I have been staying tuned to the constant news of an economic bust where people are losing homes, jobs, and retirement savings. In my city, there is a definite squeeze where costs are being cut to try and avoid some job losses. In some cases, it isn’t because of a lack of revenue; it’s to save money for a nuclear winter in the event that money is not available in the future. It’s a mode that many businesses are operating under, and from my radar, it’s most visible in the tech sector.

While I don’t pay attention to tech blogs like I use to, I still hear about the effects of the down economy on tech companies, primarily Silicon Valley startups, via my regular tech podcasts. One company that was recently affected was Revision3, a new media company that focuses on IPTV shows. On October 27, Revision3′s CEO, Jim Louderback, announced show cuts and layoffs, which included axing popSiren, Internet Superstar, and Pixel Perfect. Later, the GigaOm Show and The Revision3 Gazette were also canceled from Revision3′s lineup after the original blog post. Revision3 also ended its distribution deals with Wine Library TV and EPIC FU and laid off approximately 10 of their staff, which included popular hosts Sarah Lane and Martin Sargent. This wasn’t a surprising move to me since many startups are announcing cuts. What also wasn’t surprising was the comments left by Revision3 “fans” on the blog post and message boards. (more…)

For months, I have watched the media and the masses badmouth China on everything from Internet censorship, lead-filled consumer products, and most recently, China’s treatment of Tibet (complete with Olympic torch protests). I have been staying attuned to the coverage of China in western media over the past several months, and I have reached a verdict: we are being brainwashed into thinking China is bad. This is similar to how we were brainwashed into thinking Russia was bad when they were a communist nation. This is something that concerns me because it seems like we’re heading towards a new cold war era thanks to mainstream media’s propaganda.

First, I want to say that I’m not some communism-loving fanatic. I love democracy, even though I don’t think a democratic government can work for some countries and cultures (Iraq, for instance). Like most kids, I was taught that communism was a bad form of government in school, which is not surprising since I grew up during the height of the Cold War era (the Regan years). My classmates and I were taught that the U.S.S.R. along with any other country with a communist government was not our friend. However, I have also learned not to believe everything you read in textbooks because history is often not reflected accurately. I have applied this method of thinking when it comes to items I read in the news, hear on podcasts, and watch on TV. As a result, I am instantly inclined to believe that much of what I’m hearing or reading is not entirely accurate. Someone is pushing an agenda to brainwash millions into believing something that may or may not be true. After all, something must be true if you repeat it enough, right? This is why I look at the news coverage of China doing “bad things” with a side eye.

Do I believe China is doing some outlandish things to its citizens? Of course, they are, but tell me, what country isn’t? I’m absolutely positive that many of the western countries pointing fingers at China are doing bad things to their citizens on a daily basis. But our faults and problems in the western world are not as important as what China is doing at the moment. To me, it’s a hypocritical way of thinking that we, as westerners, should sit back and evaluate before casting stones at a glass house. (more…)

Revision3 CEO Jim Louderback finally put the last nail in the coffin for the IPTV’s latest effort, Social Brew. If you don’t know what Social Brew was, it was a show dedicated to covering social networks on a weekly basis such as Twitter, Zune Social, Facebook, etc. When the show debuted, I wondered how anyone could possibly sustain a weekly show on social networks, so I decided to see for myself by subscribing to it via Zune Marketplace. From episode one, I had a feeling that Social Brew was doomed for failure.

Non-compelling and/or Mismatched Hosts

Social Brew’s main host was Irene McGee of Real World Seattle fame. I thought it was an odd choice from the beginning, but I definitely felt it wasn’t the wisest of choices after watching episode one. One thing I noticed about McGee was that she seemed uncomfortable and nervous on camera. She talked – a whole lot – with her hands, which I spent more time watching (in annoyance) than listening to what she was saying. She also had an irritating tendency to ramble, make things about her, and take over the conversion, which she did improve upon in future episodes. I know some viewers also held the “Stephen incident” against her, which turned into a minor controversy on Rev3’s forums. I’m also aware that some people just didn’t think she had enough “geek cred” to host the show, but it wasn’t as if she was hosting Systm, people. Personally, I found that McGee, aside from the other annoyances, just wasn’t interesting as a host and lacked the “it” factor.

