#moderation and reality vs storytelling

[abbinurmel]

And in all honesty, I think games can and do make people more violent leaning... it's just that MOST people will very easily suppress those urges fairly effortlessly. In the same way MOST people who are, say, watching a soda ad, they subconsciously might automatically get a tiny bit thirsty- but they fully know they are not REALLY that thirsty irl, or, maybe they just don't drink soda very much, they can rationalize that too much soda drinking is bad for you or see simply that there is no logical reason to get off their butt to leave the house right NOW to just go and buy this one particular soda brand on a whim...they openly know this ad is just flashy corporate fantasy hypnotism to get them to go out and spend money. But, let's say my throat is PARCHED AF and I already like soda a lot. Let's say I worked outside all day and it is hot and I am tired. Am I gonna resist as much the constant marketing??

Now, say I am bitter jaded emotionally starved angry teenager. Maybe I have violence in the home or experience with violent bullies or other trauma. Maybe I got a fetish already for the army, or nationalistic parents. Maybe I wanna take my anger out on people who have wanted me dead or feel a general sense of anger and mistrust inherent in every part of my life. MAYBE I just MAYBE would have more of a slight lapse in judgement?...maybe just maybe that unhealthy, irrational command to go do a soda run, that most people will just ignore, would start looking pretty real good about now, or, in the near possible future whenever I happen to next spy the product being put in my view?

I feel like peoples reaction to "video games make you violent" has created this mindset where you're crazy for thinking a video game can influence your mindset AT ALL which is so fucking annoying given the amount of political propaganda in video games

[tirralirralirra]

something I love about having read/watched frieren and dungeon meshi concurrently is getting to see that, despite their similar broad genres (fantasy, DND-esque settings, failure op elf girls /lh), they are two very distinct stories that ultimately achieve the same* thematic goal through different narrative means.

like you have frieren's contemplative, almost slice-of-life style storytelling that focuses on how the connections between people make an impact, and how it's beautiful to cherish the memories of those we love, even the small ones (especially the small ones), and that being alive is so, so beautiful because of those things. Then juxtaposing this with the overall narrative of a literal journey to a land beyond in order to meet with the dead, while not losing focus on those that are alive. Frieren as a story takes time to explore the small things that make life beautiful (fields of flowers, the beauty and not the power of magic, stargazing and sunsets with your friends).

and then you have dunmeshi's tight narrative arcs that are built around urgency (saving falin, first from digestion, then from...chimera-ization), but also continually return to the same concept as a core tenet to both the literal narrative structure around meals and the overall story: to eat is a privilege of the living. That there is joy to be found in eating because it means you are alive, that you survived. That taking time to take care of yourself is honoring your life. That death is a part of life through the acts of killing monsters to eat, and that the dungeon's condition where a soul remains tethered to the body is unnatural.

For that last bit, I love how we're just introduced to the concept in the beginning as a bit of world building, something you might just take at face value of, "oh, I guess this is how this works in this story", and over the course of the story the characters start to interrogate that reality, culminating in Marcille's realization at the end that they took death for granted because of the dungeon's condition:

[ID: Manga panel of Marcille looking down in thought and saying "Look, this might sound a little weird, but...I think the entire point of this journey we went on....was learning how to accept death.]

(Panel is from the ehscans version, will update with official eng when the final volume releases)

I also love that the story takes the time to say, look, you can be in a hurry, but you still need to take care of yourself. Eat well, sleep well, What will you achieve in the service of yourself or others if you don't take care of the most basic qualities to survive first? The most recent episode is a good example of that with the focus on shuro vs. laios, and then there's this reinforcement of the idea by the end:

[ID: Dungeon meshi manga page showing Laios, Chilchuck, and Senshi shouting "A balanced diet!!" "R-regulating our daily rhythms!!" "And moderate exercise!!" respectively, followed by the three in various poses in front of the word "VICTORY" and Laios saying "If we watch these three points...we'll naturally work our way to strong bodies!!"]

Anyways this is all very disorganized and I have other things I need to do and I could write a more cohesive, actually organized thought piece on all of this with like, coherent points, but I don't really like to delve into literary analysis on my fandom account. it just lives in my head, rent free. thank you for coming to my ted talk tumblr. don't expect to see more of this, lol.

*I say same goal, which is not to say the only goal. stories can have more than one theme, it's ok if you disagree with me on this, but please bear in mind that I'm speaking very, very broadly.

[redantsunderneath]

Critical Accommodation

The first forum thread I ever started, on some televisionwithoutpity-type forum, was on the topic of simultaneously overrated and underrated art/artists.  Now, I don’t know if I expressed my ideas clearly or not, but in the email exchange subsequent to a strangely angry moderator deleting the post, clarity didn’t seem to be the issue as much as a failure on his part to admit to the idea that the relationship between quality and popularity could somehow be multivalent.  At the time, I probably used Radiohead or something as an example – underrated by any sort of mass audience but overrated by what you might a few years later have call pitcthforkers – but maybe Serial is a good modern equivalent.  I doesn’t hold enough interest for anyone who has seen more than 3 Datelines and thinks the idea of NPRing the concept up is boring, but elicits a little too much ado from the Slate reading contingent who, maybe, believe True Crime as a genre just got invented.

