Friday, November 20, 2009

Value for Sunning

WELL, I'M OUT of here for a week. Lighting out to Sunny Florida.

Next week we've got something special planned.  Hope you'll be able to make it back for a few new voices in this space.

I'll see you sometime after the Grey Cup.

Go Stamps!

News As The Canary

INTERESTING ARTICLE IN Playback:



The champagne corks are popping at CHCH in Hamilton.
The local TV station, recently purchased for $12 by Channel Zero, has seen its supper-hour newscast become highly competitive this fall in nearby Toronto, the country's biggest and most lucrative advertising market.
According to BBM Canada, CTV's 6 p.m. newscast led all comers from Aug. 31 to Nov. 15 in total (2+) viewers with 283,000 on average, while CHCH has fought a three-horse race for second place with Citytv Toronto and Global Television.
City averaged 134,000 viewers, followed by Global with 120,000 and CHCH with 115,000 viewers, BBM Canada reports.


Interesting, why? Well, for all the fooferal over Local TV mattering, we know that Canada's private broadcasters have spent years consolidating and cost cutting in the regions, and pursuing a strategy that said that only ever-increasing spends on U.S. programming could save them.


Now they're before the CRTC, begging for money.  Yet a station that's gone aggressively local has seen dividends from it.   Anomaly? Fluke? Maybe.  But I have yet to see a satisfactory explanation from anybody on the broadcast side why they have such trouble making money off their local newscasts, when that's the profit centre of most local stations in the U.S.


It points, unfortunately, to the sobering conclusion that maybe -- just maybe -- they're not very good at running their businesses?


The same argument is made about CanCon -- the "non-local" part of the homegrown spend, that these nets are always trying to get reduced.  This week, we've heard network reps stand up there and say that Corner Gas never made CTV money, and that CanCon can't make money -- falsehoods that were proved so by a Nordcity study released by Canadian Producers and the WGC earlier this year.


When Norm Bolen, the new head of the Canadian English Language Producers Association, the CFTPA appeared before the CRTC yesterday, he came with that same message: maybe it's time to actually commit to making things.




Producers called on the CRTC to put the brakes on foreign programming spending -- echoing sentiments by cable and satellite companies -- and said Thursday that over-the-air broadcasters would be better served focusing on Canadian content as a viable business opportunity.
Despite challenges, conventional television "still has lots of life in it," the producers group declared at the commission's continuing hearings into fee-for-carriage, noting that new Portable People Meters show higher audiences than previously thought for OTAs.
"Sky-high expenditures on foreign programming are a big part of the problem in the English-language market. Any business that grows spending more than its revenues is walking on a tightrope," said CFTPA president and CEO Norm Bolen in his opening remarks, pointing out that private conventional broadcasters spent 7.4% more on foreign programming, while revenues decreased by 1.5% in 2008.
The CFTPA put forth solutions it says will improve the financial health of over-the-air television, including an introduction of CPE or Canadian programming expenditure obligations -- maintaining that the model works for specialty channels which generate audiences and derive profit from their homegrown shows.

You don't often hear about it, but the kinds of lifestyle programming that crops up on so many of those specialty channels aren't just filler -- they're leaders.  In fact, if you look at a channel like HGTV, many of their homegrown shows are, in fact, the big drivers not just on the Canadian HGTV -- they're the backbone of the American version of the services, as well.


Now there's Flashpoint, consistently drawing nearly 2 million viewers.  Heartland on CBC is in the same territory. Canadian produced tween and animation programs buoy services like YTV, and export to both acclaim and cash.


The business model for Canadian OTA networks is bruised and broken -- but there is evidence from CHCH to Flashpoint to their own specialties, that actually committing to trying to do more than one-minute more that they're required to could point a way toward viability. Certainly more than the drunken-free-for-all American program spending -- with CTV instantly thrown into precarious straits and Canwest on the edge of the abyss.


It requires a big change of thinking -- and there's no question that the will is not there.  They had it very good, for a very long time....little effort, write a check, let the money roll in.  But that's gone now. And sure, there's denial and wanting to grasp and no taste for trying something riskier -- there's no will to actually try making comedy and drama. But what if there was?  What if they stopped paying lip service to their obligations and actually tried to market and make shows that their customers liked?  


