Howdy all! And welcome to Friday! I don’t know about you guys, but I was terribly impressed with the shows this week. A lot of times, when the ‘Colbert Report’ comes back from a break, it struggles a bit with finding its footing before it gets back in the groove, but I really think the break gave the staff (and Stephen, of course) a much needed break and they hit the ground running when they came in on Monday. Stephen has looked so relaxed and refreshed, and I don’t know what they’ve done to his hair this week but it’s just shiny and full and beautiful.
Also, we’ve been doing some cleanup here on the backend with the Episode Guide archive. I put out a call for recruits last week, and we got more of a response to the Episode Guide cleanup than I ever imagined we’d get! Thanks for all who volunteered, even though we weren’t able to use all of your help. I’d like to take a quick moment to say a very sincere Thank You to all of the people who were able to contribute to the the Episode Guide cleanup this week – verbaltypo, nerdygirl, LadyNocturne, FurElise, Porter, Tiger, Val, AnnG, Cole, and last but certainly not least MsInterpreted. When I asked for the recruits for this project, we had 26 guides that needed to be completed for our archive to be cleaned up. In the course of five days, this wonderful team has gotten *22* of them done! I still need to clean up and post the last of the already completed guides (and finish a few of my own), but we should have the project done by the end of the weekend. Huge Kudos to all! I’ll work on a schedule this weekend to get the new SCribes set up for getting the guides done on a nightly basis again, and we should be at 100% with the guides again on a daily basis very soon. But don’t fret – we’ll also be keeping the wonderful R.A.P.S. posts that give us instant feedback to what everyone else thought about the episode.
This year at No Fact Zone, my focus is going to be to make the reader’s fan experience both unique and meaningful. With ColbertNation.com bringing us much more official content, as well as a shiny new forum, it is important that we work hard here to both compliment the support that is finally being given given to the fans by Comedy Central, as well as make your visit here something that you find a worthwhile experience. Our uniqueness here, and what gives us worth, revolves around the fact that we are truly organic, that this is a “labor of love” by the fans, for the fans, and a way for us the fans to express our fandom in a very personal way.
Which brings me to a subject which I’d love to hear your thoughts about in regards to the Lessig interview last night. I found the concept of the mash-up in regards to web content quite interesting. What we do here at No Fact Zone is definitely building on the works of other artists, specifically Stephen Colbert and the ‘Colbert Report’ writers. Not only do we disucuss our feelings about the show and the humor created by the artists, but we also feature things such as fan art and other fandom creations inspired by Stephen and the show.
My creation, my “art” if you will, is this blog. And it’s so much more than talking about Stephen’s beautiful head of hair, although obviously that’s part of it. Through my passion, to express my “art”, I have taught myself HTML, taught myself how to blog, and learned how to do so much online that I’ve never done before. I take my art and make it about expressing my thoughts and feelings about another artist.
The main point that Lessig made that really hit home for me is that this “mash-up” art mentality, taking something that is already created and building upon it, is itself a very valuable form of art. This concept has really given me pause, and brought back to the forefront some thoughts about blogging that have been mulling around in my head for quite some time.
I am proud of my work here at No Fact Zone as are all the staff, but none of us would be creating anything if it were not for our inspiration from Stephen. I’ve been reading the new blogging book by the Huffington Post (The Huffington Post Complete Guide to Blogging), and they say that the number one rule for blogging is to express your passion. And our passion is the show. Building a blog around the actions of another, however, is definitely epitomizing this “mash-up” mentality that Lessig brought to the forefront last night.
There have been moments where I have really done some self-examining, especially at times like this last show break, where there’s not much news and I’m wondering how much of this blog shold be “me” in proportion to how much should be Stephen and the show. Is it fair to the fans of Stephen for me to use this outlet to discuss myself as well as the show? Or how the show affects me personally? The book says that no matter what your passion, it’s your personality that makes or breaks a blog. I like to think that it’s the personality of the commenters who make or break this blog, and I am very satisfied with the strength of our community.
But it still comes around to “my” art, and having “my” art revolve around the show. It was wonderful to feel that in some way, this art of mine is similar to Stephen’s art. I loved the point that Lessig made about how Jon and Stephen base much of their own art on the ridiculous news around them. They take the news, and add to it to create their own unique, and marketable, product. Even Stephen mentioned the fans, and how the Green Screen challenge was the fans taking his work and adding value to it by mashing it up.