 I kind of lost interest in this as a concept as, after a while, all you can see are the social signaling aspects of this multi-audience interaction, maybe thanks to hipsters turning countersignaling into a game of chicken where they threw their steering wheel out the window. But it seems that multiple axes of “is it good” that coexist have become more obvious lately, and not just because people are starting to notice that everyone lives in a bubble. Case in point: I was involved in an exchange recently about the movie Suicide Squad, with a poster claiming that the response to the movie showed how pronounced the divide was between critics and the casual audience.  I had to ask what this meant because the critics I pay attention to have been very positive about Suicide Squad and the DC movies in general (in relation to the Marvel movies especially) and dismissive of the sea of internet opinions that call the films garbage.  The person bringing it up was talking about the actual moviegoing audience which made the movie immensely profitable because they weren’t told they were supposed to hate it vs. the majority of internet based and payed critics who poo-pooed the movie as you would expect.  Both of these critical-mass divides were true at the same time, but each of us preferentially saw one.

 I’ve written a lot about textual story and subliminal story in an effort to pick at the meaning of entertainments of all kinds.  But all this is making me think about the fact that there are more levels than just above and below and various audiences are habituated to look for satisfaction at a certain level. One problem is that no matter how smart and attentive the audience member is, they tend to privilege this one layer and, as a result, this strata is optimized for by producers (via a complex Darwinian system) if they are viewed as the primary audience.  So the actual most complicated and interesting multilayered stuff is going to suffer for any specific audience in that it will not be “the best possible thing” at the level they are trained to value the most.  The funny thing is, this system more and more doesn’t favor people who focus on depth and complexity in producing a serious work, but artists who are profoundly unhinged at some level who are willing to operate at the most superficial levels primarily with the deep stuff inadvertently spilling out like piñata guts.  These movies often don’t make intellectual sense.

 I think in order to consider this, text and subliminal aren’t going to cut it.  There is a superficial or visceral level of engagement – incident, big emotion… the action movie thing, but also at a different pitch the romantic comedy thing.  Crowd pleasers that satisfy the lower levels of Maslow’s pyramid – oral (safety, threat, need, good/bad) and anal (dominance, desire, will).  Then you have the mid level engagement of the genital (intricacy, complex relational, intellectual satisfaction) and basic social consciousness (mid to upper Maslow) which is common internet aesthete and print critic land.  If there is talk of screenplay structure or complex characters or representation, it is in this middlebrow-that-thinks-it’s-highbrow area. The Oscar zone.  

 There is another level, though, which me might call the ineffable, the preconscious, the deep structural, the semiotic, the transcendent, or the sublime.  People who I usually pay attention to are focused on this later level to some degree. The thing that ties these people together is an emphasis on visual storytelling (or poetics if we are talking about print) and a philosophical bent.  The escape of conscious forms, of spoken language and structure, receiving symbolic content and using that to construct meaning.  There is a lot of theory in this zone… it is not not intellectual, but rather senses something hidden or unintentional and wrestles that into the zone of language and reason.  This includes primal unexamined societal impulses where the motivations for politics and hatred lie.  

 So group 1 are the conscious experiencers (popcorn moviegoer).  Group 2 are the social intellectualizers (the maven or critic).  Group 3 have found some way to touch an unmediated submerged experience and bring it up to examine, which oddly gives them more in common with group 1 (the dredgers and deep divers).  Everybody at a higher number level has some experience with the lower numbers but what I have noticed is that most people in this hierarchy tend to limit focus to their preferred layer and stick there, losing the ability to really engage at the other levels with something that doesn’t satisfy on theirs.  I do run into more people who are able to put a foot on 1 and a foot on 3, people who go deep on trash cinema for instance, but these people usually take a shit on level 2.  Many of these people hate prestige TV very viscerally.  Others stick to 3 and tend to close read based on one particular “deep topic” like capitalism or gender.

 This leads to extremely insightful people who have a fixed level of focus.  I almost said “myopia” but a better ophthalmologic analogy is loss of lens accommodation, a common problem of age (the need for reading glasses after you turn 47 is this).  With this condition you can be nearsighted or farsighted or have 20/20, but you can’t focus very well outside of a narrow range of your focal length.  My very favorite writers on narrative art are able to focus up and down the scale and, importantly, experience the piece as a blank slate, so the reading can be guided by the piece and not a bias as to level of engagement.  Zizek is great, but I’d prefer it if he seemed to be able to be exhilarated, have fun, recognize bad pacing, or appreciate an actor/actress performance without making these a function of some Marxist/Lacanian equation.

 The good reviews of Batman vs. Superman I have seen dwell on the visual composition and fuck off attitude, but also focus on the movie as a critique of a kind of moral simplicity implicit in nerd/internet culture who can’t see what these characters are really up to.  The film is deliberately provoking the group that generates all the reviews.  Superman is an alien who is hyper aware of the conflict between humanity’s potential and its reality. His choice to act for the good in Man of Steel is that of a god in absolute agony as he has to take the war into himself, killing because moral choices are horrific and don’t have the external consequences they should in a just universe. Superman knows he chooses his path to suffer and serve the good and the universe could care less (Nietzsche’s Ubermench, anyone?). His suffering imposes a moral order on the universe.  In BvS he confronts the prospect of progressive inaction, the Obama path, do no harm because everyone seems to want you to be blamed, shamed into will-less-ness… one of the failure modes of the current American (masculine) spirit. Batman represents the other failure mode, the wallowing in the anger at traditional American values violated by the rise of selfishness and me first mentality.  Of course they need to fight – they are primal opposites: deflated optimism vs. pessimism on steroids, past vs. future, sun vs. void, naturally gifted immigrant vs. driven legacy born on third base.  

