Tech media business blog PaidContent unearthed some big, unannounced funding this weekend for Christian video sharing site GodTube. The site, which combines short and long form Flash video with chat and live video, is now $30m richer - PaidContent writes.
All content, right down to the comments, is vetted by human editors before it appears on GodTube. That labor requirement, in addition to the prevalence of 30 minute long videos, is sure to eat up a large amount of cash. Fortunately for GodTube there's advertising revenue to be made from the only other nearly-omniscient party on the company's radar - Google.
The investment comes from a company called GLG Global Investment Management, whose website greets US visitors with a statement explaining that the site is not intended for US audiences and that due to regulatory requirements US residents should leave. Presumably the GodTube founders chose to stay on the site. The London based company is a hedge fund that specializes in trading the debts of "emerging markets" (Third World countries). Charming folks.
GodTube has every appearance of a for-profit endeavor and has gone so far as to copyright the phrase "Jesus 2.0. ©" Though the site calls itself non-denominational, it also says it features content from "all of the traditional Christian denominations." There are far more search results for the term homosexuality than there is for the word Unitarian, a liberal Christian faith, for example.
The Terms of Service prohibit uploading content "contrary to the evangelization of Jesus Christ and His teachings, or constitutes blasphemy, or is otherwise offensive to our online Christian community."
With that I'll leave you with my own favorite verse from the Christian Bible and some important words of warning about Oprah's power over the souls of "silly women."
Matthew 6:5-6: "And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men....when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret...."
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: GodTube Raises $30m for Jesus 2.0 ©.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3892
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Religion is everywhere and GodTube shows that. When they are on TV, Radio and Websites, then why not on online video. But I think it is ok. Faith is must in person’s life and when most of the people use internet more than 6 hours a day, this is a good approach.
Posted by: Siddharth | May 5, 2008 9:36 AMI think your favorite verse is not being applied correctly here. They're not praying in public. They're not ascribing their sanctification/justification to their public actions nor are they deriding the actions of others to follow God.
Furthermore, the fact that there are less articles from "Flavor R" or more from "Flavor I" of Christianity is sort of a red herring. If you're inferring that their editors follow a more conservative approach to approving content, say so, but don't make it out to be a duplicitous act.
Finally, what does Oprah have to do with it?
Posted by: Justin | May 5, 2008 10:41 AMDamn.
Great post by the way... a laugh a minute. (Starting with the copyright sign in the title. ;) hehehe ). I'm glad you got this one here Marshall... it definitely needed your sarcasm to make this awful news readable!! Although the raw fact that decent money is still finding it's way into web ventures is good... can't complain too much I guess. :)
Posted by: Matt | May 5, 2008 10:46 AMJustin - check out the prayer wall on GodTube, I'd say they are praying in public. As for their more conservative leanings, I can't say for sure that's what's going on but it sure seems that way to me. I think that got communicated clearly enough in the post. Oprah is just relevant because I found the video there to be a good, offensive example of content I could repost here. Finally, re duplicitous acts - I think there's some of that going on here. That's why I made allusions as I did. Thanks for stopping by and for taking the time to comment.
Posted by: Marshall KirkpatrickSo basically, any comments or uploads will be devoid of dissent, argument or disagreement. I had no idea the Taliban had expanded into this market.
Posted by: Carl | May 5, 2008 11:17 AMAs a born-again Christian I find sites such as GodTube incredibly offensive.
They do not organize themselves to further the gospel, they use language such as "Jesus 2.0" which is insulting to the Lord's name, and in general they are just cheap (and poorly crafted) knock-offs of secular ideas.
If Christians spent more time reading their Bibles (give Romans 12:2 a read before you register the domain "diggJesus.com" or similar) and less time making lo-fi videos about who knows what...the body of Christ would be a much more respectable entity.
Finally, I find the verse quoted in the article both poignant and relevant.
Posted by: Jerod | May 5, 2008 11:42 AMI would have to agree with Justin in part. I don't really agree with what I call yellow page pulling of scripture to apply to a specific issue, and I think it was not applied in a manner I would personally use, but it's your article, so by all means.
Although it is done all the time, I think viewing in context is a much better way of showing what the meaning was intended to be.
Social networking sites are all setup to "discriminate" as their network seems to fit, it's not like this is a governmental organization or something, they are providing a service that I would say a good many of their users would (I would guess) appreciate.
It is a site, marketing at a very specific genre of people, I don't see anything wrong with that, anyone else certainly has the option to create UnitarianTube if they like, but I wouldn't expect to see a whole lot of Unitarian stuff on a Christian site??
Don't know why you would actually think that to be strange? Unitarian's maintain that Jesus was a great man and a prophet of God, perhaps even a supernatural being, but not God himself. This by itself goes against what the stated purpose of GodTube stands for?
They say: GodTube is a video-driven social network where users can explore their faith and the tenets of Christianity.
It is a Christian based site, not a "world faith god site" place. I know some would disagree but I think it is a BIG stretch to call Unitarian a "Christian Denomination" (if you were to ask a born-again believer).
I did enjoy your post, very interesting information, I read your blog frequently and enjoy many of the articles posted.
Posted by: Scott Fillmer | May 5, 2008 11:46 AM@Jerod that's what I love about our faith, you get 5 believers in one room and you will get 6 opinions :)
Posted by: Scott Fillmer | May 5, 2008 11:48 AMObviously, GodTube is an online community intended for Christians. It's "public" in the sense that anyone can visit, in the same way that anyone, including non-Christians, can visit a church. So I don't believe that Matthew 6:5-6 applies this context.
In fact, I'd say that GodTube's "Prayer Wall" -- indeed, the entire site -- can be justified with this Bible verse:
Hebrews 10:24-25 "Let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another -- and all the more as you see the Day approaching."
Posted by: Marcello | May 5, 2008 12:09 PMI've never been to GodTube. But you have to admit it is a pretty cool name.
Live From Las Vegas
Posted by: The Masked Millionaire | May 5, 2008 1:13 PMThe Masked Millionaire
Interesting to me that none of the defenders of GodTube appear to be "silly women."
Absurd.
Posted by: christina | May 5, 2008 8:39 PMI think you mean to use the word "greets" in the first sentence under The Money?
Posted by: Fuzz McFadden | May 6, 2008 9:00 AM