The Long Tail: Why the future of Business Is selling less by Chris Anderson (2006)

Maybe 2006 was a blur to me. Maybe it was the year that books by writers from Wired magazine didn't seem to matter much. Almost self-proclaimed futurist Chris Anderson pontificates in perfect Generation X prose a single idea over and over again. To extrapolate a feature article from Wired; well to be generous it could have been a book chapter, into a whole book is not an art form.

In an idea he shares, would Anderson have spent so much time watching reruns of Gilligan's Island if there was something better to do? Probably not.

He offers us a the salvation of giving us an insight into the life since 2000. Now, this could be of great use to my Grandfather who thinks of Bob Newhart as a young guy. But really, Anderson is preaching to the choir.

But . . . ok maybe this book is for middle age men looking at the new media and scratching their heads.

This book provides full descriptions in e-commerce sites such as google, netflicks, amazon, itunes, etc, and how they work.

He makes the point that when people have more options they are not going to be sitting around watching TV. He punctuates these points with interesting factoids, such as that a top TV show now would not make the the top 10 shows in the seventies, because less of the population is watching TV.

I can relate. My TV watching declined significantly when I moved to New York City where there are a thousands better things to do than watch TV. A case in point I can watch John Oliver on the Daily Show or I can go we him perform live at Comix on 14th street.

Actually, speaking of the Daily Show, Anderson tells us that more people watch it on-line than see it on TV. Still, he goes further. He predicts that formats of shows will change as people see TV content on the web or through Tivo. He has a point with Handheld devices , such as, the iphone, who wants to sit through a scheduled half hour of TV to see the one good Simpson joke. He makes this analogous to buying individual tracks of an album on itunes instead of buying the whole CD for one song. Why should I spend $10 on the last U2 CD when the only good song is Vertigo. This is liberation!

Google (+it's services like utube), itunes, amazon are making fortunes by giving people exactly what they want and for a lot less money and time. Now I have more money and time to try out new music, for instance, often based on the sites suggestions with customer reviews to back it up. Far out ,if I may barrow the expression.

So what is happening here? How is it different than what has happened in the good ole days.

As Anderson quotes some dude, people are filled with general and specific (niche) interests. On-line stores have infinite self space, so now I can get that music of German groove and funk from 1967 to 1974 that I heard in Canada but couldn't find in one New York city record store. It's really good by the way.

So, why could I not find this music today. It's the same reason why there was a radio show called 'Name that tune.' Limited shelve space equates to limited choices. In the 1940's everyone knew the latest Benny Goodman hit. Today, I don't think I have heard a song that went to number one on the billboard chart since Outcast's "Hey Ya." And my german music would not have many buyers besides me, and Costco can only sell so many CDs so they stick to the hits. Maybe if I couldn't find my german music on line I would have bought "Fifty cent sings the Journey catalogue, 'Don't stop believing in the da Hood'" Ok, sadly that isn't a real CD.

So, what is happening with the virtual store front, such as Amazon and itunes, is that people will be able to buy their niche interests. True, they only sell a few of those each, but aggregate that and the sales equal the sales of the hits. People generally flock to stores that selling everything than specialty stores, but on-lines are both. This is the long tail, in a standard deviation there is hump then lines goes off. It is where this line going off is where the money is.

Anderson gives us most of this is the first chapter and the rest of his goes over it again and again from slightly different directions.

Fall Central Park 2008

Farragut North (Atlantic Theatre Company, The Linda Gross Theatre 336 West 20th Street)

November 13, 2008

Got a chance to see the hottest play in New York City. Bad weather got me the last ticket. Farragut North is play loosely based on experiences of working on the Howard Dean and Hillary Clinton campaigns of 2004.

The play starts in a bar couch with two political hacks, their assistant and a New York Times reporter. Just what you would expect to paint the scene of back office politics. Chris Noth ( you know from Law and Order and Sex and the City) is the senior hack. Broadway star John Gallagher Jr. plays the hotshot Stephen. Stephen has the press in the palm of his hands. The banter goes back and forth. Noth takes up most of the space as the guy as gained a considerable amount of weight, he is much bigger than you may remember from TV. The chemistry doesn't work. The actors seem forced. Gallapher dominates the scene, Noth doesn't seem comfortable with that. Nevertheless, the scene works, because characters and conflicts are set up.

