Weathers new home

I was very interested to see what the new weather center was like from the Weather Channel. I'm a total weather geek but have really discounted the weather channel as they seemed to you sub-standard technology and meteorologists. This all looks to be a step in the right direction.

I did find a couple of interesting things about their virtual tour that I didn't really like. There were several times where they claimed to have made an improvement to make the studio more earth friendly. These statements were overly vague. For instance; "a portion of the materials came from less than 500 miles away." That means basically nothing. One ounce of 200 tons is "a portion." I also found it funny that they made a big deal of telling us they used 170 square feet for recycling bins... and then didn't show where they were on the diagram.

Obviously I still hold some skepticism towards The Weather Channel but they are growing on me a bit. I'll check them out in HD and see if they can sway me any further.

NYFA Virtual Tour

Unfortunately, the link provided for the virtual tour redirects me to the pages' home. I attempted to use Google Cache and The Way Back machine but no luck with those either. I looked at several other aspects of the site and it does appear to be a quality place to attend if someone is looking to go into film making. I also like the fact that they have locations all over the world, not just the US. This can ensure a full exposure to making movies in all kinds of locations and locales.

Stages of Emily

I watched the film called Stages of Emily.

It was about a woman who was facing her marriage as if it was the death of her single self. During this film she went through all of the stages of grief and you really began to feel the strain on her as if she were actually dying.

All of that being said, I really wish I had watched something else. There was some foul language, and while it wasn't much, didn't enhance the story at all. So why even have it in there?

Her friends, family and religious leader were basically worthless in helping her cope with these feelings. I would like to think that at least one of those would actually help you out.

I really have to question YouTube's decision to make this a featured film in their screening room. While slightly creative, its nothing we haven't seen before and was very far from anything innovative.

NYT's New Digs

Overall the building is quite nice, However I do have a couple of gripes and a couple of things that really stood out to me.

I love how open the newsroom area is even between floors. It truly gives a team feeling as well as easy method for quick communication as it appears that cube walls are only about 5 feet high. We have actually started to implement a similar layout where I work and many people have really embraced the change.

The view from the mast is amazing. It truly holds that quintessential New York Skyline.

I'm still trying to figure out what the small rectangles are that line the walls of the 8th street entrance to the building. Are they small TV screens?

The views out from the newsroom and cafeteria do not really do much for me for some reason. I think the horizontal bars make it feel a bit like a correctional facility.

That being said, I think the new building truly fosters a team environment and a comfortable place to work.

Glory to Gutenberg

The Gutenberg Bible website from the University of Texas was an excellent read. What an honor it must be to hold such an amazing piece of history. Not only was this the first book printed with movable type was also quite possibly the salvation of the Bible in general.

Movable type brought education and the Lord to the masses. Its just so amazing.

I love that they have also gone ahead and digitized the Gutenberg Bible. This was a great idea for several reasons. First, we can safely get a copy of the text before the materials deteriorate. Second, it allow for even more people the privilege of seeing the Gutenberg Bible without having to travel. Third, and possibly most importantly, it ensures that the content will not be lost in the event the Bible is destroyed by a disaster.

Where would we be without the invention of movable type? I'd hate to even think about it but we would be no where near where we are today.

This is one of those inventions that truly changed the world.

State of the Media

First of all, I loved the listing of subjects covered by percentage. Just excellent information.

I was also particularly impressed with the Media Ownership Dashboard. I was completely unaware that Cox Enterprises owned so much of the radio market and is a head above their nearest competitor.

This website has an unbelievable amount of information covering all aspects of media. They even have Nielsen analysis. This has been added to my bookmarks and will be visited by me at least every quarter after all I am a total information geek.

The Major Trends page was also very interesting. Where you would think technology and new media are leaving old media in the dust. They have actually found that technology actually benefits old media more than new media. When you also take into account that they found most new media outlets are limited in their ability to produce content. Very interesting and a limitation of new media that I hadn't thought about.

The ethics of a business can be summarized in (cough)

After going through the class I found a couple of interesting case studies.

