Recently in Media - General Category

Once upon a time, Hollywood was creatively bankrupt... again.  The year was 2011 and poor little Hollywood didn't know what kind of movies to make. 

The heads of the major studios (including Manka Bros. - the owner of OnMedea) knew that a film adaptation of the fairy tale "Alice In Wonderland" made over $1 billion at the box office in 2010 and said "That's a lot of money." 

So after much thought (or not), Hollywood decided to make EVERY FREAKING FAIRY TALE EVER WRITTEN INTO A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE!

Come on, really? 

Every day, I read about another studio doing another fairy tale adaption.  And all of them are a DARK, GRITTY version that the "19th century authors originally had in mind". 

Not a fluffy Hollywood squeaky clean version that doesn't scare our whimpy modern day kids - but a frightening and bloody tale like children used to experience when kids were tough and enjoyed waking up screaming from a horrifying nightmare because of the bedtime story they were read.


To be fair, I think it was a great idea to reimagine Red Riding Hood with a darker tone  - which is certainly fitting of the story.  And while the trailer looks like a cross between a perfume ad and Twilight, I still believe it's a solid original concept and should result in strong box office.  (I'll certainly be there opening weekend.) 

But then came a fairy tale adaptation tsunami (which includes 3 SNOW WHITES!) that has now completely flooded the town. 

Here's a sampling of what's coming up:

• Jack the Giant Killer (Warner Bros.) - a gritty modern day reimagining of the classic tale.

• The Brothers Grimm: Snow White (Relativity) - gritty reimagining starring Julia Roberts as the Wicked Queen.

• Snow White and The Huntsman (Universal) - gritty reimagining starring Charlize Theron as the Wicked Queen.

• Snow White and The Seven (Disney) - sweet, no gritty, set in 19th century China.

• Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (Paramount) - Starring Jeremy Renner, Gemma Arterton (and, no doubt, various star cameos), H&G are now accomplished bounty hunters out to get the witches who nearly killed them years before.

• Beastly (CBS Films) - Beauty & The Beast set in high school.  I don't expect much from this one as I've already predicted the death of CBS Films in a previous blog.

• Pinnochio 3D - a stop motion reimagining of the classic fairy tale.  Expect a very dark and disturbing retake on this one as it comes from the genius mind of Guillermo Del Toro.  I can already imagine losing sleep after I witness the stop motion, painful transformation of the children into donkeys sequence.

• Hey Diddle Diddle (Manka Bros.) - a grim reimagining of the classic bedtime ditty set during the 1930s in a Soviet Union gulag.  Why does the cow jump over the moon?  Freedom.

• Grimm (NBC) - Gritty TV cop drama set in a world where the characters of Grimm's Fairy Tales actually exist.
  

----------------------------------------------------------
And that's just in the next couple of years.  Just think if these projects make money what we'll see next:

• Pat the Bunny - set in a post-apocalyptic cannibalistic world.

• Rumpelstiltskin - featuring the beloved garden Gnomes from Gnomeo & Juliet in their first R-rated turn.

• If You Give A Mouse A Cookie - rewritten with darker twists and turns so that it ends in murder.

Etc. etc. etc.

And the sad reality is, I won't be able to take my five year old daughter to one of them because, if I did, she would wake up screaming in the middle of the night after witnessing Snow White disembowel one of the dwarfs (or something). 

But I guess these movies aren't made for her.  They're Fairy Tales - they're not made for children for Christ's sake.  They're made for the guys who go to Comic-Con.  And THEY lived happily ever after.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

I believe Groupon is headed for failure.

Even if they somehow survive, I fear they are doomed to be a company we all view with complete indifference.

I don't write this lightly.  I was amazed and sort of proud that they had the balls to turn down Google's $6 billion offer. 

Founders and senior management becoming fabulously wealthy excepted, there really is no upside to signing away your soul to a giant soulless corporation (take that Manka Bros.!) if you have a solid business or at least unique concept that absolutely cannot fail.