So I guess my question to you all is, what are your thoughts about “Mash-up” art? It can be about what we do here, but more than that, I’d like to hear about how Stephen has inspired your art. I know books have been dedicated to him, and portraits have been painted of him, and other fan sites have been created. Most of you who read this blog participate in other fandoms as well. Do you have any thoughts that this interview helped to bring out in you? Some of my favorite posts here at No Fact Zone are the ones where the Zoners really think about things with the show and their own lives. I really look forward to seeing the responses and discussions that these ideas facilitate.
Does this news remind anyone else of Jon Stewart’s interview with “Al Sharpton” (as “me-mixed” by Colbert)?
http://wonkette.com/405343/al-sharpton-is-your-new-alan-colmes#more-405343
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I think fan videos and “mash-ups” are very important in building the fan community and even in making more people interested in the subject matter.
Someone I watch on Youtube (StevieProductions) made a good video recently about copyright laws when it comes to making fan videos and putting them on Youtube (after a music video he made was taken down). His main point being that fan-made music videos introduce people to new music, which I couldn’t agree with more. Even when people make Colbert fan vids, if I like the song and have never heard it before, I will go and check out the song and the artist. I have gotten interested in a lot of new singers just by seeing “mash-ups” online.
I think that mash-ups, which could technically be considered as violating copyright laws, just help to fuel the excitement within the fandom. I love fanvids, macros, LJ icons, fanfic, wallpapers, etc, that all have to do with my favorite fandoms.
Also, I think that Stephen should really put that book he drew in on eBay. And I want to see a closer picture of that Snoopy he drew. lol.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Copyright is always a very sticky issue with things like this site, and other fan endeavors. I remember in the late 90′s that NBC shut down almost all of the ‘Late Night with Conan O’Brien’ fan sites, and they lost a TON of fan support over it. We’ve been fortunate here to work to an extent with Comedy Central, but I always try to be careful with using anything that might be considered a copyright violation. Because if Viacom puts the hammer down, this site is gone. I have no resources to defend myself.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I’ve always been interested in copyright issues when it comes to Viacom. I’m sure everyone here has noticed, but Viacom is a real stickler when it comes to protecting their own. I’ve gone on Youtube and found that things I had looked at only the day before were suddenly missing. I was thinking last night, and things like music videos tend to be in my understanding of ‘mash-ups’, but those things disappear faster then presents at Christmas.
But I do agree that without fansites, the show would probably plummit. That’s why I think I love Stephen so much, he understands the major support his fans give him and plays back with them to an extent.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Word. A ridiculous amount of the artists I listen to now I was introduced to by fanvids and the like. Off the top of my head, there’s Scissor Sisters, Black Lab, Arcade Fire and Big City Rock. I’ve bought 8 albums just from those bands alone.
And yet, one of my fanvids was removed just the other day because of the music. *sigh* Embrace the net, music companies!
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
@bowl ofpetunias
I noticed the disappearance of your vid, it was on my youtube faves.
It was an outstanding vid, and I wasn’t familiar w/ the song until you chose it. :(
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Aw, thank you. I’ve come to realize that half of Linkin Park’s songs could have worked. They’re rather emo angry.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
So — why is there a box on Colbertnation.com that says “Lawrence Lessig’s REMIX has been removed at the request of Penguin Publishers.” …?
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I don’t know where to start on this. There is so much to say. I am not sure whether I have internalized the correct definition of mash-up art but hopefully my comments are still interesting.
I began doing art of the traditional sort because of fan-art. In another fandom, someone made a black and white drawing and got a huge positive response. Then she let us “remix” it and we all added our own colors to it using computer applications. I had so much fun with that that I took art classes inside and outside of school, and now I draw and paint whenever I can, with varying degrees of quality in my final products. I have made some Colbert fan-art and fan-crafts, but it’s not my main focus.
I think of my fan-art as a lesser type of art. I am proud of a pencil drawing I made of Colbert; I grabbed the model picture from an eye candy post here. However, I always have nagging doubts about it, whether I should count it was one of my favorites, because I’ve learned from my art classes that famous subjects are not valued. They age too much attention when the focus should be on your actual craft, and you want to “make something new.” I think this is a high school art show mentality, but it’s also been the traditional approach for centuries. My art history education comes from intense museum visits and not a class, but I do know that in more modern art the remix concept is accepted and applied in all sorts of different ways. I enjoy those results, but I’m more in awe of centuries-old oils that are nearly picture-perfect. I don’t care who the people are, I just love to see the artistry. Still, for myself, if my audience is chiefly online, I’ll probably benefit from using a face they recognize.
