You hear that phrase "the liberal media" all the time. I've never bought it, for a number of reasons--not least of which because I've read/watched the media. But I also know the web of connections between global corporate giants who own most of the major media, and these powerful, concentrated forces are anything but "liberal."
Still, one would think if we did have a "liberal" media, there might be more attention paid to stories like the annual Project Censored announcement. Since 1976, Sonoma State University in California has released an annual survey of the top 25 stories the mainstream media failed to report or reported poorly, culling them from national and international sources.
The project organizers define censorship as "any interference with the free flow of information." Among the top 2008 stories that the media under-reported or failed to cover at all:
1. How many Iraqis have died? The number varies widely. Top estimate: 1.2 million.
2. Security and Prosperity Partnership (NAFTA on steroids)“It’s a scheme to create a borderless North American Union under U.S. control without barriers to trade and capital flows for corporate giants, mainly U.S. ones,” wrote Stephen Lendman in Global Research. “It’s also to insure America gets free and unlimited access to Canadian and Mexican resources, mainly oil, and in the case of Canada, water as well.”
3. Infragard (FBI deputized business members, who get pre-terrorism warnings before regular individuals. So they can protect their interests).
4. School of the Americas: a training ground for illegal wars in Georgia.
5. Criminalizing the anti-war movement
6. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, designed to root out the causes of radicalization in Americans.
7. H-2 visas and 120,000 immigrants working legally in America ("closest thing to slavery I've seen" Rep. Charles Rangel)
8. "As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse had access to the DOJ opinions regarding presidential power, and he had three declassified in order to show how the judicial branch has, in a bizarre and chilling way, assisted President Bush in circumventing its own power." (Amanda Witherell)
9. Soldiers speaking out against the war.
10. Teaching torture: "Psychologists have been assisting the CIA and the U.S. military with interrogation and torture of Guantanamo Bay detainees—which the American Psychological Association has said is fine, in spite of objections from many in its 148,000 members." (Witherell)
None of these important stories were covered by the mainstream media.Below is a video of an interview with present director of the project, Peter Phillips.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Video Killed The Radio Star
Recently, our Visual Journalism grad class took a little field trip to Arlington to visit the offices of Washington Post interactive (Washington Post.com).
Below is a brief slideshow I made, featuring our host and guide, assistant multimedia editor, Chet Rhodes. Rhodes made some good points throughout the night, including:
Sometimes "innovation comes at the cost of usability," and we should always be careful balancing the old and new technologies. Or in other words, try to keep it simple for the viewer, but useful.
He also added that their online site was "very profitable" but still not enough to replace the revenue being lost by the print side in downtown D.C.
His overall mission, simply stated: "we want people to come to us for text and video."
He recommended checking out the work of Emmy-award winning MOJO, Travis Fox and noted that when we were filming, "never ZOOM!" and keep the head of the subject touching the top of the screen. Hmmm.
Oh! And he noted that Washington Post.com does now have its own You Tube channel, a valuable ally in the attempt to make videos go viral and reach a wider audience.
Stay tuned.
I also included a video of him that I found on You Tube where he discusses some more of the changes coming to journalism, which mostly revolve around the emerging dominance of visual (video )images over print.
Below is a brief slideshow I made, featuring our host and guide, assistant multimedia editor, Chet Rhodes. Rhodes made some good points throughout the night, including:
Sometimes "innovation comes at the cost of usability," and we should always be careful balancing the old and new technologies. Or in other words, try to keep it simple for the viewer, but useful.
He also added that their online site was "very profitable" but still not enough to replace the revenue being lost by the print side in downtown D.C.
His overall mission, simply stated: "we want people to come to us for text and video."
He recommended checking out the work of Emmy-award winning MOJO, Travis Fox and noted that when we were filming, "never ZOOM!" and keep the head of the subject touching the top of the screen. Hmmm.
Oh! And he noted that Washington Post.com does now have its own You Tube channel, a valuable ally in the attempt to make videos go viral and reach a wider audience.
Stay tuned.
I also included a video of him that I found on You Tube where he discusses some more of the changes coming to journalism, which mostly revolve around the emerging dominance of visual (video )images over print.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Special Blog extra: "Rock Star Politics: Obama in Richmond 10/22"
Saw the Obama train roll through Richmond today. Outside, throngs of people streamed into Richmond Coliseum from all sides, as t-shirt and button hawkers lined up their goods, and a truck with pictures of aborted fetuses drove in circles, with a big sign that read "Abortion is an ObamaNation."
After brief warm-ups from Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, Obama took the podium about an hour late to thunderous applause. I took some pics from high above in the nosebleed section. My old history professor Bob Hiett was down front, and got a few words in with the superstar candidate. The speech was hard to hear due to the poor sound system, but it was mostly familiar ground from the campaign. The atmosphere was electric, unlike anything I've ever seen at political rally.
After brief warm-ups from Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, Obama took the podium about an hour late to thunderous applause. I took some pics from high above in the nosebleed section. My old history professor Bob Hiett was down front, and got a few words in with the superstar candidate. The speech was hard to hear due to the poor sound system, but it was mostly familiar ground from the campaign. The atmosphere was electric, unlike anything I've ever seen at political rally.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
The Changing Media Landscape
Recently, a blog entry on Mediashift posted several video interviews with various j-school professors about what they felt journalism students needed to know today as they enter the workforce. All of their comments seemed to ring true: that is to say, there are a multitude of things journalists must know. They range from the essential, traditional building blocks (fundamental interest/passion in informing the public, maintaining ethical standards) to the modern (understanding new technology mediums and "marketing work" to an ever-changing audience). Journalists today must become more savvy than in the past, without losing critical writing and reporting skills.
When I boil it down, the biggest change in media over the last five years seems to be twofold: a decrease in print and increase in video content, combined with an interactive, personal-based approach to media consumption.
With a plethora of media to choose from, readers are moving to whatever satisfies their personal curiosities/tastes: be they community or national based, hard news or entertainment. People want customized information.
Journalists today need to know how to follow the quickly changing media landscape. They can do this in many ways: staying on top of trend publications, being involved in online settings, and just keeping up with what other media are doing. While doing this, they should always try to be innovative and find new ways to apply the media in their storytelling--no easy task. Creativity and imagination are critical.
Individual journalists should know their audience, and know what they can provide to best serve their interests. If this means twittering info, or whatever the latest trend is, so be it. Basically, they should stay on top of how content information flows online, which means they need to constantly be reading online, following stories and reader communities, and discovering where the journalist can add crucial information and provide services in the interest of the community served.
All of this weight should not fall on the journalist's shoulders alone. Management at media companies need to come out of the Stone Age and actually invest money in moving forward into the brave new digital world: hiring web producers, [insert innovative new titles here] and others who can monitor and create new ways to "market" or reach online audiences. Ideally, journalism in today's climate should be a team affair (two or three person teams would do a much better job at providing a multi-pronged approach to a multimedia world).
When I boil it down, the biggest change in media over the last five years seems to be twofold: a decrease in print and increase in video content, combined with an interactive, personal-based approach to media consumption.
With a plethora of media to choose from, readers are moving to whatever satisfies their personal curiosities/tastes: be they community or national based, hard news or entertainment. People want customized information.
Journalists today need to know how to follow the quickly changing media landscape. They can do this in many ways: staying on top of trend publications, being involved in online settings, and just keeping up with what other media are doing. While doing this, they should always try to be innovative and find new ways to apply the media in their storytelling--no easy task. Creativity and imagination are critical.
Individual journalists should know their audience, and know what they can provide to best serve their interests. If this means twittering info, or whatever the latest trend is, so be it. Basically, they should stay on top of how content information flows online, which means they need to constantly be reading online, following stories and reader communities, and discovering where the journalist can add crucial information and provide services in the interest of the community served.
All of this weight should not fall on the journalist's shoulders alone. Management at media companies need to come out of the Stone Age and actually invest money in moving forward into the brave new digital world: hiring web producers, [insert innovative new titles here] and others who can monitor and create new ways to "market" or reach online audiences. Ideally, journalism in today's climate should be a team affair (two or three person teams would do a much better job at providing a multi-pronged approach to a multimedia world).
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Phil and Mike's Not-so-Excellent Adventure
As part of MASS COMM week at VCU, I caught a midday seminar on Monday, "Innovations in the Newspaper Business," featuring two recent graduates from VCU who now do contract work in the Publications branch of Media General (the others being Interactive and Broadcasting).
If anything, this was a depressing look at what happens when young, energetic college grads-turned cubicle drones meet the iron fist of corporate, bureaucratic hell. To their credit, they were honest but spent most of their 45 minutes complaining about the lack of budget, vision, and technological savvy of their superiors at Media General.
Clearly, the jobs of these two students revolve solely around bringing in ad dollars through business-friendly projects such as their upcoming "Find A DayTrip.com," a new website with a print quarterly component focused around individual and pre-packaged daytrips on a statewide level. Apparently anytime they try to get innovative, it is deemed too expensive. What managers are looking for nowadays is big return on little investment (like IReporters who turn in content for free).
After informing the small crowd of mostly undergraduates that it was important to wear a suit to interviews ... the team of Phil Hillard and Michael Terpak bemoaned the "backwards" old fogeys at Media General who hold "meetings about meetings."
