Sunday, March 30, 2008

Three Days in Moscow

If you happen to be one of my scant few followers on Twitter, you would have learned that I spent much of last week in Moscow. I was invited there to give two speeches on the changed dynamics of PR these last few years. The audience: about 100 corporate communications chiefs from Russia's largest companies. More on that in a second.

First, I should tell you that Moscow is a grimy city with horrendous traffic. Not only is the traffic terrible, but virtually every car is caked with dirt and all drivers behave like belligerent NYC taxi drivers playing chicken in traffic. Moreover, every Russian taxi driver tried to gouge me on the fare. This born-and-bred New Yorker had to haggle big time.

On the other hand, the Moscow Metro, dug deep under this bustling city, is a model of efficiency. The trains run every 50 seconds, each station is artistically and architecturally distinct, the cost to ride is 20 rubles (less than a $1), and the platforms are busy and apparently safe throughout the night. Could there be a Hopstop in its future?

Muscovites think their city is heads above all others. One woman tried to convince me that Moscow's restaurants make New York City's pale in comparison. Huh? I credited that notion to too much vodka in her daily diet. Still, the people are friendly and I didn't notice any of the cloak and dagger stuff.

No matter what you say about Moscow, one thing's for sure: it is most definitely a boom town. Someone told me that 30 billionaires and 100,000 millionaires live there. It is the epicenter of all business. St. Petersburg may be pretty, but it's no Moscow when it comes to defining the new Russia. I should say that this blogger was a bit bothered by all that wealth, not so much because he could use some of it, but more for how it so blatantly manifested in clothes, cars and conspicuous consumption. Muscovites proudly and overtly display their new-found materialistic trappings.

My presentation focused on how the changed media landscape and the empowerment of citizens as journalists have caused a major re-think in how companies engage their customers. One attendee found it incredulous that a blogger would have the audacity to denigrate a company's reputation, as was the case with the Comcast repairman video or Jeff Jarvis's rants against Dell. Another asked whether it's even legal to write negatively about a company or person. I cited the First Amendment, but also referenced the lawsuit brought against two former employees by Apple for divulging trade secrets.

I provided examples of CEOs who blog and companies that encourage/empower their employees to blog to demonstrate greater transparency...and hopefully improved reputations. I discussed the growing importance of search, and the migration of media consumers from offline to online, time-shifting included. I showed examples of some companies seeking the magic elixir for that holy grail of marketing - positive viral WOM -- sometimes with unforeseen and unintended consequences.

Finally, I did have a chance to attend a party celebrating the one-year anniversary of "Business FM," a new Moscow-based terrestrial radio station that its lawyer told me had gained profitability in less than five months. Held at the newly opened European Trade Center, an all-glass modern shopping mall on the Moscow River, the party, like everything else in monied Moscow, was totally over-the-top.

White tablecloths, expensive cognac and vodka on every table, revelers dressed to the nines, a ten-piece R&B band from the UK, cigar bar, and come-ons from Mercedes, real estate purveyors, jewelry dealers, etc. My companion asked me whether U.S. radio stations threw similar parties. I thought of the current travails of Clear Channel, smiled, and said, "No."

Monday, March 24, 2008

Spider from Mars

Remember the uproar over Beacon, Facebook's effort to make money by selling to marketing partners the online purchasing habits of its user community ?