That’s all for now. I have a lot more ideas but I do have other things to do…I might be back later to say more.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
The notion of “Fair Use” versus copyright protection is SO complicated, sometimes it seems to reside in the eye of the beholder (as in owner like Viacom vs. youtube). Lessig’s point about added value re Colbert’s addition to the book was well made, on the other hand ad revenues are what fuel Stephen’s show so anything that doesn’t feed that could be interpreted to be a problem. Do you think Stephen’s strong arguments w/ Lessig were only from his character’s point of view or did a little self-preservation come into it as well? (Remember that Viacom revenue flow chart TCR used while discussing the youtube fight?)
Personally, TCR got me reading NFZ and then writing for Colbert U. I’ve created a bunch of Colbert fanvids on my youtube channel but have been careful to not use CC video footage just pictures. These are done for love alone, no money is involved and the absence of that kind of commerce is an important element of the fandom.
As DB noted re this blog, the love and passion for the subject are vital elements in this kind of sharing. It’s what brings us here and what keeps us together as a fan community. You could describe this blog like a worldwide, super “water cooler” around which fans can discuss Stephen and TCR. And isn’t that exactly what TV executives want? Sorry if I’m rambling a bit.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
That’s a great way to describe this blog! :-) Without the fans, they wouldn’t have the shows.
As others have noted, the whole re-mixing/mash-up thing has been around for a very long time. With the addition of computers and the internets, it’s become easier and more accessible. It’s a tricky thing. Where do you draw the line between copyright infringement and fair use? Interesting stuff to ponder.
TCR brought me to this site as well and I truly enjoy the sense of community here as well as the info. I wish I could have helped out with episode guides but I’m not terribly computer-literate and I generally don’t get 2-hour blocks of uninterrupted time at any point during a typical day. I started doing a couple of episode threads a week on the old colboard back in November, I think, and have just started doing the same thing at the new forum and I feel a bit inspired to try to be more creative with them. That’s a challenge for me because I’m not a very creative person and with 2 young children, I don’t have much spare time to sit in front of the computer. We’ll see how it goes.
On an off-topic, free-for-all note, I’m going to the January 15 taping of TCR. Anyone else here attending that same one by any chance?
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Wow, DB, great topic! I’m stealing desktime at work, so I’m just going to fire off a few tidbits that came to mind both last night during the interview and today reading your post.
- Did it seem like Stephen’s admonition to the Nation to NOT make a mash-up of the interview was actually a sly invitation to the Nation to have at it?
- I hadn’t thought of mash-ups in other mediums besides music/video until it occurred to me that the whole art of making collages – bringing together bits of color and shape and size from various already-existing print material to create a distinct and separate work – might be the original mash-up. In fact, there’s a guy who goes around the NY subway system and cuts away pieces of the ads posted to expose part of the ads below it that it was pasted over to make a new “work” that has a very deliberate construct (mash-up by reduction, I guess).
- And just to play Devil’s Advocate – I found it very interesting that the point of contention in a lot of the copyright discussion had to do with monetary value (i.e., Stephen’s doodle’s in Lessig’s book would bring in more money on e-bay than the cost of the un-adorned book in a store) as opposed to intellectual value, which I find to be the more interesting and compelling aspect of copywriting. Regardless of whether or not monetary value can be assessed as added in a mash-up situation, the fact remains that someone thought up and executed the original work(s) (art, music, video, whatever) and without that the subsequent mash-up would have no material to mash. Is requiring footnoting of the original material enough to satisfy giving credit where credit is due? If there’s monetary gain from the mash-up should there be some mechanism for trickle-back to the creators of the original material. I’m not advocating for anything; just asking.
recaptcha: heavy Bixby. I dunno; Bill wasn’t that big a guy.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Since I haven’t seen the episode yet, I can’t really comment on mash-ups. I do love the fanvid with I Don’t Feel Like Dancing. Such a great song, and I hadn’t ever heard it before. I had to download it, and I have it on my HappyMaking playlist on my iPod.