The first was under Privacy and was entitled, "Naming a Rape Victim." In this case study a child abducted while walking home. The news media covered this story heavily and released the name and photo of the victim. Two days later, the girl was able to escape her captor and was reunited with her family. Again the news media covered this story heavily as well. Two days after this, the abductor was found and charged with sexual assault.

The debate in this issue comes from the fact that the victims name and photo was released to the public.

I know it is a general rule that when a rape victim comes forward, you are not to release their name but, I feel, this instance is different. How many times does a child get kidnapped in Kansas and the Amber Alert system is activated? This system shows the name and picture of the victim. If, days later, the child is found to be a rape victim, their image and name have been all over the news.

Its a matter of balancing privacy with effectiveness in finding the child at all. If we withhold the information and the child is never found, in my opinion, we have lost more. If the child is found but the world knows they were sexually assaulted, I think that is less of an issue. At least the child was rescued from a terrible situation.

Another excellent section covered the Source/Reporter Relationship. I had often wondered exactly how media outlets could get away with using antonymous sources. I now see that it truly puts the reputation of the media outlet at risk.

The case study I liked in this section was about Ricky Williams. It details the media feeding frenzy that ensued after "sources" revealed that Williams had violated the NFL's substance abuse policy for a fourth time. Several media outlets jumped on the story, none of them revealing any sources. This story circled the entire US completely unattributed. Even a managing editor from the Sun-Sentinel stated "Looking back, I'm not sure we needed the column. It feels way too speculative." Obviously she feels that publishing this story was a mistake. I tend to agree. If a source is not willing to put their name on the line, where is their skin in the game? I could tell you that my place of work lost $500 million dollars yesterday but if I want my name to remain private, whats to stop me from making it all up? (By the way they didn't lose $500 million).

I feel that if a source isn't willing to put their name on the line then their information isn't news.

Safe Surfing

Online safety is nothing to be taken lightly. I have frequently had people contact me, not knowing me at all and giving me way too much information.

Being an IT professional, I see all kinds of issues with internet safety.
There are countless internet safety games out there by one of my favorites is NetSmartz Kids. They offer an extensive number of games, tips and tricks for kids and parents alike.

A more adult test is the SonicWall Phishing IQ Test. This test is very difficult. Even seasoned IT professionals will miss at least one or two.

I did play the AT&T game and for the most part, I thought it was an acceptable method for teaching online safety.

Then I came across the following question:

Really? One of the few things I really know about children is that they are hesitant to admit that they are afraid or scared. Knowing this, why would you include an option like "Nothing, I'm never scared"?

I would be willing to wager that most kids get this one wrong on the first try.

We have to remember that we are not only teaching children about the dangers online but also the correct method of handling these situations.

Bringing Censorship to the Masses

Let me just start this off with one of my favorite commentaries on censorship from the FCC. Warning... this may be slightly NSFW.



Now that we have that bit out of the way, on to my actual opinion. While I do believe there is some truth to the commentary from Family Guy, for the most part I'm ok with an acceptable level of censorship.

I believe that there is a time and a place for crude language, situations, etc. but that it's only acceptable if it truly enhances the story. I feel an excellent example of this is the classic book To Kill a Mockingbird. There is a significant amount of racism depicted in the book. However, it enhances the story. In this instance the racism is used to depict the issues that a society has and how they can be overcome when someone will stand up for whats right.

I have a friend who is teaching from this book in her English class for high school juniors. She did everything by the book and notified the student of the racism ahead of time and explained the use of this racism similar to how I did above. While most of her students used intelligent, critical thinking about the issue, there were a few who simply refused to read it based on principal.

I'm not saying those people are wrong, I'm just saying that I believe that is how censorship should be handled. Everything should be presented upfront and once the consumer is of age or maturity to decided for themselves, they should be allowed to.

Knowing that I'd like to say that I feel completely different about Apple censoring Apps in their App Store. My issue is not a matter of morality but of Apple's attitude and advertising of their App Store. Apple likes to market their iPhone and App Store using terms "open" and "freedom" and "magical." First of all... Magical... yeah right. But under what definition of open or freedom is the inclusion of censorship? I believe this model will ultimately be the demise of Apple. Their attitude of being better than everyone else is just waiting to back fire... and this is coming from a former Apple user.

