DigitalSpritz

The Making of a Meme.

What's a "meme?" you ask.  Well, it's a postmodern name for those silly bits of media that spread like wildfire on teh interwebs.  Just about anyone can tick them off in their heads:  Evolution of Dance, Star Wars Kid, Dramatic Chipmunk, LOLcats.   There's a great visual timeline here. 

No one knows how they start, why they catch fire, what they reflect about the underpinnings of our collective unconscience in cyberspace.  Malcolm Gladwell would claim that he had that all figured out when he wrote the Tipping Point.  I would argue that he was profiling the decidedly 20th-century versions of this activity, and that social media has brought us something new:  the 21st-century iteration of an old-fashioned party line. 

Anyway, if you look quick, you can catch the latest one in action:  JK Wedding Entrance Dance.   Up to more than 1.6M views on YouTube since it was posted a few days ago.  The bride and groom appeared on the Today Show, well, today -- and apparently the whole wedding party is showing up to repeat the dance on the show tomorrow (which of course, will become the moment this meme jumps the shark).

Catch it now, while it's still hot:

The Next Debates Will Be in 3D ... Guaranteed.

So, it's been a few weeks (again!), but here's part two of our discussion on 3D media.  The big news today is that Digital Cinema Implementation Partners (DCIP), a consortium of the three leading motion picture exhibition companies in the U.S., has inked a deal with five big Hollywood studios.   The deal?  Well, it's a little complicated, but it basically amounts to having the studios help fund part of the per-location cost of converting movie theaters to digital cinema systems.  It's fair to have the studios help fund the conversion costs because they save a bundle in the move to digital cinema, as it allows them to distribute films electronically, rather than having to make a physical copy -- called a "print"-- for each location.  You can now basically upload a film to a theater when you're ready to distribute it, just like posting videos on YouTube. 

But, why, you ask, does this make Presidential debates in 3D a certainty?  For three reasons:  1) Digital cinema is necessary for 3D -- and it costs nothing extra to install 3D capabilities if you're already doing a digital upgrade;  2) the parameters of the deal mean that the number of 3D-enabled theaters in the US and Canada will jump from about 900 today to 14,000 by 2012, representing 30% of the screens in those markets; and 3) studios have a heck of a lot of 3D films coming out over the next year. 

Studios are making more films and pushing for more screens because 3D and large-format films take in more box office:  Journey to the Center of the Earth, a recent 3D release, brought in 65% of its gross ticket revenue from 3D screens -- which represented only 25% of its distribution.   

And then there's the DVD market.  The Blu-ray format already supports 3D.   But there aren't that many 3D-enabled TV's out there.  How long do you expect that situation to last, given that theatrical ticket sales represent only 14% of a successful film's revenue?  (DVD sales represent 60%, television broadcast rights represent another huge chunk). 

So, studios are pushing for more theaters, and more available content -- including all that fancy sports content with Michael Phelps that we talked about earlier -- will put more pressure on consumer electronics manufacturers to make devices available.  And with companies like 3ality Digital making 3D broadcast possible over 2D pipes, it's guaranteed that the 2012 versions of John McCain and Barack Obama -- or Joe Biden and Sarah Palin -- will be arguing in 3D, for your political pleasure.   It's up to you to decide which candidates would fare better in living, 3-dimensional, color.  Leave your bets in the comments section, please. 

Why Steve Jobs' Health Matters

First of all, dear readers, apologies for the long break.  Both Tom and I have been making major changes in our day jobs, which has resulted in a bit of disruption in our writing schedules.  But we're back, in full force, with many things to say.  Be warned. 

I have to start this post by saying that, in case you haven't noticed, I am an Apple junkie.  This blog is written on my beloved 12" Powerbook, one of five Macintoshes in various states of use/repair in my home.  I am the proud owner of a second-generation iPod (at last count, there were also five iPods in my home), as well as a newly-minted 3G iPhone which, well, sleeps with me at night. I set up my first home Airport network in 2000, when it was stilll a novelty that I could access the Internet in my backyard:  the neighbors came to gawk.  I've been a devotee since I hauled my first Mac -- a Classic-- home by the handle in the top of its case, to work on my SimCity metropolis, which is still preserved on a 3-1/2" floppy disk somewhere.  Yeah, I drank the Koolaid.

And whether or not Steve Jobs is healthy is very important to me.  Because Apple is not a technology brand, it's a fashion brand.  And the heads of fashion brands are always crucial to their success in the market. 

Now, Mr. Jobs and the Apple Board may disagree, taking the point of view that Apple is a technology company -- perhaps the world's premier consumer technology company, as a matter of fact.   But a great deal of Apple's current leadership is based not on true technological innovation, but on vertical market integration, and on style. 

Case in point:  the iPod.  There were certainly digital music listening devices before the iPod arrived.  But they weren't as sexy, and filling them with music required a certain facility with "ripping" software.   Apple's genius lay in making the music easy to access, assuaging the music industry's fears of piracy with long-extant DRM technology.  Once it had a lock on this vertically-integrated market, Apple continued to rev the devices, so that having the latest and hottest became a mark of well ... style. 

Now, I have to admit that there is some true technological innovation going on in the iPhone:  that fancy Minority Report touchscreen is a wonder to behold.    But there are limitations as well - email that doesn't leverage the capabilities of an Exchange server, voicemail that doesn't work with my Bluetooth headset (a true problem in now hands-free California).  RIM's long-existing Blackberry doesn't have these issues.  But it's not as sexy, not worth a four-hour wait in line just to be one of the first (and for a while, the only) people to get their hands on the device.   And I haven't even talked about my beloved Macs, which can cost as much as 50% more than equivalent Windows machines. 

So, who exactly is the source of all this style?  The candy-colored original iMacs, the flat-as-an-envelope MacBook Air, the iPod that clips to your lapel?  As far as the market is concerned, it's Mr. Jobs. 

Remember Gianni Versace?  He of the Medusa-head buttons and British-Empire-worthy shoulder pads?  His murder sent shockwaves through the fashion world, and damaged his company virtually beyond repair.  Granted, Versace at that point was a much smaller, private and probably less-distributed company than Apple.  But it was iconic enough to inform popular culture and to define status in the way that Apple does. (Don't believe me?  Watch Showgirls.) 

The market worries about Mr. Jobs the same way.  Like it or not, he's an icon of style, a symbol for the fashion trend called Apple.  (No "Computer" in the name now, fittingingly.)  Even his trademark black turtlenecks and jeans have mythic status. 

Perhaps my nephew showed it best when I asked him what kind of computer he had.  "A PC," he said.  "I hate Macs."    But he wouldn't be caught dead without his iPod.  It's just not cool. 

No, He Didn't ...

So, it's not all punditry and pedantics here on DigitalSpritz -- sometimes we have to entertain you a little.  And today's offering is a true geek horror-fest, as Tom blends his 3G iPhone. Shudder and enjoy:

iPhone Mania, v.2.0

Well, in less than 12 hours, the first 3G iPhones will go on sale in the U.S.  (Apparently, they're already available in New Zealand).  And the geek universe is going crazy.  Techcrunch reports that some enterprising souls have already unlocked the new iPhone 2.0 OS.  Look for iPhone Pimping to follow quickly.  As a matter of fact, the whole front page of Techcrunch is suitably devoted to iPhone hysteria, although Mashable is suitably restrained with only 4 stories, matching GigaOm.  Surprise of surprises, the mother-of-all-geek-toys-blogs, Engadget, has only 1 story -- so far.  I predict at least 15 at daybreak tomorrow.   

Apple released not only the new operating system for the phone today (and I use the term "phone" loosely), it also release the iPhone Apps store, featuring a slough of toys, games and some actually-useful applications for the phone.   It's like Christmas on the Interwebs. The ratings and reviewing frenzy has started apace.

Where will I be tomorrow, you ask?  Well, not standing in line, actually.  I plan to fully embrace the Tao of the iPhone 3G and join my eager tribe members, but actual life obligations preclude the camping-out actions, at least for a few days.  I'll just have to read the blogs and live vicariously for a while.  The mania, however, has driven me to one, perhaps inevitable, conclusion:

It's Steve Jobs' world, and we just live in it. 

Brave New World of Video Surveillance, Part 2: YouTube

Well, it's not supermarkets and airports:  It's YouTube.  A Federal judge ordered yesterday that YouTube turn over to Viacom its records of every single video watched on the service.  The action is part of Viacom's ongoing copyright infringement lawsuit against YouTube. 

Chris Albrecht at NewTeeVee has the details.  Obviously, individual privacy concerns are a major issue here.  On the other hand, don't we all realize that, while we're watching YouTube, YouTube is watching us?

My friends the Electronic Frontier Foundation are up in arms over the ruling.  It remains to be seen whether Google/YouTube will have to comply.   In the meantime, I'd suggest you keep any viewing of Viacom-owned content -- as well as all those sexy girlie videos -- to a minimum. 

Seven Dirty Words

I can't get over the irony.  If you do a search on "seven dirty words" on Google and choose video results, you'll find a 10-minute clip of George Carlin's famous routine.  And if you have a device like an AppleTV, you can stick those seven dirty words right on your television set.  Yes, I know you could have probably watched the same routine on premium cable, but this way is more true to Mr. Carlin's rebel ethic:  you don't have to sit around waiting for some programmer in a suit to schedule it.  Load it up, watch it ten or fifteen times, and say an appropriately raunchy blessing for Mr. Carlin ... who maintained a blog and a kick-ass website, BTW.

I'm sure he would have had a few choice words to say about this, if we'd had a chance to ask him. 

Twittering, Part II: Obama/McCain

For those of you who think Twitter is too "girly," (you know who you are!), you might change your minds on this one:  Obama and McCain have scheduled a weekend-long policy debate on Twitter.   You can find the details here, on Silicon Alley Insider.  Go sign up, follow and tweet, and enjoy how democracy works on the web.  Don't forget to poke a few friends on Facebook while you're at it. 

Twittering Teddies and Other Modern Time-Wasters

I'm a big fan of an old piece of technology:  the carousel at the Santa Monica Pier.  I love the beautiful carved horses, the ocean air, and the rickety thrill of going high in the air (well, if you're a three-year-old), and swooping back down again.  But what I really love about that carousel is the old-fashioned fortune telling machine in the corner.  Put in a quarter -- or two, because inflation is rampant -- and the animated fortune teller gives you the once over, then flicks you a card with your future written all over it.  It might be nice if she could speak to you, but she would lose her air of mystery if she did.

But then again, maybe not.  Over at Verizon, the folks who are responsible for the FiOS initiative have built a web 2.0-ish version of that fortune teller: the Twittering Teddy.    This animatronic creature doesn't charge you a quarter, but she does talk to you, by reading Twitter tweets.  She's not reading our future, but our present, which in some ways seems to be evolving --or perhaps devolving-- to snatches of shortened conversations, transmitted in digital bits. 

For those not in the know, Twitter is a micro-blogging platform where you create an account, and subscribe to ("follow" in Twitter parlance) anyone who interests you.  They, in turn, can follow you.  Twitter was created to answer the eternal question "What are you doing?" in a maximum of 140 characters.  These statements are called "tweets."  Twitter hit the tipping point at SXSW in 2007, and how boasts nearly 2 million users tweeting multiple times daily.  (If you'd like to follow me, click on the button on the right.)  Twitter also allows developers to build on top of their platform, creating an ecosystem of useful gadgets such as Twittervision and Tweetmeme.  It also apparently can be engineered to turn the lights on and off in your house when you're not home.   

I'm not quite sure why the FiOS folks created the Twittering Teddy -- something about showing off the phenomenal networking ability Verizon is demonstrating by laying fiber to every house in the country -- but the Teddy sure is fascinating.    She blinks her eyes thoughtfully as she reads the tweets you send her in a computerized voice, little snatches of words ranging from the sublime to the mundane.  But be careful:  she also asks why you are laughing at her, and notes that she's wearing pink ribbons in her hair.  It's almost as if she was summoned up out of Steven Spielberg's imagination -- go watch AI:  Artificial Intelligence if you don't know what I mean-- because we simply don't have enough ways to waste time on the web, or heaven forbid, enough people to talk to.  She's an awesome marketing stunt, BTW:  one that pretty much guarantees at least a visit from everyone on Twitter.  She will also be auctioned off on eBay at the beginning of July, with the proceeds going to the Homeless Children's Education Fund. 

In the meantime, feel free to follow me.  If you tweet, and don't get a response, don't fret:  I'm talking to the Teddy, and will be back soon.  I'm still trying to figure out if she can turn on the lights in my house.

Carl and the Giant Proxy Battle, or What Google and John McCain Have in Common.

It's on everyone's lips these days.  (Well, everyone geeky, that it is.)  Carl Icahn is mounting a proxy battle to force Yahoo back into an acquisition by Microsoft.  And he's awfully prickly in his moves, that Carl.  He's gotten Bill Miller and Gordon Crawford to change their tunes about the price -- putting their 12% of Yahoo on the table.  He's nominated my favorite Facebook Friend™ Mark Cuban for the board -- the same Mark who became a billionaire through Yahoo's purchase of Broadcast.com.  According to MSNBC, Icahn's tactics are quite simple:  his proxy battles consist of buying up minority stakes in companies he thinks are badly run, then humiliating their management.  He's won 10 of the 18 battles he's mounted.  Prickly but effective, that Carl.

However, I'm noticing some interesting parallels to the presidential primaries in the press coverage over this brouhaha:  The real battle is elsewhere, and its leader is currently getting a free pass.  By "leader," I mean the John McCain of online business:  Google, of course. 

As Geoff Yang (no relation to Jerry) of Redpoint Ventures said:  Someone has got to stop Google.  Not that anyone is implying that Google is innately evil; Google just happens to be the proud holder of a dangerous amount of market share: one that threatens choice, and puts people in a potentially perilous spot when it comes to personal data. 

When Microsoft held a similar position in the marketplace (remember those days?), I personally retaliated by refusing to give the company more than a sliver of my business.  I've always had a Mac (or four), so operating system was not an issue.  I bought Microsoft Office apps, did my browsing on Netscape (and now Firefox), purchased a PlayStation and a Blackberry.  Now, after reading Cory Doctorow's perhaps not-so-tongue-in-cheek story for Radar magazine, "Scroogled," I'm doing the same with Google.  You can have my search and online advertising activity, thank you, but you're not getting the apps, the feeds, the chat, the mobile OS, or the start page.  (I do cop to using Gmail, but not for my primary email).  Even so-called "Friend Connect" is a bit challenging:  do I really want to make Google the primary holder of all my personal data? What if they suddenly truly became evil?  What would be my recourse?  The consequences have Facebook rather worried.

So, while Yahoo and Microsoft duke it out in a Clinton/Obama-esque battle, Google gets to pose as the good guy, the lone representative of all that is wise and powerful on the internets.  Yahoo needs some help?  Google rides to the rescue, and its all-encompassing mission -- organizing the world's information -- doesn't seem quite so threatening.  Their straight-talk express puts everything in its proper little box.  The algorithm keeps everything tidy.   And Google keeps growing its market share.

Hey, Carl:  maybe you can take on Google next?  There's no buyer big enough, for sure, but I'd certainly like to see a little anarchy introduced into algorithm.  Much like the war in Iraq, let's not assume that Google's market dominance is going to last 100 years - -perhaps we could do something about it a little sooner than that?  My money's on you.