Chopping Up Truth In Media Since 2009
Two very popular websites and what they posted at exactly 3:00 PM Pacific time today (October 2nd).
The real question going into the debates tomorrow isn’t who will win – Obama or Romney? (FYI, Fox News has already declared Mitt Romney the winner.)
The real question is which website will be able to bring down the candidate they hate before November 6th?
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Hawk Koch was named President of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences today.
Like his aggressive name suggests, this is a bold choice from an extremely bold organization.
To have the balls to choose the old media film producer son of an old media Hollywood mogul is the kind of cutting edge change necessary to keep AMPAS relevant.
I have a feeling this is going to be one of the greatest years in the history of the Academy.
Here’s what we can expect:
… and on and on.
Very exciting stuff.
Glad to see the giant vacuum bubble that was put in place over Beverly Hills in order to keep fresh ideas out is still secure.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
P.S. – Now I can see why my boss, Khan Manka, Jr., has such a problem with the organization.
Today is a big day for FB:NASDAQ.
The first earnings release after a pretty crappy IPO.
Needless to say, earnings and guidance must destroy expectations.
This is important for everyone who has a stake in the company – from those who had blind faith in the IPO and bought whatever meager shares they could, to the early investor billionaires and millionaires who were counting on a lot more than they’ve received thus far (greed’s a real pisser), to all the Facebook employees that have lost a bit of their swagger (and future riches) over the last couple of months.
In fact, Silicon Valley as a whole has lost its swagger a bit because of this IPO flop.
A blow-out earnings report would allow all those who were doubted and shunned to say “nah nah nah nah naaaah – told you so – we rock you suck, etc.”
Which makes me wonder, if, indeed, this is a blow-out earnings report despite what many analysts are predicting (consensus: not a blow-out), should the numbers be believed?
Is there a temptation by management and the number crunchers to goose things a bit for this very important first earnings report? Juggle some things. Move stuff around – make it up later. I’m sure they feel they’re smart enough to get around that little “random regulatory audit thing.”
They’ve got millions of made-up users – why not millions of made-up dollars?
There must be that temptation, right? I mean, how much could the SEC fine be in the scheme of things?
I’m sure the immediate reaction to such a wild, speculative (and probably fictional) premise is – “I’m shocked! Â How dare you presume that Facebook – with its long history of supreme ethics and outstanding morals would even dream of such a thing?”
Maybe it’s just me.
But if we hear on Thursday that there are now over 1 billion users – I’m just not going to believe it (especially when you take out the 200-300 million users that are either animals, aliases or fictional characters).
If they say that people are spending more time than ever on Facebook – I’m just not going to believe it.
If we hear on Thursday that advertising on Facebook has never been better and will continue to grow into 2013 – I’m just not going to believe it.
It is Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg’s job on Thursday is to convince us that things are awesome and getting ‘awesomer’ every day.  And when they say that, I am not going to believe it.
But, truth be told, I am not the most bullish person when it comes to Facebook.
After all, I did write “Facebook And The Disappearing Valuation (A Fairy Tale),” and “Facebook Is Worthless,” and “Facebook Must Be Stopped,” and “All The Facebook’s Men,” and “Advertise On Facebook And Reach More People Than 10 Super Bowls,” and “Facebook To Reach 7.3 Billion Users By 2015,” and “Y Combinator Is a Stupid Idea” (I just threw in that last one for fun).
But you do have to wonder – it is soooooo important NOT to disappoint and pressure is coming from everywhere to make sure that they don’t.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
SCREAMING BUY!
YHOO is headed for $50/share.
Marissa Mayer is a perfect choice.
Great for Yahoo!
Great for Silicon Valley.
It’s a stunning move – completely shocking and unexpected.
If you’re worried about her pregnancy – then shame on you.
Her pregnancy makes me even more bullish on the stock.
Marissa is going to make this work and no one should question it (especially the loser stock holders who, for some reason, were holding Yahoo! stock before this announcement).
I, frankly, didn’t think the Yahoo! Board had the cojones to make such a choice.
Well done.
