Content ownership in the digital age

One of my friends posted a really cool story on Facebook about a San Antonian barber who does some really original “hair pieces” (pun intended). Recently, said barber created a tribute to San Antonio Spurs’ MVP Tony Parker.

The story was broadcast by San Antonio’s Fox affiliate KABB, and then picked up by Yahoo! Sports.

What people don’t know is that the original video was filmed by my very talented friend Christian Rios.

Christian is a student at the University of Incarnate Word, where he is majoring in Convergent Media (and is a pupil of my good friend Professor Joey Lopez, who originally posted the story on Facebook).

Christian is extremely smart and talented. He picks up skills like Jay-Z picks up hit singles. He runs his own website, he DJs and broadcasts live on Ustream, and he’s a filmmaker.

Christian shot the original video and posted to YouTube. KABB used some of Christian’ YouTube footage, plain and simple.

I do not know if KABB asked Christian for permission, as it is required by YouTube’s Terms of Service, but by looking at both videos, you can clearly see Christian’s footage being used.

Both videos even start with the same shot:

If you watch both videos, it is clear KABB used Christian’s footage in a derivative nature.

Yes, it does seem KABB went back to get more footage for their story, however, they still clearly used Christian’s very unique footage. The cool panning shot of the end result is clearly Christian’s.

Who owns content when you upload to YouTube?
YouTube’s Terms of Service state that the content creator owns the “Content.” This means that you — as the content creator — own your own content.

Does this mean you give up copyright to YouTube when you upload your content? Not exactly.

YouTube “owns” what you upload, in as far as they can do whatever they want with your content in order to promote YouTube. This means YouTube can use your content in any way that would help YouTube promote itself (commercials, other videos, etc). And according to their TOS, they don’t have to ask for your approval. When you upload a video to YouTube, you give YouTube this right.

As a content creator using YouTube as a free service, I’m okay with that.

Here’s where it gets tricky.

Other users cannot use your content without the approval of the content creator and/or YouTube. From YouTube’s TOS:

“You shall not copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, broadcast, display, sell, license, or otherwise exploit any Content for any other purposes without the prior written consent of YouTube or the respective licensors of the Content.” 

Does KABB have a blanket license with YouTube that allows them to use any video they want? Maybe. I don’t know.

But usually, bigger media broadcast companies like CNN or even Fox News, use a disclaimer when they use content from the Internet, like a watermark at the bottom of the video that says “From YouTube.”

This usage is deemed okay by Fair Use laws because media entities can use content for journalistic purposes. In this case, using a video and citing its source as specified above is sufficient for broadcast, without having to fully clear rights with the original content owner.

KABB did not do this in their news story. Christian’s footage is mixed with KABB’s footage. Therefore, to the casual viewer, it looks as though all the footage was KABB’s, which is misleading to the viewer.

Anyone can claim “Fair Use” nowadays, and true Fair Use best practices seem to be getting murkier by the day.

Let’s look at it this way.

If I were a documentary filmmaker, and I wanted to use a newsclip for my documentary, I would have to clear the rights.

If I wanted to use the segment KABB ran, with the footage from my friend, I would have to ask KABB for permission — not my friend. So in this turn of events, my friend no longer owns the content he filmed.

What can content creators do to avoid their content being “stolen”?
Honestly, if you are putting stuff on the Internet, it’s probably going to get used without your permission in one way or another. That’s the age we live in.

We’re fortunate enough to live in a society where content is readily available to mix and mash-up to create new content. That also means that sometimes, you might not get credit for something you created, if it was repurposed by someone else.

1. Watermark your videos / photos: If you really don’t want your content to be so easily stolen, out a watermark on your content. Something that’s not obnoxious, but that can help you make the case that you do own the content. Or make it annoying for someone to figure out how to crop out your watermark.

2. Use Creative Commons and only upload your content to services that embrace Creative Commons, and will protect your content from being stolen. I’m a big fan of Flickr and Vimeo for standing up for their users’ copyrights.

***

You can view both videos here and judge for yourself.

Original: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq8l8Ntm0pI&feature=plcp
KABB’s: http://foxsanantonio.com/newsroom/top_stories/videos/vid_10232.shtml

Migrating content from Tumblr to WordPress: Why and How

First: The Why.

Yes, I am migrating posts from Tumblr to WordPress. It seems silly.

Most people are finding reasons to migrate away from WordPress to newer blogging platforms, like Tumblr, Squarespace, or even Posterous.

My issue: I primarily have been using WordPress to host my personal site, which you’re looking at now. My strategy had always been to keep my personal .com site as a static one-pager with information about who I am and what I do.