They said local was impossible.  Yet CHCH is popping champagne corks. PPMs say the numbers are up.  And best of all, nobody's saying you have to put down the Yankee crack pipe entirely.


Surely from a consumer standpoint that's better than expecting Canadians to put up with wholesale blackouts on the U.S. network feeds they've had for 40 years.


Really -- expecting people to put up with that... is that really more farfetched than maybe being able to build on doing more than pay lip service to making things?

Different Industry, Same Dream, Harsh Reality.

Y'ALL MIGHT FIND this interesting.  A no-B.S. breakdown of how you won't get rich just by having a book on the New York Times bestseller list.  

Should give the starry-eyed AND the haters something to think on...

(H/t @kazza323)

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Holy Cow.

UM.  WHEN DID Parks & Recreation get so damn funny?

Death of the sitcom, my overwatered kiester.

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

On The Raydio

ONE OF THE interviews I did this morning, for CBC's Toronto Morning show, Metro Morning, with the venerable Andy Barrie is up and available for download.

I have to get a better phone.

Andy's questions were really great -- and he's very informed on the subject.  I think it's a pretty good interview. Listen and see if you agree.

Contempt.

I HONESTLY DON'T think that I have more to say about the coverage and things I heard from the CRTC hearings today.  I'm astonished, a little.  The openness, the utter lack of ideas, the complete and bloody-minded insistence on old ways of thinking.

A business that stands in bankruptcy got up today and showed a lot of the reason why they got there.

I can't even type about it any more.

Let's just throw it to a few of the days' most juicy tweets, shall we?






I really hate to say this. But I'm honestly starting to think that there's no sense in preserving the Canadian ownership rule for Canadian broadcast properties.

Based solely on what we've witnessed today, I cannot conceive of how ceding ownership to American or foreign owners could possibly result in a more contemptuous attitude toward homegrown creative talent and shows.   It's one thing for a broadcaster to view having to produce something original as a "tax." It's quite another to say it out loud.

Throw open the door.  Let'em in.  Make them promise to make shows here that use Canadian talent.

It might be no better for us.

But it won't be worse.

And the viewers at home won't even notice the difference.

So be it.

***
Alan Sawyer also has a very detailed -- and excellent -- breakdown of the issues from a Cable/Satellite perspective here.

And for a little bit of piquant context, I'd like to link to an entry I wrote just shy of three years ago now. It's a response to a broadcasting student's questions.  When I read back through the whole thing, I'm struck by two things:  1)  That I'm talking about an upcoming CRTC hearing where they're going to discuss... carriage fees.  Yup. That's how far we've come.  Three years, and one recession later.  No new ideas. The same discussion. Again.

(It is interesting that now the spin is that carriage fees are needed to save local tv... hmm... but, they were asking for them three years ago and "save local tv" was nowhere to be found.  It's almost like the cash grab came first and the justification came.... naaaah.  Couldn't be, could it?)

The second thing I notice?  How optimistic I seemed then.  I thought we were changing things. I thought things were going to get better.

As Blue Rodeo -- a band that, like so many others, benefited greatly from CanCon regulation (and whose new recording is fantastic, by the way) once sang,

"I used to think I knew
What I was fighting for.
I don't think that anymore."

Kinda Exciting

IF YOU'RE A TeeVee Geek... from the NYTimes:

After devoting most of his energy in recent years to feature films and cable, the writer, director and producer Larry Charles is returning to network television. Mr. Charles, left, who wrote many episodes for the NBC hit series “Seinfeld” and “Mad About You” in the 1990s, is to write and direct the pilot of an as-yet-unnamed series for NBC. In this decade Mr. Charles has directed Sacha Baron Cohen’s “Borat” and “Brüno” films, and also directed, produced or written episodes for the HBO hit series “Curb Your Enthusiasm” and “Entourage.” The new NBC show is to have an ensemble cast and be set in a small town. Mr. Charles told The Hollywood Reporter that the show would try to depict “contemporary American life through the prism of a do-it-yourself homemade aesthetic that will mix mediums.”

If You're Coming Here from CBC Radio...

IF YOU'RE IN Cape Breton, Windsor, Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, Moncton N.B., Gander NFLD, Sudbury ON, Victoria B.C., Tronnna, Kelowna, B.C. or Fredricton, N.B. and you listen to CBC Radio, you might have heard me pop up on your Radio this morning talking about the current CRTC Broadcasting framework review, which is currently starring a WWE style smackdown between Canada's broadcasters and cable/satellite co's.

