A silly idea that occurred to me, but I like throwing ideas at the wall that is the internet and seeing what sticks.

The short version: in boring tweets about Twitter, we should include an ONML, or obligatory non-meta link so we don’t get sucked into an existential black hole of self-reference.

The long version: Tumblr and Twitter are the two online communities where I spend most of my idle web-browsing time. And as I’m curious, nosy, and essentially a geek, I’m always interested in what goes on behind the scenes at these sites, both technically and business-wise.  So a lot of my tweets and tumblelogging activities end up being about tweeting and tumblogging themselves.

I realised a while ago that this sort of meta-discussion is pretty dull for many people: not all my Twitter followers could really care about the platform itself, it just happens to be the place where they go to find out about music or politics or whatever interests them.  Jeff Atwood’s Coding Horror blog has a great post about how “Meta Is Murder“, where he gives Joel Spolsky’s example that “all they’re talking about on this so-called ‘podcasting gear’ website is the podcasting gear website itself”.  Which I’m sure you’ll agree is pretty useless (not to mention boring) if you’re actually more interested in the message than the medium, as I’d guess those without my geeky “how does it work?” tendencies are.

So I made a conscious effort not to talk to much about Twitter or Tumblr so as not to scare away/alienate/bore to death my followers who innocently followed me looking for some music links.  And this self-imposed rule did mean my online output became a bit more focused.  Atwood and Spolsky’s Stack Overflow programming discussion site employs a similar method of banishing all meta-discussion to a dedicated forum, so as not to destroy their community with feature suggestions for the community itself.

But I’ve realised recently that there is some merit to these discussions; I tweet about all forms of new media and technologies, so why exclude what may be genuine insight (or at least a LOL) about Twitter just because that happens to be the medium I’m using at the time?  If nothing else, a shared interest every Tumblr user has is Tumblr itself. And we all like to write a blog post with “news about our blog” on the odd self-important occasion, right?

So perhaps the answer to the problem of meta-discussion is not to hide it all together, but to give it a value beyond self-reference. So I propose the introduction of an obligatory non-meta link (ONML) to be included in any tweet about Twitter or any blog post that’s just about how you’ve decided to change your WordPress theme.  So rather than post something that may alienate some of my readers, I simply add an ONML like this, and voila: a post that was potentially only of interest to a handful of people instantly becomes valuable to everyone by the inclusion of something that’s not solely self-referential and meta. Because everyone likes pictures of cute stuff.

Or alternatively: I come across a lot of cool stuff online that I want to share, but don’t necessarily have much to say about it. It might not be the sort of thing my online friends would normally be interested in, but it’s worth pointing out nonetheless. So when characters are limited, why not kill two birds with one tweet (and mix metaphors while you’re at it) by mentioning something that would otherwise have been forgotten?

I’m going to try this a bit and see whether people are bemused or intrigued by it!

Apple's Photobooth application that ships with Mac OS

I know that title might sound like a PhD thesis, but stick with me; a few more posts and I think I’ll have the grand unified social meeja theory of everything…

Perhaps not, but there are of course a number of ideas I seem to notice throughout various online services, and TechCrunch’s piece today on a service called DailyBooth made me think of one of them. The TC post says “it’s a Twitter-like quick message service, only the main form of communication is pictures. You can send pictures of anything you want, though most users tend to send images of themselves, photo booth-style, and attach messages to them”. That’s sort of it, but I’d hold off on comparing to Twitter too much – TechCrunch (and most blogs) are well aware that lazy name drops of the Big T generate lots in interest in their posts.

What’s more accurate is a comment on the article that says “Wait what? This looks like they just slapped a new front end on 4chan. How is this news?”, referring of course to a cult message board that (arguably) gave birth to LOLcats, Rick Rolling and hundreds of other memes – it’s the grass roots (or cesspool?!) of web culture. There is a remarkable similarity, and undoubted influence (whether known to DailyBooth’s creators or not). 4chan wasn’t an original idea though – it’s just an imageboard, a type of message board popular in Japan.  And looking at these imageboards, it’s clear that’s really all DailyBooth is, but with some real-time Web 2.0 buzzword magic thrown in.