As is becoming the case across journalism, nothing flies unless it brings in money.
Another interesting point the "young Turks" brought up was that they are not evaluated in any capacity. They receive feedback constantly, but no formal evaluation. Perhaps because they are contractors, who knows?
In terms of innovation, both saw a future that involved user-friendly web media and the ability to interact with customers ... but they were mum on specifics, besides mentioning a company called Concursive with "great small business tools" (such as free CRM, or customer relationship management) that Media General is working with. When asked point blank if the corporate politics of Media General stifled innovation, both responded with a hearty "yes."
A more interesting discussion came during the forum later that night in Harris Hall, “The First Amendment, Freedom of the Press and the Future of Journalism," held as part of the 100th anniversary of The National Press Club.
VCU instructor Jeff South (pictured below) rightfully expressed his worry that local media was losing its watchdog role, ceding that fundamental duty to bloggers.
Meanwhile, fiery Nancy Kent (also pictured), news director at NBC 12,drew cheers from yours truly when she discussed the VP debate and begged the question of when mainstream media was going to "start asking the follow-up question?"
No wonder people are jumping ship with a media as boring, tame and predictable as the one we have now. That young generations are going to Jon Stewart (and my old co-worker Jason Ross, who has written for Daily Show since 2002 and now has somewhere around 400 Emmys) for their news context. A comedy show, mind you, does a better job stringing together facts.
When asked what employers were looking for, Kent insisted that young people know how to write and think critically (be able to research, pull facts from documents) before applying for a media job, something that seems to often be ignored in school programs racing to keep up with technology trends.
If you don't know the basics, it's difficult to be innovative and save journalism from falling off a cliff.
What really disturbs me is the insistence on catering to the lowest common denominator--on allowing the audience to pick nearly all the content. Porn is really popular too, but we shouldn't all move to Simi Valley.
Finding a way to make money is the reality, I understand this. But it can be done without giving up on the fundamentals of investigative journalism and becoming round-the-clock salesmen. Journalism has to be confident that rising generations want real reporting, and they have to do a better job of explaining difficult subjects in a stimulating, more visual way.
If anything, this was a depressing look at what happens when young, energetic college grads-turned cubicle drones meet the iron fist of corporate, bureaucratic hell. To their credit, they were honest but spent most of their 45 minutes complaining about the lack of budget, vision, and technological savvy of their superiors at Media General.
Clearly, the jobs of these two students revolve solely around bringing in ad dollars through business-friendly projects such as their upcoming "Find A DayTrip.com," a new website with a print quarterly component focused around individual and pre-packaged daytrips on a statewide level. Apparently anytime they try to get innovative, it is deemed too expensive. What managers are looking for nowadays is big return on little investment (like IReporters who turn in content for free).
After informing the small crowd of mostly undergraduates that it was important to wear a suit to interviews ... the team of Phil Hillard and Michael Terpak bemoaned the "backwards" old fogeys at Media General who hold "meetings about meetings."
As is becoming the case across journalism, nothing flies unless it brings in money.
Another interesting point the "young Turks" brought up was that they are not evaluated in any capacity. They receive feedback constantly, but no formal evaluation. Perhaps because they are contractors, who knows?
In terms of innovation, both saw a future that involved user-friendly web media and the ability to interact with customers ... but they were mum on specifics, besides mentioning a company called Concursive with "great small business tools" (such as free CRM, or customer relationship management) that Media General is working with. When asked point blank if the corporate politics of Media General stifled innovation, both responded with a hearty "yes."
A more interesting discussion came during the forum later that night in Harris Hall, “The First Amendment, Freedom of the Press and the Future of Journalism," held as part of the 100th anniversary of The National Press Club.
VCU instructor Jeff South (pictured below) rightfully expressed his worry that local media was losing its watchdog role, ceding that fundamental duty to bloggers.
Meanwhile, fiery Nancy Kent (also pictured), news director at NBC 12,drew cheers from yours truly when she discussed the VP debate and begged the question of when mainstream media was going to "start asking the follow-up question?"
No wonder people are jumping ship with a media as boring, tame and predictable as the one we have now. That young generations are going to Jon Stewart (and my old co-worker Jason Ross, who has written for Daily Show since 2002 and now has somewhere around 400 Emmys) for their news context. A comedy show, mind you, does a better job stringing together facts.
When asked what employers were looking for, Kent insisted that young people know how to write and think critically (be able to research, pull facts from documents) before applying for a media job, something that seems to often be ignored in school programs racing to keep up with technology trends.
If you don't know the basics, it's difficult to be innovative and save journalism from falling off a cliff.
What really disturbs me is the insistence on catering to the lowest common denominator--on allowing the audience to pick nearly all the content. Porn is really popular too, but we shouldn't all move to Simi Valley.
Finding a way to make money is the reality, I understand this. But it can be done without giving up on the fundamentals of investigative journalism and becoming round-the-clock salesmen. Journalism has to be confident that rising generations want real reporting, and they have to do a better job of explaining difficult subjects in a stimulating, more visual way.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Brave New World
A recent Christian Science monitor Op-Ed is the latest in a long line of essays marveling at the sheer interconnectedness of the Internet. Yes, it is the future. We know.
Everyone has a platform. Everyone has their 15 milliseconds of fame if they can go "viral" enough. The author mentions a YouTube video "Charlie Bit My Finger" that he believes has been seen by 53 million people (the view count is now 57 million). I'm not sure of this statement. Views go up when people repeatedly watch, right? Some of the same people probably watched this video 20 times or more. But still, a lot of people watched. Agreed. And it's one of many popular videos that manage to trigger communal frenzy.
I first remember seeing this video as part of one of those ubiquitous blooper TV shows, can't remember the name. Now it's caught on and people--who know the video is popular and are seeking an audience for themselves--are making remixes. Such as the adult remix just below it, which features the children's voices set to men engaging in oral sex [it's been "viewed" over 600,000 times]. Just goes to the author's point that, while the new generations coming up are more connected, more able to comment on each other's "work"--most of the responses are crap. Just like Internet's huge porn audience, the least common denominator of interest is not always enlightening, or constructive. But it has opened a new window to collective work on a massive scale ... that is fundamentally changing the way we interact.
Sometimes there is interesting art, or interesting journalism that you could find nowhere else--and the ability of people to respond and help shape and create information is indeed "the future." Interestingly, it's become easier for people to share influences and appropriate intellectual property as well.
I was reminded by this assignment of my old college friend Kembrew McLeod, an U of Iowa professor and author/activist/journalist (Rolling Stone, Spin, Village Voice) who is an academic expert on intellectual property law. Here is an op-ed he wrote for the LA Times about fair use and free speech. And below is a truly creepy collage mash-up video of Mr. Rogers that You Tube took down, and Kembrew fought to get back up (see his Op Ed for more).
As Kembrew writes: "If YouTube is our new public sphere, we are in trouble, at least when it comes to free speech. YouTube's parent company, Google, is more concerned with its bottom line than anything else, whether it's copyright censorship in the U.S. or political censorship in China.But all is not hopeless. The DMCA [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] contains a legal tool for resisting unreasonable copyright claims -- the "counter-notice." That's what I filed after YouTube pulled a satirical collage video of mine that mashed up media from another strange staple of my childhood, "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood."
Everyone has a platform. Everyone has their 15 milliseconds of fame if they can go "viral" enough. The author mentions a YouTube video "Charlie Bit My Finger" that he believes has been seen by 53 million people (the view count is now 57 million). I'm not sure of this statement. Views go up when people repeatedly watch, right? Some of the same people probably watched this video 20 times or more. But still, a lot of people watched. Agreed. And it's one of many popular videos that manage to trigger communal frenzy.
I first remember seeing this video as part of one of those ubiquitous blooper TV shows, can't remember the name. Now it's caught on and people--who know the video is popular and are seeking an audience for themselves--are making remixes. Such as the adult remix just below it, which features the children's voices set to men engaging in oral sex [it's been "viewed" over 600,000 times]. Just goes to the author's point that, while the new generations coming up are more connected, more able to comment on each other's "work"--most of the responses are crap. Just like Internet's huge porn audience, the least common denominator of interest is not always enlightening, or constructive. But it has opened a new window to collective work on a massive scale ... that is fundamentally changing the way we interact.
Sometimes there is interesting art, or interesting journalism that you could find nowhere else--and the ability of people to respond and help shape and create information is indeed "the future." Interestingly, it's become easier for people to share influences and appropriate intellectual property as well.
I was reminded by this assignment of my old college friend Kembrew McLeod, an U of Iowa professor and author/activist/journalist (Rolling Stone, Spin, Village Voice) who is an academic expert on intellectual property law. Here is an op-ed he wrote for the LA Times about fair use and free speech. And below is a truly creepy collage mash-up video of Mr. Rogers that You Tube took down, and Kembrew fought to get back up (see his Op Ed for more).
