http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Thu, 2 Sep 2004 13:08:36 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/09/02/130836.php Kevin Aylward*** WIZBANG EXCLUSIVE *** All pictures copyright Wizbang.Unauthorized use prohibited.Bono paid a visit to the Republican National Convention (posing here with an attendee): View Full Picture Bono hung out in in the Host Committee Suite for 15 minutes... View Full Picture Then as quick as he arrived, he was gone... View Full PictureAdditional coverage at Wizbang. For aggregated coverage of the RNC from credentialed and uncredentialed bloggers visit RNCBloggers.com Politics19383@blogcritics.org Thu, 2 Sep 2004 13:08:36 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/01/110613.php Kevin AylwardThe Daily Record is reporting that Croupier star Clive Owen will be the new James Bond.In unrelated news James Bond was busted for a DUI in San Diego. Video8817@blogcritics.org Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:06:13 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/25/234020.php Kevin AylwardMoxie and I both worried this summer if a US version of Coupling would fall on its proverbial face. Well in my opinion, as a serious fan of the UK version, the NBC version acquits itself well. Here's why:Steve - Jay Harrington as Steve brings is the emotional center of the show. Versus Jack Davenport's Steve the US version is played as a little less bumbling and a touch less pathetic. I think I may enjoy the Steve character more in the US version.Susan - Reena Sofer is as good as the very sexy Sarah Alexander in the role of Susan. It's a good thing, as the Susan character as written can get a bit annoying.Sally - Sonya Walger in the part played by Kate Isitt in the UK version is a work in progress. The first episode is not a good "Sally" episode. Isitt is at her best when obsessing about body parts and their endless and futile fight against gravity. Walger has yet to show anything, but the jury is still out.Patrick - Colin Ferguson in the US version is not as funny as Ben Miles in the UK version, but he looks more the part of the deeply self obsessed himbo.Jane - Lindsay Price plays the part very well. Gina Bellman in the UK version plays it ditzy as well, but Price came off just as well.Jeff - Unfortunately Christopher Moynihan as Jeff, played in the UK version by Richard Coyle is a disappointment to anyone who is a fan of the British version of the show. There is almost no way to describe what Coyle's Jeff adds to the show. As delivered by Moynihan, Jeff's lines which are the backbone of the UK versions humor come off flat.So leave the Friends comparisons for the blow hard critics. Any fan of the UK version should be comfortable in the US version. It's not as good, but it's not a disaster. It will be interesting to see how long they stick with the Steven Moffat scripts from the UK version. Once we see new material then the debate as to the merits of the US version can begin. Original material will appear in the first season of the US version.Cross posted at Wizbang. Video8675@blogcritics.org Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:40:20 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/12/003725.php Kevin AylwardChristian Bale, best known as Patrick Bateman from the movie American Psycho, has been picked by Warner Brothers to take over the role of Batman in the latest installment. Memento director Christopher Nolan will direct Bale in "Batman: Year One" which focuses on Bruce Wayne's first year as a crime fighter.You already knew Bale as Bateman, just drop the "e" and you're all set. Perhaps Batman can ask the villain, "Do you like Huey Lewis?" Video8318@blogcritics.org Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:37:25 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/09/04/193757.php Kevin AylwardAt 9:00PM (EST) tonight the Washington Redskins host the New York Jets in the NFL season opener at FedEx Field. ABC coverage starts at 8PM (EST) with a pregame concert featuring Britney Spears, Aerosmith, Mary J. Blige, and Aretha Franklin.Get your pool picks in, set your fantasy football lineups, and get on over to SportsBlog for information, predictions, opinions, and trash talking. We've got all sports covered, although right now the focus is mostly on football.Did I mention that SportsBlog is patterned after BlogCritics. If you know how this site works you'll understand SportsBlog. We've got a new layout in progress, but the content is already top notch. We're always in search of more contributors and if you're a BlogCritics author you'll notice the similarities immediately. We're proud to call SportsBlog a blog child of BlogCritics. Sports8107@blogcritics.org Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:37:57 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/28/134522.php Kevin AylwardLooking through the items that are saved on our TiVo, I noticed that quite a few items have been marked as Save