I had a chance to check out my friends and former band mates, Jac and Jill, at their CD release performance. Great show! The band was tight, the girls were on their game and the crowd loved every minute of it. If you haven’t had a chance to check them out and you like power-pop music, don’t wait too long….
CLICK THE LINK BELOW:
Jac and Jill LIVE photo slideshow
I saw this on Vincent Laforet’s blog. He is a cinematographer who dedicates alot of time to the new HD Digital SLR cameras.
This is definitely the direction that journalism can take to bring back the audience. Not specifically this piece per se., but magazines especially can benefit from this type of production.
Technology is getting cheaper, the new crop can combine the old and new, print and visual. Check out how the program will force you to click when ready, I like that feature. A combination of different font sizes, bold, underline etcc. can really help get the main points of the story across, but there can still be deeper info when needed/wanted.
Gotta say I’m diggin this like dirt.
VIV Mag Interactive Feature Spread – iPad Demo from Alexx Henry on Vimeo.
Check out the link below, it shows how the mag was shot, greenscreen, cameras ( shot with Red One.)
VIV Mag Featurette: A Digital Magazine Motion Cover and Feature for the iPad from Alexx Henry on Vimeo.
http://www.commodoreusa.net/index.html
Looks like the Commodore is trying to make its comeback.
Looks kind of cool to me.
If they could give it rechargable batteries like a laptop and some way to wirelessly transmit to the TV.
Hmmmm.
“Yet The New York Observer reported that the total number of people who signed up for online access to Newsday at $260 per year was a shockingly low 35.” – David Cohen , mediabistro
There is a simple reason behind this that you are not noticing. Cablevision does not want Newsday to succeed. By purchasing Newsday, and by virtue of supplying cable service to 75% of Long Island’s households, they now have a virtual monopoly on the news.
Something tells me that they will make a lot more money selling cable tv, internet access and phone service than they will by selling newspapers. They have already rejected ads in Newsday from their main competitors, Verizon FIOS.
More proof: Charles Wang and the Islanders (Nassau Coliseum) vs. The Dolan family and the Rangers (Madison Square Garden).
I also find it odd that a huge project to revitalize the Islanders home, Nassau Coliseum and surrounding areas, could not get permission to build in Nassau County under the leadership of former Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, who was fired by the voters last year. Where does he work now? You guessed it. Cablevision.
Is it possible that backroom deals were struck so that Cablevision’s position in the NY area market with MSG and the Rangers would dominate?
I don’t know, but it kind of makes you think there should be another news source in the local community to ask those questions. But alas, Newsday is now a poor cripple shell of it’s former self. By design.
I hear ya about this decision smelling real bad. I think the media companies that didn’t cover this know a good thing when they see it. Kind of like when your girlfriend farts really smelly for the first time. You know its gross, but you keep your mouth shut because she is a great kisser and is super-cute.
These media companies are the HUGE winners in all of this. Where do you think the corporate and labor interests are going to spend all that new money?
The mainstream media did cover this though. NY Times had it on the front page this morning. MSNBC had whole shows devoted to it. FOX, not so much, but it was there. I can’t speak for network news, but I am assuming if they didn’t cover it yesterday they will today.
In my humble opinion, the justices had no choice but to vote this way. The First Amendment should always beat out some lame rules telling who to speak and when. The idea that you have to follow rules about what you can say and when you can say it, especially when it comes to politics, is just plain unconstitutional.
Corporations will try to persuade the public with slick fancy auto-tuned politicians just like they have done with musicians. It is really up to the general public to become informed citizens. As long as more people vote in the American Idol finale than they do in local elections, we are all fucked.
Anyways, glad I can still speak my mind in America.
A little bit of common sense conspiracy about the news business for everyone here.
The first chart represents the growth of Facebook from July, 2006 to October, 2009.
The chart below it represents Newspaper ad sales from January, 2006 to January, 2009, not a great year.
I have done some research on this and what I found was a disturbing sign
that the average user spends about 20-30 minutes on Facebook per day.
If we add in the fact that an average television viewer watches TV for four
hours, we can see why newspaper industry is in complete disarray.
I’m not saying that Facebook is the straw that broke the camel’s back, but look at the charts once more.
Facebook became huge, newspapers crashed.
http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html
http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?timeline
Can the internet take it all over?
Should we all think business first, journalism second?
What percentage of people become proficient with a camera, rather than just using the auto function?
Can you justify changing editorial content for profit.
