BEST OF MUSEA E-MAIL CLUB MESSAGES
(7 - 06 to 6 - 07)

DEAR READER, Peruse through the list and see if you can find something interesting from the Musea World of arts and media.
Best wishes, - Tom Hendricks

#345 Bluwer-Lytton - Ten Winners

Dear Readers,
A regular reader of Musea, Melanie, sent me this list of the ten Winners of the Dark and Stormy Night, bad writing contest - and I couldn't resist resending it to you.

It is named after Bulwer-Lytton who started one of his novels with the line, "It was a dark and stormy night." The list is from the English Dept. of San Jose State U. Enjoy.

This year's 10 winners of the Bulwer-Lytton contest, wherein one writes only the first line of a bad novel:

10) "As a scientist, Throckmorton knew that if he were ever to break wind in the echo chamber, he would never hear the end of it."

9) "Just beyond the Narrows, the river widens."

8) "With a curvaceous figure that Venus would have envied, a tanned, unblemished oval face framed with lustrous thick brown hair, deep azure-blue eyes fringed with long black lashes, perfect teeth that vied for competition, and a small straight nose, Marilee had a beauty that defied description."

7) "Andre, a simple peasant, had only one thing on his mind as he crept along the East wall: 'Andre creep... Andre creep... Andre creep.'"

6) "Stanislaus Smedley, a man always on the cutting edge of narcissism, was about to give his body and soul to a back alley sex-change surgeon to become the woman he loved."

5) "Although Sarah had an abnormal fear of mice, it did not keep her from eeking out a living at a local pet store."

4) "Stanley looked quite bored and somewhat detached, but then penguins often do."

3) "Like an over-ripe beefsteak tomato rimmed with cottage cheese, the corpulent remains of Santa Claus lay dead on the hotel floor."

2) "Mike Hardware was the kind of private eye who didn't know the meaning of the word 'fear'; a man who could laugh in the face of danger and spit in the eye of death -- in short, a moron with suicidal tendencies."

AND THE WINNER IS...

1) "The sun oozed over the horizon, shoved aside darkness, crept along the greensward, and, with sickly fingers, pushed through the castle window, revealing the pillaged princess, hand at throat, crown asunder, gaping in frenzied horror at the sated, sodden amphibian lying beside her, disbelieving the magnitude of the frog's deception, screaming madly, 'You lied!"

#346 Musea Challenges Jeroem Weeks of DMN

Jerome Weeks, who seems to do most of the book page commentary for the Dallas Morning News, did a column, "Why are our airwaves silent on literature and culture?"

I e-mailed him a challenge asking why he and the Dallas Morning News were silent on zines - the literature of this generation.

He wrote back:
"Not only have I written about zines, I've written about you. But my point was about paying careers in long-feature journalism."

I was frankly startled and ask him to follow that with a reference. He sent this. There are indeed two references to Musea , a listing at the top and a short paragraph toward the end - but no other zine references that I could find in the article.

I note that he seemed to like these indie publications, but why then was there no regular coverage of them over the years? Also note the article was very old. IMO this does not cover zines. And barely introduces names of other statewide publications.

Here is his response
in full. You be the judge.

February 9, 1999

The good word about Dallas-area literary journals
Byline: Jerome Weeks
Credit: Staff Critic of The Dallas Morning News

Amazing - but true! The Dallas-Fort Worth area has more bookstores than San Francisco.

It also hosts more than a half-dozen literary journals - from the high-toned to the scrappy and hot-headed. The prestigious quarterly Southwest Review has been published in Dallas for 84 years, while anarchic, one-person 'zines such as Musea have popped up. There's even a new statewide publication, !Tex!, that started with a bang. An initial run of 153,000 copies in December gave !Tex! the widest circulation of any literary journal in the region.

Texas, of course, has a history of major writers, from Katherine Anne Porter through Cormac McCarthy. Still, literary journals in Dallas must seem out of place to anyone who believes the area's TV image of football and skyscrapers.

"We do get a kind of "Holy heck! What is this?' response from some people," says Neal Easterbrook, editor of Descant, Texas Christian University's 39-year-old fiction-and-poetry outlet. "On campus, people tend to be either very respectful of what we do, the tradition of work here, or they're ignorant even of the journal's existence."

Despite the low fees they pay writers and their limited readership - print runs of only 1,000 copies are common - literary journals wield an outsize influence.

Says Willard Spiegelman, editor-in-chief of Southwest Review at Southern Methodist University: "The importance of the small magazine in America has always been in inverse proportion to its circulation. There are always certain new writers, eager to break in, and the magazines give them a leg up."

Think of such nonprofit magazines as the regional theaters of publishing, drawing spare but supportive crowds and giving artists a chance to polish their skills - before they go off to Hollywood. Larry McMurtry didn't start out with Pulitzer Prize-winning novels and TV miniseries. The Southwest Review published his first story even before his debut novel, Horseman, Pass By, came out in 1961.

Small-press periodicals are also outlets for literary styles and sociopolitical ideas that profit-oriented mainstream media see as too obscure, too brainy, too downbeat, too explicit or too radical.

Common Knowledge, for example,is aimed at "the sort of person who reads the New York Review of Books and TLS [the Times Literary Supplement of London] back to back," says the magazine's co--founder, Robert Nelsen. The magazine carries easily the most distinguished editorial board in the area, including such "name" intellectuals as Susan Sontag, modernist critic Hugh Kenner and Nobel Prize-winning poet Czeslaw Milosz.

Dr. Nelsen developed Common Knowledge nine years ago with Jeffrey M. Perl, his fellow University of Texas at Dallas literature professor. Although the journal prints poetry and fiction (of "an experimental bent," Dr. Nelsen says), its primary voice is in "meta-theoretical essays." But among these are also reports on Bosnia or Islam and democracy. And that mix of fiction, literary theory and skeptical liberal politics is intended to help "end the battles among the disciplines on campus," Dr. Nelsen says.

For its part, the Southwest Review prints such Lone Star authors as essayist Don Graham (Giant Country) and novelist Rolando Hinojosa--Smith (Ask a Policeman). But Dr. Spiegelman says he avoids "cowboys and Indians," meaning typical Texas fare about land and cattle.

"Too often, the appeal to regionalism is a disguise for the third-rate," he says. The region, he believes, is better served by printing quality fiction from Joyce Carol Oates or Reynolds Price as well as newcomers. As a result, the Review is regularly ranked among such illustrious and better-funded journals as the Paris Review.

It's also probably better known, Dr. Spiegelman notes with a drop of resignation and resentment, in New York than in Dallas. Distribution woes

That's not necessarily due to rampant local yokelism, however. Most small-press journals in America suffer from serious distribution headaches. Dallas-Fort Worth may have more bookstores than San Francisco, but it's hard for local periodicals to get into them.

"Most chain stores won't accept any issues on consignment from an individual," says Joel Weinstein, publisher of Mississippi Mud. "It all has to be approved in New York."

To make matters worse, the Austin--based distributor Fine Print, which had meteoric success placing journals with national chains in the early '90s, went bankrupt in 1997. Small presses have shifted their business to four or five other networks, Mr. Weinstein says.

"But those distributors are all regional," he notes, "and they're mostly geared toward independent bookstores, not the chains."

Having published Mississippi Mud for 25 years - its name whimsically plucked from a Tin Pan Alley song - Mr. Weinstein moved from Portland, Ore., to Dallas last year with his wife, a curatorial assistant at the Dallas Museum of Art. He's now trying to find area advertisers for his next issue.

Fortunately for Mud, it has more than literary appeal. The glossy annual is stunningly designed, making it as much an artistic artifact as a literary product, Mr. Weinstein says. So it sells outside the bookstore market - in venues such as the Dallas Museum of Art and the McKinney Avenue Contemporary.

A very different solution to the problems of money and distribution is to keep a journal cheap and quick.

Musea, Tom Hendricks' 7-year-old 'zine, grew out of his frustrations as a musician. He saw the recording industry - indeed, much of American pop culture - controlled by a handful of giant conglomerates. So he set out to create an independent voice in print.

He photocopies several hundred copies each month of his own work and the writings of like-minded authors. He distributes these at the McKinney Avenue Contemporary and the same Deep Ellum--Exposition Park retailers that stock other area journals, such as the monthly arts calendar The Word.

Asked to describe the material Musea prints, other than poems or essays, Mr. Hendricks says simply, "Rants. That's a good word." He is proud of the fact that, as each issue (and his Web site, musea. digitalchainsaw.com) proclaims, he produces it with "No Advertising. No Government Grants. No Sponsors."

He does this by keeping costs down to $100 a month. "I figure I'll always be able to afford that," Mr. Hendricks says. "So I can keep this up forever."

Computer link

Perhaps the most novel solution to the distribution bottleneck, however, is being developed for !Tex! A product of the Writers' Garret, the local literary service established by Thea Temple in 1994, !Tex! was started with a $50,000 grant from the Today Foundation, a conservative think tank involved in education and printing suburban newspapers such as Cedar Hill Today.

Intended to promote Texas literature, !Tex! is designed as a tabloid supplement to be slipped into newspapers and used by schools.

Potentially, the most ingenious aspect of !Tex! is its distribution through computer disk. That way, Ms. Temple says, any newspaper can pick it up, insert its own advertisements to pay for the supplement and then print it.

The National Endowment for the Arts, once a major force in small-press journals, has almost disappeared from the scene. Yet the agency gave the Garret $20,000 in November to develop !Tex!

Using computerization to buck the marginalization of literature, turning a narrow audience into a populist one: If it works, !Tex! could add new dimensions to the world of small-press journals.

"We believe literature is living," says Ms. Temple. "It's not just something that's archived. It's an expression of who we are as a people. So why not put it in the hands of the people? As many people as we can?" Jerome Weeks
Book columnist
The Dallas Morning News

#348 Best Online Site for the Revolution in literature

Readers who are also writers need back up. And no site fills you in on the trials that new writers will face than the MONDAY REPORT, a weekly column open to just about all commentors, on the ULA website:
http://literaryrevolution.com.

Note the vast range and scope of the writers that contribute here. They come from all over the country and from all types of backgrounds. If there is anything in common, it is there support for quality and their hatred for the consolidated mainstream publishing mess we have now.

I encourage you to join me in being a regular reader (and occassional contributor) to this weekly internet literary column. IMO its the best that 's out there.

#349 Last E-mail From Science Writer David Darling

Today I got the last e-mail newsletter from the science writer David Darling (regular readers will remember him as the one who posted my UV science paper on his site.) It is an eloquent appeal for our environment, our world, and our home. Here it is:

Issue #40

August 9, 2006
e-mail: daviddarling@daviddarling.info
website: http://www.daviddarling.info

Dear Friends,

This will be the last newsletter I'll be sending out. The increasing number of people using my website, and especially the two encyclopedias it supports - The Encyclopedia of Astrobiology, Astronomy, and Spaceflight and The Encyclopedia of Alternative Energy and Sustainable Living - mean that I have my work cut out just maintaining and updating these resources. I'm especially committed to making available, in easily digestible form, more information on how we can live in greater harmony with the Earth, through conservation and sustainability.

