Reverend Horton Heat

Whoooarh!  I have several Rev songs and have been a longtime fan of their music. But never seen them live (being too far away in Australia) and their live stuff on YouTube leaves me uninspired (I've subsequently realised it was because all I can find on YouTube are those handheld amateur recordings).


So went along to their show with expectations of a nice night out. Nice.  But from the SECOND they started playing it was captivating.  There's no fancy stage props, the focus of their show is on the music, despite very nice attire worn by Jim Heath. It was fast, crisp and at the right volume. They did song after song of fast fabulous Gibson guitar sounds. They did 3 songs from each of the first albums up to 4th and then the new one which has a slower country feel, even if the lyrics rail against Hollywood and misinformed artistes who think the Saguaro cactus grows in Texas.   


But although the focus of the show was very much on the sound, they did some smooth moves eg: the bass guitarist threw his double bass up in the air and caught it.  And it was nice to see the singer looked in fine health, tanned and he even had arm muscles. They came across as a band who have been doing this for 25 years over and over and over and have it down pat, professionals but also they seemed to be having fun given it was the last show of their Australian tour.  


Memories of my youth were evoked by mohawks crowdsurfing in the moshpit, but it was all safe and noone was being annoying.  My nephew who came along said it was awesome and exceptional.  Another friend who went is still raving about it.  I think it was the show of the year for me.

I AM NOT COOL

I'm a long time user of last.fm ( http://www.last.fm/user/MelodyAngel ) and in late November I was looking at the rockabilly interest group on last.fm and saw someone there had posted this:

http://www.last.fm/group/Rockabilly

Oh OK, I hadn't checked coolsville.org out so did so.  I later discovered Michael_deluxe (who made that post) is the owner moderator of coolsvile.org.

So, because my interests veer towards rockabilly and I recognised someone on the site I know (even though she isn't rockabilly) I registered to have a look around because that last.fm comment said I should check it out. OK. So I took some care over my profile, used the same pseudonym (Melody von Rock) I use everywhere, answered the questions thoughtfully eg:

(q) what is your dream destination?

(a) hearst castle

etc etc. i wrote a couple of lighthearted silly answers because I wasn't taking it too seriously.

For favourite music I linked to my last.fm page, because it shows the music I listen to.  I also linked to this blog even though I'm not active on it, because it too provides more detail on my interests. I uploaded a photo of me that I’ve used across a few sites with no problems, where I’m in one of my favourite frocks - a Shaheen original – in an art deco-ish pose and it doesn’t show my face.  The profile asks for age, so I entered a blatant lie (13) that anyone would recognise as a lie.

A quick digression from the story to list 3 points for context:

1. as part of my work  couple of years ago I spoke with someone who works for a large Australian social network. She told me that participants use codes to communicate certain things, for example, if someone writes ‘Shawshank redemption’ in the favourite movies section it means they are swingers who want ‘sex with no strings attached’.

2. it's commonly considered impolite to ask a lady her age.

3. I was an 'early adopter' of social networking and learnt from real world experience (1 stalker, 1 hacked computer) how ugly it can be.  These days I walk a fine line between protecting my privacy and rarely participate in online spaces. Heck, I even wrote on the site profile that I’m a private person.  I'm a longtime participant in one niche music site and as a general rule the longer I'm on a site the more trusting of it I become, and consequently more open about who I am. I was also wary of posting private details on coolsville.org because it's not a 'commonly known' site. I rankled at putting my real age - not because I'm an old duck but because too much accurate personal information on the net is risky, especially on a small site I know nothing about.

So my profile was setup and over the next couple of days (20+21 of Nov) I logged in about 4 times to respond to comments from men (only men – why is that?) on my page, all funny, welcoming and pleasant. One wrote:

"Hi Melody...quite an interesting blog for a 13 year old lol, welcome to Coolsville!

To which my reply included friendly humour, something about how I saw Robert Gordon recently (the writer was a Robert Gordon fan) and something like:

‘a lady never tells her age, and if I’m under 18 there’ll be no rudeness’,

His reply was:

"me, rude? never! you have quite the resume for someone under 18.it just doesnt seem to add up, but ,hey, thats life. right? im glad you liked roberts show. hes my buddy and its always good to hear nice things about him. ciao"

he he he and I thought nothing further of it.  Then I didn’t look at my messages or the site for a fortnight, I saw on my phone the headers of 4 friend requests and a message that came through but didn’t read them and just thought ‘low priority, will look at later’. 

5Dec I logged in to find something about a rockabilly restaurant in Melbourne that I had seen when registering on the site and saw this:

‘Michael deluxe’ sent a message 29Nov titled ‘hey’:

It's great that you have other pages and want to link to them, but if you only want to be on here to promote your other pages, please don't bother. I'm sure you're older than 13 since one of your other sites say you're 40. Please be honest and fill out your info on here.