I can say the same for co-hosts Johnny Hwin and Neha Tiwari (who was actually good on Tekzilla). While I felt they were better hosts than McGee, I found them mostly boring whenever they were on camera. They primarily lacked a “spark” whenever they were discussing topics for their segments, which made me wonder if they really liked what they were doing. The only exception was Moujon Z. whose personality stood out and whose comic relief was the best thing about the show; however, I felt that in some ways, she didn’t belong on Social Brew. Moujon was the extreme opposite among all of her co-hosts, which made it even more obvious that she was neon pink and everyone else was just beige in terms of on-screen personality. (more…)

Over the past couple of months, we’ve seen some U.S. presidential candidates go through “Pastorgate,” which is a series of scandals involving controversial comments made by ministers of churches that are or aren’t associated with the candidates. Barack Obama had to deal Rev. Jermiah Wright and more recently Father Michael Pfleger. John McCain had Rev. Rod Parsley and Rev. John C. Hagee. And Hillary Clinton? Well, no pastor seems to care about embroiling her in scandal. In any case, I have watched the media headlines and “news” talk shows dissect these “scandals” to the point of overkill. As an observer, I simply don’t understand why the media is harping over the Pastorgate comments. After all, the candidate didn’t say these things; these pastors did. So why is the media focusing so intently on comments made by these “rogue” pastors when these words didn’t come from the candidate? It’s quite simple; the media is trying to sway your vote by shooting a huge marketing effort for/against a particular candidate, which is why I think the U.S. government controls mainstream media more than we realize. However, we, as Americans, should take a deeper look at why these comments from pastors are irrelevant to the 2008 election.

When I attended institutionalized churches, I listened to hundreds (if not thousands) of pastors’ sermons. Some things the pastor preached, I agreed with and others, I did not. I usually didn’t agree with the pastor using the Word of God to preach a personal agenda that had nothing to do with saving souls or uplifting people. See, I listened intently enough to realize that there were times when I was being served up personal agendas that the pastor was pushing via charismatic sermons. Here are examples.

Example 1

One particular pastor constantly preached about how “the Baptists are trying to do it like we do.” By “we,” this particular pastor meant the charismatic movement known as the Pentecostal movement, which is similar to the Evangelicals. He obviously had an ax to grind against the Baptists because he often used them for target practice during his sermons. Whenever I visited that church, I noticed he could barely deliver a sermon without targeting the Baptists at least once. I also noticed that while some members jumped on his anti-Baptist bandwagon, others were so turned off that they eventually left the church, which also sent him packing not too long after attendance dropped. (more…)

I have been a Sprint subscriber for six years. For the most part, I have been happy with my cell phone service. In the beginning, you had somewhat “cutting edge” cell phones when I first signed on as a subscriber. The clarity of phone calls on your network was unmatched to any other carrier I’d had – Alltel, Cingular/AT&T, and US Cellular. While your initial network penetration in my area had some mixed results, I noticed that you focused on building up your infrastructure; therefore, I actually had cell phone coverage in more rural areas and not just metropolitan areas. Technology and infrastructure concerns aside, you had some other issues: like a policy of extending your customers subscriber agreements (the infamous two year contract) for another two years if you made one small change to your plan. And while you just recently discarded that policy (after numerous complaints by your customers), you still have some other issues to contend with. I recently sent you a snail mail letter addressing some of my issues with you, but I’m ready to take these issues to the public. Let’s discuss a few of them, shall we?

In a nutshell, your customer service reps are nice and pleasant, but they have a different answer (or none at all) to the same question whenever I am transferred around like a ping pong ball. In fact, I recently got trapped in “transfer hell” after speaking with at least five people (all over the world) just to get a simple answer on what I need to do about a broken, defective cell phone case. I’m normally a pleasant person, but when you spend nearly 35 minutes plus on the phone – explaining the same problem to five different people who keeps telling you they don’t handle my issue – your patience wears thin. That’s what happened to me after being told to call *2 on my phone for the third time…probably to speak to someone else who would tell me they couldn’t handle my issue. I wasn’t having it, so I asked for a supervisor to give me an answer to a very simple question, which she did: return your case to the Sprint store and they will replace it. I finally got some resolution to an issue after one of your reps (a few weeks earlier) promised me he would order me a new case to replace it, which was a straight out lie; one of your supervisors told me that they could not do that and that whoever told me that should not have. Well, gee, that’s great to know now, but you shouldn’t have given me expectations that were outright false and then don’t tell me what I need to do to get my issue resolved until I’ve gone through five different people in several call centers. While I had to sweat blood and tears to get that issue worked out, my recent experiences with your customer service reps fired me up on a whole new level. (more…)