As mentioned in the previous post, I've been on Blogger for nearly ten years. I've also been on YouTube for four years. So, I have no problem sharing, and I enjoy creative hobbies. But one thing I've never gotten into was podcasting.
I opened an account at PodOmatic.com back in 2007, but I never really knew what to do with it. By that point I was already vlogging on YouTube, so it seemed like, if I was going to put in the effort to "produce" an audio program, I'd rather put the same effort into producing a video.
Just in the last week or so, my friend Rich (WorldAccordingToRich on YouTube, and on Blogger) started playing with podcasting over at Audioboo.com. My first reaction was, "Hey, where's the video?" Then, in his blog, he made a great point about some people being more comfortable opening up to a microphone than they would be to a camera. Audio could be a great tool for getting some quick on-the-street interviews that otherwise would not make it to video.
Then, poking around the Audioboo site, I found they had one thing that PodOmatic does not have, and perhaps it's the one thing that guaranteed I would try it: Audioboo has an iPhone app.
And so, once again, I'm testing out podcasting, and here's my first attempt... if you enjoy it, you can check out my Audioboo profile page and subscribe by RSS feed, follow me on the site, or even subscribe using iTunes.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Blogging is Dead! Long Live the Blog!
Pretty much since blogger.com launched eleven years ago, giving the average non-total-geek access to the tools to create frequently updated, timely, personal websites, the mainstream press has been declaring the death of blogging. First off, they said, what we were creating now were not truly "weblogs" as the pioneers had created, they were more along the lines of diaries or journals, or even worse, according to the professional pundits, amateur punditry. And so they looked to any signs to show that it was all just a passing fad and fancy.
Newsweek (remember them? they used to publish a magazine?) is the latest to pound these well-worn drums in an online article titled "Take This Blog and Shove It!" with the clever sub-title of "When utopian ideals crash into human nature—sloth triumphs."
Among the horrifying (yawn) statistics uncovered:
Starting a blog is the modern version of starting a novel or screenplay. In any office in any city anywhere in the world, you'll find accountants, clerks, middle-managers, and other assorted board pencil-pushers who all have the seeds of their dream project tucked into the back of a drawer. Nobody has ever put a number on their abandonment rate, but I'm willing to guess it's somewhat over 95%.
If 5% of first novels started this year were actually completed and published, we'd be seeing more new authors than at any time previously. 95% of blogs are abandoned? Fine. Does that take into account blogs that were started for a particular limited time purpose, like promoting a (now past) event? I doubt it. Some blogs have a final post for a reason, but still remain live for archive purposes.
The only difference between blogs started and abandoned and writing the first few pages of the Great American Novel is that one is a far more public declaration of the would-be writer's creative ambition. Writing is tough work, whatever the medium. Not every idea pans out the way we hoped it would, and not everybody with a creative idea has the stamina and drive and determination to see it through.
I've certainly abandoned my share of blogs. This particular blog (9-1/2 years and over 1,100 posts) is still going strong, as is my Nonprofit Consultant Blog (nearly 5 years and over 200 posts). But my attempts to do a food blog or a guitar blog have not fared as well. Big deal. Next point.
So, 10% of tweeters account for 90% of tweets? Again, not surprising, or any different than we'd expect in any type of communications medium, including face-to-face meetings. Does your workplace have staff meetings? Keep track of who does the most talking. This is just human nature. Some people have the common sense to keep their mouths shut once in a while.
To me, what I see in that sentence is "50 million tweets per day." That's a big number, representing an awful lot of written text, even at 140 characters per tweet. And that's from only 10% of people with Twitter accounts? I don't see failure; I see an awful lot of written communication and I'm still impressed.
Next point... the "stabilization" of citizen journalism. Again, "only" one in ten web users has created a news or opinion piece. I wish somebody had ever thought to keep track of how many newspaper readers had ever even written a letter to the editor, let alone had one published in the paper.
When in the history of the planet, has 10% of the population been able to share their ideas, opinions, and creativity with mass audiences beyond their immediate family and a few associates without editors, censors, and expensive hurdles to cross?
And this amazing amount of participation, writing, and reading, is what Newsweek terms "sloth"?