On the day I logged on ‘Scatman’ wrote a comment on my profile page:

"hi im sorry but your clearly not a 13yr girl,what are you trying to achieve by saying that,your blog puts you as a very intelligent adult,this site is for cool gals and dudes,dont spoil it!!"

‘Scatman’s profile says “My Turn-Offs: people who say they are rockin and have modern pop bands on thier profiles” (sic their), although he watches X-factor...... So I decided he was a judgmental purist and it wasn't worth a response. 

2 hours after the scatman comment, Michael Deluxe sent a message with a header ‘please read’:

After 7 emails I am forced to address this situation. The people on this page all share a common interest. I am not too positive that you share any of these interests, so I am asking you to UPDATE you profile, including your age. You claim to be a teenager, although your blogs so otherwise. I ask that you also use a real photo of yourself, showing your face as the other users have done. If you refuse to do this, I will have to ban you from using coolsville.

What emails? Who? What? I took affront:

(a)    I HAD spent time putting my interests on when I signed up, a lot more than others on the site;

(b)    Plenty of users on that site didn’t have photos of themselves (not just new profiles but old ones too); and

(c)    it’s rude to force someone to supply their age. 

I looked at Michael Deluxe’s profile, in it he lists his favourite movie as ‘Shawshank Redemption’.   And because I had registered just as a bit of lighthearted fun I felt suddenly uncomfortable, I deleted my profile.  In response Michael deluxe put this on my page:

"I asked this person to update her profile with her real age and interests, so she deleted herself. good."

Charming.  I then remembered I had also added details of a rockabilly event in the ‘events’ section. A bit awkward…  So using the ‘feedback’ function I explained I had deleted my profile because I consider it rude to force a lady to disclose her age, and politely asked if he could also delete the event, which was still on there with my avatar attached.  I was polite despite the circumstances, and added that if he didn’t I would take further action.  The reply from Michael Deluxe was:

Your event was deleted last night, it takes up to 24 hours for deletions to show.  As for the other profiles, they have uploaded photos of themselves, just not as a main picture. The one who have not, I emailed along with you.  You're going to "take further action"? How so? I own the site, I pay for the site, I run the site, and the terms that YOU agreed to when signing up state that you will provide your real age, a photo, and profile info. you did not follow the rules, so you are history.

I’m history, rejected from coolsville, I am DEFINITELY the least cool person I know.  Michael Deluxe, the site moderator wrote: "The people on this page all share a common interest. I am not too positive that you share any of these interests.” He somehow judged I do not have ‘common interests’ with rockabillies hahahahaha……….. well I admit I have no interest in Shawshank Redemption.   

For the record:
(a) the site requests that the user supply only basic info and I supplied quite a bit about me and my interests;

(b) a quick scan of the earliest 30 participants on the site shows no photos on many of them (NO photos, not just ‘no main picture’) eg:

http://www.coolsville.org/members/profile/15  (no photo, no interests);

http://www.coolsville.org/members/profile/2 (photo of a kid wearing a mask);

http://www.coolsville.org/members/profile/28 (no photo, no description); 
http://www.coolsville.org/members/profile/34 (no photo and flogging a product)………….


I could go on but have made the point – these people have not been banned. In particular the last profile above is flogging product, but Michael Deluxe, who used last.fm to promote his site, wrote to me:

“if you only want to be on here to promote your other pages, please don't bother.”

Umm, like what other pages am I promoting? I’m not a heavy internet user and definitely don’t flout my blog or last.fm page.  So within 2 weeks of next to no activity on a social network I was threatened with being banned.  What a load of misdirected crock.

I told some friends about this tale and all had a good chuckle and then thought no further on it.  It’s unimportant, despite my ironic pride that I was threatened with banishment on a site for cool people.  One (very cool) friend took it seriously and offered advice:

(1) I gather they didn't get your tongue-in-cheek answers.  One's sense of humour often isn't shared, or at least doesn't always come across via email with strangers.

(2) The online playground is not worth worrying about.

(3) You're smarter/better than this!

However one friend who has an interest in the site emailed me today, 16 days later, to tell me that on ‘Scatman’s board there is a recent comment by ‘Rockabilly Richie’:

 http://www.coolsville.org/members/profile/135

that says “I think they mean iq when they say 13, not their age, lol”. What? I do not know 'Rockabilly Richie' and have no idea what that comment is in relation to, but it's close enough to this issue for me to guess it is about me.