It's a cliche to say that we living in changing times. In fact, we live in planet-changing times. There's no longer room for doubt that Homo sapiens - we self-styled "wise men" - are radically altering our environment and threatening the global life-support system on which we and other species depend. We are, all the signs suggest, into the last century of what might be called "business as usual." By 2100 many of our fellow species will be extinct, following in the recent path of the northern black rhino. Global warming and concomittant sea-level rises will be undeniable even to those whose positions and careers have been bankrolled by the oil industry. While we continue to bomb each other and indulge in the futile, age-old occupation of tribalism, the terrestrial ecosystem is being ravaged, the future of our children's children obliterated. At a time when we most need a united-planet vision, we seem to be fragmenting ever further on nationalistic, sectarian, political, and religious grounds.

I'm not by nature a pessimist. I happen to believe that humans are a part of, rather than apart from, the Gaian ecosystem. But I've felt the need for some time now to put more effort into doing what I can to help support the green movement. The best way I can do this, I believe, is to devote my time to enhancing the information I provide on my website on our place in the cosmos, the precious nature of all life, and practical ways to achieve a sustainable future.

I wish you and yours all the best and hope that you'll bookmark my site or any aspects of it that you find useful.

Front page: http://www.daviddarling.info

Encyclopedia of Astrobiology, Astronomy, and Spaceflight: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/ETEmain.html

Encyclopedia of Alternative Energy and Sustainable Living: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/AEmain.html

Peace,
David Darling

#352 Zinewiki and the Zine Hall of Fame

Readers,
I have mentioned zinewiki before - its the online encyclopedia of zines that is open to all to add their info. Since its start in June it has grown to 500 articles on zines and zinesters.

This week I finished adding all the Musea Zine Hall of Fame inductees. One of the two founders, Alan Lastufka, has graciously set up two pages for the ZHOF. I encourage you all to check them out.

Go to zinewiki.com , then enter 'MUSEA ZINE HALL OF FAME in the search area. And push 'go'. That will lead you to the info page on the ZHOF. Then if you push - "SEE ALSO" you will see the complete list of all 84 inductees. Or you can go directly (though its not as much fun) to the list through: http://zinewiki.com/index.php?title=Category:Musea_Zine_Hall_of_Fame

A big salute to all these wonderfully talented zinesters - well deserving this and many other accolades for their good work.

#353 Review of "NEXT" 2nd post-bands cd by Hunk and PD

It's very rare for any indie cd - or for that matter any mainstream cd - to get a song by song review. I recently got one and I wanted to pass it on to you. It's by J.D. Finch who does a blog and the zine , The Whirligig. You can see the original at: http://thewhirligig.blogspot.com/2006/08/musical-notes-from-underground-while.html Thanks JD.

Musical Notes From Underground

While the zine incarnation of The Whirligig is dedicated to fiction and poetry, here at the blog there is no reason why we can't cover anything in the arts and present it in essays, reviews, blurbs or any other form as the mood strikes.

So in that spirit, here is a review of Next, a music CD by Hunkasaurus and His Pet Dog Guitar (www.hunkasaurus.com) aka Tom Hendricks of long-running zine Musea (www.musea.us), of which Next is a CD version. (TH = a composition by Tom.)

Songs 1-3 (Anytime at All, For Pete's Sake and How Do You Do It) Homages to a watershed period in pop music, the British Invasion of the early 60's. Tom does this stuff well.

Song 4 (Fully Automated TH) Nice short interlude instrumental. Somehow reminded me of Pink Floyd's "Interstellar Overdrive".

Song 5 (Not Fade Away) I would have preferred a bit more grit in the performance, but there's a nice twist in his "come-on/come-on" as the guitar seems to make a move of its own -- with a mind of its own.

Song 6 (Lovin' You) A Presley chestnut that didn't do too much for me here.

Song 7 (That Means A Lot) Tom has a good feel for Beatlesesque pop and as this was written by Lennon/McCartney he's on firm ground. Enjoyable.

Song 8 (Modern Art TH) Bert Jansch type melodic acoustic guitar song.

Song 9 (Secret Agent Man) Cleverly adds the James Bond guitar riff; but what happened to the third verse?

Song 10 (140 MPH TH) Simply a well-crafted pop song. Like the songs from the group America (Ventura Highway, Sister Goldenhair, etc.) that you liked in spite of yourself, it just has something.

Song 11 (I'm Alive TH) Simple in all ways: Lyric, melody and arrangement all serve the purpose of the song. Referencing Thoreau, it makes the most basic statement of existence: I'm alive.

Song 12 (Sleepwalk) With Kazoo!

Song 13 (Windy) Serviceable rendition, but I'm not a fan of the song.

Song 14 (I Will) Interesting/different arrangment of this song from "The White Album". Good double tracked vocal.

Song 15 (Grand Sweep TH) Another good change-up piece that moves things along nicely. If this CD were Sgt. Pepper's this song would be Fixing A Hole.

Song 16 (Shake, Shout, and Go TH) Good boogie based riff. This song is the definition of "catchy" and seems happy to exist just for that.

Song 17 (Harmonics TH) Tom says goodbye with a little acoustic music of the spheres.

#354 Biggest Musea Issue Ever - 30 Pager

Musea Readers,
The new huge 30 page issue of Musea is now available at the regular stops and through the mail. It is an encyclopedia of all things Musea. It summarizes all 150 issues plus most of the other highlights (chapbooks, cd's, even the AACA t-shirts).

There are only about 150 made (one for each issue from the past). So get yours now. Here is the first entry to show you what it's like. PS On the cover is a photo of the Queen of Musea. Worth the price right there!

From Musea #151:

Musea Celebrates the first 150 Issues

Time for a look back and a celebration!!! This is issue #151 of my zine Musea. That means since the first issue was printed in September 1992, I've produced 150 Museas covering most every aspect of the arts and media that I could think of.

This issue looks at some of the highlights - a zine clip show! Also if you wish, you can read it as a 'brief history of a zine' or " the first years of an attempted art revolution'. [And for you collectors out there (like me), see if there are any Museas you missed.]

For browsers, skip to the highlighted sections in between the issues for a shortened version.

Let's start with issue #1. It's a dark and stormy night ....

#1 (Sept.'92). Musea started out as 'MUSE NEWS", a single legal sheet printed on front and back. Highlights of the first issue were "Interview", an interview with editor Art S Revolutionary (me), "State of the Arts', an overview of the arts at that time, and the intro titled "Finally an art Newspaper that hasn't been bought off!" "Finally an art newspaper that can tell the truth without being pressured by any interest groups. We at the Muse News are glad to introduce you to a real alternative to the other media. We accept absolutely positively NO advertising. We will not ask for, or accept any government grants. We will not accept corporate sponsors. The Muse News is for artists and art lovers period!

#355 Zinewiki And Chapbooks

Fellow zinesters. I've added a section on zinewiki for chapbooks - those one of a kind indy publications. Chapbooks are different from zines - zines are long running, chapbooks are a one time publication. By having this chapbook list I think it'll expand the zinewiki listings. I have listed 15 chapbooks from Musea press alone!

Also now we have a place for all these non-zine publications: indy novels, one shot comics (like from Suzanne Bauman and Yul Tolbert), chapbooks from my notable Zine Hall of Famers, chapbooks that I've reviewed in Zine World, and your chapbooks! So if you are a zinester and you've also done chapbooks, I encourage you to go to zinewiki.com and add entries for your chapbooks. And when you do, at the bottom, add this [[category:chapbooks]] and it'll add your titles to the list of other chapbooks.

In in house news - the 30 pager Musea that I've been talking about (the zine clip show, the history of a zine, a history of an attempted art revolution, an encyclopedia of all things Musea, a summary of each of the first 150 issues) is not only out in print version, but posted on our website at musea.us. You miss the photos, but all the text is there. Check it out.

#356 Poetry Slams

Another of the many aspect of present day culture (zines, mail art, etc.) that never gets fair media attention is poetry slams. I got the following article from a reader who got it from someone,etc. So I don't know the original source, but its worth reading if you are not familiar with this aspect of art that mixes performance and poetry.

WHAT IS A SLAM?
"Slam, the stepchild of poetry and stand-up comedy, crossed with forensics, oratory, dramatic monologue, and hip-hop, is a sport . In the same sense that American Idol and The Gong Show are sports. It's all about competition, the search for a champion. Slam is the World Wrestling Entertainment of the literary world. For an audience member, it can be electric and thrilling - sort of like a revival meeting at a sports bar. For a poet, it can be crushing, elating, and addictive. Slams offer sheer adrenaline thrills, belly laughs, and all the drama of competition. Someone wins, someone loses, and you're in the middle of it, cheering it on. Once in a while you even hear a poem that rockets to the sublime, that breaks the world into a three-minute block of divinity for you." -San Francisco Bay GUARDIAN

Slams are high energy, take-no-prisoners, clever and crackling spoken word at it's best! No costumes, props, clothing removal or stupid pet tricks. Although stupid human tricks have been witnessed in the past! THERE ARE NO LIMITATIONS ON CONTENT, STYLE, or LANGUAGE! Poetry slams are FREE SPEECH ZONES! It's all about speaking your mind! There is no musical accompaniment. Poets will have 3 minutes with a 10-second grace period to perform their original work. After 3 minutes and 10-seconds we add the notorious time penalty. Judges are picked at random from the audience to assign a numeric value to a poet... So come out and have fun!!!

#357 More Than an Opinion

This quote about reviews of art is from "The Opera Glass" by Iris J. Arnesen. I totally agree with her. And it works on all reviews of all the arts.

"At the moment, our society's mania for building 'self-estem; even in those who have done nothing to merit esteem has worked to convince people that ALL efforts, from the most feeble to the most masterful, are equally worthy of praise. If one criticizes a production these days, he is likely to hear from one who disagrees not a vigorous argument in favor of the merits of the performance, but rather such statements as, "They worked really hard on the show', or 'That's just a matter of opinion', or 'If you know so much, let's see YOU do it!' It is true that not everyone will agree on the merits or flaws of any performance, but despite what self-esteem builders may say, objective standards do exist. I might pay a great deal of money to hear a world-class instrumentalist, but I would flee from a small child pounding on a piano."

In other news:
It looks like Tower Records is closing.
It was probably the record chain that carried the most zines.
We wish all those employees the best in the months ahead.

#358 & #360 Hunkasaurus Photo in the October Modern Luxury Dallas Magazine

Dear Readers,
Well here is something out of left field. (though I've known about it since the photo shoot)

I've got a huge COLOR photo (9 1/2" by 12" on page 134), in the magazine Modern Luxury Dallas, OCT. '06 (the mag looks like an oversized Vogue) website - modernluxury.com.

It's published by an upscale national magazine chain that publishes city versions in each of about 12 major US cities. The photo is part of the lead article "Dallas After Dark".

It shows me playing in the Inwood Box Office and it shows both of the Hunkasaurus cd's too - on the ledge.

The photo is by Dallas free lance photographer, Terri Glanger - glanger.com . I'm very pleased with it. I think she did some wonderful work (with what she had to work with!). This photo could well be a poster. Note how she's framed me within the reflections of the neon on the box office glass. See what you think.

UPDATE:
I recently told you about a photo of me playing in the Inwood Box Office* that was featued in Modern Luxury Dallas Magazine.

For those who would like to see that picture and were unable to get a copy, or for those who would like to see more photos from that photo shoot - here are 2 pages with 28 of them!