So, if DailyBooth is just a community based around a bog-standard imageboard, why is it news that warrants a write-up on TechCrunch? One word:

Context.

And here’s my point: so many people get bogged down in what a site/service/app does from a technical or functional point of view (“but it’s just a 4chan/Twitter/Myspace clone!”), that they forget about what really makes these things what they are: their users, their design, the way they’re marketed, the attitude of their founders and so on. The context they’re placed in. (Not groundbreaking of course, but something it’s good to be reminded of).

No-one argues that LinkedIn is just a poor man’s Facebook. It’d be pretty difficult to argue that the former’s functionality is better – it’s actually pretty simplistic – but it’s the way LinkedIn is positioned as a “serious” social network that makes it popular with a certain type of user.

Similarly, Yammer is essentially a Twitter clone. But it’s aimed at businesses for use internally, which venture capitalists think makes it worth at least a $5million investment.

So by positioning itself as a “microblogging tool” (rather than a message board) at a time when such things are en vogue, DailyBooth has been able to get some mileage out of an old concept.  Its changed the way people use this concept by guiding behavioural norms in the site’s community (eg. “post pics of yourself not random stuff you find online”). DailyBooth is transparent about its owners and terms of use, compared to the somewhat arcane shroud around 4chan. Most importantly, it seems to have a friendly community, rather than a cryptic network of in-jokes.

Admittedly, DailyBooth is not yet Myspace. But by changing the context of a simple imageboard, it’s overtaken a stalwart of internet culture (oops, incorrect stats – see comments) picked up a large number of users, got people talking and potentially begun to move the idea towards the mainstream, seemingly capturing the elusive teen audience along the way. So how many other simple, old ideas could become cool new web businesses by changing their context?

And next time someone says to you “that’s been done before!” or “that’s only 10 lines of code!“, just remember: context.

It’s taken me ages to put this review (written for Orange) up here…spending too much blogging-time on Twitter and over at my tumblelog.

14th February @ Liverpool Guild of Students

It’s a scientifically proven fact that no rom-com has ever featured a Brummie lad-rock band’s live show as a major plot point. But a sold-out Valentine’s night gig with no shortage of snogging student couples might suggest that Hollywood’s missing out on something.

And just like a screening of the latest J-Lo blockbuster is unlikely to attract hordes of cinephiles waiting to draw comparisons with Citizen Kane, it seems that those who aren’t here with a partner are more interested in throwing pints on each other’s Ben Shermans than admiring some of the baggy cast-offs and U2 “me-toos” from The Twang’s forthcoming second album. Nonetheless, when the band stumble into their second single, 2007’s hit Either Way, early on in the set – a brave move, given that they’ve not exactly got a huge repertoire of anthems to save up for the encore – romancers and beer-boys alike are united in a stirring singalong.

The band’s odd double-lead-singer dynamic does afford them the luxury of being able to show particular onstage energy, but only the most casual gig-goer would be fooled into thinking that running about and shouting “come on Liverpool!” constitutes stagecraft. That doesn’t matter though, as the band know their crowd is more V Festival than All Tomorrow’s Parties, so their polished and competent, yet derivative, dirges are well received. And in a world where Mamma Mia DVDs have sold more copies than The Bible and Bride Wars can top box office charts, perhaps catering to the lowest common denominator with no regards for quality or originality is a recipe for success.

Just a quick post: I’ve realised that I’ve not yet put online the research paper I spent much of the first half of the year writing.  As 2008 draws to a close, it’d be a shame not to unleash it on the world under a Creative Commons licence. Maybe someone will stumble across the wise words of one of my interviewees via Google and find them useful, so here’s the full thing in PDF format. Feel free to share or adapt for your own works.

