(Back to index)

First Reviewer Rights

The popularization of video sharing sites such as YouTube has enabled people to create their own personal "shows" at basically no cost (requiring only a cheap camera and microphone, besides the computer that everybody has anyways), and have hundreds of thousands or even millions of viewers, something that was basically impossible before. While most of these are quite bad, there are many people who are very talented at it, and their "shows" are very enjoyable to watch.

One popular form of this is to make commentaries and reviews on popular culture phenomena, such as movies.

Alongside these reviews a really idiotic and annoying ancillary phenomenon has appeared as well. I call this phenomenon "First Reviewer Rights".

Whenever a popular internet personality makes the first review of, usually, a movie, it seems that he gets some kind of implicit "rights" for reviewing that specific movie. Whenever another popular internet personality makes a review of the same movie, you will invariably see comments like "xyz already reviewed this."

So fucking what? Does 'xyz' get some kind of exclusive right and privilege to be the only legitimate reviewer of that movie simply because he happened to be the first one? Where is this odd idea coming from?

Those comments are just idiotic. Just because some popular person reviewed the movie doesn't mean that others don't have interesting things to say about it, nor does it diminish their review in the least bit. If 'xyz' had delayed his review to be after that second person's review, the situation would now be reversed, even though the contents of the reviews would be identical.

(Note that this phenomenon is exclusive to viewers only. I have never seen the reviewers themselves claiming some kind of implicit "first reviewer rights", unless it's humorous in some situations.)

(Back to index)