Well, today we learn that Google, which purportedly rejects being "evil," has introduced a search-within-a search function that lives and profits off of the websites onto which it leaches. And it's not just those Mom & Pop sites as The Times's Bob Tedeschi explains:
This month, the company introduced a search-within-search feature that lets users stay on Google to find pages on popular sites like those of The Washington Post, Wikipedia, The New York Times, Wal-Mart and others.
What's particularly irksome is that Google's search-within-a-search (don't all these sites already have reasonable search functions?), allows Google to potentially usurp the online ad spend reaped by the sites themselves. Some of the ads may even tout the sites' competitors:
"The problem, for some in the industry, is that when someone enters a term into that secondary search box, Google will display ads for competing sites, thereby profiting from ads it sells against the brand. The feature also keeps users searching on Google pages and not pages of the destination Web site."
Granted, sites that don't wish to have this new search function installed can ask Google to turn off the function...permanently:
"According to a Google spokeswoman, the company has honored such requests from “a couple” of unnamed businesses. These companies, however, may not be able to reverse their decisions. “So we ask them to try it out and see if they want it removed,” the spokeswoman said. “We think it could be a really useful feature."
And sure, I bet the Google will do a better job of internal spidering than many of these sites' current finders. Yet, me thinks that Google could still get a black eye in the court of public opinion for this one. It has a little something to do with opt-in and opt-out. Google should ask before it preys. I wonder what John Battelle would say about it?

Friday, March 21, 2008

Money + Congress = Corruption

This blog over the last three years has spent a fair share of time looking at politics through the focused lens of a PR practitioner. After all, hasn't this administration provided enough taint on our profession to merit such attention?

Some of my previous political posts included:
  • Are Hillary's consiglieres giving her the best advice?
  • How truly distrustful are Ari Fleischer and Dana Perino?
  • Why did Mayor Mike's handlers use a paid wire service that included in its news release a contextual ad that opposed the issue promoted in that very release?
  • What did this President do post-Katrina to gloss over his criminally tragic inaction?
  • How Dick Cheney manhandled Tim Russert.
But this post concerns a project to which I gladly lent a professional hand these last couple of weeks. In a National Press Club speech yesterday, sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation, Stanford Law professor Lawrence Lessig announced that he and political strategist Joe Trippi have teamed up to form an organization called Change Congress for the purpose of fighting the corruptive influence of money on Congress.

In a kind of Google mash-up, but for politics, Prof. Lessig hopes to use technology and wiki-tools to engage and connect people with the many organizations already working in this area. The organization will also keep tabs on which candidates and Congressman have embraced such reforms, and which have not.

His speech, which runs about 40 minutes followed by Q&A, is a must view. For inspiration, take a watch here...then get involved. Please Digg it here. More about yesterday's speech:

Huffington Post (Lessig's own words)
Mashable (Paul Glazowski)
Huffington Post (Craig Newmark's take)
San Jose Mercury News
Industry Standard

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Roasted Baristas

It's been three weeks since that PR stunt in which Starbucks nationwide closed at the same time for some "retraining."

Today, as an extension of the ubiquitous green-signed company's makeover efforts, founder and chief inspiration officer Howard Schulz declared that Starbucks would "return to its roots." According to today's New York Times:
"The initiatives are intended to restore an authentic coffeehouse experience to the stores and, in turn, re-energize an ailing stock that has lost half its value in the last 15 months."
Or as Mr. Schultz "obliquely" put it:
"A lot of people are making unique claims about coffee and what they do," he said. "What’s interesting to me is that they are not coffee roasters."
Well Mr. Schultz, it's Starbucks that's about to be roasted. In a separate, but ill-timed piece of news that stands in contrast to Mr. Schultz's emancipation proclamation, The AP late today pours us a strong, decaffeinated brew:
"A Superior Court judge on Thursday ordered Starbucks to pay its California baristas more than $100 million in back tips that the coffee chain paid to shift supervisors."
Huh? You mean that all those coins we've been pouring into the tip jar from our $3 down for a $2.05 grande drip, have been horded by the baristas' bosses??? Yep. It appears to be so:
Starbucks Corp. spokeswoman Valerie O’Neil said the company planned an immediate appeal, calling the ruling "fundamentally unfair and beyond all common sense and reason."
I wonder what visitors to Starbucks' new community site (to which Ragan's Michael Sebastian directed me today) will have to say about the California lawsuit ruling?