Until I Delete (SUID). My wife gets a little carried away with that function sometimes. Since our TiVo has been upgraded to hold 100+ hours we hang onto shows that we almost certainly will never watch. The oldest show currently on the Now Playing list is an episode of The Wiggles on the Disney Chanel from 12/14/2002. I'm not counting this show as the oldest since we don't record the show regularly and we only keep that one episode for the children of our friends when they're over.The oldest show on our Now Playing List: Broadway Melody of 1938 from Turner Classic Movies (2/26/2003). A close second is Hello, Dolly! from the Fox Movie Channel (3/1/2003).No those aren't my recordings, they're my wife's... I wouldn't want my TiVo to think I'm gay...But enough embarasing details about my household. What's the oldest saved recording on your TiVo? Video7283@blogcritics.org Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:45:22 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/27/180253.php Kevin AylwardThere has been a lot of press recently on the after effects of the decision against the major record labels in their case against Morpheus and Grokster. Much of the speculation has centered on the record labels potential use of proactive search and destroy programs against consumers. Most of the information coming out is aimed at the casual P2P user as a form of FUD (fear, uncertainty,and doubt). The record industry wants you to believe that they are the bogeyman who can lock your computer or erase parts of your hard disks if you continue your copyright infringements. For the most part, it's all BS.Technically all of the shadowy types of measures they are leaking to the press (see the NYT article - Registration required) are already available in the form of viruses, trojans, etc. Orin Kerr at The Volokh Conspiracy has some legal advice for the record companies, and was where I saw the NYT article first. There is nothing revolutionary being discussed, rather it is that the potential threat comes from multi billion dollar conglomerates as opposed to teenage hackers. There is almost no chance of the record companies crossing the line into proactive destruction of your computer property, there is only the perception that they are able to do it. If you believe that the record companies or their agents may launch such an attack against you, your file sharing behavior will change, so the logic goes. When that day comes, the record companies will have scored a partial victory in the war against music trading. Imagine if everyone on Kazaa stops sharing, figuring the other guy would share. When that day comes the service stops being effective.So the premise is that the record company would like to index your computer for illegal media (MP3's) and remove them. Here is my offer to the record companies. I will opt-in to a piece of software that ensures that my computer does not store ill gotten music or media under one condition: You have to pay me!My payment, of course, would be in music or credits to CD stores, online music services, etc. Basically I agree not to participate in music trading for a payoff. I am making a rational economic decision based on an examination of the music economy as it exists at this instant. There is a continuum in the music industry between free MP3's available on the P2P networks and the $15 to $19 CD I can get in the store. If I like a single song and want to listen to it, the marketplace leaves me little choice but to go to a P2P service to get it. It's not like I can walk into the CD store and pay for one song. If on the other hand I want to get the latest Dave Matthews album, I must make another choice between spending all of the time necessary to get every track off the P2P networks or just stopping by the store and paying the full price for the CD. Given that I have a job and kids, I do have a monetary value attached to my free time. Downloading and burning a CD could take at least an hour of my time, hence in most cases I would opt for the CD purchase (especially if the price were lower). Obviously students and teenagers have a much lower monetary value attached to their free time and may be less inclined to stop using P2P.So if I let the record companies (and/or the movie industry) certify my PC as copyright infringement free, I expect that they will pay me for that privilege. Why? Say, for example, that I "steal" 50 albums a year at a loss to the record industry of $750 per year. Keeping my PC copyright infringement free would lead me to spend some portion of that $750 dollar loss on actual recorded music. For this example lets say that by participating in the "program" I buy $250 worth of CD's that I would not have otherwise bought. At this point the record industry has made incremental revenue gains of $250 with the added benefit that I cannot share the music with millions of my closest friends. Forrester estimates the record companies are loosing $3.1 billion dollars a year