I never intended to use WordPress as a blog. I didn’t want my simple ‘about me’ one-pager to be muddied by blog posts about whatever it is that I found a reason to rabble rabble about that week. So I decided to use Tumblr as my primary blogging platform.

This sounds reasonable right up until the part where I tell you that I tend to write long-form blog posts, as opposed to short pieces. Tumblr was never intended as a long-form blogging platform, and WordPress is not really the best solution for a one-pager, static site.

As someone who is a social media “specialist” (or whatever you want to call me), I should know better than to use a platform for something that it really wasn’t intended for.

I wondered why my personal site was so boring and never got much traffic.

Then I wondered why I was never really that successful at Tumblr.

Then I realized I wasn’t using either of those platforms as they were intended. I always tell my clients that, in social media, it’s not enough to be on a platform, but that you need to use that platform as it was intended. And I had forgotten to apply that thinking to my own online presence.

So I decided to migrate all of my long-form posts to WordPress (and delete them from Tumblr),  while focusing on short-form posts on Tumblr. So, in diagram form:

Rants –> WordPress
Funny gifs of cats –> Tumblr

We’ll see if this strategy works for my so-called personal online ‘brand’.

The How

WordPress has an “Import from Tumblr” plugin available. It was developed by WordPress.org, so I thought it’d be good.

Piece of crap.

Basically, you can download and install the plugin, then go to Tools > Import > Tumblr, and hook up your Tumblr to WordPress. WordPress then works “in the background” to import all your posts.

According to the plug in, the process takes a long time because “Tumblr is often down,” blah, blah, blah.

Fuck. That.

I left it “running” for a day and didn’t import any posts. Nothing!

Fine. I’ll just do it the old fashioned way:

  1. Activate the RSS Importer (Tools > Importer > RSS)
  2. Download my Tumblr posts as an XML file (I used this: http://haochen.me/tumblr/)
  3. Upload the XML feed via the RSS importer
  4. Posts imported in like 2 seconds! Sweet!

The XML feed I got was absolutely prefect and did not have any formatting issues at all. I just went to Posts > All Posts and checked out all my beautiful Tumblr posts now in WordPress.

After that, I bulk deleted anything I didn’t want, and presto. My long-form posts are all nice in my new WordPress site.

And now, please excuse me, I need to go find some pictures of cats to add to Tumblr.

What’s all this talk about The Artist?

So, I refused to see THE ARTIST for the longest time on the basis that I thought it was a gimmick.

Like, “hey, let’s make a silent movie just for the LOLz and for the sake of nostalgia.”

Boy, was I wrong.

The film works because the film is silent as a narrative device, which director Michel Hazanavicius works with marvelously well.

It’s not a film about a silent film, it’s a film about a silent film star coming to grips with the future of his craft. His craft is no longer relevant with what the audience wants, and he doesn’t know how to adapt.

The film is the artist’s journey as he discovers how to continue to be a relevant performer, while staying true to his craft.

At the very least, the sound design is amazing! Both subtle and relevant. The director really uses sounds carefully and emphatically to help you get into the main character’s state of mind; more so than in an average “talkie.”

If I ever teach an intro to film class, I would show this film to open the discussion of silent film history. The film doesn’t delve into classics of the early sound era, like The Jazz Singer; but the historical approach rings very true to Hollywood life at the time.

Nods to the early films of John Barrymore, and frequent nods to Citizen Kane, make THE ARTIST a film nerd favorite, at least in my book.

In 2011, I still enjoyed films that didn’t get any Oscar love, like Marcy Martha May Marlene or Take Shelter, a lot more than The Artist; but I am willing to admit that the recognition this film is getting is well-deserved.

Berenice Bejo as Peppy Miller is captivating; truly a star-making role. I just hope that she is just as good, if not better, in speaking roles. Same for Jean Dijuardin. Much like their characters in the film, success (in the form of a possible Oscar) won’t help them much if they can’t shine in a speaking role.

The star of the film, for me, was really the dog. A clear homage, in my opinion, to early talkie favorite, The Thin Man.

If THE ARTIST wins best picture tonight, it won’t be a surprise, but I also won’t be disappointed. THE ARTIST was a breath of fresh air.

Ideas. I has them.

One thing that came out of the last Refresh Austin meeting (featuring The Nerditorium incubator), is that I need to make my ideas happen.

I am working on a different post about my reaction to the folks at The Nerditorium, but that will come soon.

The bottom line is that I have two pretty cool ideas for apps / services, and I want to make them happen. These are as follows:

Codename: BRO DATE


Purpose: A place to meet friends outside your circle
Why: Sometimes, as you get older, it gets increasingly difficult to meet like-minded people. When you’re young, you meet people at school, college, etc. Maybe you make tons of friends at your first job right out of college.