The site, btw, taps the roasted roaster's coffee-consuming crowd for ideas. How's this for one: give your baristas more incentive to step up the pace. It's slow torture to listen to those chain-saw sounding espresso-makers drowning out the new artists you once broke, while waiting, forever, for a cup 'o joe.

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

King for a Day

Dear Jamie,

Yes, you're the king. All those comparisons to J.P. Morgan must really be putting on the big head swell right now. You're feeling pretty darned good, I bet.

And why not? You gave up several nights' sleep to get this deal done. And the ends certainly appear to justify the means, at least in terms of your business reputation.

But I have to ask, Jamie (may I still call you Jamie?), what about the thousands of Bear Stearns employees whose nest eggs were wiped out? What about the shareholders who didn't know enough to short the stock, e.g., those who actually followed Jim Cramer's ebullient advice? And we haven't even begun to contemplate how many jobs you'll ax -- in your hometown, no less.

If I were advising you (and who am I to offer JP Morgan's heir incarnate advice?), I would say do something for the many tens of thousands Bear Stearns employees, investors, etc. whose life savings and livelihoods just took a serious turn for the worse as you triumphantly celebrate "stealing" the fifth largest bank in America.

Give some thought as to what you can do (versus say) that could ease their pain. Be a George Bailey, not a Mr. Potter.

Your old college friend,

Peter Himler

Monday, March 17, 2008

News Media Shifts

As if anyone needed to remind us about the malaise at the network evening news programs, today we learn that this softening extends to other celestial bodies in the broadcast universe, namely the morning shows and newsmagazines.

Today, the Project for Excellence in Journalism releases the fifth edition of its State of the News Media . Among the major trends cited:
News is shifting from being a product — today’s newspaper, Web site or newscast — to becoming a service — how can you help me, even empower me? There is no single or finished news product anymore. As news consumption becomes continual, more new effort is put into producing incremental updates, as brief as 40-character e-mails sent from reporters directly to consumers without editing.
A news organization and a news Web site are no longer final destinations. Now they must move toward also being stops along the way, gateways to other places, and a means to drill deeper, all ideas that connect to service rather than product.
The prospects for user-created content, once thought possibly central to the next era of journalism, for now appear more limited, even among “citizen” sites and blogs. News people report the most promising parts of citizen input currently are new ideas, sources, comments and to some extent pictures and video. But citizens posting news content has proven less valuable, with too little that is new or verifiable.
Increasingly, the newsroom is perceived as the more innovative and experimental part of the news industry. This appears truer in newspapers and Web sites than elsewhere. But still it represents a significant shift in the conversation.
The agenda of the American news media continues to narrow, not broaden. A firm grip on this is difficult but the trends seem inescapable. A comprehensive audit of coverage shows that in 2007, two overriding stories — the war in Iraq and the 2008 presidential campaign — filled more than a quarter of the newshole and seemed to consume much of the media’s energy and resources.
Madison Avenue, rather than pushing change, appears to be having trouble keeping up with it. Like legacy media, advertising agencies have their own history, mores and cultures that keep them from adapting to new technology and new consumer behavior.
Since an understanding of journalism and current knowledge of the state of the media landscape continue to serve as core competencies for PR practitioners, I would recommend checking out the new study.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Chocolate Covered Cacao Beans

Tough week. Had to miss the second day of the McGraw-Hill Media Summit, but received a nice letter from one Victor Harwood, president of Digital Hollywood, producer of the confab for five years now.

While I didn't post on it in this space, I did burn up my Twitter account with day one's ruminations and prognostications by Disney CEO Bob Iger who was interviewed with aplomb by Business Week Asst. ME John Byrne.

I then had to choose between the panel on social media and the one featuring ABC News' David Westin, USA Today's Kinsey Wilson, Atlanta J-C's Julia Wallace, CNN's Jon Klein, and Porfolio.com's (and former Timesman) Howell Raines. I opted for the latter, since social media is on the rise and this panel is anything but.