As Kembrew writes: "If YouTube is our new public sphere, we are in trouble, at least when it comes to free speech. YouTube's parent company, Google, is more concerned with its bottom line than anything else, whether it's copyright censorship in the U.S. or political censorship in China.But all is not hopeless. The DMCA [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] contains a legal tool for resisting unreasonable copyright claims -- the "counter-notice." That's what I filed after YouTube pulled a satirical collage video of mine that mashed up media from another strange staple of my childhood, "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood."
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
Spin Prophet? Guccione Jr. speaks
Founder of Spin magazine, Bob Guccioni Jr., the son of the Penthouse founder, knows the media business from the inside. So his predictions, recently listed in a Huffington Post blog titled "The Future of Media: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying that the Internet will consume Print" are worth taking a look at.
There are four main predictions he lists in this article, and I can see all of them happening at some point. But if I had to guess which one will definitely happen: a cable channel will almost certainly pass one of the big four networks, if only because the best programming is on cable today. It's just a matter of time. If I were forced to disagree with one of predictions, however, it might as well be the one where he says the Internet will not consume print, because "it's not strong enough, its not better, and its too busy consuming itself."
One thing I've noticed over 12 years of writing for an audience of between 45-60,000 is that, by and large, younger generations coming up do not read, nor are they particularly interested in critical thinking or challenging the status quo.
Like cattle, they've been fattened on video, raised since birth in a highly stimulating visual world of TV and computers. Maybe the relatively new medical condition known as ADD is simply the phenomenon that occurs when you take a person used to quick moving images, and place them in front of another human speaking. Usually the speaker is too slow, the ADD mind too fast, or unfocused, or both.
Not only will print have a harder time paying the bills, but (sadly) I think it will almost completely lose sight of its fundamental journalism goals out of financial necessity.
There simply won't be any readers left. We are clearly moving back to more of an oral culture. But video trumps the printed word. Not to mention that most people now prefer the speed and ability to skip through stories at their own pace--taking them in bits or pieces rather than whole. It's impossible to compete once the brain has been trained to receive information in short quick blasts. Non-stop advertising has also played a role in training us this way.
Magazines and weeklies will probably fare better than traditional daily newspapers, unless they can, as Guccione suggests, get truly creative and find not only ways to make their papers more visually exciting, but also get creative in content, and provide useful information in a timely manner that the Internet cannot.
There are four main predictions he lists in this article, and I can see all of them happening at some point. But if I had to guess which one will definitely happen: a cable channel will almost certainly pass one of the big four networks, if only because the best programming is on cable today. It's just a matter of time. If I were forced to disagree with one of predictions, however, it might as well be the one where he says the Internet will not consume print, because "it's not strong enough, its not better, and its too busy consuming itself."
One thing I've noticed over 12 years of writing for an audience of between 45-60,000 is that, by and large, younger generations coming up do not read, nor are they particularly interested in critical thinking or challenging the status quo.
Like cattle, they've been fattened on video, raised since birth in a highly stimulating visual world of TV and computers. Maybe the relatively new medical condition known as ADD is simply the phenomenon that occurs when you take a person used to quick moving images, and place them in front of another human speaking. Usually the speaker is too slow, the ADD mind too fast, or unfocused, or both.
Not only will print have a harder time paying the bills, but (sadly) I think it will almost completely lose sight of its fundamental journalism goals out of financial necessity.
There simply won't be any readers left. We are clearly moving back to more of an oral culture. But video trumps the printed word. Not to mention that most people now prefer the speed and ability to skip through stories at their own pace--taking them in bits or pieces rather than whole. It's impossible to compete once the brain has been trained to receive information in short quick blasts. Non-stop advertising has also played a role in training us this way.
Magazines and weeklies will probably fare better than traditional daily newspapers, unless they can, as Guccione suggests, get truly creative and find not only ways to make their papers more visually exciting, but also get creative in content, and provide useful information in a timely manner that the Internet cannot.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Examining online award winners
The Online News Association recently named its 2008 winners award winners. Awards were handed out in Washington, D.C. on Sept. 13.Checking out the student winners first, one sees some excellent rising talent.
South of Here is "a documentary multimedia project produced by students from the University of North Carolina School of Journalism and Mass Communication and the Facultad de Comunicación at the Universidad de los Andes in Santiago, Chile. It explores the history, people and communities of Tierra del Fuego in Argentina and Chile, the surrounding waterways and their critical relationship to the environment."
Looking at this site, one is first struck by the impressive photography and simple layout of the site. It's very easy to navigate and features large photos, quick point and click summaries, and lengthy, well-produced slideshows. The producers did a good job with subtitles and natural sound, but may have overused titles a bit (see the "Last of the Yagans" whose titles can break up the flow of the slideshow). Nonetheless, the photos really carry this production.
Looking at the winner for investigative journalism from a small site (The Times Herald Record in Middletown, NYC), one can see just how much online video presentations are beginning to take on the production values of TV.
This story about the murder of a prostitute, and a botched investigation which led to a man's conviction, features a nice use of text and video, with small, easily digestible chunks of information that allow the viewer to skip through the story details at his or her own pace. A comprehensive piece that really ties together the paper's exhaustive coverage of this story.
Another interesting winner (outstanding use of digital technology - small site) with some pretty major implications was Everyblock, a site devoted to delivering the news on a city block basis. So far the site was focusing on major cities: Boston, San Fran, LA, New York, DC, Charlotte, a few others.
Using a fairly simple interface, this site allows users to keep tabs on things like crime in their respective neighborhoods, building permits, restaurant inspections, and of course, news articles.
With most print outlets undergoing budget cuts, a site like this is destined to take off, creating new citizen journalists in its wake. This is a revolutionary new means of tailoring news to personal concerns, while also allowing watchdogs to spring up from within the concerned community itself. Will be interesting to watch how many people use this site and how it expands (city council coverage????)
You can even find lost pets (click image below).
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Meet Alana Taylor: Another College Whiner
Recently, a junior at NYU named Alana Taylor made some noise with a whiny, naive article she wrote slamming the journalism program at her school for being behind the times in terms of embracing every new Internet phenomenon that comes down the pike [her product placed, advertisement-raised generation's claim to fame].
Most of the article seems primarily concerned with celebrating Taylor's own "social media maven" skills, the number of trendy technologies she knows how to use--while at the same time illustrating that her writing and critical thinking skills are fairly pedestrian.
"The truth of the matter is that by the time my generation, Gen Y, gets into the real world there will be a much higher demand for web-savvy writers and thinkers than traditional Woodwards and Bernsteins. I was hoping that NYU would offer more classes where I could understand the importance of digital media, what it means, how to adapt to the new way of reporting, and learn from a professor who understands not only where the Internet is, but where it’s going."
Hmmmmm. Clearly, Taylor already thinks she knows where things are headed. The problem with people like her is they ignore the real function of journalism and writing--they don't want to do investigative work or learn how to communicate with mass audiences, instead preferring to ramble only for others who think like they do, or subscribe to the same social networking.
By ignoring real reporting (a la "Woodwards and Bernsteins"), Taylor seems to thumb her nose at the important historical function of the journalist's job of telling truth to power. Indeed, she seems more interested in blabbing on and on about her own, inexperienced opinions: what most of the millions of online blogs do.
Sadly, she is woefully mistaken if she thinks blogging alone will make money. She makes it clear how naive she really is with statements like these:
"What surprises me further is when Professor Quigley informs us that people actually get paid to blog. That they make a living off of this. For me this was very much a “duh” moment and I thought that it would be for the rest of the students as well. They should be fully aware at this point that blogging has become a very serious form of journalism. Furthermore, they should be aware that it is the one journalistic venture that requires little or no ladder-climbing. You can start at any age, with almost no experience, and actually get published instead of fetch coffee."
Taylor needs to understand that ladder-climbing can be another name for learning your craft or gaining experience. Most bloggers out there today do not get paid. The ones that do are typically established journalists who earned their reputation in print, or sometimes online, with good reporting and writing skills--which Taylor clearly has none of, or she might have cited statistics in her story, or done the slightest bit of digging about the phenomena she hopes to understand.
Taylor and other newbies need to understand that most bloggers simply comment on news they get from mainstream sites, where traditionally trained journalists are still climbing that old ladder. Without real reporters, and newsrooms around the world with budgets to report, bloggers would be left with very little to talk about. There are very few bloggers that do their own reporting, even less that do it well.
See this Pew study from 2006 that shows bloggers are most interested in talking about themselves.
This may be reading too much into it: but Taylor seems representative of a new "me" generation that believes socializing is a legitimate life's calling. She is part of a generation already earning poor reviews in a variety of fields for a lack of work ethic and inability to focus on anything that requires sustained effort or sacrifice. Taylor's generation has been fed from an electromagnetic teat since birth and immunized to critical thought by billion dollar ad campaigns that quite literally run their lives. That's not to say that J-schools shouldn't be teaching modern technology trends--but the key is to put them into the service of good journalism.
Most of the article seems primarily concerned with celebrating Taylor's own "social media maven" skills, the number of trendy technologies she knows how to use--while at the same time illustrating that her writing and critical thinking skills are fairly pedestrian.
"The truth of the matter is that by the time my generation, Gen Y, gets into the real world there will be a much higher demand for web-savvy writers and thinkers than traditional Woodwards and Bernsteins. I was hoping that NYU would offer more classes where I could understand the importance of digital media, what it means, how to adapt to the new way of reporting, and learn from a professor who understands not only where the Internet is, but where it’s going."
