THE FUNNIEST THING around the whole DMCA debate, and the even-worse-than-the-made-in-the-USA version that the Tories are trying to saddle us with here, is that at the margins, even a system as corrupt and intellectually bankrupt as the current doyennes of Hollywood occasionally show that they get it too. That the whole old thing's over. That something else has gotta take its place.
Nowhere is this more true than in the world of the pre-release torrent. For the last couple years, around this time, whoops, heavens to Betsy -- upcoming big TeeVee shows from the fall have had their pilots "leak" online.
Oh man! Quelle Horreur! Break out the lawsuits and the corporate sturm and drang!
Except...uh...it doesn't come. Amidst all the finger shaking over copyright and the evils of bit torrent and corporations suing their customers, here's this one tiny area where they're quiet as churchmice.
Now...why would that be, exactly?
Hmm.
Last year, much of the pre-release goodwill for Pushing Daisies was generated off the strength of its very engaging and impressive Barry Sonnenfeld pilot. Bionic Woman, too, generated some excitement - unfortunately, most of it was for the character played by Katee Sackhoff -- you know, the way more interesting Bionic Woman.
The strike narrative may have overwhelmed these nascent promotional efforts, but yet again this is a phenomenon that has its roots in Cable. Cable was there first -- Season 2 of Weeds, and both Seasons of Dexter and Brotherhood were helped by some pre-release torrenting of their first few episodes.
It's really smart when you think about it. The kind of people out there torrenting are the early adopters -- the technology-friendly junkies who build buzz. The buzz that starts online can make that jump to the mainstream media, and suddenly you have a wedge against all the other shows that are competing for attention.
The only problem is, you have to build in that plausible deniability. You can't admit that, you know, you're the ones who sort of leaked it in the first place.
It's just one more of our delightful little 21st century hypocrisies.
Starting last weekend, the eagle eyed caught the Pilots for the New J.J. Abrahms series FRINGE, and the Anna Paquin-starring HBO adaptation TRUE BLOOD, from Alan Ball (Six Feet Under.) In recent days the trickle of pilots has become, well...a torrent (forgive me.)
Now you can find the Kung Fu Monkey's new show, LEVERAGE, DO NOT DISTURB, starring and directed by Jason Bateman, the American adaptation of LIFE ON MARS, genderbending new fX show PRETTY HANDSOME, and the new Stephen Bochco series RAISING THE BAR. By the time this post goes live, there's liable to be four or five more.
First impressions? FRINGE is slick. The Aussie lead actress is credible and hawt, and Pacey acquits himself well. It's a straight up XFiles for the 21st Century, but man -- don't tell me I'm the only one who's missed that kind of show. I thought the world painted in TRUE BLOOD was utterly fascinating, and I want to spend time there. And Anna Paquin is just....cuuuute. But the storytelling in the pilot itself left me a little cold. I'll have more thoughts on these later.
The easiest way to find these shows is to go to one of the torrent sites like Isohunt, Pirate Bay, Mininova or what have you, and type in "PREAIR" in the search engine.
Normally, I'm against wholesale torrenting because for the moment it eats my lunch. Or, you know, the lunch of the system that still refuses to pay us writers fairl--fuck it I am NOT getting into that again right now....but seeing as, you know, wink wink, they're all SO VERY UPSET that these new shows leaked, I think it's fair game to go check 'em out. Everybody else is.
Oh, but don't say I sent you.
I wouldn't want to get in trouble.
EDIT: If you're the type that's concerned about Spoilers and such and you intend to watch these shows, you shouldn't read the comments. That is all.
#netflixfkdup
46 minutes ago
13 rumbles:
No offense, DMC, but I think True Blood will do what Blood Ties and Moonlight could not...that is, get renewed. Anna Paquin herself made me want to go out and buy those Sookie Stackhouse novels, and the production values were so top notch that nothing distracted from the story. No soft focus, faux noir of Moonlight that killed any sense of realia, nor the overly "Canadian" feel of Blood Ties with the lighting that seems a bit off, and the sound that is just a touch to echoey.
