Why I'm not currently Tweeting at my Usual Rate....

Waiting for a film to import to iMovie, and I'm going to watch The Mentalist while it does....

Posted via email from matchesmalone's posterous

This is a job for...

Wait, wrong blog. Ok, I'll rant here. There have been several things swirling around my brain lately, and this will be a rant that is random, as opposed to a random rant. Which is still another blog that I have.

Seth Godin believes that you shouldn't watch TV according to this post, but what he specifically describes in his blog, is the TV watching you. I get that. What about those of us that are in the industry? Doesn't it make sense to keep track of current trends, so we aren't accused of stealing someone else's ideas? Furthermore, multitasking is alive and well. While I have the TV on in the background, I'm composing this entry, and tweeting as well. I also have several other tabs open, with various stories that will contribute to other posts either here or elsewhere. He's wrong about this one, that's all I'm saying....

Of course, now that I'm mentioning him in this post, he'll get more link juice, which is a good thing, for him. It may at some point create a larger readership for me, however, I don't necessarily know that I want the larger readership that everyone else says I should have. If everyone is doing the same thing to increase their following, how does one stand out?

I once read that the follow me and I'll follow you paradigm is six years out of date, as of this writing. I came to the conclusion that to stand out, one must lead. If you want to go where I'm going, then by all means, follow. On Twitter :) Otherwise, it's not necessary. At the same time, if you're following me, there should be no obligation on my end to return the favor. I've stated this elsewhere, so, no need to repeat.

I just read something else that says I shouldn't be obligated to post a blog entry everyday. Or is it, every day? I get those two confused, sometimes. Probably because the first time I used the wrong one, I learned the other usage, and get the two confused.

Great, I got distracted. If anything resonates, by all means, leave a comment. This rant is effectively over.

Of course, I reserve the right to post another one, elsewhere, later....

72 and sunny in Redondo Beach.

I've Noticed a Disturbing Trend Recently....

About, content. It's what you're reading right now, and what I'm providing for you. I'm creating this content myself, simply because, well, I can. Are you depending on me to create content for you? Probably not. You might be creating your own, or, you might be satisfied absorbing, taking in, reading, or watching content that others create. That's ok too.

What I don't believe to be ok, is to ask others to create content for you, and then not pay for the privilege, like this recent tweet. It would seem to me, that they're asking you for your review on the film in question, and are going to incorporate it into theirs. These guys aren't the only ones guilty of regurgitating content, just the most recent.

There was a column in a magazine that most of you haven't heard of, so, I won't mention it, who's subhead was, "There are 20 people creating for the rest of us, many will contribute to this column." That's a paraphrase, and now more than ever, with the 'net out there, it looks to me like most are relying on their own set of 20 or so people to create for them, and maybe they're not doing anything original themselves.

Think about this for a second. There are for instance, six, or seven major movie studios out there, depending on the outcome of what happens to MGM, that for the most part, decide what you see on the big screen. And until such time as the current distribution bottleneck is cured, (37,000 screens in 6200 theatres as of this writing) this won't change. The answer isn't more distributors, as there are many more than just those above, and the answer isn't more theatres, as even though box office goes up from year to year, attendance itself remains relatively flat, and the $10 ticket you bought last year will mostly likely cost $11 today.

And these people aren't really even making their own films, they're simply making sure that you can see them. I read once that Paramount for the most part, except for maybe its resuscitated Star Trek franchise, is not in the business of making movies anymore, they're simply distributing them.

Was tweeting around the other day, and came across an article about blog scrapers, and how there's a whole cadre of people out there that have 'bots crawling around, grabbing content, and putting it on their own site. The unsuspecting among you might believe this to be original with the site your visiting, when the reality is, someone else took the time and effort to post somewhere else, quite possibly with the expectation that you'd read it there, and click on their links on their blog. Will this madness end?

Let me know what you think, and when you think it in the comments below. That is, if you've read this far, and haven't reposted it on your own site.

72 and sunny in Redondo Beach.