Category: media industry

Posted on

Popular Music’s Sad Legacy

The death of Amy Winehouse–from what some suspect was a drug overdose–may not come as much of a surprise to her fans or those who study popular culture. Sadly, too many aspiring young musicians have died early deaths as a result of addictive behavior and a hard-driving lifestyle. The phenomenon has  been chronicled in a 2009 book, The 27s: The Greatest Myth of Rock & Roll.
 There’s also a movie, The 27 Club, based on the tragic and dangerous lifestyle that too many have tried, unsuccessfully, to live. Here’s a brief synopsis of the movie:

When you’re dead, you’re gone. You exist only in the minds of those you leave behind. You become a fragment of a story; a beginning, middle or end. Tom is dead. Elliot has been left behind. Tom was the front man of their successful band, Finn. He died on his 27th birthday. Elliot is left to decide if he, too, will join The 27 Club.

Members of the real-life 27 Club include, among others: Brian Jones, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison and Kurt Cobain. A complete list is available here.

Music, an important social and cultural force, and the music industry have long attracted artists and creative minds that sometimes march to the beat of a different drummer. Add to that a lavish lifestyle and the trappings that come with fame and fortune and the outcome is sometimes too easy to predict. The need to succeed–which for many musicians is exemplified by an appearance on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine–often eclipses more rational and reasonable needs that are part of a healthy lifestyle. It is sad to watch talented and creative musicians self-destruct. In some cases the downward spiral is quick and catches us off guard. For other, such as Winehouse, the signs have been present for quite some time.

August 24 Update: Toxicology reports indicate that illegal drugs are not responsible for the death of Winehouse leaving experts puzzled. However, the following from ABC News indicates that the evidence is not conclusive.

But Pittsburg forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht cautions against reaching a conclusion from the family’s statement.

“The fact that the family said no illicit drugs were found does not mean in and of itself other drugs obtained legally were not found,” Wecht told ABCNews.com. “Most drug deaths are from legally obtained drugs. That’s one caveat I would express in regard to the family’s statement.”

Bruce A. Goldberger, a toxicology professor at the University of Florida, said some prescription drugs, illicit drugs and “designer” drugs can escape detection.

Posted on

Thank You & Goodbye

Last Sunday Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid News of the World was laid to rest after 168 years of operation. A scandal in which private individuals’ cell phones were hacked led to the public outrage that forced the closure. While politicians and celebrities, including Hugh Grant, have long complained of phone hacking by tabloid reporters, it was the hacking of the phones of  private citizens that brought strong criticism and investigations by law enforcement. Among those hacked: 13-year-old missing person Milly Dowler, relatives of victims of the London terrorist attacks and the families of fallen military.

Throughout history journalists have been rewarded for “scooping” the competition. The paper or news organization that got the story first was rewarded with the largest audience and the accolades of their peers. The challenge, of course, is knowing when to stop before aggressive journalism crosses the fine line that separates ethical from unethical practices. While this case appears to have focused attention on an unusually egregious lapse of ethics, the truth is that journalists push the envelope daily and often escape scrutiny. Sometimes the risk pays off in a big way. Other times it leads to someone getting fired–or an entire news operation being shuttered and hundreds of people loosing their jobs.

Posted on

iPad & the Future of Print Media

The iPad 2 will be available at Apple Stores this Friday at 5pm and the buzz on the street is that it will be another barn burner. In the first 9 months of iPad sales last year, Apple sold nearly 15 million units. Analysts expect that figure to double this year with the release of the iPad 2. The iPad is not the only tablet/e-reader/e-book/etc., it is simply the best-selling and is expected to hold that position for another 2-3 years. Unlike other tablets, the iPad is not first and foremost an e-reader. While the Amazon Kindle and the Barnes & Nobel Nook are about e-books, the iPad is about apps that range from games to business productivity. But the iPad can also be used for books, and perhaps more important, magazines. Condé Nast, one of the largest magazine publishers, has announced plans to release all of their titles as iPad apps. They already publish Wired, GQ, and Vanity Fair, amongst others, in digital format.