Raines was the most quotable, followed by Westin. I also enjoyed Jon Klein talking about Jeff Toobin's take on Spitzer...live on CNN from Maui via SKYPE! Here's Howell:
"Newspapers were blindsided by a tsunami they've been watching for 20 years..." or "the newspaper model is broken"...or "the Washington Post expects to realize $100 million in revenue from its website this year."
And David:
..."lots of news is a commodity...ABC can't win covering the bridge collapse, but we can win on a story like the Foley scandal"...or "technology doesn't change people. People still want high quality trustworthy credible info. They just don't want us to tell them what they want"...or"...surely death for us is to simply say this is a plebiscite, and we should give them exactly what they want."
Yesterday, I also missed reading Business Week's primary competitor where, today, I stumbled on a blog post titled, "How to Get Killer PR," posted by Kelly Spors. In it, she sings the praises of a small New York company that sells chocolate-covered cacao beans whose founder has achieved media ubiquity in recent months.
"I called Ms. Endline and asked how she’s managed to generate so much media buzz for her five-employee company. (She has bagged more than 20 mentions in magazines and several TV appearances in the past few years.) Sweetriot, she says, retains a PR firm called Think PR to help follow up with journalists she meets, devise PR strategy, and craft the message. Yet, she estimates that nearly half of the coverage comes from the company’s own efforts."
Well, it was nice she gave her agency at least partial credit. Jumping over to her agency's website, which required Flash, I clicked to the first place I usually do when scoping out another agency -- the client list. Well, I may be old (i.e., a prime candidate for the male version of the Dove Real Beauty campaign), but this long stylish tail of a list contained just a handful of names that I recognized.

No matter. That's the beauty of our business. PR can work for almost anything -- chocolate covered cacao beans included!

Thursday, March 13, 2008

A Star is (About to Be) Born

Who doesn't believe that notoriety breeds celebrity in America today? Just ask Kate Moss, Lindsay, Paris, Britney and Joey Butafuocco, for God's sake.

Let's now make room for one down-on-her-luck 22-year-old aspiring singer named Ashley Alexandra Dupré* who lives in the Flatiron district of NYC. This is from The Times:
"Ms. Dupré said by telephone Tuesday night that she was worried about how she would pay her rent since the man she was living with “walked out on me” after she discovered he had fathered two children. She said she was considering working at a friend’s restaurant or, once her apartment lease expires, moving back with her family in New Jersey 'to relax.'”
Well, honey, your luck is about to take a monumental turn for the better. You've hit the faux-celebrity jackpot where $1000/hour is chump change. Didn't you notice that your MySpace page is attracting record numbers of visitors, each of whom gets a taste of your tonsils, I mean voice.

You can milk this one, baby. Just play it coy with ET, Extra, Access, GMA, Today and all the others when they come calling this week. Don't overextend yourself. Don't take the first offer from People or US Weekly for the real inside scoop, or Playboy for the outside scoop. Be choosy. Think in the long-term. You don't want to flame out too soon. A measured media strategy is the ticket.

Update (late Thursday): Amie Street's New Star: Ashley Alexandra Dupré

* Ashley is the real name for Kristin. Yes, that Kristin. The one who took down you know who this week.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Thin-Skinned Hippocrate?

No. I'm not talking about "Client-9," but rather A-list blogger Mark Cuban whose actions this week prompted a letter of protest to NBA Commish David Stern from the Society of Professional Journalists.

Mr. Cuban' decided to ban full-time bloggers from his Dallas Maverick's locker room. The feisty blogger explains his rationale (sort of) in a blog post this past Monday.
"So post my little newspaper rant, it comes down to something very simple. A blogger is a blogger is a blogger and there are millions of us. . The name on your check, if you get a check, is irrelevant. BlogMaverick, Belo, xyz.blogger.com, we is what we is, and as long as there is limited space in our locker room, we is going to be outside in the Press Interview room getting comments says the bans"
To make his point about the physical constraints of the Mavs' locker room, he even linked to a picture (above). What a tool!

