Amanda Michel caught up with Nicholas and Holmes to discuss Democracy, PCF’s open source video player and their role in our Internet TV culture.

————————————————————————-

Would you quickly describe Democracy?

Wilson: Democracy is a free, open source video player and downloader with a simple interface. It plays virtually any video, you can explore and download video podcasts and bittorrent feeds, and you can search for and save videos from sites like YouTube. It’s also a vision for Internet video distribution that embodies all the best principles of the Internet: openness, competition, and freedom from centralized control. Anyone can use Democracy Player to distribute video directly to their audience without being dependent on Youtube/Google.

Who uses Democracy? What do you know about your users and community?

Reville: It’s a really hard question to investigate, actually. We know that the content that’s being submitted to our Channel Guide really runs the gamut. Since we’re a video app, I expect our user base is broad, but probably leaning towards early tech adopters, blogosphere, etc.

We’ve started to see more downloads on weekend days than weekdays. Does this mean people are using Democracy in their spare time, rather than surfing around at work?

What are the highs and lows of the past year for the Participatory Culture Foundation?

Wilson: Bringing together the functionality of a web browser, video player, and RSS/bittorrent downloader was much trickier on Windows than on Mac and Linux. That was a protracted low. It was like there was a series of hills in front of us, but until we got over the first hill we couldn’t see the next, and right up until the end we never knew how many challenges remained. It was extremely frustrating. But in software development, when you’re doing something somebody hasn’t done before, that risk is always there.

The week in February when we launched the Windows version of Democracy Player was definitely a high. We had a tremendous response with 100,000 downloads in the first week, and with each release we get more positive feedback and more regular users. It’s also very cool, interesting, and satisfying for us to watch all the amazing videos that people are using Democracy Player to distribute.

What features of Democracy are community inspired? What things have you implemented at the community’s request?

Reville: Tons of things have come from users. It tends to be a lot of little things that help people really get into the flow. For example: marking videos as unwatched, setting torrent ports, a setting to play one video then stop (rather than playing continuously), and lots more.

On your website it says that you work with lots of volunteers worldwide. How many people do you work with? What do they do? How do you bring them into the workflow?

Wilson: We’ve had hundreds of volunteers. How they fit in depends on what they’re doing. There are volunteers who test new versions of Democracy before each release. We email them when there’s a new build for testing, and they report bugs in the bug tracker (Trac). We also have volunteers who translate Democracy into other languages. For that we use Rosetta, the translation tool used by Ubuntu (a linux distribution) which makes it easy for volunteers to collaborate on translating text.

Volunteer software developers use the same tools and email lists that paid developers use. And volunteers who work closely with us on stuff other than code (say, a volunteer moderator, or a graphic designer) coordinate with us using Basecamp, which is what we’re using internally anyway. If you’re already using good online collaboration tools internally (and you should, no matter what you’re doing!) that makes it easier to involve volunteers.

When did you first come up with the concept for Democracy? How has the landscape changed since then? Do you think it’s better or worse for a participatory culture?

Wilson: We conceived the project in late 2004 and started designing and building in spring 2005. Since then, online video has exploded, and the center of that explosion is of course YouTube. Things are vastly better now for the cause of mass participation in culture because we see it all around us. One of the web developers at PCF, and an old friend, made a video where his band dances on treadmills to one of their songs. Three million Youtube views later, MTV asked them to perform the same stunt live on the Video Music Awards. This is incredible.

On the other hand, the structure that’s emerged in the online video space is very problematic. Much of the online video explosion has been centered around large monolithic services, two of which are now owned by Google. This has serious implications for competition, free speech, and the overall vibrancy of the medium.

Nick mentioned in an interview for Technology Evangelist that Democracy has taken twice as long as expected. Was it difficult to keep volunteers and the community motivated when it became clear the project would take longer?

Wilson: When there’s a delay like there was with the Windows version, you always lose some momentum. But it’s difficult to measure, and my hunch is it wasn’t too big a problem.

Why is this battle so important to you? Why TV?

Wilson: Well, TV is in many ways the dominant medium, but it’s dominated by a small number of companies and has been the least open to public participation, so the range of cultural and political expression is horribly narrow. Since democracies require an informed and engaged public to function properly, it’s really dangerous for the dominant mass medium to be so restrictive. We think bringing the diversity, vitality, and openness of the internet into the video mass medium is the best way to address this very serious problem.

What’s your relationship to YouTube? Is it cutting into the market? Or is it a realized dream?

Reville: From a software point of view, YouTube is another way that people can host content and we let people search and download from YouTube. From a social standpoint, YouTube is a little scary. If online video becomes monopolized by one or two large companies, we’ll be seeing the same kind of power consolidation that we see in traditional broadcast television. We’re working on an open model where viewers can connect to multiple video hosts at once.

When do you predict most people will watch TV over the Internet? When will a tool like Democracy become commonplace?

Wilson: In certain chunks of the population (young people with broadband, for example) it’s happening already. I think it hits the “most people” mark when there’s some show that each one of those people really wants to see that’s only available online.

