Critics about Videofreex

I believe that what makes Videofreex so different from the rest of the broadcasting shows during their era was the fact that they set their own standards for their audience. After watching  “Here Come the Videofreex”,  I am extremely grateful what they contributed for the future generations which is now. I remember a scene where they were marching for the women’s rights and the major TV stations weren’t even covering the content. At that point, I could feel their passion and commitment in content for the audience in which major TV stations would feel risky as they were ‘regulated’ in a way.

Their work was more than content for the audience, it was a visual gateway of information of the people in the reality that could not understand or experience what the event was about. With this scene, I believed that Videofreex were the starters of on-site reporting. Although it may not be live, it sure spurred more journalists and reporters after their generations. It is really important for them to cover stories, events or news that were otherwise be regard as menial by the major stations.

Would media now be different without them? Of course!

Without them, the television industry would be set back 2 to 3 year, even internet development and quality of content would be delayed. I would say that Videofreex indirectly helped the development of the internet. With the influence of television it resulted in people hungrier for information and entertainment.

How have they influenced our study of social broadcasting?

I think they were well known figures in the social broadcasting world. They diversity the variety of content for the general audience. With diversity comes intensity. Now there are many channels that focus on different categories of television, some news, some cooking and others entertainment. I am convinced that they shaped the social broadcasting landscape which resulted in what it is today.

  1 comment for “Critics about Videofreex

Leave a Reply

Skip to toolbar