Art is anything that a person uses as self expression. That's what art is all about. We have lots of different ways of expressing lots of different aspects of ourselves, and therefor, lot's of different art forms, from the more physical like dance and martial arts, to the metaphysical, like music and color composition...and everything else in between.
Words are an art form, because we use them to express ourselves...in the most literal of ways. Images, video, all of these things, inevitably, fall into this category. Does that mean that everything we do is art? No. When I worked on the night shift and packed out shelves, we called it an art form, because of the skill and concentration involved with getting row after row of Cherrio boxes to stand up just right, flat, neat, even, perfect. But in no way was I expressing myself. No Louvre worthy piece, that, then. Art then, requires two things...feeling, intent, something to be expressed...and an audience. The "Pissed Christ" has both, as does "The Innocence of Muslims". Now, one belongs in a gallery, because, frankly, the work is beautiful, well executed, etc...while the other belongs in the trash bin that is the internet, final resting place of all expression, because it was NOT well executed, poorly choreogrphed, filmed, and lit. Good and art and bad art is up to the VIEWER to decide...but the VIEWER can never determine if it IS art or not. They can have an opinion, as do we all...but you know something about opinions? They're just like assholes.
Question for some of you. What if someone re-shot the "Innocence of Muslims", but with good lenses, beautiful lighting, a better written script (with Morgan Freeman narrating), etc etc?
Would it then be art, despite NO change in content?