Bret Easton Ellis: Notes on Charlie Sheen and the End of Empire (The Daily Beast)

In getting himself fired from Two and a Half Men, this privileged child of the media’s sprawling entertainment Empire has now become its most gifted prankster. And now Sheen has embraced the post-Empire, making his bid to explain to all of us what celebrity means in that world. Whether you like it or not is beside the point. It’s where we are, babe. We’re learning something. Rock’n roll. Deal with it.

Post-Empire started appearing in full-force just about everywhere last year while Cee Lo Green’s “Fuck You” gleefully played over the soundtrack. The Kardashians so get it. The cast (and the massive audience) of Jersey Shore gets it. Lady Gaga arriving at the Grammys in an egg gets it, and she gets it while staring at Anderson Cooper (Empire!) and admitting she likes to smoke weed when she writes songs—basically daring him: “What are you gonna do about that, bitch?” Nicki Minaj gets it when she sings “Right Thru Me” and becomes one of her many alter-egos on a red carpet. (Christina Aguilera starring in Burlesque doesn’t get it at all.) Ricky Gervais’s hosting of the Golden Globes got it. Robert Downey Jr., getting pissed off at Gervais, did not. Robert De Niro even got it, subtly ridiculing his career and his lifetime achievement trophy at the same awards show.

I don't get this article.

Read the full article here.

Television's Senior Moment (Wall Street Journal)

For decades the TV industry has operated on a currency of youth, creating shows that appeal to 18- to 49-year-olds, the age group advertisers traditionally consider most likely to buy new products, switch brands and spend on everything from cars to soft drinks. But as the nearly 80 million baby boomers continue to age out of the coveted demographic—the oldest boomers are turning 65 this year, the youngest 47—networks want to charge advertisers more to reach them. After all, these viewers still watch a disproportionate amount of TV, and they control half of all U.S. consumer spending. ...

The networks want marketers to ignore age and pay for viewers based on income and other factors—in effect paying more for affluent viewers who are 55-plus. CBS Entertainment President Nina Tassler says the network has always created shows that appeal to all ages. But "boomers have always been a priority customer for us," she adds.

"Rather than saying a 22-year-old is more valuable than a 58-year-old, we're saying, 'Look, the fact is an affluent 58-year-old is certainly more valuable than a 22-year-old who is just getting by,' " says David Poltrack, chief research officer at CBS Corp., parent of the CBS network.

Makes sense to me - and a step away from the youth obsession in Hollywood is good news for everyone, in my opinion. Changes in TV will lead to changes in film, which could mean fewer movies that are retreads, sequels, or based on "established properties" that don't necessarily mean anything to the Boomers. More original fare all around! Unless someone wants to make "Cocoon 3" - then I'm totally on board. :)

Read the full article here.

Time Inc.: The Anatomy of a Fiasco (New York Times)

When Mr. Griffin was hired, he was roundly praised, but his efforts to shake up what he saw as a calcified institution through reorganizations and consultants did not take. His approach to management and low opinion of some parts of the organization created dissension that many in the company suggested was going to lead to large-scale departures at Time Inc. after March bonuses were given out. And when he was told by both the people he worked for and the people he worked with that his reliance on a small circle of consultants was not going to end well, he refused to listen, according to executives at Time Warner and Time Inc. Bringing in an outsider is always a risk, and this one led to a big and public black eye.

But how did Time Inc. end up in the corner it was in, turning to an executive who had done a good job at a smaller publisher but was someone it did not know much about?

There's also an interesting article from yesterday's NY Times with more details on some of the insider shenanigans that lead to Griffin's dismissal, including his comparing Time Inc. to the Vatican. Wha..?

Mr. Griffin, a Roman Catholic, made some in the company uneasy by referring to his faith in meetings and interactions with subordinates, two company executives said. On at least one occasion, he compared Time Inc. to the Vatican as a way of illustrating its prestige and might, these people said. Mr. Bewkes personally intervened, asking Mr. Griffin to tone down the religious references.

Read the full "Fiasco" article here.
Read yesterday's article here.