 These are gods, and are presented like gods, in a series of mise-en-scene straight ripped from renaissance paintings. It is wrong to speak of subtlety, because subtlety is the opposite of the point.  Look at those (Turin?) horses, gaudy symbols like oranges in the Godfather! The structure of the story is a mess by normal metrics, but there is a shape there, and that is enough when you are dealing with art film rules.  The collision of two celestial objects, awaiting the feminine to mediate their Hegelian synthesis and convert their masculine valances to the positive.  Dwelling on act structure is stupid.  Recognizing that they failed to make this a conventional narrative is useless.  Citing plot inconsistencies, “X wouldn’t do that,” and calling it emptyheaded and over the top mean you are watching a movie you can’t handle.  This is a skilled, smart but “off,” bodily centered outsider artist grappling with shit that is really, really big and deep.  It isn’t perfect, but no one should want that out of this (there are countless clockwork left brain things to watch)… you should come to this wanting a mess, gods of ideas punching your midbrain, opening you to experience the catharsis of basic archetypal struggles in the world.  You know, like superheroes work.  It is wrong to privilege level 2 which, remember, is where mass of expressed “learned” opinion is.  This is where the DC Verse lives.  Marvel is centered in DC’s hole, and it is right to talk of story as structure.

 My point is that the best thing you can do is learn to focus where the thing is most ready to connect with you and be flexible enough to let the thing tell you how to read it.  There is a lot of crap, but there is a lot of good stuff that gets critically ignored because too few are focusing in the right areas.  If you like more stuff, if you find everything more interesting and complex, you win. Not everything is good, but you can almost always find a way to engage it at its best.  You can say many bad things about the book Twilight, but damn if there isn’t something there about the subject/object struggle of being desired as a young woman, the disconnect of inner and outer experience, and the consideration of the choice of traditional-relationship-as-road-to-marriage in a modern context.  If you smirk and say Mary Sue, you have failed.  

 This three cluster model isn’t perfect, but explains a lot why I see lumpy, weird high budget stuff with the high viewership (mass audience), pissed off forums and think pieces (critical consensus/perceived audience if you live online), and elated jaded curmudgeons (deep critics) troika so often.  I think this is more than just a status economy (though that is clearly involved) but the production system has adjusted so that the qualities of the output levels align to the audience expectations.  The most interesting stuff is that which crosses levels, which requires risking a product that will probably seem suboptimal to everyone.  So, let’s have a toast for the auteurs who don’t fit, making movies that are a scrum of potential meanings that require you to get dirty and renounce the tyranny of “the way it should be done.” And I mean Michael Bay as well as David Lynch.  If they seem insane, it’s a feature not a bug.

[sempiternalsandpitturtle]

Where does content come into an interactive marketing strategy?

Burger King said it best with its slogan of over 40 years: ‘Have it your way’. Putting users in control of the product/service marketed to them is useful in both internal and external marketing.

Interactive marketing was made famous in recent times by streaming platform Netflix with two ‘choose your own fate’ television programs, but it’s has been around for a while – nearly half of respondents to a Content Marketing Institute (CMI) survey report said they have already used it. It’s just that many businesses don’t know where content come into an interactive marketing strategy.

In this guide, we will discuss:

What is interactive content marketing?

Common interactive marketing techniques.

Interactive versus static content and how to use both in a dedicated marketing strategy.

With that in mind, it’s time to make a choice. Learn more or leave now. Choose the light side or the dark side. The blue pill or the red pill. The decision is yours!

via GIPHY

What is interactive content marketing?

Interactive content allows users to determine their own personalised outcome to a narrative or question.

Netflix’s “Black Mirror: Bandersnatch” weaves interactive elements into the show’s narrative about a mentally ill game developer, Stefan Butler. Stefan loses his grip on reality while obsessively creating a video game with multiple possible story threads based on player choices. The Netflix audience chooses actions for Stefan to take, with each decision affecting the episode’s events and outcome. “Bandersnatch” was a critical success, showing the appeal of interactive content.

This led to another interactive series. “You vs. Wild with Bear Grylls”, being released months later. This time users are partnered with famed survivalist Bear Grylls as he is dropped into a variety of remote environments. Viewers are in full control of how he survives his wild encounters, getting to choose between different scenarios that change the narrative as it goes.

But despite having similar interactive abilities to “Bandersnatch”, “You vs. Wild” hasn’t been met with the same critical acclaim or audience interest. This shows interactive marketing is more than just a gimmick – it needs high quality, engaging content to keep users invested in making decisions.

Interactive content marketing can include:

Interactive images and videos.

Opinion polls.

Quizzes/assessments.

Drip email campaigns.

Keep this list in mind – we’ll come back to these specific examples later! The common factor uniting this content is active engagement. Users need to involve themselves with the material in front of them to learn more information, progress through a story or fill a curiosity gap.

