super pretentious (but also really interesting) note: the word accent is formally only correct when talking about the way someone speaks a language other than their first (francophones have a french accent speaking english, anglophones have an english accent speaking chinese, etc.) A dialect is the specific variation on the language between native speakers. Of course this doesn't matter a ton in most settings, but it's super helpful when discussing linguistics.
In America, there are numerous different accents (Southern, New Yorker, Midwestern, Californian etc.) even though everybody is still speaking English. Is it like that with other languages? Are there different kinds of accents in other languages?
Of course! People from South America can largely tell what country (or part of a country) someone is from by the accent of their Spanish. Every language has different accents…it would be interesting to know which language has the /most/ accents though.
Accents can form two different ways…first, by simple isolation. All languages constantly change, and given time, places that are more culturally cohesive or isolated will change in different ways from each other. This is what happened in the American south, for example. It’s also how the “American” accent drifted apart from the “English” accent.
On the other hand, some accents are holdovers from when people actually spoke different languages (like the way that French people have a “French” accent when they speak English.) These accents persist long after the local population has (for the most part) stopped speaking that language. This is the case for the “Irish” accent, for example, or the ‘Minnesota’ accent (Norwegian, Swedish, and German roots.) Of course, people still speak Irish in Ireland and even Norwegian in Minnesota, but for the most part, we consider these just another “accent” of English while forgetting that they have roots in other languages.
I’d be curious to know which language has the most recognizable accents to native speakers…probably English or Spanish, just because they’re very widely spoken, but I dunno!
Online Video is Nothing Like TV (But it Will Be if We Can't Think Differently)
WALL OF TEXT ABOUT ONLINE VIDEO!
Everything about online video is different from television (aside from the fact that lots of images are displayed in sequence in order to create the illusion of movement.)
The way the content is made is different, the mindset of the audience is different, the way social structures and fandoms are built is different, the kind of engagement is different, the barrier to entry is non-existent, the rate of change is at least doubled.
But humans are not good at thinking about things differently. Something new exists and, unless we are very young, we attempt to put it in an existing box…or some combination of existing boxes. Online video looks like television, so let’s create “Networks.” Let’s call the page of each creator a “Channel.” Let’s call the thing they do a “Show.” And the people themselves are “Stars.”
Of course this is what we do…creating new words is a hassle, especially when you’re trying to convince existing structures (like your mom, Hollywood executives, and Madison Avenue) that this thing is legitimate and interesting. So you use those old boxes.
The problem is, the more we use those old boxes, the more everything starts to look like the thing that came before it.
If we call collections of YouTube channels “Networks” everyone thinks about them like they’re Networks (especially in legacy media.) Then eventually creators start thinking about them as “online TV networks” when really, the needs of online video creators are completely different from the needs of TV creators.
Suddenly, online video starts looking more like TV not because it should or anyone wants it to, but just because we lack the collective imagination to think of it differently.
This is an old problem…and not one that can be completely avoided. People aren’t very adaptable. It’s like complaining that it snows in Montana…it’s so expensive to plow the streets, and there are more car accidents, it’s a drain on the economy! But, like, you can’t make it SNOW LESS, that’s ridiculous.
But to some extent (and maybe not a huge extent) you can change social structures and you can change people. Not to match precisely what online video would be in it’s purest state, but to let some of its unique properties shine through. This will happen no matter what, but I think it will happen /more/ if we’re conscious about it…AND if we put people who actually understand it in charge of some of its more influential structures (YouTube, MCNs, Awards Shows.)
But that’s not what we’re doing. For a few years, YouTube has been led by a guy from Hollywood…so has Maker Studios…so has AwesomenessTV. YouTube is now in the hands of a stronger CEO who is at least from the tech world, which has much less in common with online video than TV does.
That might seem like a bad thing, but I don’t think it is. I think coming at new media with fresh eyes is much better than coming at it with pre-defined boxes. Thinking, “Oh, I see, so this is kinda like a channel…but different in a few ways,” gives you a much less accurate picture than thinking, “This is like nothing I’ve ever seen before…what exactly is it?”
I (and probably you) came at online video with entirely fresh eyes. I knew nothing about hollywood structures or the roles that networks or agents or awards or channels played in the creation of media. I knew media existed, but the structures that surrounded them were entirely unknown and opaque to me.
But most people in the online video business did not enter with that innocence, and I think that’s too bad. There are very few people who understand online video solely within the framework of online video in this industry, especially people who have differentiated themselves and gained enough experience to not only /be/ experts, but to be recognized as experts (which are two very different things.)
We’re headed into a world where the people who really get it are getting old enough to differentiate themselves and bring both authenticity and expertise into this industry, but it’s a bit of a battle at the moment…especially because a lot of the bigger companies have already got it into their heads that TV and online video really are very similar.
And if they think that for long enough, my fear is that eventually, it will become true. Not because it is, but simply because we lacked imagination.
So if you’re into this…figure out ways to differentiate yourself as an expert who should be recognized as such…then please, send me your resume.
Hi Hank! I was wondering what exactly your involvement is in the Pemberley Digital series' now, because when the Lizzie Bennet Diaries were first introduced, you mentioned that it was something that you had been thinking about creating for a while. When LBD or EA is up for an award or even mentioned though, only Bernie Su's name is credited. How did this come to be, and are you still involved in the creation, and production process?