Everyone leaves except Stephen. Two things happen that set the story in motion. Stephen meets Molly. Molly is an attractive 19 year old intern. I wish that she wasn't an intern. I mean you know where this is going. An intern, come on! Molly is played by Olivia Thirlby. Olivia Thirlby couldn't look less like Monica Lewinsky, but her shadow is all around this character.

The second thing is that Stephen gets a phone call from the opposition in the Democratic Race. He meets this guy and doesn't tell his boss Noth. Stephen is asked to jumped ship. He told that the polls have been manipulated, and Stephen's candidate is not way ahead but in fact way behind. Stephen is conflicted and gives a tenuous "no!" Stephen goes back to the bar and screws the intern.

The next day, Stephen realizes that he has committed mutiny and confesses to his boss (Noth).

Stephen tries to make amends for his action, but things have changed. Shortly, knowledge of Stephens meeting is leaked to the New York Times reporter. He is confronted by the reporter. Now Stephen knows he in deep trouble. He tries to find out who screwed him. It seemed obvious to me that it was Noth. However, in the play, Stephen laboriously confronts everyone else but Noth. Until the lastly, Noth spills the beans.

This is a very good scene. Stephen is being a whinny little bitch. Noth plays it perfectly. He is the man. Watching the play you wonder what women see in Noth. He just looks an old fat guy. Here, though, he shows that he is a man's man.

Stephen goes backs and begs for the job on the other team, but they won't hire him. They just wanted Stephen out of the game. Either on their side or just out. It would look bad to hire him at this time under this heat. They knew that Noth was big on loyalty so they figured they would get Stephen or Noth would fire him. Stephen has just been screwed again.

He returns to his hotel room drunk and Molly, the intern, enters. After almost beating her. Stephen call the New York Times reporter from Molly's phone, and tells her about Molly and Noth. So, now everyone gets screwed.

In the very end, Noth is fired too, because of the scandal with the intern.

The play has excellent acting. A smart script full of bad words and fast double talk. The play obviously has more relevance before the Election. It does lack in overall story. It is a little predictable. Except for Noth's character there wasn't much character development. Olivia Thirlby plays exactly like she does in every film I have ever seen her in; that and the fact you never her face the audience directly was very disappointing. Still, it is very good, but it could have been much much better.

BryanSarkinen Wedding: http://www.bsarkinenwedding.com/

Bryan Sarkinen launched a new website (http://www.bsarkinenwedding.com/) to promote his wedding business. So how is it?

Well, it takes a while to load on my machine. The intro page, which is a bunch of little windows opening up to little wedding scene from Bryan's work, are numerous and distracting. This is a shame because if you look at Bryan's prices, they are quite reason, and a deal when you see their quality.

If you can get pass the the start of that mess, go to the video section using top navigation. On the side navigation you will see option to many different types of weddings that Bryan has shot and edited. This is the best part. These snippiest of wedding are a hollywood like production value and editing. Shot in digital video, the picture comes alive. You don't feel like you are watching someone's wedding, it feels like you are watching a movie. This is the best part to watch a wedding and not feel like you are. Bryan as a videographer captures those moments that grasp the excitement and beauty of the occasion. With smart editing, the final products is enjoyable to your college-age pal and to your mom.

The rest of the site provides a testimonials, a bio on Bryan Sarkinen, prices and contact details. The bio page lists many of Bryan works out side of Wedding Videos. There are too many projects to list here but you can go to the site it for yourself. What Bryan is demonstrating is that his lens goes beyond what you get with Videographers. So check it out here

Challenging (2008)

Challenging will probably grab a best director Oscar nomination if not Best Picture as well. This is a very good and racist picture that almost all credit goes to the director, Clint Eastwood.

Why racist? Because this movie is set in Los Angeles in 1928 and it is an all white cast. Los Angeles at the time had very high populations of Mexican-Americans and Chinese Americans. There is never a Chinese person shown once, and only time you see a hispanic is in police custody. There was a white influx into California after the Dust-Bowl and the Great Depression, but this movie predates that.

I doubt that most people will notice this but they should. As a true story, there should have been more of an effort to get the details right. There are many inaccuracies, such as showing Union Station and Los Angeles city hall when these structures were built in the 1930's. Not to mentions that these locations were built on Chinese neighborhoods and what was old Mexico at the time. This is where Charlie Chaplin filmed most of his early work.