Are there problems with video journalists shooting, editing and writing their own packages ? Terrible audio, libel, etc…
How many people are in the chain before a piece makes it to the air?
Will still and motion cameras unite to make a bad-ass super camera
( come on Red)?
Do you really think you may get the straight up truth from either of these cable news .. ahem – opinion networks, FOX or MSNBC, during prime-time? I don’t think so. A NY Times article recently highlighted the feud that President Obama is having with FOX.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/business/media/12fox.html
The article does plenty to mention the “conservative” views of FOX, but makes no mention of the political leanings of any other cable “news” channels. I know that the article is focusing on FOX and President Obama, but out of the roughly 1,500 words in the article there were none about liberal leaning media outlets.
Let me set this straight. I trust FOX as much as I trust my ex-wife’s racist grandmother. With that being said, I trust MSNBC like I would a used car salesman. They both suck. Now I may be cynical, but for straight news, neither hit the mark.
For President Obama’s White House staff to call FOX an “ideological outlet” and not feel the same way about MSNBC is just plain hypocritical.
Really, MSNBC is not “ideological.”
The networks 5p.m. to 10p.m. schedule is:
5p.m. – Hardball with Chris Matthews
6p.m. – The Ed Show with Ed Schultz
7p.m. – again Hardball with Chris Matthews
8p.m. – Countdown with Keith Olbermann
9p.m. – The Rachel Maddow show.
From watching these shows, I can tell they are all decidedly liberal. The only one who tries to hide it may be Chris Matthews.
Keith Olbermann, come on, his feud with Bill O’Reilly is like two little kids in a schoolyard sticking their tongues out at each other. His “special comments” make him look desperate for attention.
The news consuming public deserves more from MSNBC and FOX.
If you only put opinion shows on during prime-time then do you deserve to be called a news channel?
The American public increasingly distrusts news organizations as biased. I wonder why?
Think about it.
It struck an interesting chord in my head when I read a Forbes.com article about the structure and possibilities of the proposed Comcast/NBC/Universal deal.
http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/01/comcast-nbc-ge-business-media-cable.html?partner=relatedstoriesbox
In the article it talked about how Comcast may want to charge cable companies that want to carry NBC and it’s programming. This is routinely done for cable-only channels like MSNBC or CNBC, but big broadcast networks don’t make this regular practice. With somewhere around 70 million cable subscribers in the United states, this could work out to be a nice chunk of change for Comcast.
An even better reason to own NBC would be to exclude other companies from accessing the content, therefore making their own cable company a more attractive option.
Long Island’s Cablevision uses this strategy to attract new customers and keep current ones. They have a popular News channel called News12 and constantly tout its coverage of the local community as a reason against switching to Verizon FIOS television service.
Comcast could use NBC to beat down smaller cable companies and reduce competition. The FCC is currently reviewing the rules and regulations regarding what rates content companies who are vertically integrated with distribution networks can charge.
The American Cable Association, http://www.americancable.org, is currently complaining that smaller cable operators don’t get a fair shake. They are forced to buy packages of programming rather than just the channels they want. If they want to carry MTV, then they must carry MTVU, MTV3, VH1 etc… This has been the way that cable channel owners, like Rainbow Media ( owned by Cablevision), have grown all their networks at the same time. Unpopular channels ride on the backs of popular ones.
Lets see what the regulators do about the Comcast/NBC/Universal deal.
ISTVX
The rise in non-profit news organizations led me to ponder an important question. Will they be able to endorse candidates? Editors from newspapers routinely endorse candidates for election. Non-profit status would certainly preclude an organization from taking a side in a political race.
Under the IRS tax code, section 501(c)(3), a non-profit would be:
“prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”
A non-profit can lobby for the passage of legislation, but cannot lobby for politicians in elections.
To me, this would certainly tie the hands of the editorial portion of these organizations. Considering the trend of cable opinion channels like MSNBC, Fox and CNN becoming entirely editorial, this may not be such a bad thing.
Will the Texas Tribune, Pro-Publica or Minn-Post retain non-profit status?
Think-tanks seem to have found a way to influence policy without endorsing politicians. The American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation routinely trumpet conservative causes. The Brookings Institution and the Center for American Progress certainly have no qualms erring on the liberal side. These think-tanks were created from donations and grants by wealthy people with agendas.
I certainly hope the new trend of saving “quality journalism” by wealthy philanthropists does not lead in a similar direction.