The SPJ believes Mr. Cuban instituted the ban as a result of a negative post written about him in the Dallas Morning News' Mavs blog. There may be some credence in this theory since we've seen this retaliatory behavior from Mr. Cuban in the past. From the SPJ email alert:
However, the only news blogger to be permanently removed from the locker room is Morning News blogger Tim MacMahon, who also gathers quotes from players for beat writers. On Feb. 29, Cuban told MacMahon to leave the locker room, which was the same day MacMahon published a critical piece on Mavericks coach Avery Johnson.
The issue of whether to credential bloggers remains a valid one, and does involve some informed judgment about the validity of the blogger. In fact, the same rules should also apply to mainstream journalists. Perhaps this is why Mr. Cuban extended his ban to all bloggers so as to avoid making that judgment.

Mark, here's my advice: either hire a savvy PR person to deal with your throngs of beat reporters, so you don't have to, or take a small portion of your billions to expand the size of the locker room. I mean, Jason Kidd deserves no less. Finally, get thicker skin.

Update 3.13 - Mark Cuban elaborates ...and them some

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Client 9

I've been a little truant in communicating via this space today. It's called client overload (versus Spitzer overload).

Hope to pick it up tomorrow when I'm planning to cover (and Twitter) some of the presentations at the McGraw-Hill Media Summit in New York City.

Also, PCNY just posted its next luncheon and it's a winner. First invites out tomorrow.

Back at you.

Monday, March 10, 2008

SXSWi '08

No. I'm not attending the conference referenced in this post's title. But a team from MB's FishBowl NY is, and their reports seem to justify the expense of sending them.

First, they salaciously recount the awkward on-stage interview between Sarah Lacy, a former Business Week reporter, and the dedicated, self-effacing (and too youthful-->) Mark Zuckerberg who hopefully needs no introduction to the readers of this blog.

Apparently, Ms. Lacy's line of questioning and overall style were so off-putting, she elicited boos from the audience, an audiene admittedly featured fawning fans of FB. Here's one recount:
"2:21: Upon her own interruption, Lacy accuses Z. of having 'hurt look on [his] face like, 'Waah, I was talking.'' New Yorkers seated behind us: 'This is mad awkward.' She's talking to an intelligent billionaire like he's a five-year-old. Wake up Lacy, we're in Web 2.0 and Z's since cleared kindergarten."
And another:
2:38: Audience muttering over Lacy's crap interviewing skills reaching uncomfortably high volume. We're glad tomatoes are out of season.
Having done a fair share of new media moderating, I'm just thankful that the Fishbowl NY scribes missed my star turns! The interview ended with this final goodbye between Ms. Lacy and Mr. Zuckerberg:
3:06: Lacy: 'I'm sorry for torturing you for an hour.' Z: 'You should feel bad!'
And this comment came later in the day from Mr. Z:
"I feel really bad for Sarah...Right about the time when Sarah thought it was over is when it should have ended."
Elsewhere in mediabistro land, we play second-hand witness to the SXSWi's on-stage (and off-stage) interplay between Forbes's Quentin Hardy and Google's IT guy Doug Merrill. One question from the audience prompted the Scobeleizer himself to spring from his audience seat to vocalize his unequivocating vocal chords. Here's what prompted Mr. Scoble:
This "self-proclaimed 'old-media' journalist asserted to the group...that blogs didn' [sic] contain "real information," and that she didn't understand why their proliferation of coverage was getting preferenced [sic] over old print saws."
To which the inimitable Mr. Scoble had this to say:
"I've gone on CNBC, I've written for magazines," he charged. "They didn't improve my Google ratings at all. None of these things has helped the way blogging has. If you want better ratings, you don't go to the mainstream media."
"Ratings" or a pop in a high profile MSM outlet with all that it engenders? Hmm.

