry to beat a dead horse here, but --

What kind of passion to you think this guy has for this film and for the blogosphere if he pulls the plug at the first sign of trouble? Most every documentary film I know of has little or no funding. The documentary filmmakers I know do it because they HAVE TO, because it's in their blood. They use their own money, they get in-kind services, they do it any way they can. That's what you want in a documentary filmmaker. Not somebody looking to cash in on a hot topic with some corporate sponsorship, who disappears when the (imaginary) suits disappear.

What do I think? I think you're an arrogant prick with a superiority complex. You asked.

Not to carry this little flame war here, but on your blog you said you're mad because you wanted free publicity from this documentary. i.e. to cash in. So, I don't hold that in very high regard.

Justify it any way you want. You screwed me over and I don't hold that in very high regard.

Justify it any way you want. You screwed me over and I don't hold that in very high regard.

Chuck: you just asked him to use a different term. Technically, you probably shouldn't have used that as your title, but you were the suspected first to use it. Much like making a documentary called "Documentary: the Documentary," Blogumentary should be a genre, not a film title. Having said that, I think it’s a clever name.
Jason: it does suck, but I wouldn't be so quick to blame chuck or Nathan (though similar tactics were used by Nathan as Hart did).

Pissing contest aside, on the surface Chuck was polite, and careful it seems. You didn't want it to look like you were hinting to Nathan to be your attack dog. I hope that Nathan was just overzealous, and has learned that fire does not always need fire to beat it.

To 59bloggers: If you dropped the doc after THIS, then you weren't planning on making this movie. Vlogging is about overcoming the Hollywood system (just allowing them to entertain us), to present our thoughts, feelings, emotions, and creativity to the world, and to join together as a community. Yes Hart fired off without thinking - foolish mistake. But the worst mistake was to drop this project, and then blame someone else. I like the idea, and you would most likely hit issues that Olsen wouldn't have thought about. Many sides to the same story. I say make it. If you need to know how to make a documentary on a budget, check out http://www.heartofanempire.com. Jay Thompson has been busting his ass for +3 years, all the while eating ramen noodles to make sure that not only his vision is show, but also that his subject matter gets the respect necessary.

Good luck to everyone, and lets remember that the Internet was started by the military to make sure that communication wasn't disrupted in wartime. We should be turning it into a creative outlet for EVERYONE with a passion

Back in 2002, it wasn't a genre... just the title of this crazy little film idea swimming in my head. Now, why, it's a veritable industry!

Right on, Chuck! Indy Docs are made by blood, sweat and tears; boot strappin' all the way! :)