Wired published this great article in its March issue addressing the fact that video - including film and television - is traveling down the same path that music did in the late-90’s and into the early-2000’s. That path being the quick descent into free mass distribution via the Internet; also know as Piracy.

I know that I’ve nearly exhausted the conversation about how I don’t like to pay for music anymore — or anything on the internet really (with the exception of my Flickr pro account, but they lucked out with that one). But I can’t emphasize enough about what it means that I, a typical 20-something with disposable income, haven’t bought a CD in almost 5 years and I rarely buy DVDs either now, although I watch movies and tv shows available on DVD all the time.

The article gives a quick but detailed analysis at the status quo of video piracy and how to deal with it, but here’s the take away:

The lessons from the music fiasco are clear: Trying to limit the inherent advantages of digital files is a losing strategy. The way to stop piracy is to make everything available — easily, legally, and at a fair price.

Anyone can find and learn to use torrents. Why not embrace it and figure out another way to make it profitable?

Related Wired reading in that regard: Free! Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business.

I’ve been researching social media and social networking tools lately for use in marketing and PR — things like social media newsrooms, corporate blogs, social media press releases. There’s a lot going on in that space right now, mostly just talking though, and it seems like most people (and by “people,” I mean “marketing and PR professionals”) just don’t get it.

Like today for instance, a few of my colleagues and I sat in on a webinar hosted by Vocus PR that focused on “the evolving social media press release.” I’ve become a little bit of a social media PR junkie in that past few months, so I like hearing about this kind of stuff.

But what swiftly came to light as they discussed the social media press release, is that they really don’t know what they’re talking about — or at least not enough to teach other people about it. They just kept saying the same things over and over again, without giving the viewers any significant advice for implementing social media tools in their press releases.

At one point, they offered a side-by-side comparison of a “traditional press release” and a “social media release.” And what I found frustrating (if not infuriating) was that their “social media release” didn’t even include social media tools. It just looked like a regular press release without a header that used bullet points instead of actual paragraphs.

Most of my colleagues were either frustrated or completely confused as to what a social media press release actually is. Well, I feel like it has nothing to do with template/structure, per se. Here’s my super simple answer:

A press release that incorporates social media tools.

That’s pretty simple. The tools allow the recipients of the press release to share the information via bookmarking, e-mail, or even on their own blogs. It also would have an RSS feed available so that they can receive the information in their feed reader instead of in their inbox.

But I think there’s another key aspect missing, and it’s a really simple concept, too:

You have to already use social media in your personal life in order to “get it.”

Seriously, I feel like that’s the missing link. Most senior-position PR and marketing professionals probably haven’t integrated social media into their own lives as a way of gathering and sharing information on a daily basis, so how are they supposed to understand how to use it to target people who do? They can’t.

That’s the biggest hurdle I’ve encountered so far in the process - trying to convince people (aside for the 2 to 3 that are on my side) that it is essential in a forward-looking sense and not just an optional add-on. And to me, it makes perfectly good sense - but I’ve been blogging and using social networking sites for 5+ years and I’ve been using the internet as a primary form of communication for about 13. Not that I know everything about everything on the internet, I just have a different perspective than people who are, say, 15-30 years my senior.

So, here’s my point. You can’t strategically and successfully implement a social media anything until you actually use social media.

(Sorry to my non-work friends for boring you!)

January is some how about to end and I feel obligated to update my blog before it does — mostly so I don’t skip a month in my archives. I’m not trying to justify my absence from the internet or anything, I’ve just been busy lately, what with applying to graduate programs (that I won’t get into) and getting awesome at yoga (doing headstands and junk) and getting more awesome at knitting (well, knitting scarves and nothing else).

Not to mention that work is unendingly filled with things to do these days, most of which I’ve brought upon myself. As a result, I’ve spent most of my internet-perusal time researching Social Media in marketing and PR contexts — and I’m not talkin’ about just some YouTube videos and podcasts, we’re talkin’ SEO and PR maximization. A couple of guys from work and I have been holding a sálon on the topic, discussing how best to implement social media tools for our agency and how best to convince people of its importance. Which is a tougher task than one would think: Convincing people who are really set in their ways that there are new and better ways to do things and we’ve got to adapt to it and that there’s VALUE in it.

