Miley Cyrus in Vanity Fair – so what?

Allow me to stray from my usual meanderings for a moment to the media storm du jour – Miley Cyrus’ so-called “racy” photo in the June 2008 issue Vanity Fair.

miley cyrus The photo that has everyone up-in-arms is shown to the right. First of all, let me say that I don’t really like it. There’s something weird with her make-up I think. Maybe it’s because I like blondes, or maybe it’s because Miley is only fifteen years old, but I’d rather look at Lindsay or perhaps Keira and Scarlett. Vanity Fair has definitely produced some excellent stuff over the years.

I don’t see what the big deal is with this photo, yet everyone is yammering on about how it sets a bad example. And of course, Miley and her handlers are playing the blame game. Here are some things to consider:

Since when do tweens read Vanity Fair? I realize the photo is splashed all over the place now, but seriously, it’s not like she posed topless on the Disney Channel or anything. Parents, do your jobs.
She now says she’s embarrassed? Disney says she was manipulated to sell magazines? Bullshit to both. I have to believe Whoopi – everyone knew what was going on. These sorts of things don’t just happen by mistake.
Vanity Fair will likely sell a ton of magazines thanks to this shoot. They’re also not hiding anything – they’ve put a behind-the-scenes section online, and a video of the shoot.

Here is what Miley originally said when asked if she was “anxious” about the photo:

No, I mean I had a big blanket on. And I thought, This looks pretty, and really natural. I think it’s really artsy.

And here’s what she said in a prepared statement:

I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be ‘artistic’ and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed. I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about.

I feel sorry for Miley – her “handlers” are now telling her to say things she doesn’t mean. They should have supported her instead.

miley cyrus And here’s my biggest question of all – how come no one has a problem with the second photo, of Miley and her Dad? In my opinion, that’s a much more disturbing photo. If you didn’t know any better, would you look at that and think, “oh what a lovely father-daughter photo”? I sure wouldn’t.

I wanted to post this so that I can look back on it one day when I’m a father, to see if my opinion has changed at all. At the moment, I have no issue with the photo. I think it’s up to Miley’s parents to ensure she is comfortable with the shoot, and it’s up to the parents of her fans to make sure they set a good example, talk with their kids, and not leave their copy of the magazine lying around the house. Just my two cents.

By the way, I dedicate this post to Justice, the biggest Miley fan I know! 😉

Read: Vanity Fair

2008 Mayor's Celebration of the Arts

mayor's evening for the arts On Monday night I attended the 21st annual Mayor’s Celebration of the Arts at the Winspear Centre downtown. The annual event features performances by members of Edmonton’s arts community, and awards to celebrate the individuals who helped to make Edmonton the Cultural Capital of Canada. I came across it a couple months ago when I noticed that Teatro La Quindicina would be performing. Sharon and I are both fans, so we decided to buy tickets.

We paid $25 to sit in the front row of the Upper Circle level. The gallery (top level) was filled with students who were sponsored by Epcor and other businesses. The main level seemed to be full of representatives from sponsor organizations, the award nominees, and their friends and family. The reason I mention all this is that we got the distinct feeling we were among the few who actually paid out-of-pocket for tickets. Apparently attendance was up this year though.

The inside page of the event programme contained this message from Mayor Stephen Mandel. I quite like it (wonder if he wrote it, guessing not) so I’ve included it here in its entirety:

Take a bow, if you make your living in the arts – you give us the kind of City we want to live in. You make us laugh and think and smile and marvel and tap-our-toes, and you contribute to our great quality-of-life.

Take a bow, if you’ve supported the arts. Businesses, individuals, groups and volunteers – you’re vital in making sure our Creative Community flourishes so that great quality-of-life continues.

And take a bow if you’ve bought a ticket to be part of an audience. It gives you license to be a critic and a fan – and it ensures that even when we pass the title to another city, Edmonton will continue to be “Canada’s Cultural Capital”.