I think the paper’s abstract does a pretty good job of summing it up:

This paper investigates the issue of whether a profitable business model can be applied to the medium of podcasting.  It suggests a variety of potential business models that may be appropriate, and evaluates how they be may applied in this new arena.The literature review explains the parallels between podcasting and other more traditional media, paying particular attention to radio, which is deemed to be the most similar existing medium.  The popularity and adoption of podcasting both among the public and media organisations indicate that now is an appropriate time for an investigation into the economics of podcasting.  An outline is given of existing business models that have set a precedent both on the Internet and in other forms of media, as well as the wider world.  There are a number of examples of how people have previously attempted to apply these business models to podcasting.

The methodology details that the practical research used qualitative research methods. Semi-structured interviews with key producers of podcasts were to be carried out in order to gather data for analysis.  Podcast producers were chosen as the most appropriate interviewees from a large potential research base, although the findings indicate that during the course of research it became necessary to also interview podcasting experts from other related fields.  The most appropriate business models for investigation are selected from the large number detailed in the literature review.

Key topics in the paper’s findings include discussion of whether it is appropriate to monetise podcasts in the first place, as well as whether a single model can be applied to all podcasts across a range of content and contexts.  There is rarely full unanimity among interviewees, and although all were aware of many of the issues affecting the medium, it is shown that more thought is necessary on the topic from those in the industry.

In conclusion, details are given of which have been found to be the most appropriate models, and how the negative impact of monetisation on audience figures can be minimised, thus maximising potential profitability.

Many thanks are due to everyone involved in the paper, especially my interviewees:

• Tony Colman – founder and A&R of drum and bass label Hospital Records.  Produces and hosts the label’s popular podcast, and is a musician in his own right under the name London Elektricity.
• Mark Fox – economics PhD and professor of Management and Entrepreneurship at Indiana University, USA.  Has written a number of papers on broadcasting and the music industry, most notably “Podcasting: a new technology in search of viable business models”, discussed in this Paper’s literature review.
• Ben Hammersley – author of 3 books on RSS, the underlying technology behind podcasts.  Former technology correspondent for The Times and The Guardian, where he coined the term podcasting in 2004.
• Tony Hughes – assistant director of the International Centre for Digital Content, a Liverpool John Moores University media lab, where he works on research and development projects with new media companies.
• Mike Walsh – Head of Music at national radio station X-FM, part of the GCAP Media group which also owns Classic FM amongst others.

I’ve long been a fan of Twitter, but recently have begun to use it in a semi-serious way professionally to follow what goes on in the music and media industry (rather than simply tweeting what I’m having for lunch!).  Since doing this, I’ve been meaning to write a brief post on my tumblelog about some interesting music-types to follow on Twitter.

Earlier today, however, TwiTip, the blog that sets out to provide “Twitter tips in 140 characters or more”, set a challenge to construct your own ‘Top 10 Must Follow’ list related to your own “niche” or area of interest.  Never one to turn down a challenge, I thought I’d take the opportunity to write a slightly longer post on this topic, especially after Twitter user @qburns left a comment on the original TwiTip post:

“I’d love it if someone could help make a list of people to follow for discussions about the music industry and digital/new media strategies as they apply to music”.

The comment went on to mention a handful of music business tweeters, but here (in no particular order) are my own favourite ones.  Probably a bit of a UK bias, and not necessarily the most popular or most powerful, but the ones I most enjoy hearing from!

1. @Mark_Mulligan
Bio: “Vice President and Research Director with Forrester Research”

2. @mr_trick
Bio: “By Day: Internet & Music person @ Large Corporate Brand™… By Night: Radio DJ, Webhead and infrequent Producer person.”

3. @anthonyherron
Bio: “Muso, workaholic, label owner, app developer based in Birmingham UK”

4. @carlcorp
Bio: “The art of language and the language of art. The music of business and the business of music. Sleeveface.”

5. @artistshouse
Bio: “Helping Musicians and Music Entrepreneurs Create Sustainable Careers”

6. @dubber
Bio: “Music and Online Media”

7. @seaninsound
Bio: “Drowned in Sound“

8. @jonthebeef
Bio: “MP3 Blogger, DJ and Online Marketing bod.”

