A whole lot of people like to write about the application of a popular “Web 2.0” site’s model to a specialized interest, purpose, or population.
I’m as guilty of this as anyone else.
- I’ve written (approximately) a bajillion posts about sites which seek to be “Digg for medical literature.”
- I wrote a post called “Facebook for Scientists“
- I even wrote posts with titles like NurseLinkUp: MySpace for Nurses and Sermo: Another “MySpace for Physicians”.
But I’m going to go a little off-topic because I want to point out a handful of the huge number of sites seeking to be YouTube for [Fill in the Blank].
But that’s just scratching the surface of sites borrowing YouTube’s model!
Of course, Judaism isn’t the only religion with its own YouTube. F’rinstance, there’s IslamicTube (formerly IslamTube).
Lest we be overwhelmed with Piety 2.0, remember that no technology exists which can’t be tasked to serve pornography. Witness if you will the example of PornoTube (I’ll refrain from linking to this obviously NSFW site). There are at least a couple of other sites like PornoTube.
A nice contrast to PornoTube is TeacherTube.
And look at the logos- they’re so stereotypically “2.0” with their sans serif fonts, horizontal reflections and grey subtitles.
But I don’t have a problem with any of these. I think that a lot of libraryfolk spend a lot of time thinking over services like YouTube and wondering how their ideas might be leveraged to serve the needs of libraries, library patrons, and librarians. Tools like Pligg let anyone make a Digg clone, so I’m betting we’ll eventually see an open-source package for making YouTube clones- any bets on how long it’ll be before there is a YouTube clone intended for librar* purposes? Quick! Register the most intuitive and sensible domain names!
But before you do, ask yourself: does the world need another YouTube clone?