On-stage, on-screen, in theatres and cafes, out on our streets and in our concert halls, it’s a privilege to live in a City that’s bursting with so much creativity. And a privilege too, to be part of a City that’s filled with those who invest in and support it.

Congratulations to everyone who’s part of Edmonton’s professional arts community – and everyone who supports it.

The event was emceed by Peter Brown from CBC Edmonton, and Carrie Doll from CTV Edmonton. They did a great job, and Peter was especially funny! I found the most boring part of the show to be the awards. You can view the list of winners here (PDF).

The performances were what I really went to see. Kita No Taiko, Renee Brad of the Edmonton Opera, Red Power Squad, Brian Webb Dance Company, Samantha Schultz, Teatro La Quindicina, and Le Fuzz all performed. My favorites were definitely Red Power Squad, Samantha Schultz, and Teatro. The final performance by Le Fuzz was pretty cool too, as many of the attendees got up on stage and started dancing, including the mayor himself.

Not sure if I’d attend every year, but the Mayor’s Celebration of the Arts is definitely a great way to sample the variety offered by Edmonton’s art scene.

Movies on flash memory cards

movies A couple days ago I came across this article at CNET News.com about a company called PortoMedia and their plan to make movies available on flash memory cards. I’ve touched on the subject before, but for a different reason that PortoMedia seems to be interested (I was interested in the small form factor). They see flash memory cards as an alternative to Internet delivery:

PortoMedia is setting up kiosks that will let consumers download movies to a flash memory key or portable hard drive.

The kiosks will be packed with hard drives that can hold 350 to 5,000 titles. Users then plug in a memory device from the company, enter a PIN code, and buy or rent a movie. When consumers get home, they simply slide the memory device into a dock connected to a TV.

Evidently they have come up with a proprietary USB interface that can load a high-definition movie onto the memory card in less than 45 seconds. There are some big advantages to this model:

Reduced cost as packaging and shipping associated with DVDs is no longer required
More selection – you aren’t limited by shelf space with a kiosk like Blockbuster is
It can happen sooner than Internet delivery (because most of us still have fairly crappy connections)

Sadly, but not unexpectedly, the company plans to use DRM from Microsoft to protect the movies.

PortoMedia did a trial run last year, and plans to go live with the service in four U.S. cities sometime in Q2 2008.

Read: CNET News.com

Two Years of Xbox 360, Five Years of Xbox Live

It was two years ago today that I lined up at Best Buy very early in the morning to be among the first to snag the Xbox 360 gaming console. So, happy birthday Xbox 360! Kind of hard to believe it has been that long.

Last Thursday was another anniversary – the fifth for Xbox Live! It’s even harder to believe the service has been around that long – it launched exactly a year after the original Xbox console. My latest article at last100 examines Xbox Live:

Xbox Live started out as a multiplayer gaming network, but today the 8 million users with Live accounts do much more than just play games. Users can download movies and television shows, chat with friends, and more. Even Microsoft now describes the service as a “comprehensive unified online entertainment network”. Marketing-speak at its finest, but it’s true – Xbox Live is a key component of Microsoft’s connected entertainment vision. In this post we look at the state of Xbox Live today, and explore some of the ways Microsoft will likely enhance it in the future.

Give it a read, and let me know what you think!

Read: last100

Radiohead shows us the music industry of the future

radiohead

What if you could set the price for an album you wanted to purchase? Wouldn’t it be great to have the ability to spend $5 to check out a new band, and $25 for a band you absolutely love? It might happen sooner than you think, with Radiohead leading the charge:

As expected, Radiohead has gone an unusual route for distribution of its seventh studio album, “In Rainbows.” The set will be available for digital download from the band’s Web site beginning Oct. 10, but with a twist — fans can name their own price for the purchase. “It’s up to you,” reads a disclaimer on the checkout screen.

