May 17th, 2016 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
The music industry is admittedly not my wheelhouse, but an undeniably creative video, released yesterday by Coldplay, has highlighted a conflict that lies within the creation of promotional content: to what does the content owe its principal allegiance? In this case we have a marvelously impressive creative visual production (CGI heavy as it is), ostensibly produced to promote a song. If the core consideration is the song, however, it is arguable whether the video is doing it good service. Then again, if the song were abysmal, no amount of production sophistication could help. So, what role do music videos play today? Are they supposed to principally increase sales of the song, raise consumer awareness of the musician, or win awards and the media coverage that (sometimes) comes therewith? Is there some other purpose (such as simply generating buzz for the director, sufficient to springboard them into a commercial or feature career)?
Obviously, different music videos have different objectives, but I would posit that a core goal ought to be either to increase fandom (and purchase) for the song itself, or to increase viewer investment in the musician, sufficient to garner increased sales – be they merchandise, concert, or content. Maroon 5 achieved the former with their video for “Sugar”, while also generating a good deal of buzz for their inventive approach. Sia achieved the latter with her video for “Elastic Heart”. Taylor Swift’s “Bad Blood” achieved both, I would argue (and the sales numbers corroborate that claim). I have long championed the videos of FKA Twigs, which establish the artist firmly as the lost love child of Madonna and Bjork. Indeed, there exist a number of compelling music videos that successfully compel the viewer to either buy the song or follow the artist more enthusiastically.
What, however, do Coldplay’s videos (or those by OK GO, for that matter) accomplish, extant high YouTube views? Obviously, those who never liked the music might claim they mitigate an otherwise painful audio experience, but a massive investment in a music video is not going to sell the song or musician to someone who hates the music. Nobody suddenly became a new fan of U2’s after watching the video for “Numb”. If you didn’t love Christina Aguilera before, watching her embarrassing Lady Gaga copycat for ‘Not Myself Tonight’ was not going to endear her to you. Then again, Lady Gaga did herself no favors with her Madonna copycat for the forgettable “Judas”. So where’s the value?
After watching Coldplay’s recent video for “Up & Up” (the third single from their last album, “A Head Full Of Dreams”), I barely remembered the song, and I notice that all the online comments are about the video, with nary a word about the song or musicians.
Securing viewers of content on YouTube is a tough challenge these days, with the vast majority being relegated swiftly to burst traffic. It stands to reason, therefore, that content posted to online video aggregation sites such as YouTube, Vimeo, (arguably) Facebook, and soon Amazon Video Direct, needs to be compelling enough to merit swift and sustained viewership, but at what cost, and with what intended outcome? Content production without strategic context will rarely return satisfactory value. People will notice something attractive, but to what end? If that is the goal, kudos. Music videos are supposed to promote further action on the part of the viewer, though, aren’t they? Is clicking “Like” or “Share” enough, these days?
April 22nd, 2016 by dewprocess.
2 Comments »
March 8th, 2016 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
Women who changed the world.Women who changed the world. Literary mastery, pioneering science, life-saving discoveries and actions for peace and human rights – achievements of women around the world awarded the Nobel Prize. Learn more about the impactful work of these Laureates at Nobelprize.org.#InternationalWomensDay Photos: Ulla Montan, Alexander Mahmoud, Nobelprize.org. Music: Epidemic Sound.
February 26th, 2016 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
“It’s in the trees!
When will the startup gold rush fever end?
I have been trying for 8 years, with varying degrees of success, to encourage people to stop heeding the false prophecies of certain (not all) Get-Rich-Quick Venture Capital investment vehicles, and instead seek out the truly thoughtful innovations that have the potential to bring as much social value as fiscal value to the marketplace and communities in which we exist today.
It’s time for us all to stop playing this game of “my vaporware is more shiny than yours”, and try to sincerely help inventors, innovators, and other creative business builders develop the types of sustainable business propositions that can build workforces, communities, steady revenue streams, and the types of long-term economic stability that was once the hallmark of great nations. It requires time, humility, and perseverance. It requires collaboration, vision, and generosity.