Off Topic / TAKE ACTION TODAY! / 170 Million Americans for Public Broadcasting

The rapidly changing media environment is making public broadcasting more and more vital as a source of unbiased news, local cultural programming, and non-commercial educational programs designed to enhance the quality of life of our local communities.  Public broadcasting is a source of children’s programming, public affairs, music, and culture information that is often not provided by other sources.

The debate about whether or not to cut funding for Public Broadcasting is happening TODAY!!!!! Please take five minutes and tell your representatives in Congress how you feel about this.

Go to the official PBS site here.

Hollywood Reporter is being transformed to a weekly magazine (LA Times)

Beckman [the new CEO of the Reporter's parent company] thinks a lot of things about the Hollywood Reporter could be better. Since the private-equity-backed firm he leads acquired it ... [the trade] has been completely revamped. Former Us Weekly editor Janice Min was named editorial director, the staff has grown 50% to about 100 and next week the Reporter will replace its daily paper with a weekly glossy magazine. It's aimed at a wider swath of professionals interested in entertainment and intended to draw luxury advertisers that hope to reach them.

"What's happening is a result of the fact that the trades were a victim of their own neglect," said Min, who works in an undecorated office off the Reporter's newsroom in the Mid-Wilshire district. "It has been an industry press not commensurate in stature to the industry itself."

I'm damn curious to see how this turns out. Epic fail or Entertainment Weekly 2.0? What do you think?

Read the full article here.

The Vanity Fair 100 | The New Establishment 2010 (Vanity Fair)

This year Vanity Fair anoints [Mark Zuckerberg} as our new Caesar. He rules from the imperial capital of Palo Alto, California, the Rome of our nascent millennium. In this, the 16th annual ranking of the 100 most influential people of the Information Age, V.F. has also heaped some new honors on that other prince of Palo Alto, Steve Jobs, now that his Apple is worth even more than those great conquerors Google and Microsoft.

I can't say I'm surprised to see Zuckerberg and Jobs at the top of the list, However, if I had my druthers, their order would be reversed - I love Apple and am just lukewarm on Facebook - but since this isn't my list, who am I to argue? To whet your whistle, here's where just a few of the many industry's folks landed on the list:

# 4 - Rupert Murdoch - News Corp.
#12 - Brad Bird, Pete Docter, John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton - Pixar/Disney
#20 - Johnny Depp
#29 - Jon Stewart
#55 - Ryan Murphy
#75 - Angelina Jolie & Brad Pitt
#81 - Seth MacFarlane
#92 - Harvey & Bob Weinstein
#93 - Nikki Finke

See the full list here.

Roots of the modern star machine (The National Post, Canada)

Public interest in the famous is particularly insatiable today; consider the proliferation of celebrity magazines and TV shows and the celebrity news in daily papers.

My theory is that celebrities play a crucial role in our collective emotional lives by committing acts that the rest of us can view with disapproval.

Ouch! But a very interesting viewpoint that is investigated with current and past examples by both the article's author, as well as a book that he semi-reviews in the piece (A Short History of Celebrity by Fred Inglis).
Read the full article here.

Media and Tech Confer in Sun Valley (Wall Street Journal)

Look for the media insiders to discuss what Comcast Corp. will do with NBC Universal and its chief executive, Jeff Zucker, if regulators bless its bid to control the company. (The deal was negotiated in part at the conference last year. Mr. Zucker, a regular attendee, is expected to be there this week.) The fate of ABC is also likely to be a topic of conversation. Disney denied rumors that it has considered selling ABC, but chatter persists. With more moguls putting their content behind a paywall, expect talk about the wisdom of a subscription model for newspapers and TV shows and the iPad.

The techies and their deal-makers are likely to be brainstorming more potential combinations and content-swapping deals between AOL Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc., as all three plot ways to compete with ever-expanding Google. The escalating war between Google and Apple Inc. is another likely topic of conversation. Guests shouldn't expect an onsite showdown. While some Googlers are expected to attend, Apple CEO Steve Jobs isn't.

While I'm sure it would be great to attend this conference, I wonder about the wisdom of having basically the same group of highly elite media leaders year after year. If there's one thing many of us know, it's that the people at the top aren't exactly in touch with the real world. Discussing only amongst themselves just perpetuates that problem.
Read the full article here.