For the social media revolution to succeed at changing our society it does not need the majority of citizens to be constantly publishing their every thought. All it requires is that a greater percentage of people participate than have ever had the opportunity to participate previously. That has happened.
So the participation figures have leveled off a bit. Great. They've not declined. A leveling-off should be expected after the initial bursts of growth. There will be more growth, but at a slower and more sustainable rate, in the years to come.
The tools are out there, and getting better every day. The cat is out of the bag. There's no turning back. Sorry, Newsweek, but your days of being relevant are what is losing steam.
Newsweek (remember them? they used to publish a magazine?) is the latest to pound these well-worn drums in an online article titled "Take This Blog and Shove It!" with the clever sub-title of "When utopian ideals crash into human nature—sloth triumphs."
Among the horrifying (yawn) statistics uncovered:
"Amateur blogs, the original embodiment of Web democracy, are showing signs of decline. While professional bloggers are "a rising class," according to Technorati, hobbyists are in retreat, and about 95 percent of blogs are launched and quickly abandoned...
"[W]hile Twitter carries more than 50 million tweets per day, its army of keystrokers may not be as large as it seems. As many as 90 percent of tweets come from 10 percent of users...
"Citizen journalism also has stabilized. Fewer than one in 10 Web users say they have created their own original news or opinion piece..."First off, I love the quotes around "rising class" when referring to professional bloggers. If ever a typed quotation mark had to be read as air quotes, this was it. Leaving that bit of editorializing through punctuation aside, let's look at the 95% abandonment rate and why I think that's just fine.
Starting a blog is the modern version of starting a novel or screenplay. In any office in any city anywhere in the world, you'll find accountants, clerks, middle-managers, and other assorted board pencil-pushers who all have the seeds of their dream project tucked into the back of a drawer. Nobody has ever put a number on their abandonment rate, but I'm willing to guess it's somewhat over 95%.
If 5% of first novels started this year were actually completed and published, we'd be seeing more new authors than at any time previously. 95% of blogs are abandoned? Fine. Does that take into account blogs that were started for a particular limited time purpose, like promoting a (now past) event? I doubt it. Some blogs have a final post for a reason, but still remain live for archive purposes.
The only difference between blogs started and abandoned and writing the first few pages of the Great American Novel is that one is a far more public declaration of the would-be writer's creative ambition. Writing is tough work, whatever the medium. Not every idea pans out the way we hoped it would, and not everybody with a creative idea has the stamina and drive and determination to see it through.
I've certainly abandoned my share of blogs. This particular blog (9-1/2 years and over 1,100 posts) is still going strong, as is my Nonprofit Consultant Blog (nearly 5 years and over 200 posts). But my attempts to do a food blog or a guitar blog have not fared as well. Big deal. Next point.
So, 10% of tweeters account for 90% of tweets? Again, not surprising, or any different than we'd expect in any type of communications medium, including face-to-face meetings. Does your workplace have staff meetings? Keep track of who does the most talking. This is just human nature. Some people have the common sense to keep their mouths shut once in a while.
To me, what I see in that sentence is "50 million tweets per day." That's a big number, representing an awful lot of written text, even at 140 characters per tweet. And that's from only 10% of people with Twitter accounts? I don't see failure; I see an awful lot of written communication and I'm still impressed.
Next point... the "stabilization" of citizen journalism. Again, "only" one in ten web users has created a news or opinion piece. I wish somebody had ever thought to keep track of how many newspaper readers had ever even written a letter to the editor, let alone had one published in the paper.
When in the history of the planet, has 10% of the population been able to share their ideas, opinions, and creativity with mass audiences beyond their immediate family and a few associates without editors, censors, and expensive hurdles to cross?
And this amazing amount of participation, writing, and reading, is what Newsweek terms "sloth"?
For the social media revolution to succeed at changing our society it does not need the majority of citizens to be constantly publishing their every thought. All it requires is that a greater percentage of people participate than have ever had the opportunity to participate previously. That has happened.
So the participation figures have leveled off a bit. Great. They've not declined. A leveling-off should be expected after the initial bursts of growth. There will be more growth, but at a slower and more sustainable rate, in the years to come.