Photographer Terri Glanger (glanger.com) has gratiously posted 2 pages of the best photos from that shoot at these two urls: (please note the urls are both case sensitive)

www.glanger.com/clients/ModernLuxury/NightLife/TomHendricks2/ and www.glanger.com/clients/ModernLuxury/NightLife/TomHendricks/

The first group (the url ends in 2) was taken at night and shows off the theater neon best. Of these VJ000431 was the photo used in the magazine. The 2nd group was taken during the day.

I play my box office concerts INSIDE the ticket booth, though we took some pictures out front just for variety. Check them out if you want to see what I've been talking about all these years. (As far as I know I'm the only person doing box office concerts)

Other news - writers now have another outlet for getting reviews of their work. Not only the Musea Review Service but the ULA, Underground Literary Alliance has started doing reviews of writings. for more info see //literaryrevolution.com or //ulabookreview.blogspot.com

#359 War Cost Misspent

Besides the massive lost of life and excess human misery of the war with Iraq, there is the expense. Some say 300 billion, some say 400 billion may be the total cost to the US.

I contend that that money could have eliminated poverty, over time, on any single continent. Let's look at the numbers and use the US as example. And if I got my numbers right - and with numbers this big its easy to miss a zero - I think I can show you how that money could be spent to improve the world, not destroy a part of it.

350 billion or 350,000,000,000 is our starting number. We are taking that amount and putting it into state CBA's or community bank accounts. The money stays in banks, the interest goes to that state to do with whatever it needs to help all its people.

350,000,000,000 divided by the 50 states = 70,000,000,000 per state. We invest that in state banks (where the money can only be loaned out to state companies - which is an added bonus of CBA's) and let's say we get a modest 5% per year. And note with that kind of cash I would think you could get better percentage - money talks! - but let's keep things moderate. 5% per year of 70 billion = 350,000.000 or 350 million. I'm adjusting that to 360,000,000 million just to make it easier for the next math step. We take the (now) 360 million per year interest, and divide it by 12 months. That gives us $30 million dollars per month interest. Let me repeat That gives each state $30 million dollars per month interest - that NEVER stops coming in. Month after month after month after month after....... Whether you like it or not - each month $30 million more dollars to spend - every month - every state - without end - this year, the next year, the year after that, and on and on and on.

That is a LOT of money.

Now for fun, let's take a state - right dab in the middle like Nebraska. Each month NEB. get $30 million. So we start by giving it to the towns. It's January, so Omaha gets $30 million. Feb. -Lincoln gets $30 mill, Mar- Hastings, April .... By the end of the year we've gotten to towns so small you never even heard of them like Burwell, or Kearney, or Red Willow. And that's just the FIRST YEAR. Maybe Nebraska wants to give the cash to a different county each month. OK That'll take maybe 3 years to cover all of them. But in the meantime imagine Arthur County, Nebraska way out in the middle of nowhere USA, getting $30 million dollars! That's a LOT of money. And we've just done 4 years. Remember this money NEVER stops coming in. You can then use it for power plants, clean up water, tourism, yada yada yada, and it NEVER stops coming in. Each month, every month, Nebraska gets $30 more million dollars. Is this gettting through? Don't you see how doing this would pretty quickly eliminate poverty in most average states and make a dent in the highly populated ones?

Now imagine if you put this money into an African CBA. The world could easily afford it, and with many African poor - really poor - this amount would buy even more than it would in Nebraska.

Look at the war - 350 billion, now look at what peace and thoughfulness could do with that money.

It's our gov. We decide.

In other news, I learned that after 37 years of reporting on movies at the Dallas Morning News (and 2 years before that at the Dallas Times Herald) , Philip Wuntch is retiring. As you know I don't LIKE the Dallas Morning News, but I always appreciated its group of long term, skilled reporters like Philip Wuntch. His retirement is a loss to us all. And for me it was one of the few bright spots in the newspaper.

# 361 Hey Observer, It's a New Century, New Art

I hope the progressive political win recently seeps over into the arts and we have an art revolution! It's due. I sent this letter to the Dallas alt , Dallas Observer, but I could just as easily send it to the news, PBS, or any major outlet that covers the arts. Basic message: new century - new art:

Dear Observer,
Hey its a new century! Did anyone mention it to you guys?

How about some coverage of the arts that is not from the last century? There are a lot of progressive changes in the arts - big changes; yet, no one at the Observer seems to know about them.

In the 40's and 50's the media talked about abstract expressionism. Back then they TALKED about new art. In the 50's and 60's the media talked about rock and roll. Back then they TALKED about new art.

But in the new century, the Observer doesn't talk about anything progressive in any art. Not art, music, lit, nothing. And its been 6 years into this century!

Below are some topics happening now*. (and they all have a Dallas component!). Where are you guys? Does your ivory tower have an exit door? Did you all graduate Provincial U. Do you think that just because you live in Dallas you have to be conservative about art too? Does your cutting edge even lean TOWARD this new century?

I don't expect that the Observer will cover anything progressive on a regular basis - but hey how about ONE issue in the entire YEAR of 2007 where you talk about some NEW development in the arts.

All you Dinosaurs and Grannies - give up your column space to something new ONCE in the next 52 weeks of coverage. Is that still too much to ask for?

In MUSIC there's post-bands or anti-band music, the first new music in 40 years. Some pioneering musicians have gotten off the 'band'wagon but PBS is still interviewing bands as if 40 years of that sameness, was cutting edge.

In ART there is a movement against the abuses of Modern art - which hasn't been modern in about 50 years. This culminated in the 2002 conceptual art event in Dallas that suggested an end to modern art and a beginning of a back-to-basics are movement.

In Lit the novel is out and the zine is in - but even that is old hat. Though PBS doesn't talk about the thousands of writers of zines, there already is a Zine Hall of Fame.

There are even new ways to review art ( a Review services that is open to all artists in every field - and everyone gets the same fair chance.).

#362 In Defense of Zinewiki

Zinewiki (zinewiki.com) had an entry on the bigger wikipedia that someone suggested be deleted. The policy of wikipedia is to discuss the validity of any article before deciding whether to keep or delete it. I was told about it and wanted to join those supporting the entry. I wrote the opinion below. For me the bigger issue is the way many treat indie artists as something outside reality - as if only those that are promoted in the mainstream exist. I encourage any readers interested in the debate, to add your opinion to the discussion.

Zinewiki is a reality. It deserves fair recognition in any general encyclopedia on or off line. It has recognized and celebrated the decades of recent zines - a zine explosion of thousands and thousands of independent writers and artists and desktop publishers who are the major source of quality contemporary writing and art. It celebrates a new art form, zines - that combine bookmaking, writing, publishing, and illustration. It is also representative of the world of independent and small publishers outside of the recent media/art consolidation that has occured in the last few decades. If wikipedia celebrates the hack commercial writers of the mainstream publishers - that are overly promoted - then it should cover the gifted writers outside that commercial promotion, and those that celebrate these gifted writers like Zinewiki does. The world of writers it covers is real. It's work is all the more important and valid for becoming the source for the history of so many gifted and neglected writers. It is a recorded history of zines and deserves recognition as a history source as much as any other history source. If writers are covered in wikipedia, then zinesters should be covered. If online sources for writers are covered, then zinewiki should be covered. If zines are covered in wikipedia how can one not cover zinewiki? There seems to be a dangerous challenge to all artists that aren't a part of the handful of corporations that control the mainstream arts (music, film, writing, tv, etc.). This isn't fairness its prejudice in favor of big corporations.

#363 Analysis versus News

Watched any Sunday morning news shows or nightly news on TV lately? How about radio news? Then you've seen and heard a lot of news 'analysis'. I think its away of avoiding hard news. Here's why.

First off by having two experts analyse a situation, you don't have to pay a reporter to go out get the news, write it up, fact check it, and turn it in. You save a bundle in work and salaries and time. And you don't have the responsibility of what they say. Often news shows will get irate responses when they do hard news. Its part of the job. The company lawyers must be happy over analysts, because all the responsibility of what is said is on the analysts not the moderator. Thus there is no liability in what is said - blame it on those two analysts, not our newsteam!

And you can cover a lot of time on air without investigating anything or getting into all the hassles and downright dangers, that real investigative journalism has.

Instead of hard accurate news we get 'safe opinionated analysis. Its cheap cop-out journalism that shifts the risk and the responsibility of getting and reporting and being responsible for hard news, to moderating guests opinions! And note how seldom the moderator fact-checks what the guests say, or follows up the analyses with background info or follow up reports. It's cheap shoddy journalism, and an excuse for real news. Join me in opposing it!

ITS A NEW CENTURY - Time for new arts AND MEDIA!

Musea has a Christmas card for all at musea.us PLUS my new issue of Musea - a short story for the season called, "HEADS UP PENNY' is there for you to read.

#364 Message to the Moon

Want to send a message to the moon? A friend sent me this notice by the Selene Project. Details below. (And don't forget the Musea Book called '100 Pieces of the Moon' - still a few copies left).

SELENE "WISH UPON THE MOON" Campaign

JAXA invites you to send your name and message to be delivered to the Moon. This is a worldwide campaign in cooperation with The Planetary Society of Japan and The Planetary Society of the U.S.A. We can accept names and messages until January 31, 2007. We are looking forward to many entries.

The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) is scheduled to launch the Selenological and Engineering Explorer (or Moon explorer) "SELENE" by an H-IIA Launch Vehicle in the summer of 2007.

The major objective of the SELENE mission is to acquire scientific data to answer key questions on the Moon's origin and evolution. It is the first fully-fledged lunar exploration project since the Apollo program.

As we would like to stir everybody's interest in the Moon as well as in the SELENE project, we decided to launch the "WISH UPON THE MOON" campaign. We are asking you to write your name and message to deliver them to the Moon by etching them on a sheet and having it onboard the SELENE.

This is a worldwide campaign from Japan and the United States sponsored by JAXA in cooperation with The Planetary Society of Japan and The Planetary Society of the U.S.A.

1. To apply
Please send us your name and message within the following letter limits. In English: Name should be within 10 letters, and the message should be within 40 letters. The name and message will be etched on a sheet and it will be loaded near the access panel or the adaptor truss of the SELENE.

Please understand that the limits for letters are set in order to accept names and messages from as many people as possible. Please be aware that your message may be published on the JAXA website or released to the press without your permission for the purpose of this campaign's public relations activities.

2. When to apply
Between December 1 (Fri), 2006, through January 31 (Wed), 2007 (If applying by postcard, the postmark date must be before Jan. 31, 2007.)

3. How to apply
(1) Internet Please apply via the following site.
In English: http://www.jaxa.jp/pr/event/selene/index_e.html The English site will be accessible from 4:00 a.m. Japan Standard Time (or 11:00 a.m. Pacific Standard Time in the U.S.) on December 2 (Sat), 2006.

4. For inquiries:
e-mail: selene_info@jsforum.or.jp

Sheet and Onboard Locations
http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2006/11/20061130_selene_e.html#at01
This page URL: http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2006/11/20061130_selene_e.html

#365 Letter to "Studio 360" and Response

No matter the media outlet - there is one universal - no one talks about this generations arts and no one talks about the new art of this century. I challenged PRI (Public Radio International) and specifically the PRI show "Studio 360" which in its promos suggest that it covers new art. I said they didn't. And I wondered if their underwriting support by Warner Brothers (a publisher of books and music, etc.) wasn't part of the problem. Here is my letter, and a response from David Krasnow, Senior Editor, Studio 360.