The movie tells a story of a mother, Christine Collins played by Angelina Jolie, who son goes missing. Collins is a single mother. The LAPD brings a child a few months later that is not her child. They convince her that she is wrong, but that doesn't last for long. At the same the police are finding out about horrible crime that would be later know as the Wineville Chicken Coup murders.

The Wineville Chicken Coup murders was a heinous murder of young boys. Twenty boys were murdered, molested, killed and chopped up by a young man who would search for boys to kidnaped off the streets. The police stumbled on it when they picked up a kid who was wanted for being in the country illegally from Canada. He confessed, and his uncle was picked by Canadian law enforcement for the murders.

One of the boys who was said to be one of those killed was Walter Collins, the son of Christine Collins.

Interesting enough, Wineville has since changed its name to Mira Lomba, which is town over from where my Grandfather grew up. He was eight years old at the time. I told him, it was lucky that he wasn't picked up by this murderer. My grandfather failed to see any humor in that.

The movie goes further to tell the story of Christine Collins battle with the LAPD. By not accepting that the boy was hers the police put her in a mental institution, which was a common practice of the LAPD at the time, to commit women who challenged them.

Collins is helped by preacher played by John Malkovich, who is on a crusade to expose the LAPD for its abuses of power.

The movie takes us in the court room drama of two trails. One of the LAPD and the other of the murderer.

What the movie does best is to keep the audience involved in every scene. All the emotions are squeezed out of every scene. Every situation is rich, tense, and rewarding in its outcome no matter how horrible it is.

The director and writer do a very good job at exposing how people are manipulated and coerced. Christine Collins has one thing she wants, she wants her son back. Everyone can understand that. The LAPD detective twists and recasts that into every plausible situation to discredit her. It is so real and I have seen it so many offices. This part of the movie can be studied to understand this phenomena.

Angelina Jolie is interesting her. She makes you uncomfortable. There is something about her that does that. It keeps you awake and interested. The only time you feel you are seeing her as a real person is when she is going crazy at the asylum. She seems to have a hard time playing normal. She seems to be good in movies with a strong director and a strong cast, so that movie to goes on around her. Then her air of instability works to give the movie an edge. Tom Cruise does something similar.

If you see this film, remember that it is very long and emotionally draining.

Last Night (2008) by Moby

Last Night is Moby's best work since Play This work was released at the beginning of the year. It is surely one of the best album of the year.

If you are true fan of Moby going back to the early underground days in the early 90's, and you have stumbled across this review; you will probably see me as a poser. You would be right. I only got into Moby with Play, which I think is one of the best album of the nineties; up there with U2's Achtung Baby and Radiohead's OK, Computer. I never went back and really explored Moby's pre-Play works. I have been up-to-date since then though.

The cover looks like an American Apparel add. It is all 80's retro, except that the 1980's never had such high resolution digital pictures.

Moby gives his mission statement like he does with all his releases. This time Moby is trying to gives the listener a taste of what is was like going out in New York during his youth. He regales us with tales of sneaking out from his elitist Connecticut suburb and taking the Metro-North rail into the city on a school night during high school.

Moby a habitual night owl, continues to describe the surreal world of night. He gives a very sober account, but you wonder what he might have been on during those time, as raves are not known for being drug free.

Must Download:

ooh yeah
Disco Lies
the stars

Like most good Moby works, you don't hear him sing so much. There are loops of Black soul singers in much of the work. Some of it does remind you of previous releases. In the song live for tomorrrow reminds you of When its cold, I like to die, but this time the structure is much more sophisticated which leads to a beautiful ending.

Through much of the album I can't help feeling that I am listening to something new, but familiar. It has the uncomfortable feeling of something you like but are not used to. Your mind has to adjust. Once your ear adjusts, you're into it.

I find that this work doesn't go very well with the rest of CDs in my collection. Maybe this is because I have no 80's dance music that Moby's is trying re-interpret. I say "try" because this so NOT 80's music. It is more 90's retro than 80's. The song hyenas like his contemporaries Air, French Band, and there is something updated in here too.

Last Night would have made a perfect follow up to Play. Somehow tracks from this CD could have gone well next to The Strokes or The Killers.

In the end Moby sounds like Moby, and he does a very good job. He creates a very good album too.

Maybe Eminem is right that nobody listens to Techno, but maybe they should.