31 Aralık 2012 Pazartesi

Pam Corkery's Birthday, Her Herald Interview Plus The #1 Song The Day She Was Born

To contact us Click HERE
Today is my co-host from The Two Pam Corkery's 56th birthday and in case you missed it, here is the link to today's New Zealand's Herald where she was featured in the 12 Questions segment.

Amongst the obvious highlight of her mentioning my name, Pam reveals why she's glad she abandoned the brothel for women business idea (so am I), says what terrifies her the most and explains one of the things her mother taught her which still resonates.

Because it's Pam, not surprisingly today's 12 Questions is funny, but it is also incredibly honest, blunt and poignant. This is a woman who has survived and right now, things are deservedly good. Good health, good man, good writing, good co-host (humbly said) and ratings* neither of us can scarcely believe.

Happy birthday Pam! Here is the song that was US #1 the day she was born and not a bad one either:




*Ratings increased for Newstalk ZB's The Two (Sunday evenings 9pm-midnight) from 13% market share in Auckland all ages 10+ one year ago to 19.4% six months ago to 25.7% where they are now - almost triple that of the second top-rated competitor. During the same period my Thursday - Saturday morning overnight shifts have also increased from 15% market share to 24.8%. 


Why Rod Stewart's Shag-tastic Autobiography Is Genuinely Inspiring, Plus A Forgotten Early Fave

To contact us Click HERE
I've just got home from four nights in Melbourne and in between a reunion with a dozen of the best Aussies I've ever met, taking in Derby Day at Flemington, playing (and losing) tennis with a long-time rival and catching up with my sister and brother-in-law, I found time to read Rod Stewart's brand new autobiography Rod.

I'd mentioned on-air a couple of weeks ago on Newstalk ZB that I not only loved Rod's music, but had much admiration for the man too. "How could you say that about such a hell raising womanizer!?" said Alarmed of Albany via the text machine, but really it's easy. Rod didn't woo all those blonde beauties by being a Brad Pitt-esque hunk, he did it in large part by being so ridiculously charming. That charm didn't just extend to tall, tanned models and actresses - read just a couple of chapters of Rod and it's clear this is a bloke who blokes like too, be it his soccer buddies, his bandmates or famous cohorts like Elton John or (especially) Ronnie Wood.

I was talking to my sister about the difference between Rod and politicians who lecture to the rest of us relentlessly on Christian morality while privately conducting affairs or sometimes, much, much worse. I was contrasting that with Rod who (not surprisingly) never lectured on morality, has filled his book with a remarkable honesty and is oddly enough, someone I find inspiring.

Whereas Eric Clapton's equally gripping book's tales of his infidelity left me thinking how little I now liked Eric, Rod's book had the opposite effect. I put this down to the fact Rod's honesty about his failings is coupled with an acute understanding of how charmed a life he's lived. He is simultaneously humble, grateful and self-aware enough to know both his astonishing talent and his monumental cock-ups. He also grew up.

All of that makes a working-class man who's driven Lamborghinis for more than 40 years both very real and very relatable. And back to the morality stuff, I'd always got a sense that underneath the boozing, the cocaine-fuelled parties, the hotel-trashing and the shagging, this was an inherently good guy who wasn't adverse to thoughts of a more spiritual nature. Bare in mind this is a chap whose neck has rarely been seen without a crucifix (even when it wasn't just the accessory de jour), who covered Amazing Grace round about the same time he wrote about bedding a girl whose name he couldn't remember (Stay With Me) and chose Curtis Mayfield's devout People Get Ready as his mid-80s reunion song with guitar great Jeff Beck. He also admits to he and wife Penny finding an unspoken pull into churches where the two of them often walk in for silent prayer.

Rod is funny (his explanation of the prominence his buttocks received in the Da' Ya' Think I'm Sexy video is priceless), real, ridiculous, inspiring and self-deprecating. The New Zealand Herald critic said he felt like marrying the man after finishing the book. I don't know about that, but I'd unashamedly love to hang out with Rod, encourage him to keep songwriting (a skill he'd thought had deserted him but which has recently returned), discuss our favourite Sam Cooke records, get some tips on the art of woo-ing insanely beautiful women, have a couple of beers and crack a few funnies. He seems like that sort of bloke.