The tools are out there, and getting better every day. The cat is out of the bag. There's no turning back. Sorry, Newsweek, but your days of being relevant are what is losing steam.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Social Media Meet-Up in Santa Cruz, CA, September 18, 2010
Along with my friend Curt (known as OhCurt on YouTube and elsewhere online), I'm organizing a Social Media Meet-Up (or SMMU) on the Santa Cruz Pier for September 18, 2010, 10 AM to 3 PM.
In the past I've been to several YouTube gatherings, but the social media landscape is much broader than that now. I've been here, on blogger, for nearly a decade, YouTube for about four years, twitter and facebook since they each launched, and the community is very fluid, with people migrating from on platform to another as their interests and needs shift.
One day video bloggers may be posting vlogs on YouTube, but the next on Vloggerheads or Vimeo, or micro-vlogs on 12seconds. Bloggers now tweet, and status updates from twitter now automatically post to facebook or buzz. It's a fascinating time, and there are lots of great people involved, and the SMMU is an attempt to get them all together for a great time and learn about how we're all using social media in an informal and fun setting.
For all the details on the SMMU (location, time, etc.), please see the SMMU blog at sc-smmu.blogspot.com, or the join our facebook group. Meanwhile, here's a little announcement video about the event:
In the past I've been to several YouTube gatherings, but the social media landscape is much broader than that now. I've been here, on blogger, for nearly a decade, YouTube for about four years, twitter and facebook since they each launched, and the community is very fluid, with people migrating from on platform to another as their interests and needs shift.
One day video bloggers may be posting vlogs on YouTube, but the next on Vloggerheads or Vimeo, or micro-vlogs on 12seconds. Bloggers now tweet, and status updates from twitter now automatically post to facebook or buzz. It's a fascinating time, and there are lots of great people involved, and the SMMU is an attempt to get them all together for a great time and learn about how we're all using social media in an informal and fun setting.
For all the details on the SMMU (location, time, etc.), please see the SMMU blog at sc-smmu.blogspot.com, or the join our facebook group. Meanwhile, here's a little announcement video about the event:
Monday, July 05, 2010
Why I'm Not Going to Vidcon
Next week in Los Angeles is Vidcon: "The first ever gathering of the most influential and popular independent video makers online and the communities that have made them a force in the world."
Many are saying Vidcon "is just a con," "It should be free," "What do they know that I don't?" etc. I disagree with all that. I would love to attend, and find true value in, a serious conference about online video, and where all this is going, and $140 would be a bargain ... if it were the right conference.
Unfortunately, Vidcon is not that conference. And not because they're charging admission, or because of who is organizing it, or who the speakers are, but simply because of the lack of serious in-depth content.
Looking at which of my own vlogs have received the most hits, the strongest reactions, and most emotional comments, it's the ones on copyright and DMCA issues. I think most of us agree, that's a major problem on YouTube. But at Vidcon, there's a single 1/2-hour break-out session on "YouTube Policy, DMCA and Fair Use" (with "Meet Charles Trippy" going on in the next room over), but nothing on "What IS the law," "What IS fair use," "How to protect yourself," or anything on finding royalty free music, public domain images, etc.
There's a handful of sessions under the heading of "Online Video Film School," but none of them long enough to teach anything in depth or that will be remembered once the attendees return home. And, for each "Online Video School" there are two "Meet-up with [famous 'Tuber]" sessions.
There's a session on the Future of YouTube, lead by YouTube's "Director of Product Management," but nothing on the future of online video or social media as a new and exciting medium in which to create original work.
It seems to me (IMHO) that Vidcon – however well-intentioned the organizers may have been – will be more of trying to fit new media into an old media shell, and relying on "star power" to drive attendance and excitement for the event.
I look at the schedule and there's dozens of short sessions with no point to them, and not a single in-depth educational session that I might get anything out of. It's the short-attention-span YouTube gathering, and not much more.
I've attended many, many professional conferences over the years, and I've even helped organize at least a dozen or so conferences, but I've never seen such a jumbled, aimless mess of a schedule than the one for Vidcon.