I was rooting for this upstart that had the guts to resist billions.  I signed up and started to get the daily deals that were offered - "40% off a facial ($75 value!)"; "Pay $10 for $20 worth of hair products (not my brand)", etc... these horrible "deals" kept coming and coming and I kept NOT BUYING.  Now I believe they should have sold. 

Groupon is not a terrible business - a little annoying, a notch above Spammer - but it's basically a business that pushes all this crap on people that they don't need (and from my experience, mostly stuff that I don't even want).  The brilliance they have is that they make you think you're getting these amazing deals and you'd better buy soon or they're gone forever.  Consumers will wise up to this fairly quickly.

Sure, millions are buying (with Groupon keeping well over 50% of the proceeds) and it's probably good for some of the small businesses that are participating (though I have heard of several disaster stories) - but it's really just a sexier online version of Valpak - those blue envelopes of local coupons that we all get in the mail and we mostly ignore.

If Groupon really wanted to add value to my life, they would offer "50% off my Trader Joe's bill"; "$5,000 off a 2011 Prius"; "$10 will get you $20 in cash", etc.  Things like that would be valuable to me.  I would buy those.  But Groupon can't offer these things because Trader Joe's and Toyota would be crazy to do it (and wouldn't even dream of it) and the shit Groupon actually has to offer isn't really... real.  It's just made up facts and figures to make you believe you're getting a great deal.

Let's say I own a Day Spa and offer $50 off a $300 massage.  What makes it a $300 massage?  I own the Spa, I set the price - there is no $50 value to be saved.  I could go to another spa and get a $50 massage and save $200 more than I would have buying the Groupon.  Groupon's genius is convincing consumers that they are saving money on these great services when, really, the cheapest option is NOT TO BUY GROUPONS.  That costs zero ($0) dollars.

And now, because the business model is so easy to replicate, I'm getting offers from Groupilicious, CouponYou, My Little Deuce Coupon, CouponDeville, Grouper With A Squeeze of Lemon, etc. and it will never stop because local businesses will always try to drum up sales by knocking 40% off a price that they set themselves.  Buy it wholesale, mark up the price 100%, offer a Groupon for 40% off - still make 20% on the sale.  It's not difficult.

Right now Groupon is sexy.  Even sexier after turning down Google.  They are hiring an army of MBAs in their 20s, everybody dresses down - it's a real startup mentality, it's Chicago, it's exciting.  Hell, an IPO is coming!

But I look into the future, and all I see is Valpak.  Ever been to a Valpak office?  Not sexy.  Not exciting.  No roller skates, no ping pong - the only perks there are 20% off bagels when you buy one dozen.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

What is it going to take for TBS (or any other Basic Cable channel) to get a little respect? 

I watched the premiere week of Conan and thought it was fine and exactly what I expected (which is a slight disappointment, right?).  (Also, why was it on at 10pm on DirecTV when every advertisement in the world says 11pm?... but I digress.)

The one thing that did stand out was the constant bashing of TBS and Basic Cable in general (I know it is a joke, I get it - I also got it in 1985 when the Basic Cable jokes started).  But times have changed.

I was a proponent of Conan leaving NBC and for Jeff Zucker to be fired for many MANY reasons (including the handling of the Jay/Conan affair and for having anything to do with Ben Silverman.  Please, someone wash everything Ben touched, it's filthy!).

But, I must say, I'm disappointed with the way Conan has handled the transition to TBS.  It was a very difficult decision, I'm sure, but why bash your new home?

Why is Basic Cable still struggling for any sort of respect?

