The amount of media being wiped from the internet is worrying for viewers, and industry workers who need the exposure, says journalist and critic Zach Schonfeld
Last June, fans of Comedy Central – the long-running channel behind beloved programmes such as The Daily Show and South Park – received an unwelcome surprise. Paramount Global, Comedy Central’s parent company, unceremoniously purged the vast repository of video content on the channel’s website, which dated back to the late 1990s.
I’ve looked around quite a bit for The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. No one seems to have the complete series. The show ran nightly for 30 years and amassed 6714 episodes so it would be quite a large torrent.
Most of the episodes aired before at-home VHS was common, and TV stations weren’t in the habit of archiving their old footage for nightly broadcasts; The show was viewed as transient since it dealt with current events, and nobody expected people to want to re-watch old episodes. It’s likely that a lot of them aren’t available simply because nobody (including the tv station) has recordings.
Wait until you realize that most of your favorite movies and shows have been re edited or messed with.
I was watching the office for the 100th time and one of my favorite jokes was just straight up removed from the show during this rewatch. So just in the last few months they’ve gone back and edited the show.
I was also rewatching breaking bad and they’ve changed some of the music as well.
Here’s a random paranoid tangent before lunch! I was reading recently
about the evolution of theater in England over a hundred years from
~1550-1650. Elizabeth ruled during the first part of that interval,
and Shakespeare wrote. His plays included perspectives from wide
slices of society and were performed for royalty and commoners
alike. Elizabeth died and private theatrical commissions began to
outgrow public theater, which according to wikipedia “sustained
themselves on the accumulated works of the previous decades”.
Starting in 1642 theaters were closed entirely by act of a Puritanical
Parliament. That ban lasted 18 years and once the audience was Quite
Thirsty, the English Restoration restored theater abstractly and
filled it with bawdy raunch.
Yada yada, Disney then hired a crew of weepy Christian writers in the
20th century to repackage folk tales into Little Mermaid and Iron Man,
which seems parallel enough to Shakespeare retelling Ovid. Film
flourished, and in the early days of broadcast TV anybody could star
in their own very own program. The Writers were on the brink of
delivering us Heroes, but they up and left before they could save the
cheerleader.
Now this age of regurgitated, computer animated-and-written,
crowdsource produced art seems familiar, too. We’re filling the gaps
with what we know, and the Appalachians wielding the pen are finding
gaps they didn’t know were there. It’s odd being here, but my point is that if we
are stuck in a loop then there’s the potential that on the horizon is
a period of Hollywood producing a bunch of light hearted Boob
Comedies.
Preservation is an invasive and destructive process. Recreating the experience of watching ‘The Daily Show’ in the 90s or early '00s is already impossible. Language and culture mildew and rot just like leather and wood.
EDIT: People don’t seem to understand what I’m talking about. Even the people who are responding in good faith seem confused. That’s on me. So I thought I’d try to clarify with an example.
Take the Mona Lisa. Perhaps one of the most preserved objects in history. It’s so well preserved that it’s impossible to see. Sure, you can look at it, but you won’t see it. Taking a picture of the painting is encouraged, but you can’t get a look at it in your camera roll either.
If you saw the actual painting hanging on a friend’s wall, your first thought would probably not be “what a masterpiece”, but “why didn’t they remove the default print that came with the frame”? If you go to Paris, you can wait in line to have the “Mona Lisa experience” but the painting you saw wasn’t hanging on the wall, what you’ll see is the Mona Lisa you brought with you.
(yes, I stole this example from ‘were in hell’ youtube channel)
Even considering your edits, it’s still a stupid argument. By that same logic nothing should be preserved. Watching LotR now is not the same as watching it when it first came out, which should have never been made according to you because by that time the book should have already been destroyed since you wouldn’t want to preserve it for 50 years, but Tolkien shouldn’t have even written it, since they were based on ideas and drafts he did during the first world war exploring how war changes men and power corrupts, which obviously is only valid in that context and nowhere else so it should be destroyed since preserving it would be invasive and destructive, no?.