Hmmmmm. Clearly, Taylor already thinks she knows where things are headed. The problem with people like her is they ignore the real function of journalism and writing--they don't want to do investigative work or learn how to communicate with mass audiences, instead preferring to ramble only for others who think like they do, or subscribe to the same social networking.
By ignoring real reporting (a la "Woodwards and Bernsteins"), Taylor seems to thumb her nose at the important historical function of the journalist's job of telling truth to power. Indeed, she seems more interested in blabbing on and on about her own, inexperienced opinions: what most of the millions of online blogs do.
Sadly, she is woefully mistaken if she thinks blogging alone will make money. She makes it clear how naive she really is with statements like these:
"What surprises me further is when Professor Quigley informs us that people actually get paid to blog. That they make a living off of this. For me this was very much a “duh” moment and I thought that it would be for the rest of the students as well. They should be fully aware at this point that blogging has become a very serious form of journalism. Furthermore, they should be aware that it is the one journalistic venture that requires little or no ladder-climbing. You can start at any age, with almost no experience, and actually get published instead of fetch coffee."
Taylor needs to understand that ladder-climbing can be another name for learning your craft or gaining experience. Most bloggers out there today do not get paid. The ones that do are typically established journalists who earned their reputation in print, or sometimes online, with good reporting and writing skills--which Taylor clearly has none of, or she might have cited statistics in her story, or done the slightest bit of digging about the phenomena she hopes to understand.
Taylor and other newbies need to understand that most bloggers simply comment on news they get from mainstream sites, where traditionally trained journalists are still climbing that old ladder. Without real reporters, and newsrooms around the world with budgets to report, bloggers would be left with very little to talk about. There are very few bloggers that do their own reporting, even less that do it well.
See this Pew study from 2006 that shows bloggers are most interested in talking about themselves.
This may be reading too much into it: but Taylor seems representative of a new "me" generation that believes socializing is a legitimate life's calling. She is part of a generation already earning poor reviews in a variety of fields for a lack of work ethic and inability to focus on anything that requires sustained effort or sacrifice. Taylor's generation has been fed from an electromagnetic teat since birth and immunized to critical thought by billion dollar ad campaigns that quite literally run their lives. That's not to say that J-schools shouldn't be teaching modern technology trends--but the key is to put them into the service of good journalism.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Presidential campaign getting nasty
It's officially underway now, folks. With polls calling Obama/Mcain a dead heat, the rhetoric between the two camps is starting to heat up.
I couldn't believe it when I heard that McCain is running an ad claiming that Obama is for comprehensive sex education for kindergartners.
Is it me, or does every ad that this guy runs throw an outright lie in the face of the American public? He's still running ads that say Palin was against the bridge to nowhere, which is clearly not true as the record shows. Even CNN admits it.
For his part, Obama is starting to get a little pointed in his attacks, as this Politico article addresses.
Hey, if The Daily Show can run video of McCain and Palin contradicting themselves, why can't the Obama campaign?
Maybe its because he was in Lebanon, VA the other day, but Obama made a comment about "putting lipstick on a pig" that is sure to have Republicans crying foul in the next few days. The New York Times looks into how Obama's lipstick line was taken out of context:
"With a laugh, he added: "You can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change; it's still going to stink after eight years."
In the latest sign of the campaign's heightened intensity, Mr. McCain's surrogates responded within minutes and called on Mr. Obama to apologize to Gov. Sarah Palin for the lipstick remark. But to those in the audience, it was clear that Mr. Obama was employing an age-old phrase -- lipstick on a pig -- and referring to Mr. McCain's policies. He had not yet mentioned Ms. Palin at that point of his speech."
The dirt is flying, folks. And it's probably going to get a lot muddier from here on out. I just wish they would spend a little more time talking about the issues.
Both campaigns have raised a lot of money so far, and it looks like a lot of it will be spent on slurs.
This is a crazy election, and one in which bloggers will be playing their biggest role yet. In my opinion, we've already seen them have a major impact, driving the vetting coverage, and steering mainstream media into Palin's family matters, when it really should be addressing her judgment and questionable, hard-right, extremely religious viewpoints. I've already heard Palin compared to Bush, but she may be a bigger tough guy than he ever was. And scarier too. I'm still waiting for her to do some real interviews and put herself up to the media scrutiny that Obama and Biden have been facing for years now.
I couldn't believe it when I heard that McCain is running an ad claiming that Obama is for comprehensive sex education for kindergartners.
Is it me, or does every ad that this guy runs throw an outright lie in the face of the American public? He's still running ads that say Palin was against the bridge to nowhere, which is clearly not true as the record shows. Even CNN admits it.
For his part, Obama is starting to get a little pointed in his attacks, as this Politico article addresses.
Hey, if The Daily Show can run video of McCain and Palin contradicting themselves, why can't the Obama campaign?
Maybe its because he was in Lebanon, VA the other day, but Obama made a comment about "putting lipstick on a pig" that is sure to have Republicans crying foul in the next few days. The New York Times looks into how Obama's lipstick line was taken out of context:
"With a laugh, he added: "You can put lipstick on a pig; it's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change; it's still going to stink after eight years."
In the latest sign of the campaign's heightened intensity, Mr. McCain's surrogates responded within minutes and called on Mr. Obama to apologize to Gov. Sarah Palin for the lipstick remark. But to those in the audience, it was clear that Mr. Obama was employing an age-old phrase -- lipstick on a pig -- and referring to Mr. McCain's policies. He had not yet mentioned Ms. Palin at that point of his speech."
The dirt is flying, folks. And it's probably going to get a lot muddier from here on out. I just wish they would spend a little more time talking about the issues.
Both campaigns have raised a lot of money so far, and it looks like a lot of it will be spent on slurs.
This is a crazy election, and one in which bloggers will be playing their biggest role yet. In my opinion, we've already seen them have a major impact, driving the vetting coverage, and steering mainstream media into Palin's family matters, when it really should be addressing her judgment and questionable, hard-right, extremely religious viewpoints. I've already heard Palin compared to Bush, but she may be a bigger tough guy than he ever was. And scarier too. I'm still waiting for her to do some real interviews and put herself up to the media scrutiny that Obama and Biden have been facing for years now.
Friday, September 5, 2008
Thursday, September 4, 2008
MySpace vs. Facebook (A Friend In Need)
I’m two months away from turning 37, but I did something recently that should qualify me for senior citizen benefits at the multiplex, or at least Hometown Buffet. After months of ignoring my MySpace page, I finally made the jump to Facebook. Finally! One more magazine article about the site’s filthy-rich genius, Mark Zuckerburg, and the disgruntled Harvard coders who despise him, and I was going to puke.
That I’m only now getting on Facebook probably says something about the college I attended, my former church, or where I get my ideologically-tailored news online—I’m not sure. But could someone please explain what all the fuss is about?
On Facebook, I have an articulate, bright, and clean site, without any music or other frills, that looks like it was creatively inspired by a corporate shill in conjunction with my middle school computer tech. I get to read little comments about what my (scoff) 29 friends are doing at any given minute. Right now, Sarah is “shooting moose with her AK 47 while singing cumbaya,” John is “soooooooo tired” and Karl is “torturing a recently rescued shelter poodle with a lit cigar.”
In August, The Pew Research Center for The People and The Press issued a hefty new report: “Audience Segments in A Changing News Environment” that looked at new trends in online and digital news. Aside from some odd references to something called “the traditional print media,” the study mostly confirmed what I already suspected: You are nothing if you do not have over 1,000 friends on Facebook.
It took me several years to get up to 200 friends on MySpace—and now Facebook is telling me I have to start all over again? That’s like getting yanked back into junior high, given a braided rattail mullet and the name Erskine Patton-Dick. Not good.
It got me thinking about this whole friend thing. Some people out there will befriend anyone. Celebrities, porn sites, anime characters, video games, fast food chains. Shouldn’t there be some requirement to determine whether the friendship is actually human (and according to Wordnet) “a person known well and regarded with trust and affection?” I doubt that Naomi Klein, Javier Bardem, or Werner Herzog feel that way about me, but maybe I’m wrong. I don’t think the crazed fans running sites in their names have a much better idea, either.
So I’m offering a brief friendship quiz, free of charge to Mr. Zuckerburg—provided he does not try to claim the idea was his—so geeks like me will stand a fighting chance in this brave new social order.
