Poll: Should I accept Facebook friend requests from strangers?

I've had a few interesting friend requests on Facebook lately. All have come from people I've never met or worked with. I've never interacted with them in any way. And I've never even heard of them, to the best of my recollection. They put the "Total" into "Total Stranger". (I'd say they put the "Strange" in there, but I'm reserving judgment.)

Friends of mine may have recommended they contact me and ask to be friends. Or, maybe not. Maybe they just think I'm globally influential. Or really hot.

These people range from someone who went to the same college as me (within a year of me), to a record company executive with an impressive resume.

I may have been recommended to the former by some mutual alum, but I never got a Facebook notification about it... just the straight-up friend request.

The latter — the music industry man — has something like 2,300 people on his Friends List. Now, although I happen to have a couple of shiny sales awards on my wall, I really doubt I can be of any business-networking aid to this fellow... since I haven't done anything musical in something like a decade. And I never was "in the business." Which makes me wonder why he would send a friend request to this particular stranger. I mean, my profile page isn't one of those "celeb" things where people collect "fans". On the other hand, we do have 6 mutual friends, from two totally different circles in the entertainment industry. Again, no friend referral notice... just the out-of-the-blue request.

My notion of the Facebook profile and the Friends List has always been that you only add people you know personally. And people who are willing to tolerate your idiosyncrasies — or the flip side of that coin, people with whom you're probably relaxed enough to be yourself.

If I expand my FBFL sphere to allow anyone who asks — spammers excluded — should I / will I have to start editing my profile to make it super-businesslike, for fear of random funny posts besmirching my ever-so-serious [*koff*] industry rep?

So my poll question is this: Who do you accept as a Facebook Friend? And/or what would you suggest I set as my standard?

1) Only the people who know where the bodies are buried— and brought a shovel.
2) Fellow gravediggers, plus hearty party partners.
3) Gravediggers, party partners, plus anyone who can pimp my career.
4) Gravediggers, party partners, career pimps, plus casual hand-shakers
5) Anyone who has enough computer skill to click on my name— except spammers.
6) Every Tom, Dick or Harriett who sends the word "Friend" to within a 1,000-mile radius of me.

What say you? Insular, promiscuous, or somewhere in between?

On a Subscription-Based Web

Originally posted by me at The New Digital Cinema group on Facebook:

All pr0n aside, subscription-based web sites have been all but dead for quite some time now... Their passing isn't a result of the recent economic downturn. Content providers learned a while back that the subscription model doesn't work-- or at least didn't work while there/are were plenty of comparable ad-supported alternatives available.

Salon tried a subscription model for a year. The New York Times held out longer. But both of these and many more have torn out the toll booths between users and content.

There are very few audiences who are willing to pay directly, possibly because we've gotten so used to broadcast TV's long ad-based availability. (Those of you who remember the Beeb's Big-Brotheresque monitoring vans rolling by, with subsequent fines being levied may be exempt from this mindset.)

Then again, you might think that paid services like cable and satellite television would have cured us of this sense of entitlement. But we have to consider that cable and satellite are probably more often considered to be semi-agnostic delivery services rather than content providers, since they bundle such a large [sic] selection of networks and services. While a few networks are found exclusively on one provider or another, the majority are available on all.

This may be a clue to a viable future model; large numbers of sites banding together under a single subscription price. In the near-term, lots of general-interest, or financial or sports sites bundled into separate subscription packages. Later (or maybe sooner than later) more consolidation could take place, with variety packages offered, much like the collection of networks and channels provided with basic cable.

Much as Philip was saying, porn producers are already there, offering several sites for a single price -- or so their bot-net spammers tell me.

All this bundling would be a throwback to the days when services like AOL, WebTV, Prodigy, @home, et. al. provided connectivity and content. But users of Der Intertuben are more sophisticated now, and prefer a neutral ISP, along with access to anything and everything. And look where users have left those services...

Because of this, bundles that are limited in scope by media conglomerate ownership might not be as appealing; we're used to cable and satellite delivering a variety of networks owned by a variety of parent companies (Viacom notwithstanding).

ISPs on the other hand, could provide neutrality, but still offer special co-branded packages of bundled content. Some do today, but the content seems to be delivered by B-grade providers, or limited deals with individual media giants, or their own in-house operations that pale in comparison to third-party offerings. These packages are no more than perqs, rather than real attempts at providing a serious selection of content.