Besides that, I saw Dan Deacon again (at the beginning of the month) and it was rad. How rad? This rad:

Also, my brother came to visit us in our humble Durham abode, and we had a Durham-filled time:

And here are those knitting projects that I’m proud of: an orange scarf and a green & grey one (rolled up in the photo). I’d like to add that the second scarf only took me, like, two days to finish (rather than 3 months or a year - in the case of the two previous scarves) and it is 6 feet long:

So all of that is great. And, on top of it all…

LOST IS STARTING AGAIN TONIGHT OMFG!!!!!!

To commemorate the fact that it’s back, and simultaneously mourn that we’re only guaranteed eight episodes, here’s an article from Jezebel describing how being a LOST fan is like being in an abusive relationship. (Disclaimer: That’s not to say that I don’t support the writers’ strike. I’m willing to sacrifice a little LOST so that they get paid for the job that they do).

It’s so right. And so wrong.

(I apologize to anyone who has already read this on my tumblr. Did I mention I have a tumblr? It’s neat.)

I saw more movies over this holiday week than I’ve seen in the past 5 months (read: two).

I saw Juno:

Which was great. It had an awesome soundtrack, and I’m a fan of the The Kinks now as a result of watching this film. I’m also a big fan of Ellen Page now — so much so, that I will forgive her for being in that X-Men movie.

I’m going to use the word “fan” a little more here…

I have to admit, though, I was worried at the beginning after the first hamburger-phone conversation — not a fan of the deliberately overly trendy language — but it tapered off into pure enjoyment. I think I’m a new fan of Diablo Cody — which means I’ll be picking up some of her other written work — I don’t care if she was a stripper once, maybe.

Go see it. Fanhood.

I also saw Margot At The Wedding:

Which was neither good nor bad. It was written and directed by Noah Baumbach, who also wrote some of The Life Aquatic and wrote and directed The Squid and the Whale (with Wes Anderson’s help, of course), both of which I liked a lot, so I figured I would like this one, too.

I’ve never experienced a movie in which I hated every single character in it — even the children — but still didn’t despise the film itself. I mean it: I. Hated. Every. Character. I would never want to meet or have a conversation with, let alone be RELATED to, any of these people. I hate to admit it, but Jack Black’s character was the most relatable and genuine character in the movie — which isn’t saying much, since there was that scene with him in his underwear crying in his backyard. And the tree is a metaphor for Margot. At least as far as I could tell.

Also, the film bordered on pretentious, was very talky, and the screenplay must have been 600 pages long. There was so much excessive information about everyone and everything, I couldn’t even begin to digest any of the information until afterwards. But I guess it’s intended to get the audience so wrapped up in the emotion of everything that you don’t have time to think or judge or digest.

I know that I was so wrapped up in everything that I didn’t even see the only other two people in the theater — besides us — walk out at some point. They obviously hated the characters AND the movie.

I’m looking forward to Cloverfield.

My friend Scott is a pretty discerning and opinionated guy, which is why I don’t mind sacrificing an hour or so in the morning to engage in a debate with him — while reading my e-mail, looking at my Facebook newsfeed, checking my Etsy transactions, and webclipping for my client (I’m good at multitasking in the morning, what can I say?). I mind even less when he begins it by acknowledging a blog post I wrote the previous day:

• Scott: i read your latest internet weblog entry with some interest.
• me: thank you
• Scott: because i’m thiiiiiis close to baleeting myspase.
• Scott: you can’t see, but my thumb and forefinger are about a half an inch apart.
• me: so deleting your myspace page is cool? but i meant it in a general way… i mean, youre still very active on facebook…
• Scott: oh sure, facebook is full of win. facebook has utility. myspace has none.
• me: yeah… but news from the ‘bleeding-edge’ is that having any of that stuff is going to be lame pretty soon
• Scott: unpossible.
• me: once all the lame-o’s catch on — which they have — it’s no longer cool
• Scott: can i still txt people?
• me: yeah.. but things are gonna get real analog… youll have to start writing letters. eventually, that is
• Scott: no wai. i have one device that lets me make calls, send emails, send txts, and do the facebook. you’re telling me that’s not cool?
• me: maybe, like, 5 years ago
• Scott: you’re 5 years ago!
• me: THE INTERNET IS 5 YEARS AGO
• Scott: noooooooooooo. we’re only just now figuring out how to use it!
• me: that’s just it!
• Scott: five years ago, we had no idea! it was all animated gifs and YTMND.
• me: EVERYONE is figuring out how to use it. MY MOM just learned the internet last week!
• Scott: but is she doing it right? and i’ll bet your mom’s a happenin’ lady. be nice to her.
• me: my mom does happen to be a happenin’ lady… however, she is not tech-savvy one bit. she also recently learned to text message, too. which, i’ll admit is nice because she doesn’t leave me voicemails that say “i have to tell you something, call me back” anymore
• Scott: this is an article i read yesterday that i think is closer to reality: http://www.slate.com/id/2177969/ (Ed note: this is a good article, you should read it — the title of this post came from it!)
  
