Will Ferrell’s “You’re Welcome America”

Posted on by

Even HBO was unwilling to air “You’re Welcome America: A Final Night with George W. Bush” in prime time. Perhaps it was the giant photo of a penis Will Ferrell kept calling up on the screen behind him.

But if you weren’t offended by the last eight years, you’ll be okay with this amazing one-man show. Ferrell was at his raunchy best. As funny as he could have been during his SNL salad days if he could have shrugged “fuck it” when appropriate.

It was difficult to distinguish which words actually came from W’s mouth and which were pulled from Ferrell’s very funny ass. So difficult in fact, the word TRUE would be flashed on the big screen to help us know the difference.

As with Oliver Stone’s W., I came away feeling more sad for #43 than mad.

Eagles concert

Posted on by

The Eagles provided the soundtrack for an important period in my life. Equally true, I assume, for others in the audience at last night’s Eagles concert. A lady sitting near us wasn’t born when the Eagles hit it big, but grew up listening with her parents.

The boys had to strain to hit a few of the notes but the memories were picture perfect. I like to think it’s more than Boomer nostalgia that keeps filling auditoriums for Stones and Eagles concerts. Which of today’s big artists will still be filling the seats in thirty years?

This photo was taken from the Cessna 350 as we flew over. But I’m not really complaining. We could see the jumbotron screens and music was loud enough, even from a couple of thousand feet.

It was a good show. The guitar licks alone would have been worth the price of the ticket.

Claire McCaskill’s blog

Posted on by

Watching MO Senator Claire McCaskill play with her new blog.

“These (photo) are the Generals and Admiral all testifying at our Armed Services hearing this am. I will ask questions shortly.”

The thought of a member of Congress “reporting on” a hearing she is covering is… is… sacrilege? Heresy? What word would be strong enough? The obvious problem is, the senator is –by definition– partisan. No way you could trust what she reports. Right?

So, how is this different from Sean Hannity? Or Chris Matthews? Or Rush? No doubt about which side of an issue they come down but they have thousands of viewers. Can we automatically assume every post by Senator McCaskill is tainted and unworthy? That every tweet by @joliejustus is designed to mislead and spin us?

Or can we mix it in with all the other “reporting” we get, factoring in her point of view? I don’t know the answer to that question but if there is one, every reader will come up with their own.

Claire McCaskill news conferences will never be the same

Posted on by
Reply

Good post by Post-Dispatch reporter Tony Messenger on how social networks like Twitter are changing the game.

“While covering the Democratic lovefest last weekend, I put a note on Twitter (I’m @tonymess, by the way) about how Republicans were exchanging nasty news releases about the Senate race in 2010 while the Democrats were uniting behind Robin Carnahan. Within minutes, the note had been passed around by countless Twitterites. The next day, Gov. Jay Nixon made the Republican infighting a central point in his speech to the group. Coincidence?”

Yeah, that must be it.

Man, all of this is SO painful for the old hands who can’t or won’t understand what’s happening and how to make it work for them. And so exciting for those do.

UPDATE: Here’s a screen grab of McCaskill’s most recent tweet. Call me naive, but I’ll be she gets some suggestions and I bet you reads them.

“If the old model is broken, what will work in its place?”

Posted on by
Reply

In a post titled “Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable,” Clay Shirky provides some insight –and historical perspective– on what’s happening to newspapers. He starts with the question often asked by those committed to saving newspapers

“If the old model is broken, what will work in its place?” To which the answer is: Nothing. Nothing will work. There is no general model for newspapers to replace the one the internet just broke.”

“With the old economics destroyed, organizational forms perfected for industrial production have to be replaced with structures optimized for digital data. It makes increasingly less sense even to talk about a publishing industry, because the core problem publishing solves — the incredible difficulty, complexity, and expense of making something available to the public — has stopped being a problem.”

“When someone demands to be told how we are going to replace newspapers, they are really demanding to be told that we are not living through a revolution. They are demanding to be told that old systems won’t break before new systems are in place. They are demanding to be told that ancient social bargains aren’t in peril, that core institutions will be spared, that new methods of spreading information will improve previous practice rather than upending it. They are demanding to be lied to. There are fewer and fewer people who can convincingly tell such a lie.”

I think this is the first time I’ve fully understood that old models can be broken before new ones are there to take their place.