Make no mistake, this is a big deal. Radiohead is obviously a very successful band with a huge fan base which allows them to experiment like this, but dammit someone has to. It might as well be Radiohead. I’ve written about making the music free before, and I’m glad to now see some action.

Techdirt notes that there is more to the story, in that Radiohead is also offering a “discbox” for $80 USD that contains the album on CD and vinyl, along with an additional CD with seven tracks, plus photos, artwork, and lyrics.

In this case, Radiohead isn’t really selling the “music.” After all, you can get that for free. They’re selling the full collection of stuff that comes with the music. Funny how it’s the musicians, and not the record labels, who seem to realize that adding value and getting people to pay for it is a business model that beats suing fans.

This is really cool. Music fans everywhere should be extremely happy about this giant leap forward! There’s more great stuff on the story at Boing Boing.

Read: Billboard

10 Reasons For Simultaneous Movie Releases

In my humble opinion, the way movies are released today sucks. First they hit the theatres, then DVDs, then video-on-demand services, and finally television. The movie studios really like these different release windows for some reason. Why not release movies to all of these distribution channels at once? It makes a lot of sense to me. The hottest item during the Xmas shopping season in 2006 was probably HDTVs, and I suspect it will remain a big seller this year and next. Watching new releases like Spider-Man 3 in the comfort of my own home sounds very appealing.

The idea is finally being explored:

Comcast is trying to make the “simultaneous release” dream happen, but with prices being proposed in the $30-50 range per screening, the dream looks more like a Hollywood acid trip.

Yeah, that price simply isn’t going to fly. The article includes a bunch of really great analysis, so check it out.

Here are ten reasons why I think the “simultaneous release” dream needs to happen (in no particular order):

Drinks and snacks at the theatre are horribly overpriced – talk about price gouging. Not to mention the cost of gas to get from your house to the theatre! I’d rather eat the food I already have in the house, thanks.
There aren’t any crying kids, cell phones, or other distractions in my house. Oh and my floors aren’t sticky either.
I don’t like being forced to sit through fifteen minutes of commercials before the movie previews start. It makes seeing a 90 minute movie a two hour experience (and that’s assuming you don’t line up to get good seats).
Many people have invested thousands of dollars into a comfortable home theatre system – simultaneous releases let them make the most of it.
Hollywood would make more money. Increased sales and reduced marketing expenses.
Pause! You should control the viewing experience, not the theatre. Want to pause for a few minutes? Go for it.
We’ll get better quality movies. Instead of making only movies that are likely to do well at the box office, Hollywood would be free to make all kinds of movies with each one being widely accessible.
Theatre owners would be forced to revisit their business. Why do we go to the theatre? I think “to see a movie” is a secondary reason. The primary reason is to socialize. Perhaps theatres will come up with a better overall experience when their backs are against the wall.
Independent and other small movie studios would play on the same field as the big boys. Remember all the trouble Mel Gibson had to go through to get The Passion of the Christ released in theatres? It wouldn’t have been such an issue in a world with simultaneous releases.
Control over the volume. Control over the temperature. No parking necessary. You can lay down if you want. Etc.

Anything else? I think it’s only a matter of time until the simultaneous release becomes the norm.

Movie Piracy? Blame Canada!

Looks like the “our business model sucks so let’s insult our customers” mantra has made it to the desks of Warner Bros. executives. If you’ve never been to an advance movie screening, too bad, because they are now banned for Warner Bros. movies in Canada:

Frustrated with unauthorized camcording of its new releases in Canadian cinemas, the studio said it will immediately halt all “promotional and word-of-mouth screenings” of upcoming releases.

“We regret having to cancel our screenings in Canada, but our studio must take steps to protect not only our branded assets but our commitment to our filmmakers and to our distributors,” Warner Bros. president of domestic distribution Dan Fellman said.

I can honestly say that were I to download a movie that was recorded using a camcorder in a theatre, I would immediately delete it. Not because I am sleeping with movie studio executives, but because a movie recorded using a camcorder just can’t look very good. Any serious pirate will have the time and bandwidth to go for quality!