And next year, at Herb Allen’s Sun Valley Conference crap-fest for moguls, there will be a new Woman of Sun Valley (sorry Sheryl Sandberg).
And if, for whatever reason, things don’t work out (very small chance), Ms. Mayer can take comfort that like her predecessors Scott Thompson, Jerry Yang and Carol Bartz, Manka Bros. will offer her a job.
Good luck, Marissa (don’t read too many blog comments).
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
That’s a frightening headline for the Hollywood studios.
It wasn’t supposed to work.
It was an ill-planned experiment that was supposed to fail.
Seriously, who would watch that crap?
Well… give one point to Silicon Valley in the Great Content Wars of 2012. Â
(This doesn’t mean I’m giving any sort of credit to that jerk Paul Graham – who issued a war on Hollywood. Â Graham and Y Combinator, in my opinion, represent all that is bad in Silicon Valley.)
When YouTube announced last year that they would put up $100 million dollars to fund original content channels, no one in Hollywood gave it much notice.
What most people expected was something like Paul Rudd walking around, eating Doritos and throwing out non-sequitors.
Basically, that no one would give a shit or watch – and if they did, big companies certainly wouldn’t throw any advertising money at it.
“We’re saving our big dollars for high-quality, professional Hollywood content, goddamnit!” (Imagine them saying it with big cigars  in their mouths for greater effect.)
Cut to one year later and there is something real going on at YouTube – and they are just getting started (see all the “Coming Soon” labels on the left graphic of the channels yet to launch).
Channels are launching with the buzz normally generated for broadcast TV or feature film premieres – and for a lot less money.
Here’s a snapshot of the numbers (July 4, 2012). These are significant numbers.
Granted, this new “premium” content on YouTube is NOTHING EVEN CLOSE to the quality of a major studio feature film or TV series. Â Everything about it screams “slapped together.”
So if that’s true, then why should Hollywood be scared?
Because the generation growing up with YouTube does not distinguish between NBC, ESPN, Hulu, iPhone Apps, etc.
Eyeballs can only look so many places at one time and Broadcast Networks are asking you to keep them locked for three hours at a time (and watch the ads).
That’s fine for my mom (and, frankly, fine for me, too – though my iPhone is in my hand while I watch) but not fine for my daughter.
No chance does she one day turn to me and say “You know what, mom? I’ve become a Broadcast Network junkie. Those shows are what I love to watch the most.”
And this is true all around the world.
The kids who are playing online games, watching videos and surfing around the various social networks are not suddenly going to watch Broadcast Networks when they turn 30.
“Now that I’m older and finished with my wandering gadgets, I’m ready to settle in my easy chair and watch quality programming and check out some of the interesting advertising that happens during those shows.”
Never going to happen.
And, of course, duh, the big media companies know this is never going to happen.
But here’s the kicker: Â Most who grew up with the Internet really don’t care about quality. If they did, Zynga would have never become popular and MP3s would have been shunned immediately for their lack of decent fidelity.
The youth of the world have been raised not to care about such things (of course, I realize there are exceptions).
A couple of years ago, I wrote a piece called  “Broadcast Networks: On Death and Dying” and regardless of the few breakout hits that do exist on Broadcast (which results in big profits from International markets and off-net syndication), it’s really expensive content to produce and it’s just not a long-term strategy.
But don’t get me wrong – studios would be foolish to give up this extremely profitable business model while the market is still there. (“Two Broke Girls” just got $1.5 million an episode from TBS – who could give that up?!)
It’s a real conundrum.
Hollywood studios can’t abandon a dying business when it’s still so profitable. But they can’t plan for the future – because the future is the death of their current business model.
And attempting to replicate what YouTube is doing would be a downright embarrassment for studios used to creating such high-priced, high-quality content.
It would be quite a step down.
Next year is crucial for content business. Trends may become irreversible and the next ten years could become crystal clear.
It is possible that both worlds can exist and make a lot of money (one with super high margins, the other with less).
The ratings for this year’s crop of Broadcast fall premieres will be heavily scrutinized. (October 17 update: Ratings have started off terrible with all networks except NBC experiencing double-digit declines without much hope for improvement.)
