Google seeking to shut down YouTube-toMP3 conversion websites
by Andrew Moran (Guest contributor/Digital Journalist)
Internet juggernaut Google is seeking to shut down a very popular website that converts YouTube videos into MP3 files. The search engine giant wrote a letter to YouTube-MP3.org saying it has violated YouTube’s terms of service.
For years, YouTube users have been able to download music from the top video streaming website. Visitors simply copy and paste the URL into a bar on YouTube-MP3.org and within moments the file is converted into a MP3 file.
Google is seeking to end this practice. The Internet company issued a letter to the website threatening legal action for violating YouTube’s terms of services, according to the blogTorrentFreak.com, which claims to have seen the letter. It said the letter was written by Harris Cohen, YouTube associate product counsel.
Furthermore, Google has blocked the website’s servers from accessing YouTube. This seems to be something that Google has been pressured to do for months from the top four record companies as well as content owners, who want an end to these YouTube conversion websites.
The blog did report that similar sites are starting to be targeted. This may be a daunting task for Google because if one types in the terms “YouTube MP3” into its search bar, there are 4.2 million results for users looking to get music off YouTube.
“We would estimate that there are roughly 200 million people across the world that make use of services like ours and Google doesn’t just ignore all those people, they are about to criminalize them,” said Philip, the website owner, in an interview with the blog. “With the way they are interpreting and creating their ToS every one of those 200 million users is threatened to be sued by Google.”
Statistics from BizInformation.com suggest thatYouTube-MP3.org generates more than 40,000 visitors a day.
Google or YouTube have not officially commented on this situation publicly.
This article was originally published on Digital Journal [Link]
Why news publishers shouldn’t be spamming communities like reddit
Every news outlet wants pageviews to grow every month. But that hunt can end up bruising publishers deeper than they expect, thanks to being ignorant to online linking etiquette.
Yesterday, online community reddit – which attracts two billion pageviews monthly – announced several prominent websites are now banned from linking to their content. A new sub-reddit (a page on the site) lists the banned domains, which include Businessweek.com, GlobalPost.com, Sciencedaily.com and phys.org.
reddit admins explain the “banhammer” by writing, “Some domains are not allowed on any part of reddit because they are spammy, malicious, or involved in cheating shenanigans.”
reddit general manager Erik Martin confirms the ban is temporary but it’s unclear for how long.
Previously, reddit banned URLs coming from The Village Voice due to writers consistently submitting their links to the site, in a manner reddit considered “cheating.”
The Daily Dot explains how self-promotion is serious business on Reddit, “but it’s also a tricky game. The site doesn’t explicitly forbid posting your own content, but it does warn that doing so puts you on ‘thin ice.’”
Publishers should know better. They should recognize how savvy users on reddit or other communities can be, especially when they sniff a cheater in their midst. Continuosly linking to your own site is not why communities such as reddit were created; readers crave honest truthful content, not something that just wants to boost pageviews and SEO value.
When the ban is lifted on these over-linking news outlets, they should learn from their slaps on the wrist. Brand trust will only be hurt by violating linking etiquette on social communities, so if they want to polish their credibility they need to play by the rules. It can be frustrating to editors who only care about exposing their content to more eyeballs, but the resulting negative publicity from these abuses will only reveal how little they know a crucial lesson about online conduct: yes, promote yourself when appropriate but pick and choose your moments carefully.
No one likes a kid who just brags about their own toys.
Why the reddit IamA Q&A posts can be the future of interviews
The Q&A interview has been done. You’ve seen it countless times in newspapers and magazines, with the usual back and forth from a journalist looking for that great pull-quote from an interviewee trying to come up with something pithy. Often, the Q&A focuses on celebs, innovators, well-known names.
But something interesting is happening on reddit, the popular online community billing itself “the front page of the Internet.” This website of sub-communities offers a page called IamA, featuring people available to be questioned by anyone joining the sub-reddit. Essentially, this idea is upturning the Q&A norm and letting the readers participate directly by asking questions and getting direct answers.
The community might feature a celeb such as Jack Black or Joss Whedon once in a blue moon, but what I find most appealing by IamAs are the average regular folk who open themselves up to questioning. I really enjoyed learning about my favourite TV show, The Daily Show, thanks to an intern who revealed behind-the-scenes tidbits about Jon Stewart and the writing crew. There’s the fellow who lost his dad to a stroke and is walking across the U.S. to honour his memory. Or the 24-year-old living with albinism. Or the retired drug dealer. Or the Iraqi who lives through horrific war. And this is just the past four days.