Common interactive marketing techniques

The list above accounts for both internal and external marketing strategies. Internal interactive content engages those close to your business, like employees or prospects on a mailing list.

External interactive marketing techniques, meanwhile, are targeted at top-of-funnel customers. CMI’s report shows around two-thirds of marketers who use interactive content do so with engagement and education as the main goals.

Interactive images and videos

Interactive videos and images allow users to interact with different onscreen elements to find the information needed. Interactive video content, as seen with Netflix’s successful shows, can be excellent for driving storytelling with the user experience at its heart.

However, interactive images, like maps or a customer review collage, also have a role to play. Images with interactive elements can have as much power as video, giving an online audience the perfect platform to learn more about what your business does.

Opinion polls

Everyone has an opinion, and the internet is fertile ground for people sharing them. However, imagine being able to capture your users’ thoughts about your business in a fun online poll? Tools like Apester allow businesses to create online platforms that keeps customers on-page for longer and allows them to share opinions. This data can then be used in future marketing efforts.

Quizzes/assessments

Testing online users’ knowledge of a given subject is another good way of engaging attention. This interactive marketing technique is often used alongside static content such as a blog article. Using a strategy tried and tested since the earliest days of schooling means businesses can assess how much information readers obtained and retained from the written blog content, while also keeping these individuals on the blog platform or organisation’s website for longer.

Drip email campaigns

While drip campaigns are most often used once customers have directly interacted with a business, this email marketing is also used to engage with new online users. Here different users will receive different ‘threads’ of information depending on their interactions with an initial email. The different user paths of a drip campaign are illustrated below, indicating how marketers can use different content messages and styles to try re-engage passive audiences.

Below is an example how different responses to the same email would generate a follow up message with two different pieces of content attached.

How to use static and interactive content in holistic marketing

Static and interactive content can be used in both external and internal marketing techniques, in support of one another, to engage and inform as wide an online customer base as possible.

Creating a united strategy comes from meeting three basic principles:

The written content is valuable and serves a purpose.

Interactive content is not reliant on interactivity solely for effect.

All content reflects the values of your customers and brand.

Let’s take a previous example of using a quiz in support of a blog article to demonstrate how important the above points are.

Articles need value takeaways. If they don’t offer users anything they don’t already know, they won’t read far enough to take the quiz.

The quiz should ask questions related to your enterprise and products/services.

While trying to engage readers, you must ensure all engagement is moderated to ensure abusive or offensive content isn’t promoted.

Nearly 80 per cent of content marketers who are using interactive content plan to increase their

use of it in the next 12 months, according to CMI. Is it time to jump on the band(ersnatch) wagon? You choose!

from http://bit.ly/2WHpKDl

[foryourart]

ABDULLA IBRAHIM & EKAYA IN TRIBUTE TO THE JAZZ EPISTLESPhotos and auction catalogs from the 1910s in the Getty Research Institute's provenance research holdings. Image courtesy of the Getty Center. 

PLAN ForYourArt: March 1–7

Thursday, March 1

Olafur Eliasson's Reality projector and Albert Oehlen and Peppi Bottrop: Line Packers, Marciano Art Foundation (Mid-Wilshire), 11am–5pm. 

Talk: Gallery Talk: Point of View—Fashion and Culture in Painted in Mexico, 1700–1790: Pinxit Mexici, LACMA (Miracle Mile), 12:30pm.

School of Music Visiting Artist Series: Jacob Shea, CalArts (Valencia), 2–4pm.

Graphic Design Lecture Artist: Anita Cooney, CalArts (Valencia), 4:30pm.

TOURS & TALKS: Stories of Almost Everyone Walk-through: Sarah Lehrer-Graiwer, Hammer Museum (Westwood), 6pm.

Persons of Interest: The Status of the Self in Digital Cultures, Wende Museum (Culver City), 6pm.

Damien Hirst: The Veil Paintings, Gagosian (Beverly Hills), 6–8pm.

Gesture | Form | Pop | Process, Kohn Gallery (Hollywood), 6–8pm.

AMERICA MARTIN, JoAnne Artman Gallery (Laguna Beach), 6–8pm.

Nelson Ramírez de Arellano Conde: I Wish I Could Understand: A History of Photography in Cuba, Annenberg Space for Photography (Century City), 6:30–8pm.

Provenance Research—A Personal Concern, Getty Center (Brentwood), 7pm.

Matthew Rolston: Hollywood Royale: Out of the School of Los Angeles, Fahey/Klein Gallery (Hollywood), 7–9pm.

Screen: Black Radical Imagination, MOCA Grand Avenue (Downtown), 7pm.

READINGS: Poetry: Rosanna Warren, Hammer Museum (Westwood), 7:30pm.

Friday, March 2

School of Music Visiting Artist Series: Jürg Frey, CalArts (Valencia), 10am–12pm.

First Fridays: L.A. Invents, Natural History Museum (Downtown), 5–10pm.

Walead Beshty: Equivalents, Regen Projects (Hollywood), 6–8pm.

Jessi Reaves, Mother Culture (Downtown), 6–9pm.

9th Annual Art For Hearts Fundraiser by Pico Youth & Family Center, Robert Berman Gallery (Santa Monica), 7–11pm. $15–40.

Movie Nights at the Museum: Wattstax, Los Angeles Poverty Department (Downtown), 7pm.

