“Scott C. Smith, publisher of the Chicago Tribune and president of Tribune Publishing, announced today he plans to retire.” – Chicago Tribune, June 12, 2008
Finally, this dude will stop trying to hog my spotlight.
I win
Lessons from the Web
Back in Jaunary, I had a little fun with Chicago magazine. Annoyed that they were taking too long to post an online version of its “171 Great Chicago Websites” story – even though the print version had already been out for weeks – I had one of our interns write a blog post listing every site they mentioned, along with a link to it. It was a tweak of their nose for not understanding the medium of the Web and as a bonus, it ended up being a nice traffic boost for us.
This week, Scott Karp at Publishing 2.0 wrote a post titled “What Magazines Still Don’t Understand About The Web” that details his frustration over a similar situation: Wanting to write a post about a story in The Atlantic, he discovers it isn’t available on their site, even though it’s available in print and – as he later discovers – available via Google. He doesn’t go to the trouble of posting the thing himself but maybe he doesn’t have an intern.
I’m not ignorant to the difficulty of balancing a print product and a site that’s largely built on what appears in it. I have it easier with TOC in that it’s a weekly. Most of our subscribers receive the magazine on Wednesdays, and the new content is always available on Thursday at the latest. If there’s something particularly exciting – food/drink content or something related to a weekend event, we’ll push it live earlier. So we don’t have near the delays associated with a monthly like The Atlantic or Chicago magazine.
Why not make everything available immediately? Partly it’s because of the way our metrics are assembled; Utilizing specific dates when we push new content out helps us to understand how people use our site. And we’ve – and by that I mean me, I guess – become adept at how to serve new content out to people each day of the week using this schedule. There’s something to be said for “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” There’s also a production/time aspect, too: Just because the articles themselves are ready to go, doesn’t mean the rest of the site is ready to show it off. But if I knew that content was already out there in print form, I’d absolutely move it live on the Web ASAP. Because I know that someone else would, whether that someone is Google or someone like me.
The real challenge, though, is this: Using the Web to provide more context, information and value. For example, this week’s TOC feature story is about tourist spots and how even a jaded city-dweller can find the fun in them. (Yours truly braved the wilds of Excalibur for the first time in ten years, and you can read all about that here.) On the Web, we created a spot-the-tourist photo quiz, and had editors name their favorite recurring events that are fun for tourists and locals. In the Web version of the story, you also have quick access to the listings of the places we mention. For reasons of medium and space, you can’t do that in print.
Creating content like this presents its own set of challenges. Someone has to go out there and take the pictures (in this case, Jake Malooley, the TOC Reporter With No Fear. Dude ate a bug once for a story because TOC asked him to), editors need to spend extra time selecting events, in addition to all their other work, and someone has to link to all the event listings. To really create exciting Web content, you need more people power. And yet every time you turn around, magazines and newspapers are letting go of their employees. As Karp notes, related content about what’s in a magazine is easily available via Google so it’s the job of a magazine to create content that satiates the reader’s desire for more.
So in addition to Karp’s complaints about what magazines don’t understand about the Web, I’d add “that just getting the story up on its site isn’t enough.”
I'm a judgmental S.O.B.
Earlier this year, I picked up a bag of mail from the place I was living at a couple years ago. Along with discovering that I’d somehow been subscribed to New York magazine, I found that a few publicists didn’t get my forwarding address and a few promo CDs were waiting.
One of the first posts I ever wrote here was about using context clues to determine whether a band sucks or not, specifically the name. (Note: the following pertains only to how I determine whether I personally will enjoy a band’s album NOT whether the album has a certain artistic merit. You can only learn that by actually listening to it, though some professional music reviewers seem to disagree.)
In any case, “The” bands automatically start off ahead of the game, IMHO. No matter what follows the “The” you’re pretty much guaranteed a band that is trying to move you in that classic three-chords-and-an-attitude way, rather than trying so hard to prove its artistic worth that it gets swallowed up by artifice. Oddly enough, the exception to this rule is The The.
I’ll also confess that album art plays heavily into my pre-listen consideration. That sounds horrid, I know, but somehow I’ve developed a finely-developed sense for this as most bands attempt a visual reflection of what their albums sound like.
Cases in point were two CDs from the aforementioned pile that I set aside without even giving either a listen, based solely on the album art. I won’t mention the artists because I realize it’s patently unfair to slag a band this way without listening to its music. (Again, even though I have full confidence in using this system to judge music I like, it’s not a guarantee that the music won’t be enjoyed by someone else. Plus, there’s a big difference between music I like, and music that has artistic merit otherwise.)
This isn’t an argument against ugliness, it’s an argument against artifice. But just to be certain, I just grabbed both out of the circular file and did a little research. In looking each band up online, I’ve discovered the artist whose cover is an arty photo illustration of his face has a MySpace page whose most recent blog entry is titled “Competition to win Sony Video Walkman” while the other – whose cover is a hummingbird with peacock feathers floating in an invisible cube over a Dali-esque ocean – has a bio that begins “Born in Seattle in 1998 at the tender age of intent…”
I feel pretty confident that I am not missing anything here.
Free Jim DeRogatis!
If a bunch of lawyers – even ones who are incompetent enough to use a Wayans Brothers movie as part of their defense strategy – were trying to charge me with possession of child pornography – I’d be pretty down in the mouth about it.
So I’m glad to see the Sun-Times folks are keeping a sense of humor about the whole thing.
Seriously though, the open access to our courts system has already taken a pretty serious beating thanks to Judge Gaughan, but the defense’s attempts to get back at the reporters who broke the story is a new low.
An open letter to a guy at my gym
Dear Sir,
You don’t know me, but we both work out at the same gym. I think you know the one.
As you’re no doubt aware, you have a frequent habit of standing nude in front of the hot air dryers, using them to dry yourself off after your shower. But rather than concern yourself with merely the hair on your head, you also spend a significant amount of time using the dryer to remove any moisture from the rest of your body as well.
While I’m certain that prolonged periods of nudity in the common, central areas of the locker room is a violation of generally accepted gym-locker-room etiquette, I’m willing to give you a pass on this, for the most part. Damp areas on the human body, or elsewhere, are a haven for bacteria and fungi, so perhaps you are overly concerned with that issue and are doing all you can to completely dry yourself.
The issue at hand, so to speak, is your balls.
Sir, what’s with all the cupping?
Again, as you’re aware, your drying routine involves a significant amount of ball-handling. I’m unclear as to why this is necessary.
First, I’ve owned a pair of balls my entire life, and they have, on occasion, been in need of drying. I’ve found that a medium-to-thick terrycloth towel, in conjunction with exposure to the air, is sufficient for complete drying vis a vis my nuts. While I have avoided careful consideration of your own testicular area, despite your very public displays, I imagine from a physiological standpoint, we don’t differ enough that hot air drying would be necessary for you to accomplish this task.
Furthermore, while you are a man of some height, the hot air dryers are far too high on the wall to ensure that the air they emit will have the required velocity necessary to dry your balls. At best, you are treating them to the light suggestion of a warm breeze, akin to the feeling one gets while sitting on a pier at sunset overlooking the Florida Keys. And no amount of cupping, shaking, handling, stretching, organizing, or re-arranging will change that.
For the comfort and consideration of all the people who use our gym locker room, please stop publicly cupping your balls.
Regards,
Our Man In Chicago
It's all downhill from here
In this week’s TOC Theater section, you can read the apex of my journalism career: an interview with former Styx frontman Dennis DeYoung.*
A couple tidbits about this interview that don’t appear in print:
* In setting up the interview, DeYoung left me a voicemail that ended with him saying the following: “Alright? ALRIGHT? ALRIIIIGHT!” Reading this doesn’t do it justice, but imagine his voice getting both louder and higher until he hits the final “ALRIIIIGHT!” in perfect Rock Falsetto.
* When I called him back to set it up, he gave me both his office and cell phone number so I would have no problem reaching him. This was important because he, in his words, has “Rockzheimer’s” and forgets stuff.
* In response to a question about what his wife would say is the secret to staying married to a musician for 38 years, DeYoung mentioned the need for patience, kindness, understanding…and then began reciting the lyrics of “The Grand Illusion”. “I wrote that 30 years ago, it’s all right there.”
DeYoung was a really decent guy, and this was the most fun I’ve ever had during an interview. I’m really happy with the way this turned out, mainly because you really do get a sense of what he’s like to talk to, particularly bits like this:
TOC: Were you exposed to musical theater growing up?
Dennis DeYoung: Absolutely not. I grew up on the South Side of Chicago. I was exposed to the White Sox and “Do you want that beef dipped?”
Somehow, I managed to remain professional and not ask him what the deal was with a song like “Lorelei,” which extols the very un-rock virtues of cohabitation.
* Sorry this blog has exclusively become “Stuff I Do At Work.” I promise to get back to blowhard-y opinions about music and pop culture next week. But come on: “I want that beef dipped” didn’t kinda make your day a little?
Chicago promoter's ordinance tabled for now
Thanks to a ramshackle coalition of the Chicago Music Commission, live performance venue owners, and grass roots cultural supporters – largely organized online – the Chicago promoter’s ordinance was tabled, for now. The ordinance will likely be brought up for a vote next month, but this time it will be the result of input from the local music industry. Supposedly. Statements on the issue and a follow-up interview with Alderman Brendan Reilly on the TOC blog.