Then there was the show-don't-tell storytelling. Did you notice how Sookie took the silver chain off the vampire, and the complete absence of expository dialogue in which, normally, some asshat would say "You know, them vampires are allergic to silver?" The audience was shown the vampire, immobilized, with his blood being drained, seemingly having been overpowered by the trailer trash. It doesn't make sense, as common vampire lore has them being wee strong beasties, so the viewer just flows with it. And then, when Sookie takes off the chain, it's like "Oh shit, that's why," and no words are needed, and no words are forced down our ears about the matter.
I just hope it doesn't do a Dresden. *Sniff*
Do Not Disturb was not bad, but awkward, and potentially offensive in a less than charming way. Like the DIversity Day episode of the Office, but with the black people ask to take a back seat and pretend to go along with it.
Pretty/Handsome....uh, awkward! Geez louise, but I sure did fell off the boat right about the time Joseph Fiennes dropped trou for the big pink reveal. How will I ever watch Shakespeare in Love again? Then again, if what's said about ol' Will is true, then maybe it won't be such a stretch.
I love those PREAIRs, because they shave weeks of wasted investment off my viewing schedule by helping me select the good from the bad. It's how I came to love Chuck, Life, and Eli Stone.
Here's a thought...slightly off topic....but since CBC is a "public broadcaster" then why in the hell can't I get each and every show as a torrent? Are we really expected to pay $300 for a cassette of the Beachcombers? Ain't that just double taxation? Shouldn't that stuff all be in the public domain?
Imagine if they could have counted the torrent traffic for Intelligence into their viewership? Methinks the cancellation might have been rethought, no?
Couple points:
I agreed with you about the silver, right up til the point where they did actually explain it in dialogue.
(there was a line about werewolves and silver, and not knowing it was true about vampires, too. That's a more artful explanation than some but you can't say it wasn't explained.)
I didn't find anything particularly top notch about True Blood. It's down the middle stuff all the way, and for all its gothic trappings, not nearly as daring a pilot as, say, Six Feet Under or even The Sopranos.
I don't follow your logic either about Intelligence or CBC shows. CBC does not make the shows. They license the shows. The shows are made by independent production companies. CBC either through your tax dollars or no, does not foot the whole bill. And your tax bite for all CBC comes to about 100 bucks a year.
I don't think that entitles you automatically to box sets of the 25 hours a week or so of original programming on the channel.
But hey, your mileage may vary.
Just don't tell the Britons. They pay a whole lot more for BBC, and still have to cough up money for box sets...
I liked Fringe a lot, for all the same reasons mentioned in your post. I didn't think I'd like it, but it got me hooked about 2/3 of the way through.
True Blood was good -- what's not to like about Anna Paquin in a tight t-shirt and short shorts? -- but I thought there was way too much "gazing dazedly at the vampire as if she'd just had a good long toke" going on. Could go either way for me, depending what they do with it.
The only other one I'm planning to check out is Leverage. I read the summaries of the others and they're not my cuppa.
Also, torrentz.com is good. It maintains an index of the big torrent sites, and searches very fast. And despite the fact that it has a tag cloud (sigh), I still recommend it.
Finally, searching for 'preair' seems to work better than 'pre release'...
Yeah, I did call it preair in the directions in that same post, but bolded pre-release up top. Did an edit to make that more clear.
So that's what a smack down feels like.
Stings.
Guess I didn't hear that dialogue. I don't recollect. I mostly remember seeing Sookie remove the chain, watch the burn heal, gasp, and then move on.
As for the CBC...my point has to do with CBC's role as a producer and recorder of Canadian culture. I get your point about Intelligence being produced by an independent company, but what about a show like Ideas on Radio 1? I remember wanting to re-listen to an episode or two, and learning that I'd have to pay a massive chunk of money for the privilege.
Then and now, this struck me as wrong, somehow. The BBC is giving damn near everything away for free online. The New York Times is allowing access to all its content, going back to the 1800's, for free. The Atlantic Monthly does the same. Newspapers, Magzines, and broadcasters have been moving towards this model. The CBC has made limited steps in this direction with their podcasts, but it's not enough. I do subscribe to a ton of CBC podcasts, but they are simply recaps or selections of content, not the things themselves.
I can go into the NFB and watch view a massive selection of films for free. I actually used to go downtown to the NFB, where a friend worked, and while away free hours doing this. Why can I watch these films for free, yet shows funded or produced by the CBC are sacrosanct?
With the CBC, it's all locked in a vault. I'm not talking about just television, but radio dramas, interviews, speeches, round tables, and more.
In the face of an overwhelming tide of American culture, would it not make sense for the public broadcaster to protect Canadian culture by giving Canadians access to CBC produced content in the most technologically efficient manner possible?
I have wanted to see Canada: A People's History, but could never afford the box set, and was never available to record or view the episode when they were broadcast.
You know, I want to be able to show my kids Wayne and Schuster. My Grandma and I used to watch them for free, over the air, on a black and white television. But right now, outside of whipping out a wad of cash for a hard to find box set, I can't.
The BBC not long ago found that old episodes of Doctor Who had value, but alas, they were lost or destroyed. Fans around the world have been compiling rough animations of each episode, and posting them online.
There is a desire out there to preserve these cultural artifacts. But unlike books, which have commonly been preserved in libraries, our televised and filmic texts are often left to rot in obscurity, soon to be forgotten.
Denis, do you honstly believe that the CBC, like CTV, should be in the business of leveraging long term revenue streams from their cultural products? To the point of making these products proprietary to the extent that they disappear from the public consciousness from lack of exposure?
If NBC can figure out a way to monetize free TV via HULU, could the CBC not find a way to do the same, in a manner that would satisfy the independent producers?
How many people downloaded Intelligence, who could not watch it in Canada? What if those people could have watched it all online, or downloaded episodes, brought to you, or sponsored by, Company A?
Magazines, and literary festivals are funded this way in Canada, especially those that operate with Canada Council grants. It's the nature of a public/private partnership. Why can't the same model be used for television or radio?
This commie ain't talkin' about taking money out of your pocket, and subverting the WGC money stream (notice I dod not use the word 'torrent' or 'waterfall'). The financial end can be satisfied by an appropriate business model. I'm talking about losing the stories and moments that defined generations of Canadians for most of this country's history.
I'm just sayin.
Christ, James, you're mixing about nineteen things in there. This whole thing's about to go off into ranty cloudcuckooland.
Bring it back to earth, will you?
Here's what you originally wrote:
since CBC is a "public broadcaster" then why in the hell can't I get each and every show as a torrent? Are we really expected to pay $300 for a cassette of the Beachcombers? Ain't that just double taxation? Shouldn't that stuff all be in the public domain?
You were talking about TV shows. Thus I answered your question. No, it shouldn't be in the public domain. Because it's not fully paid for; it's owned by somebody else, and there's copyright issues at play.
You come back and in short order, now you're on about
-Radio shows on Radio 1
-The New York Times, Magazines
-Podcasts
-Going down to view films at the NFB for free
-Free access to news
-Box sets of CBC shows
So, in short
Radio shows on radio one
CBC is trying to move toward more podcasts. But... what about the use of journalists work, the collective agreements and intellectual property involved in it? who pays for the reuse? Were the contracts written with all that in mind, considering podcasts are, oh, GENEROUSLY, a two year old phenom?
What's the manpower to put those podcasts up? Who pays for the bandwidth?
In fact, CBC, which hasn't had an effective increase in its budget for about two decades, now has to operate not just two radio networks, terrestrial TV and Newsworld -- but now it has to become a podcast publisher? You're asking for quite a bit for that hundred bucks. What gets cut? Oops, someone just bitched about what just got cut. It's not simple.