Green with envy

I have been familiar with Drew Carey's Green Screen show for quite some time. While I don't believe it to be as good as the old standard Whose Line is it Anyway? the show is still quite innovative and creative.

A green screen system works by method of color replacement. A computer is connected to a camera and is given a specific color that is intended to be replaced by a video overlay. The background color to be replaces is not restricted only to green. Virtually any color is available for replacement. There is one fairly large caveat to green screening... Your video personalities can not be wearing the color to be replaced or they will end up wearing part of the replaced image. An example of this phenomenon can be found here. (Note the weather man's tie is changing with the background)

This is actually my favorite use of green screen. I have been a total weather nerd since the summer of 2003 when I basically had to live in the hospital for a summer. When you don't really get to go outside too often, the weather becomes your window to the world.

In recent history, green screen capability has been released to the public at a consumer level. No longer are expensive all-green rooms and high-powered computers needed to obtain this media altering technology.

The Great Train Robbery (1903)

This silent movie looks to be the basis for many movies to come. It has action, thrills and a chilling ending.

Four men jump a train with one thing in mind... robbery.

The four men carry out an ingenious plan as they rob the train and make a getaway to their hideout but when a failure to tie off a loose end comes back to haunt them, they'll have to mount up and out run the long arm of the law.

All in all; a great movie. My only complaint, the deaths are a little over acted, even for a silent movie.

4.5 of 5 stars.

Big Blue, Little Red or Remote Red.

I am an avid movie goer. There is rarely a Friday night when I can be found anywhere except the theater, catching the latest flicks.

Frequently, I also like to catch up on some of my old favorites or watch the one movie I missed in the theater. So which option do I choose? To I head for the Blockbuster? Hunt down a Redbox? Update my queue on NetFlix?

Actually I use a bit of a combination. First off, I have never liked Blockbuster. They have always had higher prices and poorer service when compared competitors, including local rental stores.

Now, we're all NetFilx, Redbox and Hulu. With NetFlix and Hulu streaming options I can stream almost anything I want to my Xbox360 or PC. For the few things that I can't get via stream, I can either drop it in my NetFlix queue (and wait 24 hrs) or run to a near by Redbox and rent it for a dollar.

With options like this, its no wonder the big blue of the movie rental business is going down.

You can hear the music on the AM Radio

I'll be honest... I'm a TV nut. If you give me a situation, I can probably come up with a line from a TV show that fits.

That being said, I also love old time radio. I know many people would think that radio shows would be less engaging because the eyes aren't engaged but what your eyes don't see your mind is free to make up.

One of my absolute favorites was the War of the Worlds radio program. Orson Wells was so amazingly convincing that people thought it was real. Today people watch live TV and question if its real.

One thing that I believe was key to the longevity of radio shows was that the show was performed in front of an audience. This ensures that we don't have voice actors just reading off of a card with a monotone voice. It ensures an active voice and engaging content.

I recently saw a program on PBS where a group of people were simply reading the lines from a play while standing in front of a TV camera. Talk about boring. I think I was ready to change the channel in about 3 minutes. Some would say I didn't give it a chance buy when my 6 year old niece can read more fluidly than those clowns, I had given it all the chance it needed.

One of my favorite places to listen to radio programs is on road trips. I especially like mysteries because we turn it into a contest of who can figure it out first. Like clue but without the game board.

I truly feel that the TV killed a wonderful art when the radio show was laid to rest.

Napster v iTunes: A battle for the ages?

I'll admit, I was one of the first people I know to start using Napster. Yes, back in is pre-legal days. After joining the working world and actually having money to spend on music, I decided to go as legit as possible. I went back through my entire song database and either purchased each song or attempted to find a CD to purchase with the song on it. Needless to say, this was quite expensive for my 4,500+ songs.

After becoming legit as I could (there were a few songs by flash-in-the-pan bands from the 90's that were nowhere to be found), I became a loyal iTunes customer. This was back when iTunes purchases were only available in the A4P format (pre-fairplay, which was a HUGE misnomer). That really didn't bother me all that much because there were easy ways around the protection. Some utilities would simply remove the protection, others would mimic a CD Burner and allow you to "burn" to MP3. If all else failed, you could always burn an Audio CD and then use iTunes to import the audio back in to your collection as an unprotected format.