My friend Rich of WorldAccordingToRich will be at Vidcon. He's interested in what "approach the entertainment industry at large is taking with the YouTube phenomena," and is hoping to get some insight into that. I get the importance of it to him professionally, but it has very little significance to me.
For social media to truly continue its growth into something new and different, we must allow it space away from "the entertainment industry at large." YouTube is more a phenomenon from Silicon Valley than from Hollywood, and its impact is (and should be) anything but localized to any dominant region. Social media belongs to the world, and there's nothing Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, or London can do about it.
In the last couple of years, the growing and nearly over-powering influence of old media on YouTube, simply as a means to promote movies/TV, has threatened to drown out those who are using YouTube to develop something entirely new. Yes, social media (YouTube, twitter, etc.) can be used to promote other traditional media, but if they become mediums that are nothing but promotional vehicles, they will die quickly.
I think there's so much more potential to new media yet to be discovered that I – personally (IMHO) – have no time to care about how Hollywood will use it.
I will watch the vlogged reports from Vidcon from WorldAccordingToRich and Renetto and others I know who are attending. But I don't expect to regret my decision to stay home.
Many are saying Vidcon "is just a con," "It should be free," "What do they know that I don't?" etc. I disagree with all that. I would love to attend, and find true value in, a serious conference about online video, and where all this is going, and $140 would be a bargain ... if it were the right conference.
Unfortunately, Vidcon is not that conference. And not because they're charging admission, or because of who is organizing it, or who the speakers are, but simply because of the lack of serious in-depth content.
Looking at which of my own vlogs have received the most hits, the strongest reactions, and most emotional comments, it's the ones on copyright and DMCA issues. I think most of us agree, that's a major problem on YouTube. But at Vidcon, there's a single 1/2-hour break-out session on "YouTube Policy, DMCA and Fair Use" (with "Meet Charles Trippy" going on in the next room over), but nothing on "What IS the law," "What IS fair use," "How to protect yourself," or anything on finding royalty free music, public domain images, etc.
There's a handful of sessions under the heading of "Online Video Film School," but none of them long enough to teach anything in depth or that will be remembered once the attendees return home. And, for each "Online Video School" there are two "Meet-up with [famous 'Tuber]" sessions.
There's a session on the Future of YouTube, lead by YouTube's "Director of Product Management," but nothing on the future of online video or social media as a new and exciting medium in which to create original work.
It seems to me (IMHO) that Vidcon – however well-intentioned the organizers may have been – will be more of trying to fit new media into an old media shell, and relying on "star power" to drive attendance and excitement for the event.
I look at the schedule and there's dozens of short sessions with no point to them, and not a single in-depth educational session that I might get anything out of. It's the short-attention-span YouTube gathering, and not much more.
I've attended many, many professional conferences over the years, and I've even helped organize at least a dozen or so conferences, but I've never seen such a jumbled, aimless mess of a schedule than the one for Vidcon.
My friend Rich of WorldAccordingToRich will be at Vidcon. He's interested in what "approach the entertainment industry at large is taking with the YouTube phenomena," and is hoping to get some insight into that. I get the importance of it to him professionally, but it has very little significance to me.
For social media to truly continue its growth into something new and different, we must allow it space away from "the entertainment industry at large." YouTube is more a phenomenon from Silicon Valley than from Hollywood, and its impact is (and should be) anything but localized to any dominant region. Social media belongs to the world, and there's nothing Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, or London can do about it.
In the last couple of years, the growing and nearly over-powering influence of old media on YouTube, simply as a means to promote movies/TV, has threatened to drown out those who are using YouTube to develop something entirely new. Yes, social media (YouTube, twitter, etc.) can be used to promote other traditional media, but if they become mediums that are nothing but promotional vehicles, they will die quickly.
I think there's so much more potential to new media yet to be discovered that I – personally (IMHO) – have no time to care about how Hollywood will use it.
I will watch the vlogged reports from Vidcon from WorldAccordingToRich and Renetto and others I know who are attending. But I don't expect to regret my decision to stay home.
Saturday, July 03, 2010
Not Technically Unemployed
I'm not technically unemployed... I just have no work. There's a difference...