Something I did over the Christmas weekend was frame three Stephen magazine/comic book covers and hang them in my home office (it’s not much of an office – just where my comuter is). Anyway, I framed the Esquire cover (arrows), Entertainment Weekly one (terrorist fist jab w/ Jon), and the Amazing Spiderman Colbert variant. They all have a pretty blue matt in a black frame and look great.
I’m not artistic, but I’d love to do a tap dance for Stephen of the theme song, but it doesn’t seem very tap danceable.
DB, thank goodness for you and your art. I love this site. No one I know in my life is as obsessed as I am, except all of you. Thanks to all of you for giving me a “water cooler” to talk around.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I can honestly say that fan art, mashups if you will, completely changed my life. That sounds overly dramatic, but it’s true. It all started with my very first fanfic I wrote, a Mulder/Scully slash called “Truth or Dare.” I remembered I printed it out, deleted the file, and then I burnt the printout a few days later. But something in me had changed, and that change was a seed that grew into my current, totally different, completely wonderful life.
That’s why I’m such an unapologetic fangirl.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
This is an intersting topic for discussion. Copyright laws when it comes to things like this can be vague and confusing. Speaking as an artist, I’m inspired by the things I see around me. A good amount of the time my inspiration is Stephen. I always get so worried when I paint something, that I always make sure to give credit where credit is due. but art is a tricky thing sometimes. If I draw inspiration from something I see, I mean no harm by it, but that’s not always understood.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
In all honesty, I don’t believe creativity in any civilization can flourish without “mash-up”s. Let’s take literature for example. I spent years in college studying the classics, the masterpieces — the foundations upon which all literature was created. All the literature that exists today wouldn’t exist at all if it hadn’t been for all those masterpieces that came before them…and before them…and before them, and so and so forth, until you get to many more historic works like the Greek classics and the Bible. All of the footnotes at the bottom of all my Norton Anthologies point to allusions or references to other works that inspired those authors (and anyone who’s familiar with “The Waste Land” knows what I’m talking about here). And a generation of writers later, the footnotes in those pieces refer to allusions from those authors. So theoretically, no creative works would exist today if use or inspiration from that content was prohibited from being used in some way to inspire new content. Not to mention all the time I spent also studying literary criticism theory. To be fair, it was the most mind-numbing class I’ve ever taken, but it was nonetheless relevant and important to really critically looking at any piece of literature or art, as the case may be.
Sorry this was a bit long… Needless to say, I’m still itching to go back to school and get my Masters degree in American Lit. As you can see, I have a lot to say. : )
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Lisa, it wasn’t too long. It was deeply thought out. When you referred to the Greek Classics I thought of Joyce’s Ulysses, and your concept made complete sense.
I wonder hold old this issue — wanting compensation for “artistic theft” — actually is. Did artists accuse each other of such acts in the past centuries?
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I could be off-base with this one, but when I hear “mash-up” and “art”, the first thing that comes to mind is “convergence”.
I majored in television production (best worthless degree ever!) and minored in digital media. All my professors talked about was how everything media-related is coming together, blurring lines and influencing each other. I wound up shaping my educational career in a convergent sort of way, learning a little bit of everything and throwing it all together whenever I could (though I emphasized camera and lighting). The goal — mine and my school’s — is to be able to enter the media market at least having a working knowledge of how everything works. I volunteer at a radio station, build my own website, and take photographs — everything I learned in school.
Next year (fall ’10) I’m going for my MFA in photography. As I look at the courses, more schools are inviting mash-ups between media. The practical side of me sees it as, “More job opportunities”, while the artist sees, “More crayons in the box!” I think being able to expand into another area and have it influence you is a great and necessary skill — just like crayons in the box!
Stephen has inspired my art in a number of ways. Mostly I look at his pictures from magazines and see how I could recreate them. He also partly inspired my scriptwriting, improv/acting, and drawing (I drew a great picture of him in profile, albeit anime-style — and I can’t draw men to save my life!). I would love to be able to take Stephen’s picture someday, something like you’d see in an interview magazine… Ergh, I’m rambling! ^_^;;
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
What a great topic DB! Well, I’m still finding my artistic voice, but I did dress up as an imaginary Mrs. “Stephen” Colbert for Halloween. Wore glasses, blue tie, white top, pin-striped skirt, red bracelet (still needs authentic wriststrong bracelet). Does this count as art? I guess art is subjective.