Watch this clip featuring Bernie Sanders. You need not agree with his every political position to recognize the veracity of his observations herein. It applies to our approach to so many facets of life and society:
“The truth is, at some level, that we are in this together… The truth is at some level when you hurt, when your children hurt, I hurt. And when my kids hurt, you hurt. And it’s very easy to turn our backs on kids who are hungry, or veterans who are sleeping out on the street, and we can develop a psyche, a psychology which is “I don’t have to worry about them; all I’m gonna worry about is myself; I need to make another 5 billion dollars.”
So I believe that when we do the right thing, when we try to treat people with respect and dignity, when we say that that child who is hungry is my child, I think we are more human when we do that, than when we say “hey, this whole world, I need more and more, I don’t care about anyone else.”
January 19th, 2016 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
Watching this video, I found myself ambivalent: on the one hand, this is an impressive display of control and skill and, as an urban bicycling advocate, I am always happy to see content that promotes bicycling as an activity. On the other hand, I am dismayed that nobody seems to consider the ecological implications of this particular sort of activity. In much the same way that I see so many snowboarders “carving” down mountains, effectively pushing snow down the mountain at far greater volume than their skiing counterparts, I watch this video and find myself unable to avoid the reality that the cyclist is tearing up the ground with his antics, unquestionably uprooting nascent plantlife, and otherwise treating the fragile area (especially the marshland featured in a couple of scenes) as his own disposable playground. For one person to do this is just ignorance, with little real damage done. However, posting this video is a tacit encouragement for others to do the same. What happens when hundreds, or thousands, of off-road cycling enthusiasts watch this, and opt to go tearing through their countryside in the same manner? Already this video has been viewed, on this one platform alone, more than 150,000 times.
Should we be concerned, or am I overreacting? I feel it is always important that we balance our exploitation of our environment with our responsibility to the sustainability thereof. This does not imply a blind devotion to sitting on a moor, wearing nothing but a burlap sack and health sandals, while I sip peat bog water through a biodegradable straw. It means that we have an obligation to consider the impact of our actions, large and small, upon the world which we share with our children. Sometimes such consideration will lead us to the conclusion “no harm, no foul”. Sometimes we realize there exists potential for harm previously not duly considered.
What do you think?
January 3rd, 2016 by admin.
No Comments »
At 8:43pm last night, ABC News posted a ridiculously framed tweet about the terrorist incident in Oregon:
Denizens of the Twittersphere went ballistic, in response to this apparent double standard in journalism (White American armed takeover of Federal sites is “peaceful militia action”, while *anything* involving Muslims is a “terrorist cell”.) You can find some of the responses in the growing number of blog posts, such as this one from Raw Story.
In the face of this indignation, ABC News was sadly silent, and the trolls jumped in. The news organization’s inability to understand social brand management left the door open for erstwhile fans and trolls to take over their online brand narrative. ABC News seemed to think that ignoring the matter would make it go away…#OldSchoolMarketing
If something more interesting happens in the next 12 hours, they might get lucky, and the hubbub may abate somewhat. The damage is done, however, to any sense that their news brand is anything worth considering as “above” the fray. ABC News is now fair game, simply because they could not be responsive in the first hours of their mess-up. All they had to do (simply as one possible option among many available) was post one follow-up Tweet at 10pm, just over an hour after the first “unfortunately phrased” post: “Many viewers hold strong opinions about the situation in Oregon. We want to hear/share all reasonable views. Chat on [Periscope/Facebook] in one hour.”
ABC News could have hosted an online chat for exactly 30 minutes, with all the fair and not-so-fair comments that would have ensued, and then summarized with a nicely woven acknowledgement of the fact that “sometimes ABC does not frame a breaking news situation as effectively as – in retrospect – we would have liked to, and it is with the help and feedback of viewers and fans that the news team is able to get a better sense of…blahblahblah”…Thank everyone for their thoughtful comments and assure them you’ll “continue to work hard to responsibly explore and report on the stories that affect our lives and communities….blah blah blah…”
In short: be seen as responsive, and manage the narrative enough so it doesn’t look like you are completely tone deaf and out-of-touch. News obviously never quite works when you let it go the way of fanfic, as CNN has discovered. However, BBC News has been doing quite a good job, of late, using social tools to bring their news stories closer to their viewers and listeners. ABC News could learn a thing or two from them.