As you get older, and people are more settled in their lives, meeting new people outside your circle is a bit more difficult. Some people don’t want to make new friends (“I have enough friends already” are things I have heard), some people are married and have families, and therefore have different priorities.

For single people such as myself, it gets harder to make new friends as you get older. That’s not to say I don’t have friends. I do. But sometimes there’s something you want to do, but you don’t know anyone that would want to do it with you.

Example #1: I want to go see Band X. I don’t want to go see Band X by myself. So my options are —

A) Go by myself
B) Not go

Example #2: As people get older, they tend to migrate. Recently, I had several good friends move away to a different city. This poses two situations:

1) Your friend is in a new city, they will need to make new friends
2) You need new buddies to hang out with back home

You can’t just put up an ad on Craigslist saying “Wanted: New BFF.” Sure, some people do, but most of us don’t. Because there is a possibility we might get crazies to answer back, you can’t really screen people, and it looks generally desperate.

Solution: Why are there sites where you can be matched with people based on compatibility for dating only, but there isn’t an equivalent service for people who are just looking for friends?

Sure, OK Cupid sort of allows you to select an option for “friends only,” and Facebook lets you select what you’re there for: “Networking, Relationships, Whatever I Can Get,” are some of the options. (MySpace had a similar option as well.)

But let’s face it, NO ONE uses OK Cupid to find friends. It’s mostly people who want to find a date at some point in time. Some of my friends have tried OK Cupid just to meet new people, under the guise of “dating.”

We need a service that will cut away that bullshit, and just let you be honest: “I am looking for a buddy to go running with Saturday mornings,” or “I am looking for a buddy to go see Twilight with me.”

No dating, no misunderstandings, just friendship. Not a site where you collect friends, but a site that matches you with people you can be friends with. Once the initial contact has been made, this person would make it into your actual “friends” circle.

It’s not a Facebook replacement, but what happens before you friend someone on Facebook.

How I want to do it: A simple, web-based service. You fill out a form, determine what you look for in a buddy, then you receive buddy matches. There would also be a “wanted” section for quick turn-around posts. Need to find someone to come with you to a Queen Singalong at the last minute? No problem.

The kicker would be to write the matching algorithm. So, we shall see.

***

Codename: CHEESEBURGER


Purpose: An app that lets you check-in to cheeseburgers
Why: Because people will check-in to anything. There’s Brewski Me, which lets you “check-in” to beer; and I Just Made Love, which lets you check-in after you do the no-pants dance with someone. Yeah, that takes bragging rights to a whole new level.

But if people check-in to stuff like that, there is no reason why people wouldn’t check-in to burgers. The idea came to me when I heard about Cow Clicker, which was developed with the intention of making the stupidest game ever.

I kind of want to make the stupidest check-in app ever. But one that is actually cool and delicious.

You wouldn’t just be able to check-in and say you’re having a burger, you could:

  • Tag condiments (how did you have your burger today? Cheese, no cheese?)
  • Tag locations
  • Add pictures of the burgers you have eaten (with location data)
  • Rate the burger and places, so you know which ones to go back to, which ones to avoid
  • You could also keep track of the quality per visit and make notes (this time, burger was sub-par. Next time, I’ll try it medium-rare)
  • Keep stats (how many cheeseburgers did you have this week / this month)
  • Have leader boards (WHO is the cheeseburger king in your area)

This is the idea that I am the most excited about building. I am interested in designing the app, but I don’t have the skills to build it. I could learn, but I don’t know how long that will take.

So, those are the ideas that I want to make happen. Halp?

Cecy’s Guide to the Best Films of 2011

Last year was a crappy year for movies, at least for me. I didn’t get to watch anything…

This year, I made up for it by being able to hit up Sundance, SXSW Film and Fantastic Fest, as well as a ton of preview screenings thanks to Gordon and the Whale (RIP), I Heart Movies and Gofobo.

Best of 2011:

MELANCHOLIA
(Lars Von Trier)
This movie is a hard one to explain to people. But the bottom-line is, you won’t like it if you don’t know what depression is, or if you’ve never experienced sadness in your life. If these emotions are foreign to you, you will watch the film and wonder why the main character is so whiny.

That’s not to say the film is depressing, per se. I find the film oddly soothing in its introspective mood at the beginning, taking a look at the inner struggles of a girl who has everything, but can’t seem to be happy. This is Kirsten Dunst giving one of the best performances of her career.

The first half of the film is a nod to films like Jean Renoir’s THE RULES OF THE GAME (or perhaps even Robert Altman), telling a greater story through the lens of one evening. The second act of the film is an exploration of how different people deal with the idea of death and destruction (or loss).

The introduction is by far the most artistic intro to a film I’ve ever seen. A strikingly beautiful, colorful and carefully composed set of slow motion shots set to the music of Wagner.

