Hi, I'm a heathen

I'm not officially going to be frustrated until Monday evening. After that, if this video gets nowhere, Mark needs look for another avenue before interest in this totally sinks. We (you guys, he, or me) can still work towards getting his channel back, but media interest in HIS video, is fading. I had a conversation on this front this morning with a news anchor who thought that the whole thing was fake because nothing ever came of it. Granted, they didn't know about the YouTube thing, and I told them, but all the same.

I would suspect he is waiting to get his account back before posting the video because it's a hot item and it's going to bring in a lot of attention. And with all that traffic, people are bound to look at his other videos regarding Scientology. I would rather have him wait it out as VF says, it would drive more attention and awareness if first posted on YouTube.

Why not see if Gawker would be interested?

Considering they were the original site that had this whole thing start with the Tom Cruise video, the irony would be delicious.

I understand maybe his waiting in order for him to get the recognition from the media he deserves for his years of videos and dedication to this cause. I believe that he really, really deserves that, and the best way for that would be for him to get his channel back so that yes, people can view his other videos as well. If this had happened on a Monday or Tuesday rather than a Thursday/Friday, we would have gotten a lot further in the time span that has passed.

Originally Posted by Anonanagi

Why not see if Gawker would be interested?

Considering they were the original site that had this whole thing start with the Tom Cruise video, the irony would be delicious.

Interesting idea.

"CNN", "BBC", "FOX" etc somehow sound slightly better to me than "Gawker"...

edit: btw; am I missing somthing like the FOX deal going down the drain? ...I thought the hosting issue with YT/vimeo/whatever was the ONE issue here, and that media coverage through FOX had been secured...

Originally Posted by anonymized

"CNN", "BBC", "FOX" etc somehow sound slightly better to me than "Gawker"...

Lol. Unfortunately, one won't take scoop if the other has it. I offered to grease the wheel for him for a pitch to NBC, but that's when he was saying he had scooped Fox. Unfortunately, we don't know who he's scooped, who he hasn't, if he's scooped anyone, and if he wants to.

I would seriously like to know what happened with FOX though.

25 mins on Fox or CNN followed by links to xenutv.com for the whole 2 hours.

Originally Posted by Plups

25 mins on Fox or CNN followed by links to xenutv.com for the whole 2 hours.

Winner is you.

Because as long as there is an embed who cares where it's hosted.

Originally Posted by Skeptic1337

Winner is you.

Because as long as there is an embed who cares where it's hosted.

An embed that works.

Why not upload it fucking everywhere. I thought the idea was to spread the word about Scientology. What good does holding back the video do? Start new accounts with all of Mark's videos wherever he can possibly upload them. What is this gay "Wait 'til Youtube says it's okay to speak" shit?

WBM's own words on the subject, as posted in his blog:

I don’t blame either YouTube or Viacom for this. Both are within their rights. But I’m asking Viacom to retract the complaints because I think my channel is worth keeping on YouTube. In the past few months, it has been an important factor in this whole ongoing story of Anonymous. It’s a story widely reported around the world. YouTube is in the very DNA of the story and my channel was a part of that. I can post my videos on any number of other sites and they will continue to be seen. People will find them, I know.

But I’d miss YouTube and I’d like to think that maybe in a small way they might miss me too.

As others have said, I know this is ages in Internet time, but we'll see how it shakes out by Monday.

Originally Posted by VictoireFlamel

An embed that works.

Thus the alternative hosting discussion if shit goes nowhere with YT the next 1-2 days...

Originally Posted by VictoireFlamel

An embed that works.

But that's the point, put it up in different places one of the yanks it (not sure why they would) and just change the embed.

I understand the want / need to drive youtube viewers to the channel. This interview though is a little bigger then youtube. You want to drive the masses to view it. They wont care where you hosted it.

Any ways I'm tossing this idea here. It's really for bunker to figure decide.

Originally Posted by anonymized

Thus the alternative hosting discussion if shit goes nowhere with YT the next 1-2 days...

Originally Posted by Skeptic1337

But that's the point, put it up in different places one of the yanks it (not sure why they would) and just change the embed.

I understand the want / need to drive youtube viewers to the channel. This interview though is a little bigger then youtube. You want to drive the masses to view it. They wont care where you hosted it.

Any ways I'm tossing this idea here. It's really for bunker to figure decide.

I was agreeing with both of you with my staterment. If something get broke, you fix, or you adapt.

Anyway, you're not allowed to make sense in here. This is the Situation Room.

LiveLeak.com - Redefining the Media WBM, you know what to do

Digg for victolly!

I haven't been staying on top of this as much as others obviously have, because after reading just the summary, it's not something hard to fix. Now before I continue, here is your warning that is going to likely be tl;dr.

Frankly, based on what I have read in the various threads, I expect this will be cleared up within the week. I think we might be forgetting the red tape involved in any large company such as Viacom, who will in all likelihood drop the DMCA complaint, which will allow YT to turn Mark's channel back on. YT is doing nothing more than following their own ToS, and leaving nothing for either side to push on.

However, on the chance that it doesn't, there's a few things we have to realize. The full interview -will- end up on YT, be it by Mark or someone else. That doesn't give it much in the way of leverage. And it's much more efficient for things to continue as they began, and YT is more popular anyways.

Now, what I see that I'd be surprised if no one else had, was the loophole in YT's ToS. Because of the complaint and having his original account closed for ToS violations, he's no longer permitted by YT to have his own account. But all owning the account means is being the original person who registers it and 'owns' the email account attached to it. Any one of us could make a YT account and be the owners of the channel, and give Mark the account name and password as a third-party provider of content. It could even be connected to a shared email account (and if Mark were to devilishly change the password to the email account well that's between him and the creator). The only thing that I would imagine would be required for this would be for the account owner to post non WBM videos. And we all know how difficult it is for someone to download and re-upload some of the more awesome Anon vids out there. With Magoo, OCMB, us, Glosslip, SA, and Mark's own site advertising the new YT channel, and the Jason Beghe interview as the first post, people won't miss it. And as it wouldn't (that I can tell) violate the ToS, we get to laugh at the Scilons as they find themselves quite simply outsmarted.

There you have it, the whole fucking problem, circumvented. Once again, Psyops proves itself far more useful than Brute Force.