New Direction: Drumming Up A Dead Story

Lots of posts have been made, lots of drama has ensued, lots of thoughts have been stated, lots of progress has been made regarding all things XenuTV1. Now, that situation is essentially over. Let's recap here with the greatest hits, and then move on to how we can drum up this dead story about Jason Beghe.

Questions:
1) What about Fair Use?
From what I've learned Mark didn't introduce the clips, so they weren't used "fairly. Door, meet shut. Correct me if I'm wrong.

2) What about making an example out of YouTube for impeding free speech?
YouTube's stance on the matter is not going to change at this point. Particularly because BayTSP has told Mark that they aren't retracted. Door, meet closed.

3) What about me/my brother/my cousin offering Mark my account/What about XenuTV2?
No. Mark emailed me this tonight (Important part in bold):

from Mark Bunker <xenutv@hotmail.com>
to Victoire Flamel <vicflamel@gmail.com>,
date Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 7:47 PM

I wish I had time to be following all of this. I can only steal a minute or two at work to check email.

I have a feeling that any attempt at a XENU TV2 would get stopped. My brother offered to open an account for me to use and countless others have offered me their accounts. I'm sure if it's a regular space for my videos, whoever complained will complain again.

If we can't get it back, my new home will be at Vimeo. People can feel free to download my stuff and post it to YouTube themselves. I'd only ask they link back to my website.

Thanks.

Also, see this thread for ideas about perhaps putting a title card on said uploading materials: From Mark On The WHOLE Issue

In Summary:
It's been a long battle, mostly uphill, but in the end, Mark admits that he screwed up a bit, and I think it's best that we move on from YouTube and start focusing on how we can draw more media attention to this story now that that videos have been released.

Mark stated, and given his express permission that any and all of his videos may be spread virally, all that he asks is that you link it back to him. Whether that is Xenu.net, or whereever his new video channel home may be.

New Direction:
Let's draw media attention to the actual VIDEO, not the channel. While the media is starting to trickle in this story, it's pretty dead. Let's change that. Ideas should be discussed, and here's my contribution:

This is the phone number for the NEWS desk at NBC. Please, please, please for the love of Xenu, if you want to be taken seriously, please be serious. I would never tell Anons how to conduct themselves (people do what they want), but please keep in mind that you are calling the news desk of a major news organization and if you want to be taken seriously, please be serious. For those that would rather email, I'll get an appropriate email address (one that is more likely to be read) as soon as I can and update this OP.

I'm sure Mark has appreciated all the wonderful support we gave him trying to get his channel back up, but now, a new direction is needed.

NBC won't like this, will probably be rude, and may go so far as to say that this isn't the appropriate public channel (it's not), but progress needs to be made and this is the right desk.

NBC News Desk At 30 Rock: 212-664-2731

Please read this post (or at least the above paragraph before you start mass calling this number)

The video everyone should be directing the media to is either Mark's Blog:
Jason Beghe Interview THE WOG BLOG from XENU TV

Or, this cut together version (Captain Slug, you may want to link to Mark's blog which is the source in your video notes as well)

YouTube - XENUTV - Jason Beghe FULL Interview

You forgot your dead horse

Originally Posted by avatar2008

You forgot your dead horse

Perhaps, but at the requests of others..

I completely disagree with Victoire's statements.

1. You do not understand the "fair use" clause. The theme of his youtube channel is true scientology awareness and its current impact on society.
Showing a 3-minute clip from a television show that has produced thousands of hours of video material, is hardly disproportionate. Using the clip was not malicious and was undoubtedly appropriate in following the messages, writings, feelings, opinions, analysis, and journals also included on the Xenutv YouTube account.

2. Youtube needs to feel the pressure. They pointed a finger and ran away. I can't believe so many people fell for it.
Youtube is in bed with Scientology. Youtube has no regular or legal obligation to completely obliterate WBM's 1st and 2nd accounts. ToS/EULA is not legally binding and gives youtube the power to make up any rules they want on a case by case situation.

Youtube is Scientology's reluctant mistress. Ms. Tube thinks she's all grown up and an independent successful lady. Too bad that Mr. Scientology wears the pants in the house. Ms. Tube doesn't want to be an obvious tramp, but it only takes one or two fists to the face before Mr. Scientology decides blood is the best lubricant.

YOUTUBE DID IT

Originally Posted by alolnymous

I completely disagree with Victoire's statements.

1. You do not understand the "fair use" clause. The theme of his youtube channel is true scientology awareness and its current impact on society.
Showing a 3-minute clip from a television show that has produced thousands of hours of video material, is hardly disproportionate. Using the clip was not malicious and was undoubtedly appropriate in following the messages, writings, feelings, opinions, analysis, and journals also included on the Xenutv YouTube account.

2. Youtube needs to feel the pressure. They pointed a finger and ran away. I can't believe so many people fell for it.
Youtube is in bed with Scientology. Youtube has no regular or legal obligation to completely obliterate WBM's 1st and 2nd accounts. ToS/EULA is not legally binding and gives youtube the power to make up any rules they want on a case by case situation.