to 1 million or so users of P2P systems. In that case I would be costing them about $250 a month as an average user (sound a little high to me). So if the net benefit of my departure from the P2P field would be $3250 dollars a year, what would I really like from the record companies in return? How about a cut of the profits, by way of some free songs? The exact number and frequency are really not the point, market conditions and rational self interest will determine at what point I agree to "buy" the monitoring program. Is it one song a week, month, year? There are any number of levels that will satisfy various percentages of the P2P community.If participating in the slow demise (one PC at a time) of the P2P networks earned me the opportunity to make one legal mix CD every couple months I would probably sign on. A lot of other casual users might sign on as well.My premise is that the record companies are only really aiming at the casual user of the P2P systems. Hardcore users with nothing but time on their hands would probably be immune to any offerings. So as a casual user myself, why do I use P2P systems? It is most certainly not to get whole albums, rather it is to make "mixes" of favorite songs or artists or genres.Anyone who has used P2P knows that getting a whole album is usually a less than satisfying experience. Whether it is poor sample rates, missing songs, or cutoff recordings, you usually spend a lot of time to make an album copy and the result is not always a great copy. Here's the secret the the labels just flat out don't understand:The P2P services flourish because there is no good way to get a legal compilation of songs you want from the record industry!Face it, no one wants a lot of the songs on most CD's. If I hear a Coldplay song I like, I might want to put it on a mix CD for the gym or the car, but at no point will I actually go buy their CD or spend the time necessary to download the entire album. So if you take it as a given that I will never buy a Coldplay CD, what if the record industry had a way to make money from me if I wanted a Coldplay song? This seemed to be the idea behind Apple's entry into the music field with the IPod service. As a side note, if retail music stores stocked only the top 100 CD's and had a machine that made on demand CD's from the catalog of recorded music I suspect that they would do as well or better financially as they do now.So if the record company is going to pay me to opt-out of P2P wouldn't that cost them a lot of money? No. If the payment was in music that I could get for free from P2P it's pretty much a zero sum game for the record company. I would not be spending money on that Coldplay song either way, and there is only a small out of pocket royalty cost to the label (which I'm sure they would negotiate out of future artists contracts). Think of it like your friendly neighborhood drug dealer giving out samples of the goods, an investment of goodwill for a potential future paying customer... Music7262@blogcritics.org Sun, 27 Jul 2003 18:02:53 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/22/155018.php Kevin AylwardIn a desperate attempt to draw viewers to it's network, Trio has sold out it's primetime schedule of Rowan and Martin reruns to annoying Joel Stein from Time magazine. In exchange for mention in his column, they have allowed him to program their primetime lineup. Stein has reached into TV's garbage dump to find the worst of the worst. With this stunt, Trio proves they will try anything to attract more than a few hundred viewers. The sad part for Trio is that more people will read this post, than watch.Here is what Joel has come up with for his one week in charge:Good Clean Porn - Porn minus the porn. I think they stole this from Satan's cable channel, since this is surely what you're forced to watch in hell. Would you watch Deep Throat without the sex? Didn't think so...Idiot Savants - MTV quiz show in which four college-age contestants were asked pop culture questions by a wise guy host. Luckily 99.999 percent of the population has never heard or seem this clunker. The only apparent reason for it's inclusion is that a college-age Joel Stein was a guest.Pink Lady and Jeff - If you're going to show crap you might as well go for the worst series of all time.My Mother the Car - Jerry Van Dyke starts as a family man who discovers that his mother has returned from the grave as a 1928 Porter convertible automobile. I guess the talented brother was unavailable.Battle Of The Networks Stars (1977) - Wide World of Sports meets Reality TV. This is the height of 70's TV schmaltz. Pay close attention to the T&A which ABC graciously highlights with skin tight outfits. Added bonus is that the Monday night football crew called the action.It's an interesting alternative programing option, that is sure to attract viewers who enjoy train wreck TV. Note to Trio execs - I'm available to help... Video7137@blogcritics.org Tue, 22 Jul 2003 15:50:18 EDT