Preserving something can never be destructive, it’s the opposite of it. If the Mona Lisa was destroyed you wouldn’t even know it existed, so how can having preserved it be destructive when the alternative is oblivion?
And I agree that the Mona Lisa is no big deal, you know who else agrees? People from that time. It’s widely known that the Mona Lisa was one of Da Vinci’s less famous works, and until Napoleon made a big deal out of it it was just a random painting in a random museum. So I get part of your point, that people who make a big deal out of the Mona Lisa are only there to see the famous painting, but that doesn’t mean that there’s no reason to preserve it, or that there are no people who go there to see the actual Mona Lisa.
What an absolutely idiotic take. like holy shit bro this has to be the dumbest shit I’ve ever read, and I’ve come across some doozies. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read through it. I award you no up votes and may lemmy mods ban your account.
obviously a news show isn’t going to feel the same rewatching it. that’s not the point lol.
that would be like saying it’s dumb to preserve newspapers in libraries because it’s not going to feel as good rereading the “Hitler is dead” headline. people don’t look at old news to have a good time.
boy was it silly of us to preserve that kind of thing and it totally never comes in handy/s
that’s not even what people are upset about anyway. comedy Central mostly makes entertainment programming that isn’t news based and can still be enjoyed whenever. believe it or not, comedy Central has a lot of content that will stand the test of time. especially when looking at their stand-up catalogue.
this is the destruction of a library. a digital one, but a library none the less. that’s what people are mad about.
but you’re right. we should just dump all of our old movies and shows. they’re worthless moldy junk anyway… 🙄
Sure, “no man sets foot in the same river twice”, but that does nothing to argue against the preservation of cultural items.
Take music, for instance. I never feel the same way the second time listening to a song as I did the first time, but that doesn’t make the music less special or change anything about it at all, and it certainly does nothing to advance a hypothetical argument that music shouldn’t be recorded or that the recordings of it shouldn’t be preserved for future enjoyment or different audiences.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !selfhosted@lemmy.world
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.
Rules:
Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
Resources:
selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
/r/datahoarders
Is there a
dataLemmy alternative?Edit: don’t post if you just woke up
Letting others hoard for you. Torrents, usenet
What are the biggest usenets?
I use usenetserver.com and have been for a long time at least.
🖕 my home server disagrees 🏴☠️
Yo ho yo ho…
fill upp those hard drives me hearties yo ho!
I still have dvds and a dvd player like an old person for just this reason.
This is why pirating is justified. If you want your shows to last forever, torrent them, and keep them seeded.
I’ve looked around quite a bit for The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. No one seems to have the complete series. The show ran nightly for 30 years and amassed 6714 episodes so it would be quite a large torrent.
Most of the episodes aired before at-home VHS was common, and TV stations weren’t in the habit of archiving their old footage for nightly broadcasts; The show was viewed as transient since it dealt with current events, and nobody expected people to want to re-watch old episodes. It’s likely that a lot of them aren’t available simply because nobody (including the tv station) has recordings.
Wait until you realize that most of your favorite movies and shows have been re edited or messed with.
I was watching the office for the 100th time and one of my favorite jokes was just straight up removed from the show during this rewatch. So just in the last few months they’ve gone back and edited the show.
I was also rewatching breaking bad and they’ve changed some of the music as well.
Enshittification continues
Here’s a random paranoid tangent before lunch! I was reading recently about the evolution of theater in England over a hundred years from ~1550-1650. Elizabeth ruled during the first part of that interval, and Shakespeare wrote. His plays included perspectives from wide slices of society and were performed for royalty and commoners alike. Elizabeth died and private theatrical commissions began to outgrow public theater, which according to wikipedia “sustained themselves on the accumulated works of the previous decades”.
Starting in 1642 theaters were closed entirely by act of a Puritanical Parliament. That ban lasted 18 years and once the audience was Quite Thirsty, the English Restoration restored theater abstractly and filled it with bawdy raunch.