Now, even this technique is obsolete as Apple as started releasing many of their tracks in the standard MP3 format.

I only have 2 complaints about iTunes.
1) Using it with a non-apple device is a nightmare.
2) Their music purchasing selection does leave something to be desired.

I really can't fault Apple directly for the second complaint, they get what they can and most of the music I fail to find on iTunes, I have a difficult time finding elsewhere as well. But I can easily fault them for locking out other devices. I understand that the software is "free." What apple doesn't realize is that for many users, iTunes could be the foothold for creating one of their precious "switchers."

iTunes wins out but if I ever find a music organization system that works like iTunes, supports devices other than Apple's and isn't full of bugs, I would gladly pay for it.

The Future (or lack thereof) of Print

Just so we're all on the same page (no pun intended), I'm writing this blog post from a iPad. I Just wanted to get my potential bias out of the way.

I have been wondering for quite sometime what the fate of print media would be once Internet media came into full swing. I first started developing my hypothesis back in 1999 when I was the webmaster for my high school newspaper. At first I thought online viewership would struggle to surpass our print count. All it took was dropping the URL into the print version to blow that number away. Then a submission to Yahoo! Search pushed the number of daily views to nearly 10 times of our monthly print count. This is where I truly learned the value of online publishing. And you better believe that we never missed getting a story, picture or sports score online. The online edition became an extension of the print edition.

That is the key business model that I think could save newspapers. They need to embrace the web and it's distribution techniques. This is where the true value is in online production; reduction in production costs and the sheer volume of your readership.

The buiness model that works is not to "pay-wall" everything but to simply flip the paradigm. Where physical papers used to cost money and online was a free extension there needs to be a change. Online needs to become the primary method of production. Print doesn't go away but simply becomes a subscription only service or at least a better forecasted print count. Why spend money to print 25,000 physical papers when not even half of those papers are consumed? In the past this hadn't been an issue but with margins diminishing, every unused paper counts.

It's not that print is going to die tomorrow, many people still prefer the feel of a physical paper to the feel of an e-reader. News sources just need to be more intelligent about how they leverage print versus how online outlets are leveraged. There is a delicate balance and while I think some news papers are getting that figured out many can't see that this balance is slowly shifting towards online distributions.

I'll ban their Teacher's Editions.

I have to admit I was really taken back at the Fox News article detailing the banning of the Dictionary in California schools. I wonder just how far it will go. Running their logic to its conclusion; they should also ban the Thesaurus, any Human Anatomy book, any Biology book, any book relating to physical health or well-being.

Hmmm.... that will really lighten the students' course load.

While I understand that some books are not for younger kids, I also see a real value in classic literature and how literature itself has evolved in the history of humanity.

I went to the ALA's top ten most frequently challenged books by year page and I have to say I was more than a little surprised. Looking only at the books that have been challenged since 2001, I saw several that I had read in high school. When I see the reasons for the challenges and reflect back on the books, I rarely remember a point that would fit under any of the challenges. This leads me to believe that either I was way more mature than I should have been at that age or that the passages simply didn't have an effect on me.

The book that I was the most shocked to find was "To Kill A Mockingbird," by Harper Lee. This book was challenged on the basis of racism, offensive language and being unsuited for the age group it was taught to.

While I do remember themes of racism and some fairly mild language (which was usually to demonstrate the level of racism) these were inserted to be struck down. You have to show the evil in order to display overcoming it.

I know another very important book that had been censored for ages due to its provocative content. The Song of Solomon from the Bible. For ages Jewish boys were restricted from this book of the bible due to the descriptive nature of a man's relationship with his wife. The symbolism was so strong that it was labeled as pornographic. While I do agree that there is some pretty provocative stuff in that book, you have to look at context.

Is it not OK for a man to pine over his wife?

Is it not OK to paint a community as racist so that one man can stand up to them?

If we ban books for having evil of any kind or "bad words," we will be left with nothing. Even true stories would be banned or made completely nonfactual. Our history as we know it would be lost.

Should some books be kept out of schools? Yes, I don't think the 50 Years of Playboy book should be in our schools.

