Monday, July 04, 2005
My Thoughts on the Most Recent Little Bit of Blogin’ Without Typing
I hope you’re not reading this. Not today at least. You should be out eating charred animal flesh, or a soy based simulacrum thereof if you’re morally opposed. Even though my hometown is getting bathed in a much-needed, gentle rain, no matter the weather, you should be watching the fireworks, and if you’re in a state where it’s legal, you should be lighting those puppies off yourself. Note to my fellow Illinoize folk: just step away from the sparklers and the little charcoal pellets that turn to snakes. You’re not impressing anyone.
But when you do get around to reading this, I’d like to give you my take on a recent Register Star article that Aaron Chambers wrote.
It was good.
Ok, Bye now. Thanks for reading.
Overly simplistic? You want more? Ughhhh. You needy, little monkeys!
My only regret is that Chambers utterly neglected my whole Podcasting / hummus connection. I tried to explain the underlying chickpea-based technology infrastructure, but you know… Other than that, bang up job.
Chambers took, a technology that’s bleeding edge new, nebulous in most people’s minds, and has many misconceptions. The first hurdle he had to overcome was the name. As ubiquitous as apple’s iPod is, some people don’t really know what one is yet. And many who do, knew enough about what an iPod is to make the false connection that Podcasting has more to do directly with the actual device than it truly does. For instance, many relatively tech savvy people think you can only listen to a Podcast on your iPod.
But—honest to goodness—after reading Chambers’ article, my friend asked his father in law if he knew what a Podcast was. He thought it had to do with whale pods. Honest mistake. And it only shows to go you, as cool and fun, and useful as Podcasting can become, it is something that you can live your day-to-day life without quite easily and happily.
As much as I like the idea of it, have fun doing it, and try to turn other people on to it, Podcasting is not the second coming. So that brings us to an important note about the article in the Star: In the first instance I’m quoted, I say, “…It’s all things.” I was speaking to the diversity of Podcasting and the ability of it to cover every subject matter, and that is was an unlimited medium. Looking back on that phrase I came off a little “sermon on the mount” or something. I didn’t mean to sound so, I don’t know, messianic or whatever.
I think that Podcasting will shake up the media industry; it will grow exponentially, and it will impact people’s lives muchly and goodly, but I’m not some zealot, wing-nut proselytizing about a new religion known as Podcasting. I don’t feel that strongly about it. It’s just this thing I do.
If I recall, in the interview, I probably equivocated and wishy-washed and watered down the “It’s all things” comment. But because the stuff I said after that was likely incoherent, it was pretty wise of Chambers not to include that, I recon.
That’s another thing. I don’t envy Chambers having to transcribe a conversation with me. If you have listened to the Podcast, you know what I mean.
“Ok, how do I punctuate that thing Stotz said? Should I use an em-dash within an em-dash? Should I italicize that? Should I put in brackets that he’s affecting a California burnout voice? How do I make it clear that he was being sarcastic? Was that the antecedent to that other word 15 subordinate clauses ago? Did he really just have a pop culture reference to Tor Johnson in juxtaposition to a Molliere quip that served as a joke about horticulture?”
Poor guy.
Keeping that in mind, let’s talk about the first thing I said. “It’s very democratic.”
As you can tell, the article was not solely about Podcasting, but more about the Republicans in Illinois releasing a Podcast.
It’s an equal time thing.
Of course by democratic I mean it in the “free and equal participation in stuff” way. Like our country itself is democratic. I didn’t mean that Podcasting is left wing, though it might be predominantly. Al Gore is on Apple’s board.
And that’s another thing. Friends who skimmed the article (as opposed to reading it for real) noticed: it looks like I may be endorsing the Republican Party, or that I’m affiliated with them. I’m not. Nothing against them, and I think it’s great that they are doing a Podcast, but I was called in as a technical pundit guy. I haven’t checked it out, but I imagine the Republican Party is quite interested in making it clear that I am not affiliated with them as well. And if you read the article (as opposed to skim) that’s not really an issue. And for the record, I consider myself neither Rep nor Dem.
The last little note on the article would be this: it mentions I’m working with local folkal to produce some Podcasts for them. And the talks have barely started. I have received a lot of interest, but no yeses yet. It’s premature to announce anything. And I told Chambers this. The timing is a little unfortunate for the article, but I told him I’d let him know, if he wanted, as soon as I knew anything. Then I apologized. And expressed my regret. I then offered to pick up his dry cleaning, and walk or brush any pets, clean out his gutters, and other stuff like that by way of apology.
So that makes the fact that I “declined to identify any of them” seem like I come off a little belligerent to me. It is 100% true. And 100% accurate. But it makes me sound like a meany-head. I get the image of me shaking my fist and growling, “Damn you Chambers! You’ll never get anything out of me!” Then I hold my hand over an open flame all the while not flinching, and after an indecipherable squawk from a walkie , I do a double flip and land in a car infinitely cooler than a beat up LeSabre…uh where am I? Anyway…
That’s not what he intended, but I just sound like a jerk. Yeah. Sound like. If anything, Chambers took my ramblings and turned them into more concise, more dramatic phrases. He should write all my dialogue. The whole “declined to comment” thing will generate more buzz and hype about what I’m working on, I’m sure.