Then there's this fresh link from AlwaysOn to a Newsweek piece that extols the virtues of the MSM. (Can we blame them?) Could we see a resuscitation of the debate between citizen and mainstream journalism? More SXSWi '08 posts here.

Friday, March 07, 2008

Coaxed to Fiber

So it's official. My former colleague, the prolific Twitterer and digital pundit Max Kalehoff, has officially made the switch. Here's the first public announcement (via Twitter):
maxkalehoff It's official. Cablevision is disconnected and now on Verizon FIOS fiberoptic Internet/TV/phone, $99/mnth (vs Cablevision $140 mediocrity)
Matters little that Cablevision reportedly is winning the war to capture the hearts and minds of the bandwidth deprived. Many, like me, are taking a wait-and-see attitude given the less-than-fond memories of Verizon's arcane labrynth called customer service. (VZW is admittedly better.)

This blogger has previously written about the brewing bandwidth battle between CVC and VZ. My first post three years ago recounted how fiber-to-the-home was once dismissed even by the digital cognoscenti. Back then, CoAx-to-the-back-of-one's PC remained a (literal) pipe dream.

Fiber's now here to stay. Even so, Verizon's FiOS offering, while making some headway with early adapters like Max, still has to be disappointed by its slow uptake (and the prospect of quickly recouping its extraordinary infrastructure expenditure, reportedly "...$23 billion [to] lay down 80,000 miles of wire to 18 million homes."

As for me, I pay a little extra for Optimum Boost. My rating on the Speed Test is 29525 kb/sec downloads and 4315 kb/sec upload (during the day). Sure I pay a little extra, but if something goes wrong the Moony-esque Cablevision reps are eager (too eager?) to help. I just wish they'd let me hang up without trying to tag me to take a survey.

Thursday, March 06, 2008

First Writes of Last Rites

Al Jazeera - Several dead in Jerusalem attack. At least eight people have been killed and 35 more wounded in a shootout at a Jewish school in west Jerusalem. Agencies quoted witnesses as saying that two armed men entered the yeshiva, or religious school, and opened fire on Thursday.

Reuters - At least eight people were killed in gunfire at a Jewish school near Jerusalem on Thursday, the ZAKA emergency service said. Witnesses said two gunmen entered the yeshiva, or religious school, near Jerusalem and opened fire. Ambulance workers said they were treating several people wounded. An Israeli police spokesman said he was checking the report.

BBC - At least eight people have been killed by gunmen who are reported to have infiltrated and attacked a Jewish seminary in West Jerusalem.

The first writes of a breaking news story often sets the tone for subsequent news coverage. As I write this first write of today's blog post, we learn that two armed Palestinian terrorists, one wearing an explosive belt, sneaked into a school in Jerusalem and opened fire on eight students.

Yet, in three early reports on this unfolding tragedy -- from Al Jazeera (pan-Arab), BBC and Reuters - you will notice the absence of any mention of "children" or "students" being slaughtered and whether the gunmen are indeed Palestinian terrorists.

Perhaps Israel's communications folks should take a page from the Clinton for President playbook to decry media bias?

Here's how it really unfolded (taken from the lead in Ynetnews.com):
Report: 8 killed in Jerusalem terror attack. Eight people reported killed in gun battle with terrorist fleeing scene of attack in Kiryat Moshe quarter; one infiltrator killed, said to have been wearing bomb belt
It's no wonder PR is always top of mind in the State of Israel. It's a constant uphill battle. Perhaps Israel should send a TV crew into the West Bank to capture and disseminate the Palestinians celebrating the murder of innocent civilians?