This is a blog post I've thought about writing for a couple of weeks, as so many of my friends are going through extended periods of unemployment, under-employment, or "being made redundant." Isn't that a great term? Being told that you're now "redundant." Great way to add insult to injury, don't you think?
On the one hand, I like to [try to] keep a positive public face about my current situation, be optimistic about future opportunities, and not look like I'm seeking sympathy, but in the end, I've decided it's more important to let my "redundant" friends know that they're not alone.
So, no, technically I'm not unemployed, as I'm a self-employed consultant ... I just haven't had anyone to consult to since April 1, and my only income for the last three months has been $22.82 in book royalties. Being self-employed means that when the work dries up, there's no unemployment benefits or severance packages, just the search for the next gig.
Part of being independent is that there's ups and downs. The last several long-term gigs have come one on top of the other, even over-lapping major assignments. A "high quality problem," as Tom G. would say. But since April 1, there's been a disconcerting silence from my usual sources of leads, and very little I've been able to dig out on my own.
I've been searching for irons and fires and trying to put them together, but I can see I may have a significant bit of down-time before the next long-term assignment. In six and-a-half years of being in business for myself, this is the most difficult time I've had. Of course, considering the economy, I suppose three months of downtime after a 6-1/2 year stretch isn't all that bad.
That said, overall, I again count my blessings and say "high quality problem," but that doesn't make it any easier. Especially when it's summer, and my wife (a teacher) is also without paycheck for a couple of months, and we've got contractors bidding on re-doing our bathroom and other repair work.
So, I keep in touch with colleagues and let them know I'm available, I read the job listings to see if there's anything to tempt away from my independent practice back into "a real job," and I've started another book project of some nonprofit case studies from my last several long-term consulting gigs.
All-in-all, I've been keeping myself busy, and I plan on enjoying the summer, even if I have to do it on a lower budget than I might prefer.
So, for those of you who are redundant, I share your pain. Even though we all know "it's the economy, stupid," it's hard not to take some of it as a personal failing in moments of weakness. But we just have to push past that, keep ourselves occupied, and look for that next great opportunity. It's out there somewhere. It has to be.
This is a blog post I've thought about writing for a couple of weeks, as so many of my friends are going through extended periods of unemployment, under-employment, or "being made redundant." Isn't that a great term? Being told that you're now "redundant." Great way to add insult to injury, don't you think?
On the one hand, I like to [try to] keep a positive public face about my current situation, be optimistic about future opportunities, and not look like I'm seeking sympathy, but in the end, I've decided it's more important to let my "redundant" friends know that they're not alone.
So, no, technically I'm not unemployed, as I'm a self-employed consultant ... I just haven't had anyone to consult to since April 1, and my only income for the last three months has been $22.82 in book royalties. Being self-employed means that when the work dries up, there's no unemployment benefits or severance packages, just the search for the next gig.
Part of being independent is that there's ups and downs. The last several long-term gigs have come one on top of the other, even over-lapping major assignments. A "high quality problem," as Tom G. would say. But since April 1, there's been a disconcerting silence from my usual sources of leads, and very little I've been able to dig out on my own.
I've been searching for irons and fires and trying to put them together, but I can see I may have a significant bit of down-time before the next long-term assignment. In six and-a-half years of being in business for myself, this is the most difficult time I've had. Of course, considering the economy, I suppose three months of downtime after a 6-1/2 year stretch isn't all that bad.
That said, overall, I again count my blessings and say "high quality problem," but that doesn't make it any easier. Especially when it's summer, and my wife (a teacher) is also without paycheck for a couple of months, and we've got contractors bidding on re-doing our bathroom and other repair work.
So, I keep in touch with colleagues and let them know I'm available, I read the job listings to see if there's anything to tempt away from my independent practice back into "a real job," and I've started another book project of some nonprofit case studies from my last several long-term consulting gigs.
All-in-all, I've been keeping myself busy, and I plan on enjoying the summer, even if I have to do it on a lower budget than I might prefer.