LALUZAPALOOZA 2018: OUR 32nd ANNUAL GROUP SHOW, La Luz de Jesus Gallery (Los Feliz), 8–11pm.

Yoshito Ohno: Flower and Bird, REDCAT (Downtown), 8:30pm. $20–40. Also March 3.

Saturday, March 3

Ranch Clinic - Safely Preserving Food at Home, The Huntington (San Marino), 9–10am.

ANDY WARHOL: Prints from the Collections of Jordan D. Schnitzer and His Family Foundation, Palm Springs Art Museum (Palm Springs), 10am–5pm.

Photo Workshop – Awkwardless Photos, ESMoA (El Segundo), 10am–12:30pm.

Workshop: INHABITANTS, A Physical Theatre Activation Lab with Gema Galiana + Emily Meister, Pieter (Lincoln Heights), 11:30am–3pm.

Artist at Work: Paper and Light, Getty Center (Brentwood), 1–3pm. Also March 24.

Closing reception: Hunter/Killer, Big Pictures Los Angeles (Mid-City), 3–7pm.

The Big Picture - Chinese & Mexican Artists Examine Contemporary Muralism in Mexico and China, USC Pacific Asia Museum (Pasadena), 3pm.

Bahia Through the Senses: A Capoeira Workshop, Fowler Museum (Westwood), 4–7pm.

Kcymaerxthaere: The Story So Far... (Folio 1) // Book signing and storytelling w/ Eames Demetrios, Arcana Books on the Arts (Culver City), 4–6pm.

NIRA PEREG: Melt Away Before You or I Can't Believe it's Not Battle!, LAXART (Hollywood), 4–7pm.

LAUNCH PARTY - FULL BLEDE Issue Four: The Pattern and WILLIAM POWHIDA – AFTER ‘AFTER THE CONTEMPORARY  and IT'S OK.↘ closing receptions, Charlie James Gallery (Chinatown), 4–7pm.

50th Anniversary of the East L.A. Walkouts, The Church of the Epiphany/La Iglesia de la Epifanía (Lincoln Heights), panel discussion, 4pm.

Robin Mitchell: Paintings & Nancy Monk: Twelve by Nine, Craig Krull Gallery (Santa Monica), 5–7pm.

Martel Window Project: David Schafer and Roger Herman, Richard Telles Fine Art (Fairfax), 5–7pm.

Zoe Buckman: Let Her Rave, Gavlak (Hollywood), 5–8pm.

MYTHOPOETIC, Coagula Curatorial (Chinatown), 5–9pm.

YOUR MOUSE GOD IS DEAD (and other new works), CalArts (Valencia), 5–7pm.

¡ADIÓS, CUBA IS! Closing reception, Annenberg Space for Photography (Century City), 6–8pm.

Amy Sol and Liz Brizzi, Thinkspace Gallery (Culver City), 6–9pm.

Katherine Sherwood: The Interior of the Yelling Clinic, Walter Maciel Gallery (Culver City), 6–8pm.

Despina Stokou: Oh, Honey, Praz-Delavallade (Miracle Mile), 6-8pm.

Ben Sanders: I Come to the Garden Alone, Ochi Projects (Mid-City), 6–9pm.

Peles Empire and Oliver Osborne: Empire/Osborne, Moran Moran (West Hollywood), 6–8pm.

HIGHLIGHTAMIR NIKRAVAN: WORLD OF INTERIORS and KATHRYN GARCIA: A TANIT, Various Small Fires (Hollywood), 6–8pm.

By The Lights of Their Eyes, Shulamit Nazarian (Hollywood), 6–9pm.

Norm Clasen: Titled (Cowboy), M+B Photo (Hollywood), 6–8pm.

By The Lights Of Their Eyes, Shulamit Nazarian (Hollywood), 6–9pm.

Robin Cameron: No Now, Moskowitz Bayse (Hollywood), 6–9pm.

Emanuel Röhss: Out of Joint, 818 South Spring Street (Downtown), 6–9pm.

Emmeric Konrad, Tieken Gallery LA (Chinatown), 6–10pm.

NOTHING TAME, Keystone Art Space (Lincoln Heights), 6–11pm.

NOTHING TAME, ESMoA (El Segundo), 6–11pm.

Momo No Sekku and Year of the Dog, Giant Robot 2 (Sawtelle), 6:30–10pm.

Closing event, we tbd, Human Resources (Chinatown), 7–10pm.

ABDULLA IBRAHIM & EKAYA IN TRIBUTE TO THE JAZZ EPISTLES, CAP UCLA (Westwood), 8pm.

Analog vs. Digital, Hive Gallery (Downtown), 8–11pm.

To Kill Capitalism by Denae Howard, CalArts (Valencia), all day. Through March 9.

Sunday, March 4

KIDS: 826LA@Hammer: Advice Bot Repair Shop, Hammer Museum (Westwood), 11am.

Real Worlds: Brassaï, Arbus, Goldin, Give and Take: Highlighting Recent Acquisitions, Jackson Pollock’s Number 1, 1949: A Conservation Treatment, and Lauren Halsey: we still here, there, MOCA Grand Avenue (Downtown), 11am–5pm.

Shared Exhibition, Hannah Hoffman (Hollywood), Kristina Kite (Mid-City), Park View Gallery (MacArthur Park), 12–5pm.

