WeShow
American online video aggregator
WeShow was a New York City-based online video aggregator that delivered tailored video content to viewers around the world. The WeShow editorial team selected videos found on the internet and organized them across 200 categories. User suggestions for content to be included were also entertained. Common video repositories used to source content included YouTube, Dailymotion, Metacafe, MySpace, and Google Video. WeShow did not serve as a social networking site, unlike some similar services, not supporting either video rating or comments. Voting for favorite videos, though, was supported through the WeShow Awards facet, which allowed voting on a selected set of videos each month leading to two top videos. WeShow TV was another facet, which highlighted daily new video content.
Marcos Wettreich and Bruno Parodi founded WeShow in February 2007 and launched portals for the United States, the United Kingdom, and Brazil in July 2007.
The premise on which the company was founded rests on findings from Kelton Research that American's viewing of online video was limited by the overwhelming volume available and the "dreaded" task of finding specific content in this mass, 96% of the time ending in failure. The company had financial backing from Bob Pitman via The Pilot Group, and Bill Sahlman.
The public source identifies “WeShow” as american online video aggregator. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around WeShow, American and online.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “WeShow”, the useful work is to connect “american online video aggregator” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q16967144. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2007.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “WeShow”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow WeShow primary sources, WeShow archive and WeShow research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “WeShow”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “WeShow” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.