Google lets me target ads at myself. No more old people ads?

Posted on by
Reply

“Not only will Google now target ads at you based on your interest, but it will also let you target yourself. Anyone can go to Google’s Ad Preferences Manager and see exactly how Google is categorizing their interests. Now, here’s the really smart part: Google lets you add or remove any interest. In effect, it is inviting you to declare what kind of ads you want to see. You can also opt out of the program completely.”– TechCrunch

It took me less than 3 minutes to update my interests for Google. And I’m sure I’ll go back from time to time to tweak them.

 

Are radio commercials spam?

Posted on by

A little preface here: Most of the food I ever put in my mouth was paid for –directly or indirectly– by radio commercials. My father was a radio guy and for many years I wrote and produced radio “spots.” Lots and lots of them. Some were good, some were just the right length, if you know what I mean.

So when Seth Godin –one of the keynote speakers at the recent Country Radio Seminar in Nashville– refers to radio commercials as “spam,” it’s a problem for me. I’m a regular reader of Mr. Godin’s blog and have purchased and read a number of his books. I think he understands marketing in the 21st century as well as anyone.

So what’s spam and what’s not?

When you get your hands on my email address and send me an unsolicited email trying to sell me something (or get me to give you money, or visit your porn site, etc) …without my permission, we call that spam. You invaded my inbox without my permission.

When I turn on my local radio station, I know there will be commercials. They pay for the music/news/weather programs for which I tuned in. I’m giving tacit permission for the the station to try to sell me something on behalf of their advertisers. Value for value. That doesn’t sound like spam to me.

And if every commercial I heard was talking about something I cared about, something of interest… I’d probably pay more attention and the commercials would be worth more to the advertiser.

This is how cable TV programs work. If I’m watching HGTV (House & Garden), there’s a pretty good chance the commercials will at least marginally relevant.

I’m sure a lot of radios stations attempt to do this when and where they can. But it’s tough. They’re trying to reach the largest audience they can and will sell a spot to damn near anyone (preachers and politicians pay in advance).

Given the choice, most of us will choose NOT to listen to a poorly produced or irrelevant message. Commercial or otherwise.

So are are radio spots spam or not?

Only the listener can answer that. And he or she does, every time they punch the button to another station. And keeps punching it until they find a song or talk show they like (at least more than the commercial). Or pull out the iPod.

Watchmen: Great music, great special effects and garter belts

Posted on by

I liked so many things about Watchmen, I’m not sure where to begin. Since it’s sure to be compared to other “super hero” films, I’ll start by saying it made Batman and Spiderman and X-Men and all the rest look like Saturday morning cartoons.

The movie critic for People Magazine called the dialogue stilted. I found it tongue-in-cheek David Mamet. A few of my favorite lines don’t do justice to the writing:

  • Hitler was a vegetarian. If you’re squeamish, leave him to me.
  • Only what can happen, does happen.
  • The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon.
  • I’m sorry, but you’re in the way of my revenge.
  • I’m not locked in here with you, you’re locked in here with me.
  • It’s too late. Always has been, always will be.
  • What happened to the American dream? It came true.

And the sex? One steamy scene was the hottest thing I’ve seen since Billy Bob did Halle in Monster’s Ball. And there were more garter belts than a 50’s porn movie. But it all worked.

There was lots of action. I thought the fight scenes were every bit as good as what we saw in The Matrix. And there was no shortage of gore. Very graphic. Like the language. This is the movie your mom didn’t want you to see but all the kids are talking about.

And the soundtrack alone was worth the six bucks. It opened with Nat King Cole’s Unforgettable and slid into Dylan’s The Times They Are A-Changing. And before the nearly 3 hour film (2:40) was over, we hear Simon & Garfunkel, Janis Joplin, Billie Holiday, Leonard Cohen and Jimi Hendrix.

I spotted Matt Frewer (Max Headroom) in a small part but didn’t recognize Bill Crudup (Almost Famous) as Dr. Manhattan.

I really enjoyed this movie.

UPDATE: My friend Bob commented that he’s unfamiliar with David Mamet. Three of my favorites (he wrote the play/screenplay) are: The Verdict (Paul Newman); Glengarry Glen Ross (all-star cast); and House of Games. I just happen to like the way Mr. Mamet writes dialogue.