So some clearly are not going to let it rest and are still talking about it two weeks later! Michael Deluxe wrote to me “you are history” but apparently not, they can’t seem to forget me…..    I don’t know whether to be flattered or flabbergasted at my new infamy and have certainly never received this treatment before.  I pay no attention to IQ, but for the record my IQ qualifies me for mensa. 

Assumptions made about me were very wrong and it bordered on online bullying.  I still don't understand why supplying my age was so important.  But I politely decided to overlook this rudeness and forgot it. Unlike them.  Hence why I have detailed it here so I can refer to it later if they continue. I hope their pathetic pack mentality will cease and desist.

I don't know whether to laugh or be very scared at this online delusion

War against Justin Bieber haters - the obsessional delusion of this kid is going to haunt my brain.  (count down till when the video gets removed for inciting violence, or inciting embarrassment)...

A response from a Justin Bieber hater

The website

Another Bieber fan is getting upset (warning, that one will seriously make you sad).

Some people create their own realities in the internet world, others believe they hold more power than is good for them to believe.  The scariest thing is that the war against Bieber haters clip has been viewed 166,000 times, thus reinforcing that kids delusion.  Look at the vehemence of his facial expressions, the expletives, the threat itself....  was he reading a script? did he write a script? was it ad lib? 

!!!!!!!!!!!SOMEONE TURN OFF THEIR COMPUTERS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!  REALITY CHECK!!!  but in the meantime I'm stockpiling water, canned goods, food for my cat, oxygen....... and awaiting the 4am knock on the door from the FCC, and burrowing down for the inevitable Bieber PR campaign for his 'Punked' series (which I think this is a contrived PR stunt for)

online show ponies

this is a great article that provides six clues to online 'disinhibition'.  It's written in simple plain language by internet psychologist John Suler.

excerpt:

The anonymity, invisibility and fantasy elements of online activities encourage us to think that the usual rules don't apply. Like a science fiction escape fantasy, the net allows us to be who we want and do what we want, both good and bad.  The problem is that when life becomes a game that can be left behind at the flick of a switch, it's easy to throw responsibility out of the window. ... freedom is an illusion maintained by the online experience of invisibility, anonymity and lack of immediate, visceral, emotional feedback from others, or at least our ability to turn that feedback off.  Perhaps this is freedom: some people do report feeling closer to their real selves when online. But there's a reason we developed all those social inhibitions in the old-fashioned, offline world. They stop us offending other people...

I'm in complete agreement with Suler and must read more of his work! (have ordered the ref in the article for weekend reading! - even though it uses terms like 'solipsistic introjection').  He describes neatly the concepts I've been grappling with for months regarding how online impacts upon real selves and vice versa.

vale Eileen Nearne

everyone should stop their day and spare a thought for people like Eileen Nearne - a quiet modest war hero.

(insert silence here)

you can read more about her here and here - other articles with similar themes are in most media.  She was nicknamed 'the quiet one', and worked in France during the German occupation for the British government as a radio operator who relayed and received messages between the French Resistance and British.  She was captured and tortured by the Gestapo - and apparently was silent throughout her torture - before being sent to concentration camps from where she escaped THREE TIMES. After her final escape she also survived interrogation by Americans who thought she was a Nazi.   After the war she trained as a nurse and lived the rest of her life quietly, privately and modestly. As the NYT article above claims:

As she told an interviewer several years before she died: “It was a life in the shadows, but I was suited for it. I could be hard and secret. I could be lonely. I could be independent. But I wasn’t bored.

Vale Eileen Nearne, I hope everyone stops their day for a little while to think of her.

I also think it's worthwhile reading this little whinge, about how journalists should contact experts before writing, or to edit their puff.  It's perhaps in response to this piece.

I've read a book on Nancy Wake (because she was a NZer), am currently reading this one: and now want to know more about Eileen Nearne.    Might try and get this book next.  My parents farm is  near where Sid Cotton grew up and is buried. He's another wartime hero whose story is well worth reading.  Why don't heroes of more recent wars carry any cultural cache?  I haven't read any bios from the Iraq war, although the Michael Ware doco on ABC was compelling.  Is it just me? Should I look beyond world war two? Or is it more that the 1940-50s are the era I have an interest in.  

Analogies

the cricket… if it’s a test and people keep bowling you shit, you’re going to have to run down the pitch and hit them back over their head.


And if you’re on the same team and have spent months quietly coaching in person, and the coaching messages were just not getting through - it's just not working and they play like a self centred show pony - they’re probably going to get themselves run out, and you get the collateral damage.  