Workshop: Improvisation Strategies for the Individual and Group with Spenser Theberge, Pieter (Lincoln Heights), 12–3pm.

Mr. Fish + Robert Scheer | Conversation + Book Signing, Robert Berman Gallery (Santa Monica), 1–3pm.

Mindfulness and Self-Care Tools for Healthy and Joyful Living, Main Museum (Downtown), 1–3pm.

An Old-Fashioned Craft-Cocktail Workshop with Bar Mattachine, Craft & Folk Art Museum (Miracle Mile), 2–5pm. $70–80.

Garry Neill Kennedy: Printed Matter: Selections from 1971 to Present, as-is.la (MacArthur Park), 2–5pm.

Eric Zammitt: Exhibition & Open Studio, 323 E. Altadena Drive (Altadena), 2–5pm.

Artists on Artists: Paul Mpagi Sepuya on Real Worlds: Brassaï, Arbus, Goldin, MOCA Grand Avenue (Downtown), 3pm.

CONVERSATION@PAM: AUSTENISTAN, USC Pacific Asia Museum (Pasadena), 3–5pm.

Drawing from the Masters: Drawing on the Edge, Getty Center (Brentwood), 3:30–5:30pm. Also March 18.

Shana Lutker: Chapter 5: Phosphorescence, Pheasants, and Unpleasants and book signing, Art Catalogues at LACMA (Miracle Mile), 4–6pm.

Ramiro Chaves & MANIMAS: NIESO NIESOTRO, Ruberta (Glendale), 4–7pm.

Nick Kramer: No Neighbors, Street Lights Are Out and Jennifer Rochlin: Wild is the Wind, The Pit (Glendale), 4–7pm.

Vittorio Brodmann: Two Birds, Two Stones, Freedman Fitzpatrick (Hollywood), 6–8pm.

SISTER SPIT TOUR 2018: QTPOC Cruising the West, Human Resources (Chinatown), 7–9pm.

Monday, March 5

A Day In the Garden, private estate (Palm Springs), 11am–1pm.

UPCOMING: School of Music Visiting Artist Series: Jerónimo (Jxel) Rajchenber, CalArts (Valencia), 2–4pm.

THIS, NOT THAT LECTURE: MARK FOSTER GAGE, UCLA (Westwood), 6:30pm. 

Kip's Desert Book Club: The Dispossessed by Ursula K. LeGuin, private home (Joshua Tree), 7pm.

Wu Man and the Huayin Shadow Puppet Band, The Huntington (San Marino), 7:30pm.

Across Times, Bodies and Space: Films by Vivienne Dick, REDCAT (Downtown), 8:30pm

Tuesday, March 6

Points of Access: Artists in Conversation with Kenyatta A.C. Hinkle, Ramsess, Mark Steven Greenfield, and moderated by Isabelle Lutterodt, Art + Practice (Leimert Park), 7pm.

READING: Some Favorite Writers: Mary Gaitskill, Hammer Museum (Westwood), 7:30pm.

ArtCenter Spring 2018 Graduate Seminar Lecture: Laura Owens presents Candida Alvarez, ArtCenter College of Design (Pasadena), 7:30pm. 

Wednesday, March 7

FOWLER OUT LOUD: CHRISTIAN BESA WRIGHT, Fowler Museum (Westwood), 6pm. 

Cut! Paper Play in Photography, Getty Center (Brentwood), 7pm.

Distinguished Fellow Lecture - Conversion & Religions of the World in 18th-Century America, The Huntington (San Marino), 7:30pm.

[rfwhatsnext]

The five most fascinating people at Advertising Week 2017

By Christine Dusek

In the spirit of the famed Barbara Walters’ television interview events, I am sharing my choices for the five most interesting and prominent personalities who I was lucky enough to hear speak at AdWeek. (#AWNewYork) Their remarkable capabilities and forward-thinking viewpoints are what defines them as today’s emerging media industry icons.  I took away not only a very healthy respect (and interest in doing their PR) for what they do each day but, also, for how tapped in they are to today’s culture moments, showcasing the diversity that defines the United States, how what was once a social channel is morphing into one of the most influential platform for communications campaigns, and the need to understand all this to be an effective communications strategist.

1.      Bozoma St. John, first Chief Brand Officer, Uber:  Bozoma was in the “Wired Brand Storyteller” session, along with Jennifer Breithaupt, global consumer CMO officer of Citi, and Marc Mathieu, CMO of Samsung Electronics.  But the ever-impressive Bozoma, current chief brand officer of Uber and former Apple Music and PepsiCo (think Beyonce campaigns) marketing icon, was the real rock star of the session.  Not only is she leading the charge of humanizing the Uber brand, coming off a long string of public scandals and a leadership crisis (Uber is hoping a little marketing mojo can help it regain its footing – the whole reason I sat in the room for this one), but she owns her remarkable position as one of the few senior women of color in Silicon Valley.  All three marketing execs are master brand storytellers and, while the dialogue was continually dynamic, there were a few key takeaways from this session.  First, brands don't want to be politicized, they want to be humanized.  That means connecting brands to culture, and finding what's important to their consumers.  Second, diversity of thought and images matters, and should reflect your audience.  But the biggest takeaway was quite simple - using familiar music soundtracks, powerful visuals, and a storyline that hits at life moments that are important to consumers, is how you build audience interest and brand following.

 2.      Iram Khan, CSO, Snap: This former banker is a super-impressive speaker, who gave an articulate overview of how Snap can best fit into marketing and advertising efforts.  But the interesting takeaway from his panel was that, while video is still “everything,” the trend is that videos are getting shorter and shorter, and Snap CSO Khan even went so far as to say that video now needs to be no longer than 3-5 seconds.  He showed us some great examples of the next version launch of the “Call of Duty” video game, and how Snap previewed the video game with a simple 3-second video of Normandy Beach, and the headline of the game.  They also showcased the amazing traction they got on the “Game of Thrones” promo work with HBO, and the use of the ‘white walkers’ to attract super-fans with an ice-blue-eyed geo-filter during the premier episode.  They even had the cast of GOT using the filter on the red carpet premier, and posting to the official show’s snap channel

 3.      Carolyn Everson, Facebook’s VP of global marketing solutions, used her slot at Advertising Week to talk about Facebook’s “accordion of options” for marketers when it comes to video.  Given all the interest in video at this event, I wanted to hear Facebook’s take on the opportunity, and how that might impact other competitors’ narratives.  Video feeds are now clearly evident, as proven when I opened my Facebook app during the session and was greeted with a slew of short video teasers accompanying posts. I also learned, in this session, that Instagram is now up to 800 million monthly active users, and that half a billion accounts use it every single day. (Take that, Snapchat!)  Ms. Everson also said she thinks the industry is underestimating the potential of mobile.  Given that mobile represents around 87% of Facebook’s ad revenue, it made a lot of sense for her to bring up this interesting fact!

 4.      Sarah Jessica Parker:  SJP was fabulous for just being SJP on the Instagram Effect panel discussion, moderated by Rebecca Jarvis, and for inspiring me and other (ahem) non-Millennial remarkable female business women to finally get an Instagram account (especially after sitting through Carolyn’s Facebook pitch!).  She is the master at carefully curating her own personal brand, with over 3.7 million followers on IG, and uses a beautifully curated Instagram gallery of video shorts, photos, and memes to tell the story of her life and her iconic personal brand.  Thanks for the tips on how to build my own authentic personal brand without being a celebrity.  Oh, and those shoes were just the best….never disappointing!!!

 5.      Tim Armstrong, CEO, AND Allie Kline, CMO, Oath:  These two presenters drew everyone’s attention not only to their new corporate brand campaign that launched during AdWeek but, also, to their successful storybook narrative, and seamless integration of anecdotes about the future of ‘brand-building’ on their platforms (shameless plug for my client!!!).  Oath did a rock-star job launching its new brand campaign, and was omnipresent at every venue in terms of rolling out advertising highlights about the brand, featuring analytics about their media and advertising properties, and using a cool new video ad with a rap-inspired remix from ChuckD and Tribe Called Quest (“Can you kick it”) to showcase their brands and their coolest clients.  Their leadership team was also present as keynoters and panelists at all the top-draw events, including a ‘center stage’ keynote appearance by CEO Tim Armstrong, who highlighted his platform for the “Building your brand with Oath” campaign, which is all about how to use amazing creative, even better content, and great ad tech metrics to effectively build brands.  Finally, the entire campaign ‘buzz’ was shaped by an AdWeek feature article that dropped on Monday, followed by additional coverage in WSJ, Marketing Week, Bloomberg, BI, The Campaign, CNBC.  The trick to AdWeek, I’ve learned, is to have amazing videos, find the media onsite, and say something soundbyte-worthy.  It was a fulfilling week of learning, networking and even some celebrity sighting, and I’m truly inspired to make the ideas a reality!

  AdWeek remains the place to be seen and heard, and my key takeaways help us to be better communicator partners to advertisers and marketers:

Video is everything:  If there is one thing that reigns true, it’s that video is king.  Videos are the medium of choice and, with the increase in popularity of Snap and IG stories, video has to be a part of the content – and the shorter the better. It’s clear attention spans are getting shorter, and brands need to incorporate shorter but buzz-worthy video, either as a stand-alone or to accompany written content.

Humanize brands:  With the rise of social media, everyone wants to feel a personal connection with the people and brands they follow. To this, brands need to think less about selling products and more about selling an experience and lifestyle. This means that content needs to be less self-serving and more about the people and moments behind the brand.

Story-making vs storytelling:  Storytelling has been a theme in our     industry for a while, but now we need to look at storytelling not just as     “telling” but as “curating.”  This means that stories the brands tell need to evolve, and build off one another, so that the consumers have an ongoing, dynamic and engaging experience.

Diversity takes on many dimensions:  When we think of diversity, we need to think about not just outward diversity, but diversity of experience, thought and skills. This means agency staffing models need to move from siloed approaches to those that incorporate people who have very varied backgrounds and experiences in different industries – for example, staffing a healthcare account with someone with a tech background, or a food and beverage account with someone with a health background. What this can lead to is really unique, creative ideas that think beyond traditional boundaries.