-Magazines and Newspapers are a different medium. And by the way, both tried the monetized model before they went ad supported. This stuff is still being worked out. The economic model for broadcast TV developed over four decades, and now you're impatient because everything's not all worked out in a country the tenth the size of the United States, without a self sustaining marketplace, with tech changing every five minutes? Forgive me, but wahhh.
-The NFB...when you go down to the NFB and watch films, or even take them out, you are essentially going to the library. You are viewing a physical copy -- royalties have been paid for that copy.
That is a very different thing than throwing open the gates for sixty years of content with contracts that never saw future uses.
I'm sorry that copyright and intellectual property issues are thorny. But they are. You not recognizing the essential difference between the things you're talking about does not make those issues go away.
As for Podcasts, I know guys who desperately want to make dramas and stuff available, but again -- what is the re-use fee? You negotiate the contracts. Call ACTRA, the WGC, the CBC, SOCAN, CRIA, the CEP or any other union involved. Come on. Make the call! Why isn't it fixed yet!
Where is it!
I'm waiting!
C'mon! Now!
How can you honestly compare the CBC with NBC, part of NBC UNIVERSAL, one of the largest entertainment media conglomerates on earth? Are you nuts?
As for the Box set of Canada a People's History, I for the life of me don't understand why you just don't go to the library. They still exist you know. They have that set. IF they don't, why not ask them to get it?
Or go to a video store, and pay 4 bucks instead of 300?
I'm sorry if I seem cranky here -- but I just spent about six hours in a room discussing the shape of regulatory policy, and industrial relations, and all that stuff and how it proceeds from here.
You've said a bunch of stuff that NO ONE can disagree with. Everything you put in there is lofty, and great, and yup, it's the goal, and I'm dead sure that everybody in these organizations agree with you that this is a good idea.
But James, so is a car that runs on water.
As you loaded your buckshot and scattered the "here's what I think about things," the truth is that you really haven't thought it through very far at all.
You honestly believe that the reason none of this stuff has happened yet is because nobody's thought of it but you?
Geez Louise, guy!
You're right Denis. I, like, thought I was totally sui generis on this issue, the alpha and omega of this line of argumentation. And you're also right that I could go down to the library and get a DVD, but it'd be in Arabic, and most probably about the life of Mohammed, because I live in Dubai. Which, you know, makes the commute a bit of a chore.
Thanks for straightening me out.
The thing is, I am not overlooking the IP issues at all, but my post was long enough without going into what you have so ably gone into detail about before. I'm suggesting that there is a definite economic argument that can be made for repurposing content.
Tell me, just how will third parties, who hold copyright over content that is "not fully paid for" suffer if a way is found to generate revenue streams for content long ago shoved into a dark room and forgotten?
I am essentially making a long tail argument, the same one that Netflix, and Zip.ca have been able to use to their benefit, and the same one that companies in all different media have also been able to take advantage of. Maybe I should separate different media, but I don't because they all, be they print, television, film, or radio, are all content of one form or another.
You know as well as anyone that there is a lot of young talent at the CBC, but that there is also a lot of deadwood floating around at the top. The technology in use today for recording, delivering, and archiving content is exponentially cheaper than what was available even ten years ago. The speed and ease of production has likewise improved. Podcasting has been around for a lot longer than two years. I was downloading and listening to podcasts five years ago, and I was late getting into the action. Five years back, when I was working at a community radio station, with zero budget whatsoever, I and a few colleagues were able to put up hundreds of hours of content online, and it wasn't that difficult then, and sure as heck ain't now. Like it or not, we are no longer in an age where ten years to look at something and implement it is SOP. ITunes became the world's largest music retailer. How long did that take? Amazon.com became the world's largest bookseller. How long did that take? The BBC became the world's largest online broadcaster. How long did that take? Joost, not even out of beta, is set to become the world's largest television content delivery system when it launches. Joost was just an idea in 2006.
Are you getting paid for Star Hunter still? It's on Joost, you know. Free.
