|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on Feb 17, 2013 5:17:38 GMT -5
... don't criticize it".
These types of comments seem to pop up every time anyone makes any sort of criticism towards a "free" work on the Internet (no, it's not just a YouTube thing), no matter how constructive it may be, and I really hate them.
First, it implies that because it's free, the person doing it doesn't really need to put any effort into it. Sorry but no, if something is worth doing, it's worth doing well. I'm not saying they should look super professional or anything, but if you're going to make something for an audience, you'd better make sure it fits that audience's tastes.
Second, the logic behind it is apparently that if you complain about something you got for free, you're an ungrateful, self-centred jerk. It really isn't the case. Again, if you release something to the public, you ask that public to judge and analyse it. It's far more shallow to try and ignore the things you don't like just because you didn't have to pay for it, not to mention that never pointing out what's wrong prevents the author from improving. And if they don't want to hear the criticism, they don't deserve to have an audience. If something is bad, it's bad no matter what you pay, or don't pay for it.
And third, but most importantly, it's only "free" in the same way that TV is. Electricity and Internet aren't free, and many, many of the people who regularly post stuff on the Internet do make money from it. From Blip giving its members money for advertisement time to YouTube offering deals to some channels, to good ol' ad placement. So basically, you still need to pay something to view the material and frequently, the person creating it makes some amount of money from it, so even the part about it being "free" is bollocks (in fact, these types of comments mostly pop up among fans of works whose author does profit from).
|
|
|
Post by Hurbster on Feb 17, 2013 5:26:06 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if it's free or paid, if it's bollocks I have the right to say so.
|
|
|
Post by willywonka666 on Feb 17, 2013 10:08:29 GMT -5
I haven't heard this, but I'm assuming it comes from people that like reality shows and still rent movies at a store. They don't have high standards in entertainment and as for renting at the store, they are unaware of a thing called Netflix and probably are renting the latest Kevin James laughfest
|
|
Sektor
Unicron
The OTHER Big Red Machine.
Posts: 2,808
|
Post by Sektor on Feb 17, 2013 11:07:58 GMT -5
I only ever hear it when someone is complaining about someone who regularly puts out content not putting as much or any out. And in that case, it's perfectly valid, because its pretty lame to complain about not getting to watch something that (usually) takes a lot of time and effort and comes at no expense to you.
Your third point doesn't really hold up, either. Unless the entire purpose of your internet and electricity is to watch these things, that's not something you "have" to pay to watch it. You would've paid for it regardless. And there's a huge difference between ad revenue and paying for a premium channel on cable, because that money isn't actually coming out of your pocket, you're not paying them anything.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Feb 17, 2013 11:13:33 GMT -5
I usually hear it from fans of internet personalities getting upset when people criticize the quality of said internet personalities, and in that case, I agree with the OP. If someone is going to put videos up, they're open to criticism. If people can't accept actual criticism (at least well delivered criticism) and only want to hear the verbal BJ's, then they're probably not ready for the world at large, or aren't serious about what they're doing.
There are caveats, of course. If someone is acting like a jackass, they deserve to be dismissed. If people are upset because they don't update as much, then that's BS as well. And if you haven't ever enjoyed something someone has done, or haven't enjoyed it for a long, long time, then rather than watching and complaining every week, it's probably time to move on. After a certain length of time, if you don't enjoy watching something, it really is your own fault.
|
|
|
Post by SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman on Feb 17, 2013 11:19:07 GMT -5
Your third point doesn't really hold up, either. Unless the entire purpose of your internet and electricity is to watch these things, that's not something you "have" to pay to watch it. You would've paid for it regardless. And there's a huge difference between ad revenue and paying for a premium channel on cable, because that money isn't actually coming out of your pocket, you're not paying them anything. People don't pay for specific shows they watch on TV either and you don't hear anyone say "well, Family Guy's free so you shouldn't criticize it". As for ad revenue, my point is that the people making these works do make a profit off their work, with said profit being directly proportional to the amount of people viewing their works, therefore content creators do owe their fans a certain level of quality. It may not be coming from your pocket, but you're still making this guy money.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 24,166
|
Post by Bo Rida on Feb 17, 2013 11:59:53 GMT -5
Totally agree with the last point, be it the license fee (TV tax), subscriptions or advertising you'll be paying for it somewhere along the line. Even advertising budgets come from the money we pay companies, on a simplistic level their products would be cheaper if they didn't spend so much on marketing (of course the situation is more complex than that, if nobody knows about a product they won't buy it).
|
|
Bobeddy
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Made a Terrible Mistake
Posts: 15,183
|
Post by Bobeddy on Feb 17, 2013 12:33:02 GMT -5
I think it really does depend on the situation.
Let's take the Nostalgia Critic for example. Someone complaining that he's only doing a video every two weeks instead or every week, they've no right to complain as that's just self-entitlement.
But say a few months ago when people were complaining that the quality of his output was flagging or that he was doing too many crossovers, that's a valid complaint. It's an opinion but it's a critique of his work and anyone who puts something out there to be viewed opens themselves up to that.