But... when a book is a proven accurate portrayal of society and our protagonist has to overcome the shortcomings of this society. Then a, within reason, description of the dark side of that society shouldn't send everyone into a censorship hissy fit.

Blog Bytes: Ben Franklin's Poor Richard's Almanack

When asked to find a bit of wisdom in the almanack that I liked, I didn't have to look far. Page 4 has a wonderful statement; "Content makes poor men rich; Discontent makes rich men poor." Click here to see the original.

This really hits home for me. Last year I went on a personal crusade to become more content with my life. I worried about everything and I mean everything. Even things that were beyond my control would frequently dwell in my mind.

Like much of Poor Richard's Almanack, the terms of rich and poor are sometimes misunderstood. Here, I believe, "rich" and 'poor" talk about much more than money or possessions. Contentment is something that money and possessions truly cannot buy. Contentment comes from being at peace with your life.

Currently, this concept is almost counter-cultural. The "American Dream" seems to be all about having more money and more stuff. I didn't start that way. The american dream started as being free and self sufficient. Not having 50 collector cars and more money than your children could ever spend but as usual, the dream has been twisted and distorted into a view of lavish lifestyle.

I think if more people had adopted this simple principal, the US wouldn't be in quite the economic hole we are. I don't believe that being content will keep the economy from having the corrections that it is supposed to but I think we would have seen far less foreclosures and bankruptcies.

Ben Franklin's advice is simple: Find what truly makes you happy and your life will feel rich but often rich men seek contentment with things which do not satisfy.

One easy way to start being content with where you are in life and what you have is to check out LastYearsModel.org. This is a movement based on contentment, or laziness depending on your view.

Does the Internet limit real social interaction?

This was an excellent question. I have actually been found on both sides of the debate and I truly believe it is a serious issue facing our global society.

In my opinion, many people get tripped up on the definition of Social Interaction. Is a social interaction simply chatting with someone or smiling at a person you see walking down the street? Does it go deeper than that?

I believe it goes deeper than that.

For true, real social interaction, there are numerous cues and idioms that are lost in the translation between the synapses and 1's and 0's. The ability to read and react to body language is a perfect example. Over the last several years, I've watched the ability of those around me to read and understand body language dwindle and quite frankly, I'm not surprised.

My favorite example is of two of my female friends. They are best friends and even live with each other. Last year at this time one of these ladies had made a semester-long commitment to the athletic department at K-State which required long hours of strenuous work. The two simply never saw each other except for the occasional quick brush over the weekends. Their relationship quickly began to deteriorate. Both roommates came to me and asked me why they no longer seemed to get each other. After talking extensively with both of them individually and together I think we got to the root of the issue. The two couldn't read each other anymore because they just hadn't spent any time together. Sure they frequently chatted on Facebook but no real face time. Of course any time they did spend together, the annoyed each other because each was trying to re-learn the movements of the other.

This was so disruptive to both of these ladies' lives that they nearly parted ways. I encouraged them to set time aside to spend more time together doing activities, not just sit at home. Both took my advice to heart and are now best friends again. I'm sure if you were to ask them why their relationship almost ended, they would site the lack of real, face-to-face interaction.

It is true that societies can exist online and show realistic social interaction. I believe that Second Life and The World of Warcraft have shown us that online societies and real-world societies act in much the same way but there is still a piece of the interpersonal level of communication missing. When you can hear the strain in someone's voice over a stressful situation or see them shift their weight when talking about an uncomfortable subject, the conversation and interaction lose a great level of depth. Losing this level of depth seeks to make us more machine like in how we converse by removing the emotion from the equation.

The past is the past; the future is now! </sarcasm>

I couldn't help but laugh when I heard today's blog topic. Just today one of my friends posted this little tidbit that fits along perfectly, even though I disagree with it.

So now that the world is all 1's and 0's; Does the delivery matter? Absolutely!

This may seem a little strange but I'm going to use Twitter as a prime example. Many people see Twitter as the end of "traditional" media. Why read a news paper when you can read it all in 140 characters? It is actually my belief that Twitter has forced media outlets into a new level of story telling. Before, you had the width of an article (headline) and occationally the hook to get your readers attention. Now, you have just 140 characters, minus the length of your URL. The language must be sharp, vivid and straight to the story. If you can't convince the reader in 140 characters, they're not going to bother with the rest. I believe this is the essence of what we're asked to blog about.