I think one of the keys to profitability might a tiered service, with some ad-supported content available to all users, and premium content available only to subscribers. But only if those subscribers are able to access premium content on many different sites with that one subscription.

Naturally, this could also encourage producers to improve their game, in order to create a real difference between free-access content and the paid stuff.

So... maybe a second generation of bundled content providers would understand that they may not be able to filter and control everything a subscriber sees and hears... but that they can still make a buck if they can play nice with others, and provide enough premium content at a price users are willing to pay.

If consumers can have a net-neutral ISP and access to the whole Width of the Wide World 'O Web, while also getting one or more packages of varied, high-quality premium content, across multiple sites and from multiple providers, the subscription model might actually work for everybody.

Majel is in the house, and all is right with the world

According to Variety:

Majel Barrett-Roddenberry will reprise her role as the voice of the starship Enterprise computer in J.J. Abrams' upcoming "Star Trek" feature. She's voiced the role in four "Star Trek" TV series and three films.

While I'm not sure I agree with J.J.'s choice of a super-sleek, bright-white starship interior design, he's definitely on the mark when it comes to casting this role.

Thank you, J.J.. Clearly, you are a righteous dude.

One of the Good Guys: Paul Newman

It's a beautiful Saturday morning. I planned to go for a walk through downtown, while the pollution is low. But CNN just broke in with an update that has me sitting down to remember... Paul Newman.

That's strange in itself. Having to remember him, in the past tense. He and his many television, stage and film personae have been with us for so long, his auto-racing exploits have been so widely covered, and his legendary generosity has been such an influence that he's become a part of our lives. But now, Paul has lost his long battle with cancer.

When most of us remember him, we'll remember his roles. The usual suspects come to mind, but his acting career -- which started in 1952 -- has produced a huge range of characters. When he started out as a young television actor, he was a utility player, portraying everyone from a regular Joe at a boxing match to Nathan Hale and Plato.

In 1956, he starred as prize fighter Rocky (Graziano) in Somebody Up There Likes Me, but 1958 was The Year of Paul Newman. It's an age-old cliche, but it really applies here... Newman's career exploded onto the big screen with three influential movies, and four influential characters in a single year: "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" / Brick Pollitt. "The Left Handed Gun" / Billy The Kid. "The Long, Hot Summer" / Ben Quick.

The list of roles Paul Newman played would be any actor's dream. Israeli activist Ari Ben Canaan, pool hustler Fast Eddie Felson, steamy Chance Wayne, the ruthless Hud Bannon, Nobel Prize winner Andrew Craig, rebellious inmate Cool Hand Luke, escape planner Pvt. Harry Frigg, and Indy car driver Frank Capua.

Then came another leap in his fame and stardom: Butch Cassidy, and the cult classic Judge Roy Bean. Newman was Joseph Rearden in The MacKintosh Man -- one of my sleeper picks. Then The Sting's Henry Gondorff, and the architect of the Towering Inferno, Doug Roberts, followed by a lighter Newman as Reggie 'Reg' Dunlop in Slap Shot.

I'm a science fiction fan, and one of my favorite Newman pictures is Robert Altman's often-overlooked modern ice age movie, Quintet, with Newman as Essex. The film has its flaws, but Newman delivers as always, and in the kind of world he's never been seen in before or since.

In 1981 came tough cop Murphy in Fort Apache the Bronx, followed by legal pic roles Michael Colin Gallagher and Frank Galvin in Absence of Malice and The Verdict. He cranked up his crotchety side as Harry Keach in Harry & Son.

Newman was nominated for Best Actor Oscars seven times and received a special honorary Academy Award in 1986. He topped that honorary award the following year, when he won a Best Actor Oscar for his much-anticipated and widely-praised reprise of Fast Eddie Felson in The Color of Money.

The final phase of his career included nuke builder Gen. Leslie R. Groves, Hudsucker industrialist Sidney J. Mussburger and Sully Sullivan in Nobody's Fool. Newman played father to a younger generation of leading man as Dodge Blake, dad of Kevin Costner in Message in a Bottle. Roles in Road to Perdition as John Rooney and Cars as the voice of Doc Hudson showed that Newman still had his chops, late in his professional life.