It's all very reminiscent of the scene from "Goodfellas" with Billy Batts (Frank Vincent) and Tommy DeVito (Joe Pesci) in the bar.  Imagine Billy Batts is the "Broadcast Networks" and Tommy DeVito is "Basic Cable":

Basic Cable:  No more shines, Broadcast Networks.
Broadcast Networks:  What?
Basic Cable:  I said, no more shines.  Maybe you didn't hear about it, you've been away a long time.  I don't shine shoes anymore.
Broadcast Networks:  Relax, will ya?  Ya flip out, what's got into you?  I'm breaking your balls a little bit, that's all.  I'm only kidding with ya...
Basic Cable:  Sometimes you don't sound like you're kidding, you know, there's a lotta people around...
Broadcast Networks:  I'm only kidding with you.  I'm breaking your balls, and you're getting fucking fresh.  I'm sorry.  I didn't mean to offend you.
Basic Cable:  I'm sorry, too.  It's okay.  No problem.
Broadcast Networks:  Now go home and get your fuckin' shinebox!
Basic Cable:  Mother fuckin' mutt!  You fucking piece of shit!

If you remember the movie, Tommy then kicked and stabbed Billy about a thousand times, threw him in the trunk of his car and buried him in some disgusting pit.  I'm not saying Basic Cable will completely bury the Broadcast Networks - but it seems to be headed that general direction - so Broadcast Networks had better cut it out with the "shinebox attitude".

And seriously, to watch Conan, you would think the year is 1985 and the only programming on TBS was really bad VHS copies of really bad 1970s movies and a few Body By Jake infommercials.

This is 2010 and Basic Cable Channels are a key driver and profit center helping to keep the Hollywood machine afloat. 

So how about a little respect, Conan?  I know you're only getting $10 million from that suckass TBS that gives you "no budget" (other than a very large one) but come on!

And are you taping this show from some local station in Palmdale or in a very nice soundstage on a very nice Burbank studio lot?  And do you have one blimp to promote your show or zero blimps?

And the last I checked, Mad Men on AMC (Basic Cable) won the Emmy for Best Drama; TBS just paid upwards of $2 million/episode for Big Bang Theory (among others); and the ACE Awards (which was a popular punchline for comedians about FIFTEEN YEARS AGO) haven't been on the air for FIFTEEN YEARS!

I would also argue that with its scripted reruns and movies, TBS and the other top Basic Cable Channels have better daytime programming than any of the Broadcast Station Groups (unless you like Judge shows) and the primetime lineups are equally as creative and catching up in the ratings. 

In fact, Broadcast Networks are deep into the 5 Stages of Grief from "On Death and Dying" - and they have been in denial about Basic Cable for years.  Retrans is one final pathetic attempt to stay competitive.

So, Conan, I'm sorry you are stuck on lowly TBS when all your life you dreamed of being on NBC (now worth negative $690 million on NBC Universal's balance sheet) - but the truth is, in today's media environment, it's not which channel you are on but the programming you produce.  

Remember, even a show shot in a shack in Palmdale can be relevant (and widely seen) today.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

P.S. - Why doesn't anyone ever bash MTV for being "Basic Cable"?  Just wondering.

There... that should guarantee about 10,000 hits on this entry.  I originally wanted to call it "Y Combinator Is A Bullshit Idea" (which would have guaranteed about 20,000 hits) but the ads on the side wouldn't have displayed due to the "bullshit" in the title.

So, I just read the Christopher Steiner article "The Disruptor In The Valley" at Forbes.com (which is about Paul Graham and his company Y Combinator) and my immediate thought was of that exchange from "The Simpsons" (Season 12 - Episode 9) when Homer is undergoing medical experiments for money.  He tries an appetite suppressant:

HOMER:  "I'm BLIND!"
SCIENTIST #1:  "Who's gonna buy a pill that makes you blind?"
SCIENTIST #2:  "We'll let marketing worry about that!"

Y Combinator is basically offering Silicon Valley a pill that makes them blind (but marketing will fix it). 

They offer a little bit cash to grab a whole lot of equity in all these tiny start-ups - most which are not even close to being ready for that kind of exposure (or financial decision). 

However, with the right spin, PR and influence behind them, they (apparently) ARE ready for the additional money that others might throw their way (for another giant chunk of equity)... if they can manage to get through the summer YC bootcamp.

It's like the YouTube star who gets a shot on "The Big Bang Theory" and can barely speak because they're so nervous and then find out they have no acting skills whatsoever.