If you didn’t see the film in theaters, you missed out. This film deserves to be seen on the big screen for the intro alone.

SNOWTOWN
(Justin Kurzel)
Even though this is one of the best films I saw this year, I would not recommend you watch it.

SNOWTOWN is HARD TO WATCH. Yeah, that merits all caps. The film tells the story of what is known as the Snowtown Murders in Australia, dealing with one of the most notorious serial killings in Australian history.

The film is violent, both visually and psychologically. It plain abuses the audience with the gruesomeness it presents. There isn’t a single likable character in the film (obviously). At several times during the film, I was so disgusted I considered walking out, but the film was so well-directed that I continued to sit in the theater, watching in awe.

I watched this at Fantastic Fest (and decided to check it out because I read a glowing review over at Gordon and the Whale). Subsequently, my friends asked me if they should check it out. I gave a qualified yes.

If you can separate your emotions and watch the film objectively, there is no denying that Snowtown features some of the best, most understated performances of the year. In addition, Kurzel is whom I’d consider to be the breakout director this year and definitely someone to watch out for.

MY WEEK WITH MARILYN
(Simon Curtis)
I love Dawson’s Creek. Guilty pleasure. Sue me.

Michelle Williams was always my favorite character in the show. She was the only character that showed a true character arc, going from high school slut, to college radio indie hipster (before it was cool), then to loving young mother.

After that, Williams took some great chances with her career: BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (look at her eyes when she says to Heath Ledger “you ain’t going there to fish!” and tell me she doesn’t have amazing control), WENDY AND LUCY, BLUE VALENTINE.

When I heard she’d be playing Marilyn Monroe, I was excited to see what she would do with the role. Williams managed to deliver one of the most nuanced performances this year. Serious shame if she doesn’t win an Oscar.

It’s not because she’s playing a famous dead person (which seems to be a shoe-in for an Oscar as of recent years), but mostly because Williams has to play both the persona we all know as Marilyn Monroe, as well as the real human being behind the famous icon — and she manages to do so in a charming, captivating way.

There is a moment where she is dressed in plain clothes, then she is swarmed by people. For a moment, she turns around and whispers “should I be her now?” That is the nuance of the performance. Williams has to play a real person who also has to play a role both on and off-screen. It’s so meta it makes my brain hurt, but she pulls it off. MY WEEK WITH MARILYN is one of the best films this year, based solely on Williams’ tour de force transformation.

(It also made me want to become a lounge singer so I can wear sparkly dresses like she did.)

ATTACK THE BLOCK
(Joe Cornish)
If you like THE GOONIES, but do not want to see a GOONIES remake (ahem, SUPER 8), then you would like ATTACK THE BLOCK.

ATTACK THE BLOCK doesn’t pretend to live in a world where kids still talk like in the 80s (GOONIES, MONSTER SQUAD). ATTACK THE BLOCK lives in the now and features kids who talk the talk, even have to steal in order to retain respect in their neighborhood.

The aliens are some of the most awesome aliens we’ve seen in films lately. Not a let down like in CLOVERFIELD (seriously, so much hype for a thing we didn’t even get to see in non-blurry shots) or horrible CGI like in THE THING prequel released this year. The aliens are slowly revealed to you, which builds up the suspense much like Spielberg did in JAWS.

ATTACK THE BLOCK is a fun, sci-fi action flick that doesn’t underestimate its audience, while still staying cool, fresh and thoroughly enjoyable. It’s THE GOONIES for kids living in the now, and what SUPER 8 should’ve been.

MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE
(Sean Durkin)
This movie will stay with you. The ending will haunt you and keep you guessing. The film hits you with such subtlety, it slowly makes its way into your psyche. The film is the story of Martha (played by the lesser known sister of the Olsen twins, Elizabeth Olsen), who escapes from what appears to be a weird cult commune.

Slowly throughout the film, we learn the horrors Martha was exposed to in her previous life at the commune. But as Martha is having trouble recognizing the past from reality and dreams, everything we experience through her lens is somewhat subjective.

MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE is just such a solid script, interweaving past and present. The film is wonderfully crafted, going back and forth between memories and reality. The past reveals something about Martha’s present state, while her reality provides insight about Martha’s past. Each scene feeds into the next so subtly — it’s definitely one of the best scripts this year.

BEING ELMO: A PUPPETEER’S JOURNEY
(Constance Marks, Philip Shane)
This film played Sundance, but I caught it at SXSW. It is the most touching, inspiring film of the year, bu far.

BEING ELMO tells the story of Kevin Clash, the man behind Elmo. Clash was a self-taught kid who had been making puppets since he was very little. He taught himself to sew and perform.