You started working on Democracy quite some time ago. Since then, how has the TV-Internet landscape changed? Have recent developments changed Democracy?

Wilson: We’ve added support for Flash video and most of the popular video sharing sites so that people can use sites like Youtube to host their videos without encountering any problems. And we’ve made it easy to search these sites and create feeds based on certain search terms.

On your website you explain the significance of making Democracy open-source and built to open-standards, writing “This matters because it keeps video flowing freely. When you lock people in to closed, proprietary services, you lose everything that makes the internet work.” What is the trend today? Do you think that Democracy will be one of a few open-source platforms for exchanging video?

Wilson: There definitely is a trend towards the video space concentrating around a few large services, and these services are almost all based on a proprietary player and format, Flash. I do think Democracy will be a rallying point for people doing video who don’t want their organizations or their companies to be dependent on proprietary software or on a web service that at any moment could change in ways that harm their interests.

Our focus at NewAssignment.net is on distributed journalism. What have you learned at Democracy that would be useful to our project? How can an effort like Democracy aid decentralized, distributed, independent media efforts?

Wilson: Well, there are some direct technical benefits Democracy could bring to such a project. For example: the ability to distribute and create communities around the distribution of broadcast-quality video. If you want a community exchanging and filtering video that eventually needs to be shown on TV, Youtube won’t cut it.

Regina Lynn: ”I could not possibly stay on top of it all if it were just me.”

At her own site, reginalynn.com, Lynn hosts the Sex Drive Forum, where several thousand people talk about everything from favorite sex toys to bondage and responsible STD tests while awaiting Lynn’s queries. She opened the forum more than two years ago to provide people with a safe place to discuss sex and technology. Nowadays she credits her “smart mob” with helping her stay informed and up-to-date. “It’s a vast subject, and I could not possibly stay on top of it all if it were just me.”

I interviewed Lynn about how her forum keeps her on the beat. The Q&A is below. If you have other questions you’d like to ask of Regina, send her an email. If you know of other journalists whom we should interview, let me know.

Question: When you found out about NewAssignment.net, you told Jay Rosen that you have been a pioneer in community journalism unknowingly for the last few years. What did you mean by that?

Regina Lynn: I couldn’t do my job thinking I know everything. I write about sex-tech; anything that involves technology and romantic or sexual relationships is in my beat. That ranges from health/biomed to gadgets to social networking and online dating … it’s a vast subject, and I could not possibly stay on top of it all if it were just me. I have to tap into what other people are doing and find out directly what things are harming and helping them.

Over the last few years I’ve developed a social network of people online who also enjoy discussing the intersection of sex and technology. The community lives at the Sex Drive Forum, which I started in may 2004.

Question: How did the Sex Drive Forum start?

Regina Lynn: The community I work with now started when Comcast ended my program, Wired for Sex, in May 2004. There were a lot of people who I chatted with on Sex Drive Forum TechTv’s message boards and I didn’t want to lose touch with them. I had only five minutes to put together an interim measure, so I set up a yahoo group and posted the address to the message boards. Yahoo! was an easy choice because subscribers are asked, “Are you an adult? Click yes.” The community still lives on the yahoo group today.

The group is made up of people who like to talk about sex and technology. Anyone 18 years or older is welcome to join. Today the yahoo group has 2800 members and grows by about 20-30 people a week. Fifty members of the group contribute the most by posting links, sharing information, and personal stories. The 50 really active community members change all the time. When our active contributors leave, someone else always takes their place. Also, a few people have left because there was too much traffic.

Question: How do forum members help you write your column?

Regina Lynn: We have an ongoing conversation about sex and technology.

A lot of times conversations start when I post an email. The exercise of posting an email to the group really helps me with my thinking. I’ll draft the email and then analyze it. Does it expose too much? Have I left anyone out? Have I been very heterocentric? Then I rewrite the email. I go through this process several times before posting to the group. It really helps me clarify my thoughts. If I’m on deadline, I’ll always let them know. If I’m looking for quotes, I always warn them that I’m looking for quotes. “Let me know if I can quote you by name or if you want to be anonymous.” In response to my post community members tell me about their experiences, people they know, and new products.

I’m always learning new things, getting new leads. I am not sure how in traditional journalism you’d get all those leads except that you’d have to do it in person. The nice thing about doing it over email is that our conversations aren’t just archiveable, they’re also searchable.

Question: Do Sex Drive Forum members expect that you’ll use their suggestions?

Regina Lynn: I remind them from time to time that I might not use their suggestions or comments in anything that I publish. Or that I might use it in a year and a half in a podcast or in a blogpost. Whether or not I use it in public, I’m always thinking about what they tell me. Not all members want to be quoted publicly, and being quoted certainly isn’t their reason for joining the forum.

I also check out members if I’m going to quote them about anything other than their personal opinions. One of our members, Dr. Kris Gowen, is a psychologist who also teaches workshops for adults about “what teenagers are really doing on the Internet.” She’s done a lot of work in the intersection of sex and the Internet, and she’s also a forum member. Before I trusted what she said, I researched her. Like everywhere else, I don’t think everything is above board. You still have to do the background checking writers do all the time by verifying it elsewhere. What the forum offers is a handy group of people who are open to the idea that talking about sex and technology isn’t evil and they’re there because they’re willing to talk about it.

