The Tattler...featuring Blogs! Submissions, please...

If you're like moi, you probably have very little time during the course of the day to cruise the Internet, and take a gander at popular new blogs that are revving up - and subsequently - piquing widespread interest out in the wilds of the blogosphere.

On the other hand, perhaps you're an talented insightful blogger with a lot to chirp about.

In spite of the fact you've been toiling away publishing those sizzling posts at the crack of dawn each day, nobody is nibbling at the smorgasbord of delectable goodies you've been tossing their way.

The musings - like zillions of others out there - are going virtually unread.

Meanwhile, the popular "with-it" blog trend-setters, are continuing to make their merry way into dizzying social circles in a big way.

Maybe it's time to pack it in?

Nope!

Now, you have a chance to enter the big leagues, and become a celebrated hit-getter like gossip maven Perez Hilton or the undisputed Queen of the "blogs" Arianna Huffington.

Yes, the Tattler is expanding its horizons, and reaching out into the blogosphere!

Our high-profile website is setting aside a little premium space (!) in order to showcase - and ultimately thrust into the spotlight - a handful of bloggers who deserve a kick-start and a few kudos along the way.

So, if you're a blogger pining for a little more exposure - and aching to be a much-celebrated "Featured Blog" at the Tattler - just zip off an e-mail off to us when you have a mind to.

Contact:

publisher@thetattler.biz

A simple link to your blog to facilitate a quick review of your creative renderings is satisfactory.

However, if you include a brief bio with a couple of insightful (and/or heartfelt) notes on your - hopes, dreams, and wishes - may trigger a profile piece alongside your blog site entry.

Good luck!

http://www.julianayrs.com

Bloggers...abandoning blogs according to New York Times! Misleading info...

I would be remiss if I did not respond to the New York Times article just recently in which a reporter asserted that bloggers were abandoning their sites in droves. (06/07/09)

For starters, some of the reporter's statements were terribly misleading.

According to the journalist, one source - Technorati (the largest blog site in the world) - alleged that blogs were sitting idle and not being updated on a regular basis.

Although that bold-faced statement warranted a follow-up interview with at least a blogger or two to confirm the facts - the reporter was inclined to accept Technorati's observations as true.

In this instant case, the lack of journalistic ethic on the part of the writer, has left egg on the face of the New York Times staff.

The truth of the matter is that Technorati has been experiencing quite a few ongoing glitches at their site which account for the reason a handful of bloggers may have been reluctant to follow through in recent days.

For example, when I first signed up with Technorati, my blog posts at google's Blogspot (The Tattler) and WordPress (Pop Culture) were pinged on a daily basic; consequently, my material was always current and up-to-date.

So, time-sensitive notices about local and National events - and spur of-the-moment news flashes - were published quickly enough for readers to act upon them.

However, in recent weeks Technorati has been experiencing a number of technical problems which they have not been very quick to fix in spite of their professional obligation to do so.

Specifically, it should be noted in my own instant case, that although I wrote daily posts for weeks-on-end - on more than one occasion - Technorati falsely reported that no new posts had been published for days!

On those occasions did Technorati staff incorrectly assume I abandoned my blogs, too?

No wonder their data is out-of-whack!

Notwithstanding the aforementioned, once the flaws in the Technorati software came to my attention, I began to ping the posts daily since the automated system was not reliable from the get-go.

In spite of that dedicated effort on my part to ensure readers would receive all updated posts in a timely fashion, Technorati still managed to prevent material posting in a timely manner (sometimes for durations of twelve or thirteen days).

To make matters worse, Technorati's site crashes often, which adds to the frustration.

When a blogger attempts to log in, a bizarre message - The Monster got loose - may flash across the screen and instruct the individual to try back later (without any explanation).

Also, I can't count the number of times I have logged in to my account and received the startling message that my blog (The Tattler) didn't exist!

Duh!

As to the other issues raised by the New York Times?

The reporter asserted in the article that bloggers were abandoning their blogs because they were frustrated by the fact their arduous efforts were not panning out in spite of the fact they busted their butts - with the ultimate aim - of being "discovered".

For instance, the reporter surmised that because book deals (bloggers were eagerly anticipating) were not forthcoming - and fame did not come knocking on their door with a promise of untold overnight - that disenchanted bloggers were opting to jump ship.

If that was/is the case for many - who are now seeking recognition elsewhere because of their failed attempts on the Internet - the truth of the matter is that a multitude of artists over the years (in a myriad of fields of creative expression) have similarly offered up their talents in a non-paying capacity with the express hope they would be catapulted into the spotlight.

For example, comics have often signed up for open-mike night at celebrated nightclubs, with the express hope that a talent scout in the audience might recognize their talent - and ultimately - land 'em gainful employment.

Actors have also been known to perform on stage in equity-waiver theatres - to specifically showcase their talent - in order to land a starring role in a major production on Broadway or in a feature film.

All things considered, it appears that the New York Times really screwed up on this one!

Took a blustery blogger to set the record straight, eh?

http://www.julianayrs.com/

Cannes Film Festival...snobs turn up noses at bloggers! French merde!

Gauche promotion that is true Cannes!

Pregnant pauses!

In spite of a downturn in the economy in recent months, a handful of bloggers have been stashing away cash in order to rustle up airfare and Hotel accommodation, with the aim of attending the prestigious Cannes Film Festival in May (2009).

If this excited wave of Internet Journalists expect to trot the red carpet, interview celebs amid the glitz and glamour of the Internet Jet Set - or even rub shoulders with the tony elite in Southern France - they may be disappointed when they arrive at the pearly gates!

Undoubtedly, the party crashers will be waved away by a snooty Official attired a lot like a stuffy maitre d' at a 3 Star restaurant.

Yes, a few Bloggers and Internet Journalists have grumbled about the fact Festival Officials gave them the-run-around when they applied for press credentials for the much-ballyhooed event.

"How many unique impressions does your site get a month?" one staffer sniffed.

In addition, the status of the publication writers were in the employ of, was of utmost importance to the phony-baloney snots.

"Please provide the site address for the head office of your publication on the Internet."

If the applicant's site was listed under the auspices of a web site such as technorati, blogspot, or - God forbid - wordpress, they were given the old heave-ho post haste.