New shows need to emerge more than they ever have in the history of television (no platitudes here, man). Syndication pipelines need to remain full with bidding wars from multiple channels and station groups.
If that happens, old media and the current way of operating survives for another five years or so.
If not, there’s only so many more spring upfronts that advertisers will show up for.
Next year, I guarantee, the YouTube upfront presentation will get as much press as CBS’ upfront – regardless of how many more stars CBS pulls onto the stage.
Why is that?
Because it’s new. Â It’s exciting. Â And new and exciting always wins.
And, remember, this is a reality TV world (created by Hollywood) where everyone can be a star.
And now those stars don’t need Hollywood anymore.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Like Ragnarok, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and The Sopranos –  all things (good and bad) must end.
And that end has come for the Church of Scientology.
It was an experiment that just didn’t work.
For Tom Cruise, it’s another high-profile bomb  – like “Rock Of Ages” and “Knight and Day.” Â
So… it’s time for all the vacant eyed, lost soul, followers of Scientology to leave the fields, re-enter society, and a have a few beers. Â Reality is waiting – time to get on with it.
The final nail in the coffin for Scientology is, of course, the TomKat divorce.
Finally, the “Church” has a scandal it cannot hide from or cover up  – and an entire organizational collapse is imminent (and what an organization it is – see left).
To compare it to something in the media (this is a media blog after all), the TomKatSu divorce scandal is to  Scientology what digital is to the newspaper industry.  This scandal has effectively put an end to Scientology  “subscriber growth” and it will not recover.
Its “best days” are behind it – and the end is near. Â Seriously, what movie star or powerful media figure would join Scientology now?
No amount of pressure by Thetan thugs or house visits to Katie by Anne Archer will get Scientology out of this mess.
It’s over.
[For full, unbelievably well-researched accounts of what happens behind the guarded walls at Scientology – please read this piece in the New Yorker and this piece in Rolling Stone.]
America and the world are completely on Katie’s side and anything other than full capitulation by Tom Cruise and Scientology will only make matters worse.
Words like ‘creepy,’ ‘evil,’ ‘cult,’ freaky,’ ‘fucking bizarre,’ ‘brainwashed,’ and just plain ‘disturbing’ are often used when people comment about Scientology.
But somehow, nothing much was done about it – probably because most people just think it’s a place where out of work actors go to detox and secure five and under guest shots on shows like “Dharma & Greg.” Â
Lots of allegations – but no real criminal charges have stuck against the “Church” other than random financial issues (taxes, etc.).
But now there is a very high-profile little face in the middle of it – little Suri Cruise – and the people of the world will not allow this “Church” to overtake her developing brain. [To see photos of Suri – you can Google her name. Â It felt wrong to put a photo of her in this blog.]
Either Scientology leaves them alone to live a somewhat normal life – or they commit organizational suicide by trying to force this little girl into the SeaOrg re-education school for high level Scientologists (or some other work farm type education).
Tom Cruise and, to a lesser extent, John Travolta (power is based on box office grosses) are the faces of Scientology.  And the faces of Scientology look pretty shitty right now.
Leave Suri alone, cut the creepy secret cult shit that makes so many people afraid of you, and do the right thing for your members – let them go. Â Stop ruining lives.
Perhaps there are some decent life lessons to be learned from the writings of L. Ron Hubbard (i.e., “The fastest way to make a fortune is to invent a religion”…), but those lessons will never reach a mass audience as long as the perception of Scientology is that of a cult of zombies eating the brains of the young.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
Hollywood is so desperate to grow their businesses in China they would almost do anything.
Look the other way while the Chinese government continues to abuse the basic human rights of its citizens? Â Check.
Alter the content or severely edit a movie in order to pass Chinese censors? Â Check. Â (Reminder – theater owners in Utah often want to edit the content of a movie and movie studios tell them to go F themselves.)
There are even allegations (but we know it’s true) that Hollywood pays bribes to Chinese officials in return for preferential treatment when it comes to filming in China and getting their films into China.
Is 1.3 billion people and their growing disposable income really that important to major media companies around the world?
Unfortunately, yes. Â And it has always been this way.
Hollywood didn’t even criticize China after the Tiananmen Square massacre in which thousands of innocent protesters were mowed down by PLA tanks and guns.
That was 23 years ago and they’re still trying to crack that horribly corrupt market. Â (At right: Â Imagine the lone protester symbolizes Hollywood – the tanks are China.)
Reality check: Â It’s never going to happen in the way that you would like, Hollywood. Â
China can sign whatever contracts you want signed – but, in the end, they will not honor them and you will leave, beaten, with your tails between your legs.
Chinese officials know this and are laughing at you as you put so much pride and resources on the line time after time.
Now there is a new disturbing trend that has popped up recently. Â The co-funding of Chinese local language films by U.S. companies.
Does this mean, as all Chinese-made films and scripts must be approved by the Chinese Central government, that Hollywood is funding Chinese propaganda?
Of course. Â This is truly an amazing, laughable coup by China.
I can just imagine some of the conversations with producers about story ideas:
Granted, it’s not quite that simplistic – but it’s not that far off either.
I worry that Hollywood  is getting taken advantage of by their dumber and less savvy “partners” across the Pacific.
It’s similar to the way Silicon Valley is attempting to undermine Hollywood by just grabbing whatever high-end premium content they need (without much payment) to make their devices cooler.
The bottom line is this: Â Let’s take human rights and actual motives involved out of the equation and look at it from a purely business standpoint. Â No matter what percentages are negotiated and no matter how many movies Hollywood gets into China – China is not going to pay what they owe and contracts mean nothing.
But, in the end, it’s 1.3 billion people with growing disposable income. Â And an attempt must be made, I suppose. Â In theory, there is A LOT of money there.
So… here’s how it plays out… China is going to build the world’s largest film industry off of the creative and technical knowledge of Hollywood and then… they’re going to send Hollywood home… without a check.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
OK – let’s say you’re 30 years old.
Let’s say the average American reads three books a year (outside the U.S. the average may be a bit higher).
Let’s say you have a good fifty years of reading before you die.
That’s 150 books.
[Fun fact: The average American will watch 72,800 hours of television in that same time period.]
Is “The Fame Game” by Lauren fucking Conrad going to be one of those 150 books?
Let’s assume you’ve already “Crime and Punishment,” “Pride & Prejudice,” and the complete works of William Shakespeare and don’t know what to read next and you’re at the check-out counter at Ralph’s and  there’s Lauren Conrad smiling at you naked from Glamour magazine asking you to read her book.
Resist!
You’ve still got over 129 million books to choose from – do a little exploring!
Are you seriously going to read “The Fame Game” when there are a couple of Hemingways, Brontes and Woolfs you haven’t gotten to?
It’s time to up your “Summer Read” game and resist the temptation of shitty celebrity writing!
“A Prayer For Owen Meany” is a fairly awesome book.
Read that one instead.
Or any one of these: Â Â 1,000 Novels Everyone Must Read.
And if you simply can’t stay away from the trashy celebrity novel – go for Jackie Collins (I can’t believe I wrote that) and leave Lauren Conrad in her reality show world where she belongs.
I warn you, if “The Fame Game” is a best seller, Audrina is going to write a book next.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
P.S. – If you’re one of the crazy reading freaks who are able to consume a couple of books a week, disregard the above and enjoy “The Fame Game” – it may clean your palate for loftier fare.
Andrew Breitbart died just after midnight last night.
He was 43 years old.
I offer my deepest condolences to his family and friends. Â A sudden death like this is incredibly tragic.
Yes, he was an asshole (at least in my mind) and a much hated Right Wing Conservative political bomb thrower. Â He rarely cared who he verbally stepped on, attacked or ruined.
To be fair, he was also much loved (I suppose) by the Far Right.
But politics is not the point here.
The point is – the man died last night.
The media has already flashed the “Breaking News” alert, flooded social media, analyzed his impact on society, put forward ideas on who will replace him on the bomb throwing Right, etc.
The man has been dead for less than 9 hours!