When will these idiots learn? Camcorders in Canada are not the source of piracy. I doubt the practice has any measurable effect on the movie industry at all. Mathew Ingram points out a number of flaws with the argument being made, and Engadget gets a dig in too, noting the ban affects upcoming movies like…

…the upcoming Ocean’s Thirteen and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, which’ll surely not be pirated now.

Surely not indeed! Come back next week to read about Warner Bros. suing toddlers and their grandparents!

Read: Reuters

Get ready for Spider-Man 4, 5, and 6

I went to see Spider-Man 3 last night, and I enjoyed it. I think the critics were unnecessarily harsh (though not harsh enough to make it rotten). It’s like they all met in the back room and decided to call the movie “a disappointment.” With a few minor exceptions, I thought Spider-Man 3 was even better than the second movie.

There is a particular villain who really should have its own movie, so I wouldn’t be sad to see them make another installment in the Spider-Man series. If you believe the chief executive of Sony Pictures though, they’ll be making more than just another one:

Sony Pictures chief executive Michael Lynton told the BBC: “Everybody has every intention of making a fourth, a fifth and a sixth and on and on.”

There would be “as many as we can make good stories for”, he pledged.

That is kind of exciting to hear, but you have wonder if fans will get tired of Spider-Man movies at some point. Or more importantly, if the actors will get tired of the movies!

He probably said that because Spider-Man 3 has broken both the opening day and opening weekend North American box office records, bringing in $148 million (do they not count Sunday as part of the opening weekend, or what?). It’ll be interesting to see if it can hang on to that record with Shrek 3 and Pirates 3 coming out later this month.

Don’t listen to the critics, Spider-Man 3 is definitely worth going to see.

Read: BBC

Stop the madness – abolish DRM!

Has DRM (digital rights management) ever accomplished anything positive? I find it really hard to believe that DRM has increased sales of music, movies, or any other protected content. In fact, I’d bet it has had the exact opposite effect. Just mentioning the acronym brings nothing but negative thoughts to mind.

I think it’s only a matter of time until DRM is gone. Steve Jobs doesn’t want DRM. EMI is willing to forget about DRM. And yesterday, thousands of online citizens proclaimed in a unified voice that they do not want DRM either. The writing is on the wall. The only question now is when DRM will disappear.

I can’t say it any better than Cory Doctorow:

AACS took years to develop, and it has been broken in weeks. The developers spent billions, the hackers spent pennies.

Instead of spending billions on technologies that attack paying customers, the studios should be confronting that reality and figuring out how to make a living in a world where copying will get easier and easier. They’re like blacksmiths meeting to figure out how to protect the horseshoe racket by sabotaging railroads.

The railroad is coming. The tracks have been laid right through the studio gates. It’s time to get out of the horseshoe business.

In the past, movie studios and record labels had to worry about content and distribution, but no longer. It’s clear now that distribution doesn’t need a helping hand. The sooner the studios and labels figure that out and stop wasting money on it, the better it’ll be for all of us.

Read: BoingBoing

Make the music free and sell the show

Chris Anderson’s post today at The Long Tail is about the music industry and provides a really good analysis of what should be happening with music. Essentially, bands should give the music away for free and make their money on live shows. He explains:

Music as a digital product enjoys near-zero costs of production and distribution–classic abundance economics. When costs are near zero, you might as well make the price zero, too, something thousands of bands have figured out.

He points out that the average price for a ticket increased 8% last year, reflecting demand. Indeed the fastest growing part of the music industry is live performances, up 16% in 2006 in North America.

And don’t think that live shows are not profitable. They are extremely profitable for the artists, just not for the record labels. Chris includes a list of the top ten grossing touring bands of 2006 – and their numbers total a truly astounding $970.3 million.

I say – goodbye record labels, hello free music and awesome not-free shows!

Read: The Long Tail

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: