By all means, do not limit what you have to say to the things with which you disagree (though this will always get you more traffic then agreeing). However, it seemed to me that in this case, everyone was agreeing with Godin a bit too quickly (what I would have done would be to reference Godin’s post, and concentrate much more on Style vs. Talent, less on the example given).

Here is the line from your post that caught my attention:

As I watched Jason juggle, it was obvious that he is fantastic at what he does. But I wouldn’t hire him for a corporate event. He’s just not engaging. He looks alternatively show-offy, bored, and angry. Bliss seems totally engaged in what he’s doing, excited about it, even a little worried. He pulls us into his experience through his showmanship and makes it ours. Jason seems to be doing it all for Jason.

This line said to me that you were judging both videos as if they had the same context. True, Jason may have been doing it just for Jason. As others have commented, these two videos are getting much more exposure than either of the two jugglers involved would probably have ever imagined. Thus I do not think it too far fetched to say that Jason was treating this as anything more than a chance to prove that three balls is nothing to brag about. From the YouTube page:

As a juggler, I (and most of my juggling friends) are pretty annoyed by the fact that everyone and their mother (literally) is forwarding us this video and talking about how great the guy is.

So my friend Jason copied his routine, trick for trick. Only Jason does it with 5 balls. Yep. Five.

Watch the video, and understand: THIS is great juggling. That Bliss guy may put on a good act, but he is not a good juggler. There is a huge difference.

The way I read it, this was nothing more than showing off. Granted, it was a lost marketing opportunity for Jason (since he could have added a smile or two), but still should not be judged in the same context as Bliss.

And I agree, this is getting way too much airtime.

When I viewed the two videos, I tried to strip out the context and just look at whose performance I found to be more engaging. Yes, lighting, sets, etc., can factor into it, but in the end it comes down to the performer. Having seen some amazing performers (again, not necessarily the best technically) blow away crowds in places less glamorous than a gym, and some technically brilliant performers flop in elegant ballrooms, I maintain that the differentiator is not context, but performance style. (And Jason was performing for an audience if he knew his video was going on the Web–I bet more people have now seen his clip than have seen Chris live through his entire career. If he didn’t know it had the potential for an audience, it wouldn’t be out there, I don’t think).

Also, I find it odd that you object to someone finding an idea they agree with, linking to it, and expanding on it. Why do you assume that those who agree with a post don’t do any critical analysis because we don’t take the same thing from it you do?

Should we limit limit comments and links only to posts with which we disagree, have a problem with, or believe to be wrong? Frankly, if it’s something I think my readers could learn from, I’ll link to it. If I agree with it, I’ll put in context for my readers and expand on it. If I disagree, I’ll say why. If I miss an important point, someone (like you did today) will let me know, and I’ll chew on it and update my post if I agree that it needs discussion.

P.S. Anyone else think the amount of emotion surrounding these two videos is getting ridiculous?

P.P.S. Sorry about taking so long to approve your comment. Sometimes, life gets in the way of a timely response. I hate it when that happens.

I did trackback to Godin. It has not yet been posted to his blog (maybe the trackbacks are moderated and he hasn’t gotten to the queue yet this morning).

You are right, my main point does oppose Godin’s. The thing that got me started on this post was that I read Godin’s and then read 4 or 5 posts linked to his that seemed to say the same thing (when it didn’t seem to be so clear to me).

In the case at hand, I did agree with Godin but felt that his original post offered only a limited explanation as to why he thought Jason’s performance would earn a less enthusiastic response. The purpose of my post was to expand beyond Godin’s basic message of “perceived effort counts” and describe the details which I felt make the Bliss performance more memorable to a general audience.

Look again at your conclusion and Godin’s…
Yaakov:
“Jason is a much better juggler. If he dressed up and went to a performance hall and performed (ie: added some audience interaction), which, as a professional juggler and entertainer he most certainly knows how to do, he would kick the pants off of Chris in any popular vote.”

Godin:
“…even though I know how much more difficult Jason’s routine is and how skilled he is, the very ease of his delivery makes it less likely an audience would give him that same ovation.”

Your main point opposes Godin. Great! If you would trackback to his original post like you did to mine, it might challenge him to make a better case for his views in a new post. If he responded, then you could post a counter-argument, etc. I bet I could learn something from both of you :)