9. @MyChemToilet
Bio: “Shiny Media’s music blog – flush with musical goodness, festival frivolity and video viralosity”

10. @gleonhard
Bio: “Media Futurist, Author, Keynote Speaker & Presenter, Strategy Advisor, Blogger, Idea Curator, Musician…”

Plus some honourable mentions to: @coolfer, @creativecommons, @whatevrnvrmind, @cshirky, @fascinated and @choochootheband, who may only be one of the many bands starting to use Twitter, but are using it better than most bands I’ve seen.  Their tweets are frequent, interesting, friendly, and not too self-promoting or only of interest to die-hard fans.

And don’t forget to follow me (@JonathanDeamer) for updates on digital music stuff (publishing, marketing), tunes I’m digging, and plenty o’ links.

I’m sure I’ve missed out some cool people; let me know in the comments. And do you tweet about music yourself? Say so!

“System of a Down are not breaking up. We’re just gonna do like Kiss and put out our own solo records”. That was what System guitarist Daron Malakian said in 2005 when he first mentioned his Scars on Broadway side project. And now there’s finally a debut long-player from SoB, it’s less one-man studio doodles and more of a fully-fledged band, featuring as it does System drummer John Dolmayan among others.

So while the “solo records” part of Malakian’s statement may not be correct, the Kiss comparisons could well be. His band produce the sort of powerchord-heavy FM-radio rock indicative of a childhood spent listening to Gene Simmons and co. There’s barely a track over three and a half minutes, with 128-second opener ‘Serious’ sounding as if it would sit comfortably on daytime Radio 1 and those “pretend-to-be-a-rockstar” computer games alike.

But it’s by no means a Fischer-Price attempt at playing rock music. It’s just that while System were at times progressive and political to the point of alienating their more casual listeners, this album keeps to the point with its sheer head-banging thrills. The occasional creepy vocal refrain (‘Chemicals’), bit of pulsing synth (‘Funny’) or even post-punk jangle (‘Enemy’) attempts to give the record a layer of depth and intellect, though on the whole it remains accomplished but one dimensional, often verging on samey.

That barely matters though. Hey, this is the age of the iPod! And there are more than enough bite-sized chunks of downloadable rawk on here to keep you shuffling for weeks. But while the individual tracks are great, in its entirety this is an average album.

Scars on Broadway fans: you might also enjoy my reviews of KoRn and Slipknot.

16th July @ Manchester Apollo

Seattle’s Death Cab for Cutie might just be four scruffy lads with a bit of dodgy facial hair, but they somehow exude a vibe of sheer Americana cool. Their first few songs alone name-check more US cities than a Jack Kerouac novel. So when singer Ben Gibbard announces “Oh Manchester, how we’ve missed you” shortly into the set, it’s difficult to know how much he really means it.

False humility or not, at first it seems Manchester really has missed them. The reception given to tracks like New Year can’t indicate anything else. Whereas on record it’s twee-and-whimsical college indie, in the live setting it becomes quite a powerful rock beast. But soon enough, such crowd-pleasing singalongs give way to dirgeful slow-burners and too many of the dreaded “here’s one from our new album”.

So while the front row obsessives mouth along to every word regardless, and the indier-than-thou hipsters murmur about how different it is from the band’s first album tour in 1998, the fair-weather fans are the real barometer of how entertaining this is. They may have only discovered Death Cab when the group soundtracked a repeat episode of The OC last week. But they know the truth: tonight is mostly boring, with the odd flash of melodic brilliance. And don’t let anyone – Death Cab diehard or muso snob – tell you otherwise.

It’s weird: Sugababes produce exciting, interesting shiny pop gems on record, but I hated them live, while Westlife’s albums are some of the dullest things known to man, yet their live show is pretty good. Never thought I’d end up becoming an expert in stadium pop shows…

3rd July @ Liverpool Echo Arena

After they’re made to wait until 9:40 on a school night to see their heroes take to the stage, the mostly pre-teen audience can be forgiven for getting a bit restless. Some of the older members of the half-full Arena’s crowd have taken to booing the band before they even come on, such is their lateness.