Stephen has also inspired me to try acting…something I’ve wanted to try for a long, long time. I’ve taken Acting I and Acting II, but I hope to eventually take an improv class. Not sure if I’ll go professional, but Stephen has certainly helped me pursue more creative paths. On a side note, I’m going to an improv performance in the near future called Jane Austen Unscripted—which also reminds of Stephen because of improv and and his Jane Austen bit not long ago!
Oh, I’ve also tried a bit of comedy writing. I’m writing about my trip to NYC when I went to the TCR taping and did many other things, but I’m giving the story an exaggerated, comic twist.
Wow. I didn’t realize how much Stephen had influenced my artistic self until now! Thank you Stephen!
I love reading this thread by the way! What a great way to…Better Know a Zoner!
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Haha! Better Know a Zoner! That has a really nice ring to it…
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Thanks Lisa!
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I could never really credit myself as an artist (the best I could do is amateur oboist – my brother has all the talent), but the topic of intellectual property rights is fascinating. I’ve spent years working in intellectual property litigation consulting and have run into the same copyright debate Stephen and Lessig had on Thursday numerous times. The most interesting thing about this debate is that, for now, both sides are correct. “Stephen” is right, current copyright law does not allow for the free use and distribution of an entire work without express permission of the owner and those who do so are technically breaking the law (partial use and fair use distribution laws are even more arcane). The owners tend to want just compensation for their work. However, as folks on this blog have pointed out, most current new ideas are built “on the shoulders of giants.” In other words, almost everything new and valuable is influenced or inspired by the ideas that came before. This is true in literature, art, inventions, and even law itself (at least in the U.S.). Because today’s technologies make it so much easier to create added value from other’s copyrighted work, it may be time to consider a serious overhaul of the copyright laws, not just the minor fixes that have been implemented recently. Although not perfect, patent law may provide a better model. All patent applicants are required to recognize the “prior art” that influenced their invention but are given a de facto monopoly on their specific invention with the issuance of a patent. Anyone wanting to use the patent must either wait for the patent to expire or work out a deal with the patent owner. There are issues with royalty stacking and overvalued patents, but generally the rules are better defined for patents than for copyrights. By not modifying the copyright laws we will lose out on today’s most accessible form of artistic expression, the mash-up and along with it, distribution channels most copyright owners could only dream of.
I’m sorry for the long, rambling post – I just really geek out over these topics :)
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I thought Lessig’s points were very interesting. Copyright-laws do need to be overhauled, and badly. I am an artist, as in I paint and make pretty pictures and such, and I’ve I could never be anywhere if I wasn’t inspired by, well, every piece of art I’ve ever encountered. The problem that I see in Lessig’s argument though it that it seems like it could be taken advantage of really easily. It’s heartbreaking when someone steals your art and claims it as your own, but sometimes it’s even more devastating when someone steals your ideas and concepts and claims them as your own. I think the problem is the line is so frustratingly mushy between theft and inspiration that every case would be subjective and that a set law could never really cover that reality. One the one hand, our laws now are mercilessly strict and archaic and need updating for the internet revolution. On the other hand, having interpretive laws allows people to manipulate them. My head is hurting trying to get a hold on all the different sides honestly xD
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I haven’t tried making fan art yet in any medium, but I enjoy viewing/listening to/reading them and sharing them with other people. I think it gives us interesting, varied perspectives of different people viewing the same show and observing the same performance.
And on that note, I’m enjoying the remixes tremendously. :)
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
I haven’t tried making much fan art either. I haven’t done any remixes. Not talented enough. I love all fan videos and remixes though.
Try making sugar cookie fan art. When Mom and I were making sugar cookies this Christmas, I spelled the name Colbert. Frosting is very hard to work with. But it was very fun.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hobogirl1/
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Lovely pictures! I definitely have to try making food fan art someday. :) I don’t know how to bake, but I love baked goods, hehehe.
Speaking of food, my mom recently bought a giant bag of Doritos Spicy Sweet Chili for all of us to gorge on. And that led me to watch TCR videos when he was in Philadelphia.
And the mosaics are really cool. I cross-stitch, so I hope to make a cross-stitch of Colbert very soon, after I finish my long line-up of projects.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0
Oh you don’t know how unforgiving the frosting on the cookies was. I ruined them a few times. That is a DELICATE art! I gave him a picture of these. I hope I get a response.
Shout Out (Hey!):
0