In deciding to go digital, Condé Nast design director Wyatt Mitchell said that the company considered the pros and cons of print and digital, and tried to capture the benefits of both. One of the benefits of print is the fixed design. Magazines ported to the web left designers frustrated by OS, browser, and html/css quirks that reduced their design decisions to mere suggestions. With the iPad, complete creative control is back in the hands of the designers and content experts. Advantages of electronic delivery are myriad and include: speed of publishing, interactivity, the compelling persuasive power of video and audio, and a much smaller carbon footprint.

If you’ve never seen a magazine on an iPad, it is certainly something to behold. More than just high-resolution images and text, iPad zines contain interactive features that make the content breath and pulse with life. What do you think, will the tablet-based digital magazine change the way you read magazines?

[polldaddy poll=4678599]

Posted on

Skins Skating on Thin Ice

I hesitated to write about the new MTV series Skins, a remake of a BBC series by the same name. By pushing the envelope MTV knew that it would generate plenty of buzz–and contributing to that buzz, even in a very small way, makes me an accomplice in their marketing scheme.  I’m going ahead with this post because I believe that the debate over Skins is one that must be joined if you’re going to engage modern popular culture and the role of media in shaping that culture. Recent accusations that the program may actually cross the line into child pornography is another reason why this is not just another Jersey Shore. Several of the actors on Skins are as young as 15 and that raises serious questions about the appropriateness of the acts they’re portraying on the small screen.

Skins premiered on MTV to strong ratings (3.26 million viewers 18-49) but fell to less than half this in its second episode. The premiere was likely boosted by two things: 1) people checking out the show to see what all the fuss was about and, 2) a new episode of Jersey Shore as a lead-in. Jersey Shore has been a ratings powerhouse and last week’s special episode (featuring the much publicized arrest of Snooki) drew 7.7 million viewers.

Despite the TV-MA ratings, Nielsen estimates that more than one-third of the Skins premiere audience were under the age of 18. That shouldn’t be surprising since MTV has claimed to own the teen demographic for some time.

Now, on to the controversy. David Carr, writing in the New York Times, makes an interesting point when he observed that Skins does not exist in a vacuum. While critics argue that these kinds of media portrayals are glamorized depictions far from reality, there’s also a bit of truth to MTV’s claim that much of the behavior we see in shows like Skins happens with or without media depictions. According to Carr,

Now that MTV is back on its heels, you will hear arguments that “Skins” merely describes the world that we already live in. There’s something to that. MTV didn’t invent “friends with benefits,” oral sex as the new kiss or stripper chic as a teenage fashion aspiration.

“Skins” is nothing new, only a corporate effort to clone a provocative drama that will make MTV less dependent on reality shows and add to the bottom line. True, MTV is not alone. Abercrombie & Fitch built a brand out of writhing, half-naked teenagers, as Calvin Klein once did.

But the critics of Skins also have justification to claim that media depictions of bad behavior are educational lessons, especially for young viewers. Once again Carr explains the difference between Jersey Shore and Skins in this regard.

Even in the most scripted reality programming, the waterfall of poor personal choices is interrupted by comeuppance. People get painful hangovers, the heartbreaks are real if overly dramatic and the cast members have to live with their decisions.

Not so on “Skins,” where a girl who overdoses and is rushed to the hospital wakes up to laughter when the stolen S.U.V. taking her there slams to a halt. Teenagers show children how to roll blunts, bottles of vodka are traded on merry go-rounds, and youngsters shrug off being molested and threatened by a drug dealer. And when the driver of the stolen S.U.V. gets distracted and half a dozen adolescents go rolling into a river, the car is lost but everyone bobs to the surface with a smile at the wonder of it all.

Leading the charge against Skins is Parents Television Council, a conservative media watchdog group, or, as their website puts it, “A non-partisan education organization advocating responsible entertainment.” PTC called Skins, “the most dangerous program ever” for children and their website includes an interactive feature that allows visitors to fire off a letter of disapproval to sponsors. And that tactic appears to be working.