But anyone who criticizes should also understand that they have the option of not watching anymore. I don't understand the mentality of people who watch something week-to-week and just complain about it. I love the Simpsons but I can't stand what it is now. So, I stopped watching the new episodes because they made me angry. But saying that, I will occasionally watch a new one to see if the quality has improved and to see if the criticisms I have still hold.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Feb 17, 2013 14:15:32 GMT -5
I think it really does depend on the situation. Let's take the Nostalgia Critic for example. Someone complaining that he's only doing a video every two weeks instead or every week, they've no right to complain as that's just self-entitlement. But say a few months ago when people were complaining that the quality of his output was flagging or that he was doing too many crossovers, that's a valid complaint. It's an opinion but it's a critique of his work and anyone who puts something out there to be viewed opens themselves up to that. But anyone who criticizes should also understand that they have the option of not watching anymore. I don't understand the mentality of people who watch something week-to-week and just complain about it. I love the Simpsons but I can't stand what it is now. So, I stopped watching the new episodes because they made me angry. But saying that, I will occasionally watch a new one to see if the quality has improved and to see if the criticisms I have still hold. Sure we can, cutting down on output is obnoxious. Plus look what it eventually leads to: Spoony, Death Battle, VG Cats. Series just gracing us with a video when they feel like it.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Feb 17, 2013 14:20:29 GMT -5
I haven't heard this, but I'm assuming it comes from people that like reality shows and still rent movies at a store. They don't have high standards in entertainment and as for renting at the store, they are unaware of a thing called Netflix and probably are renting the latest Kevin James laughfest That's... a really judgmental post.
|
|
Dukect
Don Corleone
A person who tries to make sense of the senseless
Posts: 1,573
|
Post by Dukect on Feb 17, 2013 15:04:54 GMT -5
As some one who does Online reviews (cheap plug) I take any criticisms good or bad because I feel that if you have a legit criticism of my work then I could work on it to become better. As for bad criticisms like "youl lik wrestling lol your gay" well I just laugh them off
|
|
|
Post by Brother Nero....Wolfe on Feb 17, 2013 16:00:09 GMT -5
The way I see it, criticism is always fine regardless of whether a product is free or not. The line is drawn when it goes from criticism to demanding--which is ridiculous if the product is free. "Free Product X needs to update more often!" is not really a fair thing to say since the provider isn't really gaining anything from fulfilling your demands, but "Free Product X would be better if it updated more often" seems fair. Free does not protect you from criticism, just from demands.
Though there's also an argument to be made that a lot of "free stuff" like say, web series, actually generate money for the guy making it. Sure you aren't directly paying him, but you watching it makes him money--so there's room for harsher criticism there, because should you stop watching his show, that would actually affect him. It's closer to a "commercial set of rights" than anything else.
|
|
Glitch
Grimlock
Not Going To Die; Childs, we're goin' out to give Blair the test. If he tries to make it back here and we're not with him... burn him.
Watching you.
Posts: 12,787
|
Post by Glitch on Feb 17, 2013 16:42:31 GMT -5
Most people shouting out this stupidity are idiots who use this as a defense mechanism for you criticizing something they like. Just like every other argument about why you should shut up and stop criticizing something, it boils down to you taking apart something they like. They have absolutely no defense for liking a piece of crap, so they come up with some convoluted logic.
Similar to the example somebody brought up with kevin james movies, they laugh at something simply because it has jokes. And enjoy an action movie because it has people fighting. Low brow loving people who are too stupid or ignorant to realize what low brow is.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Feb 17, 2013 17:13:10 GMT -5
I think it really does depend on the situation. Let's take the Nostalgia Critic for example. Someone complaining that he's only doing a video every two weeks instead or every week, they've no right to complain as that's just self-entitlement. But say a few months ago when people were complaining that the quality of his output was flagging or that he was doing too many crossovers, that's a valid complaint. It's an opinion but it's a critique of his work and anyone who puts something out there to be viewed opens themselves up to that. But anyone who criticizes should also understand that they have the option of not watching anymore. I don't understand the mentality of people who watch something week-to-week and just complain about it. I love the Simpsons but I can't stand what it is now. So, I stopped watching the new episodes because they made me angry. But saying that, I will occasionally watch a new one to see if the quality has improved and to see if the criticisms I have still hold. Sure we can, cutting down on output is obnoxious. Plus look what it eventually leads to: Spoony, Death Battle, VG Cats. Series just gracing us with a video when they feel like it. It's only obnoxious if they're not honest about it. Otherwise, they'll make money based on how much they put out, and if they're not putting out much for whatever reason, they'll make less and it balances out. As far as output goes, the only criticism that has weight with me is if you've commissioned an artist for something and they're not putting it out in a timely manner.
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Feb 17, 2013 17:22:32 GMT -5
Could we not make viewpoints without burying other people with it?
|
|
|
Post by Apricots And A Pear Tree on Feb 17, 2013 17:30:08 GMT -5
Could we not make viewpoints without burying other people with it?
|
|
|
Post by Big DSR Energy on Feb 17, 2013 18:27:47 GMT -5
Even things that don't cost you (the consumer) money are not actually free. You still spend time watching/listening/reading whatever the thing is. And you're not getting that time back.
|
|
Dat Dude
Dennis Stamp
Wait, what?
Posts: 4,785
|
Post by Dat Dude on Feb 17, 2013 18:45:07 GMT -5
I think it's a valid argument if the viewer is constantly complaining about when the next installment is coming. If the content provider is not getting paid for their work, chances are that they have a job on the side, and thus their schedule would be limited.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2013 19:00:49 GMT -5
To me when I hear that it translates to "You get what you pay for."
Which seems fair enough to me. I don't expect free stuff to be that great. It's cool when it is and it's not really worth it to complain about it because that probably means it just wasn't intended for me.
|
|
|
Post by MGH on Feb 17, 2013 19:58:44 GMT -5
I haven't heard this, but I'm assuming it comes from people that like reality shows and still rent movies at a store. They don't have high standards in entertainment and as for renting at the store, they are unaware of a thing called Netflix and probably are renting the latest Kevin James laughfest That's... a really judgmental post. Yeah, it was. That wasn't cool.
|
|