The video of Jill Peterson and Kevin Heinz and their attendants dancing down the aisle at their wedding has over 13 million views on YouTube. Neither Chris Brown, whose song "Forever" served as the processional music, nor Sony Music demanded a takedown of the video. Rather, they requested click-to-buy links to Amazon and iTunes from YouTube, and sales of the year-old song skyrocketed. But what about Jill and Kevin? They appeared on morning TV to talk about the video, but haven't made any money. Instead, they are using their sudden fame to raise funds for charity. From their website:
We have been through a lot in life, but have come through each experience stronger and more in love with each other. Our experience since we posted the video has been incredible. We would never have expected this response to our wedding entrance in a million years. We hope to direct this positivity to a good cause. Due to the circumstances surrounding the song in our wedding video, we have chosen the Sheila Wellstone Institute. Sheila Wellstone was an advocate, organizer, and national champion in the effort to end domestic violence in our communities.
There is a donation button on the site. Link
It's very neat that they are using the publicity for a good cause.
But I still don't buy the 'we never expected this response to our video' line. Videos of dances at weddings/wedding parties on YouTube have been hugely popular (and even posted here on Neatorama previously). They had to have known that there was a good chance it would become a internet video hit
:)
So: are we not talking about the fact that they were dismayed their performance was giving much money to Chris Brown, beater, and that they chose a domestic violence organization in order to reroute the money/popularity from a symbol of pathos to a gesture for change? I don't understand why that was left out.
I for one welcome our new Non-Copyright-Infringer-Decider/Overlords.
Every "old" person I've shown this to thought it was a blessing. The hatred that has been showered on this video is what really amazes me.
It's not about age. It's about respect for the "venue" in which they were "performing". You can have fun and make a lot of people laugh, but is it appropriate?
They were acting precocious, like a kindergarten recital. Nobody expects anything decent, they all clap and film it because "aww, isn't that darling?", but everyone knows they suck.
I don't care about the tradition of the white dress and the procession; do what you like at your wedding. But a church should be more than just a rented hall for the occasion. Do your little dance at City Hall, or on the beach, or at the Comic Book convention, wherever you decide to get married.
That's not hatred to say that.
I think the Superman/Wonder Woman wedding is way more interesting and fun.