The film chronicles Clash’s story landing a show at the tender age of 16 at the local Baltimore TV station, all the way to a chance meeting with Jim Henson — to his later success with Sesame Street.

Kevin Clash is like the Weird Al of puppets. There are no scandals or drugs in his story — just drive and determination to do what he loves. Yet, the film will make you cry. Seeing someone fight so passionately for what they love to do, and being equally passionate about reaching out and teaching others how to pursue their dreams — is so touching. Be prepared to use a tissue. Or two.

DRIVE
(Nicolas Winding Refn)
Some people complained that there wasn’t enough driving in DRIVE. Sorry, the film is not quite FAST FIVE.

I loved DRIVE so much, I saw it twice in one week. The film is masterfully directed, down to the 80s soundtrack and members-only jacket. It just all fits.

The cinematography is accomplished, makes you feel like you’re living life in slow motion.

A lot of folks complained Ryan Gosling didn’t have much dialog in the film. But what he can accomplish with his poker face by just one look is what makes his performance so brilliant. Gosling makes ambiguous look sexy here. “Be Ryan Gosling in DRIVE” is the new “be David Caruso in JADE.”

TAKE SHELTER
(Jeff Nichols)
I traveled to Utah to see this at Sundance before everyone else. I loved it so much, but then I wished I had waited for my friends to see it, because TAKE SHELTER is a movie you should watch with people so you can take it in and discuss.

The film cost 5 million to make. Sony Pictures Classics purchased it as an awards vehicle for Michael Shannon. However, the film has not received much push or publicity from the studio, though it was been nominated for several Independent Spirit Awards.

TAKE SHELTER blew me away when I saw it in January of last year, and is not only my favorite film of 2011, but one of my favorite films of all time. If I ever teach screenwriting and directing, I would show this film on the first day. I cannot wait to see what Jeff Nichols has up his sleeve next.

I’ve already talked a ton about this movie, so I will shut up now.

Honorable Mentions:

BELLFLOWER
(Evan Glodell)
“Hipsters with flamethrowers,” is what my friend Fidel said after seeing this film. And I can totally see that point. Still, I felt BELLFLOWER captured so much of what my generation is like, I just thoroughly enjoyed it.

I can’t deny that this film wrecked me. I saw it at SXSW, and I was supposed to go see Matt & Kim at the Gowalla party right after. I was such a mess after this movie that I just couldn’t do a concert. There is something so tragic and moving about how the characters destroy each other out of passion and selfishness.

We never see the main characters at work. Ever. Not because they don’t have jobs, but because (according to Evan Glodell), at that age, work is not something you talk about. You live to hang out with your friends,  you live for the relationships you have. That and destructive, silly hobbies, like building a car with a flamethrower and whiskey dispenser. BELLFLOWER felt like life, but with the boring parts cut out.

The film is shot beautifully, and the performances are naturalistic. Some found it insufferable, I found it pleasing in its earnestness and simplicity.

I loved the ending and structure of the film, going back and forth between past and present, reality and perception. I feel BELLFLOWER shows promise in Glodell and I can’t wait to see what he comes up with next.

EXTRATERRESTRIAL
(Nacho Vigalondo)
An alien film without aliens. It’s like SHAUN OF THE DEAD, but without zombies — an exploration of survival when you are forced to deal with crazy neighbors, the hot love interest and her crazy boyfriend.

Similar to films like DAWN OF THE DEAD, EXTRATERRESTRIAL explores human relationships within the context of the end of times — all from a vacuum (in this case a tiny apartment). Unlike DAWN OF THE DEAD, this film does so with a tongue-in-cheek, comedic tone.

The film is not about fighting the aliens, a la INDEPENDENCE DAY. The film is about sticking together and staying true to the relationships that are important in your life (aawwwwww, sounds cheesy, but it works).

Very proud of such a great film being completely in Spanish, while being easily accessible for foreign audiences.

HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN
(Jason Eisener)
Brilliant satire. Doesn’t take itself seriously. HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN is just plain fun for any gory, B-movie fan and a must-watch. Pitch perfect.

Social Media Do’s and Don’ts: Airline vs. Celebrity edition

Yet another social media faux pas involving an airline, a celebrity and Twitter.

Earlier last year, Kevin Smith was kicked out of a Southwest Airlines flight due to his “weight.” Smith took to Twitter to recount the story, causing a social media frenzy.

Southwest issued a half-apology on their site. While Southwest did eventually try to reach out to Smith via social media, their use of Twitter and blogs left much to be desired:

  • Kevin Smith gets lots of @ replies, Southwest’s tweets and attempts at reaching out to Smith via Twitter went unnoticed. Not the smartest way to reach out to a celeb.
  • Their blog post was a half-apology. They said they were sorry for the trouble, but then continued to re-iterate their “fattie” policy, without clarifying whether or not the Southwest team made the right call in kicking out someone who did indeed meet their policy.