When they’ve allowed their fans to get that upset, Sugababes are going to have to put on a show more crowd pleasing than a Beatles reunion to make up for it. The show they do put on, however, is more akin to a school assembly performance than a triumphant production by a girl band who’ve sold more records than The Supremes, Banarama and even Destiny’s Child.

From the opening four-on-the-floor club mix of ‘Hole In The Head’, the 3 ‘babes are upstaged both by their dancers and fantastic backing band. They give the same rehearsed sultry looks and pull the same wannabe-sexy moves for the show’s duration. They look bored, quite frankly. The musicians, meanwhile, are having a great time, keeping themselves entertained by dropping elements of The Who’s ‘Baba O’Reilly’ into ‘Push the Button’ and wigging out with some guitar histrionics on ‘Freak Like Me’.

Despite having some genuine pop classics in their repertoire, the trio manage to put on one of the most lacklustre and unnecessarily low key stadium show that can have ever been. Let’s hope it doesn’t put the younger audience members off gig-going forever though. Quality pop can be so much better than this.

Not really my usual fare, is it? But a surprisingly good show seen in the course of writing another review for Orange.

29th June 2008 @ Echo Arena

As far as big pop events go, they don’t come much bigger, poppier or more eventful than this without the involvement of Bob Geldof or Nelson Mandela: the last show of a forty-million selling boyband’s 10th anniversary tour, on the opening night of Liverpool’s annual Summer Pops blowout, at the city’s spanking new Echo Arena.

The almost palpable anticipation is immediately justified when the lads come onstage wearing leather jackets and Aviators to a cacophony of rock guitars and a light show worthy of Pink Floyd. It’s clear this isn’t going to be a sat-on-stools, stand-up-for-the-key-change run through of the Irish boys’ ballad hits. Many of their fourteen number one singles are there of course, but there’s also a show-stopping selection of uptempo covers, from The Jacksons through to Robbie Williams via Kool & The Gang’s ‘Get Down On It’, with pyrotechnics that could probably be seen from Dublin.

The fact that these tracks form the gig’s centrepiece though serves almost as an admission of the chronic dullness of much of Westlife’s own material. This is further evidenced by a tedious acoustic mini-set of songs from last year’s Back Home album, which sees most of the reluctant dads and boyfriends in attendance head off for a Carling.

Despite this, and no matter how much they may pretend to begrudge accompanying their loved ones tonight, the dads and boyfriends will have enjoyed it really. From the final brace of ‘Swear It Again’ and ‘Flying Without Wings’, along with the requisite stadium spectacle and emoting, it’s clear that no matter how boring their records, Westlife put on a show that only a miserablist like Geldof himself could fail to like.

A version of this originally published at Orange.co.uk, for whom I’m now writing.

Necessity is the mother of invention, according to some ancient Greek bloke. So does the complete lack of invention shown on Silent Cry mean that the last thing the world really needs is another album from the band who bought us ‘Buck Rogers’?

It’d be churlish to suggest that we’ve never needed the Welsh trio. Their early records helped fill a gaping Britrock void in the late 90s, and since 2001’s Echo Park they’ve unleashed a handful of mini pop-classics that sit beautifully alongside ‘Bohemian Like You’ and ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s on local radio stations across the land (admittedly, a back-handed compliment if ever there were one).

But the band’s sixth record abandons that joyous melodic sensibility in favour of a faux-anthemic Snow Patrol approach. Opening track and lead single ‘We Are The People’ is a directionless dirge, produced, dubbed and layered to within an inch of its life to hide a chronic lack of what those in the music biz call ‘bollocks’. And while ‘Miss You’ hints at Feeder’s previous scratchy punk-pop brilliance, it’s one of only a few moments of light relief in an album full of humourless attempts at mature radio ballads.

Silent Cry’s 45 minutes are an overlong and tiring listen. At 13 tracks, it’s like having to explain the same thing over and over to a stupid co-worker. And as the sort of intellectual giant who reads Plato-quoting record reviews in their spare time, surely you don’t need music that reminds you of that feeling?