QUESTIONAIRRE
1. Your sister just had a nasty break-up with her state trooper husband. You would:
A. Plant crack in the state trooper’s locker.
B. Prank call 9-11 all night with your slumber party friends.
C. Challenge the trooper to a game of pick-up basketball for your sister’s future.
D. Get the trooper fired and if not that, fire his supervisor.
2. Your 17-year-old, unwed child is pregnant. You would:
A. Comfort her with a new SUV wrapped in a giant red bow.
B. Make her high school boyfriend the head of FEMA.
C. Beg her to visit a single teen mother and help for a week.
D. Take her on a whirlwind media tour of the United States.
3. Your friend joined a fringe group that believes, after the coming apocalypse, that Alaska will be the only inhabitable place on earth, populated by a race of super-warriors who know the riddle of steel. You would:
A. Call producers at Jerry Springer.
B. Have your friend abducted by The Promise Keepers.
C. Shoot your friend in the face while hunting.
D. Encourage your friend to run for vice president of the U.S.
4. Your friend is being investigated by the liberal national media. You would:
A. Get her to change her hairstyle.
B. Bring her some fresh moose pie.
C. Dump a bucket of pig blood on her head to make her angry.
D. Help her figure out how to sink back into obscurity.
5. Your friend was raped and impregnated by her father. You would:
A. Help her pick out baby clothes.
B. Keep it a personal matter.
C. Suggest baby names like Javelin, Skagway, Snowmachine, and Geo.
D. Have the father fired, and if not him, then his supervisor.
That I’m only now getting on Facebook probably says something about the college I attended, my former church, or where I get my ideologically-tailored news online—I’m not sure. But could someone please explain what all the fuss is about?
On Facebook, I have an articulate, bright, and clean site, without any music or other frills, that looks like it was creatively inspired by a corporate shill in conjunction with my middle school computer tech. I get to read little comments about what my (scoff) 29 friends are doing at any given minute. Right now, Sarah is “shooting moose with her AK 47 while singing cumbaya,” John is “soooooooo tired” and Karl is “torturing a recently rescued shelter poodle with a lit cigar.”
In August, The Pew Research Center for The People and The Press issued a hefty new report: “Audience Segments in A Changing News Environment” that looked at new trends in online and digital news. Aside from some odd references to something called “the traditional print media,” the study mostly confirmed what I already suspected: You are nothing if you do not have over 1,000 friends on Facebook.
It took me several years to get up to 200 friends on MySpace—and now Facebook is telling me I have to start all over again? That’s like getting yanked back into junior high, given a braided rattail mullet and the name Erskine Patton-Dick. Not good.
It got me thinking about this whole friend thing. Some people out there will befriend anyone. Celebrities, porn sites, anime characters, video games, fast food chains. Shouldn’t there be some requirement to determine whether the friendship is actually human (and according to Wordnet) “a person known well and regarded with trust and affection?” I doubt that Naomi Klein, Javier Bardem, or Werner Herzog feel that way about me, but maybe I’m wrong. I don’t think the crazed fans running sites in their names have a much better idea, either.
So I’m offering a brief friendship quiz, free of charge to Mr. Zuckerburg—provided he does not try to claim the idea was his—so geeks like me will stand a fighting chance in this brave new social order.
QUESTIONAIRRE
1. Your sister just had a nasty break-up with her state trooper husband. You would:
A. Plant crack in the state trooper’s locker.
B. Prank call 9-11 all night with your slumber party friends.
C. Challenge the trooper to a game of pick-up basketball for your sister’s future.
D. Get the trooper fired and if not that, fire his supervisor.
2. Your 17-year-old, unwed child is pregnant. You would:
A. Comfort her with a new SUV wrapped in a giant red bow.
B. Make her high school boyfriend the head of FEMA.
C. Beg her to visit a single teen mother and help for a week.
D. Take her on a whirlwind media tour of the United States.
3. Your friend joined a fringe group that believes, after the coming apocalypse, that Alaska will be the only inhabitable place on earth, populated by a race of super-warriors who know the riddle of steel. You would:
A. Call producers at Jerry Springer.
B. Have your friend abducted by The Promise Keepers.
C. Shoot your friend in the face while hunting.
D. Encourage your friend to run for vice president of the U.S.
4. Your friend is being investigated by the liberal national media. You would:
A. Get her to change her hairstyle.
B. Bring her some fresh moose pie.
C. Dump a bucket of pig blood on her head to make her angry.
D. Help her figure out how to sink back into obscurity.
5. Your friend was raped and impregnated by her father. You would:
A. Help her pick out baby clothes.
B. Keep it a personal matter.
C. Suggest baby names like Javelin, Skagway, Snowmachine, and Geo.
D. Have the father fired, and if not him, then his supervisor.
Friday, August 29, 2008
New Pew Study
A new media study from The Pew Research Center lays out some interesting new data concerning online and digital news that is not such good news if you work for traditional media, especially print. Yes, the numbers of people who get their news online continues to grow at a fast clip, people are incorporating new technology, from social networking sites to cellphones, into their daily lives. According to the study: "Since the Pew Research Center's 2006 news consumption survey, there has been a substantial increase in the proportion of Americans who get the news online every day. A quarter say they go online for news every day, up from 18% two years ago; a decade ago, just 6% said they got news online on a daily basis."
There is still a major gap between the educational levels of those who get their news online--probably explainable by the sheer costs of maintaining Internet service at a personal residence. As search engines grow more specialized, the study finds that "a growing percentage is using search engines more frequently. Nearly a third of online news users (31%) deploy search engines to look for stories at least three days a week, up from 24% two years ago and 19% in 2004."
The study pointed out several differences between the way young people and older people use the Internet. It appears that more young people follow links to stories, whereas old people go straight to the news sites themselves. To me, this indicates that young people are visiting specialized sites that probably fit in with their own personal viewpoints, using trusted sites to hyperlink them to other stories they think they will like. This can be dangerous as it creates a kind of ideological ghetto, where information can become narrow-minded or singularly focused in terms of personal preference or taste. Younger people are also far more likely to check their own personal social networking sites, indicating they tend to use the Internet more for social reasons, than news gathering.
One of the most interesting aspects of the study, I thought, was the huge number of people who go online while at work. Shockingly, the study finds that "More than four-in-ten full-time and part-time workers (44%) say they regularly go online from their place of work. There are substantial education and income gaps among those who go online from work and those who do not: three-quarters of those who have attended graduate school say they go online from work, nearly four times the proportion among those with no more than a high school education (20%). And while 66% of those with family incomes of $100,000 or more go online from work, just 20% of those with incomes of less than $30,000 do so."
It makes one wonder how much productivity is being lost in the workplace, and why more businesses haven't restricted Internet use at work. It also may point to the fact that although white collar workers make more money, they tend to work less than blue collar workers. Not that it comes as a big surprise, considering many blue collar jobs are more labor intensive.
It appears that people at work have begun to fetishize the news like it was a soap opera, or lifeline to the outside world more likely--a break from the doldrums of cubicle life. The study shows that 56% who go online for news from work admit that this is not a necessary part of their jobs.
There is still a major gap between the educational levels of those who get their news online--probably explainable by the sheer costs of maintaining Internet service at a personal residence. As search engines grow more specialized, the study finds that "a growing percentage is using search engines more frequently. Nearly a third of online news users (31%) deploy search engines to look for stories at least three days a week, up from 24% two years ago and 19% in 2004."
The study pointed out several differences between the way young people and older people use the Internet. It appears that more young people follow links to stories, whereas old people go straight to the news sites themselves. To me, this indicates that young people are visiting specialized sites that probably fit in with their own personal viewpoints, using trusted sites to hyperlink them to other stories they think they will like. This can be dangerous as it creates a kind of ideological ghetto, where information can become narrow-minded or singularly focused in terms of personal preference or taste. Younger people are also far more likely to check their own personal social networking sites, indicating they tend to use the Internet more for social reasons, than news gathering.
One of the most interesting aspects of the study, I thought, was the huge number of people who go online while at work. Shockingly, the study finds that "More than four-in-ten full-time and part-time workers (44%) say they regularly go online from their place of work. There are substantial education and income gaps among those who go online from work and those who do not: three-quarters of those who have attended graduate school say they go online from work, nearly four times the proportion among those with no more than a high school education (20%). And while 66% of those with family incomes of $100,000 or more go online from work, just 20% of those with incomes of less than $30,000 do so."
It makes one wonder how much productivity is being lost in the workplace, and why more businesses haven't restricted Internet use at work. It also may point to the fact that although white collar workers make more money, they tend to work less than blue collar workers. Not that it comes as a big surprise, considering many blue collar jobs are more labor intensive.
It appears that people at work have begun to fetishize the news like it was a soap opera, or lifeline to the outside world more likely--a break from the doldrums of cubicle life. The study shows that 56% who go online for news from work admit that this is not a necessary part of their jobs.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Ain't nuthin' free here
When I lived in Northern California (1995-2004) I went to a bunch of shows at world renown venues in San Francisco such as The Fillmore and The Warfield. Just walking into these historic venues is like taking a trip to a rock museum. You can feel the history in the room. Above the main bar at The Fillmore, there are huge B&W photos of Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin from their days playing the club. And nearly everywhere else hang diverse concert posters in varying styles--from the '60s acid freak stuff to today's smooth computer generated product. But the coolest thing was that these venues would simply hand you a free copy of the poster (nice quality paper)at the end of the night, on your way out the door, as an added souvenir. I still have several from shows featuring the likes of Gillian Welch, Elliott Smith, Jonathan Richman and Belle & Sebastian. They're nicely done.
Today's RTD had a story and accompanying slideshow about a Charlottesville company, Public Domain, that is making posters for events at Richmond clubs The National and Toad's Place Richmond. Of course, nothing is free here. You have to pay $10 to take one home, but that's not asking too much.
