and another piece from WIRED, this time on video blogs

Hey, if you think that I rely mostly on WIRED rss feeds to cannibalize for my own blog, you are probably right (-; at least tonight)

Anyway, the linked piece about video iPod and video blogging (yeah: VLOGGING *yuk*) is a nice list of pros and cons for video instead of audio-only content for blogs. As it boils down, there is a lot less hype and increase in offered content going on in video blogs (and no, I won't type that acronym again...) than there was after the advent of audio blogs and there are several good reasons for that. Probably the most important is that you need to actually add something that makes sense on video, or more sense on video than on audio-only to make it work. And then there are the costs to consider (cited from the WIRED article):

"It's a much more costly endeavor to start a videocast... You'll need to purchase a video input card or a digital video camera and the tools for encoding to video. Currently, there's no standard video format that exists like MP3 for audio. DivX/XviD encoding is popular but run into problems requiring extra software. QuickTime, Real and Windows Media video encoders run into the usual problems inherent with proprietary formats."