If someone is critical do not deflect it back to them, take time to analyse it then deal with it.  It's far better to get direct negative feedback than none at all, or worse, via the grapevine, behind your back.

the holistic approach to launching content initiatives

for any new content initiative to work, i like to frame the levers required around what I call the six c's: content, communication, champion, culture, cash and computing.  This framework is © me (another 'c'!).   Having it in my head ensures I look at initiatives holistically, which is important.  I developed this framework many years ago during my days of launching knowledge management initiatives in a large multinational firm.  I'd always ensure that on launch teams there was someone in each role.  Breaking it down to these 'six easy pieces' helped when lobbying senior management.  I've limited it to 'content' initiatives because that's the only area I've tested it in, but suspect it would easily transfer to services.

Note this is about launching an initiative, that is the initiative has already been developed in close consultation with customers (the most important C).

I know 'computing' is a stretch and the term should be technology (furthermore it could be broadened to processes) but hey, I wanted it to fit...  Commerce could be substituted for cash if it fits better - basically some measurable performance indicator.

The success of any launch depends upon leveraging TOGETHER these elements, with no one element dominating.  We've seen too many initiatives that have been dominated by technologists who, for example, wanted the public to write on envelopes a certain way so their automated readers could sort the mail (AustPost in the 1980s), or failed from a lack of someone with enough power to push it through inevitable barriers (Steve Jobs comes to mind as a great champion).  Poor quality or quantity of content diminishes the impetus for the initiative, as do poor communications.  The 'culture' aspect is one of the most important, in the workplace it might involve getting the HR rep on board, in broader society it may involve behavioral factors - for example the notion that virtual workers are novelties and subliminally are treated as such. The novelty of the technology used to work with them (eg. videoskyping into a meeting) subliminally clouds the contributions from that person.   How does a voice down a bad phone line compare with someone sitting  across you at a table with body language?  Thirdly with regards to culture, we've seen many innovations stall because the mass wasn't ready for them yet - creative destruction takes time.  I would suggest the 'culture' aspect is the second most important factor.  Why isn't 'cash'/commerce the most important factor? because we've seen plenty of new initiatives launched successfully with minimal funds, bootstrapped.

What this holistic framework emphasises is the team approach - how each lever needs to pull its correct weight at the right time. Secondly, the elements of the team need to keep each other in check, if one starts to dominate or go too fast pull them into line.  If an element breaks then replace it before it affects the running of the other elements.  Doing so will keep the machine running.  Why didn't behaviorists pull the AustPost technologists into line with a reality check?  When initiatives stall at the barriers, where is the champion to put them back on track? etc.

There are plenty of other factors to consider - legalities and regulation for example - but many of them are an integral part of each of the 'c's.  For example, a communications person would need to consider libel etc., a content person would need to consider copyright,  the champion needs to address factors in a way that complies with market regulations, and cash must be obtained legally.

This all reads like a machine, like a scientific management approach, but I prefer to describe it as systems thinking.

THE STEPFORD SINGLES – a tale of horror

Subtitle: FARTBOOK is FARCEBOOK filled with FAECEBOOK

Many years ago I was an early adopter of, and immersed my Self in Myspace.  It was new, it was exciting and slightly 'innocent', it was great to see that there were people like me out there – wherever in the world –with similar specialised interests.  I also reconnected with long lost friends, it was socially reinforcing.  As one example, I made friends in Italy of all places, they became close friends who I visited in person and their friends visited me (when holidaying in Australia).   I discovered Italy and it’s culture, new music etc. It was an enriching experience. 

But as more people joined, at some point it became fake, a dysfunctional ‘competition’ replaced the sense of community, for want of a better description.  I started to live my life through the lens of my camera that I would take everywhere to record and upload my life for the ‘world’ (or 800 so-called ‘friends’) to see and comment on.  I cosseted myself in a lifestyle of constant activity, busy-ness and Myspace became too big a distraction and time-vacuum.  At first it was great lighthearted fun, but as others took up similar patterns I began to see an emerging dysfunctionality in these behaviors – that today has become extremely pronounced and is recognised as a social disease.   'Telling friends about it afterwards' became as big an incentive to go out as the opportunity to catch up with friends and/or the event itself. Besides, I communicated with my friends online, right?  So I immediately stopped, even though (a) I have always loved photography (sparked by my grandfathers interest in it) and once considered it as a career and studied photography for a year and (b) I am by nature personable and like meeting new people, especially creatives which is my academic/work interest.  Despite that I still share long personal emails with some of the friends I made worldwide – most of whom know me in real life and pay no attention to my online presence.  And I do use subject specific social networks and some sites for experimentation/curiosity/for work.  In the rare times when I do so I do it anonymously with pseudonyms.  For example years ago I registered on linked in to explore it for work - I think on there I'm a call centre worker in India.

