Rotherberg vs. Zuckerberg

I was sitting at the College of Charleston's Hungry Cougar having a delicious southern breakfast of grits and bacon, and I unfolded my hard-copy of the New York Times. 


Yeah...weird I know. Who reads the paper anymore? But with free delivery service to the campus residence halls, I couldn't pass it up....That's beside the point!

I'm a social media hound! I turned to the Business Day section and saw the infamous word "Facebook". My eyes were fixed! I whipped out my highlighter and began reading. 

The article by Verne G. Kopytoff attempts to destroy rumors about Flickr's dying trend as a photo-sharing website. But for me the article simply re-instated that Facebook will never be defeated.


"I'VE NEVER EVEN HEARD OF FLICKR" That's probably because you adopted Facebook First.

Flickr is a site owned and maintained by Yahoo! I remember being about grade-school age and using Yahoo! for everything, games, e-mail (or lack-there-of) and news updates when I got into high-school. But the arrival of MySpace and  Facebook, Yahoo! seemed to disintegrate into the world of social media. I know a few people that still use the venue for world updates and e-mails (which seems to also be a dying trend) but Yahoo's leading competitor is Google. I mean... c'mon folks.


According to The Times article "Yahoo's top executives have barely mentioned Flickr publicly for some time. Few top executives actually have a public Flickr account." The embarrassment of the deceased photo-sharing network seems to be a direct cause of Facebook's increasing popularity. The article points out that there are 123.9 million users who upload pictures to Facebook, while Flickr tops out a measly 21.3 million. (Those numbers seem huge to me, but who am I to say)


Flickr users are often times professional or showcase photographers. In this case Flickr is more of a professional venue to share photos. There are endless amounts of articles about pictures on Facebook being to risky, wild, inappropriate (the adjectives are copious). Facebook seems to be constant status updates through picture sharing medium while Flickr remains to be professionally sound. This is a benefit to some, but not for the mainstream, no-time-to-think social media users today.


I have a few photographer friends and every once and a while I get an e-mail link to see their photos. The quality is clearly better but there is really no easy way of scanning the photos. You have to have a log-in name (along with your Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Gmail accounts to remember) and our minds have been so programmed to venues like Facebook, I find it difficult to use. The format of social media sites is simple. Flickr is outdated in this aspect. 


One idea that caught my eye in this article was that Flickr and Yahoo were planning to grant more  viewership to trending current events through photos. I thought this was a genius idea and it's something that Facebook could definitely benefit from. With venues like twitpic some of these ideas are already in progress. Maybe Flickr could use it's reputable professionalism and instill some plans to encourage this. 


WHAT IT BOILS DOWN TO...


But the mainstream screams "FACEBOOK!" And we can't really shy away from that it all goes back to good ole' Communication Theory class and the SIDE Theory (social identification/de-individuation model). This communication model claims that we often set aside our own desires in order to become more socially acceptable in society [Postumes/Spears]. Not be extreme, but seriously "everyone is doing it" Facebook that is. 


No other comment in this article grabbed my social media psyche than "The internet is starting to rotate around the axis of Facebook..." I find this to be completely true as you'll find in all of my social media blog entries. Matthew Rosenberg (of Flickr) mentions in this article that he wants to bring back the simplicity of photo-sharing where it was "a rich storytelling experience" and not just something you breeze through on a day to day basis. But Mr. Zuckerberg has changed all that. I own one photo album. When my computer is near crashing, I tell the guy to save my music and my pictures. Everything is electronic and everything is public. 


I've made the debate several times that Facebook will become a monopoly. This article pillars my argument.




((Statistics and article from The New York Times. Monday, January 31, 2011. Business Day; B3 "At Flickr; Fending off Rumors and Facebook" by Verne G. Kopytoff.))

Audacity in Auditioning (and other things too)

When an actor hears about an upcoming audition two things come to mind: (1) This is a great opportunity (2) I'm scared out of my pants! Depending on your experience in the theater business the latter of the two might be a stretch. However, as a student actor, my nerves still take hold of me as I walk up to the stage to perform a piece for a director. 


There have been auditions in which the director is sitting in the very back of the house, arms crossed, look=stern and waves his or her hand in a motion saying "begin!" There have also been times when the director will communicate with you, ask you about your pieces, give you feedback and sit in the very front where the intimidation factor isn't so strong. The non-verbals of the directors are varying, but often times terrifying. It isn't until after the audition is over that your heart-rate returns to normal (sometimes) and your palms dry. Then comes the posting of the call backs...


At the college level, there is usually a general audition that takes place a few weeks before rehearsals. Then that audition is narrowed down to about half, we call these "the call backs". These are the actors the director wants to see again, in hopes to better place them into a practical position for the show he or she is casting. The list for the "second auditioners" is usually posted, e-mailed or phoned. There isn't really a common practice for this. When the list is e-mailed, the actor finds out in private and can celebrate independently. When the actor is notified by phone, there is a weird pause in the conversation. Do I say "thank you"? Do I show my excitement out loud? Who hangs up first? But...when the list is posted, the drama in the drama department unfolds.


A list was recently posted with the names for those called back for a production at the College of Charleston. We (as actors) were aware of the time that the director would post the list. We waited. There were about 10 of us that evening around 8:15pm in the hallway of the main arts building. We talked, laughed and shared our nerves with one another about the pending arrival of the ever-so-precious piece of paper. We had all worked with each other at some point so the anxiety was calmed with the reassurance of friendship. Then the director comes up. He gives a short soap-box speech about how it was very hard to narrow it down this far and what the call back audition would entail. He maneuvered his way down the hall to post the list. We waited once again. I made a joke about being a line of ducks behind him. He laughed, but subconsciously I was serious. 


He left and the hallway was silent. Who would make the first move? Lets all go together. Should we go one by one? This is awkward.


I made the first move. I was called back. I was excited! This was an opportunity. Most of the people standing in the hallway that evening were in fact called back. But as I sat down to make some phone calls to the people that were unable to see the list tonight, I was able to point out the people who weren't called back. They attempted a smile. The surface value of their conversations was easily seen through. As actors, we are constantly asked to put on a face and emotional appeal that isn't ours. Thank God we can do that at the drop of a dime.  It's helpful to be able to hide our feelings, while still being congratulatory to our fellow actors. I know its a fact of life but I'm just trying to figure out if there's a better way to do this whole thing. You know, posting a list without hurting peoples feelings. ("THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT WORKS KIDDO, SOMETIMES LIFE IS HARD") It goes back to the ancient times of getting picked last, or not at all, in a friendly game of playground dodgeball.

http://thereviewcast.com/

It seems like its been done like this for years. With the advancements of social media, email, etc. directors can contact their actors more specifically. But with outlets like Facebook and twitter, the sad (or glorifying) truth is still in everyone's face. I'm a compassionate person and the great thing about being an actor is our ability to empathize. But its hard to see a friend work so hard and then be crushed by a 12 point font, times new roman 8.5 by 11 piece of paper.