MTV has seen important advertisers back away from Skins for fear of associating their brand with content that goes beyond edgy. Taco Bell (you know, the company using meat filling that is–surprise–significantly less than 100% beef), Gillette, Wrigley, Foot Locker, L’Oreal , Schick, and Subway have pulled spots. The movie studios and assorted products targeting the Skins demographic remained on the air in episode two. One of the spots on Monday night was for stretch mark cream. One commentator joked that it might have been a direct response ad! Oh, and you might not be surprised to learn that one of the advertisers of this week’s episode was the video game Dead Space 2 (see post below).

What do you think? Does the lifestyle presented by Skins and similar programs resonate with your personal experience? Are parents making too much of a fuss about something that will likely self-destruct on its own? Or is there something here that demands a response…something that, if left unchecked, will lead to even more dangerous behavior by even more adolescents?

Posted on

Your Mom’s Gonna Hate This

Electronic Arts has taken an edgy and controversial approach to marketing Dead Space 2, a videogame described as a, “third-person horror survival game in which players must battle an alien infestation” by “strategically dismembering” necromorphs. In a viral marketing campaign, [see clip below], 200 “moms” were invited to participate in “market research” that turned out to be a way to collect their on-camera reactions to some of the most horrific scenes from Dead Space 2.  Here’s the clip:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jri8LFci4xQ]

In case you missed it, the VO said, “A mom’s disapproval has always been an accurate barometer of what is cool.” But wait, this video game is rated M the by the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board), meaning it is to be sold only to buyers age 17 or older. Last time I checked that crowd wasn’t overly concerned about what their moms liked or didn’t like. Is it possible that EA is actually marketing a game rated “M” to kids younger than those allowed to buy it? This marketing campaign is going to give more ammunition to critics of video game violence: people like Jon Leibowitz, chairman of the FTC, who, according to Wired magazine, was quoted as saying that “the videogame industry’s self-regulatory efforts around the marketing of violent video games to minors are still ‘far from perfect.’”

There’s another issue here that centers on ethics of research. According to the video, “over 200 moms were recruited to participate in market research, only this wasn’t market research.” Obviously the moms were asked to sign a release form that gives EA’s market researchers permission to use the video from the hidden cameras, but the breach of standard research ethics is obvious and appalling. Beyond that, the moms may have legal recourse based on the emotional and psychological distress that they may have experienced in the process. I’m sure EA has a large legal team, but they may be well advised to “lawyer up” in order to defend this controversial example of ambush marketing.

Posted on

Questioning Motives

It’s still much too early to figure out what motivated Jared Lee Loughner to shoot 19 people, killing six, on Saturday…but that hasn’t stopped many from speculating. News pundits, reporters and commentators have lined up to offer their opinion of what was behind the tragic and atrocious act. On the ride home today I listened as a radio reporter speculated that political rhetoric, amplified by the media, was to blame for the shooting.

Perhaps what has been most disconcerting has been the eagerness of some to score political points by ascribing motives to Loughner that fit their personal political views. Yes Representative Gabrielle Giffords is a Democrat from a Republican district, and yes she had previously been the recipient of heated rhetoric from those who opposed her policies. But too many in the media (both mainstream and online) are trying to link the actions of a madman to social movements and political activism which may or may not be responsible.

Even the local sheriff, Clarence W. Dupnik, weighed in just hours after the shooting with his opinion linking the tragedy to “vitriolic political rhetoric.” Others suggested that talk of “second amendment remedies” and maps with cross-hairs used to target political races across the country, including Giffords’ district, were to blame. There MAY BE a connection between heated political rhetoric and the actions of Loughner, but it is too soon to try to connect the dots when one of the dots is clearly not dealing with a full deck.

Please don’t mistake my objection to those placing blame for anything less than complete repudiation of Loughner and his heinous act. Blame should–and will–come to rest on Loughner, and anyone or anything that contributed to his decision to use deadly violence. I’m simply saying that to make pronouncements about causal relationships so soon after such a shocking event says more about the motives of the speaker than it does about the motives of those under the microscope.

UPDATE: According to Broadcasting & Cable magazine, Rep. Bob Brady (D-Pa.) is working on a bill to make it a federal crime to use “language or symbols” that could be interpreted as inciting violence against a member of Congress.