The very things that have always been important, still are. The only difference is a change of format. Who wants to read a spreadsheet about the current economic status? Very few. Most of the US would rather have a well researched piece of literature that not only tells us where we are but where we've been and where we could be going. The reader loves a storyteller, therefore the writer must have a love for telling the story. As for clear, vivid language; pictures and video still can't compete with the human imagination, at least not yet.

Ah, respect for history. This is something that I believe we Americans kind of fail at. Many times when I see a tragic or shocking happening, I know that it will all blow over in a few months. Just about 60 days is all it takes for us to do what we do best... forget. I actually believe that TV and social media are giving us a slight push in this direction. Twitter doesn't keep much of a history and neither does Facebook. But this is a place where great storytellers who use language that brings the past back to life, can excel. It is history that defines an object, a date, a website, an event. To lose the history is to allow the object itself to fall into obscurity.

Blog Bytes 1: Media Junkie

The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery rates me at a 26/100 points for being an "Internet Addict." Twenty points was the lowest possible score, so I guess I'm far from a "Media Junkie" right?

Well, lets just agree to disagree.

I would say that I'm a fairly big media junkie but I think the form and function of the media junkie has changed.

My biggest fix comes from mobile media. I have a Blackberry and I know full well the reason for which it earned its nickname of "CrackBerry." If I haven't checked the device (note that I didn't call it a phone ) for more than an hour, I start to get the shakes. My device has immediate inroads to Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, LinkedIn, sports scores and anywhere else the internet can take me. The "Crackberry" has single-handedly not only made me an "media junkie" but more of a "media nazi". With the ability to fire back messages, tweets, statuses, pictures and videos, its not only that you consume media, you interact with it.

I will admit that my work does have me at a significant disadvantage. I work in Information Technology, where you are encouraged to gather information. If I'm not on the trade sites or blogs at least once a day, I fall behind the market. Granted, this is nearly all work related but its still a level of information gathering that has become more of a habit than a task.

So how about home life? While significantly better, its no clean break. Most of my time at home is consumed by listening to TV or music... while checking "news" on my laptop or Blackberry. Even now as I'm typing this I'm listening to Last.fm and am chatting with a friend on GoogleTalk. Surely, the madness will come to an end when I sleep? Eh, mostly. I do have sleeping setting on my phone but it has some strategically placed alerts for certain people. These are all for very close friends and family and only applies to phone calls or text messages. All other notifications (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) are silenced but rest assured, they are still there waiting for me when I get up.

So, how much time are we talking here? I would guess that the only time in a day when I'm truly away from technology is when I'm sleeping. I usually get about 8 hours. I'm also against using technology while driving and it takes me about 15 minutes to get to work. Assuming I come home for lunch and get 8 hours of sleep, that would put me at 9 hours a day that I do not spend with technology. That equates to 15 hours a day. Now, I don't do this everyday. On weekends I'm not found lounging on my couch. Lets say an average of 10 hours a day. Assuming that average, I spend about 152 days out of a year with technology. Astounding, if I do say so myself.

So what is my driving force with this digital crusade? By and large, its maintaining my level of education in my field of IT. I'm not going to lie though, I can sometimes be found hitting the "Random Article" button on Wikipedia and letting it take me into a world I wouldn't have otherwise known. A fair amount of my sponge-like info acquisition is simply for expanding knowledge.

Is it the best use of my time? No. No its not.

Is it better than other things I could be doing? Yes.

But here is the kicker for me: When I have something better or more important do to, can I put the technology away? Yes. Yes I do.

That's what this entire phenomenon comes down to in my eyes. When the time comes, can you leave the tech behind. I can honestly say that I can. I love camping and I have T-Mobile. Those two things do not mix as T-Mobile doesn't cover much outside of major cities or highways.

In closing, yes, I am a media junkie but I don't let it rule my life. Life comes first, tech comes in some other place. I would say second but that's putting its importance too close to life.