Question: Other than talking about your columns, what else do forum members discuss?

Regina Lynn: People talk a lot about new products. For example, “My wife told me she’s interested in doing bondage. Any recommendations?”

Question: Why is your community so helpful to you? Is it you, the topic, or both?

Regina Lynn: Part of it is my doing. I have eleven years experience in building online communities. One online community I founded, a discussion list for professional women writers, is 11 years old and it succeeded at a time when the Internet was all about porn. I worked at TechTV as a producer of its website and did community development. I also did a lot of community building for Oxygen Media when Oxygen first launched. I’m an active member of a few other groups, like “San Francisco Women on the Web” and “Web 405.” I also participate in a few online writing groups.

I don’t believe a forum like this can exist as a democracy. It’s a benevolent dictatorship. I’ll kick anyone out for flaming or if I think they are being inexcusably rude. I also steer people back topic by making a joke about my position. I’ll say, “I’m putting on my dominatrix boots. If you don’t focus on this and that, then I’m going to ban you all.” It works. The forum is a safe place because I don’t let people be mean. And what’s very cool is that I don’t recall ever having a serious problem with anyone. This is a group of intelligent, creative, funny, and articulate people. I have the greatest respect for the forum members.

If you’re willing to massage the forum, answer emails, guide members, and appreciate people in public, then this works. I don’t know if I just lucked out, but there are some amazingly smart people in my group. There are inventors, geniuses. That is partly because there aren’t many places for people working in the development of sex and technology to converge.

Part of it is also the topic. People who want to talk about sex and technology need a safe place, especially if they’re going to talk about their personal experiences. I live in San Francisco and Los Angeles, both of which are places where people can talk openly about sex. San Francisco’s also a place where people talk about technology. For people who live in smaller, more conservative towns, it’s not as easy. The forum is a place to find out answers to questions like ‘What is the best vibrator’ and ‘I’m in love with someone I met online but I’m in Florida and he’s in Australia, and we are trying to decide whether to get into teledildonics, what do you all think?’”

When I met Jay he talked about the fact that you can’t just have a community and expect them to help you. Because anyone can publish today, no one is going to join a group like mine just to see their name in pixel. They do it because they feel that they’re helping a cause, even if that cause is “we’re reviewing the latest ipod.” They feel that they’re doing something worthwhile and feel appreciated.

Question: What is a recent column or project that wouldn’t have been possible without the community’s help?

Regina Lynn: That is hard to say because we’re always talking. It’s an ongoing discussion that’s part of my constant thinking and analysis. I got a lot of help from forum members when I was researching my book, SexRev2.0. I did an article for Complete Woman, a national women’s magazine about why men love cybersex and what women can learn from that to improve their sex lives. About a dozen men from the forum volunteered to be interviewed, which made it possible for me to speak with people all over the country.

Question: You mentioned that some forum members are real innovators in the field. What inventions are Sex Drive Forum members responsible for?

Regina Lynn: The inventor of the Happy Kitty is a forum participant. The Happy Kitty is a device named after the inventor’s girlfriend, whose name is Kitty. It has a sort-of tapping motion to stimulate the clitoris. It also has a soft little cylinder that would form a suction if you got the angle just right. The idea behind the device is that some women are too sensitive for vibrators. There’s also Q-Dot, who has worked a lot on creating devices that your far away lover can control via your computer. The author Dr. Libby is also in the forum. He’s written one of the few books out there for teenagers about sexual pleasure.

Question: How do people find out about the Sex Drive Forum these days?

Regina Lynn: I promote it in my column and there’s a link on my website. I don’t promote it that often, just periodically. If I quote from a community member in my work, I usually write, “A sex drive forum member told me….”

Question: Do you think journalists covering other issues could follow your lead and create a forum for people who want to discuss, for example, politics? Are there topics that are a no-go?

Regina Lynn: I have reservations about creating community with the specific intent of pulling participants into citizen journalism or open source media. I think you need to think about ‘how can I give,” not “what can I get.’ In my case I wanted to give people a place where they are safe and wouldn’t be judged for their opinions on a controversial topic. Everyone in the forum can listen and learn.

I like what you’re doing with NewAssignment.net because the people who join will want to be a part of it. But for Wired News, Slate, or the New York Times to try to create communities specifically to harvest ideas or to assign people to perform certain tasks, I think we have to be very careful. People like to be part of something, and to create and build and make things happen. But they don’t like to feel like they’re being used. Communities build themselves but they need a solid foundation, and lots of support and nurturing especially in the beginning. And then the community will dictate where it wants to go, and how — the publication can nudge and shape, but it can’t control.

Question: Do you have advice to journalists about using the Internet to connect with people who share their passions and interests?

Regina Lynn: If community building scares and confuses you, don’t dive in all the way by trying to start one all on your own. Go find a community you like. Join it, give to it, participate fully, and then see what happens. We can all build our own communities, and the more experience you have in online interaction the better your chances at creating a space where people want to spend time.