• me: that article reminds me of how whenever i’m at my computer my mom will say “Who ya e-mailin’?”
• Scott: adorable.

The conversation went on like that for a while longer and we conclude that:

• Scott: i think we’re basically agreeing here, up to the point where the cool kids, the real cool ones, not the cool ones like you, ditch the facebook. facebook is about to asplode, we’re only starting to figure it out. facebook is now and forever.
• me: i think its hit a pinnacle. which means theres only one direction to go. i thought Friendster was now and forever. and then i thought MySpace was now and forever
• Scott: but friendster was useless! and myspace was useless!
• me: so now im skeptical is all
• Scott: facebook is doing it right! facebook is a piece of SOFTWARE.
• me: i agree with you that facebook is being strategic. more strategic than its predecessors at least. but i think my theory deals more with the cycle of cultural “coolness”

And that’s my only point in all of this. I love the internet — in fact, I want to go back to school to learn to use it better — and I think it’s an important component of modern life. But, I think we also have to consider it in the context of it being a cultural phenomenon and not put all of our eggs in one basket, so to speak. Investing so much time, effort, and money in the internet is not the way to go. Using it in combination with real-life, one-on-one relationships, in a strategic and moderate way is using it successfully. And that goes for everything from corporate marketing to your personal life.

I went to the Triangle Interactive Marketing Association meeting on social networking in Raleigh today. While, more often than not, I try to avoid venturing into the capital city, and my previous experiences with industry-oriented events like this (ahem.. sorry PRSA) have proven themselves to be not-worth-the-gas-to-get-there, this hour-long talk about social networking tools from the perspective of corporate marketing was not only engaging, but also THOUGHT PROVOKING.

And here I was, with over a decade’s worth of internet experience surfin’ and chatting and whatnot packed into my short 23 years of existence, thinking I had the internet tied around my little finger. Take a look at the bottom left of this blog — yep, it reads “im all over teh internetz” and I wrote it that way on purpose, to show people I know what I’m talking about. But maybe, just maybe, I haven’t thought it all through completely.

Peter Shankman — who writes PRdifferently.com and has been featured on Gawker.com with such infamous (re: life-destroying?) contributions as “How Not To Act On J-Date” among others — spoke at the meeting today and not only offered a lot of good examples for how to successfully implement these tools in consumer and B2B marketing, which was informative for my professional life, but it also made me reconsider my personal internet existence.

What is my brand? Whether I like it or not, I’m building one. But, like, what is the point?

Peter put it this way: “Your privacy is currency.” You pay a little bit of privacy to build relationships with other people and with companies. So how much privacy have I now spent building this Lauren Frohne brand and what has it gotten me?

Then it got me thinking about how five to ten years ago, people were terrified of the internet. It was all “screennames” and “chatrooms” and “badguys tracking kids down because they saw the kid’s photo on the internet.” No one used their real names, not even in their e-mail addresses (my first AOL screenname when I was 9 years old was ’strikelf’ — I used to rack up innumerable hours on AOL in Star Wars- or Grease-themed chatrooms and answer the question “A/S/L?” a lot), everything was anonymous. But now that everyone uses the internet, it’s somehow become less scary and it’s even become a trend to use your real, full name for everything. People put family photos on Flickr, details of their wedding on The Knot, their every move on Twitter. Which, in this Web 2.0 world, translates into less privacy, more currency for the internet (does that indicate privacy inflation?), and no more shroud of anonymity.

I suppose I made the conscious switch to non-anonymity about a year ago. Knowing that I would have to apply for jobs with a respectable e-mail address, I opted out of having something along the lines of eMoGrRl2984@whatever.com and took the plunge towards a unified “brand” so to speak. But even that is still loosely compiled at best — anything semi-serious uses my real name, everything else uses some variation of a moniker I came up with randomly about five years ago.

But what is my BRAND?

My myspace and facebook profiles say practically nothing about me. Searches on Google bring up results from my current job, a few things from my sporty past, and my former-affiliation with a comedy theater — although I am proud to say that 12 pages yield all me-related results. I’ve been described in a recent interview as “a writer from north carolina.” But is that what I am to the internet? Then add in the part where there is no division between “You” and “Professional You,” and I don’t even know where to start!

Obviously, I have a lot to think through. But at least I’m re-engaged by the internet because of it.

Because, to tell you the truth, I have this theory… and it’s just a theory… that it’s only a matter of time before the internet becomes “uncool.” It happens to everything the becomes mainstream eventually — especially once corporate America catches on and tries to be “cool” and “with it” — but signs of internet-lifestyle early-adopters becoming jaded by, and even more or less swearing off, the internet are already visible. What will we do when it becomes “cool” to delete your myspace page? Well, it’s already happening actually, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing — you know, people reconnecting with other people in the flesh. So it’s hard to determine exactly how much to invest in this particular brand-building.

Maybe it’s a healthy balance between both I should be aiming for. Which is another point that Sam Harrelson, another digital world expert who spoke at the meeting, made at the meeting: good networking comes from one-on-one offline relationships. Which is good to keep in mind both personally and professionally.

Last night’s outing to the Duke Coffeehouse in Durham to see The Octopus Project evoked a complex mixture of emotions, including but not limited to the following:

• Nostalgic for a time when it was okay not to wear shoes in a public setting, showering was optional, and it didn’t matter whether it was Sunday night or Tuesday or Saturday or whatever — otherwise known as college.
• Complete repugnance for mesh shorts.
• Angry at the prospect of getting home at 2am on a Sunday because sound check took two hours.
• Annoyed that only half the bands scheduled to play were actually playing the show and that none of the bands had anything in common.
• A little bit more nostalgic mixed with a good, strong helping of distaste for listening to college kids wax philosophical about how their perfect date involves movies and cheese while sitting on old dirty couches, instead of listening to the band I went there to see — or any music at all, for that matter.
• Disappointed in the booking and management of a venue where professional touring bands come to play.
• Finally, awestruck with happiness and glee while The Octopus Project played. Among many other instruments used, a Theremin was involved.

So — despite the delays, the horrible sound guy who didn’t know how anything worked, the obnoxious college kids, the drunken bro-dudes, and The Octopus Project not going on until about 12:40am — it was a really good show, and I regret that I didn’t see them at the Local506 a couple of months ago.

Their stage design was cute, simple (not counting the number of instruments and cables involved) and created a good atmosphere for their show — it included cloud-like details, christmas lights, sheets made into characters covering the amps, and a dvd of obscure video footage playing in the background — perfectly accompanying their songs which are even more energetic, intense and fun live than they are on their records.

Most of all, stage props or not, The Octopus Project exemplifies the kind of music that doesn’t require vocals and lyrics to progress and feel cohesive. In fact, when I first got their albums, I’m certain I listened to them several times — granted I was at work, so I wasn’t giving them the most acute listen — before I even realized there were no vocals. They carefully — yet almost recklessly — combine layers and layers of electronic noise and beats with guitar and live percussion to create new wave pop ballads that embrace all aspects of synth pop and generate a sound that is distinctly of this era.

But, aside from their records, I like The Octopus Project for a few other reasons, including all of the other things they create in addition to music. Not just t-shirts and buttons, but characters and artwork and wallets and toys and lots of other handmade things that go along with their whole performance. You know… music isn’t the most functional of creations; you write it, you perform it, you listen to it, it fills up silences, some might even dance to it if they are so inclined, but it doesn’t necessarily have a function. But I like the idea of using music as a vehicle for other creations, and creating those things while riding around in their van from show to show.

Using music to incite other creations that serve a function; the collision of different artforms at one axis; the difference between performance and performance art… This is all leading up to me telling you that I got this while I was at the show:

His name is Slampy, and he is a plush doll that was handmade by one of the band members. Obviously, this is better for me than a band t-shirt at this point in my life.

To see their other artwork and things, go HERE.

And then go download some of their tunes HERE.

Apparently, a big-screen version of Land of the Lost is in the works, and while I’m pretty stoked about the prospect of this, I’m also a little disheartened.

It seems like everything is a remake now, or an adaptation of some past television or movie phenomenon. I almost feel bad for kids these days. As if it weren’t bad enough that plenty of shows and movies we loved as children were based on an idea or concept from 20 years previous, kids now are getting movie versions of television series that were remakes of old shows to begin with. They rarely get anything new, that’s just for their generation; instead, they get watered-down versions of ideas that were great 10, 20 or 30 years ago.

It’s kind of shame, but at the same time, it made me want to look up the intro to Land of the Lost on YouTube and remember again how awesome it was — possibly more awesome than the show itself. Some of that junk was real weird.

I’ve posted it here, so you may do the same:

ur welcom.

I made a video a while ago, inspired by a Saturday Night Live digital short — yes, it was a parody of a parody. Well, the whole “meme” became a huge deal on the internet, and because of that, the little ol’ video I made has accumulated over 80,000 views since April, which is ridiculous (it’s also accumulated a bunch of dumb comments, too… some nice ones… but a lot of dumb ones — as per the title of this post).

It’s been featured on numerous websites, message boards, and junk, too — including one called Overtime Comedy.

They recently asked me to do an interview about the video. They were very nice, so I agreed to it.

It’s featured on their site today — CHECK IT OUT!

(and also see it on BEST WEEK EVER HERE)

Friday night, we went to the Local506 in Chapel Hill to see Matthew Dear’s Big Hands and Mobius Band, and a local band from Chapel Hill called Opening Flower Happy Bird.

If you don’t know much about Matthew Dear, you should at least know this: He is a DJ. Around 2003, he started receiving a lot of attention for his techno club hits, remixes, and minimal tracks created under his own name, as well as pseudonyms like Audion, False, and Jabberjaw.

In other words, you are more likely to see him slumped over a laptop at 3am in a poorly lit Detroit warehouse than onstage at a rock club in a small town with a guitar slung around his neck, belting into a microphone with maracas in hand, accompanied by other band members.

While Matthew Dear doesn’t attempt anything avant garde with this album, he recreates experimental pop music with his own style. Something like a darker Postal Service with haunting, yet upbeat, lead vocals reminiscent Jim Morrison and a touch of David Bowie, with a Wayne Newton flair (which could be attributed to his snappy vest outfit that night). Then add in some laptop-generated beats and a few folkish ballads, and there you have it.

One of the things I couldn’t stop thinking about while watching Big Hands, though, was how he must have felt about the rockshow setting — people standing there, looking at him, foot-tapping, crossed arms — and how awkward and strange it must feel for someone who is used to DJing minimal beats in dark clubs with people dancing and cheering. In an interview with Blender, he actually talks about that transition and how it feels for someone so used to a club scene:

When you DJ in a dark club, the people in the audience just want to listen and dance. But when you have a guy onstage with a microphone, he immediately becomes somebody to stare at. It’s more of a visual show, and chances are people won’t dance as much. In techno, if something happens in the middle of a song, people applaud and cheer, whereas when I do more of a rock show, it’s different because people just sit there with their arms crossed and stare at you. That’s not a sign that they don’t like it, because at the end of the song they’ll clap, but it kind of changes the whole system I’m used to. It definitely took some adapting for me, but it’s been fun trying to figure out what works.

It’s this kind of keen awareness and understanding of the relationship between music and setting — that I believe many experimental musicians might fail to realize — that sets Matthew Dear apart from other musicians like him. Differences like that could make other musicians think they are failing, and ultimately get stuck in what they feel familiar with. But Matthew Dear acknowledges the difference and learns how to tailor his performance to it. And unlike, oh, say RJD2, he seems to genuinely enjoy this diversion, is proud of what he’s doing, and it actually means something to him.

If you’re interested, Cool Hunting and Slices both have cool video interviews with Matthew Dear in which he talks about everything from growing up in Texas, to the differences between each of his pseudonyms, to all the influences he uses in his music.

——————————

Mobius Band. I’ve always liked them, but seeing them live has propelled them into my current top ten bands. And other than that, you should just go see them if you can. The vocals are beautiful, the synth beats are really catchy, and they genuinely have fun even if there are 60 people in the house (which there were on Friday).

They did, surprisingly, attract a handful of college bro-dudes that I wasn’t expecting, but I suppose that proves what a good band they are that they can even penetrate that flip-flop-clad, DMB-loving market a little bit.

And the drummer has a really silly mustache right now.

——————————

And the opening band from Chapel Hill, Opening Flower Happy Bird, fit really nicely into the show. What they lacked in experience, they more than made up for with enthusiasm, energy, and fun, dancey beats. Like the two touring bands, they combined synth beats with live percussion, guitar riffs, and vocals with an air of Clash-era Joe Strummer’s youth and dissonance. And while there are only two members of the band, they generate songs with multiple layers and an impressively full, complex sound.

Unfortunately, their drum pedal broke and they had to quit early:

Very sad.