Hopefully through my haze of sleepiness, I managed to direct you to a couple of edifying posts that could be accessed through my blog.  Here they are.  The first is from my friend Jim Henshaw, a proud Saskatchewinian, TV Writer and Producer, who's worked in this industry longer than I've been alive.  He's also seen a thing or two, and has a way of framing the problem of Canadian TV with a lyricism I think you're really going to enjoy.

You can also check out this piece by Will Dixon, a writer, director, and educator who currently lives in Saskatchewan.  It chronicles a bit of the spin he saw when he went to the "Save Local TV" info session.

But before you do go there -- do me a favour and watch this here video from the WGC (that's the Writers Guild of Canada.) That's the organization that I belong to that reps close to 2000 writers of drama, comedy, animation, childrens and documentary programs.

As I may have said this morning, we're kind of on the leading wedge of the 600 000 people employed making TV in this country.  We're also consumers, like you. We pay taxes, like you. And besides the fact that our cable bills might go up too, we also are in a bit of limbo while we wait for these behemoths to stop their silly fighting and come to some solution that doesn't send our whole industry into the toilet.

Anyway, if you've been thoroughly confused by the half truths in the "Save Local TV" and "Stop the TV Tax" Campaigns (and I don't blame you if you are) here's a video we made trying to give some context to the whole thing.



I've written my own takes on why Canada's creatives feel a bit held hostage by this silly fight -- and also about how the "Save Local TV" cry rang a bit hollow this summer when a storm raged through town.

Believe me. I hate having to write about this stuff. I'd much rather be writing things I care about, like, oh, Starbucks holiday cups, and Remembrance Day tributes, and even nifty ways of focusing your day and avoiding procrastination.  (That last link is even great if you're not a writer!)

I'd also rather be trying to write something entertaining for you to watch on your TV. You know...if you want to.  Ah well. Maybe somebody will come to their senses.  Maybe.

Thanks for your interest, and thanks for stopping by.

Denis McGrath

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Tweet it And Weep


Context.

UM, YEAH.  You know the big Cable - Network fight up at the CRTC there?

Keep fiddling, boys.

Your Handy CRTC Decoder Ring

MAYBE YOU'RE A masochist.  I don't know.  I mean, I know why I am keeping an eye on the current CRTC hearings.  They directly affect my livelihood. But now that Canadians have been bombarded with five months of misleading advertisements from both "sides" in the Fee-for-carriage (wait, this just in, new jargon...now it's "Value for Signal." Oh MY GOD that fixes EVERYTHING!!!!) debate, maybe there might be some civilians who tune in and take a peek.  And then hit a horrible jargon wall.

In the spirit of that, here is a handy jargon Decoder ring, courtesy of the Writers Guild of Canada. (Thanks David Kinahan!+ Kelly Lynne Ashton from the WGC!)

WGC’s Magic Policy Hearing Decoder Ring:

The following concepts and acronyms are being thrown around with abandon. Here are a few ‘plain english’ explanations. We’ll try not to define acronyms with acronyms.

FFC – Fee for carriage. Over the air broadcasters want to be paid by the cable and satellite companies for carrying their signal. Cable and satellite have never paid for over the air, only specialty and pay services.

VFS – Value for Signal. This is a new term for fee for carriage artificially imposed by the CRTC.

NVS – Negotiated Value for Signal – what CTV calls fee for carriage.

OTA – Over the air television, also known as conventional television. CTV, Global, CBC and others.

BDU – broadcast distribution undertaking. This is the Broadcasting Act definition of cable and satellite operators

DTH – Direct to home satellite.

VOD – Video on Demand

CMF – Canada Media Fund. Used almost interchangeably with predecessor 

CTF (Canadian Television Fund -- soon to be CMF - Canada Media Fund)

LPIF – Local Programming Improvement Fund. This fund, which started September 1, 2009, was created by the CRTC as a way of helping local programming for smaller markets (ie not markets with population over 1 million). It is funded by 1.5% of revenues to be paid by cable and satellite operators. This contribution has been passed on to consumers by the cable and satellite operators.