This is not to say that there aren't a whole lot of geniuses out there with a lot of great ideas.  There are.  Most are smarter than me (but not as smart as Khan Manka, Jr.). 

But these geniuses (and mostly non-geniuses, let's be serious) are being exploited by Paul Graham and company and tossed to these VC wolves who will eat through many a carcass to get to the next Facebook (which I think is Worthless, by the way). 

(Also Digg is dead - R.I.P. - so is Electus and Comic-Con but I digress....) 

But much like the screenwriter in Los Angeles who will pay people to read their script because they "work at a studio", the chances of success in one of these cattle call models is virtually zero.

As a quick primer, allow me a paragraph (from Wikipedia) to explain Y Combinator to those who may not know what it is:

Y Combinator is an American seed-stage startup funding firm, started in 2005 by Paul Graham, Robert Morris, Trevor Blackwell, and Jessica Livingston.  Y Combinator provides seed money, advice, and connections at 3-month programs.  In exchange, they take an average of about 6% of the company's equity. 

Compared to other startup funds, Y Combinator provides very little money ($17,000 for startups with two founders and $20,000 for those of three or more).  This reflects Graham's theory that between free software, dynamic languages, the web, and Moore's Law, the cost of founding a startup has greatly decreased.

In other words, throw a bunch of shit on the wall and see what sticks. 

Great for Paul Graham and company, I suppose (based on his theory, Y Combinator would have gotten $20,000 from Y Combinator), but terrible for almost all of those thousands who apply to his program every year just in the hope of getting the YC stamp of approval (and 60 lbs of chili)  - which supposedly means a lot to VCs and Angel Investors in Silicon Valley.

So Y Combinator is a Venture Capitalist that funds your start-up so that your start-up can get funded by another Venture Capitalist. 

Enough with these f-ing VCs, man. 

Whatever happened to creating a company, becoming successful and growing it based on that initial success.  Success because you have a product that people really (REALLY) want. 

Thousands of techies are just sitting around coffee shops and cafes in all the "Silicon Valleys of the world" trying to think up new ideas that Paul Graham (and others like him) might like.  Not because it's an idea that the start-up founder actually believes in anymore - but because it's one that might get funding. 

I mean, fuck passion, right?  These days it's not whether your company succeeds or fails, it's whether it gets funded in the first place and a mention on TechCrunch.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

Dear Peter Jackson,

Please eat. 

I've been speaking to some fanboys (and girls) and they OVERWHELMINGLY would prefer that a fat Peter Jackson directs "The Hobbit" rather than the less creative skinny Peter Jackson. 

With the Holidays coming up, there is plenty of opportunity for you to pack on at least 50 pounds before film production begins next year. 

Based on the great sacrifice your country has made to make sure 'The Hobbit' is made in New Zealand, there is a lot at stake.  The least you can do is have a few extra helpings of lasagna and eggnog to ensure that the finished product is more "Lord of the Rings" and less "Lovely Bones".

Craft Services is your friend - less salad and more empty calories, please (Red Vines and donuts are good).  And alcohol.  Lots of alcohol.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

P.S. - And start wearing your glasses again!

For Broadcast Networks, the end is coming and it's time for them to Accept their fate.

This isn't to say ABC, CBS, FOX, MBS, NBC, Univision and The CW (and similar Broadcast Networks around the world) are going away.  They'll just have to transform into one of the million other "Channels" out there - high profile Channels with good programming and production values - but still just another button on the Great Media Grid like ESPN, TNT, USA, Oxygen, Justin.tv (indeed), YouTube, etc.

According to a model developed by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross in her 1969 book "On Death and Dying", there are Five Stages of Grief. 

Over the past 20 years or so, Broadcast Networks have bounced around the First Four Stages in an effort to fight off the inevitable:

1.  Denial:  Broadcast Networks will always be the only place to reach a large audience.  We don't see that ever going away.  No one is going to watch the shit they make on Cable.  It's nothing but George Foreman Grill infomercials and drunken Jackass teenagers riding their bikes into traffic.

2.  Anger:  It's just not right!  They make such crap on Basic Cable.  How are they pulling in more advertising than us?!  I don't give a shit about the ratings of "Jersey Shore", the content on Broadcast Networks is far superior and always will be.  Goddamnit!  And don't you dare mention that fucking "Mad Men" to me again!  And Hell will freeze over before we ever produce a series for that inferior platform  There's no syndication value.  It's bullshit!

3.  Bargaining:  The playing field is not level.  It's not fair.  We really need you cable and satellite operators to pay us to retransmit our signal.  Don't forget - we're the Broadcast Networks.  If you give us two revenue streams, we'll give you really great programming with high ratings and advertising rates that are healthy for everyone.  Don't you realize there is only one place to reach a large audience?

4.  Depression:  Remember when Saturday night was the greatest night on television - when three networks (and three network Presidents) controlled every household?  Everyone had incredible line-ups.  It will never be that good again.  Thursday night used to be a place where advertisers needed us to launch a new movie or car or department store sales.  Those were the days.  Oh well, at least we still have our beach houses and court side basketball seats.

5.  Acceptance:  It's going to be okay.  It's not so bad to be equated with TBS.  I mean, they have Conan O'Brien now.  They are sort of like a Broadcast Network.  And we're still bigger than most of the other Channels.  And we'll get the Super Bowl back one day (after ESPN and The Food Network have their turns).  It's all good.

--------------------------------

The death of Broadcast Networks may not happen in the next five years but it IS going to happen and the sooner we put them out of their misery and end that painful decline, the faster the industry can heal and begin to grow again. 

Make no mistake, nothing can be done to save Broadcast Networks.  It's an old concept in a new world. 

For old school TV executives and their Madison Avenue chronies who are accustomed to lavish Upfront Presentations at Carnegie Hall, Madison Square Garden and the International Space Station, it's time to just let it go.  The Days of Wine and Roses and Fine Dining and Muffin Baskets are over.

Broadcast Network defenders (yes, Les Moonves, this means you) are becoming pathetic.  Face the facts, ESPN and Google are more valuable than CBS.  It may not seem fair - but there are many new Sheriffs in town.   Remember, if  you're in a business where single-digit drops in viewers is the New Growth, your business sucks.

So what are the Broadcast Networks supposed to do next?  Very simple.  Just accept equal footing (two revenue streams - subscription and advertising - enough with this silly Retrans business that no one can understand) and continue to run your business as just another Channel on the Grid. 

In the future (and it's coming), with a channel lineup grid that will be sorted Alphabetically and not by "importance" or "size" (and will include TV channels, websites and whatever else comes up) programming is, as it always has been, King . 

And may the best programmer win.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

Remember, whichever side you are on in this debate, Juan Williams had TWO JOBS during the worst economy since the Great Depression when so many people out there can't even get ONE JOB. 

I think it was good of NPR to fire Juan Williams if only for the simple fact that they can now hire an out of work Political Commentator who can get off the public dole.

Interesting that Fox News would reward a guy with a $2 million dollar contract who basically said that Muslims who are dressed as their religion requires(!!) make him nervous on an airplane. 

Juan Williams perfectly fits the mold of the "Fox News Liberal".

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea 

Lesson #1:  If Google offers you $200 million for a business that has no real focus or vision - TAKE IT.

Lesson #2:  If the due diligence doesn't back up a $200 million valuation and someone else offers you $80 million - TAKE IT.

Lesson #3:  If you ignore Lessons #1 and #2 and decide to redesign your very popular (but unprofitable) website - MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T SUCK.

Lesson #4:  If the redesign of the website sucks and the entire world complains - DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

Lesson #5:  If Lesson #4 is ignored and senior management continues to party like its 2006, YOUR COMPANY IS DYING.

Lesson #6:  If your company is dying and you don't have the cure, LET IT DIE WITH DIGNITY AND START OVER.

I'm afraid we're at Lesson #6. 

DIGG IS DEAD - R.I.P.