So, for those of you who are redundant, I share your pain. Even though we all know "it's the economy, stupid," it's hard not to take some of it as a personal failing in moments of weakness. But we just have to push past that, keep ourselves occupied, and look for that next great opportunity. It's out there somewhere. It has to be.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Summer Movies (so far)
We tend to go to the movies more during the summer months. First, we have more free time, as my wife (a teacher) is off of work. Second, when the temperature starts rising, it's nice to go someplace dark and cool for a couple of hours.
But it can be frustrating, as the types of movies that are out in summer tend to be the types of movies we avoid: anything with a number in the title, anything that's a remake of something we watched on TV 30 years ago, and the all important Rule of 15 (anything that's likely to have more than 15% of the audience under 15 years old). Still, we've managed to see a few good films so far this month; Exit Through the Gift Shop, Solitary Man, and Micmacs.
Exit Through the Gift Shop is a documentary about Thierry Guetta, a shop-keeper, turned documentary film maker, turned street artist, and the world of graffiti artists such as Banksy, Space Invader, and Shepard Fairey (the guy who designed the iconic Obama poster). It's an absurd story that calls into question the fine lines between street art and fine art, between fine art and commerce, between paying ones dues (the suffering artist) and overnight success, and between being a filmmaker and being just another guy with a video camera and a mental problem.
Yes, the big question is always "but is it art?" but it's all the other questions along the way, and larger-than-life characters, that make this a fascinating, fast moving, and entertaining movie.
Solitary Man is the most commercial of the three films we've seen so far this summer. Michael Douglas plays a successful businessman who hits the mid-life crisis free fall with swift, steep, and beautifully self-destructive results.
It's a story we've seen before (catering to aging baby boomers is big business itself), and if you pay too much attention there are enough holes in the plot to fill the Albert Hall, but the performances (including far too little of Susan Sarandon, Danny DeVito, and a wonderfully viscous and spoiled Mary-Louise Parker) make it an enjoyable afternoon at the cinema never-the-less.
Micmacs is the truly amazing, charming, and creative gem of the group. Director Jean-Pierre Jeunet (Amélie) gives us the world of the luckless Bazil. While a boy, Bazil's father is killed by a land mine, destroying his family and childhood. Years later, the quiet life he's made for himself is again sent into turmoil by a stray bullet finding his head, which he barely survives. Now, out on the streets, he's taken in by an underground group of misfits and petty thieves (think Terry Gilliam directing Fagan, the Artful Dodger and the rest of the Oliver Twist gang), who help him exact revenge on the companies who made the landmine and the bullet.
But that plot, and characters like Elastic Girl, Slammer, and Calculator, only scratch the surface of how wildly inventive and visually stunning this movie is. I saw one review that said it was like a live action Toy Story. Having not seen the Toy Story series (see my rules for summer movies above), I can't say how accurate that is, but I would say that the style owes much to Tex Avery and Chuck Jones. There is a political message underneath all that creativity, but Jeunet slips it in quietly and without disturbing the creative flow. Best movie of the summer so far.
But it can be frustrating, as the types of movies that are out in summer tend to be the types of movies we avoid: anything with a number in the title, anything that's a remake of something we watched on TV 30 years ago, and the all important Rule of 15 (anything that's likely to have more than 15% of the audience under 15 years old). Still, we've managed to see a few good films so far this month; Exit Through the Gift Shop, Solitary Man, and Micmacs.
Exit Through the Gift Shop is a documentary about Thierry Guetta, a shop-keeper, turned documentary film maker, turned street artist, and the world of graffiti artists such as Banksy, Space Invader, and Shepard Fairey (the guy who designed the iconic Obama poster). It's an absurd story that calls into question the fine lines between street art and fine art, between fine art and commerce, between paying ones dues (the suffering artist) and overnight success, and between being a filmmaker and being just another guy with a video camera and a mental problem.
Yes, the big question is always "but is it art?" but it's all the other questions along the way, and larger-than-life characters, that make this a fascinating, fast moving, and entertaining movie.
Solitary Man is the most commercial of the three films we've seen so far this summer. Michael Douglas plays a successful businessman who hits the mid-life crisis free fall with swift, steep, and beautifully self-destructive results.
It's a story we've seen before (catering to aging baby boomers is big business itself), and if you pay too much attention there are enough holes in the plot to fill the Albert Hall, but the performances (including far too little of Susan Sarandon, Danny DeVito, and a wonderfully viscous and spoiled Mary-Louise Parker) make it an enjoyable afternoon at the cinema never-the-less.
Micmacs is the truly amazing, charming, and creative gem of the group. Director Jean-Pierre Jeunet (Amélie) gives us the world of the luckless Bazil. While a boy, Bazil's father is killed by a land mine, destroying his family and childhood. Years later, the quiet life he's made for himself is again sent into turmoil by a stray bullet finding his head, which he barely survives. Now, out on the streets, he's taken in by an underground group of misfits and petty thieves (think Terry Gilliam directing Fagan, the Artful Dodger and the rest of the Oliver Twist gang), who help him exact revenge on the companies who made the landmine and the bullet.
But that plot, and characters like Elastic Girl, Slammer, and Calculator, only scratch the surface of how wildly inventive and visually stunning this movie is. I saw one review that said it was like a live action Toy Story. Having not seen the Toy Story series (see my rules for summer movies above), I can't say how accurate that is, but I would say that the style owes much to Tex Avery and Chuck Jones. There is a political message underneath all that creativity, but Jeunet slips it in quietly and without disturbing the creative flow. Best movie of the summer so far.
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Post Election Hangover
Yesterday was election day in California, and I have to say, I'm pleasantly surprised with the results on most of the ballot propositions - an area where I was preparing myself for bitter disappointment.
Despite putting $46 million of our (ratepayers) money into Prop 16, PG&E's power grab attempt went down to defeat, along with Prop 17, Mercury Insurance's "please make us give you a discount" attempt. Nobody is giving you something for nothing, and just enough people saw through these two corporate abuses of democracy for what they were, and by slim margins turned them down. Good for California and good for Californians! We're not as dumb as we might look.
My one really big disappointment was the passage of Proposition 14, deceptively and cynically titled, "Increases Right to Participate in Primaries." The idea here is to eliminate the power of political parties, by putting all primary candidates on a single ballot. The top two vote getters then face off in the November general election.
Now, if you read this blog regularly, you know I'm a registered independent, and all for breaking the stranglehold of the two major parties ... if it is to open up the process to more choice. But nature abhors a vacuum, a rule that also applies to political power. In this case, party structure is simply replaced by money and name recognition.
The diagram from the official voter information pamphlet (shown here) says it all. Instead of several party primaries, each with maybe four or five candidates selecting their nominee to face off in a general election where again there will be a half-dozen candidates, each representing a different party, we'll now have a primary with a confusing dozen or more candidates leading up to a general election choice of only two ... and both potentially of the same party!
Supporters say this will give us "more moderate candidates" as everybody will have to play to the middle. But to rise above a field of 15-20 candidates in a state the size of California, it will only give us better connected and wealthier candidates. More corporate shills to continue the status quo.
Speaking of which, the Republicans nominated two former Silicon Valley CEOs for top office; eBay's Meg Whitman for Governor and Hewlett Packard's Carly Fiorina for Senate.
In her victory speech, Whitman, who will face off against former Governor Jerry Brown in November, said that she was ready to "shake up" the Governor's office with thinking from "outside Sacramento." Whitman (who spent over $70 million of her own cash to secure the nomination) said she'd be a different kind of Governor because she isn't "beholden to anybody."
Now, if she were following a Democratic Governor, or even a Republican "career politician," that might be a good argument. But she's hoping to follow the non-politician, self-funded millionaire, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Has she not been paying attention? Probably not. She's so new to this "democracy thing" that she's rarely bothered to even vote in her adult life.
The one thing I can say for Whitman, however, is that she at least was a successful CEO, not that that will automatically translate to governing success. On the other hand, Carly Fiorina, who will be trying to unseat Senator Barbara Boxer in November, just about destroyed Hewlett Packard. When they finally fired her, their stock value was about 1/3 what it was when she was hired. Along that path, she laid off over 30,000 employees, sent thousands more jobs from California to Asia, and accepted a $20 million golden parachute to leave Silicon Valley. Ummm... she's seeking to represent me?