The key point of this blog entry is that there is a marked difference between social networking and social promotion (a nicer term than exhibitionism so let's use it). Simplistically, one is good and the other is bad.

When I used to take photos and upload them, it was not about me, it was a process I undertook that helped form a kind of friendship glue. Before uploading any photos that included other friends I would seek their permission first.  I rarely photoshopped them, and initially would put a black box over everyone’s heads to protect their privacy.   The process of us taking the photos would be a chance for us all to crowd together and hug, and those who didn’t want to be in the photo could opt out, and those who didn’t like the photo taken would tell me to delete it from the camera and I would as a courtesy as I value the esteem of my friends because as even blogger.com instructs "to upload photos of others without permission is bad manners".  It was all funny fun and not serious at all.

Yesterday I was disturbed by a faecebook behavior that has led to the following rant.  Some time ago I organised a night out amongst a few friends.  I did so on the back of (a) wanting to gauge enthusiasm for a little new venture I’ve been trying to motivate friends to startup and (b) I’d been awarded my doctorate.    A few days before the night one of these friends had visited and noted in my wardrobe a leopard print frock I used to wear ‘back in the day’ but no longer wear as I like to dress my age!  She said I must wear it to our night out so I indulged her and put it on with little thought beyond a cringe and giggle (I’d spent most of the day running around town etc and so got ready at the last minute).  I digress… we arrived to find a couple of friends and two people we didn’t know were already there.  We were introduced to the 2 we didn’t know but one of them just stared and rarely spoke with us.  From hereon in I'll refer to them as the Stepford singles, not wives because at least two of them are  single and aged in their 40's.  The three of them were not really up to conversation with us, preferring their enclave.  They then commandeered the venue stereo and did some synchronised dancing, with their backs to us, facing other people in the venue.  I then realised they weren’t actually interested in us as people or conversing per se.  So I tried to kickstart a conversation but was met with blank faces.  Blank.  Then their cameras came out and they were suddenly highly animated and clicketty clicking themselves then deleting the ones they didn’t like and trying again.  They put on their ‘wow’ faces – expressions of ‘wow I’m having a great time’.  The fakeness of it all made my other friends and I uncomfortable. “lord what is going on” was muttered by one.  I somehow made it obvious that this behavior was socially unacceptable.  “Yes aren’t we vain” came the reply and the behavior continued.  Another stepford single whipped out her mobile to twatter that she was oh so drunk on her 3^rd cocktail etc etc.  (she wasn’t). We left them to it and departed the venue quickly.  I didn’t think we were in any of the photos and our permission wasn’t sought.  It was all about them. I wrote off the disappointing night and days later I did a ‘take 2’ celebration with other friends that was fab. 

I discovered yesterday that a photo that includes me taken by the third stepford single, who did not converse with us at all - just stared at us blankly, is on her faecebook page.  I don’t know her, I’m not her friend and feel very uncomfortable about it and want it removed.  But I don’t know her name and am not on fartbook so can’t contact her to issue a takedown notice. I don’t want to be associated with her – not because I dislike her, but because it’s fake, I don’t know her and she made no effort to converse with me.  She literally just stared at me throughout the time we were there.  The fakeness of it all disturbs me.  Secondly, the Stepford singles were all scrupulously censoring their photos of themselves, rapidly deleting any that were deemed unflattering and perhaps even photoshopping them before uploading to their farcebook.    However they did not, of course, edit any of the other people, or at best selectively.  They look perfect, others look less so.  But most importantly, they did not contact any of us to ask permission to use us as subjects in their photos.  A friend has sent a copy of the photo I’m in to me, and it is NOT flattering, I was clearly caught in a bad moment. In fact it looks like I’m thinking ‘get me out of here’ as the flashes were constant and distracting from any ability to converse.   I know another stepford single has done this in the past – made publicly available a photo of herself with friends where she looks ‘glowing’ but the others less so, without seeking their permission.

This form of social promotion is unhealthy.  It had an element of female competition to it, it is NOT social networking, which is about meeting people and talking with them.  It is not real life, trying to converse with them that night was arduous (and I have subsequently given up when I’ve seen them at the places to be seen).  This form of what I call social promotion is vacuous and fake and has long term damaging effects (which I've written about before and posted an excerpt here).  The more that a person participates in it, the more pressure they place upon themselves to maintain the fake wow bar they have set up high for themselves.  As we saw on that fateful night, these people are not engaging in real social activities.  It’s just self exhibitionism, self promotion.   I advise they

-       turn off all access to social networks, twatter and online communication for 2 months and get some reality back into their lives;

-       allow their edifices some imperfection and originality;

-       go out without a camera / ban use of their camera phone;

-       seek to understand why they do it;

-       accept that they are aged 40+ and need to stop behaving like 20 year old kids in mating markets.  It’s unseemly; and

-     -consider that perhaps noone actually pays attention to their online profile amongst the flood of other profiles (the 80/20 rule is probably closer to 99/1 rule on farcebook).

