Washington Post – “In the newest installment of Prestigious Institutions Slumming It (remember when the Library of Congress acquired Twitter’s archives?), the Guggenheim Museum has announced that a new exhibition will come from . . . YouTube. YouTube Play, which launched Monday, is a partnership between the video site and the renowned art museum. It invites users to submit their short creative videos at http://youtube.com/play. The top 20, chosen by a jury of professional artists, will be on view this fall at Guggenheim museums around the world.
Telegraph – “Group is working to persuade music and video companies to cash in rather than clamp down when their content is uploaded”
Telegraph – “The site contains existing and new images, including the only known video footage of Anne – a shot a few seconds-long of her leaning out of an upstairs window during the wedding of a neighbour in July 1941.”
Out of the Jungle – “If you are applying for admission to the Florida Bar, you had better clean up your social networking sites. “
AP – “Administrators lifted the ban on Friday, citing an increasing amount of educational material on the popular video-sharing site, university spokeswoman Carri Jenkins said. YouTube has its own filters for porn, but BYU added it to the list of Web sites blocked by campus online filters in 2006 because administrators felt there was too much content that could violate the school’s strict, conservative standards.”
Press Release – "On Friday, June 19, the National Archives will formally launch a YouTube channel to showcase popular archived films, inform the public about upcoming events around the country, and bring National Archives exhibits to the people. The launch will coincide with the National Archives 75th Anniversary.
NPR – “By now most people are aware of the joint venture between the Library of Congress and Flickr to post and promote photographs long cloistered within the LOC's stacks. But did you know about the new initiative between LOC and YouTube?”
Legal Blog Watch – “Depositions are a matter of public record, and as such, most lawyers never think to shield videotaped deposition testimony from public disclosure except in cases involving highly sensitive or proprietary information. After all, up until a few years ago, even if someone wanted to disseminate inflammatory or embarrassing deposition video, there wasn’t any way to do so conveniently.”