I’m like a proud grandmother. At this point, I have so much going on with VidCon and CrashCourse and SciShow and Subbable and OTHER THINGS THAT ARE COMING SOON that I can’t be closely involved with Pemberley projects. And I don’t /need/ to be because Bernie and his team KICKS ASS!
As is evidenced by how awesome Frankenstein MD is! IT’S SO GOOD!
Having an idea is not valuable…making it real is. And at this point, I’m not even having the ideas :-)
I was mildly surprised but mostly just dismayed to find many anti-LGBT comments on the Crash Course Psychology lesson about sex being thumbed up to the top. Would you be interested in doing a sort of follow-up on the subjects of sexual orientation and gender identity, to counter accusations that you guys put forward baseless arguments?
It isn’t a case of them being thumbed to the top, it’s YouTube promoting them because they have caused a discussion and YouTube likes discussions (this is an algorithmic failing that I am not fan of.)
You can only thumb up a YouTube comment, not thumb it down. We all know that there are bigots in the world, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that some of them leave comments about how homosexuality is a disease or whatever bullshit they’re spewing these days. And it also shouldn’t be a surprise that a few people come along and agree. Those people exist, we shouldn’t pretend they don’t exist.
Of course, by promoting the comments that cause discussions, and not allowing people to vote comments down, they’re giving undue air-time to controversy rather than validity. If you look, the first reply to every one of those comments is a rebuttal, and each one of those has five or ten times more upvotes than the original comment.
I don’t think a follow-up is necessary, I think we said exactly what we intended to say in that episode, and it’s being received well by the vast majority of people. The rest of them well…it’s more about their identity and their worldview than it is about reality, and that’s not the kind of discussion we have at CrashCourse.
About a week ago, I watched your Adblock rant video, and shortly thereafter disabled AdBlock on my computer (though I'm looking for a solution to remove the "News" section from the Facebook homepage still). A few minutes ago, CGP Grey posted his "Crowdfunding" video, and offered "Adblock Absolution" as a Patreon perk. I've been meaning to ask what your position is about people using Adblock on your videos if they are also subscribed via Subbable.
Oh, if you’re a subbable subscriber…absolutely you are 100% guilt free feel free to block ads on all our videos! A $1 a month subscription on Subbable is literally hundreds of times more money than we’d make from ads.
Sittin’ here writing a script and realizing that the reason Uber and Lyft are fighting so hard right now (and having so much investment capital dumped into them by rich people) is that in 10 years, all cars will be driven by robots and thus taxi services will be much cheaper but still very high margin. Uber wants very badly to kill Lyft now, while it’s young, so that there’s less (or no) competition in that uber-profitable future (pun intended.)
Why are the official SciShow Space and The Brain Scoop uploads listed as copyright claims on your Content ID page? Do you use this to get the revenue from all of these channels in one place?
We basically have an MCN (like Maker Studios) except that it’s only for our channels. So, any time we start a new channel, we can just partner it with our MCN and all the money comes to the same place and we get to claim content that gets re-uploaded.
We’ve thought about opening this up and inviting others in, but we don’t have the resources to police it and make sure that a large number of people wouldn’t mis-use our system, and I wouldn’t feel right about taking money from people to pay for said policing since monetizing videos on YouTube is something anyone can do now.
Hank. Why do you choose not to monetize the videos which you have intellectual right/s to?
Sometimes I do, sometimes I don’t.
I don’t claim videos of people who do covers of my songs because I am honored that they choose to do covers of my songs. I don’t claim videos of people who make music videos for my songs because I think that’s super freaking cool.
I do claim videos from people who just re-upload our content. I don’t claim content from people who dub our videos into different languages because that’s hard work and a service to the world.
So…basically…I’m pleased to be an individual who can go with his gut, rather than a corporation with a policy that doesn’t consider how freaking cool community creations can be.
Could you guys do a video on Ferguson? I am quite confused about whats going on.
I think that we are all pretty confused about what’s going on and, what’s more, any video we made would be out of date pretty instantaneously. I think the internet is actually doing a pretty good job of discussing what’s happening in Ferguson and is already starting to generate actionable things that can be done.
It’s doing a much better job discussing Ferguson than, say, Gaza or Syria, for example, which I would love to videos about (because people know less, and the situations have existed for a longer time and are thus more stable and can be talked about without being immediately out of date.) I haven’t made those videos though because THEY ARE SO HARD TO MAKE.
If you want a full story of what’s gone on, here’s an incomplete timeline as a place to start: Buzzfeed timeline.
I'm confused on the nature of gravity in space. Why is it called "zero gravity"?
First, there’s gravity everywhere. We’ve got a whole episode on it. But we also have this unit of force called the g-force, sometimes abbreviated as G (though this isn’t a technical SI unit.) One G is the amount of force we all experience because of the Earth’s gravity all the time. Two Gs would be double that…we can experience this much force if we’re accelerating away from earth or on a planet two-times more massive than earth (but the same size.) Likewise, if we are in constant freefall (as astronauts are when they orbit the earth) they will experience no Gs at all. We would call that “Zero G” which is not, oddly enough, the same thing as “zero gravity.” Gravity is a force…not amount of force, and just because you are under the influence of gravity (as everything in the universe is (as far as we know)) does not mean you are feeling “G forces.”