Maybe I'm just getting old.

[Gary Huff]

Why it would offend them, how it would offend them, should it offend them... are fundamentally totally irrelevant to the question. All that matters is that it does or might offend them. They have a right to choose whether to be exposed to it or not, not to have it dropped in their lap with no warning.

So you would respect a decision by Vimeo to ban or otherwise hide wedding videos of gay couples?

 

[Pickthorne]

Totally agree with the OP. I self-host for this very reason. And also some of my clients in government are unable to view the larger video hosting sites as they are blocked on their workstations.

 

[simonpwood]

I lived in a country for a while where it was offensive to a large % of the population for a women to drive a car. It was also offensive for them to see a women in public without a headscarf. Drinking alcohol was also pretty offensive, as was eating pork.

Given that the internet is global; do you think it is wrong to show any of the above without warning because some people would genuinely find the above offensive?

There is all kinds of offensive and all kinds of appropriate.

 

[Gary Huff]

Given that the internet is global; do you think it is wrong to show any of the above without warning because some people would genuinely find the above offensive?

Simon, I think the obvious answer is that most people want to be protected from what they find offensive, but what other people find offensive that they don't have a problem with, well just screw those other people, they don't know what they're talking about.

I think it takes an understanding of the larger picture to protect what you personally find offensive because if not, then why should what you not find offensive be protected?

I know adults who cannot handle watching movies outside of G/PG rated Disney cartoons. Frankly, I'd hate to live in a world where, as an adult, I was "protected" from content above this level in order to promote some kind of illusion of propriety...because that's all those "back in the day people were better/nicer/more polite/ect." musings are about: an illusion.

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Well, are we going to live in a civilized society where we respect each other or are we going to live in the jungle.... Fundamentally that's the question. It's content that SOME people might find offensive. You put it behind a warning door out of RESPECT for them and their beliefs, morals, whatever. If you want to get respect you have to give respect.

Why it would offend them, how it would offend them, should it offend them... are fundamentally totally irrelevant to the question. All that matters is that it does or might offend them. They have a right to choose whether to be exposed to it or not, not to have it dropped in their lap with no warning.

On the topic of this thread... that is using an 'open general service', for displaying one's business material... is problematic. The 'what if offensive', can also be 'what if a competitor's media is shown'... A wedding videographer points their potential clients to Vimeo... and a zillion 'other' wedding videographer's work is on display...

The point being, if one uses a general service then anything could happen that may offend or distract the client... the answer is... either use the service providers methods of 'protecting' or don't use the service... if one has to pay to make sure only one's own material is presented... that's the way it is...

In the case of nudity... there are laws about sexually explicit material being presented to minors. However, 'nudity' in the US, and Europe is not 'sexually explicit' by the fact that the person is nude.

I would rather general service providers not lump 'nudity' into 'adult' and require an 'opt in' method for viewing.

As for 'respect', I don't 'respect' people who demand that the world be made 'safe' for them when it comes to 'viewing material'. If they want to volunteer or pay for services which collect lists of 'safe viewing' sites, fine... if they want to contact the service provider and have them provide a 'safe portal'... fine as well...

As it is, it seems that the 'problem' of the original topic arose because of either Vimeo not have an option of 'fine control' over content that was put on the 'feed' listing... or the OP had not availed themself of some option to eliminate potential objectionable content.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

This discussion has gotten way off track - and I'd prefer not to see it turn into a political or religious debate (given that both those topics are not allowed here).

There are two things at play here - offensiveness and appropriateness are two different things.
There is a reason that, even here on DVXuser, we use tags like NSFW. There are many things that I (and most) would not find personally offensive that we still acknowledge as not being appropriate in certain context.

The original post was referring to something that, regardless of offensiveness, we can all hopefully agree is inappropriate in most professional working environments.
Regardless of your feelings on nudity, or where you draw the line for what is considered 'sexual,' I think we can all agree that full frontal male nudity is not appropriate in most workplace environments.
And so, if you are sending links to your clients for work review it seems reasonable to prefer a platform that would not run the risk of promoting videos that might be deemed NSFW (given that your client is probably in an office environment).

The only simple solution to that is to find the platform that fits your needs, and use it - or simply find a way to embed your own videos on your own site so you can control the ecosystem.
And yes, there may be a price associated with both those options - and that is simply the cost of doing business. It's as simple as that.

But please - let's not turn this into a "what is offensive" debate.
The general discussion of how to keep clients from seeing inappropriate material is a constructive one, regardless of how each of us, or our clients, might define inappropriate or offensive.

 

[Gary Huff]

The general discussion of how to keep clients from seeing inappropriate material is a constructive one, regardless of how each of us, or our clients, might define inappropriate or offensive.

Agreed. I can speak from extensive experience with Vimeo that I have never once worried about directing people to my channel, because it's my channel and it doesn't show anything else. Now, if I told people to go to Vimeo and search for my name...well, first that seems somewhat unprofessional to do it that way, and that would also be the way for a potential client to see other people's content, which I wouldn't want anyway.

Aside from that, the content I want to be seen is also embedded on my website, so I could just direct potential clients there as well.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

For that reason I use a wordpress widget to embed my vimeo channel on my website.
It simply takes the RSS feed of the specific channel, so all I need to do is upload my pieces to vimeo and add them to the channel.
That way I can send clients to my site, and no need to worry about any outside videos or any inappropriate content.

 

[Gary Huff]

It simply takes the RSS feed of the specific channel, so all I need to do is upload my pieces to vimeo and add them to the channel.

Now that's a great idea. Never thought about doing it that way. But I tend to split up the videos into different "genres" and add them by hand, depending on where they sit. I also like to write a blog post about different workflows and issues with each one.

Still, if I wanted to duplicate the channel functionality and place it under my control, that would be a great way to go about it. One thing I don't particularly care for is the redesign of the channels. It's also tough to promote older pieces as I've found that most visitors to my Vimeo channel never watch anything on past the first page.

 

[Doc Bernard]

Excellent points Luis.

It is also important to note: Whether you pay for a service, or you utilize a free vid hosting service.........you are at the mercy of the owners and administrators of that site. Or any site for that matter. And the rules you voluntarially agree to. And yes there are cases where the rules do not specifically address an issue, but a judgement is made on behalf of the rest of the members of that site by the people entrusted to do so.

 

[nothing]

That video had one pretty distinct purpose and "artistic merit" shouldn't in any way figure into any decision to at the very least temporarily remove it from public view - like now.

And what purpose is that? I did watch the video, and browsed the rest of the user's channel. It's obvious to me that none of the videos feature said user. It is my opinion that these videos were posted there for the sole purpose of offending some and causing discussions just like this one - and if that is the case, then said channel IS art by my definition.

The idea, previously espoused in this thread, that these videos are meant as some sort of homosexual dating service, is the offensive part of this discussion to me. So male nudity means gay now? That attitude is wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to begin to discuss it.

There is much more homophobia on display here than I ever would have expected from a forum dedicated to producing art, and that saddens me greatly. I guess there are more businessmen than artists here, concerned more with not offending than with art and the statements it can make.

Now, if I told people to go to Vimeo and search for my name...well, first that seems somewhat unprofessional to do it that way...

This.

Such an action is akin to saying "I have my work on the internet, go find it there," and then being surprised when somebody finds something offensive there. Direct your clients more directly, please. Besides, you are using a cheap/free service for business purposes and then bitching when it doesn't cater to you - time to wake up, the world doesn't and never will cater to you.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

With over 90 posts I think it's safe to say this thread has run its course.
Everyone has had their say and the topic has been covered from all sides.
I am closing it now before it is driven over a cliff.