One local artist who should be considered for local music posters is Adam Juresko, who lives in Oregon Hill and has worked on album covers and other music related art. Here is an article by Brandon Reynolds at Style, after Juresko won a Mountain Dew art contest.
Now maybe if promoters and local organizers threw in a live bootleg CD documenting the concert, fed directly from the sound board, we'd have another little souvenir (how about poster and CD for $15? Anyone?)
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Help pick the band for VCU's 40th bash
Party down. VCU is celebrating its 40th anniversary in Monroe Park on Oct. 25 and they want you to help pick out the bands for the party. Go here to check out a list of local bands and cast your vote. You can also add a band name if you like. Voting is open until Sept. 5.
While I have to give locals Prabir & The Substitutes a thumbs up (see post below) I'm of the opinion that salsa music always works well at parties. So why not rely on Richmond's greatest ever salsa band, Bio Ritmo? Yep, that band is still doing its thing, and they have a new album coming out this fall, with an album release party in New York.
The winners of the VCU party band search will get some sort of cash prize, and probably a few free cartons of cigarettes from "friends" at Philip Morris.
By the way, here's an article about the recent Philip Morris controversy (for those who don't know, the giant tobacco death merchant funds medical research at VCU which some locals and professors have challenged as unethical and risking scientific integrity) check out this AP story.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Think the Stones are going to quit? Guess again.
People keep waiting for the Rolling Stones to quit touring, considering they're old men, they fall out of coconut trees, and at least one of them looks like a tarted-up corpse (that would be you, Keef). The New York Times just reported that the Stones have left their label EMI and signed a new three album deal with Universal Music Group.
Of course, Universal is a monster, the largest music publishing business in the world, wholly owned by Vivendi. Their flagship artists include Mariah Carey, Mary J. Blige, Elton John, U2, and now The Stones.
While some people say they should hang it up, I'd gladly go see them play again.
With much anticipation, I caught the Stones on their last tour at UVA (the bomb threat night) and at Duke University--and they didn't disappoint. The ticket prices may have been outrageous, but those Brits really know how to give good spectacle. And you can't beat that catalog of material.
My favorite Rolling Stones tunes are always changing, but here are a few perennial favorites: "Out of Time," "She Smiles Sweetly," "Paint it Black," Connections," "Back Street Girl," "Take It Or Leave It," "Sweet Virginia," well, all of "Exile on Main" Street, actually: perhaps the greatest rock album of all-time.
Here's a link to a brief review I wrote for Style Weekly of the IMAX presentation of the Stones most recent concert movie, "Shine A Light"--one of Scorsese's lesser efforts.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Local coverage of Centerstage project
Today's RTD featured a story and audio slideshow on the progress of the tax-guzzling Richmond Centerstage project. You know, the place where blue haired old ladies, and Richmond's old money elite (read: .000000001% of the population) will get their opera and theater on.
As usual, the TD ignored the real news beneath the story and opted for a drooling, slavishly business friendly tone. At least they mentioned, in passing, that the project is $8 million over budget. For real coverage of the project, it's best to read the blogs, namely Don Harrison at Save Richmond.com.
As Harrison points out, this is just another case of the elite using the city taxpayer dollars for an endless money pit filled with overpaid con artists and schemers. Who is going to pay the millions for parking, anyway? Oh yeah, all of us. Here's hoping that they will book some artists that appeal to the masses. Highly doubtful considering we already have two new venues in The National and Toad's Place.
Meanwhile, over at Style, we had a story on the Centerstage big-butt chairs whose drink holders are already offending fat cat donors.
And Richmond Magazine had a piece about what kind of artists will be performing at the new arts center. Don't expect any big names until 2009 or 2010 at the earliest.
As usual, the TD ignored the real news beneath the story and opted for a drooling, slavishly business friendly tone. At least they mentioned, in passing, that the project is $8 million over budget. For real coverage of the project, it's best to read the blogs, namely Don Harrison at Save Richmond.com.
As Harrison points out, this is just another case of the elite using the city taxpayer dollars for an endless money pit filled with overpaid con artists and schemers. Who is going to pay the millions for parking, anyway? Oh yeah, all of us. Here's hoping that they will book some artists that appeal to the masses. Highly doubtful considering we already have two new venues in The National and Toad's Place.
Meanwhile, over at Style, we had a story on the Centerstage big-butt chairs whose drink holders are already offending fat cat donors.
And Richmond Magazine had a piece about what kind of artists will be performing at the new arts center. Don't expect any big names until 2009 or 2010 at the earliest.
Interview with Prabir Mehta (of Richmond group, Prabir & The Substitutes)
Richmond rockers Prabir & The Substitutes are known for having more than a dollop of melodic Beatles influence in their shake, rattle and roll. Having toured steadily in recent years building regional fanbases for their hyperactive live shows, the three-year-old group was approached by bookers from the legendary 9:30 Club in D.C. with an odd proposition. Would they open for a Beatles tribute band, The Silver Beats, from Tokyo, Japan?
“We definitely take a lot of influence from ‘60s harmony fueled music like The Beatles and The Zombies,” says Prabir Mehta, 28, the lead singer/guitarist for the group who moved to America from Gujarat, India when he was nine. “I didn’t know anything about The Silver Beats, but I did my research the next day and realized it was going to be the weirdest gig in the world.”
To Mehta’s surprise, the show sold out.
“It was great. They look and sound eerily identical to the real thing,” Mehta says. “They also do the entire catalogue. You haven’t really heard the Beatles until you’ve felt that bass thumping in your chest in a live venue.”
When the Silver Beats planned an upcoming gig in Richmond at Toad’s Place, they remembered Prabir & The Substitutes and asked them to open again. Mehta, in turn, asked if they could join The Silver Beats in Nashville, another town the Substitutes have done well in. “They said, why don’t you just do the whole tour with us,” Mehta recalls.
And so it began: a tour straight out of a Tarantino flick that is featuring a nice contrast between Beatles influence and a full-on Beatles worship, complete with four Japanese guys who don’t speak much English but have phonetically learned to emulate every syllable and gesture of the famed Fab Four.
Mehta is a former member of local group The Rachel Nevadans, and he says that B.B. King was the reason that he began playing guitar. His new band has released three albums so far. But just how did the name The Substitutes come about?
"I was talking to my old bandmates and told them after we broke up that I'd just have to find some substitutes for them ... the name just kind of stuck."
During this tour, Mehta will be even more busy than usual on the road. He will be providing images, video clips, and a tour diary from Prabir & The Substitutes to be featured on the website Brightest Young Things.com.
Prabir & The Substitutes perform on July 25 at Toad’s Place with Hoots and Hellmouth and The Old Ceremony. They open for the Japanese Beatles cover band, The Silver Beats, at Toad’s on August 10. Pre-show day tickets are $10 and $12, respectively.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
CD Review of Prabir & The Substitutes (Local band)
Prabir & The Substitutes “Five Little Pieces” (self-released)
Lead singer/guitarist Prabir Mehta moved to the United States from India when he was just a kid, but to listen to his preferred blend of ‘60s-influenced power pop, you’d think he was raised in British pubs studying the Beatles and The Zombies. The former Rachel Nevadan’s latest band has been touring steadily, earning fans with acclaimed shows that flex equal parts saccharine sweet pop and ecstatic, roots influenced rockers.
Recorded locally by John Morand at the Sound of Music, the band’s latest effort captures their hungry live sound well. It starts out with “The Kiss,” a melancholy ‘70s-styled ballad with sleepy slide guitar, la-la backing vocals, and Mehta’s confident lead vocals recalling shades of an adenoidal young Elvis Costello. Then it kicks into high gear with the raucous bar rocker, “Bad Days Are A Comin’” highlighted again by Mehta (he’s a good screamer) with rollicking piano flourishes from Charlie Glenn. Mostly, Mehta leads the group through concise, melodic pop/rock numbers while the other four members back him with the sort of structured looseness that is tougher than it sounds. Heavy cymbal workouts, organ coloring, and treble-thin guitar riffs all add significantly to the sweat factor. If Mehta ever matched his impressive vocal presence with a more meaty lyrical realism (like, say, The Hold Steady) the Substitutes might make some real noise. For now, file them alongside modern bands like Dr. Dog who inject youthful passion into well-traveled veins of music, returning to the basics for inspiration.
Lead singer/guitarist Prabir Mehta moved to the United States from India when he was just a kid, but to listen to his preferred blend of ‘60s-influenced power pop, you’d think he was raised in British pubs studying the Beatles and The Zombies. The former Rachel Nevadan’s latest band has been touring steadily, earning fans with acclaimed shows that flex equal parts saccharine sweet pop and ecstatic, roots influenced rockers.
