In What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, Tim O’Reilly makes an argument for what he views as an immense transformation in internet today. With the dot-com collapse in late 2001, O’Reilly describes how many felt the internet had been over-hyped and that in the end, it was not all it was cracked up to be. What was feared to be the failure of the internet was nothing of such, and instead the internet, was only seeing bubbles and shakeouts, as all technological revolutions seem to see. As O’Reilly explains, the internet saw instead of a collapse, a unique transformation in which the companies that forged out of these troubled times seemed to possess something in common. From these characteristics that the survivors held, a new concept emerged called “Web 2.0” emerged. From the characteristics and traits that O’Reilly describes in his piece, it becomes evident that You Tube is a clear example of what he calls Web 2.0.
Founded in February 2005, You Tube is “a consumer media company for people to watch and share original videos worldwide through a Web experience” (YouTube.com). Everyone can watch videos on You Tube, both on YouTube.com and across the Internet. People can see first-hand accounts of current events, find videos about their hobbies and interests, and “discover the quirky and unusual” (YouTube.com). As the website explains, “As more people capture special moments on video, You Tube is empowering them to become the broadcasters of tomorrow” (Youtube.com). You Tube is a place for people to engage in a new fashion with video by sharing, commenting on, and viewing videos. Originally starting as a personal video sharing service, You Tube has grown into an entertainment destination with people watching more than 70 million videos on the site daily. You Tube allows viewers to upload, tag and share videos worldwide, browse millions of original videos uploaded by community members, find, join and create video groups to connect with people who have similar interests, and can customize the experience by subscribing to member videos, saving favorites, and creating playlists. Users can also integrate You Tube videos on websites using video embeds or APIs, make videos public or private, and elect to broadcast their videos publicly or share them privately with friends and family upon upload. You Tube therefore, emerged as a unique company that offered services like no other before.
The first characteristic of Web 2.0 that O’Reilly explains is that to be classified under this class, it must provide services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability. YouTube.com does this very thing. As a site where users can upload and download videos for free sharing with all other users, it provides a service, not software. As well as offering the service of posting videos to share with others, it does not cost the viewer to post them. Therefore it is extremely cost-effective for the user as well as the company itself.
Next, it must have control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them. The more users upload videos onto You Tube, the more information is available for others to find. Likewise, the more users search and view videos, the more the videos posted are viewed and receive attention. The greater the user base becomes, the more unique You Tube has become due to the diversity of videos posted. O’Reilly notes that “the value of the software is proportional to the scale and dynamism of the data it helps to manage” (O’Reilly 3). The more people using You Tube, in turn means that more data is made available. With more users, You Tube is more therefore more valuable.
The next characteristic of Web 2.0 is that the company trusts users as co-developers. YouTube.com in fact does this. By allowing content to be in the hands of the users, they in turn are co-developers. Web content is reliant on the users and their role of uploading videos. Also related to this trust of users as co-developers, the company must have the ability to harness collective intelligence. While viewing a video from a certain user, the viewer is allowed to view other videos from the same user, or videos also on playlists where the video they are watching also appears. Furthermore, the user is allowed to view most watched videos of the day. All these qualities of YouTube.com make is successful in harnessing collective intelligence, and provide an example of what O’Reilly calls Web 2.0.
Though the user has the option of making videos private, and to share only with their specific friends and family, this does not eliminate You Tube as a version 2.0 company. As O’Reilly explains, “The more points [a company scores], the more they are worthy of the name. Remember, though, that excellence in one area may be more telling than some small steps in all seven” (O’Reilly 18). Therefore, a weakness in one area, such as the option of making videos private or public does not account for the disqualification of You Tube as a Web 2.0 company. Furthermore, the number of users who choose to make videos private is few, and many videos in turn are made public. This sets You Tube apart from other companies, such as Friendster, where the user always must accept connections from other members.
As O’Reilly explained, one characteristic of Version 2.0 companies is that companies of such often join in collaboration with other version 2.0 companies to build even stronger companies and capitalize on version 2.0’s success. This is true in the case of You Tube, which was acquired by other version 2.0 giant Google.com in 2006. With such a pairing, their version 2.0 characteristics were even further enhanced. With their pairing with internet giant Google.com, You Tube created even more possibilities of exposure and access.
As O’Reilly points out in What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, contrary to what many onlookers thought at the time, the dot-com collapse of 2001 was not the end of the internet. Rather, it was the beginning of a new era, one in which its champions would prevail with characteristics specific and in common. This fashion was deemed Web 2.0, and many soon claimed to be such companies. Yet as he lays out the fundamental characteristics in his writing, it becomes clear that only certain companies can be classified as such. Following O’Reilly’s description, it is clear that You Tube is a valid example of a Web 2.0 company, and it is precisely because of this that they have seen such immense success, and have gained the interest and acquisition by internet giant, and fellow Web 2.0 company Google.