I encourage any reader to write him at the e-mail below, and challenge the idea that 360 Studio is a radio show that fairly covers the new arts of the new century. DKrasnow@wnyc.org from Studio 360 radio show writes:

Dear Mr. Hendricks,
I received your email from PRI. Studio 360 aims to cover the full spectrum of the culture, from mainstream forms of entertainment owned by corporations, to indie or completely unreleased art. In fact, the art forms you mention -- zines and mail art -- we have covered at various times on the show (as in our show on the theme of letters, http://www.studio360.org/yore/show040205.html).
(th - this link is to a very minor and weak mail art article)

TH wrote:
There seems to be no coverage of zines that oppose corporate publishing, talks about the Zine hall of Fame, or the ULA - Underground LIterary Alliance, etc. Compare your coverage of zines with your novels and major publishing book coverage - you'll see your slant is towards major publishing and against the bulk of the best publishing outside the majors. And clearly there is no talk of this controversy - site that story if you can.

360:
A quick glance at our archive will reveal many examples of solo musicians, electronic musicians, and other artists not on major labels (as for example in our story on Matthew Herbert http://www.studio360.org/episodes/2006/10/20.) I invite you to become a regular listener and try out the variety of what we have to offer.

TH
You miss the point and confuse post-band music with solo artists. What's missing is talk about the new music from this century - the music that opposes bands. Solo artists have nothing to do with the new music - It's back to basics, no bands, different locals instead of clubs, in many cases not even electrified instruments. And clearly you have not talked about this controversy.

And in the other arts, nothing in the post - modern art field, nothing in the new types of review service, nothing in the new type of art centers - and so much more.

360:
Studio 360 has received underwriting from several corporate sponsors that produce entertainment. Our underwriting is arranged through PRI, and no one who arranges underwriting deals has any input on the content of the show.

TH
Why then is there influence there? Why is there none of the advocates against their dominance? You can't say that the influence is not there - when it shows in every program. It's hard to take what you say seriously when the show broadcasts the safe corporate route each and every show.

360:
If you find the balance of our show too mainstream for your taste, please understand that it is just that -- a matter of taste -- and not an issue of corporate relationships. But if you listen, I believe you will find much that interests you.

TH
Hardly. No balanced program would boycott all new arts. There is no excuse for cultural genocide of a generation that doesn't fit the mainstream art conglomerate model. The culture of this generation is not the one you show - its the one you refuse to show.

360:
I appreciate your concern about this issue, and thank you for spending the time to write to us.

TH
If that was true you would recognize your conscious or unconscious drive to not cover anything new in arts. New century, new arts!!! - Cross the time line! And appreciate what's new in the arts. Surely someone somewhere in your organization has more interest in new arts than to work so hard to oppose one of their messengers? Isn't that the job of your show to talk about the innovative?

Regards,
David Krasnow
Senior Editor, Studio 360

#366 Modern Art Abuses

Modern Art has lost its way. It's become the salon art of our time. It's art that is no longer relevant.

The Dallas, 'End Of Modern Art, Conceptual Art Event' of 1/8/02 was staged to oppose the abuses of Modern art. Specifically it opposes these major problems of MODERN ART:

1. It's cold.
It's harsh and unfeeling.
2. It's disjointed.
Usually modern art is disjointed parts that have no relevance to each other.
3. It's non communicative. Usually the artist has to explain what you're looking at!
4. It's weird.
5. It's elitest only the elite get it, get to see it, get to buy it.
6. It's often technically poor - if there's any technique at all.
7. It's pompous and inflated in size (it covers walls and rooms) and in concepts.
8. It's not useful Seldom integrated into our lives - instead its isolated in galleries and museums.

The post-modern art is opposed to all this. New Century - New Arts!

#367 Year End Round Up

Year end time, and time for a lot of media to talk about the best of the arts of 2006. When you listen to them think about this. The Big handful of media/art conglomerates of Disney, Warners, Viacom, NewsCorp, Bertelsmann, CBS, NBC, and a few other smaller players, control the bulk of production of these art types: Publishing, Music, Film, and TV. AND they also control (either directly through ownership or through their massive advertising dollars) much of the media that talk about the arts. At the end of the year you hear an arts round up that, not surprisingly mostly talks about corporate controlled arts: Best films, books, music, and tv.

What you will NOT hear a lot about , if at all, is 1. Best of the arts not controlled by these behemouths like theater, dance, architecture, photography, sculpture, etc etc etc.

2. Any artists not controlled by them : zines, mail art, indie film makers ( when was the last time you heard a show on the best indie films of the year), etc.

3. Any advocates against the art conglomerates ( like my art revolution work, or the work of the writers advocacy group the ULA, etc.)

4. Any advocates for anything new in the arts - Its a New CENTURY and yet how much coverage have you heard of anyting New in the Arts. Six full years - and no new arts covered period!

You would think that this would be confined to media outlets owned by the conglomerates or commercial outlets, that depend on their advertising dollars. But it goes deeper. Even the so called 'PUBLIC' Broadcasting System (PBS) follows the same bought off path. It's time to reconsider our donations to PBS. If they are nothing but shills for corporate art - why not let them get their funding from corporate art (which they already do to some extent. Listen to who supports them).

It's a new year - yet for the bulk of the country its nothing but old art from old dinosuars from old conglomerates, reported by old media. Yourjob, should you accept, is to join me and help change that in the coming year!

Also this quick salute. James Brown died this week. He put on the best concert I saw in the 60's, and I saw Jimi, Rolling Stones, Doors, Cream, Led Zeppelin and more. But none did what James could do. He was an incredible recording artist, he recorded the best live album on disc, he put on the best live shows (and this was in a football arena in Tyler, Texas - not exactly the big city), he initiated a lot of whats supposedly new in music trends now, and he helped others a lot - a whole lot. Thanks James Brown, for all you did.

UPDATE
Readers,
I just sent you an e-mail about how too many mainstream media outlets (or those that depend on corporate art ad dollars) reduce their coverage to those arts they control : movies, music books, and tv.

Hours later, as if to prove my point, the new Dallas Observer came out (it's our pretend alt, weekly). The only headline on the cover was: THE YEAR IN MOVIES AND MUSIC. (didn't make that up, didn't plan it)

#368 Response to Diane Rehms Show Producer

Readers, I wrote the Diane Rehm Radio Talk Show (NPR) and asked why they didn't cover the new art of this century , it's been 7 years now. And not one show on any new art. Tanya Weinberg, the producer wrote the following back. Then I responded. See both below.

In a message dated 12/29/06 10:22:00 AM, drshow@wamu.org writes:
Hi Tom. .... thanks for the critique. Feel free to suggest arts topics for coverage anytime.

Tanya Weinberg
Producer
The Diane Rehm Show

My response:

OK here goes. But there is so much change in the arts/media of this new century that I can only LIST them and I really can't tell you anything about any category let alone any entry. But you should be covering each and every one of these. They are that important.

Overall there is a change AGAINST the stuck-in-a-rut art of the 8+ mega media/art conglomerates: NewsCorp/Disney/Viacom/Warners/Bertelsman/ etc. and FOR the progressive art of the 300 million Americans. If its art with a PR agent - it isn't new anything! And here's a tough question - why don't you know all this already? How could you miss ALL of this? Time to put a handle on that ivory tower exit door?

Anyway its a New Century with New Arts - time to cover each and every one of these.

LIT: While novels are the only lit published by corporate art (they've tried to kill short stories, playwriting, poetry, essays, etc) - progressive lit includes all that and: ZINES. The desktop explosion allowed for a publishing explosion of thousands and thousands of indie writers, illustrators, and editors. By far the most publishing in the US is zines. See ZINES, ZINEWIKI.COM, ZINE HALL OF FAME, ULA (literaryrevolution.com), the main writers advocacy group.

INTERNET: The shift from tv to the internet shows. New info and entertainment include: BLOGS, YOUTUBE, MYSPACE, ONLINE GAMES, NEW INTERNET INFORMATION SOURCES, NEW MEDIA (see below) etc.

MEDIA: Shift from ad driven, corporate owned slow media to new indie media characterized by being: more immediate, passionate, democratic, and inclusive; having more scope and perspective; being more open, and available to all. See: INTERNET BLOGS, INDIE NEWS SOURCES,INFO WEBSITES, NEW REVIEW SITES, etc.

ART: Is moving away from modern art (that hasn't been modern in 50 years) and galleries, and muli-million dollar ivory tower museums - and toward the post-modern art. See POST MODERN ART. END OF MODERN ART CONCEPTUAL ART EVENT OF 1/8/02. THE NINE ABUSES OF MODERN ART. PAINTING REPRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY (the mass marketing of art - the last art to be mass marketed). MAIL ART (another field of thousands and thousands of artists never talked about) etc.

MUSIC: Post-bands music. While rock and rock bands have run their 40+ year course, and have now denigrated to the music of advertisers, a new post-bands music has started. See POST-BANDS MUSIC, BOX OFFICE CONCERTS, BAGATELLES (new classical art form).

All this and more: New forms of Art Centers, New open-to-all review services, Art Revolution Festivals, New revolutions in libraries, English Language Reforms, Educational Reforms, etc. etc. etc. etc.

New Century New Arts - come see the real world!

#369 SPAM - Society for the Prevention of Advertising on the Moon

Nobody has started this society yet, but it is long overdue. I suggest someone start up:

S.P.A.M - the SOCIETY for the PREVENTION of ADVERTISING on the MOON.

We who hate advertising and see it as nothing but propaganda to buy something you don't want (or you would already have bought it) We who see ads as propaganda to be selfish, self-centered, wasteful, and never sharing. We who see ads as eyesore. Need to stop this before its too late.

When we look up into the night sky - it should be Moon we see not billboards.

I encourage any and all who agree and who want to do more to take the acronym SPAM and run with it. I'll be glad to be the first member to join.

In the works -
Musea two parter - Adventures in Reading - a guide to a lifetime of reading (Feb and March issues).

#370 The Paris Review - a CIA Front!

The venerable Paris Review, the influential US literary magazine started in Paris in 1953, has been outed as a CIA front by the ULA, Underground Literary Alliance. (I am a member.) Here is an overview from Leopold McGinnis's website.
www.redfez.net/leopold

Nearly two years ago, the Underground Literary Alliance ran a Monday Report alleging that the influential Paris Review had been established by, and a front for the CIA to serve political propaganda purposes. A large part of this funding was also to subvert the voices of real artists who might have opposed prevailing American and Capitalist policy.

Only now, two years later, after constant work by the ULA, is the story actually breaking! This week a New York times interview revealed that the ULA's allegations were true, and PBS will be running a documentary with similar corroborating evidence in the near future.

How far do government organizations and interests run interference with art and culture. Is the Paris Review (and other literary journals by extension) still involved in muting out real voices?

Visit www.literaryrevolution.com to see the original report, and learn more about ongoing developments.