Recorded locally by John Morand at the Sound of Music, the band’s latest effort captures their hungry live sound well. It starts out with “The Kiss,” a melancholy ‘70s-styled ballad with sleepy slide guitar, la-la backing vocals, and Mehta’s confident lead vocals recalling shades of an adenoidal young Elvis Costello. Then it kicks into high gear with the raucous bar rocker, “Bad Days Are A Comin’” highlighted again by Mehta (he’s a good screamer) with rollicking piano flourishes from Charlie Glenn. Mostly, Mehta leads the group through concise, melodic pop/rock numbers while the other four members back him with the sort of structured looseness that is tougher than it sounds. Heavy cymbal workouts, organ coloring, and treble-thin guitar riffs all add significantly to the sweat factor. If Mehta ever matched his impressive vocal presence with a more meaty lyrical realism (like, say, The Hold Steady) the Substitutes might make some real noise. For now, file them alongside modern bands like Dr. Dog who inject youthful passion into well-traveled veins of music, returning to the basics for inspiration.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Chat with the maker of "Yacht Rock"!!!
J.D. Ryznar (right), co-creator of "Yacht Rock" video series, seen here portraying a drunk Michael McDonald.
One of the greatest bits of homemade video comedy on the Web in recent years, the saga of "Yacht Rock" still lives on today. Co-creator J.D. Ryznar of Los Angeles started making these goofy short films, which lampoon the soft easy listening acts of the '70s, with his buddies and they soon became an Internet sensation (check out an episode guide on Wikipedia). Filmed in behind-the-music style, the crude show originally aired on LA internet channel 101, where it won voter contests.
After trying to call Ryznar and getting no answer, I caught up with him by e-mail. He was a little terse with his answers, but he's probably ready to get over this particular phase in his career and strike it big as a screenwriter.
Nonetheless, if you haven't seen "Yacht Rock" yet, do yourself a favor. Or just listen to a sweet yacht rock tune at their myspace page.
These things made me laugh out loud when I first saw them. It helps if you know a little about the bands in question, I might add.
E-MAIL Q&A with J.D. RYZNAR
What are you currently working on?
-A couple of feature script projects.
What is the current state of the "Yacht Rock" show: are there still ongoing festivals and special screenings?
-We have upcoming screenings in various states of finality in New York, Minneapolis, Detroit, Muskegon Michigan, and Chicago.
How has your life changed since the show became a popular underground success on net?
-I have a career writing movie scripts now.
Have you ever thought of trying to turn it into a comedic screenplay, or develop your own yacht rock musical?
-"Yacht Rock" is what it is, and it would never work as anything else. And it would lose all of its appeal if we were paid for it or had to answer to anyone but the audience.
What kind of advice would you give people who want to try to gain attention for their work online?
-No advice. It was all dumb luck for us. Make sure its good.
What about merchandising: I figure a DVD is out of the question, but what about shirts and stuff?
-We sell shirts sometimes, when we feel like it.
What kind of feedback have you gotten from actual soft rock artists?
They all seem to like it. I've never talked to one personally about "Yacht Rock" nor would I ever want to, but those who have say they get positive responses.
I heard the whole thing started because you were a fan of Steely Dan (which I am too, seen them many times); Does it bother you that people mostly consider the show a mockery of these artists?
-No. When we made Donald Fagen talk gibberish, it wasn't so the audience would appreciate the sarcasm of Steely Dan's lyrics or the brilliance of their arrangements, its so they would laugh at the guy playing Donald Fagen. "Yacht Rock" is a comedy, hopefully, so when people watch it and laugh, they often assume the music is the joke. If people get into the Doobie Brothers or Steely Dan as an afterthought, then they are some lucky people, cause that's some sweet music to listen to.
What has the success of the program meant for you personally, it seems to have quite an underground following.
-It means a lot. It's fun to take it real easy with people listening to smooth jams. I'm glad more people are doing that because of our show.
What do you think most accounts for its popularity?
-I have no idea.
Do you keep in touch with Hunter Stair [co-creator of the show]: or will you be working on other "Yacht Rock" related projects with him? Is there one story you wish you could've covered in the series, but didn't?
-I see Hunter all the time. If there's a story we really want to do badly enough, nothing will stop us from doing it. If we want to make a Yacht Rock, Hunter, Dave Lyons and I get together, drink malibu rum and coke zero, kick ideas around, and then, when we're all drunk, Hunter yells at us about how great Michigan State sports are. A month or two later, there's a completed "Yacht Rock." Magic.
Note: Watch below the classic first episode of "YACHT ROCK." Yeah! Starring J.D. himself as former Doobie Brother, Michael McDonald.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Listmania (Comparing with Rolling Stone editors)
Back in 2003, the editors at Rolling Stone magazine put together a list of the top 500 albums of all-time.
Their top 10 included the following:
1. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, The Beatles
2. Pet Sounds, The Beach Boys
3. Revolver, The Beatles
4. Highway 61 Revisited, Bob Dylan
5. Rubber Soul, The Beatles
6. What's Going On, Marvin Gaye
7. Exile on Main Street, The Rolling Stones
8. London Calling, The Clash
9. Blonde on Blonde, Bob Dylan
10. The Beatles ("The White Album"), The Beatles
It got me thinking of what I might put in my top ten list, if I could only pick 10 discs to go with me to a desert island. So here you go.
1. Kind of Blue -Miles Davis
2. Blonde on Blonde - Bob Dylan
3. Exile on Main Street - Rolling Stones
4. "The White Album" - The Beatles
5. Solo Monk - Thelonious Monk
6. Bach Cello Concertos -Edgar Meyer on double bass
7. The Harry Smith Anthology of American Folk Music
8. The Ramones - The Ramones
9. Decade - Neil Young
10.The Velvet Underground & Nico -Velvet Underground
Then again, they would be useless on a desert island anyway. But oh well.
Here are Time Magazine's top 100
And here are some of the best selling albums of all-time. Contrast these with the critics' darlings. But my favorite list comes from Blender, who look at the top 500 songs since you were born (roughly 1980, they assume).
This is a pretty sly nod to the new breed of multicultural-versed music critic who believe (rightfully) that its a bit snobby, or narrow-minded at least, to keep holding up the classic white-guy rock canon as the best albums ever.
For the most recent generations, it can sometimes seem as if nothing existed before hip hop culture.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
New shows announced at Toad's Place
The competition is heating up. After a memorable inaugural season, with hot shows by the likes of Gogol Bordello, Ween, High On Fire, Buddy Guy, and many others, Toad's Place Richmond is beginning to announce its fall line-up. There are still a few decent summer shows left to go: rap diva Fox
y Brown appears on Saturday, July 26; The Old 97s play the next night, July 27; the geeky bass player from Phish, Mike Gordon plays on Tuesday, Aug. 5; and noted hip hop act, Mos Def performs on Thursday, Aug. 7.
Among the highlights of the fall season so far: funky jamband music from Galactic (Friday, Oct. 10), and demonic metal from Danzig and Dimmu Borgir (Mon. Oct. 13), and the ever raucous hillbilly punk of Rev. Horton Heat with Nashville Pussy (Fri. Nov. 7)
I just saw Steel Pulse the other night at The National. The crowd was great, but the music was just so-so. Pretty commercial reggae with the kind of bland synths I don't really appreciate. It will be interesting to see the kinds of acts that the National will be booking for this fall. I would have to say Toad's has the edge so far in terms of quality acts; while The National has the far superior venue.
y Brown appears on Saturday, July 26; The Old 97s play the next night, July 27; the geeky bass player from Phish, Mike Gordon plays on Tuesday, Aug. 5; and noted hip hop act, Mos Def performs on Thursday, Aug. 7.Among the highlights of the fall season so far: funky jamband music from Galactic (Friday, Oct. 10), and demonic metal from Danzig and Dimmu Borgir (Mon. Oct. 13), and the ever raucous hillbilly punk of Rev. Horton Heat with Nashville Pussy (Fri. Nov. 7)
I just saw Steel Pulse the other night at The National. The crowd was great, but the music was just so-so. Pretty commercial reggae with the kind of bland synths I don't really appreciate. It will be interesting to see the kinds of acts that the National will be booking for this fall. I would have to say Toad's has the edge so far in terms of quality acts; while The National has the far superior venue.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
"Walk in Hell With Me" (Local DVD review)
Brutal metal kings Lamb of God may just be the most famous band to ever come from Richmond, which is made clear within the first minute of this MTV-like documentary of their triumphant “Sacrament” world tour from two years ago ("Walk in Hell With Me"due out July 8). With two discs containing five hours of footage, disc one begins with a collage of international LOG concerts: huge, arena-sized crowds that prove demonic, growled metal is a global phenomenon. The band plays to 72,000 fans at one show alone in Europe.
“Sacrament” reached number eight on the Billboard charts and LOG was nominated for a Grammy during this whirlwind tour. The surprising commercial success seems to have helped them deal with interpersonal demons. There are no fistfights like in their last video, when drunken lead singer Randy Blythe forced guitarist Mark Morton into a bloody brawl. Instead, the members seem focused on a common goal: being the greatest live metal band in the world.
Somewhat predictably, director Doug Spangenberg sticks to light, backstage moments and bored, day-off shenanigans sandwiched between hard-hitting live footage. If you’re looking for insights into the scene, or the individual personalities, you’re out of luck—there’s not much digging or directorial perspective. Instead we get standard rock sightseeing and promotional chores: the band letting off steam shooting assault rifles in the desert, signing autographs after a memorable first gig in Japan, playing with bullwhips, bungee jumping, seeing the world as tourists. This is a document of the thralls of rising stardom, but the only real drama comes from dealing with the “Spinal Tap”-like mishaps that plague all big-time rock bands. Compare this film to a more artistic, probing rock tour documentary, like Robert Frank’s “Cocksucker Blues” (Rolling Stones, 1972--SEE YOU TUBE VIDEO BELOW) and you’ll see the huge potential missed. It would’ve been nice to have more than just a cursory glance at the fans and hanger-ons. In my experience, rock stars are less interesting the more they talk.
