Friday, March 17, 2017

in which the pond spends quality time with proven thought leaders ... thanks to the lizards of Oz ...


If it pleases m'lud, the pond would like to make a point of explanation ...

There are some things which are simply too instantly famous for the pond to cover, like the kids intruding on the expert talking about Korea for the BBC, delightful as it was ...

It's just that it's already wall to wall, and will stay that way for yonks ...

The same goes for recent chatter about laura norder.

The pond can't contribute, as it regularly breaks the law - and if every other law-breaker who manages to speed, or jay walk, or who takes a view on laws deemed unjust or irrelevant, or who gets up to other mischief, it'd be a short conversation ...




The same goes for the doings of the Josh when he's allowed out into the world without silent Mal ...

The only issue with Josh and unsilent Jay is where to find the full disaster, the entire enchilada catastrophe ...

In these curated, edited, shorn down to intertube digestible gobbet form, most of the excerpts run under a minute ... whereas the pond watched the entire occasion transfixed ...

This is like people wanting to reduce Hamlet down to a digestible ninety minutes ... and so you get the ABC's down-sized, edited "blow-by-blow" account ... as here ...

Of course if you turn to YouTube you can find a 3'37" lump uploaded by the ABC here, or the same footage by one "David Marler" here ...

If you follow this "David Marler", you will find plenty of recycled content, in the YouTube manner ... as with this News 24 coverage of the affair, running some 9'15" here ...

It's all jolly good fun, but Josh and unsilent Jay is already an eternal meme, a treasured moment punters will long return to ...

Happily, all this content, flung willy nilly around the world, does provide a segue into the pond's lunch-time topic ...

You see, the reptiles this day ran a very agitated piece ...



Uh huh. Naughty google ...

Now first the pond should note that it runs on Blogger for free. It's an indifferent platform, but it's free and free is a language the pond speaks fluently ...

The pond choses not to run advertising because it contains, in the YouTube manner, a lot of editorial content that belongs to other people, though if the pond represents a threat to the business plan of the lizards of Oz, then they're in even deeper trouble than the pond realised ...

But the pond is running ahead of itself. First the pond should introduce Mr Cleland, using his own words ...



There's a lot more here.

Suffice it to say,  whenever the pond is in the company of a "proven thought leader", who blathers on about being an "internetization strategist" and the "expert's expert", the pond is inclined to do a Johst ...


This line turns up on the internet in many forms, because everybody from honest Abe Lincoln to Richard Nixon to Einstein to Marilyn Monroe to Stephen Hawking has found it useful from time to time ...


But enough of all that, it's time to get on with the Cleland ...



Now around this time, the pond routinely gets irritated, when Americans blather about how certain corporations are stealing from Australians.

This requires the pond overlooking the way that the American and UK combines got together in the 1930s to degut the Australian film industry, and have kept it degutted ever since - though the Brits faded from the scene in the 1960s and never came back, leaving the turf to the US combine.

As a result, most Australian high end film and television product is financed by government. Taxpayers pay for it once through taxes, and then again through advertising, and then, in the case of the ABC or SBS, if they want a permanent copy, they're expected to head off to the shop and pay for it again.

At some point, the pond is inclined to snap, and PVR anything it really wants, and this was also once a thought crime thanks to the dictates of the American combine. 

Now Americans under Trump might want to degut public broadcasting, but in Australia, Australian content has been paid for, and when it turns up on the intertubes, the pond is inclined to think it fair and reasonable use.

The real content criminals happen to live in the United States, where all sorts of territorial restrictions are imposed for no particular reason, except to protect oligopolies ... and to maintain control long after any reasonable law would have told the corporations to let go ...

Better minds than the pond dubbed this the House of Mouse rule ...


That bit of shameless corporate nepotism can be found written up here ... and now, with that in mind, it's time to get back to the bleating Cleland ...



Now here's the thing. The Murdochians frequently embed/link to content on YouTube. The Daily Mail regularly rips off its competitors. One way or another, they all do it, either in big or small ways.

Everyone jaywalks or speeds to the extent that they don't think the law is watching.

The pond wonders just who these law-abiding, non-monopolist companies might be, these pure Persil-white American giants. 

What, the house of Mouse, wanting government protection extending into eternity?

And what is the copyrighted innovative Australian property that's under threat from google? There is a difference, not noted in Cleland's conflation, between conventional content and patented innovations ...

What this sounds like is another Graham Burke bleat, this time directed at google rather than other kinds of pirates ...

Well there's no doubt that google can be naughty, but what sort of comically rich nonsense is it to talk of Australia being treated more like a digital colony than a sovereign country by it, when in reality American producers of content have routinely and for decades treated Australia as a digital colony .... subject to threats and intimidation if the US rules, as variable as House of Mouse copyright, were deemed to have been broken.

Worst of all comes when proven thought leaders wander in to town warning of the demon google, while blathering about the way that other American companies are as innocent as the driven snow ...


The sting's there in the tail - "some of which are Google competitors" - and hogwash to all that ...

The pond's not going to be shedding tears anytime soon for a mob that thought they had control of rivers of gold which would flow forever, only to discover that life is full of disruptions ...

But the pond will play along. Perhaps we could raise that question yet again, especially considering the way this driven snow petal runs a major studio ...


And now just to wrap up, it's time to take in a Rowe, with more Rowe here, where he dubs the cartoon Josh n jay agl flamegirls ...



Ah the flame girls ...


Well in the spirit of Cleland, it's time to hop off to the demonic YouTube time machine and head back to the 1980s ... and shed a tear for simpler times, before it was decided to rip out the gas and ship it offshore ...

Simpler and happier, with talk of suffragettes just a dream ... and Australia a quaint digital colony content with its place in the American world order ...





3 comments:

  1. "Naughty" Google? Well it's a corporation, so human foibles don't really apply. Likewise with pandering to Google's conscience.

    Problem is governments the world over are treating large corporations like humans. Why wouldn't Google ask for a 'poacher's safe harbour'? No harm in trying it on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could it be, Merc, that Google will get its (their ?) 'safe harbour' when Google's cheque reaches 'safe harbour' with the LNP ?

      Delete
  2. "Or consider a pollution safe harbour for Australia's worst polluter? Of course not."

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha! Scott doesn't really know much about Australia, does he?

    ReplyDelete

Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.