What is compelling about these interviews is the unfiltered truth. No editor is hand-selecting what questions are answered. It’s up to the interview subject, who truly says Ask me Anything! (thus, AMA). The editorial gatekeeper is bypassed to bring readers an honesty you won’t find anywhere else.
Could this be the future of the Q&A? Will this upend how journalists approach interviews? It very well could be, if progressive publishers take note. Some outlets try to bring in guests to take liveblogged questions, but it feels so quick and curated, as if publishers are worried a question might upset their precious guest. That’s an old-school way of thinking. reddit lets the reader ask any question without any censorship (barring vulgar and abusive language of course); that kind of respect for the reader goes a long way. I’ve seen IamA threads with more than 2000 comments, and the interviewee has done his best to reply to most of them.
I can picture how this type of Q&A can be used in the mainstream media: the Globe & Mail, say, can invite someone of interest, like an open-heart surgeon, to answer any of the questions submitted within a 12-hour period, structured not too differently than a reddit IamA. The doc takes a few hours to answer the questions he can, offering as little or as much insight as he wants into his career. Readers can be notified with their question was answered, either via email or (dare we say it) SMS. This can all take place on Facebook too. Then, after the Q&A session, the Globe editor can compile the best answers into a succinct article summing up the doctor’s statements. The Q&A remains active on the website so anyone can see the answers the editor couldn’t include in the article.
Is this crazy talk? Too ambitious? I don’t think so. If news publishers want to embrace digital media as they say they do, they need to look at successful communities such as reddit to see what works. Otherwise, they’ll just be doing the same boring thing we know and don’t love.
Digital Journal among Top 20 most promising startups in Canada, invited to C100 event in Silicon Valley
Digital Journal announced today it has been hand-picked from hundreds of companies across Canada as one of the 20 most promising startups by the C100, an organization representing accomplished Canadian entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley.
Twice a year, the C100 holds an event called 48 Hours in the Valley designed to offer 20 of Canada’s most promising startup companies a chance to visit Silicon Valley for two days of mentorship, workshops, investor meetings, strategic partner visits and networking.
Digital Journal is happy to say it has been recognized along with 19 other Canadian startups as “best-of-the-best of Canadian entrepreneurship” and the company has been invited to Silicon Valley for the exclusive 48 Hours in the Valley event in June that caters to Canada’s best-in-class companies.
“Being named in the Top 20 is a badge of honour for Digital Journal,” says Chris Hogg, CEO of Digital Journal, “especially given the fact that media companies never show up on a Top 20 list of technology companies. It really speaks to our unique business advantage in the media space, the power of our platform and our ability to execute.”
The C100 is a non-profit, member-driven organization whose focus is to support Canadian technology entrepreneurship and investment. The organization is made up of a select group of people based primarily in Silicon Valley, including startups CEOs, top executives of companies such as Apple, Cisco, EA, eBay, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Oracle, and venture investors representing more than $8 billion in capital.”
Digital Journal has an exceptional management team who has built a company and product from the ground up, and we are looking forward to playing a big role in the future of media,” said Hogg. “We are also very fortunate to be backed by some of the most talented Digital Journalists in the space and we look forward to moving ahead to the next stage with them and bringing more opportunities to content creators everywhere.”
More information on Digital Journal, the team, its product and the company’s technology, can be found here. Digital Journal also hosts an annual speaker series called Future of Media dedicated to following the evolution of journalism, news and media. Past speakers include executives from Facebook, BBC, Globe and Mail, Global News, CBC, CTV, Rogers, blogTO, Polar Mobile, National Post and more.
Facebook testing new feature Highlight to let you pay to promote status updates to more friends
Social media giant Facebook is testing a new tool called Highlight, letting users pay a small fee to make sure their status updates reach more friends, it’s been reported by TechCrunch.
Highlight lets the average user, not Pages or businesses, select an “important post” and make sure friends see the update, the blog explains.
Highlighted posts could appear higher in the news feed, stay visible for longer, and display in front of more friends and subscribers. “However, they’re not colored differently to make them stand out. And to be clear, this is not like Twitter’s Promoted Tweets which is designed for businesses. Facebook Highlight is for the end-user.”
New Zealand is reportedly a testing ground for this new feature, which hasn’t been rolled out officially yet. Facebook wrote to TechCrunch: “We’re constantly testing new features across the site. This particular test is simply to gauge people’s interest in this method of sharing with their friends.”
A New Zealand report states “The trial appears to mark Facebook’s first attempt to make money from postings by regular users and comes as it is gearing up for a public listing which is expected to value the company at about US$90 billion.”
The experiment is playing with different fees for this feature, including a free option. A screenshot of the feature shows a screen asking for $1.80 US to use Highlight.