*In related LOG news: lead singer Randy Blythe will be making his film debut in the horror movie, “The Graves,” starring Tony Todd (“Candyman”), tentatively slated for this fall.
Friday, June 27, 2008
"The Godfather of Rap" playing at Toad's on Wed (7/2)
He may have had some problems with coke in the last few years that have landed him in jail, but legendary street poet/musician/activist Gil Scott-Heron is still someone worth checking out live, if only to catch some of his soulful '70s material like "Lady Day & John Coltrane" or "The Bottle."
He will be performing in Richmond with funky local sax player, Plunky & Oneness, at Toad's Richmond on Wed. Tickets are $25.
Check out this guy doing a funky dance to one of Scott Heron's best known songs, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" (a phrase he originally coined).
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Daniel Johnston visits Devil Town (Review)
Some locals were surprised that legendarily quirky singer songwriter Daniel Johnston made a stop in Richmond on June 23 during his recent tour--and at the brand spanking new National Theater no less. You can check out my interview with him at Style Weekly.
For anyone who has yet to catch a show at the National, what are you waiting for? Oh right, a band you like. I'll admit the artist selection has been a little sketchy so far--but those of us who have been there a few times know that this is a great venue and Richmond is lucky to have it. (Great sound, good views from nearly everywhere courtesy of the graded hardwood floors, kicking A.C., and very few patron lines since bars are located everywhere, plus there's no smoking indoors, thank you. Even in the valley of the shadow of Philip Morris, venues are starting to catch on and realize that smoking sections outside are the way to go).
The show itself was short and like Johnston himself, evoked bipolar reactions. People either loved it for the emotionally honest tunes and Johnston's bizarre, whacked out on medications persona (sadly, his arm was constantly shaking from some condition). Others likely thought his voice was horrible, the show was way too short, and the whole idea of placing a mentally ill singer on stage was potentially exploitive.
By the numbers, Johnston's show featured only a brief set of acoustic numbers in the beginning, followed by another short electric set with Johnston backed by a competent group of young hipster rockers, The Hymns, from New York. Sadly, there was no house piano, so Johnston was unable to display his unique piano playing style--sort of a childlike version of Thelonious Monk banging away at fractured, ghost-like chords.
My girlfriend and I got to the show early in order to meet Johnston and his brother/manager, Dick, backstage. As soon as we walked upstairs, Dick told us they were worried about Dan's voice, which had gone ragged from several consecutive shows. Over sitting on a large sofa was Dan,his usual friendly, oddly charming self. He immediately greeted us by saying "Hey look Dick, its John and Yoko" then offering us both a cup of Mountain Dew (those who saw the award winning documentary "The Devil and Daniel Johnston" from 2006 will get the joke).
But what seemed to please Dan most were the boxes of comic books he had just bought from Richmond's Velocity Comics nearby. He had an old friend from Austin, who now lives in Richmond, take him there for some serious impulse buying. There must have been four boxes. I bet the guys at Velocity were stoked.
Having seen Johnston perform before in Long Beach, CA, I can safely say that his shows usually offer the same mix of poignant, near-tear-jerking moments, and totally off key caterwauling (the electric set). The best moments tonight were when Daniel sang alone for the opening set, chugging away on a small custom built acoustic guitar. One of the most memorable songs came near the end, when he sang a near perfect rendition of "True Love Will Find You in the End" from, in my opinion, one of his best albums: "1990." It's a beautifully sad, naive, innocent song that will pull at your heart strings, if you have any.
He closed out the night with an abbreviated sing-a-long to "Devil Town" which fit this city perfectly--what with its ghosts of slavery days past. Oh, and i almost forgot, the ghost of Orson Welles, who once performed on The National stage, could be seen hovering tonight too. He was a wacky fat guy of an altogether different stripe--but I bet even he would've enjoyed the music of Dan Johnston.
The show itself was short and like Johnston himself, evoked bipolar reactions. People either loved it for the emotionally honest tunes and Johnston's bizarre, whacked out on medications persona (sadly, his arm was constantly shaking from some condition). Others likely thought his voice was horrible, the show was way too short, and the whole idea of placing a mentally ill singer on stage was potentially exploitive.
By the numbers, Johnston's show featured only a brief set of acoustic numbers in the beginning, followed by another short electric set with Johnston backed by a competent group of young hipster rockers, The Hymns, from New York. Sadly, there was no house piano, so Johnston was unable to display his unique piano playing style--sort of a childlike version of Thelonious Monk banging away at fractured, ghost-like chords.
My girlfriend and I got to the show early in order to meet Johnston and his brother/manager, Dick, backstage. As soon as we walked upstairs, Dick told us they were worried about Dan's voice, which had gone ragged from several consecutive shows. Over sitting on a large sofa was Dan,his usual friendly, oddly charming self. He immediately greeted us by saying "Hey look Dick, its John and Yoko" then offering us both a cup of Mountain Dew (those who saw the award winning documentary "The Devil and Daniel Johnston" from 2006 will get the joke).
But what seemed to please Dan most were the boxes of comic books he had just bought from Richmond's Velocity Comics nearby. He had an old friend from Austin, who now lives in Richmond, take him there for some serious impulse buying. There must have been four boxes. I bet the guys at Velocity were stoked.
Having seen Johnston perform before in Long Beach, CA, I can safely say that his shows usually offer the same mix of poignant, near-tear-jerking moments, and totally off key caterwauling (the electric set). The best moments tonight were when Daniel sang alone for the opening set, chugging away on a small custom built acoustic guitar. One of the most memorable songs came near the end, when he sang a near perfect rendition of "True Love Will Find You in the End" from, in my opinion, one of his best albums: "1990." It's a beautifully sad, naive, innocent song that will pull at your heart strings, if you have any.
He closed out the night with an abbreviated sing-a-long to "Devil Town" which fit this city perfectly--what with its ghosts of slavery days past. Oh, and i almost forgot, the ghost of Orson Welles, who once performed on The National stage, could be seen hovering tonight too. He was a wacky fat guy of an altogether different stripe--but I bet even he would've enjoyed the music of Dan Johnston.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Richmond Folk Festival will have international flare
Organizers of the first annual Richmond Folk Festival plan to gradually release the names of the 25 musical artists performing—just as soon as they sign their contracts. The festival, which hopes to draw on the popular success of the National Folk Festival during its recent three-year stint in
The National Folk Festival, the oldest multicultural arts celebration in the nation, changes venues every three years. The festival will be held this year in Butte, Montana.
Anxious to keep the ball rolling,
Jim Wark, chairman of the festival’s programming committee, said that the festival is committed to keeping the same format as the National Folk Festival, and the event will remain free to the public. He adds that his goal is to at least match attendance from last year, which drew 175,000 people.
“Weather conditions could not have been better last year, so it was sort of a harmonic convergence,” Wark says. “The weather will make the difference between 50,000 people coming either way.”
The festival is funded by corporate sponsors and subsidized by grants of the National Council for the Traditional Arts, which curates The National Folk Festival. The current budget for the
Wark explains that his committee, which consists of local artists and music experts, composed a wish list of diverse performers and submitted it to the NCTA, which was retained by Venture Richmond, a local umbrella group of city promoters and businesses. Wark says his committee focused on choosing exotic and diverse acts that would not usually play
“I always look most forward to the strangest acts,” Wark says, adding that the festival is decidedly uncommercial. “People should know sponsorship dollars had zero influence on programming.”
One of the committee’s goals was to hire “purists,” or performers in a direct lineage to traditional music genres, meaning they likely come from its birthplace.
Grammy winning sound engineer and producer Christopher King of
“It’s all about compromise. If I get the old time group or person that I think fits the bill the best, I can roll over and ignore decisions made about other music,” he says.
In the future, King says he hopes the festival will add traditional hip-hop, which he feels is a legitimate folk art expression.
Programming member Zarina Fazaldin, a Kenyan who worked the last three years with the National Folk Festival, says she is working on bringing more music from
“Richmond is so international now,” she says. “We have many African-Americans who are interested in teaching and learning Swahili.”
There will also be plenty of crafts and food for the crowds to enjoy.
Chris Williams, who lives in Arlington County and has worked with the National Festival for 15 years, volunteered to coordinate crafts for the Richmond event. The theme this year will be finding common ground between communities of immigrants in Virginia and longtime Americans, he says.
“We’ve all learned to eat Indian, Thai, and Pakastani food in Virginia—we didn’t know that 20 years ago,” Williams says, adding that there should be 15 to 18 traditional craft demonstrations. “We’ll have everything from Mongolia to Mexico to Cambodia to Czechs, Slovaks, Danes … but we’re still working on it.”
The programming committee will likely have one more meeting, Wark says. The next annoucement on signed musical acts is expected within a month, according to Lisa Sims, director of events with Venture Richmond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