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Hocus Vocus

In the last year, Vocus has gained considerable traction in its efforts to position itself as the media database software company that "gets it." Yet earlier this week in one of my favorite blogs, Church of the Customer, Jackie Huba took Vocus to task as just another purveyor of PR spam.
"Undaunted, Vocus powered on in its spam-like ways by adding the contact information of bloggers to its system. A few months ago, without warning, I've been spammed regularly by Vocus clients like the Virginia Tourism Board and Eight O'Clock Coffee, telling me about some wonderful new campaign. I will use this space to say to the Virginia Tourism Board and Eight O'Clock Coffee: Please, get a clue."
Jackie makes a number of valuable observations including whether journalists should have the ability to opt-out of (or minimally the option of opting-in to) these media databases:
"Once you're in the Vocus system, it gets Kafka-esque. Bloggers can unsubscribe from Vocus PR spam, but from the spamming client only."
She also questions whether the Vocus software actually empowers and emboldens PR pros to send out emails en masse to bloggers with the false security that the software has vetted the "target" recipients. As one of those recipients, Jackie, and many others, bristle at the practice of mass anything to citizen journos:
"You should know that Vocus has simply tacked an old-world model of media relations onto the new-world model of blogging."
There is no automated short cut to effective blogger relations, just like there isn't an automated short cut to effective MSM relations. However, good spidering software can at least set you off in the right direction. The engagement part is where it gets tricky.

Tuesday, March 04, 2008

Maniac World

One of New York City's great attributes lies in its citizens' indifference to celebrity sightings and nonchalance toward the unusual. It's almost as if the 8.2 million New York City residents have seen it all. Very little can phase them, and respecting another's privacy actually means something.

At the height of the M*A*S*H days, I'll always remember how mortified former client Alan Alda was when our limo went MIA outside the RTR following a press lunch. We wound up walking from West 57th to East 55th unfettered, i.e., without a single Gawker Stalker.

New Yorkers certainly have seen their share of PR stunts, including the one over the weekend wherein some numbnut thought it was a good idea to dole out money in Union Square, an area of the city that retains the vestiges of the homeless and disenfranchised in spite of the well-healed shoppers at the Greenmarket.

PR Princess Claire Celsi picked up on the near-riot that ensued from the ill-conceived, though admittedly news-generating promotion, which seemed to work in San Francisco

Some PR stunts take place for no apparent reason or beneficiary. Here's one that's tailor-made for anyone who's ever passed through New York's Grand Central Station. Watch the video. It'll give you the heebie-jeebies.

Monday, March 03, 2008

Life Casting

On Friday, I touched on the trend among a new breed of photo agencies that crowdsource-for-profit celeb pics captured by you, me or anyone for that matter.

I observed that the fees doled out for images of out-of-context (e.g., out-of-control) A-listers have fueled the growth of the Patrick McMullan-wannabe movement. There's simply money to be made in those megapixels courtesy of the fastest growing segment of the media -- celebrity blogs, websites and magazines.

So what's fueling the growth of digital video? It's certainly not the prospect of earning a few bucks from the multitude of video-hosting sites.

If you believe the fast-talking, narcissistic New Jersey-based oenophile Gary Vaynerchuck, it's all about building one's personal brand. Screw the person you work for. Look out for numero uno, baby, and utilize every digital tool out there to make yourself a star. It's the Me Generation on steroids.

We've entered a banal twilight zone called Justin.TV where the creators reverse the cameras and by so doing, hasten the dilution of what we once recognized as celebrity. As Sara from Pop 17 informs us on Viddler.com:
"Video on the Internet is not a new occurrence. But as you probably know, its a relatively hot topic especially for up and coming personalities who want to use the platform for a voice."
A voice? More like a table at Hyde.

While one set of amateurs aspires to become paparazzi, another prays to become the paparazzi's prey. Or as one person rationalized in a post last fall on the Sarah Myers (Justin's asst.) blog:
"Social media is shaping and changing early adaptor’s lives; at least mine, for that matter. Watching the evolution of life casting has changed the way that I see humanity’s future interactions with social media. Emotional needs are being met as new technologies come into play."
I guess.