What can you say about an incredible career like Paul Newman's... except to touch on the man's life outside of film. Rarely has a celebrity been as well known for their unassuming demeanor and quiet, far-reaching philanthropic efforts.

His 50-year marriage to Joanne Woodward was a stand-out in the entertainment community. And his generosity is the stuff of legend. In 1994, Newman received the Academy's Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award. Famous for his Hole-in-the-Wall Gang camp for seriously ill children, and for donating all proceeds from his Newman’s Own brand products to educational and charitable causes, Paul Newman was truly one of a kind in terms of giving.

Through all of his diverse characters and all of his real-life stories runs a single thread: integrity. Even when he was playing a bad guy, Paul Newman was definitely one of the good guys.

The debate: in case you were napping

During tonight's debate, I think we all should have played a drinking game: everybody takes a drink every time McCain patronizingly says "what Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand."

No, wait-- then we would all have been dead from alcohol poisoning by the end.

Senator Obama clearly understood absolutely everything he spoke about, and in tremendous depth and detail. While Obama discussed the facts and what he would do, McCain repeatedly resorted to vaguely chanting about how experienced he is and what he, the experienced [read: insider] candidate can do, and relating anecdotes that he and his campaign calculated would appeal to the gut reactions of the right.

What Senator McCain doesn't seem to understand is that folksy stories aren't what we need. We need a president who knows the nuances of policy, of international relations, of economic checks and balances, that are vital to getting the country back on track-- not a president who pouts and stamps his feet and refuses to engage adversarial nations. The silent treatment has been proven a failure again and again and again, not only with North Korea, but throughout the Cold War and broader history.

What Senator McCain doesn't seem to understand is that he's stuck in a nationalist / adventurist / shoot-first mentality that will be the death of this republic if allowed to continue to saturate the actions of an Imperial White House.

McCain showed once again that he's an idealogue who bases decisions on presumptions. Obama proved once again that he's a pragmatist who studies the issues and crafts a policy based on a calculated outcome.

Some of the pundits are saying this was a tie. Apparently, they were watching a re-run of a previous election's debate.

For anyone who gauged the outcome on how much we learned about how each of the candidates thinks, and what actions they would take on various issues... well... Barack kicked the old man's ass.

Blowin' up: Sa Dingding

Every once in a long while an artist or a particular song comes along... and gives me chills. Sa Dingding, a Chinese singer, and DJ Full Phatt have done it with this remixed version of her song "Alive", from the debut album of the same name.

According to KCRW, this mix is available on an import release, but after Gargling, I discovered that the label has also made it available as a free download; the MP3 is here. While the Full Phatt Remix is more westernized and electrified, the rest of the tracks on the album lean a bit more toward acoustic instrumentation and Sino-centric sounds, and I'm sure many will note a New Age influence, although this stuff won't have you napping after a few bars.

Ms. Sa's voice moves effortlessly from the bright, traditional violin-like beam of light to a blues-influenced, breathy sensuality-- within the span of a single phrase. Invoking ancient Chinese or Mongolian culture and a chilled urban groove at once is an accomplishment in itself.

I could rave for paragraphs, but words can't replace a listen. Enjoy (iTunes affiliate link):

Joe Lieberman tries to Rove the convention

From the What Were They Thinking Department:

I've respected Joe Lieberman, off and on, for his willingness to be independent. I thought he would have made a decent VP to Al Gore's Presidency.

But now he's rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, all the while assuring us that the Republican ship of state is unsinkable.

In October of 2006, Lieberman decided to call himself an "Independent Democrat". Not just as some sort of media-branding tool, but officially, for the record. That was a bit of a head-scratcher, but tactically understandable in that he'd lost the Democratic ticket bid for his seat.

When asked "Would you unequivocally caucus with the Democrats?" Joe said: "Oh, come on. I’ve said that 1200 times.... Yes. Yes!"

In December, 2007, Lieberman announced he'd be backing McCain for president. Now there's a declaration. It calls up images of Lieberman perched on the bow of the Titanic, screaming "Look at me! I'm independent! King of the world!"... showing that it's possible to take the independent thing to an illogical extreme.

And yet, asked in July of 2008 if he would start voting with the Republicans to hand them the majority, he said "I don't have any intention of doing that before the end of this session of Congress." Really, Joe? This isn't independence. This is navigating without a map, a compass, GPS, landmarks, stars...

Now, at the Republican National Convention, Lieberman says "In the Senate, [Obama] has not reached across party lines to get anything significant done, nor has he been willing to take on powerful interest groups in the Democratic Party."

Wow. As if throwing support behind Mr. 90%-With-Bush weren't bad enough, now Joe's decided to start telling obvious lies? What sort of efforts would Joe call "significant"? As Obama advisor Robert Gibbs said, the senator worked with Sen. Richard Lugar to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists and with Sen. Tom Coburn on the budget. Just for a couple of examples. And the last time I checked, those guys were Republicans.

If forging a solid budget and preventing terrorists from getting nukes aren't "significant" enough for you, Joe, what is? Perhaps you would like Sen. Obama to build consensus with the Republicans on Unified Field Theory? Or maybe form a bi-lateral committee to definitively establish or disprove the existence of God?

It's as if Carl "Repeat a Lie Enough Times" Rove himself had written Lieberman's speech.

More evidence that if John McCain is elected president, America will be subjected to at least four more years of flat-out lies.

And, it's apparently evidence that Joe Lieberman has lost not only his spine, but his mind. I would say "Say it ain't so, Joe"... but I doubt he could respond coherently.

In a world where there's no Don LaFontaine...

...movie trailers -- and life in general -- will be just a bit less scary. Or dramatic. Or funny.

The legendary voice over artist who did more than 5,000 movie trailers died today at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in LA, reportedly as the result of a collapsed lung.

I never met the man, but have always envied those pipes, and that signature read. And from all the cameos I've seen, Don could also poke fun at himself... as in the recent GEICO "In a world..." spot.

Thanks for all the great reads, Don!

ET Online: Don LaFontaine Dies at 68

Bud's TV ad: Anthemic or Anemic?

I finally got some time to watch the Olympics today-- and I thoroughly enjoyed the US men's swim team's world-record-setting performance in the prelims of the 4x100 relay... Although I managed to miss their final smackdown of a certain snarky Frenchman and his pals in the medal event. Gotta get TiVo.

One thing I managed to see, though, is the latest Budweiser TV spot, called "Anthem".

There are lots of images of hard-working Americans and baseball games and such, narrated by a kind of Mellencamp-Lite soundtrack, with lyrics like "This is what I believe in."

I was struck by the peculiar timing of this kind of theme in their marketing. This sweeping, corn-fed, heart-massaging parade of Americana is being trotted out close on the heels of the company's sale... to the Belgian company InBev. Does their marketing department not realize how smarmy and disingenuous this ad could seem after selling out to a foreign country? Were they not paying any attention to the substantial backlash stirred up by the sale? I imagine that they had long planned on running the ad during the Olympics, which is natural. But I hope they at least had second thoughts about running it so soon after the citizens of St Louis and much of the rest of the country felt a sharp stabbing pain in the back.

But I digress (like mad). The thing that really caught my eye during the Anthem spot was an overhead shot of a football field filled with some sort of drill team with cards, spelling out a word. (And remember those lyrics: "This is what I believe in.")

I was glancing up and down between computer and television at the time... but I could have sworn that word they'd spelled was... TIBET.

Needless to say, I was dumbfounded. Could Anheuser-Busch actually have the stones to make a statement like that? Aren't they all over the Chinese market now?

Surely they spelled something else.

So I Gargled for the spot, and eventually found a video clip.

The word?

LIBERTY.

Then the layers of irony started landing on me like a division's worth of Chinese Army surplus sleeping bags.

The cowards at Fiat folded like a diagram in a Chilton's Repair Guide when China threw a tantrum about the Lancia ad starring Richard Gere, in which the actor/activist manages to drive the car to Tibet. Instead of delivering a non-apology, Fiat bowed and scraped to the People's Republic of Human Rights Violations.

So, of course, it was too much to ask that Budweiser grow a pair and step up.

Then again, I guess this might say more about my wishful thinking than about socially-comatose corporations. Looks like it was nothing more than an acute case the mind seeing what it wants to see.

But... wouldn't it have been mind-blowingly great?

Declaration of Mobile Contract Independence

I've been waiting for the end of my current mobile contract to get a new phone. Now that the second version of the iPhone is on its way, I decided to call my provider a couple of weeks ago to find out exactly when my contract is up.

Symbolically, my contract expired at midnight on July 3rd... meaning that the 4th of July is my Mobile Phone Contract Independence Day.

In that light, I thought it would be appropriate to lightly rewrite our great country's Declaration of Independence and declare my independence from a tyrannical Mobile Contract:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Declaration of Mobile Contract Independence

In My Loft, July 4, 2008.
The curmudgeonly Declaration of Bob West,

When in the course of Mobile Communication, it becomes necessary for a Wireless Phone Customer to dissolve the Contractual Bands which have connected them with a Provider, and to assume among the Powers of Technology, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Physics and of Rollover Minutes entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mobile Customers requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

I hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Mobile Phone Users are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Long Battery Life, Liberty to Roam, and the pursuit of Cool.

That to secure these rights, Services are instituted among Consumers, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Subscribed.

That whenever any Contract with a Wireless Operator becomes destructive of these Ends, it is in the Right of the Customer to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Contract, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Reception and Happiness. Prudence indeed, will dictate that Operators long established should not be changed for light and transient Outages; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Callers are more disposed to suffer, while occasional Dropped Calls are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Contracts to which they are signatory. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Wireless Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Mobile Operators, and to acquire new and hipper Handsets for their future Use.

Such has been the patient Sufferance of this Customer; and such is now the Necessity which constrains him to alter his former Systems of Mobile Service. The History of the Present Mobile Provider is a History of $200 cancellation Fees and Refusals to Budge, having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over this Customer. To prove this, let the Facts be submitted to a candid World.

It has refused its Assent to Contract Cancellation, most wholesome and necessary for the Customer's Financial Good and Self-Esteem.

It has forbidden its Customer Service Reps to waive the $200 cancellation Fee, unless waived as part of a Service Renewal or Upsell obtained; and when so waived, it has utterly neglected to offer a sufficient handset upgrade, instead thrusting upon the Consumer wimpy, dorky-looking chunks of outdated electronics.

It has refused to provide others dissolution of contractual bonds; unless those People would relinquish 200 Bucks, a Sum inestimable to them, and formidable to a Customer's Cash Flow.

It has cobbled together a network of Cell Towers at Places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the places this customer frequents, for the sole Purpose of appeasing a few crotchety retirees in Beverly Hills.

It has dropped Calls in Korea Town repeatedly, opposing with weakness of signal the Rights of the People to talk and text from Olympic Boulevard.

It has refused for a long Time, after such Dropped calls, to put up new Towers; the Customer remaining in the mean time exposed to all the Irritations of talking to One's Self, and Deciding Whether to Call Back.

It has obstructed the Advancement of Customers' Reputations as being hip and cool, by failing to establish a Contract with Apple for the provision of a subsidized iPhone, locked or otherwise.

It has made Customers dependent on their Service alone, for the Term of their Contracts, and for the Amount and Payment of their monthly Bills.

It has erected a Multitude of new Towers, while somehow ignoring dead spots.

It has kept us using, in Times of iPhone buzz, a Samsung Clam Shell with a clunky Interface and no Photo Caller ID, without the consent of the User.

It has affected to render its Contract Enforcement Division independent of and superior to the Customer Base.

It has combined with its Lawyers to subject us to a Jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by a customary Service Agreement; giving rise to their Acts of pretended Benefit:

For protecting themselves, by a Contract Clause, from Punishment for any Service Interruptions which they should commit on the Users of these Services:

For cutting off or rendering unintelligible our Calls with all Parts of the World:

For imposing mysterious Fees on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many Cases, of the Benefits of Groovy New Technology:

For transporting Customer Service beyond the Seas to be staffed by overly-cheery night owls with thick accents:

For abolishing the free System of Competition among Service Providers, establishing therein an arbitrary Contract Term, and refusing to Pro-Rate, so as to render it at once an Example and fit Instrument for introducing the same absolute Rule in these Service Areas:

For taking away our Freedom to Choose, abolishing our ability to order an iPhone, and thus altering fundamentally our willingness to answer a call in front of Others:

For suspending our contractual Habeas Corpus, and declaring themselves invested with Powers to tell us when we are allowed to upgrade.

It has abdicated Responsibility, by declaring our situation out of their hands and waging psychological War against us.

It has plundered our bank account, ravaged our hearing, fried our brain cells, and destroyed the ability of our People to use a Soft Keyboard and pinchy-like Interface Gestures.

It has coerced our fellow Users taken Captive through draconian Contracts to conscript their fellow Countrymen and Women, to become the Jailers of their Friends and Family, or to bankrupt themselves by ridiculously inflated Rates.

It has excited Consumer Insurrections among us, and has endeavoured to bring on the Inhabitants of our Networks, the merciless Teenage Savages, whose known Rule of Texting, is an undistinguished Destruction, of the English Language as we know it.

In every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble Terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated smarmily-presented offers of more-expensive phones and an additional two years of Obligation. A Service, whose Character is thus marked by every act which may define a Corporate Tyrant, is unfit to be the Exclusive Mobile Provider of a free People.

Nor have we been wanting in Attentions to our Mobile Overlords. We have warned them from Time to Time of Attempts by their Legal Department to extend an unwarrantable Jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the Circumstances of our Emigration from our previous Service and subsequent Signup with them. We have appealed to their native Justice and Magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the Ties of our common Kindred to disavow these Usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our Data Connections and Textual Correspondence. They have been deaf to the Voice of Justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the Necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of Humankind, Enemies at Contract Renewal Time, and in Times of Solid Service, Friends.

I, therefore, a Resident of the United States of America, sitting at my iMac in my Loft in Downtown L.A., appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of my Intentions, do, solemnly Publish and Declare, That this Mobile Service Customer is, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent of his current Service Provider; that I am absolved from all Allegiance to said Provider, and that all contractual Connection between me and my Mobile Operator, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as a Free and Independent Consumer, I have full Power to stand in an absurdly long Line at an Apple Store, grab an iPhone, sign a new 2-year Contract, wait around while the contraption is activated, and to do all other Acts and Things which Mobile Phone Customers who lust after objects of excellent Industrial Design and Human Interface may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of the divine Providence, I pledge to Apple and AT&T my Mobile Life, my auto-debited Checking Account, and the transfer of my sacred Mobile Number.

Signed by ORDER and
in BEHALF OF MYSELF,
BOB WEST.

A Kiwi takes flight - Brooke Fraser

Sometime early last year I first heard the music of Brooke Fraser. This New Zealand-born singer might generally be categorized as a "Christian folk" artist.

Okay, okay, I know. You're either saying, "Right on!" or "Harumph!" (Seriously. Even if you're not actually saying "harumph", I know you're at least thinking some modern-day equivalent. Maybe even "EWwwww-WUH!")

Trust me, Brooke Fraser is redefining "crossover".

Now, there are lots and lots of "Christian rock" or "Christian folk" clone artists, mostly cranked out by the giant cash factory known as Word Records. For the unexposed, they've long been like a born-again version of Motown records... except the concept of "soul" is a little different. Most of these artists go straight for the left ventricle, slide in a tube, and fill it up with highly-refined sugar. Or -- if they're a "Christian metal" band -- they stick a fork into your heart muscle, twist it and then say "Sorry. I need some grace now."

But Ms. Fraser has benefited from the buffer of the International Date Line. Coming up in Wellington as a musical prodigy and an independent artist, she signed with SonyBMG in Australia/NZ, in 2002, at the age of 18.

This young woman has one of the finest vocal instruments I've heard in a long time. Her voice is sweet but never saccharine, warm but touched by the salt of the earth. She can wrap you up in a blanket of reassurance, and while you're there, snugly listening, she'll deliver her payload of soul-searching, intelligent, conscientious world view.

But it's not subterfuge, it's not self-righteous, and it's no head fake. Apparently, she really means every word. And without an abundance of the sort of repetitious, opaque tracks you get from some artists in the genre. Her touch is generally light both musically and evangelically, so even the most jaded of harumphers may enjoy all but the most hymnal of her tracks in spite of themselves.

There's just one thing that bugs me. This girl who has such an amazing instrument... has pierced her tongue. Look, I'm all for freedom of expression and stuff. But when I'm listening on decent speakers, I'm clearly hearing the sound of a self-imposed speech impediment. Each and every S and TH is just a bit diffused by the metal stud that pokes up between her taste buds. For me, it can be more than a little distracting. C'mon, Brooke-- why pollute this gift you've been given?

But, finger-wagging aside, her voice and music tend to overcome this shortfall (especially if I listen on small speakers or earbuds). Her lyrics and music videos show that she has a larger, better world in mind as she's writing, from her heartfelt commitment inspired by a trip to Rwanda -- "Albertine" -- to intimate but soaring tracks like "Deciphering Me". I highly recommend "Shadowfeet"... especially the video. Check it out on YouTube. As with Deciphering, the chorus rises in a gently anthemic arc that floats you down the stream of her consciousness. The video uses a tried-but-true technique: a series of close-ups of various people singing the song. This grey-day execution, populated by the diversity of humanity and combined with a comforting but melancholy hook, really works for me. In a throat-lumping kinda way.

Brooke isn't just a crossover or breakthrough artist; she's managed to obliterate the line, plowing into the mainstream with 13x platinum sales in her corner of the world, and with the US release of "Albertine", she's hit the Top 10 on iTunes. I'd say she's likely to blow up in the US any day now.

So for those of you who occasionally venture into the world of "Christian crossover", and even for those of you who appreciate global thought but who usually eschew the divine, Brooke Fraser could be a welcome voice.

Now, I don't think Wood & Bone Records (her new U.S. label) is owned by the Word Records conglomerate, but you never know. So, Brooke, be on the lookout for some A&R guy driving a tanker full of sugar.

Is Red Dead?

I saw a TV ad for "Hellboy II" for the first time the other day. As with a lot of movies lately, it looked absolutely spectacular. Obviously, their CG budget for this round has been seriously juiced. The number of characters involved appears to have increased by a factor of 1,000. Great character design, CG lighting and FX. Very cool.

And then I started listening to the dialog. Hellboy (Ron Perlman), known for witty, edgy banter, uttered such zingers as "And stay down" and "I wouldn't do that if I were you."

Hey... funny stuff.

So I went to the Apple trailers sub-site and rolled 'em.

Trailer 1: Very serious. Drama-rock soundtrack and dark VO, over cuts of the action. About 3/4 of the way through, HB gets to say "Now you pissed me off" out of context, which sucks all the comedy out of it-- if there was any to begin with. But at least he's allowed to utter one "ohhh crap" at the end of the trailer. Mr. Perlman's read on that line is always enjoyable, but it's just not enough to overcome the brooding nouveau-goth fanboy atmo of the trailer.

Trailer 2: Just a tad lighter. But not really much funny in there.

Trailer 3: Mostly more of the same. Red calls Liz (Selma Blair) "babe". She protests. "I said 'Abe'!" he retorts.

Are these the funniest lines in the movie?

The VO artist talks about "The visionary director of 'Pan's Labyrinth'"... and that would be Guillermo del Toro, who also directed the first "Hellboy." Which was a lot funnier than these trailers.

Has Guillermo bought the PL hype and directed a "visionary" movie that leaves behind all of that much-loved Hellboy comic-world snark?

Or have Universal's marketing department and the trailer cutter decided to go purely with the visionary vibe, at the expense of a few laughs before show time?

I can't say, but I'll definitely be seeing this in the theater, funny or not.

I'm a sucker for science fiction with high production value. I also like well-done effects, and production designer Stephen Scott has apparently brought his A+ game this time out.

Selma Blair looks spooky-cute-beautiful as always. (But her flames are reddish orange in the one shot I saw. Is it just me, or is that HB1 slomo shot of her engulfed in blue flames, turning past camera, eyes shining with reflected heat just the most erotic non-nude closeup ever created? Let's all join hands and pray for blue flames in HB2.)

On a fishier note, it sounds as though David Hyde Pierce is MIA as the voice of Abe Sapien. Is Doug Jackson voicing the character himself? He's billed as playing "Abe Sapien / The Chamberlain / The Angel of Death" on IMDb. Busy guy.

And what's with the Stargate-Wraith wannabes?

Well, here's hoping Ron is allowed to let his usual wry self shine through... regardless of how thick the red paint and prosthetics get. Bring on the whammer, baby.

Charge!

On June 23, the Pentagon announced the nomination of Lt. Gen. Ann E. Dunwoody to the rank of four-star general, making her -- pending congressional approval -- the first woman to achieve the distinction.

While this is an exciting advancement for Dunwoody and all women, I'd like to point something out. The Army had a chance to show that women can do any job that men can. They had a chance to make a real statement about equal opportunity. So what did they put their first woman four-star general in charge of?

Shopping.

Yeah, that's right. Gen. Dunwoody will have control of one of the world's biggest credit card accounts as head of the Army Materiel Command. For some, this may conjure up visions of buying lots of boots and lovely camo ensembles, but Materiel Command also, of course, supplies potatoes and tanks and artillery, and moves all those tons of stuff around the world in an amazing display of organization and energy.

So why couldn't the Army have put her in charge of something a bit more... combative? Like, say, the U.S. Intercontinental Butt-Kicking Command (USINTBUKICOM)?

Well, it's partly because the law (still) says that women can't engage in combat. General Dunwoody has had a highly distinguished career in logistics, providing the vital supplies that an army needs to clothe itself, brush its teeth, and fight its battles. But she hasn't been allowed to participate directly in those battles. (Not that it's stopped her from earning a Master Parachutist badge, or serving with the 82nd Airborne in Saudi Arabia in the Gulf War).

Since combat commands are the traditional path to full general, it may not be surprising that it's taken so long for a woman to get there. In a way, it also makes Dunwoody's promotion particularly impressive. I guess the Army just couldn't ignore her 33-year record of excellence in leadership any longer. The Pentagon says there are 57 active-duty female generals in the U.S. military, and five of them wear three stars. Clearly, more doors are open to women, although the door to the 4-star level still has a tough lock to pick.

Now, working in Materiel Command doesn't mean it's a day at the mall, by any means, for women or men. As of this date, 98 American women have died in Iraq from hostile action and non-hostile incidents. So, not to put too fine a point on it, but women can die just like men, even though they aren't at the very top of the chain of combat command. Not yet, at least.

Could a woman become Commander-in-Chief before a four-star female commands combat troops? Or before women fight in combat? It's very possible.

Someday a woman will take command of USINTBUKICOM.

Until then, mens' and womens' lives will depend on a woman's command of the world's largest logistical operation, and when in-theatre, that woman will be dodging bullets just like everyone else.

Climate change? Nah. That's just a myth.

From the standpoint of our government telling us the truth about climate change, we might as well have been living in China for the last 7.5 years:

Climate Findings Were Distorted, Probe Finds

Appointees in NASA Press Office Blamed


It's not really "new news", but it's just one more piece of proof that The Shrub and his cronies are the most blatant, self-serving liars we've had in power in ages.

Then again, my question would be-- Why are there any political appointees in the public affairs office at NASA? The agenda for that organization should be objective, unbiased research in science and technology. And it should have the reputation for it.

But, as has been shown time and again, the far right and those with short-term financial interests (AKA "Big Oil") are willing to do and say anything in order to line their pockets with cash, while deficit spending their children's future...

...all the while proving themselves morally bankrupt.

Can someone say "Time for change"?

"Personalized" Facebook ads

I have a Facebook account (like half the planet). Because I entered my age in my profile, Facebook customizes the small ads that appear over in the left column.

I'm far from being a senior citizen, but they seem to enjoy taunting me with ads about hair loss and stair lifts (those slidey things that allow the mobility impaired to have two-story houses).

Among all the ads apparently aimed at the increasingly-decrepit, though, is something I find really interesting. The ads for over-50 dating services always seem to include a photo of an attractive woman in her 20's or 30's. (And, of course, mammarily disproportionate.)

So, Facebook's idea of a male in his 50's is one who is losing his hair and can't walk... but who regularly dates young hotties.

Which begs the question: what ads do they serve to twenty-somethings?

Perhaps they see their younger male members as being hairy marathon runners... who date cougars.

Maybe someone from Facebook can clear up this demographic puzzler.

Oh, no, wait-- Sorry. They're all out right now, getting their hair cut. Or rock climbing. Or hooking up with Demi Moore.