Are there kinds of programming that you think are better or worse suited to an Open Content format?

Most will not create stuff that’s anywhere near the quality of what you do… But they’re going to do things that make them more media literate… and they will create things that we don’t expect. And to me, the ceding of control to others for the uses that we don’t anticipate are where we get the really interesting stuff.

(Dan Gillmor, Center for Citizen Media)

For us as content producers, what are the risks and opportunities that Open Content offers? Will people refuse to be filmed if they know their interviews can be downloaded and re-edited freely by anyone accessing the Web? On the other hand, if we don’t offer our programs in Open Content service, are we “hoarding” valuable public resources? What kinds of new genres and formats can we develop using Open Content, for children, for education, for general audiences?


3 COMMENTS, oldest at top.


I believe that open content offers local producers a path to extend civic engagement. We are embarking on an experimental initiative to bring other voices to the production process by providing selected video clips and photographs online. If I could figure out how to add an attachment, I’d attach the proposal. But in essence, we want to have our community share their personal stories relating to the history of Miami. We hope to jumpstart the effort by providing video clips and still images. Two local visual archives are joining us in this effort. We are going to encourage users to mix these resources with their own visuals and audio track to create their story to upload to our companion web site.

Posted by Jack Kelly on Wednesday February 7, 2007 · #


Hoarding may not be the most apt term, but keeping materials in closed formats and under closed licenses does prevent updates, improvements, and further distribution. It also makes direct review, comparison, and translation difficult.

New genres and formats that Open Content makes possible include locally-relevant texts, local context for global materials, and local and regional aspects of universal stories which would be prohibitively complicated or expensive to produce in a central fashion.

Additionally, works of great breadth or detail that can only be produced or processed through a collaboration of hundreds or thousands of people scale best when there are no issues of copyright or licensing to negotiate before modifications are made.

Posted by SJ Klein, One Laptop per Child on Wednesday February 7, 2007 · #


Dear WGBH Educational Foundation,

This is in reference to Anne Frank and the Jewish community and countless other communities.

Civilocity is a form of government where the people watch the ruler entirely amongst their reign. Civilocity is for the people so the people don’t allow their country to attack a person because of their ethnic background, religion, race, creed, gender, or sexual orientation which has happened countless times in history, including today, resulting in millions of lives being lost.

The phonetic pronunciation of civilocity is civ-il-o-cit-y (siv‘əl‘ä‘sit‘ē). The definition of Civilocity is a form of government where the people watch the ruler entirely amongst their reign. The exact definition of “Civilocity” is, ‘literally, behaving in the dwelling’. The meaning is derived from the Latin term civilis (‘civil’), the Middle English term o (‘o‘), and the Medieval Latin term civitat (‘city’) in the early part of the 21st century to improve the political systems existing in some American city-states, notably Washington, DC. In developing this philosophy, my hope is to ensure that the ruler doesn’t usurp the power of the country for themselves at the expense of the people.

I just imagine the products of civilocity compared to the products of democracy. Having a human with law would be more intelligent than picking a human without. That’s civilocity compared to democracy. Which one is the better form of government? Civilocity, as a form of government, is going to change the world.

I wonder if Anne Frank would have included civilocity in her second book if she had known what it is? Well if she didn’t she would allow what happened to her to happen to someone else. It is almost like she wrote about the wrong thing. What civilocity is to you is a word what it is to her is a breath.

I don’t know why I would have to send civilocity more than once to you because of what the wait does?

Your going to allow genocide to happen to someone else if we don’t instate civilocity. If you don’t allow us to teach it I can assure you, you will be arrested. How will it be accomplished if the government doesn’t allow the largest newspapers to publish it?

‘Why aren’t you teaching us civilocity, why don’t we instate civilocity, anne frank couldn’t have asked that if she was a student in school in america before May 31, 2010. That’s the story, the scandal that’s about to emerge in america. Think about an american girl from sudan who lost her parents to genocide not allowed in school to be taught civilocity a form of government to watch the leader of sudan or ask why don’t we instate or advocate civilocity a form of government to watch the leader of sudan as of May 31, 2010 even with everything going on in sudan.’

Not allowing civilocity to be taught is corruption. Any act of covering up a solution to make sure the way someone died another person doesn’t die the same way is corruption. That’s participation of genocide by covering up civilocity and not allowing it to be taught.

When will other people want to make sure a holocaust never happens again?

Nathaniel Isaac Wenger

Posted by Nathaniel I. Wenger on Tuesday June 22, 2010 · #