Speaking more broadly on a global scale there are changes afoot, with international ‘turn off faecebook’ day where people were encouraged to delete their social network accounts, universities are starting to ban social networks for periods.  The ‘turn off’ and 'be real' movement may well become as strong as the slow cooking, slow living movement. I personally refuse to go near farcebook and my sister has adopted a mantra of  ‘online exclusivity’ – she refuses to promote herself professionally and personally online in mass market sites– although her small business has a web page -she networks one-to-one online via emails.  She’s all for the dignity of real life.  I applaud that.

We see alarmist scenarios of how in the future a key occupation will be ‘personal brand manager’ – staff who ensure their client is represented appropriately to their brand online.  This is a service not for stars, but for everyone, anyone, all 500 million fartbooks .  I don’t have a big online presence anymore, the test phase is over and i learnt from it, but I sure would like to hire one of those brand managers to identify, locate and tell the stepford single to remove that photo of me.  I believe increasingly ‘personal online exclusivity’ will become far more valuable than the detritus that is the washing machine of faecebook where everyone and their pet is perfectly mouthing “wow I’m special and lead an exciting life’ in their photos on their personal pages (less so in the photos of them that are on their friends pages….), whilst they continue to reference the totems of their tribes in a global group think “yes I lurve tiki, it’s so iconic blither blather blah blah.” I’ve heard it all before, there’s no originality in it.  There’s no originality in the hairstyle that is copied from others, nor in the leopard print that 3 of us were dressed in that night.  Original individual thought is exciting, not just repeating the group think that dares not diverge with an individual opinion.  When I prodded a stepford single at an earlier event, I just got more blathering of token phrases that bored me. Brain is off.  And the groupthink may not actually be what the individual likes, what the individual really personally likes. All up it equals LOW VALUE THOUGHT. By thinking and speaking honestly I will value you more.

As a postscript, I was recently taken to task by someone over the behavior of one of the stepford singles. It was really uncomfortable as I have no influence over her behavior but was considered somehow responsible by association (do you understand now my reaction to appearing in the photo of a stranger?).  Regardless, I communicated directly, plainly and simply the message to the stepford single that she should stop leaving suggestive comments on the farcebook page of the man who made the complaint.  In reply I got an emotional voicemail asking me to contact her. I won’t as I made my point plainly and by further discussion fear it will result in a catfight that will then be faecebooked.  It's not my responsibility. And I want out and away from vanity robots.  Their fantasy-land is my sci-fi horror.

 

  

my dissertation

it's official! But really the writing of a dissertation is nothing compared to all the work beforehand. The dissertation is like a last little wave.

The Nature, Cause and Trajectory of Emerging Business Models in the Digital Music Sector: Opportunities for Specialised Musicians

Dr Melody von Rock explored emerging business models in the digital music sector, to assess opportunities for musicians who operate outside the traditional music business system.  Her research revealed a wealth of opportunities for self-management, where musicians may achieve financial and experiential sustainability. However despite having the necessary tools and capabilities, musicians were typically disinclined to perform administration and management tasks.  Because music sector innovation often provides a lead indicator, the findings of this study indicate future opportunities across creative industries.

WWHOOOOOOAAAAARRRRRRHHHHHH!!! Lemmy

if you see one music doco this year make it this one: - Lemmy!!!!!!!


There are many reasons why Lemmy is an icon, including:

1. he is a rebel and society needs rebels;

2. his musical influence;

3. he can tell a joke;

4. he is a stubborn survivor;

and I’ll now elaborate on each point.

1. He’s an iconic rebel and we need rebels. He has been described as a hedonist into sex, drugs and rock’n’roll, strip clubs, who drinks whisky like water, and, perhaps most controversially he collects Nazi memorabilia and old  knives. He has always been an outsider, or so he says. He apparently distances himself from everyone, is a loner, is hard to get close to, and prefers the company of whores and strippers. Who today would be the ultimate outsider? A metalhead dressed in Nazi uniform in Los Angeles. And that he is. Lemmy was a punk before punk existed. Society needs rebels, the fringe, people who test the limits.  We may not like what rebels do, but acceptance of it, providing there is no harm to others, implies a healthy society. He isn't breaking any social taboos, merely challenging them.  Even museums collect Nazi memorabilia which is perhaps his most questionable activity.  According to Wikipedia, the Iron Cross has been popular with many bikers, hot rodders, skinheads and others, who have used German iconic militaria to promote a tough-guy image, or as a symbol of rebellion or non-conformity.  It is better for this behaviour to be overt, otherwise monitoring it is more difficult.  It is the subversives that cause most trouble in society and Lemmy doesn't hide much it seems, he doesn't promote either. He is quite open and honest about his activities yet he doesn't encourage others to copy him, and the fact that he can walk down a street in Nazi costume and his only threat is from fans reflects an open accepting society.  That the Hells Angels are typically big Motorhead fans may also offer him some protection (and perhaps that is where his Nazi fascination began - although i think his collecting of nazi memorabilia is akin to curatorship).  The Motorhead tour of Russia symbolised the easing of communism there.  So all up, if Lemmy epitomises 'bad' then we're doing alright because on closer inspection he's not that bad really.