UPDATE 2: I just came across a thoughtful commentary from Jon Stewart’s show last evening that addresses this very issue. Stewart said, “you know we live in a complex ecosystem of influences and motivations, and I wouldn’t blame our political rhetoric any more than I would blame heavy metal music for Columbine, and by the way that is coming from someone who truly hates our political environment.” Read and/or watch more here.

Posted on

Apple PR v Student Journalist

An online spat with Apple may have contributed to a student journalist’s invitation to cover the release of Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7. Chelsea Kate Isaacs, a journalism major at Long Island University, received a class assignment that involved finding out more about an initiative at her college to buy iPads for all incoming students. As any good journalist, Chelsea contacted Apple requesting a quote about using iPads in an academic setting. But after the Apple PR department failed to return multiple phone messages, she sent an email to Steve Jobs…who, in hindsight, probably wished he hadn’t responded. But he did respond, leading to a back-and-forth that quickly deteriorated. A final email from Jobs reportedly said, “Please leave us alone.” You can read more about the reported email exchange here.

That might be the end of the story, except that Microsoft saw an opportunity to promote its Windows Phone 7 by selecting Isaacs to travel, all expenses paid, to the Microsoft launch event. According to CNET news, “Despite two radically different experiences, Isaacs said she has no plans to cover either company any differently.
Read more.

What corporate PR lesson, if any, should we take away from this incident?

Posted on

C 3-D PO coming to a screen near you

Lucasfilm Ltd. just announced that the Star Wars films are being remastered in 3-D and will be released in theaters in 2012. The work is being performed by the team at Lucas’ Industrial Light & Magic.

According to the Star Wars website,
There are few movies that lend themselves more perfectly to 3D; from the Death Star trench run to the Tatooine Podrace, the Star Wars Saga has always delivered an entertainment experience that is completely immersive. Presented by Twentieth Century Fox and Lucasfilm Ltd., the cutting edge conversion will take that immersion to the next thrilling level, with Industrial Light & Magic supervising the project.Star Wars: Episode I The Phantom Menace is expected to be released theatrically in 2012.
According to the website The Wrap, IL&M visual effects supervisor John Knoll “told Variety that there are no plans to add or fix visual effects in the films, which should please fans who were upset when Lucas made a few digital tweaks to the original trilogy.”  Unfortunately, that means we’ll have to endure Jar Jar Binks once again! Oh well, hopefully the fly-throughs will make it all worthwhile.
Posted on

Mocking the legislative process, or just having a little fun?

Fake news shows on Comedy Central, e.g. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, have a history of poking fun at news-makers, politicians, the media, and the whole news-as-entertainment phenomenon. But when Stephen Colbert testified before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law yesterday, some saw it as mockery of an institution that should be above the cheap laughs and clever word-play that are standard fare for comedians.

Colbert, who stayed in character for his entire testimony, spoke about the difficult working conditions that migrant farm workers endure. Allegedly Colbert testified from personal experience after spending a day working in the fields beside migrant workers. But with his typical dead-pan delivery of a script that was clearly more about laughs than substance, few in the room seemed prepared to take his testimony seriously. You can watch a news clip of his testimony here.

This led some critics to call the appearance, “a huge waste of taxpayer time and money” and others to call it an embarrassment. But apparently this is not the first time that a committee hearing featured an entertainer who was invited to entertain. Sesame Street‘s Elmo excepted, most celebrity witnesses testify from an area of expertise. What do you think? Does one day in a bean field give Colbert the kind of credibility necessary for an appearance on Capitol Hill?

Posted on

Misogynistic Hip-Hop Lyrics: What’s the Big Deal?

In class today we discussed the prevalence of misogynistic lyrics in rap and hip-hop music. Unfortunately we didn’t have enough time to hear from more than a few of you, and I’m curious about what others think about this issue. To rephrase the issue, is it okay for popular rap and hip-hop artists to denigrate women? If so, are women paying a price for accepting attitudes and images that reduce them to sex objects and second-class citizens? And if not, why do people defend the music and the musicians that perpetrate these images? Before you weigh in, watch this five minute video on YouTube:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjxjZe3RhIo]

Before posting a reply remember that this is not a forum to attack a culture, subculture, ethnic group or individuals belonging to any group. Keep your comments civil and attack the issues…not other posters.

css.php