After all that had been said, I liked the article. Chambers’ pen done good.
One other quick factoid that didn’t make the article:
Podcasting has been around longer than some think. I first heard about it in the PG Wodehouse novel, You’re Not as Charming as You Think When You’re Drunk, Jeeves!
But when you do get around to reading this, I’d like to give you my take on a recent Register Star article that Aaron Chambers wrote.
It was good.
Ok, Bye now. Thanks for reading.
Overly simplistic? You want more? Ughhhh. You needy, little monkeys!
My only regret is that Chambers utterly neglected my whole Podcasting / hummus connection. I tried to explain the underlying chickpea-based technology infrastructure, but you know… Other than that, bang up job.
Chambers took, a technology that’s bleeding edge new, nebulous in most people’s minds, and has many misconceptions. The first hurdle he had to overcome was the name. As ubiquitous as apple’s iPod is, some people don’t really know what one is yet. And many who do, knew enough about what an iPod is to make the false connection that Podcasting has more to do directly with the actual device than it truly does. For instance, many relatively tech savvy people think you can only listen to a Podcast on your iPod.
But—honest to goodness—after reading Chambers’ article, my friend asked his father in law if he knew what a Podcast was. He thought it had to do with whale pods. Honest mistake. And it only shows to go you, as cool and fun, and useful as Podcasting can become, it is something that you can live your day-to-day life without quite easily and happily.
As much as I like the idea of it, have fun doing it, and try to turn other people on to it, Podcasting is not the second coming. So that brings us to an important note about the article in the Star: In the first instance I’m quoted, I say, “…It’s all things.” I was speaking to the diversity of Podcasting and the ability of it to cover every subject matter, and that is was an unlimited medium. Looking back on that phrase I came off a little “sermon on the mount” or something. I didn’t mean to sound so, I don’t know, messianic or whatever.
I think that Podcasting will shake up the media industry; it will grow exponentially, and it will impact people’s lives muchly and goodly, but I’m not some zealot, wing-nut proselytizing about a new religion known as Podcasting. I don’t feel that strongly about it. It’s just this thing I do.
If I recall, in the interview, I probably equivocated and wishy-washed and watered down the “It’s all things” comment. But because the stuff I said after that was likely incoherent, it was pretty wise of Chambers not to include that, I recon.
That’s another thing. I don’t envy Chambers having to transcribe a conversation with me. If you have listened to the Podcast, you know what I mean.
“Ok, how do I punctuate that thing Stotz said? Should I use an em-dash within an em-dash? Should I italicize that? Should I put in brackets that he’s affecting a California burnout voice? How do I make it clear that he was being sarcastic? Was that the antecedent to that other word 15 subordinate clauses ago? Did he really just have a pop culture reference to Tor Johnson in juxtaposition to a Molliere quip that served as a joke about horticulture?”
Poor guy.
Keeping that in mind, let’s talk about the first thing I said. “It’s very democratic.”
As you can tell, the article was not solely about Podcasting, but more about the Republicans in Illinois releasing a Podcast.
It’s an equal time thing.
Of course by democratic I mean it in the “free and equal participation in stuff” way. Like our country itself is democratic. I didn’t mean that Podcasting is left wing, though it might be predominantly. Al Gore is on Apple’s board.
And that’s another thing. Friends who skimmed the article (as opposed to reading it for real) noticed: it looks like I may be endorsing the Republican Party, or that I’m affiliated with them. I’m not. Nothing against them, and I think it’s great that they are doing a Podcast, but I was called in as a technical pundit guy. I haven’t checked it out, but I imagine the Republican Party is quite interested in making it clear that I am not affiliated with them as well. And if you read the article (as opposed to skim) that’s not really an issue. And for the record, I consider myself neither Rep nor Dem.
The last little note on the article would be this: it mentions I’m working with local folkal to produce some Podcasts for them. And the talks have barely started. I have received a lot of interest, but no yeses yet. It’s premature to announce anything. And I told Chambers this. The timing is a little unfortunate for the article, but I told him I’d let him know, if he wanted, as soon as I knew anything. Then I apologized. And expressed my regret. I then offered to pick up his dry cleaning, and walk or brush any pets, clean out his gutters, and other stuff like that by way of apology.
So that makes the fact that I “declined to identify any of them” seem like I come off a little belligerent to me. It is 100% true. And 100% accurate. But it makes me sound like a meany-head. I get the image of me shaking my fist and growling, “Damn you Chambers! You’ll never get anything out of me!” Then I hold my hand over an open flame all the while not flinching, and after an indecipherable squawk from a walkie , I do a double flip and land in a car infinitely cooler than a beat up LeSabre…uh where am I? Anyway…
That’s not what he intended, but I just sound like a jerk. Yeah. Sound like. If anything, Chambers took my ramblings and turned them into more concise, more dramatic phrases. He should write all my dialogue. The whole “declined to comment” thing will generate more buzz and hype about what I’m working on, I’m sure.
After all that had been said, I liked the article. Chambers’ pen done good.
One other quick factoid that didn’t make the article:
Podcasting has been around longer than some think. I first heard about it in the PG Wodehouse novel, You’re Not as Charming as You Think When You’re Drunk, Jeeves!
// posted by Tim @ 5:44 PM 