2. I can clearly hear rockabilly in Motorhead music. And not just the (appalling) old covers of Louie Louie or the ‘Please don’t touch’ duet. But in the beats and melody – it’s very rockabilly speed, speedy rockabilly, or speed metal or something.  In his spare time from Motorhead Lemmy plays in rockabilly band - the Head Cats. He however would just call it all ROCK'N'ROLL.

That Lemmy can play a bass and write tunes needn't be said. He is an experienced expert. But his lyrics look like 'last minute in the studio' work, and he can’t sing – at best it’s a throaty yell and is often flat. As he puts it: "I'm not the greatest singer in the world, I know that, but I know how to get my point across."  It fits well with the Motorhead music that suits a power yell, but less so with his Head Cat work.  But he is having a go and that should be applauded.  He sets the bar low enough that others might have a go. Whether or not that's a good thing is questionable, but the 'have a go', do-it-yourself ethos defined punk, and punk restored the health of the music industry.

3. He’s funny and can tell a joke:

“My earliest memory is shouting. At what and for what reason, I don't know. Probably a tantrum; or I may have been rehearsing. I was always an early starter.”

''If this band moved in next door to you, your lawn would die.''

''I don't need Channel 4 to tell me how rock and roll I am; I'm in fucking Motörhead!'' - After taking Channel 4's 'How Rock And Roll Are You?' test and barely scoring 2/3 of the marks.

'I got a tattoo of a dick on my dick, only bigger''

“If you think you are too old to rock 'n roll, then you are.”

4. Lemmy is a stubborn survivor.  His resilience teaches us that rock’n’rollers can age yet never be outdated (or in his case never unable to get a date). This makes us feel ok about being middle aged and still slightly dysfunctional.  He has been around since the Beatles played the Cavern, tells stories about Hendrix.  While it may seem that every interviewer wants him to repeat these experiences, and he politely does so, even though it must bore him and frankly, his fans would rather hear about him, he doesn't need to name check for cred. 

He has chosen his path and not deviated, not compromised through the peaks and troughs of musical genre cycles.  It shows dedication, what business schools refer to as 'sticking to the core', the mission.  It inspires others. He teaches us to pursue our passion straight ahead, not deviate from that pursuit, to live fully. He's been around long enough to have seen trends come and go and doesn't waiver.  Timeless.  Sure he's a hedonist but even so, to have lived his lifestyle for decades without waiver demonstrates discipline, tenacity, drive, stubbornness.  There aren't many CEO's of companies (which he effectively is) who have lasted decades through peaks and troughs in the same business. There were times when he was the sole member of Motorhead as his compadres burnt out, yet he persisted and built it back up.  His roadcrew have stayed with him for decades and Motorhead tour constantly, surely a good sign of his leadership abilities.

He has a low tolerance for fools, fakes and liars. He’s honest – in an era of healthy cotton wool-ed plastic botox he’s never removed those moles on his face, although his teeth look like they’ve had work. He wears whatever he wants and is never in fashion, yet never out of fashion. Look at clips of him in the 1970s and you look at HIM not his clothes, they may even be the same clothes he’s wearing today.

He's one of very few – he has survived and seems content and grateful. Unlike other survivors he hasn't taken an easy path. He hasn't advertised for Luis Vuitton luggage and earned $$$. He's done it alone and his way.  It appears he intends to keep going.  And that is why I appreciate Lemmy.

this obsession with formatopia

"Pulped wood bound in cardboard isn't culture. words are culture. Books are no more cultural than t-shirts"  (Clay Shirky)

ban the term e-reader

just watched a video of analysts discussing the potential of tablets.  most referred to 'e-readers' - please take note, typically, PEOPLE DON'T JUST READ ANYMORE!! They scan, watch videos, photos and art, move their fingers all over the screen, click click, post, interact, link.  Yes sometimes they like to read a book linearly, from p.1 to the end, but also read in many other ways more often.