At Fiorina's celebration, a spokesman for the California Republican Party expressed his joy at having these two candidates to run against the Democratic "professional politicians." He says he welcomes the perspective of these leaders because they'll remove the shackles of oppressive regulation from businesses. How he managed to say that with a straight face while millions of gallons of oil having been spilling into the Gulf of Mexico for the past 50 days show that he learned some acting skills from the current Governator.
This post is getting quite long ... sorry, that's what happens when I don't blog for a while ... so I'll end it here, but in coming months I'll explain why I fully support Jerry Brown, our once and future Governor, and our Senator Barbara Boxer. And where, and why, I will likely not be voting a straight Democratic ticket in November.
Despite putting $46 million of our (ratepayers) money into Prop 16, PG&E's power grab attempt went down to defeat, along with Prop 17, Mercury Insurance's "please make us give you a discount" attempt. Nobody is giving you something for nothing, and just enough people saw through these two corporate abuses of democracy for what they were, and by slim margins turned them down. Good for California and good for Californians! We're not as dumb as we might look.
My one really big disappointment was the passage of Proposition 14, deceptively and cynically titled, "Increases Right to Participate in Primaries." The idea here is to eliminate the power of political parties, by putting all primary candidates on a single ballot. The top two vote getters then face off in the November general election.
Now, if you read this blog regularly, you know I'm a registered independent, and all for breaking the stranglehold of the two major parties ... if it is to open up the process to more choice. But nature abhors a vacuum, a rule that also applies to political power. In this case, party structure is simply replaced by money and name recognition.The diagram from the official voter information pamphlet (shown here) says it all. Instead of several party primaries, each with maybe four or five candidates selecting their nominee to face off in a general election where again there will be a half-dozen candidates, each representing a different party, we'll now have a primary with a confusing dozen or more candidates leading up to a general election choice of only two ... and both potentially of the same party!
Supporters say this will give us "more moderate candidates" as everybody will have to play to the middle. But to rise above a field of 15-20 candidates in a state the size of California, it will only give us better connected and wealthier candidates. More corporate shills to continue the status quo.
Speaking of which, the Republicans nominated two former Silicon Valley CEOs for top office; eBay's Meg Whitman for Governor and Hewlett Packard's Carly Fiorina for Senate.
In her victory speech, Whitman, who will face off against former Governor Jerry Brown in November, said that she was ready to "shake up" the Governor's office with thinking from "outside Sacramento." Whitman (who spent over $70 million of her own cash to secure the nomination) said she'd be a different kind of Governor because she isn't "beholden to anybody."
Now, if she were following a Democratic Governor, or even a Republican "career politician," that might be a good argument. But she's hoping to follow the non-politician, self-funded millionaire, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Has she not been paying attention? Probably not. She's so new to this "democracy thing" that she's rarely bothered to even vote in her adult life.
The one thing I can say for Whitman, however, is that she at least was a successful CEO, not that that will automatically translate to governing success. On the other hand, Carly Fiorina, who will be trying to unseat Senator Barbara Boxer in November, just about destroyed Hewlett Packard. When they finally fired her, their stock value was about 1/3 what it was when she was hired. Along that path, she laid off over 30,000 employees, sent thousands more jobs from California to Asia, and accepted a $20 million golden parachute to leave Silicon Valley. Ummm... she's seeking to represent me?
At Fiorina's celebration, a spokesman for the California Republican Party expressed his joy at having these two candidates to run against the Democratic "professional politicians." He says he welcomes the perspective of these leaders because they'll remove the shackles of oppressive regulation from businesses. How he managed to say that with a straight face while millions of gallons of oil having been spilling into the Gulf of Mexico for the past 50 days show that he learned some acting skills from the current Governator.
This post is getting quite long ... sorry, that's what happens when I don't blog for a while ... so I'll end it here, but in coming months I'll explain why I fully support Jerry Brown, our once and future Governor, and our Senator Barbara Boxer. And where, and why, I will likely not be voting a straight Democratic ticket in November.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