Yada yada, Disney then hired a crew of weepy Christian writers in the 20th century to repackage folk tales into Little Mermaid and Iron Man, which seems parallel enough to Shakespeare retelling Ovid. Film flourished, and in the early days of broadcast TV anybody could star in their own very own program. The Writers were on the brink of delivering us Heroes, but they up and left before they could save the cheerleader.
Now this age of regurgitated, computer animated-and-written, crowdsource produced art seems familiar, too. We’re filling the gaps with what we know, and the Appalachians wielding the pen are finding gaps they didn’t know were there. It’s odd being here, but my point is that if we are stuck in a loop then there’s the potential that on the horizon is a period of Hollywood producing a bunch of light hearted Boob Comedies.
Thanks, Obama.
Preservation is an invasive and destructive process. Recreating the experience of watching ‘The Daily Show’ in the 90s or early '00s is already impossible. Language and culture mildew and rot just like leather and wood.
EDIT: People don’t seem to understand what I’m talking about. Even the people who are responding in good faith seem confused. That’s on me. So I thought I’d try to clarify with an example.
Take the Mona Lisa. Perhaps one of the most preserved objects in history. It’s so well preserved that it’s impossible to see. Sure, you can look at it, but you won’t see it. Taking a picture of the painting is encouraged, but you can’t get a look at it in your camera roll either.
If you saw the actual painting hanging on a friend’s wall, your first thought would probably not be “what a masterpiece”, but “why didn’t they remove the default print that came with the frame”? If you go to Paris, you can wait in line to have the “Mona Lisa experience” but the painting you saw wasn’t hanging on the wall, what you’ll see is the Mona Lisa you brought with you.
(yes, I stole this example from ‘were in hell’ youtube channel)
Just a simple lowly troll, nothing of importance to see here
Even considering your edits, it’s still a stupid argument. By that same logic nothing should be preserved. Watching LotR now is not the same as watching it when it first came out, which should have never been made according to you because by that time the book should have already been destroyed since you wouldn’t want to preserve it for 50 years, but Tolkien shouldn’t have even written it, since they were based on ideas and drafts he did during the first world war exploring how war changes men and power corrupts, which obviously is only valid in that context and nowhere else so it should be destroyed since preserving it would be invasive and destructive, no?.
Preserving something can never be destructive, it’s the opposite of it. If the Mona Lisa was destroyed you wouldn’t even know it existed, so how can having preserved it be destructive when the alternative is oblivion?
And I agree that the Mona Lisa is no big deal, you know who else agrees? People from that time. It’s widely known that the Mona Lisa was one of Da Vinci’s less famous works, and until Napoleon made a big deal out of it it was just a random painting in a random museum. So I get part of your point, that people who make a big deal out of the Mona Lisa are only there to see the famous painting, but that doesn’t mean that there’s no reason to preserve it, or that there are no people who go there to see the actual Mona Lisa.
What an absolutely idiotic take. like holy shit bro this has to be the dumbest shit I’ve ever read, and I’ve come across some doozies. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read through it. I award you no up votes and may lemmy mods ban your account.
obviously a news show isn’t going to feel the same rewatching it. that’s not the point lol.
that would be like saying it’s dumb to preserve newspapers in libraries because it’s not going to feel as good rereading the “Hitler is dead” headline. people don’t look at old news to have a good time.
boy was it silly of us to preserve that kind of thing and it totally never comes in handy/s
that’s not even what people are upset about anyway. comedy Central mostly makes entertainment programming that isn’t news based and can still be enjoyed whenever. believe it or not, comedy Central has a lot of content that will stand the test of time. especially when looking at their stand-up catalogue.
this is the destruction of a library. a digital one, but a library none the less. that’s what people are mad about.
but you’re right. we should just dump all of our old movies and shows. they’re worthless moldy junk anyway… 🙄
Sure, “no man sets foot in the same river twice”, but that does nothing to argue against the preservation of cultural items.
Take music, for instance. I never feel the same way the second time listening to a song as I did the first time, but that doesn’t make the music less special or change anything about it at all, and it certainly does nothing to advance a hypothetical argument that music shouldn’t be recorded or that the recordings of it shouldn’t be preserved for future enjoyment or different audiences.