The song featured in this edition of The Roxborogh Report is 40 years old and was written by Rod and probably his best friend, Ronnie Wood (who prior to joining the Rolling Stones, was Rod's bandmate in the wonderfully shambolic Faces. In Rod, Ronnie is always referred to as "Woody" and the two don't just look like brothers, it's clear they share a deep brotherly love. This song is early Rod at his very best in that it is not just rock, but is folk, has a bit of soul, has the narrative of country music and the humour of...well, Rod Stewart. This is Lost Paraguayos.



4 More Years For Obama - The Irony Of Springsteen's Campaign Theme Song

To contact us Click HERE
Obama & Springsteen on the campaign trail.
It's almost a week since President Obama won a second term so it's about time I loaded up a relevant song to The Roxborogh Report to mark the occasion. I've gone with what became the campaign theme song, Bruce Springsteen's We Take Care Of Our Own from his most recent album Wrecking Ball.

The song was an interesting choice for Obama to use because for not the first time in Springsteen's career, he's written what almost sounds like a jingoistic first-pumper which on closely inspection is anything but. Like with Born In The USA (which Reagan unsuccessfully tried to use as his 1984 re-election theme), the chorus line of We Take Care Of Our Own is sung with a good dollop of irony. Just read the lyrics immediately prior to the first chorus:
"I've been stumbling on good hearts turned to stoneThe road of good intentions has gone dry as a bone"
Referencing the appalling government response to Hurricane Katrina a few years ago, Springsteen in the second verse talks about "from the shotgun shack to the super dome," before mentioning a cavalry who stayed at home and that there was nobody "hearing the bugle blowin'."
But the final, extended verse seems to offer a slither of hope amidst the frustration. He sings of looking for the work that will set his hands and his soul free, of searching for the spirit that will "reign over me." The fact he still believes in that spirit suggests all hope is not lost and "wherever this flag is flown, we take care of our own," might be less ironic and more literal in that last chorus. Or maybe not and maybe it was a bad choice for a President trying to be optimistic.
Possibly, but in a non-cynical way I think the presence of Springsteen in the Obama campaign (sometimes a physical presence too) spoke volumes of the inclusiveness that is the reality of this President. Fox News want you to believe in the Divided States of America, but when a white rocker in his 60s whose fan base is overwhelmingly also white has the courage to back Obama, it speaks of a nation where unlikely bonds can still be formed. And Springsteen formed one of those with his best-mate Clarence Clemons 40 years ago - read his spectacular eulogy to him here.
For those lifelong fans who were surprised Springsteen publicly endorsed Obama, they'd clearly never read any of his lyrics - his compassion for the common man has always been there for all to see. A further irony to all of this is that it's possible the Obama team didn't really read the lyrics to We Take Care Of Our Own either. That is unless they understood that the song's message of frustration and fear for a nation who had lost its way would appeal to people who could see a bigger picture than just the previous four years. If those final lyrics in the song do represent a shift away from irony to something more genuine, then it's a message I hope comes true.





When A Great Band Gets A Good Album's First Single Wrong #U2 #TheKillers

To contact us Click HERE
Bono in the Magnificent music video.
Apologies for the hashtags in the headline (almost sounds like a band name #Hashtags In The Headline), but two of my favourite bands have erred in recent times with their new album's first single and somebody needs to come forward and tell them.

Today I was at JB HiFi and was reminded of just how brilliant and inspirational U2 can be. Lots of people would agree with that and would no doubt cite countless songs from the 80s and even 90s as proof. But the DVD playing in-store was from their most recent tour and the song that made Bono take off his sunglasses and look skywards was from their most underbought album in decades, 2009's No Line On The Horizon.

Magnificent is not ambiguous. When Bono sings against a stunning Edge guitar line, "I was born to sing for you," and he looks to the heavens, you're not left in any doubt as to who he is singing to. He goes on to say, "I didn't have a choice but to lift you up / And sing whatever song you wanted me to / I give you back my voice from the womb / My first cry, it was a joyful noise."

In the same way that their early 2000's mega-hit Beautiful Day wasn't really just about a bit of sunshine and blue sky, Magnificent isn't really about something or someone being "magnificent" as far as we would normally comprehend. It's much like the word "awesome." At the heart of it, both these words pack significant punch which due to their common usage has been diluted. Regardless, had the awesome (and to be blunt, God-fearing) song Magnificent been the first single (rather than the forgotten second) from U2's 2009 album, it would've undoubtedly given a much more positive impression of the album than Get On Your Boots.

