YouTube Talk

Lauren and Kevin

The introductory paragraph perhaps should include a basic description of what YouTube is. Everybody knows what it is, I know, but it follows typical wiki protocol. What you have so far is a layout that is dominated by massive pictures that swallow the text. The large picture of the homepage is fine, but now the focus should be on a detailed explanation of the site's features and how they influence users. Keep in mind that you should stick to the third person. Avoid 'we'. When you tell us that "this analysis will be focusing on an in depth look at YouTube's first impression," we feel that is not exactly what the assignment asks for - though it is an important aspect.

Jonathan and Oscar

Is the blue section necessary? If we're writing this in a wiki format, the inclusion of the 1st person seems out of place.

Intro needs to be fleshed out a bit.
Images good, but the spacing and sizing for the "play button" and the "logo" seem a little off - maybe the logo top right, the play button next to the table of contents.
Also, you should include a brief history of the website.
Double check for grammar and spelling ("it does no lose its purpose….")
Some of your sentences could be tightened a little bit, add an air of disinterested objectivity. Home section could use some work, we understand what you are trying to explain but it could use some clarification, less abstraction.
The images are actually pretty good, but could use resizing, formatting and placement.

Anam & Adam

  • Are both images really necessary? The box around them is a nice, professional-looking touch, though.
  • Rhetorical style needs some attention. Not in "wiki" style yet. Written like an essay, not an article on a website.
  • Regardless of style, EXCELLENT analysis here. You're clearly working hard to get at the heart of what each section is and how it functions.
  • Images are perhaps a little too big? Good idea on showing how the front page changes with watched videos, though — stark before-and-after contrast.
  • Lots of good stuff here, but it feels like you're just transcribing your analysis draft onto a wiki page. Work on making this its own thing.

Comments by Morgan and Jeni

  • !!!!! When you hover over you images on the top of your page the mouse shows you that it is hyperlinked, however when you click on these images it brings you to Grindr's website???? Very confusing
  • Make sure you mention how YouTube is different when you have an account, you can follow pages and the site also offers you a variety of videos to watch or other people to follow based on videos you've liked or subscribed to in the past.
  • don't overuse images, it doesn't hurt to use text to explain things every once in a while, it also helps your page looks more visually diverse

ES comments

I agree with what the others have said.

  • Smaller screenshots. Consider cropping them to only show the most important information. Flickr should have some basic functionality for that (I think Aidan made an account last week); if not, Pixlr will do it.
  • Eliminate the blue background table and instead give a brief explanation of the history of YouTube (who started it, when, why, etc?) and what it's purpose is. Pick one of the two images to put next to it (technically the play button is the mobile app icon, so also kind of a logo).
  • Use third-person instead of second-person. IE: "users" instead of "you."
  • Finally, remember to add a section on implications that addresses how the interface influences user behavior. Analyze how the interface encourages certain kinds of communities or interactions (how does it enforce rules, etc?; how does it control what users do and why?).

ES final grade feedback

This is generally a well-written wiki page. However, the analysis is a bit shallow. For instance, you do not draw any conclusions about user implications or the user experience. A section at the end that explains how YouTube's interface functions to promote certain user experiences or to encourage particular user cultures would have tied everything together and solidified your analysis (it was also one of the evaluation criteria).
The page design is also a bit inconsistent. Sometimes the images are next to text, other times they're under it. Some lines of text break off suddenly and begin on the next line.
The strongest part of this analysis is your use of images. The letters on screenshots corresponding to sections of text that explain them are effective.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License