CPE – Canadian Programming Expenditure. Currently only specialty services have a CPE. At licence renewal they have a condition of licence that sets their CPE for the licence term based on their profitability (higher profits mean higher CPE) though the calculation is based on revenue (ie 30% of revenue). CPE is generally an expenditure requirement to be spent on all Canadian content rather than specific genres such as drama or docs. 

Simultaneous Substitution – also known as Simulcast. This is the practice of Canadian conventional broadcasters being allowed to substitute Canadian ads (sold by them) in the broadcast signals of US programs aired by the Canadian broadcaster at the same time as the US broadcasts that program. So you see the US ads on NBC but the Canadian ads if you watch on CTV. This locks Canadian broadcasters into the US schedules but allows them to keep Canadian audiences watching the Canadian broadcaster.

Non-simultaneous Substitution – this means that the Canadian broadcaster would be able to insert the Canadian ads into programs broadcast at a different time than the US broadcast. There are technical and commercial problems with this. It is frequently raised but there seem to be too many difficulties.

Non-simultaneous Deletion – this is another way of saying protected program rights. If CTV has Desperate Housewives then the cable companies would have to delete the broadcast of ABC so there would be no broadcast of Desperate Housewives in Canada except on CTV. 

Digital Transition – Analog signals are to be shut of August 31, 2011. Broadcasters have known this for a long time, it’s been postponed but they are dragging their feet building digital transmitters. They are also not willing to build enough transmitters to cover 100% of Canadians. About 10% to 20% of the population will not be covered and will lose access to television. There is also the problem of requiring Canadians to get cable or satellite in order to get television without over the air signals. There’s been a call for the government to help with that transition either by subsidizing the cost of transmitters or helping rural and/or poor Canadians with satellite dishes and/or set top boxes.

Priority Programming – in 1999 the policy was changed from direct support of drama and docs to exhibition requirements for priority programming in prime time. Priority programming is drama, docs, variety, entertainment magazine shows and regional programming of any kind except news and sports. 



C'mon. Aren't you glad you asked?


The next fight -- watch this CPE thing.  Remember that even if they do get spending and exhibition requirements (the only thing that's worked in the past to get CDN broadcasters to actually invest and show drama and comedy shows, that right now based on the 1999 ruling, they could easily spend it on more crappy ET Canada ripoff shows...cheapo magazine crap. "this week on Entertainment Tonight Canada -- Jean Claude Van Damme, Kate Gosselin and Ivanka Trump... cause as we all know, we all really need that essential Canadian spin on Ivanka Trump.)


Seriously, Aren't you glad you asked?

Bane & Cable

WHILE WE'RE AT it, don't forget about the helpful video from the WGC giving the real context to this current CRTC cheese & whine...


Cra$h & Burn premieres Tomorrow

BIG CANADIAN TV premiere of the week is Cra$h & Burn on Showcase. (Wow...Crash & Burn. What a great title for a show... Wonder how they came up with that? Anyway...)

Malcolm MacRury (the rich ZOS, Deadwood) is the Creator for this series about an insurance adjuster with deep dark secrets.  Diane over at Tv,Eh? had a roundup of some pre-press articles.

Next part is courtesy Jill Golick:


Malcolm was a guest at a recent Writers Watching TV screening in Toronto and he talked at length about the genesis of the series and the writing process that drives it.
The entire discussion was recorded and is now available as the second in the Writers Talking TV podcast series.  Download it from theWGC site or iTunes.  Or just click here and listen now.
Crash & Burn premieres on Showcase Wed Nov 18 at 9pm

Reprint: Critical Regulatory Tipping Catastrophe

While the latest Farce at the CRTC continues, here's a little piece of the REAL context of "Save Local TV"...Originally published August 21, 2009. If you're fed up with the CRTC's inaction on behalf of people, rather than corporations, take note. 


ONE OF THE big arguments of history is what drives human history more -- great events or great people. It's a fascinating argument. But an equally interesting little eddy is how critical mass is achieved for an idea. When Malcolm Gladwell wrote The Tipping Point, he sort of put into words something that most of us sensed, or knew from our own lives. We're taught that things change slowly. But they don't. Not really. Things kind of tend to stay the same, and then something happens and suddenly there's a critical mass and whooosh, change happens faster than you could possibly imagine.

The Soviet Union and communism had been on the ropes for awhile, but when that Wall fell, it was game over. We heard about subprime mortgages in crisis for a long time -- but Bear Sterns went down, and suddenly the whole financial system quickly imploded and we plunged into recession. The British Colonists had been grumbling and complaining for years, but when Great Britain passed the Intolerable Acts, the tea went into Boston Harbour and British North America began to unravel.

Canadians are a largely complacent people. A little smug, and not prone to rash displays. There might be some people who get a little bent out of shape about subjects like media concentration and taxation levels, but very few people are actually moved enough to do something about it.

So we have the situation we have today. Cell phone service in this country is some of the most expensive and least robust of anywhere in the industrialized world. On Text messages, the industry markup is 4900 percent. Cable and satellite services for most people have gone up something like 30% since the sector was largely deregulated a few years ago. The big three or four companies control most of the pipe money -- delivering tv and internet to the majority of the country. They've made record profits over the last few years, $2 billion last year -- off you and me, while enjoying robust regulatory protection.

On the broadcast side, well, if you've read this blog before, you know the drift of that. They've done more to spend money on U.S. programming, while consolidating, and cutting local TV coverage to the bone. My part of the industry has suffered a lot. And the broadcasters spent huge amounts of money gobbling each other up, and made, again, hand over fist profits, until they latest downturn where they decided the sky was falling -- and brazenly turned around and said that the active strategy of consolidation that they'd been pursuing for years, wasn't the reason that local TV had become so anemic. Nope, apparently everything was fine until Bear Stearns went into the tank, and GM pulled the plug on advertising.

We've been treated (okay, I concede, it wasn't much of a treat, and you probably weren't paying attention anyway) to an ugly squabble for the last couple of years between the cablers and the broadcasters. It's over money, as everything is. The broadcasters want to get paid for their valuable signals that duplicate what you already get on the U.S. networks, and the Cablers say they shouldn't have to do anything to support the system, and if they're made to pay into a fund that saves local tv or promotes Canadian creative drama, or buys pony rides for sick kids, well, that's a tax and they're just going to pass it on to you and me -- like they've passed on those massive increases over the last few years, for substandard service.

Oh there's other neato stuff around the rims, too....like the fact that they want to be able to shape internet traffic -- so they'll sell you on blazing hot speeds and then cut off the faucet when you try to get what you paid for. They also want to set rates that favour their businesses -- specifically, usage-based rates for internet pipe that makes it very difficult for the 20% of the market that isn't one of those big five Telecommunications behemoths to try and offer better service to Canadians.

In any case, with all those regs in place that mean you can't seek out a real competitor, (I mean, wow, I can choose between Rogers and Bell? Lucky me. Now, for my next choice, I get to choose between death by hanging or drowning, right?) aren't we all lucky that we have somebody watching out for us?

Who am I talking about? The CRTC, of course.

Except, of course, they don't. They never have. The CRTC doesn't work for you and me. They're a bureaucratic organization that's basically bought and paid for by the industries they regulate.

Little brushfires over things like net neutrality might have started the ball rolling, but a few recent, very tin-eared decisions and processes have stripped the veneer away from the game. First, there was that wonderful case in the last broadcaster hearings where they went behind closed doors and then erased the redacted transcripts of what was said. Then there was the screw up of the Do Not Call list, and the fact that now the CRTC is going behind closed doors AGAIN, in order to PROTECT the companies that have violated that list.

That's what they do. They protect companies. Not you. And not me.

In classic netgeek fashion, it's the internet decision last week that started an ugly ball rolling. A very slick, quite professional campaign to Dissolve The CRTC. When the light is shone upon the dark recesses of the commission, it's pretty hard to argue against the point that the commissioners are clearly too close to the industries they regulate.

But yesterday, the other crying baby, the broadcasters -- were served up a slice of failure pie that takes that grassroots campaign and elevates it to something else.

In the midst of a horrific local storm, with Tornadoes touching down all over the city, local TV failed in the most profound way possible to inform its citizens. If you ask "what am I paying for?" then based on yesterday, the clear answer is nothing. Nothing at all. As Jim Henshaw put it:



Since the lightning was now crackling the radio so much it was unlistenable and local television was in news hour mode, I went back to the TV to find out what was happening. I learned that the Lockerbie bomber had been released, the Prime Minister was enjoying his trip through the Arctic and Hurricane Bill was threatening Bermuda. Nothing about what was happening right outside my window and less than 30 clicks from where these broadcasts were originating. To be sure, there had been a mention of Durham, where the first Tornado had hit an hour earlier and that there were “suspected” touch downs of funnel clouds in Vaughn and my hometown of Newmarket. But no details. No raw video from a courageous videographer. No field reporters ducking flying cows. In the centralized model of Canadian local TV I’d predictedmonths ago but never thought might ever personally affect me, the two million people who live just beyond the Greater Toronto Area had no television service addressing the imminent threat they all faced. Instead, I was treated to the same pre-packaged news segments, the same smiling meat puppets and the same banal “Sparky, what the heck’s happened to my Blue Jays?” banter.

People who grow up in Toronto are used to the frequent storm crawls and radar
messages that run on the Buffalo stations whenever there's a storm. Our local stations here couldn't even muster that much yesterday -- except in one case, long after the storms had already crested.


Interestingly enough, I have to say that I was out on the road yesterday, listening to my Ipod, and had no idea how really bad the storm was, until I got an email alert on my phone -- from CBC.CA. That's right. The poor, maligned, complained about CBC dropped an alert in my inbox that said Tornadoes in Toronto and spelled out the severity of the storm in dire enough terms that I immediately found a parking garage and waited out the deluge.

Go read Jim Henshaw's justifiably livid accounting of the utter failure of local TV during the storm. Better yet, print it out, mail it to your MP with a big red "WTF?" written across the top. Remember, this is local TV in Toronto, a city of TWO MILLION people -- not Regina or Red Deer or Saint John. Ask yourself if you think Michel Arpin and the merry band of CRTC commissioners are sweating yet?

A big bowl of #fail with sadness sauce. And maybe, if we're very lucky, and people keep the heat on-- a tipping point.



To comment on this story, please click through to the original post.

Monday, November 16, 2009

Running With The Sons

I'M NOT THE first to notice this, but in case you haven't seen it elsewhere, Kurt Sutter from Sons of Anarchy has one of the best descriptions of the job of Showrunning in toto, that I've ever read.

As you read, please note the places where there's room for variation.  Every writing room is run differently.  You can have a staff where the showrunner rewrites all, or one where the communication is good enough that writers can do meaningful second drafts. There are shows where the senior writers aren't rewritten as much because their scripts are closer; I've found shows where the Writer follows their ep through production and becomes sort of the showrunner proxy is a good way to delegate.  But it's not the only way to do it.

If you're partnered with a Director (like Tommy Schlamme on West Wing or Pamela Fryman on How I Met Your Mother) maybe you don't spend as much time in editing.  Or maybe you don't care as much about wardrobe. You can split up duties anyway you want.

Sometimes you have a second that runs the writing room for you.  Sometimes you come in with the whole season figured out in your head and you pitch it to the staff; sometimes it's vague and you let the staff pitch to you.

Sometimes (and I think, ideally) it's your show. Sometimes it's somebody else's and you're there to execute it.  There are lots and lots of variations. But there are two things that I think are common to all the iterations, when a show works:

Communication.  The showrunner sets the tone, and others succeed or fail as well, by how well they can communicate with each other.  Being able to articulate concerns and questions; being able to visualize problems eight weeks out instead of day after tomorrow and come up with workable solutions is key. So is being able to listen when your Producer speaks budget to you, and to come up with ingenious creative fixes without compromising content...Being able to inspire confidence and also to trust that there aren't factions or Producers squabbling behind your back, that in fact, everybody is pulling in the same direction -- the direction that you are setting...all that is what we mean when we talk about the second essential component:

Having a Vision.  It's easy to come up with an idea for a show. Ideas are cheap like borscht.  The tough thing is being able to see that idea through to a finished episode, season, or series. Having the experience to know what is important and what's not, where you can compromise and where you can't, what's essential and what's not.  Remember, you've got forty people running around. Actors think their role is the most important.  Production Designers think their needs are greatest. To propmasters it's about stuff. Wardrobe, Hair, Makeup -- all view the show through their prism.  It's your job to conceive and communicate how they fit into the orchestra that is your show.   That is what vision means. Or should anyway.

Anyhow. Go read Sutter.

blogger templates | Make Money Online