Youtube is Scientology's reluctant mistress. Ms. Tube thinks she's all grown up and an independent successful lady. Too bad that Mr. Scientology wears the pants in the house. Ms. Tube doesn't want to be an obvious tramp, but it only takes one or two fists to the face, before Mr. Scientology decides blood is the best lubricant.

YOUTUBE DID IT

Anyone that wants to keep pressuring YouTube, fine. I'm all for whatever you want to do. However, Mark made it very clear tonight that he won't be opening a "XenuTV2" which is what a lot of people were suggested. Many people have PM'd me and emailed asking where we go from here in terms of bringing Media attention to the Jason Beghe story, and this thread is an answer to that, and to assist those people.

Also, disproportion has got nothing to do with any of this. Someone could argue that they've saved thousands of lives working for the World Health Organization, but if they kill their wife, they are going to jail.

Alas, the full interview vid on YT is now gone. Removed for ye olde terms of use violation. -.-

Just my 2 (euro)cents:

Who decides what to do when infringement takes place on Youtube? Is that Youtube or the one complaining about infringement?
It is Youtube calling the shots here. If Mark had an infringing video on his account, it is Youtubes decision what action they take. To my knowledge, removing the video would have been enough. Their decision is to yank the account. It has nothing to do with BayTSP, Viacom, Stephen Colbert. Just Youtube.

I think Mark should ask people not to repost his video's on Youtube. It is Youtube that implements these draconic measures, they should feel the pain for doing that.

Primary target? Scientology. Not YT, BayTSP, etc.

The cult is doing a fine job of suppressing this. RadarOnline and Glosslips, two site I know are in Google News' index, aren't showing up when you search for Beghe. And Glosslips posted it TWICE.

Consider Google compromised.

googlebomb timez?

Originally Posted by ENSLAVER

googlebomb timez?

yes

I still want to know where in the world is Matt Lauer? He's still being glib. I would think he would like to have a target handed to him on a silver platter.

Google relies on keywords. The more keywords (scientology, anonymous, beghe, cruise, free katie, suri, travolta) the more linkbacks (here's one: GlossLip Is Tom Cruise Film “Valkyrie” The Latest Victim Of Anonymous Campaign Against Scientology), the more likely it is to appear. Learn the google algorithm, plan the statement wisely, use the robots.txt file to your advantage (come back and see me every 12 hours). Google is google. Know thine enemy before fighting it.

}:{)>

Oh, and googlebombing is "not condoned."

Holy hell fuck face. YouTube can suck it at this point as far as I'm concerned. Their flagging system is a huge problem, and Google hasn't picked up on Glosslip and the "WOG Blog" listing about Jason Beghe was back on page 3 (page 1 earlier).

I will make calls when it's later on the West coast. I'm agreeing with everyone.

GOOGLE'S NUMBER: 650-253-0000 (in case anyone forgot)

Originally Posted by VictoireFlamel

Holy hell fuck face. YouTube can suck it at this point as far as I'm concerned. Their flagging system is a huge problem, and Google hasn't picked up on Glosslip and the "WOG Blog" listing about Jason Beghe was back on page 3 (page 1 earlier).

I will make calls when it's later on the West coast. I'm agreeing with everyone.

GOOGLE'S NUMBER: 650-253-0000 (in case anyone forgot)

And thanks for keeping this up! The more dead horses are beaten, the more people wonder why it is being done, and they look. Eyes on the videos, eyes on the stories (especially the eyes of the damn media) are what is needed. And as they say, the squeaky wheel usually gets the grease first.

Google sued over advertising program | Tech news blog - CNET News.com

Google is not having a good day.

<QUOTE> When customers do not bid for ads on third-party sites, Google places ads there anyway and automatically charges customers the amount they specified for ads on Google.com, the lawsuit says.

On the system, customers see two blank boxes, one for typing in a bid for ads on Google.com and another one, marked "optional," for putting ads on content network sites. Sophisticated search engine marketers know to put a "0" in the box for the content network AdSense sites if they don't want ads there, says Brian Kabateck, lead counsel on the case. "For most people, if you see a box and leave it blank, you think you're not going to be charged," he says.

Google does not inform its advertisers that if they leave the box next to the content bid blank, Google will use the advertiser's bid for clicks occurring on the content network, the lawsuit says. There is no option to opt out of content ads during the process, according to the document.</QUOTE>

According to the story, this is a recent filing and the lawyers haven't framed a response yet.

I wonder how much bad press they can handle in a week...

Here is my hopefully short term solution to our pretty major problem. Not the best but hopefully it will do for now.

The failsafe solution for getting this to the media is BURNING IT ONTO CD and handing it to them (local or national media outlets). I'm considering doing this in my area since the USA Today, Gannet, and other assorted offices are in the DC area.

Otherwise the FULL version on Google Video is still up
Jason Beghe Scientology Interview -- COMPLETE [Part 1 of 1]
for now atleast