"There is such a demand for the passes that we can only grant them to a select few."

Of course, reporters from the New York Times, a major Television Network, or journalists penning copy for a U.S. publication with subscriptions tallies that stagger the imagination, are given carte blanche!

It all boils down to numbers, maximum coverage, and a big bucks audience.

Normally, just prior to the big launch in Cannes each dazzling new season, bloggers and Internet journalists alike are inclined to publish a raft of gushing press clips, with a big thrust on celebs that plan to bask in the glow of the spotlight, award-winning films to grace the French Cinema screens, in tandem with a ton of delicious titillating gossip about the party circuit, fashion scene, who's screwing who, and that sort-of-thing.

Yes, Internet writers are a force to contend with on these shores and on those abroad, no question.

What if the blogosphere militia left the Cannes Film Festival out in the cold this year, if only to make the point?

Would the frogs do a sudden about-face and invite bloggers to their murky little lily pond next year?

I, for one, am not going to pen any post on the Cannes Film Festival hereinafter, nor do I intend to promote their overrated festival (which ranks a big zero in my eyes, all things considered, on the heels of the aforementioned fiasco).

Frankly, I've had enough of "Boutique" films rife with painstakingly long pauses, sketchy subtitles that beg interpretation, and gobs of butter masquerading as "Art" to intentionally fu** the filmgoer up the a**.

In the alternative, I plan to rent a DVD or two, hop into bed with a bevy of fluffy pillows courtesy of Martha Stewart, and wash down a plateful of scrumptious freedom fries with a goblet or two of vintage wine from the Napa Valley.

Paris (Nevada) even looks more inviting these days!

http://www.julianayrs.com

Germany...forced speech. Bloggers comply or face fines!

I have heard of free speech, but forced speech?

The startling news astounded when it first streaked like lightning around German websites in recent days.

The public library system was going to force every blogger and website to submit material for their digital library files or face a potential fine of $12,700 (U.S. Funds).

Turns out, the "thought police" were not in an arm-twisting mode, at all.

Not yet, anyway.

In a bid to document "pop culture" on the world-wide-web in a digital format for future reference, officials have been painstakingly selecting specific material from a handful of websites that are presumably representative of "voices" on the net.

To ensure the project is completed without a hitch, the Government took the unusual precaution of legislating applicable penalties that may be levied against any blogger or net surfer inclined to object to use of material.

It appears that the Government may be taking a nod from Europeana - the new European Union digital library - which has been actively digitalizing 2m books, recordings, and paintings and films for their files.

The archives may be helpful to researchers in the future who may want to take a reliable peek into cultures from earlier ages - no matter how advanced or primitive - and at break-neck speed.


When the Europeana digital library went live last month, the site promptly crashed.

No wonder.

They're boasting a staggering 10 million hits a month from around the globe.

The beauty of the digital library is its permanency.

Currently, the information highway offers up no guarantees.

Internet pages shut down, for instance, as bloggers close-out their accounts and start fresh elsewhere.

Because technology will leap ahead, too - documentation of the "dark ages" in the "wild" on the Internet - may be of interest too.

So, there is an ongoing effort to coral that data.

A U.S. based archive is currently involved in an ambitious effort to collect data on these shores, but the task is monumental.

And, there is the question of storage space.

So - have libraries prioritized data collection at this point in time - or are scholars going about the project willy-nilly?

Where do a blogger's daily ramblings rank in the scheme of things, for instance.

"We don't have any predefined criteria," noted Rory McLeod, the British Library's digital preservation manager.

"The library captures large slices of the web, but what is important to retain is the Internet's changing technological specifications so that future researchers can reconstruct them."

My vision for the future?

A holograph library!

Bloggers...thank you for your support! And, have a Happy Thanksgiving...

Since I hooked up with wordpress, I have been able to keep better track of my blog stats - and subsequently - determine what kind of activity is going on in respect to my daily posts.

Frankly, it has been quite heartening to discover these past few weeks that numerous bloggers have either "quoted" my comments on their sites or installed direct links to posts they have been keen on.

Not unlike me, many bloggers painstakingly struggle over their message - with a keen eye to the turn-of-a-phrase - before posting.

Then, after the little gem is published, most wonder to themselves.

Is anyone ever going to stumble on this post - and just maybe - read the material I slaved over?

Fortunately, when I step out the door, I get an immediate reaction to my musings!

When I waltz into a restaurant, or stroll down the street - even step into a crowded Hollywood nightclub - all eyes turn toward me.

"That's him," they whisper, "The famous blogger."

Nonetheless, the support I have received over the past few months, has been quite heartening.

Daily, I receive private e-mail messages about some novel or thought-provoking idea or two, bloggers pine to pass on.

Many are inclined to post a comment on the blog sites, too.

Since I started up my first blog over a year ago on the Fox Network TV Website ("On the Lot") my first-hand experience in the blogosphere has been about ninety-five percent positive!

Occasionally, I do get some wacko spouting off at the mouth, but rarely.

Also, through a glass darkly, I have had the chance to get a glimpse into the psyche of a handful of twisted individuals around the country.

For instance, one day I penned a post after a red carpet premiere in Hollywood, in which I noted that Jeff Goldblum was very kind on the eve of the screening.

Shortly after that, I stumbled across a screwball comment, that some Goldblum fan made on their blog.

The individual, who acted like they owned Mr. Goldblum, referenced my article in which I underscored the actor's good manners.

Rather than just link the story, or say thanks, he proceeded to make a negative remark.

"I LOL! We already knew that. It's too late."

Too late?

Since when is it too late to compliment a person on their exemplary conduct?

Notwithstanding, people do change over time.

Personalities (especially in the spotlight) are often in flux.

A few years ago, an actor may have been a mean scoundrel who spit in the face of the press; but today, they may be meek as a lamb.

Also, new fans are always coming into the fold every day.

For their sake, isn't it a good idea to mention how approachable the object of their admiration is?

Oftentimes, I run into twisted people with no common sense whatsoever, either.

For instance, recently I wrote up a post on an e-mail I received which was a satire on Obama's speech patterns.

However, when I originally penned the post, no credit had been attributed to the original writer in the e-mail I secured the hilarious material from.

One day I was cruising the net when I located the article with a credit to the original author.

Instead of just "lifting" the name of the individual, I actually spent a few moments to thank the blogger for including the author's name, so I could give the comedian professional credit in my own post.

Wasn't that the appropriate professional action to take under the circumstances?

The blogger in question proceeded to read the post - and due to an obvious lack of intelligence or abililty to read and comprehend English - summarily twisted and distorted my intentions in such a convoluted way that it boggled the mind!

The lady (who posts anonymously and uses a photo of Raquel Welch to represent herself online) proceeded to post a negative comment about me!

In contrast, any intelligent sensible person would have recognized my obvious thoughtfulness and professionalism.

Talk about wacko!

More recently, a couple of individuals attempted to post negative comments on my blog in response to my expose on Richard Raddon in recent days.

Since the posts were written anonymously - and were traced back to the LA Film Festival site - it was obvious to me that a person in support of Raddon was involved in some all-out skulduggery on his behalf!

Needless to say, I zapped their comments into oblivion.

What am I thankful for this turkey day?

To be blessed with the precious good fortune of having readers at my blog sites who are like-minded, sound in intelligence, and of good heart.

Happy Thanksgiving, eh?

Blogging...fame! Oddballs come out of woodwork...

A few months ago, I noted that blogging foisted me reluctantly into the spotlight.

I never expected the phenomenon; after all, my profile shot is quite miniscule compared to the rest of the content on my blog site.

Unlike many post-it folks - my blog is not a vanity site - where I am inclined to splash a rash of publicity stills of moi across poorly-designed pages screaming out the obvious.

Me! Me! Me!

In view of the fact quite a few bloggers use monikers on the Internet, and cruise anonymously about the World-Wide-Web, maybe my modus operandi jars web surfer sensibilities a tad.

Golly, it's him in the flesh. He's a real person!

Of course, from the offset, I was keen to the fact that there were thousands of blogs out there vying for public consumption.


For this reason, I always endeavoured to offer up informative posts on topical subjects, a bit of social commentary, political news, and - oh my God - a dollop of celebrity dirt!!!

On occasion I walk the line - get a little outrageous - and the sh** hits the fan.

Maybe that's why people stare.

Dude, he said what?

Uh-huh.

A psychic foretold I'd be famous one day for "telling it like it is".

Well, maybe, that prediction has come to pass.

Yeah, the truth is hard to swallow, for some.

Maybe that's why all the eyes are focused on me now.

The other night, for instance, I waltzed into a movie theatre to catch a flick.

When I strode into the lobby - all the theatre-goers went silent - and acted like there was an elephant in the room.

On occasion when I stroll through The Abbey, too, jaws drop.

One night, I overheard a woman with her back to me, wonder aloud:

"What is everyone staring - "

At that moment, she half-turned and spied me over her shoulder strolling by.


Her voice trailed off - at which point - a dazed expression swept across her face.

At CVS when I stop in for a pomegranate Tea late at night - it's the only really good thirst quencher I know of in a pinch - the staff fumble around and make fools of themselves.

When I stroll up to the counter to pay, they totally lose it!

I want to utter up a tired old expression.

"Take a picture. It lasts longer."

The paparazzi wised up to that scenario a long time ago.

If I pop into the Internet Cafe to check e-mail, curious onlookers glance at my screen, ad nauseam.

Are they seeking lay-out tips or trying to get a scoop on my next sizzling post?

Meanwhile, I pretend not to notice the bizarre behaviour.

Now, it makes sense to me why celebrities react so negatively to fans and strangers when they're are out on-the-town for a respite from it all.

If a handful become recluses, it's easy to fathom why.

At times, the way people act, 'ya feel like you're from another planet.

Britney Spears must go through he** when she ventures out.

The creepy part has started, too.

Gawkers - with stalker tendencies - tend to lurk around when I am quietly having a light snack out-of-doors.

And, a strange character with an eerie light in his eye, pays too much attention when I occasionally dash down to the library for a book or two.

I hate to be rude, but judging from his odd-ball demeanor, it appears to be a better bet to take a wide berth.

On occasion, pedestrians and shoppers stop dead in their tracks, when I alight from my car.

There he is, they seem to be saying to themselves.

How can I capitalize on this chance encounter?

Lately, I've entered a new phase of my fame, too.

I used to hear people whisper behind my back:

"Do you know who that is?"

Then, there was a new line of query after that, for about a month or two.

"Do you know how old he is?"

At that juncture, curious spectators tended to surreptitiously inch forward a bit, to scrutinize for tell-tale signs of a nip 'n tuck here and there.

Nope, I haven't had any work done.

Not yet!

I expect that phrase three of my ten minutes of fame is on the rocky horizon.

When I'm in line at Starbucks, or Gelson's, I expect I'll hear astonished musings in an entirely different vein.

"Is he still alive?"

Yup, over my dead body!!!

Blog Action Day...I'm in, are you? Post a healing message on poverty October 15th...

Bloggie Award..."The Mother Load" nabs it!

"The Mother Load" - a site for mothers who are not afraid to tell it like it is - just got the nod for a Bloggie Award.

The well-designed blog is maintained by best buds - Jenica Bergere and Brooke Purdy - who have incorporated myriad strands of video, audio, and plain text into the mix with surprising entertaining results.

To snag some attention for the site - the winsome twosome put on their "thinking caps" - and came up with a catchy hook to pique the interest of the folks who dole out the Bloggie Awards.

“Just because you’re a mommy does't mean you can’t talk smack.”

After taking a gander, there was a ceremonious drum roll, and the results were tabulated.

For "Visual Aesthetics" the site rated a "10".

Mother Load nabbed this top honor because the home page is crafted in vivid colors which complement each other well in the overall mix.

A photo of the two moms and their kids is worth - as they say - a thousand words!

In addition, salient eye-catching photos are scattered within the posts, to spice up the dialogue.

"User Friendliness" garnered a "10" as well.

Mother Load was given kudos for offering up links to all relevant content within the site in a straightforward manner that warmed up to the browser.

Ah, another "10", for actual reading enjoyment.

So, it wasn't just a lot of eye candy, eh?

The bloggies issued a word of caution, though.

For the prudish - "Mother" may be quite the load to swallow - without blushing at least!

Because the site is relatively new, blog radar scored the content at "8".

The blogger "Moms" advice on a handful of issues isn't too practical in the strictest sense, according to the critic reviewing the site.

For "Overall Experience", the Mother Load nudged up a tad higher to land a "9".

The reason?

If you're a mother - tired of being labelled and stuck in a box - Mother Load is inclined to inspire those who are bogged down to get out, kick up their heels, and have some merriment in their otherwise dreary lives.

Amen!

http://www.motherloadradio.com/HOME.html

Los Angeles Times...quote of the day! Blogger screws up...

A controversy arose when a writer from a blog site (Blue Tidal Wave) submitted a story for consideration on Digg - which alleged that footage from a Katie Couric interview - was being "held back" to gain some advantage in the leverage game.

The writer, going by the moniker - The Saint - first lifted a quote from media critic Howard Kurtz, to jump-start his report.

"The worst may be yet to come for Palin. Sources say CBS has two more responses on tape that will likely prove embarrassing."

At this juncture, the Saint - less than Saintly judging by his scurrilous actions - proceeded to twist and distort the information to suit his own personal agenda.

According to the Times writer, David Sarno, the Saint took Kurtz's revelation and transformed it into an accusation of censorship replete with his own sounding board.

In short, here's what he posted.

"CBS evening news insiders say the censoring of the Palin interview was orchestrated by CBS news heads and Couric in an effort to show the McCain (!) campaign that they should choose the struggling nightly news program for their exclusive (!) interviews."

Well, for starters, there were enough red herrings in that little ditty to entice any super sleuth!


Sensing that Tidal Wave's tale of intrigue did not pass the smell test, either, the reporter at the daily followed up with a question or two of his own.

Ha! The Saint confessed.


The alleged CBS source was not that, at all.

The "insiders" fibber-boy was referring to - did not have any clout - and weren't heavyweights on the inside at CBS with privileged information, either.

"It was just a friend."

In addition, he admitted shame-faced the two only spoke "off-hand".

The icing on the cake?

"There never was any permission to cite a source."

When it comes right down to it, the Saint did not know if additional unused footage would be used at all, or if ever.

So, he put on his thinking cap, and dredged up the titillating accusation that the CBS camp was holding back footage with future strategies in mind.

It has since been determined that footage does exist; however, the wild scenario fathomed up by the Saint was nothing but a load of "hooey".

The truth of the matter is - Couric shot material separately for a "Questions" segment - which included a matching interview with Senator Joe Biden.

After chastising various individuals - and raising the issue of ethics in reporting - David Sarno uttered up what is undoubtedly the quote of the day.

"If there's one thing you learn from reporting on the Web, it's to be careful what you swallow."

Gwyneth Paltrow...Goopy, dude! Web site doesn't nourish...

To be quite honest with 'ya, actress Gwyneth Paltrow lost me when she scrambled up on stage a couple of years ago, and sobbed uncontrollably for about twenty minutes, after snagging a coveted Oscar.

Goop - Paltrow's second grab for the brass ring - rubs me the same way.

Frankly, it doesn't deliver up its promises from the get-go.

On the main page on the web site - Paltrow unceremoniously dumped on unsuspecting chartered members of the Internet this past week - the high-strung actress waxes eloquently about her much-anticipated vanity offering.


"Nourish the inner aspect," the spoiled little rich girl urges her guests.

And, how she intends to dish it up!


But, not before confusing the heck out of 'ya!








For example - when a web surfer clicks on a handful of odd-ball icons arranged neatly (she likes things to be nice) across the main page - the mystical little webmaster returns the viewer ad nauseam back to the start-up page without having accomplished a single thing.

Ah, I get it.

Rearrange the letters of Goop and you come up with Pogo!

Just hop around Goop on your Pogo stick, dude!

Soon, it will be obvious to 'ya.

Goop is an exercise in futility.

If not - maybe the newsletter I signed up for this afternoon - will zip off a message over the weekend and laughingly titter the obvious.

"Julian, 'ya just got punked."

Gwyneth, your site kind of reminds me of an old joke.

An old philosopher once said,

"To be is to do"

A fellow scholar was inclined to add further,

"To do is to be"

But, Frank Sinatra said it best, when he crooned,

"Do be do be do"

Gotcha!

Jesse Hasselbeck...View host puts down bloggers. Dumb blond syndrome!

Hasselbeck dumb blond on far right...

On a Hollywood gossip show this morning, Jesse Hasselbeck - one of those professional gabbers from the "View" - accused bloggers of being nit-picky and hysterical in respect to the controversial issues surfacing over Sarah Palin's odd-ball entrance into the big-time political arena in Washington, D.C.

The issues are hardly petty by any stretch of the imagination!

Her attacks on intelligent ethically-minded individuals - who are concerned about the future of this country - are easily to fathom, though.

After all, Hasselbeck is a republican - rooting on the sidelines for a woman to smash the "glass ceiling" - and go the distance in the current political race for the White House.

Who does she think she's fooling?

In sum, the B-list TV personality has single handedly revived the old image of the dumb blond.

It's curious, though, because she has dark roots.

Just another Hollywood phoney, I guess!

Bloggers...under "big tent" at Democratic National Convention!

Blogger keyboards at the ready...

Some have been grumbling at the Democratic National Convention that bloggers don't get any respect.

But, you've come a long way, newbie!

At the convention in 2004, those who loved to "post-it" in the blogosphere were issued press credentials, granted.

And, allowed to mingle with the elite in the mainstream media.

But, the relations were strained a tad.

At the Dems' big bash this year, illustrious bloggers have not only been given the "green light" for access to all the relevant (and not so relevant) political events, but given asylum - if you will - under a "big tent".

The grandiose digs herald a new dawn for Internet pundits who have gained momentum and power in recent days on the political landscape.

Just ask Obama and Clinton - who are still stinging from a spiteful blogger's word-stalking - on the campaign trail in recent days.

Although blogsters were required to cough up one hundred bucks for their credentials, the joyride include wi-fi access, free burritos, and never-ending kegs of beer to wash the high-protein snack down with.

Heh, they're making out like bandits in Denver.

I'd better hop on a plane, pronto, and join the fray!

But, there have been some glitches in communication - in spite of the state-of-the-art presence of gizmos provided by two generous sponsors - Google and Digg.

When MSNBC tried to hand over the reigns to a newsie in-the-field for coverage on the blog presence at the Democratic Convention this morning, a number of technical difficulties delayed broadcast of the reports.

The anchor man joked,

"This is all the way from the Bloggers' camp in the Ukraine, so the feed is slow."

In view of the way some of the legit high-powered media types treat 'em, they may as well be!

All kidding aside, the bloggers appear to be happy as clams in their comfy digs.

One web writer noted on-camera that the free-standing canvas facility provided an independent base for their cerebral musings to emanate freely from.

No, sir!

This savvy blogster didn't intend to be influenced - nor did he plan to kow-tow to - the Democratic machine spinning their own wheels just outside the tent flaps.

Google and Digg sponsored the 8,000 square foot facility which includes a theatre, lots of leading-edge gizmos, and all the blogger interaction you could imagine in your wildest web-surfing dreams.

But, what will the talking heads produce, I wonder.

I'll be cruising the net this evening to take a gander.

Let's hope what Barbara Ehrenreich once opined is not true:

"We who officially value freedom of speech above life itself seem to have nothing to talk about but the weather."

Federal "Shield" Law...Journalistic ethics separate wheat from chaff!

Interactive newsroom a wave of the future?


In the OPINION section of the Los Angeles Times, an attorney - Scott Gant - penned an article on the issues surrounding a proposed Federal "Shield" law geared towards protecting Journalists, their work product, and subsequent sources.

Mr. Gant noted that the Bush administration opposes the measure on the grounds that it would weaken law enforcement efforts and jeopardize National Security.

Baloney!

Currently, any reporter or news organization that refuses to cough up documents and information on the heels of a subpoena, may be fined, held in contempt of court, or tossed into jail.

Mr. Gant posed an intriguing question.

Who would fall under the protection of such a Statute?

The Washington legal eagle mused that by virtue of a proliferation of - bloggers, podcasters, and a myriad of fawning news outlets on the World-Wide-Web - that lawmakers would have to take a "stand".

To date, the House has defined Journalism as:

"The gathering, preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing, reporting or publishing of news or information that concerns local, national or international events or other matters of public interest for dissemination to the public."

Understandably, under current thinking on the "Hill", due protections would be extended to those who "practise" journalism regularly and for a "substantial portion of the person's livelihood for substantial gain".

Would those who sell "gossip" be included?

Indeed - should the shield law be limited to so-called "professionals" - or be more inclusive to reflect a broader view of Journalism in the Internet age?

From there Gant took a giant leap and boldly asserted:

"The line distinguishing professional journalists from others who disseminate information, ideas, and opinions to a wide audience has been blurred."

He summed up by concluding:

"We're all capable of being Journalists now."

On the contrary!

Documentarians, perhaps. Journalists, no.

In my view - the distinction between a Journalist and one who "documents" and/or disseminates information - is crystal clear!

Journalists check their sources, for instance. And, verify their facts. Also, they endeavour to present a level playing field where both sides of the issues may be argued so the reportage is ultimately unbiased and balanced.

To quote the Detective from the old Dragnet series:

"Just the facts, man."

Notwithstanding, it should be noted that Journalists usually attend a College or specialized "learning institution" to "be educated" about - well, let's see - silly little concepts like ethics, rules of professional conduct, and standards in Journalism.

Oh yes, there may be a fine line between Journalists and those "others", to some.

To me, it's evident after perusing a few "news bites" on the Internet this morning, just how wide the "divide" is.

I found Mr. Gant's arguments not only self-serving but laughable and naive; in essence, he was reaching!

If anything, he has a skewered slant on things.

To boldly assert that the musings of a few - who dabble in social or political commentary on a personal blog or by podcast - are to be taken as legitimate Journalistic offerings is a ludicrous assertion by any stretch of the imagination.

Sir, there is an old saying:

"Consider the source."

Fortunately, there are a handful of true journalists who still carry the "torch" - and likewise - make every bold-faced effort to shed light in dark corners in a courageous pursuit of the truth.

Gee - maybe that's why we have Awards for outstanding accomplishment in Journalism - do 'ya figure?

Yes, to honor those who exemplify the epitome of standards and ethics in Journalism.

Citizens in the land of the alleged "free" should take every precaution to preserve - what to a handful - may appear to be a lofty ideal fading into oblivion.

Henry Anatole Grunwald once said:

"Journalism can never be silent: that is its greatest virtue and its greatest fault."

Anonymous blog comments...to post or not to post?

Well, when you first start up your blog, you face one dilemma right off the bat.

Do you accept comments across the board without censorship?

In view of the fact there are a staggering number of wackos out there - spewing a lot of psycho babble as they surf the Internet daily - for me the answer to the question was an easy one to come to grips with.

Then, the issue of "anonymous" comments surfaces.

There are many good reasons why an individual may be inclined to post a comment anonymously.

It is wholly possible the person is a celebrity or in the public eye and they want to make a contribution to the dialogue without throwing the spotlight on themselves.

Okey-dokey!

On the other hand, setting up an account (at Blogspot, for instance) with requisite - e-mail contact address, background info, and profile shot - may be a bit of a pain in the butt (and too time-consuming) for some.

In that event - if the "anonymous" author makes an intelligent comment or worthwhile contribution to the discussion topic - I am inclined to "publish".

But, when it comes to "anonymous" comments that take pot shots at personalities mentioned in a post, or that go into a vitriolic rant about some political or social issue, I am inclined to "reject" the remarks.

For good reason!

My blog is not a forum for cowards who seek to assassinate the character of public figures while they remain out of harm's way anonymously.

Nor is it a launching pad for those with a "secret agenda" either!

Once I start to peruse such a missive, and determine the nature of its misguided focus, I just hit the old "reject" button.

In fact, the comment remains not only "unread", but does even see the light of day!

The bar is set pretty high for those who seek to make the "cut" at the Tattler.

But, my standards are reasonable under the circumstances.

For example, in spite of the fact I am inclined to pen and post daily - and make a few outrageous remarks on occasion sure to rankle a few - at least my mug shot (and legal name captioned above) squarely identify me.

Brooke Shields once said,

"I make no excuses."

Nor do I.

Frankly, it's liberating!

As George Bernard Shaw once said,

"Hatred is the coward's revenge for being intimidated."

Associated Press...Monopoly of the news is un-American. Technorati bans AP!

There has been quite a fall-out against AP in the wake of their attacks on the DRUDGE report for alleged illegal misuse of quoted material and news clips.

Many blog sites are banning Associated Press from their band widths.

In recent days, AP big-wigs pointed an accusing finger at DRUDGE for linking up to their news reports and providing short quotations via reader submissions.

According to Tech Crunch, DRUDGE is doing nothing more that what Digg, TechMeme, Mixx and dozens of other sites do.

Obviously, because DRUDGE is the big honcho on the block - who savors a widespread influence in his capacity as an innovative news outlet on the world-wide-web - AP has elected to either ding him for the privilege of using their musings - or in the alternative, at least - shut him down altogether.

In the wake of the controversy, Technorati - numero uno blog spot on the planet - has banned Associated Press from their band widths altogether.

For good reason.

AP does not want people quoting their stories despite the fact that such activity very clearly falls within the fair use exception to copyright law.

As long as bloggers and reporters from news outlets give proper credit for the quotes, there should not be any problem, in my humble opinion.

If Associated Press labels the fair use activity as an infringement, then I say bullsh**.

In essence, AP is trying to secure a monopoly on the news.

And, in my estimation, that is un-American.

Notwithstanding, it should be noted that on any occasion that I have ever "chosen" to quote AP myself, it amounted to "throwing a bone" their way.

Because I attempt to give a balanced view of the news, I often include a myriad of viewpoints from a handful of news sources to add depth and dimension to the report. If ever I quoted AP, it was because I chose to, not because there was any pressing need for their material.

Personally, I can survive quite nicely without Associated Press.

If anything - they are stuffy and old guard and are ham-strung in many respects when they report on their white bread "news" - anyway.

A.P. Vice President Jim Kennedy says they will issue guidelines telling bloggers what is acceptable and what isn't over and above what the law says is acceptable.

Over your dead news organization!

He had the audacity to note for the record that AP intends to "define clear standards as to how much of its articles and broadcasts bloggers and web sites can excerpted without infringing on the AP copyright".

Boy, he's full of himself, isn't he?

Kennedy went on to warn that those who disregard the guidelines risk being sued by the AP even if those guidelines are in direct conflict with applicable Laws.

In my mind's eye, their downfall is surely on the way.

Who needs 'em?

Bloggers, blog sites, and Internet Web news sites are proliferating, and gaining respect and stature in the news industry; but, more importantly, are changing the face of the news arena daily.

In the near future, AP will be turning to bloggers for news stories!

Are the blogsters going to let 'em use the material?

The jury is still out.

Meanwhile, bloggers and blog sites are turning their backs on Associated Press.

AP is banned until they abandon their lunatic strategy.

Likewise, Bloggers will no longer quote 'em or link to 'em or even acknowledge their petty meaningless existence.

Voltaire once said,

We have a natural right to make use of our pens as of our tongue, at our peril, risk and hazard.

Los Angeles Film Festival...Richard Raddon improper behaviour. LA Times conflict of Interest! Blogger disdain. Pass on it...

I tell you, they are a screwy bunch over there at the Los Angeles Film Festival.

In recent months - whenever there has been a Festival of Films - I simply get in touch with the Festival Director and a press pass is issued so that I may cover the events, pen reviews, and interview guests whether they be a director, a star, whatever.

That was the case with the 24th Annual Asian Pacific Film Festival, the Newport Beach Film Festival, the Backlot Film Festival, and the Mockfest Film Festival.

In recent days - I was not only baffled by the questionable conduct of the Festival Director - Richard Raddon - but taken aback at his incessant game-playing, lies and deceit, and obvious efforts to either bribe me, make a pass at me, or wrangle my services for the Los Angeles Film Festival.

A case in point.

I submitted my request for a press pass in anticipation of the event looming on the horizon. But, a response was long in arriving.

I was about to send a query to determine if the request had been lost - when a lowly Public Relations person - Petra Kauraisa - sent me a curt notice informing me that her office could not provide an accreditation for the Film Festival.

Without explanation, mind you. Talk about unprofessional conduct.

What an odd turn of events!

Especially in view of the fact I gave coverage to handful of their events last year.

In fact I gave glowing reviews to worthy entries at the Festival.

Talk about ungrateful bast**ds!

In a good-faith effort to resolve the issue - and assuming the young lady was not familiar with my credentials - I responded by enlightening her that I was a critic in the professional arena, a known-writer, and then proceeded to provide links of Festival coverage to her superior, Julie Siegel (Public Relations).

Normally, I don't like to toot my own horn, but what was a boy to do?

The experience was somewhat intriguing because my press credentials for the CineVegas Film Festival (a major Film Festival event in the United States) were just approved without problem.

Why does a rinky-dink little Film circuit program like the Los Angeles Film Festival have such a difficult time issuing press passes?

At first, I thought - well now - the Los Angeles Times wants all the coverage of the events to themselves. After all they are a sponsor of the Festival.

The idea that the Los Angeles Times was behind the rejection is not all that far-fetched, either.

It should be noted that in recent days I reported on the LA Book Festival.

I did not attend, though.

I simply gave notice of the much-anticipated event (to be attended by Literary giants such as Gay Talese) so that interested blog readers could attend if they were unaware the popular fair was scheduled that weekend.

On the heels of that fair, a journalist at the Los Angeles Times newspaper made some disparaging remarks about bloggers. For instance, the writer reported there were a lot of scruffy bloggers at the UCLA celebration.

Obviously, at the Los Angeles Times there is some disdain towards bloggers.

After all, the remark, was uncalled for.

Another writer - at the same paper - also lamented one day in another piece that bloggers hadn't gone through the journalist route and inferred that they hadn't paid their dues and - bottom line - suggested that they weren't bona fide professional writers.

When you consider these events, it would appear there may be a connection between the obvious disdain towards bloggers at the Los Angeles Times, and the denial of a press pass to a blogger who openly competes with their newspaper on a daily basis, wouldn't you think?

After all, in the event you were unaware of it, the Los Angeles Times backs the annual Los Angeles Film Festival.

In retrospect (and all things considered) it would appear that the newspaper may be inclined to hog all the coverage of the events for itself - or in a more sinister vein - is trying to control the image of a Festival that is their "baby" which they have gone to great pains - along with an impressive outlay of cash - to build, promote, and boast about in the community each year.

Understandably - in my view - it is a conflict of interest for the LA Times to act as a major sponsor for the Los Angeles Film Festival for obvious reasons.

It would appear they only want select journalists - and maybe non-bloggers - to attend their press events to garner the high-profile coverage they are seeking to tout their artistic efforts.

In view of the foregoing facts, the argument is compelling, isn't it?

Notwithstanding these curious events - it should be noted that after I received word there would not be a press pass - I proceeded to ask the Public Relations office to provide the name and e-mail address of the Festival Director so that I could lodge a formal complaint.

At this juncture, things got curiouser and curiouser, as they say.

Mr. Raddon - the Festival Director (who had been out-of-the-loop until this time) - sent me an odd e-mail out-of-the-blue replete with staggering implications and - under the circumstances - some highly unusual requests.

He started by informing me that he had "watched" the trail of e-mails back and forth between myself and the publicity department and that he realized that I may be able to "help" the Festival because they were trying to resolve some web issues.

Verbatim, his e-mail says:

"We are working on many web agendas and you sound like the kind of individual who would have a wealth of information about this arena."

Then, he requested I meet with him as soon as possible.

"I am open this week. Accreditation at the LA Film Festival wont be a problem, but I want to meet."

Why, pray tell?

In fact - the urgency of his demands, and the nature of them - were a little unsettling.

One minute, Raddon's office denies me a press pass; then, in the next breath they urgently court me on the grounds that I "have a wealth of information about this arena" that may be of use to them?

If my wealth of information requires an urgent meeting, then why wouldn't he issue the pass?

Because there appeared to be no logic to his actions, I had to seriously consider if there were strings attached.

He said he could come to my neighbourhood. That we could have drinks.

Verbatim, his e-mail says:

"I would still like to meet you in person and I can come to your neighborhood for a quick lunch or drinks. Please let me know if you have the time and inclination."

Gosh, what was going on here?

He wants to come to my neighborhood and have drinks?

When I noted somewhat hesitantly that I was busy with preparations for the upcoming Vegas Film Festival coverage, he responded by noting,

"I have to leave Thursday afternoon for a family emergency. are u free tomorrow at all? ill come to you."

I've never had a Festival Director ever made such an overt, improper request, in my entire life.

For this reason, I was leery.

Since he said - "if I had the time and inclination" - I decided to pass.

And - since he said the pass would be no problem - I just expected it to be ready at the Festival gate when the festivities commenced in Westwood.

This evening, in anticipation of my plans for Vegas, I zipped off an e-mail to Mr. Raddon to ensure that the press pass would be ready at the Festival grounds.

Imagine my shock when he proceeded to not only pester me about meeting once again, but inferred that unless I did, there would be no press pass.

Does that sound like coercion to you?

I responded by noting that I basically found his behaviour odd and that I would forgo on any future efforts to obtain a press pass.

I notified him of my intention to file a post online to report on his bizarre odd-ball antics, and to inform my readers as to why I would not be reporting on the Los Angeles Film Festival this year.

In response, he threatened to sue me.

"I now consider this matter closed and will be turning it over to our lawyers. The law has very strict punitive guidelines for slander. We will be watching."

Well, I laughed out loud.

The man is obviously off his rocker.

First of all, slander pertains to the "uttered" word.

You can not sue a person for slander for remarks that are in written form.

Secondly, his comments about the lawyers, also appears to have been an attempt to threaten and intimidate me.

You can't be sued for printing the truth, Sir!

In sum - when you consider the chain of events (and Mr. Raddon's conduct) - it is quite obvious the man was up to "no good".

If my credentials did not pass muster, why did he want to meet with me to obtain my assistance on matters he noted amounted to - in his own words - a wealth of experience?

Why did he say the accreditation was not a problem, but later, deny it?

Obviously, Mr. Raddon wanted to meet with me in person to discuss matters he preferred not to be in writing - and in my estimation - was anxious to seize on such a meeting to perhaps make inappropriate advances to me on various questionable levels.

Why did Mr. Raddon have to meet me away from his office?

And, in my neighborhood?

And, for drinks?

Sir, I don't take bribes.

And, if you thought that once in my neighborhood (after we had a few drinks) that I would invite you to my "home" nearby, you were mistaken.

I do not help festivals sort out their problems.

I try to remain neutral in my business and professional relationships, without influence.

And, in the final analysis, I report my point of view fairly and squarely.

Mr. Raddon - at this point - it is obvious you need therapy!

Also - in view of your lack of ethics and professionalism (and inability to pen the simplest of e-mails) - I seriously have to ponder how you landed the Festival Director position in the first place.

All things considered, in my opinion, you are a disgrace to the Los Angeles Film Festival scene.

In fact, if you ask me, you are a menace to the community at large.

I'd rather get a root canal then mingle with clowns like you.

As to the Festival, by the way, it looks like pretty lackluster stuff.

Old re-runs of films, in some instances. And, unimaginative, cliche attempts to ponder the medium of film.

Losers!

Dykes on Bikes, Mark Wahlberg, Harry Potter gay spoof...rack up hits!

One of the features at WordPress I have particularly warmed up to is the blog stats function.

If a blogger is wondering how it is that web surfers unceremoniously arrived at his or her doorstep, the savvy blogster has only to check a special section of the logs to determine which "search words" were used to locate the site.

Also, since WordPress automatically matches up blog posts with related stories of interest, it is immensely intriguing to use a little detective work and fathom the links that hooked up the mercurial Internet seekers to your posts.

Another feature is pretty practical, too.

A WordPress filter senses when a spam post is being attempted and summarily places it into a holding pattern or queue until the blog owner has the opportunity to okay it or not.

For example, after I posted a feature on Erotica LA this weekend, my site was inundated with ads, videos, and promos for porno web sites!

I was able to select the best ones - um - weed out the nasty little devils and send them off to the recycle bin.

Aw, what waste of succulent erotic flesh, eh?

Most web site owners and bloggers are curious to know how popular their site is and how many clicks they're getting.

Over the past couple of days, for instance, the logs paved the way for me.

A post on Dykes on Bikes (West Hollywood Gay Pride), Mark Wahlberg (shower scene), and a gay video spoof on Harry Potter landed the top hits.

Angelina Jolie scored pretty high as well.

With a little astute analysis it should be obvious to many that this weekend - for some inexplicable reason - the masses around the Nation were horny, titillated by gay sex, and fascinated by butch women on motorcycles.

Only in America!


Risque Beowulf publicity stills of Angelina Jolie revved up the band waves!

John McCain...blogger attacks reveal scrapper tendencies. Red-neck blues over Obama win.

Well, old soldier-boy with the machine-gun mentality, sure fired off a mouthful of slugs helter-skelter this week.

Allegedly pi**ed over a raft of biting barbs flung his way from bloggers and pundits alike, the old war horse dusted off the artillery and took a few pot shots at a whole posse of 'em.

A few zingers about his bad temper, curious dalliances with a multitude of lobbyists, and his overall inclination towards rusty "antiquity", got his goat so-to-speak.

Lamenting that he was "up to here" (where that is, we're not sure) with their scurrilous antics, he was inclined to pose a scintillating question to confidants, devoted family members, and newsies at Fox.

"What do you call a hundred-thousand bloggers bound in chains at the bottom of the ocean?"

When the faithful reacted in shock to the answer - "The first month of my presidential administration" - I expect he was cackling away maniacally in the war room at the Pentagon.

Yeah, the paranoid little scrapper doesn't have a foot in the White House yet, and he's already engaged in maneuvers to obliterate a hostile coalition in the trenches he imagines is out to oust him.

Even if it takes him a hundred years, I expect.

The old gas bag rubbed his hands with glee when he revealed to a captive press his intention to replace those nagging bloggers ("sniping bastards") with intelligent (yet loyal) robots manufactured "right here in the United States".

Mr. McCain, I thought that locally-manned factories went the way of the rhino - um - Dinosaur?

Ever heard of the term "outsourcing", Sir?

"As for the losers who comment on blogs, letters to the editor, or call-in TV talk shows," Mr. McCain continued, "I will substitute charming chimpanzees to do the same job."

Well, as long as they're not combative, John. Charm we can live with.

He'll no doubt enlist 'em from his circle of friends and supporters who are inclined to charmingly ape each other, anyway.

Ironically, some of Mr. McCain's "most vocally corrosive detractors" - according to one astute newspaper reporter - "come from his own GOP Party".

Mr. Cheney - remember him? - was so incensed by McCain's outrageous conduct that he mentioned to a handful of constituents in passing that he'd like to tie McCain to a porch and beat him with a stick.

Unfortunately, Bush's "Dick" is too short to carry out the task.

Ouch!

Well, that's the first worthwhile effort that Mr. Cheney (he is VP, isn't he?) to the national dialogue in recent days.

The White House shadow was downright adamant that politicians shouldn't wax poetic about that kind of idle cocktail chatter when they're running for office.

So, I guess McCain has outed himself, in some respects.

Imagine, on the heels of Obama's big-win Tuesday, he's already losin' it.

In fact, a number of bizarre comments uttered in the heat of the moment have signaled just how balmy Mr. McCain is.

For instance, if he had his druthers, he'd take the Internet Information Highway hostage, too.

"America has lost its competitive advantage due to employees wasting time on the Internet all day long while they're at work," Mr. McCain said.

Say what?

I thought it's because we're in an expensive unpopular war scorned upon by the world.

You're just jealous because you don't know how to turn a PC on, John.

The gnarly sexy senior sure has demonstrated an eloquence when it comes to the spoken word, too, hasn't he?

"They want to open Hotmail or the Google I say they should open a big can of shut the hell up."

Sounds tasty. Can you microwave that?

Is he just envious because he doesn't know what a link is?

Oh, the man prostesteth too much.

He zips off communications by telegram, after all. Just how archaic is that?

Maybe it's time to put down the walkie-talkie, ole boy.

You need to join myspace and make a friend or two.

And, boldly go where you and your cronies have never ventured before, the real world!


John, quite the girly-man...

Blogger...book bin bust. Potential market, though!

Newsweek is reporting that there has been a fall-out in respect to blog book deals.

In support of their argument they note that a gawker.com deal with Atria for the sum of $250,000.00 turned out lackluster sales - 1,000 copies to date.

Christian Lander (Stuff White People Like) was signed by Random House with an up-front pay-out of $350,000.00 based on the fact he reved up a staggering 20 million hits at his site each month. In spite of the fact the book is slated for a release July 1, I determined after a quick google, that amazon.com has already marked down the sticker price from $14.00 to $10.36. To avoid being left high and dry, Barnes & Noble have also slashed their retail tag from $14.00 to $10.71.

Can the quickie sales bin be far behind?

In contrast, the "Hipster Handbook" (by Robert Lanham) has sold 40,000 copies to date. Understandably, a guide with a humorous twist makes for a good gift, great fodder for idle chit-chat at glittering cocktail parties, that sort-of-thing.

Brette Bloom of Kneerim & Williams Agency notes that may be the exception, though, in respect to blogger material.

"The reading experience for a book needs to go deeper," she asserted.

Obviously, if the material between the pages is rife with of old posts and dated news items, the potential for big bucks offers from the major publishers is just about zilch. Common cents - um - sense, don't 'ya think?

Who wants to read old gossip?

Personally, I think there may be a great market for books on blog material that aims high, is somewhat artsy-fartsy, and expresses a unique viewpoint.

If the blogger creations manage to be innovative, strike new ground, and explore new territory on the cutting edge of all that the rich media proliferating on the Internet, that's certainly a plus.

Indeed, a slick glossy tome designed to strategically lend artistic weight to an aesthetically-pleasing coffee table - tagged at about $60.00 bucks max - is not out of the question in my mind's calculating eye.

But then, I waste my hard-earned cash on just about any old trivial thing.

Eureka!

That's it, a blog on trivia! That's never been done before, has it?


Promo for my Sci-fi thriller "The Blog that ate the Planet"...