It immediately reminded me of CNN’s 9/11 coverage. Â I distinctly remember Jeff Greenfield standing on CNN’s roof with the World Trade Center still standing far in the background with smoke pouring out after the planes hit (and minutes before the collapse) and he’s basically summing up what it will all mean historically and what can we learn from this tragedy.
News coverage today is a complete joke and further proof that the world’s attention span is completely shot. Â With one final TWEET, Andrew was gone – forever.
What kind of a world are we living in when Davy Jones’ death (yesterday) is old news?
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea
And that’s fine with me.
In 2010, when the Tea Party won quite a few House seats and a couple of Senate seats , many people were wrongly tricked into believing that a serious political movement had begun and a rise of the Far Right was imminent.
(Frankly, I believe these were ‘protest candidate’ candidates that were elected mostly because the country was at the height of the Great Recession and there was a lot of misery and demand for change out there.)
Well, the call for change is coming to an end, the country is on the mend and the Republicans that want to keep their jobs are drifting back to the center.
And if they don’t drift to the center they will, most likely, be voted out of office because the wacko Right is no longer a viable alternative.
And, I believe, much of this rejection of change is because of a Sean Hannity EPIC FAIL.
It turns out, the majority of Americans do not want to live in Sean Hannity’s world.
His is a world of constant conflict for the sake of ratings. Â A world of hammering a message over and over and over again turning his audience into something similar to school children in North Korea.
And it’s a message that never wavers: Â “Anyone but Obama…” (The Republican pundit establishment has apparently changed that slightly – “Anyone but Obama or Romney…”)
Well, because of this message – and the millions who follow Mr. Hannity – the Republicans may well be stuck with Rick ‘The Stick’ Santorum (just as they nearly got stuck with Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry).
I can now confirm, with 0% of the vote counted, Rick Santorum has LOST the 2012 general election to President Obama. Â
There is no question Santorum has already lost without one vote being counted.  Bob Dole’s loss to Bill Clinton in 1996 will be considered a close race compared to an Obama vs. Santorum election.
Santorum will, most likely, get the lowest number of female votes in the history of Presidential elections (unless you count the Presidential races in which women did not have the right to vote).
However, Santorum will, most likely, win the Fascist vote as he is the candidate with the most images on the internet with a Hitler mustache Photoshopped onto his face.
Now, what’s crazy about all this is I firmly believe Sean Hannity, deep down, doesn’t care how people live their lives. Â Â I firmly believe that if the ratings dictated a different point of view, Mr. Hannity would shift on a dime to the Left and still claim that his moral compass has never wavered.
He would refute this claim vehemently.  And, to be fair, he has never had to face that problem because there are millions of Americans that he has focused on that love the bomb throwing, the red meat and any other political metaphor you can think of.
But because of this extremism and, yes, short-sighted view of the world, Sean Hannity is costing his political party the chance to win against a vulnerable incumbent.
It is obvious we are living in a crazy time when Ann Coulter is the voice of reason at CPAC. Â Say what you want about her, she is not a stupid person. Â She knows there is only one candidate that has a slight chance against President Obama and that is Mitt Romney.
Why the Republican establishment hasn’t thrown everything behind Mitt is beyond me. Â Perhaps it’s because there is also a feeling Mitt Romney cannot win either. Â (I am one of those people.)
But he’s really the only choice there is to even get close to the lofty John McCain numbers of 2008.
Of course, Sean Hannity (and Rush and all the others) could swing things by full on endorsing Mr. Romney. Â But if he did, he would lose half his audience and his street cred as a bomb throwing ‘lover of freedom’ (though most people would consider ‘love’ and ‘freedom’ two things that are lacking in his political philosophy).
Mr. Hannity really doesn’t care who is President. Â It is probably more fun for him to criticize President Obama than it was to defend President Bush. Â And it certainly won’t be fun for him to have to defend President Santorum (who, remember, has 0% chance to win).
Like I said – it’s completely fine with me. Â The implosion of the Grand Old Party is actually quite amusing.
God speed, Sean Hannity – you are President Obama’s best friend these days.
Jill Kennedy – OnMedea