I apologize for standing on this here soapbox and shouting through a bullhorn, but a debate requires a rhetorical stance. You and Jamie J are the wise men, who mediate amongst the squabblers like myself, with a moderate tone and a balanced, informed, and nuanced argument. But ping pong don't get played with the ball stuck in the net, it needs to be batted from side to side. And just because I'm standing on one side, it doesn't mean I’m ignorant of the other side.
Oh, and one more thing, a request, really.
Please get off that "we're a wee little country" horse. If Australia, a country two thirds our size can have a publishing industry twice the size of ours, win ten times the number of international sporting events we have, and has a public broadcaster that has archived over 16,000 hours of content for download purchase or rent for a very modest fee, all while supporting two television divisions, eight radio networks, and an established online presence, I am sure that Canada can at least play in the same ball park. Just look at what you yourself, just you Denis, have accomplished in just the past couple of years. From being a guy people say "who? wha?" about, to an award winning TV writer on one of Canada's biggest hit shows, elected to the WGC executive, and a widely read and respected authority on both the television industry and the craft of television writing.
How long did that take?
Anyways, nuf' said about the CBC.
I'm digging the new Life on Mars. I think Jason O'Meara makes a better Sam Tyler, but Colm Meaney ain't no Philip Glenister. I think Gene Hunt, like Al Swearingen, Tony Soprano, Heathcliff Huxtable, and Archie Bunker, is just one of those iconic characters played to such perfection that they will forever be associated with the actor who owned the role.
Also, IMDB reports that "Life On Mars Pilot Has Life On Pirate Websites."
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0787490/
"In fact, CBC, which hasn't had an effective increase in its budget for about two decades, now has to operate not just two radio networks, terrestrial TV and Newsworld -- but now it has to become a podcast publisher?"
It simply cannot afford do all those things. As it stands, because of its comparative lack of resources it is doing most of its work poorly. The Govt. rejected the report out of Heritage that faced some of these issues. The status quo is not an option. Either the CBC gets a massive infusion of dough from Govt. (they wouldn't during a decade of surpluses so they won't likely during an economic downturn) or the operation is significantly reduced in scope. I see a couple of radio services and a couple of digital cable services in the future. I'd like to hear how the tv network can continue.
James every single example you cite, from community radio to Itunes to, well, me, has one thing in common:
They started with nothing and started in the new age.
It's far easier to build your platform in the new age and do things to respond to it, than it is to turn around a huge entity. The secret to your analogy is netflix. Damn, they came on fast. And look at poor Blockbuster, trying to respond, while at the same time having all them brick and mortar stores.
The problem with a place like CBC is that it's got fifty years of being forced to maintain bad tech behind it. Do you have any idea what maintaining a terrestrial broadcast system of towers is in a country the size of Canada right now, for instance? So maybe they should get rid of that, right? But they can't. Broadcasting Act. CBC is hemmed by tons of stuff like this.
Big media corps like NBC Uni can throw God money to change. Undercapitalized companies simply take longer. IF they can even do it. That's just economics.
The problem with throwing up the "big change now" argument is that you're making a very simple sweeping argument about things that just aren't simple. And that mix about ten different challenges in there.
If you never had a structure before, you can get in there faster. But if you never had a structure, you also never had a brand. How do the brands meet the new reality? Well, that's the rub isn't it?
And it's not all "little guy yay!" either. My favorite Radio station is KCRW Los Angeles. I try to listen to them every day over the net.
But as much as people like me has increased the audience, it also means more bandwidth, royalty payments, etc, etc -- none of that budgeted for. So they're always on a knife edge trying to get enough donations so that their huge success doesn't bury them.
Taint simple hombre. That's all.
Now the most interesting thing you say is about Australia. But I throw it back at you. I agree with you 100 percent about Australia. Give me 200 words -- researched, about just HOW Australia manages these things while Canada has trouble doing the same...and I'll put it up top as a guest post.
I think I know the reason why -- but I want to see what you come up with.
But it can't just be, you know, Granpa Simpson stuff. Fact it out. But you're very much on to something there.
My guess as to the reason why? While the ABC and CBC have almost the same budget, the CBC has to run two services, a French and an English?
Post a Comment