Once again, a snafu involving an airline, a celeb and Twitter, has hit the Twitterverse no less than a year later since Southwest-gate.

This time, it’s Alec Baldwin and American Airlines. Baldwin took to Twitter to voice his dissatisfaction at being “reamed out of a flight for playing Words with Friends.”

(Sorry for linking to HuffPo.)

What strikes me as odd in this situation is American’s reply over Twitter:

“Mr. Baldwin, we are looking into this issue. Please DM contact info.”

Uhm, you expect Alec freaking Baldwin to DM you his contact info? Or his agent’s contact info? That’s not going to happen.

Let’s deconstruct this:

  • GOOD: American Airlines did okay by asking a disgruntled customer to DM contact info via Twitter — this sticks to a great principle of social media, which is transparency. If someone complains via social media, you as a company should reach out to the customer through the original source of the complaint (Twitter, Facebook, etc).
  • BAD: Your company’s social media strategy should include a workflow for corporate escalation. I think if a celeb complains about your company on a public forum, that counts as an escalation, and you should have a plan in place for such situations.

In this case, as soon as you see the tweet, you would:

  1. Offer a timely in-platform apology
  2. Don’t ask for more information from a public figure on a public forum. Write a simple apology, start drafting a press release.
  3. In tandem, reach out to your internal corporate social media contacts: involve Legal and PR! If you have set a successful corporate escalations path, you should be able to have your Legal / PR departments handle the issue with the big boys. Have your people call his people. That’s how it’s done in the big leagues.

Chances are that if you are in charge of social media monitoring, you don’t have the power to call the shots, that is why a corporate escalations path should be in place. Not only does it empower whoever is handling the engagement at making the right decisions in a timely manner, but it also ensures a full team will be involved in handling the issue, which can result in a faster resolution time.

Oh, and one other note: in order for your social media escalations plan to work, you need to have a team that realizes that a social media escalation supersedes all other escalations. Basically, a social media escalations plan should run like Jack Bauer in freaking 24. Clock is ticking.

Who should play Steve Jobs?

This morning, there was a rumor that George Clooney was in the running to play Steve Jobs in an upcoming biopic.

Granted, the rumor came from a very trusted publication called The Sun. </sarcasm>

If this is true, we shouldn’t be so surprised. After all, Hollywood doesn’t really get the tech industry.

George Clooney is way too suave to be Steve Jobs. That’s not to say Steve Jobs wasn’t charismatic, but I don’t think that translates to ‘suave’ — God bless his soul.

Clooney is a decent actor, after all, he does have an Oscar. However, some of Clooney’s best performances have been when he’s not taking himself seriously (O Brother Where Art Thou?).

This bit of casting news got me thinking about who should play Steve Jobs. I’m sure lots of people have their list of favorites, so I am going to start with what I think Hollywood would go for:

1) LEONARDO DICAPRIO
WHY HOLLYWOOD WOULD PICK HIM: Because he is a “character” actor. Or at least his phoney accents have convinced some people that he deserves such title. He’s played Howard Hughes and now J. Edgar Hoover; so he has the credentials on paper.

WHY THIS WOULD SUCK: Leonardo Fucking DiCaprio. He would overact the shit out of every line. Also, sorry, but the baby face would distract me. He’s almost 40 and he still cannot grow facial hair, and I find that disturbing. Leo is best in films where he can play someone age appropriate (Inception, Catch Me If You Can, The Departed).

2) PAUL GIAMATTI
WHY HOLLYWOOD WOULD PICK HIM: He’s bald and he has a beard. Just have him lose some weight, put glasses on him and you’re golden. He also seems to be the go-to guy Hollywood picks when you want to make sure your film gets some awards recognition.

WHY IT WOULD SUCK: Though Giamatti is a good actor (in fact, one of my favorites), he can be quite limited in his capabilities. His Steve Jobs would be a lot more neurotic and less nuanced.

Now, this is my fun part. When I used to read scripts and write coverage for my boss in a different life time, part of my job was to brainstorm actors who could play the parts.

Here’s who I think could play a great Steve Jobs:

1) RALPH FIENNES
WHY IT WOULD WORK: Because he’s fiiiiiiine. Okay, no. Jokes aside, Ralph Fiennes has a great range as an actor. He can play ruthless characters (I mean, he was Voldemort), as well as show subtle vulnerabilities (think The Constant Gardener).

Whoever plays Steve Jobs needs to be able to show a wide range of complexity, and I honestly think Ralph Fiennes has shown us the credentials to pull it off.