If only the Business Week cover from 2006 were true.

While many of the employees of Digg will find it difficult to start over, the founders and senior management team probably will not.  Especially Kevin Rose, who is an early investor in Twitter and Zynga.  So don't cry for dude.  Dude is fine.

Now I've Dugg many stories over the years - mostly an endless link-fest of Slide Shows and Superhero complaints - but it's time to move on. 

I suppose I'll just have to "Like" instead of "Digg" (until Facebook becomes worthless - and they are on that path!).  After that, I'll probably have to "Shout Out" or "Yeah, Baby" or whatever other little button some company wants me to click whenever I like the new taste of Coke Zero.

"Digg" was cool and nobody can take 2006-2008 away from you guys.  That was your time!

So long Kevin, Matt and Jay - who cares if you're not Billionaires?  Remember, Millionaires can still get chicks and buy drinks at any bar in the world.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

Sorry geeks.  Sorry freaks.  Gone are the dreams and dancing (well, not really 'dancing' - I forgot who I was writing about).  Comic-Con is dead.

And I know right now there are hundreds of Dr. Who and Stargate Universe marathons going on in anticipation of this or that panel discussion, but, face it, it's over.  The cool dorks know it's true.  The rest will find out soon enough.

And it's not really your fault that Comic-Con is dead.  Unlike the whacked out kids in "Final Destination", you DIDN'T see it coming.  Hollywood, with its truckloads of swag and sizzle reels, just steamrolled you and took control of YOUR EVENT (this includes my own parent company - Manka Bros. Studios - The World's Largest Media Company and Manka Bros. Publishing's MC Comics). 

It's really sad but your beautiful 'Woodstock of Geekdom' has been crushed by the evil empire of big media. 

I know you thought you dictated the terms and still think Hollywood needs your approval before going forward with a new comic book movie or TV show but, the truth is, you need Hollywood more than they need you. 

It's sort of like how you thought you and the cheerleader in high school would start dating because she was nice while you helped her get ready for a test.  After the test was over, and she passed, it was right back to the quarterback and she didn't even remember your name.  The cheerleader is Hollywood.

The problem is, the cheerleader knows that all she has to do is smile and you will be right back on board - helping her with the next test. 

Don't take the bait anymore geeks!  Rise up and stop helping the cheerleader with HER homework! 

If Hollywood thinks it can get a good write up on your blog because they send Jessica Alba down to do body shots with you - they have another thing coming!

So here's what needs to be done.  Kill Comic-Con and go back to the church basement (or wherever) to whence it started and, like the best of the comic book origin stories, begin again.  Rebirth. 

Start your little A/V club from scratch and this time DON'T INVITE THE CHEERLEADERS!  They don't want to be there anyway.  It's totally messing up their summer vacations.

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea

Being a member of the fringe press, I have no idea how many people attended the Herb Allen Sun Valley Retreat last week and I certainly don't know a complete gender breakdown - but from everything I've seen in the press (including from the blogs written by my mogul boss, Khan Manka, Jr., from inside the event), there were very very very few women represented.

By my count, there were three (and two were from Xerox - Ursula Burns and Anne Mulcahy [retired]) and only one, Sheryl Sandberg got any sort of attention at all. 

And, no, mogul wives don't count.

[If Allen & Co. can please email me an invited guest list, I'll be happy to post an update with other names.]

Yes, Facebook is the hot company of the moment with a giant spotlight on senior management, but (and we all know this is a Hollywood / New York / Silicon Valley problem and not a Herb Allen problem) this was a pretty pathetic effort no matter the situation. 

This is not to slight the accomplishments of Sheryl Sandberg.  I have a great admiration for her (even though I think she's on a sinking ship).

"The Women In Technology" panel (moderated by Tom Brokaw) must have been fascinating.  Perhaps it was set up as a way to inform the white male moguls that there are 'Women in Technology'.  Who knew?

Here's hoping that next year I can report on "The WOMEN of Sun Valley".

Jill Kennedy - OnMedea