#371 ULA Letter to NPR Ombudsman

Musea Readers, I've sent the following letter to NPR as spokesman for the ULA (Underground Literary Alliance). I encourage those who agree with us, to not financially support NPR or Public Radio until the problems are solved.

NPR Ombudsman,
There is a serious conflict of interest in many of your show's coverage of the arts. They spotlight arts from 8 major art/media companies that are often financial underwriters. At the same time they do not talk about the arts outside of the control of these same media/art conglomerates. This goes against your own stated goals of diversity. We encourage you to correct these conflict of interest problems. Until then we cannot financially support you.

NPR Shows (Fresh Air, Studio 360, Diane Rehm Show, and the morning, afternoon and weekend news shows) are often financially supported or underwritten separately or colectively, by the 8 main media/art conglomerates: Warners, Disney, Vivendi, News Corp (Fox), Bertelsmann, Viacom, CBS, GE-NBC, that collectively control most of the book publishing, film-tv, and music. On the other hand most of the art discussed on these radio shows is the books, film, tv, and music, produced by these same 8 conglomerates. That is a clear conflict of interest.

Not only that but I note that the art seldom if ever discussed includes:

1. Independently produced Books, film/tv, and music.

2 Art genres outside of books,film,tv, and music. These include: art, theater, dance, literature that is not novels, architecture, etc. These are arts NOT controlled by the media art conglomerates. That seems to be why they are not given fair coverage if any coverage at all.

3. Any art of the new century. Where is there any coverage of progressive art developments of this century? The 8 art/media conglomerates are slow to change and would be adverse to PBS talking about new developments in art outside of their control. Is this why there is no mention of new developments in art?

4. Any advocates against the consolidation of the arts and media into the control of 8 conglomerates. There seems to be a total ban here and no advocates against these media/art conglomerates is ever mentioned or discussed, and no advocate groups are ever interviewed or consulted on any show. This ban seems to be across the board and covers all shows.

We encourage you to correct this conflict of interest by
1. Making on air announcements when the book,film,tv show, or recording is made by an underwriter.
2. Give fair coverage to independent artists.
3. Give fair coverage to all arts - not just books, film-tv, and music.
4. Give fair coverage to new art and new art developments.
5. Give fair coverage, or at least SOME coverage, to advocates against media/art consolidation

The ULA, Underground LIterary Alliance. cannot financially support NPR, or PBS , or any of the individual shows, until there is an end to this conflict of interest.

The ULA will ask our members, our audience, other advocacy groups, and all independent artists, not to support NPR or PBS until this conflict of interest is resolved fairly and the arts coverage on PBS is above board, open, and fair for all.

NPR states:
"National Public Radio will serve the individual; it will promote personal growth rather than corporate gains; it will regard the individual differences among men with respect and joy rather than derision and hate; it will celebrate the human experience as infinitely varied rather than vacuous and banal; it will encourage a sense of active, constructive participation, rather than apathetic helplessness."
-- Bill Siemering, NPR Co-Founder

This is no longer true in the coverage of the arts.
Underground Literary Alliance, (ULA)
(Tom Hendricks, spokesman)
Literaryrevolution.com (ULA website)

#372 HappyNews.com

There is no doubt about it - the mainstream media is gore obsessed. They've taken the small percentage of violent and evil people and given them control of their papers and news screens. Fair news is not gore news.

On the other hand there is happynews.com I just looked at it and its real news but without the gore. It is a refreshing look at the news without the violence. Check it out. It may well become your daily news source.

I think the best news would probably be a mix, but with this proviso - that it is a fair mix. With 90% of all people doing constructive and positive things daily, why not give that news 90% of the coverage. People need to be aware of dangers and dangerous activity. Only then can they make evenhanded judgements on news events. But that is not glorifying violence to get tv ratings or sell newspapers.

I salute happynews.com for their fresh new take on news. Check it out and tell me what you think.

PS. Still no main news source has signed or even reacted to the Musea "Human Decency Pledge" that we gladly signed. (Musea issue #142)

I'll send this e-mail to the editor of happynews.com and see if he/she will sign.

#373 Art is Stronger than War

War seems invincible. But art is stronger.

Most confuse the issue by saying HUMANS are violent. They are not. MALE HUMANS are violent, FEMALE HUMANS are seldom as violent. The problem is not human violence but male violence. And resolving male violence - in my opinion it is mostly unconscious suppressed rage , much of which may be tied in to sexual frustration - resolves male violence. And once the hidden and unconscious civil war is resolved inside males, they will stop projecting their repressed unresolved, pain onto society - a society of usually innocent men, women, and children - as war.

War will end when repressed male rage ends.

But the desire for art, whether to create it and /or admire it, cannont be stamped out by any therapy. And it is not limited to either sex. It is a strong inherent human force that cannot be eliminated or 'resolved'. It is a built in part of our behavior that is so strong and so integrated that it cannot be eliminated by any means.

The force of art is stronger than war. Art will outlast war.

#374 Zinewiki Goes Beyond 1,000 Listings

Time to salute Zinewiki. Quotes from the website:

Zinewiki, the 'open source encyclopedia devoted to zines and independent media' that 'covers the history, production, distribution, and culture of the small press', has just had a milestone. It has recently posted its 1,000th article! And that's just since its beginning in June of '05!

I salute all involved and asked the two founders, Alan Lastufka and Kate Sandler for quotes on this quickly achieved milestone. Here's their responses:

Lastufka : "It's been great seeing so many people stepping up and contributing. Each person has his or her own area of focus, favorite genres or zinesters, to add or revise," Lastufka commented, "I've learned so much just from editing the articles others have submitted."

Sandler, "ZineWiki is an online window into an offline world. It offers people a glimpse at the undercurrent of print publications that otherwise go undocumented."

Personal note - I've posted the entire Musea Zine Hall of Fame on there. Check it out. It has about 80 entries.

Overall I think what is important for me is that zines, something I've loved and been involved in for 15 years is finally getting some historical coverage. Here in one place is the history AND the ongoing developments of zines.

Continued success to all - and don't forget all includes all you. Go to zinewiki.com for more info on how you can get involved.

#375 AuthorFest

Here's a smart way to promote indie writers. It was sent to me by one of my readers from San Diego. It's called an AuthorFest, a quarterly event where self published authors, can talk about their work. The last was 1/31/07. Its free.

Here's some info from their event announcement.

UC San Diego Bookstore Winter AuthorFest:

AuthorFest is a quarterly forum for small press, self published, and independent authors to come together and have their books displayed, discussed and promoted inside the UCSD Bookstore. As a self published or small press author it is often hard to get a signing in a bookstore or have their work sold and promoted. Without the resources of a major publishing house, many talented authors' books never see the light of day or are relegated to a back corner signing during off peak hours. Our AuthorFest event is designed to host several authors in a fast paced, interactive environment.
http://bookstore.ucsd.edu/books/general/appearances.htm

#376 Oscar Roundup by Melanie Pruit

No one does a better and more complete Oscar wrap up than Melanie Pruit. Here's her annual report.

Hi everbody, welcome to my online Oscar wrap-up, presented to you in straight, copy and paste email format as a double spaced attachment with large print. I hope I got all my facts straights, and all my typos down to a bare minimum. Enjoy!!! Mp

It's been a few hours since the last Oscar, for Best Picture, was presented, and I've had plenty to contemplate. As a person who's been making much ado about predicting Oscars for 30 years, there's always a certain amount of satisfaction when those predictions--those educated or informed guesses--come true. And so it was last night, when I managed a respectable 10 out of 16. Of course, some years are better than others, but I've never once had more wrong than right. On the other hand, it's the surprises that keep me drawn to the Oscars year after year. And so it was last night when the Academy saw fit to relieve the tedium of a year in which the outcome on many categories seemed predetermined.

Consider the weird case of Mexico's PAN'S LABYRINTH. The foreign language film was nominated in six categories--not a record, btw--and was widely viewed as the frontrunner in the race for Best Foreign Film. At the end of the evening, PAN'S won three Oscars, for Best Makeup (for which it had also been the frontrunner), Best Art Direction, and Best Cinematography (a stunner), but nothing for Best Foreign Film. That award went instead to Germany's THE LIVES OF OTHERS, which, admittedly, had loomed as a possible upset. The unfortunate twist is that writer-director Guillermo del Toro ended up with nothing for his creation and was instead left to watch as members of his team thanked him from the stage. It also means that the great cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, who'd practically been promised the award for his work on CHILDREN OF MEN, had to go home empty handed.

Another big surprise, and a somewhat pleasant one at that, was Alan Arkin's victory for Best Supporting Actor. Arkin, a former two time Best Actor nominee, won for his role as the grandpa in LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE. Arkin's role might not have had the inherent dramatic power as Jackie Earle Haley's sex offender in LITTLE CHILDREN, but it did represent a challenge: doting grandpa on one hand, vice addled old coot on the other. The beauty of Arkin's work was that he made sense out of this character's apparent duality. Arkin's win didn't exactly come out of nowhere, since "the old guy" is always a safe bet in the Best Supporting Actor category; nonetheless, the early, heavy betting had been on Eddie Murphy who memorably sang and danced as a tragic variation on a James Brown type entertainer in DREAMGIRLS. {I liked how Arkin spoke about "innocenceÉgrowthÉconnection."] Murphy, winner of a Broadcast Film Critics Award, Screen Actors Guild Award, and Golden Globe, seemed a lock a month ago, but the last two weeks have been filled with whispers of an upset. Some say Murphy's recent lowbrow comedy NORBIT marred his credibility. I tend to think that the effect of NORBIT was negligible, especially since the movie had a #1 opening.

I would say, instead, that Murphy's allegedly temperamental--mercurial-- personality has alienated colleagues, perhaps irreparably. Also, Murphy faced strong, strong competition. Any of his co-nominees could have made worthy claim to the statuette. (That said, my second favorite after Haley was Wahlberg, and my most problematic choice was the great Djimon Hounsou who might have been better served by being in the Best Actor category.)

I think Murphy might have also been done in by a DREAMGIRLS backlash. The Oscar season began in earnest with DREAMGIRLS receiving a total of 8 nominations--the most of any film in competition--while being overlooked for Best Picture and Best Director consideration. Looking back, it's like there's been a line drawn in the sand from the beginning. Why, I do not know, but there were times during the Oscar ceremony when it was hard not to believe DREAMGIRLS was being voted against. After all, how often does the Best Song winner come from a documentary? Exactly never, I'd say, yet that was the case when frontrunner "Listen," from DREAMGIRLS, was shut out in favor of Melissa Etheridge's "I Need to Wake Up" from AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH. Then there's the matter of Best Art Direction and Best Costume Design. Over the past decade, the Oscars in these categories have frequently been awarded dually: RESTORATION (1995), THE ENGLISH PATIENT (1996), TITANIC (1997), SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE (1998), MOULIN ROUGE! (2001), CHICAGO (2003), LOTR: THE RETURN OF THE KING (2003), THE AVIATOR (2004), and MEMOIRS OF A GIESHA (2005). The odds were definitely in DREAMGIRLS favor since it was the only 2006 film to be nominated in both categories. I can almost--almost--buy the PAN'S LABYRINTH fantasyscape winning the art direction award, but the Best Costume thing is hard to take. The costumes in MARIE ANTOINETTE were beautiful and extravagant, and good for designer Milena Canonero, but I still believe Sharen Davis's contributions to DREAMGIRL constitute a more significant achievement. After all, we've seen films akin to MARIE ANTOINETTE before: BARRY LYNDON (Canonero's first Oscar winner), DANGEROUS LIAISONS (1988) and RESTORATION (1995).

You know, four years ago CHICAGO did what EVITA and MOULIN ROUGE! could not, which was draw audiences to a movie musical in droves and clean up at the Oscars: thirteen nominations, with an ultimate tally of 6 awards including Best Picture. The musicals that followed, THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, RENT, and THE PRODUCERS were failures, at least with the critics, the public at large and the Academy (though, to be fair, they all have their admirers). DREAMGIRLS was the movie that fulfilled the promise that began with CHICAGO: early Oscar buzz followed by fine reviews and healthy, healthy box office. Yet the Academy somehow seemed resistant to the movie's charms and accorded it only nominal praise. (8 noms, nothing for Best Picture or Director, and only two wins.) And I don't get that. Even if it wasn't as seamless or as popular as CHICAGO, it still had plenty of spark and was just different enough from CHICAGO to make the point that quality movie musicals can still be made and still find an audience.

So, what did Oscar get right? First and foremost, the Academy had the good sense to recognize that whatever DREAMGIRLS' shortcomings, Jennifer Hudson was simply too good, too powerful, to ignore. Though Adrianna Barazza (BABEL), Rinko Kikuchi (also BABEL), and Abigail Breslin (LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE) all had their moments on film, none of them packed the wallop than Hudson did, and any other outcome (than a Hudson victory) would have been a huge miscarriage of justice--and it would have seemed even more than there was a definite DREAMGIRLS backlash. (I would have skipped Cate Blanchett, since she's really a co-lead in NOTES ON A SCANDAL and instead nominated Emily Blunt as the put upon, snippy office-mate in THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA.) That said, I wish Hudson had been a little more prepared in the speech department. After all, she's been winning awards for the better part of a year. Yes, last spring, based on only a partial product reel, Hudson was named Female Star of Tomorrow (or somesuch) at the National Association of Theatre Owners convention in Las Vegas. Since then, she's won the SAG award, the Golden Globe and a handful of others. Certainly, she may have been humbled at the thought of winning an Oscar, but it could have hardly been a complete surprise. Still, I know Hudson was clearly overwhelmed (though more reason to work at being prepared), since it was a mere three years ago that she was an "American Idol" also-ran (after a strong start that included stunning interpretations of "Imagine" and "The Circle of Life"). At the time, Hudson seemed too big for the construct of a mere TV show. She needed a bigger forum, a bigger space, to fully exhibit her powerhouse talent.

What a great thing for her--and us--that DREAMGIRLS allowed her to liberate the full spectrum of her incredible gifts. The question now is what's next for Hudson? She is first and foremost a singer, but she has proven herself a credible actress in record time. I don't know that she'll ever get a chance to strut her stuff as convincingly as she did in DREAMGIRLS, but I'd at last like to see her try. (Meanwhile, what, exactly, has Catherine Zeta Jones done since winning a well deserved Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her sublime turn in CHICAGO? Not much which is a shame since she seemed to have the world by a string only four short years ago.) [FYI: Hudson now joins Hattie McDaniel (GONE WITH THE WIND, 1939) and Whoopi Goldberg (GHOST, 1990) as the only African-American Best Supporting Actress winners.

I'm also relieved, yes, relieved, that the Academy finally gave an Oscar to Martin Scorsese. Not because I'm huge Scorsese fan. Indeed, quite the opposite. I don't despise him or anything, but he's never been my first choice. I've frankly always thought of Scorsese as the ultimate film school nerd, a guy who's so enthralled by his knowledge of film (and the power of film) that he'd rather draw attention to his dazzling command of technique than use that technique in service of a story. At any rate, we're all now thankfully past the point that we ever have to hear or read again about how many times Scorsese has been snubbed by the Academy. And what a nice touch that he received his award from Francis Coppola, George Lucas, and Steven Spielberg, all of whom were getting their start in the business at the same as Scorsese.

Likewise, I'm also "okay" with THE DEPARTED winning Best Picture. Of all the nominees in that category, LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE was my out and out preference, but THE DEPARTED was the movie I finally settled on as a PREDICTION. And it was a toughie. Again, usually there's either a out and out frontrunner that's an easy call (like TITANIC or DANCES WITH WOLVES), or two entries that are neck and neck (like BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN and CRASH from last time). This year, there was a wide open race with THE DEPARTED, BABEL and LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE positioned as the likeliest contenders. Still, LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE lacked the crucial corresponding Best Director bid, and BABEL (which I had problems with) seemed too superficially similar to last year's CRASH. I don't think THE DEPARTED will stand the test of time. Instead, it will be remembered as the movie that helped Scorsese finally snare an Oscar. That noted, its most Oscar-like attribute, the thing that makes it at least seem like it belongs in the same class as previous Oscar winners, is its star studded cast: Alec Baldwin, Matt Damon, Leonardo DiCaprio, Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen and Mark Wahlberg (for my money, the only reason to see the movie more than once...not that I have...yet). So, whereas last year's big winner CRASH and this year's BABEL share thematic elements, THE DEPARTED and CRASH are the movies that boast the star power to appeal to actors, the Academy's largest voting bloc.

And I'm perfectly at peace with LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE losing Best Picture, even though it was my favorite of the five nominees (and on my personal top 5 list as well). It's not as if LMS walked away with nothing. Best Supporting Actor and Best Original Screenplay are good things; moreover, a year after CRASH's "surprise" win, film snobs are still complaining that it [CRASH] was nothing more than a gussied up made for tv film with no lasting value. Well, gee, I'd rather not see LMS fall prey to that same kind of backlash. So instead of being despised as a spoiler, LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE can forever be fondly remembered as the little movie that seemed to come out of nowhere to become a legitimate contender. Besides, its fans really know it was the best of the lot anyway. An Oscar would have just been the icing on the cake. (Further, as much as I enjoyed the movie, I know that if 2006 had been a stronger year for movies-filled with the likes of THE LAST EMPEROR, TITANIC or a host of others (GANDHI, DANCES WITH WOLVES, SCHINDLER'S LIST, etc.,)--the low-key LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE might have been overlooked completely.

It's been no secret that I'm not as big on Helen Mirren (THE QUEEN) and Forest Whitaker (THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND) as a lot of folk, even though I easily PREDICTED their wins. That was a virtual no-brainer to anybody who'd kept up with the awards season from the very beginning. My few minor quibbles aside, even I have to admit that Mirren and Whitaker are both damned talented--and, yes, I guess they were overdue. Whitaker actually gave my favorite speech of the evening. I loved the part in which he talked about being from East Texas (Longview, as I recall) and watching movies at the drive-in--and also the bit about how acting is believing in a connection and how he wanted to carry the moment through the rest of his lifetime and into the next lifetime. At other awards shows, Whitaker has been a bit of a bumbler, but last night not only did he have a speech prepared, he'd also taken the time, as a friend pointed out, to practice the speech--without coming across as over-rehearsed. Instead, he was polished and gracious. Just like stars used to be at the Oscars. Nowadays, they are either unprepared (and who knows why), or the best they can do is thank their agents, lawyers, managers and personal assistants. [And, my, how things have progressed in five years: before Denzel Washington won Best Actor in 2001 for TRAINING DAY-after winning Best Supporting Actor for 1989's GLORY-the only African American Best Actor winner was Sidney Poitier for 1963's LILIES OF THE FIELD; since Washington's victory, two more African Americans have joined the honor list: Jamie Foxx (RAY, 2004) and now Whitaker-and Will Smith (ALI, 2001; THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS, 2006), Don Cheadle (HOTEL RWANDA, 2004), and Terrence Howard (HUSTLE AND FLOW, 2005) have upped the number of African American Best Actor nominees.]

I thought Best Actress winner Mirren regal yet still somehow modern and down to earth, and I liked how she saluted Elizabeth II for "her courage and her consistency." And hooray for the reverse in the Academy's recent trend of younger and younger Best Actress winners-not the fault of the actual actresses, I know, but the trend to not write, or finance, great award worthy roles for mature actresses has been disconcerting.

How was Ellen DeGeneres? I liked her. I think she accomplished exactly what she set out to do, which was to relax the audience and avoid making the show about her or making it too political. On that last note, she faltered a wee bit, but to her credit, even on the few times she was political, she avoided "calling out" anyone by name. In other words, she did not single out anyone in particular as the butt of a political joke, as hosts often do (meaning anyone currently in office). I liked the bit in which she "casually" offered her script, Good Mamas, to Martin Scorsese, when she vacuumed the carpet, and when she got Steven Spielberg to photograph her and Clint Eastwood. It was priceless Ellen. Being able to go out into the audience and just make friendly with people is what she does best. And l loved her "Third time's a charm" aside to eight time nominee Peter O'Toole. Overall, I thought she struck just the right balance, and I hope the numbers are strong enough that she gets asked back next year (and, honestly, even if the numbers aren't so strong, it's really no reflection on her but the public's indifference to the nominated films).

As much as I enjoyed Ellen, however, I was frustrated by the pace of the show. I could barely contain my ire that the show was on at least 45 minutes before the first acting award was announced. Though there is no hard and fast rule, Best Supporting Actress is usually the first award of the evening; sometimes, it's Best Supporting Actor. I can't believe telecast producer Laura Ziskin honestly believed she could audiences by making them wait before giving something they about which they might actually give a hoot. Worse, to think that after the first commercial break, we had to sit through Will Ferrell, Jack Black and John C. Reilly singing about how comedians don't get any respect. A number like that might have been okay to re-energize the show at midpoint or something, but, really, it was not needed at all--and definitely not so early. The bit with the sound effects choir accompanying famous film clips was clever, but, again, something that would have made more sense a little later in the broadcast when viewers might feel restless after sitting through awards for Best Sound or Best Documentary Short. Still, I did like the Pilolobus dance troupe and their recreation of movie logos in silhouette. That was fun. Less fun was director Michael Mann's tribute to "America on Film" or the montage about "Writers on Film" followed by exactly one of the writing awards instead of both. And the presentation of Ennio Morricone's special award was awkward; especially his start and stop speech punctuated by Clint Eastwood's translation. Wouldn't it have been more efficient to have done some kind of scroll or subtitles???

Okay, let's wrap it up with a roll call of the best and worst fashions. For me, the best of the evening was Jodie Foster in cerulean chiffon with matching colored dangly earrings and a new short layered haircut. Speaking of chiffon, I loved Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Sherry Lansing's red and black number. Down a bit was Rachel Weisz in a strapless cream colored gown, very 1930's, with deep red lips and a short, loosely curled do. Since the top part of gown was beaded, she should have lost the gigantic jewel encrusted pendant. I also loved DREAMGIEL Anika Noni Rose in red with a jewelled neckline, and Gwyneth Paltrow in a 30's inspired gown in peach--or was it rose? Seemed to change under the lights (or with a change in camera angle). I also liked her sleek long hair and red lips. She may have never looked prettier at the Oscars. Penelope Criz and Hugh Jackman looked great together. I liked, but did not love, her champagne colored, ruffled ballgown, though she certainly looked elegant. Also elegant together were THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA's Anne Hathway and Emily Blunt; the former in strapless white with black accents, the latter in strapless, sparkly midnight blue. Maggie Gyllenhaal was oo-la-la in a navy gown with black accents, a most unusual combo, and the requisite red lips, and Kirsten Dunst looked swell in an ice blue flapper style dress with metallic beading. I liked Kate Winslet's toga inspired gown, but I could never decide if the color was the palest possible blue--or the palest possible green. Cate Blanchett's gown was another stumper. It was beaded and fabulous but what was the color? Bronze? Pewter? And, oh yes, I though Jada Pinkett Smith was a knockout in strapless gold. If I missed any of your favorite "Best Dressed," I apologize. Send me an email.

I'm thinking Reese Witherspoon is too thin. Yeah, okay, she's lost weight since the divorce, but Witherspoon, who's naturally petite, need not look gaunt. I shudder at reporters who think her weight loss is some kind of adorable "the best revenge is looking good" effect. And Naomi Watts, is it me, or does your soft yellow dress with black sash look awfully similar to the soft yellow dress with maroon sash that Cate Blanchett wore just two years ago? And Cameron Diaz, you looked awkward in your white gown with irregular hem. And learn to use a comb. Once again Philip Seymour Hoffman proved that he's a slob through and through, while Ken Watanabe, Tom Cruise, Greg Kinnear, and Steve Carrell were looking spiffy.

Oh, and did anybody notice that during the "In Memorium" segment, the late cinematographer Sven Nykvist was saluted with nano clips of WHAT'S EATING GILBERT GRAPE??? Awesome.

The final tally was that eleven feature films won Oscars. THE DEPARTED won 4, LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE and PAN'S LABYRINTH won three apiece; DREAMGIRLS won two (including Best Sound Mixing), as did AN INCOVENIENT TRUTH. THE QUEEN, the only Best Picture contender to feature a leading performance nominee, took one. LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA won Best Editing (and the father of one of the winners was an actual Iwo Jima surviviorÉnice touch). BABEL won Best Original Score, Oscar #2 for composer Gustavo Santaolalla, who won in the same category for 2005's BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. That takes care of all the Best Picture nominees, plus a few (PAN'S, DREAMGIRLS, and INCONVENIENT). Also winning in one category were THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND, MARIE ANTOINETTE, HAPPY FEET (Best AnimatedÉa slight disappointment, but not totally unworthy), and THE LIVES OF OTHERS. The movie I wish I'd seen was Best Live Action Short, WEST BANK STORY, which looks like a MidEast take off on 1961's Best Picture winner WEST SIDE STORY. And I liked the WEST BANK winner's remark that "Hope is not hopelss."

I welcome feedback, so if you have any questions or comments, please send them to me personally at mpruithelsem@earthlink.net--and save the "reply all" option for national emergencies. : ) Thanks for your consideration,
Mp

#377 FCC Confirms Industry Wide Payola

This is a big day for me. Finally the truth has come out. First the facts.

For 15 years I've talked about the payola system in the radio industry. Now the FCC has confirmed all my charges against both the 4 major record companies (Sony/BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, Universal Music Group, and EMI Group.) and four of the largest radio chains that control thousands and thousands of stations across the US: (Clear Channel, CBS Radio, Entercom Communications, and Citadel Broadcasting Corp.)

Though the settlement is not final, here it is as it now stands as reported from Wire Reports:
The 4 radio conglomerates have agreed to pay the government $12.5 million (a slap on the wrist) and provide 8,400 half hour segments of free airtime for independent record labels and local artists. (Independent and local defined as not being owned or controlled by the Big 4 listed above.) These were separate agreements, all aimed at curbing payola, said sources at the Federal Communications Commission. (fcc.gov) It is all part of a consent decree between the radio stations and the FCC. They admit no wrongdoing under this 3 year settlement and details have not been made public.

Now for some comment. First of all the CEO's of these companies need to go to jail. If Martha Stewart goes to jail, then leaders in an industry wide payola scandal this extensive and covering all these decades, need to go to jail. Note that these companies were the same that went after teens who were illegally downloading their songs. Is that a worse crime than industry wide payolo for decades? I don't think so. It is time for some tough sentences for these corporate crooks!

It is also time for all those naive critics of us who claimed industry wide payola, to admit they were completely and totally wrong.

It is time for the media to finally cover this scandal. It SHOULD be the biggest story in every publication from Rolling Stone magazine, to Access Hollywood and Entertainment Tonight. I seriously doubt it will even be mentioned.

It should be the front page of every daily newspaper. I found this blurb buried in our hometown Dallas paper. And of course I doubt there will be any major editorial pieces against these abuses, no investigative stories, etc .

It should be the major story on PBS. I doubt any mainstream musician will be asked a tough quesiton on the radio, such as - "Well "musician X' weren't most of the sales of your records in the 80's, 90's and this decade due to payola, instead of talent?"

What we can and should expect is big stories in the free press such as Punk Planet, Maximum Rock and Roll, Zine World, Clamor - if it was still going, and other indie media, media that does NOT depend on the massive advertising dollars that these companies spend each year.

And finally, as this story unravels. We must next look at the publishing industry. Remember many of these same companies own the major book publishers such as Warners, BMG etc. What you will find is the same corrupt system whereby a handful of publishers get reviews, talk show interviews, etc. and the indies do not.

OK everyone that has been charging payola all these years - its time for a celebratory yell! Yeah.!!! Now the rest of the world knows they are and were corrupt all these years.

#378 Payola Part Two

Readers,
The huge payola scandal is coming out.

The charges now are limited to the 4 major record companies (Sony/BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, Universal Music Group, and EMI Group.) and four of the largest radio chains that control thousands and thousands of stations across the US: (Clear Channel, CBS Radio, Entercom Communications, and Citadel Broadcasting Corp.)

Now its time to find out more from these groups:

MEDIA: Who is covering the story? Are news and entertainmnet tv shows, magazines, radio shows, daily newspapers, talking about payola? If not are they owned by the companies that are being charged? Or are they dependent on big media ads (example many papers get many film ads by the same companies involved in the payola scandal. Will a single interviewer ever ask pop stars how they feel about all their hits being payola - paid for. Even public radio has been silent. Why? Is there 'revenue sharing' plan, more payola? And why don't they respond to criticism about payola.

GOVERNMENT: Will the FCC be able to stand up to these behemoth companies? Should the charged radio stations loose their licenses? I think they should. And I think the CEO's that don't tell all they know about payola, should be threatened with real jail time until this scandal is cleared up.

Locally - What does the TMO say (Texas Music Office). I've written them and will tell you their response. Is the Texas Attorney General involved. How do local politicians feel?

RADIO: What stations are involved? If your favorite station has never played local or indie music, then they are invovled. Almost EVERY large station in Dallas is involved. Ask them why they were doing payola? If they hate local and independent music here, why are they here. How are they going to end payola and insure it doesn't happen again? How are they going to choose what independent music now gets fairplay airplay? Is NPR involved?

EXPAND the SCANDAL. It's clear that music companies like Warners also own Warner Books, and music company BMG also owns Random House. Is there payola in book publishing and in what authors get interviewed on radio and tv and which do not? I think so and I think the scandal will widen. Then look to film payola, etc.

END THE ZOMBIE STATE OF APATHY. You reading this have not responded to this scandal yet. It's time to wake up and take the time to support good music and oppose crooks. Its time to take back radio from these crooks and for the first time in decades have good music on the radio. Its time for so called Punk generation to get mad enough to oppose crooks and end the cultural genicide against your good music. It's time to support good musicians that have had their careers ruined. Its time to do something - anything.

WRITE and INVESTIGATE:
FCC.gov for the latest A2im.org the indie record group that brought charges futureofmusic.org indie advocacy group. music@governor.state.tx.us - Texas Music Office stopbigmedia.com for Corporate art Ownership chart - ASCAP and BMI, both royalty orgs have remained silent. Why when the bulk of their members are the victums of this scandal. Congressmen, media, and radio stations. They all have a lot of explaining to do. Are they against payola? What are they doing about it?

This story has just begun!

#379 And More Payola

Readers, The FCC has sent a basic response to my complaint about Payola. I post it below with my comments on not only music payola but publishing payola. I encourage you to send your comments/complaints to FCCinfo@fcc.gov

FCC
You are receiving this email in response to your inquiry to the FCC. Dear Tom Hendricks,
Thank you for contacting the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Section 317 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. ¤ 317, requires broadcasters to disclose to their listeners or viewers if matter has been aired in exchange for money, services or other valuable consideration. The announcement must be aired when the subject matter is broadcast. The Commission has adopted a rule, 47 C.F.R. ¤ 73.1212, which sets forth the broadcasters' responsibilities to make this sponsorship identification .

MUSEA:
Note that this is not limited to music. And remember that two of the music companies involved, Warners, and Bertelsmann, are major US publishers, and that two of the music companies, Warners, and Sony are major film companies as well. The point is that payola includes interviews with writers or filmmakers of these companies if it is in exchange for 'money, services or other valuable consideration'. Thus any interview show on radio that interviews artists from these companies, while not interviewing any independent authors, or filmmakers, is just as guilty of payola.

FCC
Section 507 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. ¤ 508, requires that, when anyone provides or promises to provide money, services or other consideration to someone to include program matter in a broadcast, that fact must be disclosed in advance of the broadcast, ultimately to the station over which the matter is to be aired. Both the person providing or promising to provide the money, services or other consideration and the recipient are obligated to make this disclosure so that the station may broadcast the sponsorship identification announcement required by Section 317 of the Communications Act. Failure to disclose such payment or the providing of services or other consideration, or promise to provide them, is commonly referred to as ``payola'' and is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year or both. These criminal penalties bring violations within the purview of the Department of Justice.

MUSEA
The FCC rules are clear. It is also clear that the payola does not stop with music companies. The same parent companies of these music companies also control film, tv, book publishing, and numerous media outlets. Their policies for promoting book authors, or filmmakers or film stars, is the same as their policies for promoting musicians. Radio shows that interview their authors, and film stars exclusively, while at the same time not interviewing independent authors, and film stars etc. suggest that payola is more widespread than just music payola. Three of the 4 main record companies accused of payola are also involved in film and publishing. How is it that the FCC sees the illegal 'money, services or other considerations' from these companies to be exclusively for music and not be part of the same promotion process for their films and books?

Thus I ask the FCC to look into the same payola type practices from the same companies in other art companies that these same companies hold. Surely the fact that no book show ever talks about independent publishing - example the entire zine community of thousands of thousands of independent publishers over the last 2 decades - shows that these companies payola music policies are rampant in promotion of publishing and filmmaking on radio - and tv too.

FCC
Thus, for example, if a record company or its agent pays a broadcaster to play records on the air, those payments do not violate these provisions of the law if the required sponsorship identification information is timely aired by the broadcast station. If it is not aired as required by the Communications Act and the Commission's rules, the station and others are subject to enforcement action.

If record companies, or their agents, are paying persons other than the broadcast licensee (such as the station's Music Director or its on-air personality) to have records aired, and fail to disclose that fact to the licensee, the person making such payments, and the recipient, are also subject to criminal fine, imprisonment or both, for violation of the disclosure requirements contained in Section 507.

More information can be viewed at:
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/broadcast/sponsid.html.

Thank you again for your comments.
Mike Landis
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Consumer Inquiries & Complaints Division
1-888-225-5322

#380 And Yet More Payola

Payola scandal

1. Widens to include publishing

2. PBS finally does a story and its all fluff

3. Comment on payola from a British musician

4. Something artful to get your mind off payola!

1. Widens to include publishing. The literary group The ULA, Underground Literary Alliance has posted an article by me on 'Publishing Payola' for its weekly 'Monday Report' at literaryrevolution.com - scroll down the page and read.

2. PBS show 'On The Media' did a March 16 feature on Payola npr.org I read the transcript and wrote this reply "First I was pleased to see that one NPR/PBS radio show addressed the industry wide payola issue. Then I read the transcript of your radio piece and was very disappointed. There was no report just a few lite questions to an 'Industry watcher." Why not a news report - gather facts, write a story, then do a piece?

And if you are going to resort to just an interview (it takes no work to say 'what do you think?'), why didn't you review some people involved: FCC rep, A2IM rep - who brought the suit on behalf of the indie record companies, an indie musician , anyone on PBS - you are on a radio station that plays music, I.e. anybody actually involved. It all came across like an afterthought, a lite piece that was badly researched, fluff. And apparently, from reading the show's transcript, the stance of your radio show is payola is here, always will be, and we just should accept illegal corporate behavior - that's easier. I encourage you to do better. When the final FCC decision comes down, redo the story and this time do it right." - th.

3. Comment on Payola from British Muscian Lynn Monk with Wobbly Music: "I support you on this. We haven't had such a big problem in the UK as we still have our great public broadcasting company, the BBC. However, hype of music in some form or another has been going on for decades here too. Once upon a time, it was done by falsifying the returns that were used to calculate the UK charts. There were records at number one in the 70's that had actually sold fewer than 300 copies. They were put in that position by the large record companies bribing the record stores. When news of this got out there was a big scandal for a week or two then it was all brushed under the carpet with a few apologies and promises that it would never happen again. So the public can now be rest assured that this kind of thing no longer goes on ... (Or does it? Do we really know the truth? How could we?)"

4. Something artful to get your mind off Payola Can urinals be art? You'll think so after seeing these. clarkmade.com/urinals.html

Sent in by D. Alvey.

Finally: Payola the Decision

FCC Announces Payola Settlement

Well, it's official. The FCC settled with some of the largest broadcasters over allegations that they were engaging in payola.

The terms have been widely reported over the last month, but it's worth taking a look at some of the details again. To resolve the allegations, CBS Radio, Citadel Broadcasting Corporation, Clear Channel Communications and Entercom Communications Corp. agreed to pony up $12.5 million and provide more than 4,000 hours of airtime to local and independent artists. They will also face tighter requirements:

- Maintaining a database containing a record to identify all items received from record labels that exceed $25xin value

- Appointing a Corporate-level Compliance Officer who is responsible to ensure compliance with the Consent Order, and all sponsorship identification lawsx- Designating a Compliance Contact for each marketx- Maintaining a company hotline for employees to call the Compliance Officer to obtain advice and report payola violations

- Conducting annual training for all programming personnel and supervisorsxxSure we would have liked more airtime for independent artists, but given the current composition of the Commission this is a historic day in the fight against payola. FMC belives that payola and radio consolidation were the primary reasons that commercial radio has become a bland, homogenized product that largely ignores independent musicians and whole genres of music such as jazz and bluegrass. This agreement signals a possible new direction for commercial radio and more options for radio listeners.x

We will continue to monitor the situation, especially as radio stations implement their compliance measures and program independent music.

#382 NPR Responds to Charges

Recently I wrote NPR questioning their fairness in arts coverage. Specifically that

1. the art they covered was mostly limited to that from the Big 8, the 8 companies that control most of the music,film, publishing, and media in the US. and that

2. the art that was seldom if ever discussed was a) indie publishing, films, tv, and music, b) art genres outside of books, film-tv, and music, such as art, theater, dance, literature (that is not novels such as zines), architecture, and other art not controlled by the same media conglomerates, c) any innovative and progressive arts of the new century, d) any advocacy group that opposes these media conglomerates and the consolidation of the arts into a handful of corporate hands.

Here is their reply. I have trimmed out the indie film descriptions, otherwise it is their full response. But first my take on their response: You will note they document some coverage of indie films, a token look at payola, still no coverage of zines or indie publishing (the most prolific publishing in America), token coverage of indie music that as far as I can see does not include protest songs, no new art or new art movements, and little coverage of any art genres outside of music,film-tv, and mainstream publishing, and no coverage of art advocates for change.

Token coverage? Yes. Fair coverage of all arts - NO!

Dear Mr. Hendricks,

Thank you for contacting NPR regarding underwriting and our coverage of the arts.

NPR is committed to our mission to create a more informed public through news, information and music. NPR programs such as "All Songs Considered" and WXPN's "World CafŽ" only play songs and interviews from non-mainstream artists. We review and report on independent films during our newsmagazines. We've also spoken out against the Copyright Royalty Board's recent decision to increase the rates for streaming internet music, which would make it impossible for many public radio stations to continue to broadcast music from artists overlooked by commercial radio. (Read more: http://www.npr.org/about/press/2007/040207.crb.html and http://www.npr.org/about/press/2007/031907.copyrightroyalty.html)

Bantam Dell (a division of Random House, which is a division of Bertelsmann) is a sponsor of Fresh Air. We occasionally have sponsorships from Warner Home Video and Warner Music Group. The other organizations you mentioned have not sponsored NPR, although could have supported individual local NPR member stations or other public radio distributors.

National sponsorship from companies is a critical source of our funding. Types of sponsors include non-profit foundations, corporations, retailers and producers of products and services. NPR sponsors receive acknowledgement on-air through 10-second announcements broadcast during NPR programming. Online and podcasting sponsorship is also available. All national sponsors are held to strict guidelines about content of their announcements; in general, these promote the corporation itself.

NPR maintains a very strict firewall between its sponsors and our journalism. They have no input into news content, knowledge about it or access to our newsgathering staff. Sponsors' funding provides general support to NPR, not to any particular program or area or coverage. NPR News covers on these companies as they do any others: with independent, objective, fair reporting.

In many instances NPR News has reported critically about a sponsor's business activities. An archive of our coverage can be viewed and heard by searching on www.NPR.org. The site also has more specific information about our News Code of Ethics and our sponsorship guidelines.

Sincerely,
Emily Hellewell

NPR Communications

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7569603

Payola Still a Radio Reality
Talk of the Nation

March 7, 2007
Payola isn't new in radio, and this week's reports of a $12 million settlement between the FCC and four major radio companies suggest that pay for play may be alive and well. Guests: Jonathan Adelstein, FCC Commissioner Marc Fisher, Washington Post columnist; author of Something in the Air Maurice Bernstein, president and CEO of Giant Step Records, an influential music marketing firm hired by record companies to market artists on independent and major labels

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7718608
FCC Settles Payola Case with Giant Radio Firms All Things Considered
March 5, 2007
The Federal Communications Commission is set to announce an anti-"payola" settlement with four major radio broadcasting companies. The tentative agreement would include a significant increase in airtime for "independent label" and "local" artists. The FCC settlement, which is expected to be announced this week, includes a $12.5 million fine divided among four major broadcasting companies: CBS Radio, Clear Channel Communications, Inc., Entercom Communications Corp., and Citadel Broadcasting Corp. The full commission has not voted on the settlement, but it reportedly includes an agreement that the four companies' stations will collectively broadcast 8,400 half-hour segments of "independent label" and "local" artists per year.

#383 Imus and the Dixie Chicks

The Imus scandal is yet another case of someone possibly loosing their job over what they said. Remember the Dixie Chicks? Both cases are remarkly similar. They too were silenced by the majority for what they said.

Freedom of speech is not there to protect the majority.
Freedom of speech is there to protect those that offend the majority.
Freedom of speech means that even people that are bigoted, homophobic, sexist, crude, cruel, blasphemous, hateful, racist, or any other 'ist are protected for speaking their minds.

Freedom of speech is not just when we agree (I agreed with the Dixie Chicks). Its for when we don't agree (I didn't agree with Don Imus). They are both the same thing. You can't grant freedom of speech for only those you agree with. I encourage you to substitute "Dixie Chicks" every time you now hear the name "Don Imus" in a report on the scandal.

More and more our country is ruining the careers of those that offend the majority. That's a severe punishment. Do you really want the consequences where everyone is so afraid of loosing their jobs that they will only say the most innoucuous things? And do you really want the mainstream to be more bland, and safe? Do you really want everyone to hide their true feelings and spout out only the majority line? How close to 1984 will you go to get back to the button down 1950"s!

In my book of sayings I had this one: DON'T SILENCE OPINION, FOSTER DEBATE. It's time we see that ruining any one person's life for a majority opinion, is dangerous to every life.

Media watch: Note too that CBS who is sanctioning Imus is in the midst of a payola scandal. Why doesn't the media report on an industry wide radio/music payola scandal that has gone on for decades as much as they cover Don Imus' racial slur?

#386 Three Questions the Media Has Never Asked

Here are 3 questions I have yet to hear anyone in the media ask.

1. This administration misused the incredible feelings of patriotism after 9/11 to further their war in Iraq. Someone should ask the President and his administration their response to this misuse of patriotism?

2. The war in Iraq has cost not only 400 billion dollars, but countless lives and casualties. Was removing a small countries dictator really worth all that? Was there no better way to use those troops and spend that money? That massive amount of money could have - over time - ended poverty on ANY continent in the world, including our own. Was there no better way to spend that money and use those troops?

3. We seem to have substituted the threat of terrorism for the threat of nuclear world war with Russia during the cold war. Is the war against terrorism on the same level of danger as world nuclear war? If not why is it being presented as if it was an equal or worse danger?

Time for someone to ask some tough questions!

#387 Top Twenty Websites and Why.

From the FreePress website I got this list of most popular sites on the internet:

1 Yahoo.com Yahoo! Inc.
2 Google.com Google Inc.
3 Myspace.com News Corp.
4 MSN.com Microsoft Corporation
5 ebay.com eBay Inc.
6 YouTube.com Google Inc.
7 Facebook.com Facebook
8 wikipedia.org Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
9 craiglist.org craigslist, inc.
10 live.com Microsoft Corporation
11 Amazon.com Amazon.com, Inc.
12 Blogger.com Google Inc.
13 Go.com The Walt Disney Company
14 AOL.com Time Warner
15 microsoft.com Microsoft Corporation
16 CNN.com Time Warner
17 Comcast.net Comcast Corporation
18 IMDb.com Amazon.com, Inc.
19 Flickr.com Yahoo! Inc.
20 Photobucket.com Photobucket, Inc.

If they have anything in common its this. Most use the internet in a way that no other way will do. They have found a new way to make the most of what the internet can do. There's search engines like Google, and blog sites at blogger. There's the auction site Ebay for world shopping. There's the Movie database, IMDB for our love of film and tv. There's Wikipedia for info. There's social sites like myspace, and facebook. There's short videos on youtube, And there's sites for photos like flickr, and photobucket.

Want to make it big on the net? Then fill a niche that works best on the net.

Stay tuned for more!

Back to Main Page