Also, I am not the only one that has noticed the resemblance. A simple search of “Ralph Fiennes Steve Jobs” brings this result:

***

2) JON HAMM
WHY IT WOULD WORK: He’s Don Freaking Draper! Don Draper is the ultimate badass at selling people ideas. When genius strikes, it’s a privilege to see Don Draper in action.

The very first episode of Mad Men gives us a glimpse at Draper’s knack at selling ideas, dreams.

Perhaps a good example of Jon Hamm’s capabilities is this mash-up of Don Draper pitching Facebook’s Timeline.

This scene shows Jon Hamm’s ability to perform with both conviction and vulnerability. Hamm is absolutely captivating. Again, he has the range necessary to play Jobs.

[Another great example is this scene from Mad Men, when Don Draper is trying to rescue Lucky Strike from a bind. Watch it here.]

ONE CAVEAT: Jon Hamm looks nothing like Steve Jobs. Maybe a younger Steve Jobs (in the picture below).

If Hamm was a viable option to play Jobs, he’d really have to transform himself. It might also be really hard for audiences to separate him from Don Draper.

THE IDEAL CANDIDATE
I feel the ideal actor to play the role would be a relative unknown. Someone that can lose himself in the role. Someone that won’t have audiences paying attention on the actor, but the role.

WHAT ABOUT NOAH WYLE?
I loved him in Pirates of Silicon Valley, but I think he no longer has the range required to play Steve Jobs. He did a great job with early Steve, but later Steve is a more nuanced persona that requires a lot more than what we saw in Pirates.

Polls suck (and other social media pet peeves)

[I was trying to channel @fuckingdevtips in this post.]

Some people refer to me as a Social Media “expert.”

I don’t know why.

Sure, I used to make a living working on social media stuff for some companies. I have recently made a transition and no longer handle social media engagement (and I’m loving it).

But I do see social media engagement from the sidelines now, and sometimes I have to *facepalm* at some of the stuff I see.

Here are some things Cecy hates.

I HATE FACEBOOK POLLS
What is my incentive, as a fan of your brand, to participate in a poll? It’s only going to go on my wall and annoy the hell out of my friends. So, tell me big brand, WHY should I do it?

Give me an incentive. Here are some good examples:

  • The Alamo Drafthouse recently posted a poll question on their Facebook wall, encouraging users to leave comments stating things they like about Tom Hanks. The winner would get free tickets to their “Hanksgiving” event.
    WHY IT WORKS: I am potentially getting something out of it. Also, the comments were funny. If you can allow your followers to be creative or funny in their comments, not only are you promoting engagement, but you are also providing entertainment.
  • GoWalla posted a poll a while back, when they released their new app, asking followers to vote on their favorite feature. Even though I wasn’t getting anything by voting, I felt compelled to fucking let them know what I liked about it! Why? Because I liked their app and I wanted to make my voice heard.

I HATE OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS ON TWITTER
A food writer I follow on Twitter recently posted something along the lines of “what are you making for dinner tonight?” First, let me clarify this person doesn’t post a lot. Maybe once a day, which is not nearly enough on a platform like Twitter. But I digress.

As a social media curious cat, I was, uhm, curious to see if anyone else would be dumb enough to reply to such a lame attempt at social media engagement. Nope. At least for what I could tell, because I couldn’t see any @ replies on the account. So this means that either:

  • Followers did reply to the question, but the user chose not to engage
  • No one replied

If followers did reply, and the Tweep in question chose not to engage, then that’s a wasted opportunity. You’re not going to build relationships via social media if you’re anti-social.

If no one replied, then it’s because the followers had no incentive to reply. Incentives don’t always mean monetary incentives (like tickets, in the Facebook example above). If you’re a writer and not a brand, you might not have the resources to give something away when you simply ask a question.

But you CAN be thoughtful with what you ask. Use a fucking hashtag to keep track of the conversation!

Good hashtags catch on and light up a storm! Anyone remember the #lessambitiousfilms hashtag? Maybe not, but I do because I am a nerd.

My point is, get creative with your hashtags when you’re trying to solicit engagement from your followers. Maybe instead of asking “what are you making for dinner?” you could ask:

“Contemplating making a Frankenstein dinner with leftovers. What are you making? #whatsinyourfridge?”

WHY IT WORKS: You start by sharing, you’re being funny, you’re using a catchy hashtag.

Which leads me to my final point: You can’t expect people to share their opinions with you unless you share yours first. True social media engagement derives from humanizing your brand through real interaction. That means talking with your followers, not talking at them.

Web Accessibility at Refresh Austin

“If you want to do true accessibility testing, turn off your screen and don’t use your mouse.”