[designforwork]

Misc. notes from TechFestNW

At TechFestNW a little more than a week ago, I sat in on some fascinating chats on, among other things, creating “cinematic VR” with Daniel Wilson -- whose nuggets of wisdom included, “Our poor, stupid brains can be fooled into anything” and “Respect the viewer’s neck” (the latter, regarding the expenditure of neck energy for every cut and camera movement in such an immersive environment). The possibilities and subsequent considerations are mind-boggling and cool.

+ Also noteworthy, Rukaiyah Adams (from Meyer Memorial Trust) on “Tech-lanthropy 2.0” and ultimately social justice, who shared, “I think we need to think about the word ‘return’ more broadly” and “explore what [that word] means.” She also returned over and over to “the profound utility or impact” of innovation in the tech realm, and of weighing money vs. information. Paraphrasing her powerful talk, she believes access to products is/can be charity, and the products of innovation are philanthropy, the latter of which which she defines as “taking care of each other.” Note the distinction between charity and philanthropy -- she did.

+ Senator Ron Wyden, in what felt increasingly like a stump speech (for better and worse), started his talk by stating enthusiastically, “Don’t ever let a politician tell you liberty and security are mutually exclusive.” Congress, lookin’ at you.

+ Dr. Jonathan Hurst showed some awesome video of his team teaching robots to walk and run like our avian cohabitants (including a human kick to knock the thing off balance and recover), examining economy, agility, and versatility, along with all of our “evolutionary baggage.”

+ Eren Aksu talked immersive journalism, using VR to immerse the reader/viewer in new, oft-times uncomfortable stories. The goal: a visceral connection that results in empathy. Among the three-prong VR tech he discussed: 360, 3D, and a convergence of videogrammetry and photogrammetry. He also broke down the sectors of devices out there today: 1. the high-end “walk-around” fleet of tech like Oculus, HTC, and Vive; 2. mobile VR like Gear; and 3. scalable VR like Google Cardboard and other entry-level headsets. (Note: Keep an eye out for the forthcoming Planned Parenthood VR effort his company, Emblematic, is to release for VR streaming, “Across the Line.”) In destroying the divide between digital and physical -- “digital reality” -- the intent is to move VR to a social interaction and away from the individual. He also discussed how VR will increasingly move to a browser/web-based platform instead of the native apps seen today. And of course, the need to keep an eye to unintended consequences (via military use, for one), and to avoid scarring the user with graphic or otherwise traumatic content -- the mandate to balance the “wow factor” with ethical boundaries. Again, exciting stuff.

+ In one of my favorite talks, Tim Weber of HP discussed the endless uses of 3D printing, tracing tech innovations through the industrial revolutions and in the current and near-future frameworks of drivers like machine learning, automation, nationalism/protectionism (and resultant trade wars), IoT, and online marketplaces. When detailing the ins and outs of digital manufacturing and smart production -- mass customization and distributed manufacturing, a totally disrupted supply chain, global access at the local level, flexible capital, radical prototyping with lesser lead times, the “age of on-demand digital production” with no inventory and no factories -- he made a point to mention the 2nd Industrial Revolution, and how the U.S. retrained then agricultural workers to advance. The point: If we don’t do the same now, we’ll be left behind. Right.

+ During the final presentations of PitchFest contenders, the gentleman chatting up a venture called “Mashup Machine” -- the premise of which was far too convoluted for my liking (it didn’t win, as an FYI) -- said, “Algorithms will usher in a golden age of storytelling,” which made me wince (knee-jerk much?). I get what he says, the possibilities of choice and customization, and that ages 10-25 get 80% of their entertainment on YouTube, but still... no thanks.

+ In the last session of the two-day event, author/futurist Jerry Kaplan and moderator G. Pascal Zachary discussed the future of robots -- “slaves, masters... or partners?” In what was certainly a lively talk, Kaplan lamented the problems when economic and social policies are not aligned with each other, how America “domesticate[d] capitalism the best,” and the hype cycle of AI and robots and how they will enhance, and, to him at least, absolutely not replace humans. “Robots do tasks not jobs,” he says. “If they can do some of your [say, four] tasks, they can help you be more productive.” He also noted that, when it comes to jobs, “domains that are highly chaotic and variable are ‘safer’ for humans,” and quipped, “There’s no ‘they’ there,” regarding toasters or dishwashers or things we might have recently been told have, you know, cameras in them -- but mainly re: robots and souls and replacing us and all of that buzz. Kaplan more or less had me nodding emphatically, on how the nature of work has shifted, on the resurgence of liberal arts and their importance (in response to an audience question), and soft skills like persuasion and critical thinking, but when talk turned to labor markets, he lost me. Specifically, he mentioned how we’re getting richer, how future generations will buy a bespoke wedding gown (if I recall), but how generationally we’re getting richer. There wasn’t time to press on this, but it’s pretty well documented this is anything but the case. Perhaps the axiom “the rich get richer” is what he was referring to, but it certainly didn’t seem like it, instead more like a far-reaching, broad statement -- when in fact, it’s widely documented that the chasm in income (in)equality is widening, and, you know, the disappearing middle class... Anyway, an enjoyable and valuable talk, but I beg to differ with that statement. [I checked out his book after the fact and given its description and focus on income inequality and solutions to achieve shared prosperity, perhaps it’s a misunderstanding. Still, it really didn’t come off any other way than “we’re getting richer.”]

In any case, a great deal of inspiring content. Thanks to @pncacollaborativedesign for sending me.