OK so i'm being a little extreme, but anyone thinking they can just take text and shove it on a new device is going to fail.

Apple iPad at last

I have just preordered my apple iPad - 64GB wifi+3G.  Nothing like going for the BEST! can't wait!

OECD

a paper I wrote has been referenced in a large OECD report released today.  Titled 'The Evolution of News and the Internet'  it's a big global reference piece. I just wish I could find a copy on the OECD website....

!!!! CALEXICO !!!!

tonight i'm seeing the band whose music i listen to the very most according to last.fm.  And a friend is chauffering me there in a vintage American muscle car.  I am very very much looking forward to this!

music business

After many many years studying the music business, today I have made one final conclusion: as it currently stands the business of music is doomed because practitioners have failed in one core element of business. 

Keep close to your customer. Understand them, surprise and delight them, use them, and most importantly, maintain a close relationship with them.  Those in the music industry have perhaps considered themselves too cool and are perhaps too out of touch to identify, understand and acknowledge consumer needs. Instead they have sued them, overcharged them, ignored them, failed to include them, and not delivered what they want.

Case in point: Music Victoria, which has been nominated as the saviour of the music industry in Victoria, recently undertook a comprehensive survey of the music industry.   Q1 - no category for music consumer. FAIL.  I questioned this and got a quick response: "I'd say there was no 'consumer' category because their survey was based on people with involvement in the music industry." OK so let's take the music consumer out of the industry and what have we left? ummm, licensing music for ads and film soundtracks and games. Oblivian

mandatory viewing - the importance of the first follower

from Derek Sivers who knows a lot about this:

currently reading:

Michael Heller's book. "Gridlock Economy - How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation and Costs Lives"

quote of the day

Jane McGonigal at TED: "An entire generation of young people are virtuoso gamers. We need to figure out exactly what skills they're honing."

Copyright industry has too many middle operators

According to their 2008 IRS 990 form, SoundExchange, as of 31Dec2008, was  holding over $256 million U.S. dollars in undistributed royalties.  THAT is what is wrong with the copyright industry......  

quote of the day

i may be breaching confidentiality posting this one:

Today we learn that the UK Government is to examine artist recording contracts, especially those signed by young artists, to try to help them avoid pitfalls and problems further down the line. Much as I support honesty and transparency in all things, I can't help thinking that no politician or civil servant is really equipped to understand the piece of perverted brilliance that the music industry could be - more a troupe of levitating priests than guardians of the nation's sewers or power stations.

But even more sadly, by their ever shriller whining and sourer spitting at anything which comes within their ambit, neither can I help thinking that the BPI and IFPI, and other representative bodies, have invited the Government in to our house without fully anticipating what they would do once there, and that it will all end in tears.

Paradise Motel - Azaria

can't wait for this, my 14th most played band, reformed.  The Paradise Motel returns to present Australian Ghost Story. An album of reflections on the disappearance of Azaria Chamberlain on August 17, 1980. Unlike other reformations I have no doubt or hesitancy. this will be a sublime night

February 23

and i'll be in queensland.... sooking.

quote of the day

We need to become the change that we wish to see (world economic forum)

the future of australian cities

am really enjoying the series this week on ABCTV 730 report.  Lays the groundwork for key debates of 2010: sustainability, aircon culture, high density vs suburban sprawl; farmers selling up to developers; the world will run out of soil in less than sixty years etc.


http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/730report/video/podcast/r504308_2684295.wmv


Please note the only energy I have used so far this summer has been to turn on a small hand fan once for 2 hours during that 45 degree day.  No air con, no fans etc.   

i sooooo wish i could attend this

i reckon this could be the cultural thrill of the year - marianne faithfull, tim robbins etc.


Watch (10.5 MB)


sigh....

this made me laugh

http://unhappyhipsters.tumblr.com/

thought for the day

"The periphery is the centre" - Chinese proverb

thought for the day

What we want from artists is to be helped to notice what we have already seen

thought for the day

excerpt from Umberto Eco Foucault's Pendulum p.50:
You live on the surface, you sometimes seem profound, but it's only because you piece a lot of surfaces together to create the impression of depth, solidity.  That solidity would collapse if you tried to stand it up.  What others call profundity is only a tesseract, a four-dimensional cube.  You walk in one side and come out another, and you're in their universe, which can't coexist with yours.

Herman Hesse

today some words from Herman Hesse are in my mind: “Only the ideas that we really live have any value.”  and “The truth is lived, not taught.” (nor read, blogged, facebooked)...

some colourful Tote closure protests

serious wordage and email addresses to protest to in prior post, but some humour is needed today.  Kids can be so inventive.  I hope there's more of this:

And

a bit more context: