« November 2003 | Main | January 2004 »
December 30, 2003
Jesus Is, Like, SOOO Dreamy!
In further proof of the lows that we as people are sinking, in order to make Christianity interesting to a new generation of followers the world's largest publisher of Christian literature has now put out a version of the New Testament aimed at one of the most popular marketing groups around: teenage girls. Revolve isn't just any teen Bible, but a Bible made to look like Seventeen magazine.
In focus groups, online polling, and one-on-one discussion, Transit has found that the number one reason teens don't read the Bible is that it is "too big and freaky looking." This fashion-magazine format for the New Testament is the perfect solution to that problem. Teen girls feel comfortable exploring the Scriptures and over 500 further-study notes because of the relevant format!
I have no particular problem with trying to make Christ interesting to younger audiences but this is symptomatic of so many things that are misaligned in the world at large. When we have to resort to Christ giving beauty tips in order to make him appealing, either something has gone terribly wrong with Christianity or something has gone terribly wrong with people in general—or, as I suspect, there is something very terribly wrong with both. Somewhere along the line, Mandy/Britney/Christina/Hillary/Mary-Kate-and-Ashley became more important than the figure who has dominated and dictated world history for the past 2,000 years.
Does that freak anyone else out?
Posted in Quoi? | 30 December 2003 at 05:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (18) | Link
December 29, 2003
Merry Fucking Christmas, Everyone
Another Christmas come and gone, and nearly another year down as well. I've survived—as, I assume, have you. Though it is a wee bit late, I have a Christmas present for all three of my loyal readers. Please view and enjoy, with my warmest Christmas wishes.
...obsessed with the alphabet, and the evolution of the letter form, for as long as I can remember. [For the uninitiated.]
Posted in General Nonsense | 29 December 2003 at 07:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (66) | Link
December 23, 2003
Jingo-ism, Jingo-ism, Jingo All the Way!
In a new and terrifyingly racist policy, we (meaning the United States) will now be fingerprinting and tracking all foreigners who enter the country in order to check them against all criminal and terrorist lists. Now, this sounded almost reasonable to me until I read this:
Every foreigner with a visa will be fingerprinted and photographed when they enter the country. But those from 28 countries can avoid the scrutiny. Citizens from these countries – many of them in Europe – are allowed to come to the United States for up to 90 days without a visa.
So, to recap: tracking stations will be installed at all major international airports, international ports and land crossings and the only way to be exempt being put on the great big list of potential villians is to be from Europe.
Yes, the Europe where all the white people live.
Posted in Damn Nation! | 23 December 2003 at 02:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (172) | Link
December 19, 2003
Plumage
It's natural enough in our species, as in others, that the young birds should show off their plumage—in the mating season. But the trouble in the modern world is that there's a tendency to rush all the birds on to that age as soon as possible and keep them there as late as possible, thus losing all the real value of the other parts of life in a senseless, pitiful attempt to prolong what, after all, is neither its wisest, its happiest, or most innocent period. I suspect merely commercial motives are behind it all: for it is at the showing-off age that birds of both sexes have least sales-resistance! — C.S. Lewis
Posted in Quoi? | 19 December 2003 at 03:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (61) | Link
Stuck It To 'Em!
So thanks to my mother I have a new membership to Salon.com, where I found this delightful story waiting for me this morning:
Dec. 19, 2003 | WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled Friday the recording industry can't force Internet providers to identify subscribers swapping music online, dramatically setting back the industry's anti-piracy campaign.
The three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia overturned a trial judge's decision to enforce copyright subpoenas used by the recording industry. The subpoena power was established by a law passed before the explosive growth of swapping music online.
"It's an incredible ruling, a blow for the little guy," said Bob Barnes, a grandfather in Fresno, Calif., who was targeted by one of the earliest subpoenas from the Recording Industry Association of America but isn't among the hundreds who have been sued so far.
Here's hoping the RIAA will stick that in their pipe and smoke it!
Posted in Corporations and Creativity | 19 December 2003 at 12:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (4) | Link
December 16, 2003
Rules! There Should Be Rules for These Things!
Not that I have much respect for the psuedo-journalism that goes on at Rolling Stone, but they do still have some people on staff who know what they are talking about. They lived through a lot of what is today considered "classic" rock, and pretty much everything that has come since. So why, then, when compiling a list of the top 500 albums of all time, would they make so many bloody stupid choices?
Anyone who knows anything about anything, but more particularly, anyone who knows anything about rock 'n' roll knows that—since it is a given that the Beatles will always take the top slot—the white album is far superior to Sgt. Pepper's. That is merely a small complaint, however, compared to the shameful transgressions of the RS staff. They did include Pet Sounds at number two, though, which is a step up from their number one.
However, it is a well known and well respected fact that you do not (nay, cannot), on a list of this nature, include a greatest hits album! That is the worst kind of cowardice. These are albums being ranked, not songs, and songs are all you get on a greatest hits package. When you are ranking great albums, you are ranking the entire thing—good, bad, brilliant and pitiful. Besides that, however, I find it rather sneaky (and I would say it's cheating) to include a compilation of Robert Johnson's songs when he himself never actually recorded an album. There's some sort of dishonesty in that, because much like the greatest hits record, he didn't set out or intend to release it as we have it now. Not to say he doesn't deserve to be on the list, but it seems like there is some manipulation of the rules going on, and that I just don't agree with.
Speaking of which, it's almost time for the top ten of 2003 lists to come out. Who has one ready?
Posted in General Nonsense | 16 December 2003 at 02:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (301) | Link
December 12, 2003
More Evil is Afoot
As the music business slowly lumbers its way toward extinction, we have another round of mergers to amuse us out in the real world, where we like music that doesn't make millions of dollars.
Sony, Bertelsmann Sign Music Merger Deal
BERLIN/NEW YORK (Reuters) - Germany's Bertelsmann AG and Sony of Japan on Friday finalized terms of an agreement to merge their music businesses, as the industry confronts competition from DVDs and video games and the threat of Internet file-swapping.
The 50-50 joint venture, first announced in November, would be the world's second-largest record label, combining the recorded music units of Bertelsmann's BMG and Sony Music, but excluding music publishing and CD production.
The deal depends on regulatory approval in the United States and Europe.
The story further details that this merger leaves megacorporations Universal Music Group and the newly formed BMG/Sony each with a quarter share in total music profits from 2003.
Man, it must suck to be able to do nothing but release a preponderance of shitty music and make money hand over fist.
Posted in Corporations and Creativity | 12 December 2003 at 05:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1) | Link
December 11, 2003
Oh, How the Mighty Have Fallen
Anyone remember Whiskeytown? You know, the band that Ryan Adams was in back when he could write a song without looking like a jackass? If you do, you'll want to forget about it because Ryan just keeps fucking things up. At a recent show he further trashed his legacy (you know, the one where he had talent) by pulling stupid shit like the following:
Adams ended with an encore of his current single, "So Alive," which sounded even more like U2 live than it does on record. And it appeared that he's learned a few tricks from Bono — without his guitar he was free to roam the stage, and he worked it, swinging his microphone over his head like a lasso, singing directly to a group of screaming women, and guzzling a glass of wine, toasting the crowd, holding the bottle in the air and nonchalantly tossing the empty goblet on the ground, where it shattered.
from mtv.com
That little bout of silliness aside, my first term is officially over. I turned in my last paper yesterday and have since managed to get nearly all my shopping for the Christmas party done, as well as making a trip to Costco. Being productive is fun! Now I just have to finish shopping for Christmas gifts and I'll be all set...
Oh yeah, and check out Largemammal Print.
Posted in Another Bloody Fucking Wanker | 11 December 2003 at 02:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (260) | Link
December 05, 2003
Wankers, Every One
So, CMJ posted this interesting tidbit about how the RIAA are busily trying to corner the college market by pressuring universities to monitor student file sharing activity on campus. Be sure to notice how reasonable their charges are, and how they plan to slip it past the the students:
The recording industry and digital music retailers are in discussions with various colleges and universities to offer legitimate sources of music to students, either for free or at a substantial discount, in exchange for the schools agreeing to take steps to deter piracy on campus networks. The goal of the agreement would be to provide students with an extensive online jukebox that would allow them to play songs on-demand. The typical $10-per-month charge would either be waived or buried in the students’ activities fees, and songs could be burned onto CDs or transferred to MP3 players for one dollar or less per track. Insiders hope the new concept can be launched as early as the beginning of 2004.
But now the RIAA are up to their old tricks again, according to antimusic.com:
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has filed 41 new copyright-infringement lawsuits against online music traders and issued warning letters to 90 more.
The RIAA, the trade group that represents the five major record labels, announced on Wednesday that they filed the lawsuit in various jurisdictions across the United States. This is the third time the trade group has filed suit against online music traders, bring the total number of people sued under this initiative to 382. [...]
The trade RIAA has already settled with 220 file traders that were the target of earlier action such as warning letters, lawsuits or notifications from the users ISP that the RIAA was attempting to obtaining their personal information. The average settlement amount has reportedly been around $3,000.
At this rate, they should alienate at least half of their target market by 2005.
Posted in Corporations and Creativity | 5 December 2003 at 09:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (4) | Link
December 02, 2003
Hooray for the ACLU
Not that I always agree with the measures taken by the ACLU, but thankfully someone is standing up to the bullying that is going on by the RIAA. The ACLU is defending a UNC student who the RIAA is trying to wrangle for sharing nine (yes, nine) songs. From Yahoo! News:
The ACLU's interest stems from what it perceives as a violation of the unnamed student's Constitutional rights to privacy and anonymous use of the Internet. By requesting the student's name and contact information before proving any legal wrongdoing, the RIAA is violating the student's rights, Fine said.
"We don't support copyright infringement in any manner," he said. "Our motion is about due process rights. The Constitution and the First Amendment protects the right to engage in anonymous speech and that includes anonymous speech on the Internet."
Posted in Corporations and Creativity | 2 December 2003 at 10:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (215) | Link