Mike Squillace (Research Software Engineer at IBM) came by Refresh Austin last week to talk to us about Web Accessibility. What sets apart Mike’s expertise on accessibility is that he lives it every day. He is a programmer who is also visually impaired.

When I heard Mike was speaking at Refresh, I immediately thought of so many questions – mostly, “how does he code?” Can you imagine having to type your code, then hear it back with a screen reader? Line by line? I am, apparently, uneducated in this regard.

In any case, Mike had some great insights into accessibility that are not always priorities during a discovery process for creating a web experience. We – at least us marketers – look at demographics:

  • Age
  • Gender
  • Income
  • Purchasing behavior

We pretty much look at everything under the sun except things that are increasingly important:

  • Are there any environmental or device restrictions to how your content is consumed? (e.g. is someone accessing your content from a mobile device during a commute?)
  • Low literacy: this point is something that doesn’t usually make the list of considerations, but it is increasingly important. How literate is your audience? More importantly, how computer literate is your audience?
    • A sub-point on literacy is also whether or not your audience is an ESL audience (English as Second Language). At what point do you invest in localization to make your content more accessible?

Another point I found interesting was screen real estate. Screen real estate is not important if you can’t see the screen.

Whoa, whoa, I know! I do not mean to say the thoughtful design that goes into your site is not important. But this statement put things into perspective for me. I have been stuck on a design so many times! I keep pushing pixels around Photoshop and can’t figure out how to make it better.

Maybe, next time I get stuck on a design (like, when I redesign my site), I’ll just try to think of a way that I can keep things easy and accessible.

Images wrapped in divs, watch out.

I can see how some folks might argue that you’d have to judge accessible design on a case by case basis: what percentage of your audience would need an accessible site? But hopefully continuing to make these considerations will eventually formalize accessibility as an integral key of user-centered design, and not as an afterthought or “nice to have.”

Sometimes, the film is just not as good as the script.

In a former life as an acquisitions intern at The Weinstein Company, I used to read a lot of scripts. A LOT.

This period of my life was over 3 years ago, but in Hollywood, that’s about how long it takes for a film to get off the ground, made and then released.

I am starting to see most of the scripts I read back then up on the big screen: Inglorious Basterds, The Runaways, The Spy Next Door, just to name a few.

London Boulevard is one of the films I read during my time at Weinstein and it was seriously one of the best scripts I’ve ever read. Written by William Monahan, who had just come out of his Best Writer (for Adapted Screenplay) Academy Award win, London Boulevard was meant as a directing vehicle for Monahan.

As part of reading and reviewing scripts, you are supposed to research casting. If there are no stars attached to the script at the time, you are supposed to suggest some names. This is what is known as “packaging.”

Usually, when you’re packaging a script, you want to look at the actors who already have a good working relationship with your studio — it keeps the momentum going.

After I read the script, I intended to package this with Viggo Mortensen in the lead (now Colin Farrell) and Sienna Miller as the love interest (now Kiera Knightley).

The script, as I read it, was very gritty. The main character was supposed to have a violent past, which is hinted at. We never know exactly what he did, but we see a willingness to change and be better.

Coming right after A History of Violence and subsequently The Road, I thought Viggo Mortensen would have been great for the part. He has a gritty quality (and a great poker face), but also a palpable sensitivity — which in this film was necessary to convey the main character’s willingness to protect his love interest.

I also remember the script called for a young, yet slightly washed off actress, but a bit neurotic as well. Someone who’s been chased by the paparazzi so much, she has grown afraid and paranoid; yet someone with a hidden subtle vulnerability, which inspired the leading man to care for her.

For this part, I thought of Sienna Miller. At the time, she was in the midst of media turmoil, yet she always remained composed. Or as composed as one could in the situation. She has a tough exterior, necessary for the film’s grittiness, but also a very raw vulnerability.

Colin Ferrell lacks the subtlety that I feel Viggo Mortensen would bring to the film, and Kiera Knightly lacks the presence Sienna Miller could’ve brought to the screen.

For example, the love interest (read: the girl) is supposed to be a superstar who is relentlessly harassed by paparazzi. In this instance, the actress would pretty much be playing herself. It’s a lot better for the audience to associate someone who they see in the tabloids all the time. And Kiera Knightley is not known for scandal.

Anywho, that would’ve been my cast. I also felt, when I read the script, there was a dark grittiness that I feel is missing in the trailer. Though the script read fast (it is very well-paced), there was always the sense of dread you get when you’re watching a Film Noir.

Yet, there was also a sense of subtlety that I see is completely missing. But who am I to know? William Monahan both wrote and directed the film, so I can only assume this is the interpretation he wants you to watch, and not mine.

However, I would’ve made an awesome film with Viggo Mortensen and Sienna Miller: more Cronenberg and less Richie.