December 28th, 2015 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
December 16th, 2015 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
October 30th, 2015 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
Television today is very different from the medium of the 1970s and 1980s. Ecosystems burn and people gather in search of positive change. Yet news programs are more interested in, as writer George Monbiot recently observed, “the dress the Duchess of Cambridge wore to the James Bond premiere, Donald Trump’s idiocy du jour, and who got eliminated from the Halloween episode of Dancing with the Stars. The great debate of the week, dominating the news across much of the world? Sausages: are they really so bad for your health?”
As we move from one spectacle to another, be it fictionalized, serialized, or politicized, it behooves us to take 10 seconds or, in this case, just over 10 minutes to remind ourselves of what a force Television is, and what a unique enterprise each of our communities represents.
This weekend, millions of people will wander out in to their physical communities, roaming from home to home, as they meet one another briefly in the annual ritual of “Trick or Treat”. The origins of the ritual are all but forgotten, as children race from door to door to grab as much candy as possible, barely pausing to glance at the face and person that are attached to the arm that offers the treat. Parents idle distractedly on the pavement outside, worrying about the work week past, or the chores awaiting them in the next couple of days. The brief but wondrous opportunity for connection and community interaction is lost in our collective impatience and self-centeredness.
It used to be that media, whether televised or printed, served as a utilitarian resource for our individual and collective edification. We would reference several newspapers, as we developed an opinion about one issue or another. We would look to our television for the latest images and coverage, trusting in a relatively objective perspective, or balanced programming that ensured transparency whenever objectivity was not possible. I still own the letters my grandfather wrote to his sister in the 1930s and 40s, as he led the Allied Correspondents through Europe, covering the War. His distaste for Hitler was not hidden, but he always balanced his contempt for the man and his minions with insights in to how and why the German populace might have been convinced to follow such an unholy agenda. To listen to and socialize the opinions of others is not a weakness, but rather a manifestation of one’s own strong convictions. What are ideas worth, if they are not tested?
Today’s media, instead of serving our community of diversity, so often collaborates with our own prejudices, that it compound the memes within which we exist.
Whether our media is servant to our citizens, vice versa or, worse still, whether both become servants to a culture devoid of useful information or humanity, is still a matter of choice. For now.
October 18th, 2015 by dewprocess.
No Comments »
Your presence in the Universe is infinitesimally small, bordering on non-existent. How that strikes you, and what you choose to do with your relatively sub-atomic situation, is the marker of your true and lasting worth. Will you fall prey to the vicissitudes of modern mankind, and limit yourself to the pursuit of personal financial wealth, and perhaps a pompous executive title or two? Does the illusion of power suffice to appease your sense of self-worth? Do you want your life to amount to nothing more than what you alone can sense of it? Do you desire something else from this one-way trip, the destination of which we are all too well aware?
Artists, scientists, inventors, a very few politicians, and their ilk pursue that “something else”. They have – often unconsciously – discovered that acquisition is a reductive enterprise, while contribution is the most sustainable expression of power within our grasp. How much we give to our communities, large and small, determines our place in the Universe, and its longevity. You possess an uncommonly awesome ability to replicate and enhance your presence: through your creations, contributions, influence, and inspiration. The composition of a lovely poem will prove more lasting than most lucrative IPOs. The hours spent preemptively undermining that competitor business would have been much better spent exploring ways to merge your mutual capabilities, in service to even more exciting innovations. Of course someone will exploit your good will for their own selfish ends. They only get to do so once, though. You don’t have to be an idiot to fulfill your greatest potential, but it helps to have a bit of the fool within you. The longer we promote distrust, avarice, self-absorption, and fear; the deeper we dig ourselves into a darkened pit of history that will all too soon be forgotten amidst the vast expanse of space and time that renders all of us to the dust from whence we came.
Who made the mistake of telling you that you were the main character in your narrative? Who told you there was a statute of limitations on dreaming big for others? Who gave you permission to give up on the wonderful plans you had for a better world?
The results of this quirky experiment that is your life will be determined by your willingness to catalyze the elements around you. The greatest leaders are not the most powerful, but the most empowering. The greatest innovations are not the most profitable, but the most fulfilling. Your accomplishments will, in the long term, never be tallied in dollars and cents, but rather in the actions and aspirations of the generations that instinctively perpetuate you, whose all-too-short span of life could prove directly responsible for the more rewarding manifestation of theirs.