What is the consequence of forcing users to an incredibly constrained six seconds video format?

• The meaning is condensed. No more 5 minute video with only a few seconds of interesting action you could have skipped to directly.

• Consistency is enforced. There is just no time to tackle multiple subjects or be distracted from your original point.

• Ease of use. Anyone can make a 6 second video. Following the rules is not the hard part.

It’s Twitter all over again

The major trap with Vine or Twitter, or any fixed form of communication (haiku, sonnet, etc.), is that most people are tempted to use them for spontaneous (and usually meaningless) outbursts, when they should be carefully crafted and thought out for maximum impact.

Can Vine really be advertised as a new art form?

In itself, Vine is only a vector for communication. It’s up to the people to use them as they want, the same way Twitter is used differently by brands, celebrities, ‘gurus’, teenagers, etc.

Conciseness has never been an obstacle to depth, and Vine is certainly capable of harboring art.

Sure, a lot of Vine videos are ADHD kids doing pointless crap, the same way most tweets are random angsty comments you could live without, and most haikus are mediocre attempts.

It doesn’t mean the form is flawed, but that it is used in frivolous ways.

Vine is currently experimental and teeming with general bizarrerie. But we can expect that it will stabilize, and that the same thing will happen to Vine that happened to Twitter:

People will learn to use it effectively.