Right before the ordinance was tabled, I posted an overview of some of the less-reported details about the ordinance, particularly how it would affect film exhibitors, comedy shows and storefront theaters. It’s still worth looking at today as the city’s been making every effort to cloud the effects of this issue.
The theory I alluded to yesterday about why this ordinance was seemingly pushed through so quickly got a little more ammunition yesterday, when it was revealed in a statement from Alderman Schulter’s office that explicitly said the ordinance was introduced at the behest of the mayor. Sure, you could say this is a money grab by the city, but it’s really about making the city “safe” for the Olympics. But does “safe” mean cracking down on crime or sanitizing the cultural offerings in the city?
I’ll have more later today on the TOC blog on the lessons learned from this ordinance fight, particularly how it relates to this week’s TOC cover story on Chicago protests – past and present. (We couldn’t have planned that if we wanted to, but oh the serendipity!)
Today's promoter's ordinance updates
Yesterday, Chicago’s live performance community – including folks in the music and dance scenes – formed a critical mass of protest against the proposed promoter’s ordinance, which goes up for a vote in front of the City Council tomorrow. With all the talk about the influence of blogs and new media, which – despite a couple articles in the Sun-Times and Tribune – is where the real information about this story is coming out, you might be surprised to learn it’s taken this long. But the thing is, when politics is involved, things get muddled. People don’t realize how local government works, even in a political city like Chicago, and to really get to know a story like this, you need to delve into complex language and bureaucracy, and understand how governmental procedures work. More than one person – in the media and otherwise – sounded false alarms about how this ordinance was already a done deal.
But hey, even the city – and its aldermen – don’t seem to know the ordinance very well (see our Q&As with Aldermen Waugespack and Reilly on the TOC blog). The city’s been saying that artists won’t be precluded from promoting their shows, but that’s only if they do nothing but play and don’t deal with any of the “operational responsibility” of the show. Which is pretty much everything else.
We’ve had a couple conversations in the TOC offices about this ordinance, and what’s becoming clear to all of us is that this just doesn’t affect music and clubs, it also affects theater and comedy and any type of live performance in the city. Venue owners are just now figuring out how this might affect them. Non-profit theater owners are being told they’re safe, but that’s not how I’m reading this (and honestly, I’m about as much of an expert as anyone else at this point since I’ve talked to people on and off the record – who should know – who can’t tell me whether my interpretations are correct or not).
There’s also an open question of why this is happening now. I’ve got a couple theories, but if you operate from the point of view that everything that comes out of City Hall these days is about the Olympics, you can probably come up with a theory or two yourself.
In retrospect, maybe we should have done more analysis before now. So today, look for a post from me on the TOC blog about some of the detailed issues that are being overlooked on this ordinance. Also, I’ll be reviewing last night’s Swedefest at Schubas with El Perro del Mar and Lykke Li.
Chicago hates music?
Yesterday I wrote a little something about the city’s promoter’s ordinance. Don’t let anyone fool you, this ordinance is not about safety, it’s about money. Money the city can’t get from promoters who sponsor shows at established venues (the city, of course, is exempt from these no licensing fees). And make no mistake: these aren’t cigar-chomping sleazebags, or people who operate unsafe clubs (note that the “impetus” for this proposal was the E2 disaster which can only tangentially be blamed on the promoters) these are people like…well, me, when I worked at Chicagoist and we would sponsor shows. Or Tankboy, or Gapers Block or any of the other individuals who put together bills and make this city’s music scene so great.
But as you’ll see if you read the post, I reserve most of my ire for the Chicago music community itself. For years now, differences among venue owners and other members of the community has prevented them from banding together as a group to prevent laws like this from passing. In fact, I wrote a variation on this post two years ago. I’ll be interested to see what actions are taken in advance of next week’s City Council vote.
Also, look for a review of last night’s Robyn show on the TOC blog later today.
First time, last time
Former TOC associate music editor turned classical music record label fat cat Marc Geelhoed tagged me with this. I think if I don’t respond, a cousin of mine will die of malaria or something…
The rules of the meme:
1. Pick up the nearest book.
2. Open to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people, and acknowledge who tagged you.
My desk sits next to my bookshelf so finding the nearest book is easy. But when I lean back in my chair, the books nearest me on the shelves* are those by P.J. O’Rourke. And so, from Eat The Rich:
And is there some middle way like the ball-up in Sweden? All the world’s Russia experts (and most of its Russians) are trying to figure these things out. But Russia is “a riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, tied in a hankie, rolled in a blanket, and packed in a box of little Styrofoam peanuts,” said Winston Churchill, or something like that.
Yeah, kinda dated, huh?
And so, I tag ejshea, Tankboy, Wood-Tang, Bridgeport Seasonings, and Tales of a Post-Grad Nothing.
More to come in the next few days: book reviews and the return of the Wood-Tang/OMIC letters.