For a band as drenched in meaning, importance and metaphor as U2, it was probably briefly exhilarating to release a song as frivolous and literal as Get On Your Boots. Only problem was that not only was it not particularly catchy, it was not at all representative of the serious artistic work that it came from. And try as I might, I couldn't find a metaphor. It really was about feet and boots.

The Killers.
Las Vegas band The Killers are currently facing a similar conundrum. The momentum of their new album Battle Born has been stalled by a poor choice of first single, Runaways. While not as throwaway as Get On Your Boots, Runaways sounds in individual 30 second segments like a grand piece of stadium rock that somehow barely hangs together when listened to in one go. Indeed, it is arguably the weakest track on what is one of the best albums of 2012. To find out tonight that the album's second weakest song Miss Atomic Bomb is going to be the second single is vaguely heartbreaking.

In the music industry, everyone likes to think they are the expert with the almost clairvoyant ability to pick hits. I hate to say, but I am no different. As a massive fan of The Killers and without knowledge of the first two chosen singles, I sent an email after a week of non-stop Battle Born listening to my fellow Killers diehard buddy (also named Tim) with my six best songs on the album. None of the six were the singles. In short, whoever is making the decisions regarding singles for this band, they are costing Brandon Flowers and co. potentially millions.

The six songs in question were: The Way It Was, Deadlines And Commitments, From Here On Out, Battle Born, Carry Me Home and the remixed Flesh And Bone. To think that the last two songs are bonus tracks is galling. As to what the first single should've been, Carry Me Home leaves Runaways for dead and beautiful ballad The Way It Was as the followup would have been the business. Carry Me Home, as well as U2's Magnificent are below:







Pink's Domestic Violence Ballet "Try" - Possibly Her Greatest Song Yet

To contact us Click HERE
A still from the video for Try.
Just a short post to follow-up on a discussion Pam Corkery and I had on last night's episode of The Two (Newstalk ZB, Sunday evenings, 9pm-midnight) about Pink's latest song, Try. I don't know a great deal about what constitutes pioneering dance choreography, but as far as I can gather, the "Love Gone Wrong / Domestic Violence Ballet" genre has prior to this video been untapped.

The video is so intense that Pink's own mother said she was "speechless," and there's no doubt seeing your daughter in this way wouldn't just wash over you.

Pink bugs me a little because she has a great voice and a fine ear for a pop hook - indeed she is so massive in this part of the world that she easily sells more albums per capita in Australia than any other country in the world - but litters her songs with a Nicki Minaj-like potty mouth. Songs like her hit Perfect exist in two parallel worlds: one where the anthemic pop ode to self-belief tells you to never believe that "you're less than, less than perfect," and the other where not to think "you're less than, f*cken perfect." Being that the radio version was the clean version, it's not as if the song required the f-bomb to get to the top of the charts. Do pop singers now really use f-bombs for the alleged street cred. a warning sticker on your album gives you? What's the point in dropping bombs if you don't have to?

All that to one side, Try is (unusually for Pink) cuss-free and even without it's groundbreaking video, one of the best pop songs of 2012. Add that video to the mix and it's one of the more remarkable songs this prolific artist has recorded, not to mention arguably her bravest.



27 Aralık 2012 Perşembe

Pink's Domestic Violence Ballet "Try" - Possibly Her Greatest Song Yet

To contact us Click HERE
A still from the video for Try.
Just a short post to follow-up on a discussion Pam Corkery and I had on last night's episode of The Two (Newstalk ZB, Sunday evenings, 9pm-midnight) about Pink's latest song, Try. I don't know a great deal about what constitutes pioneering dance choreography, but as far as I can gather, the "Love Gone Wrong / Domestic Violence Ballet" genre has prior to this video been untapped.

The video is so intense that Pink's own mother said she was "speechless," and there's no doubt seeing your daughter in this way wouldn't just wash over you.

Pink bugs me a little because she has a great voice and a fine ear for a pop hook - indeed she is so massive in this part of the world that she easily sells more albums per capita in Australia than any other country in the world - but litters her songs with a Nicki Minaj-like potty mouth. Songs like her hit Perfect exist in two parallel worlds: one where the anthemic pop ode to self-belief tells you to never believe that "you're less than, less than perfect," and the other where not to think "you're less than, f*cken perfect." Being that the radio version was the clean version, it's not as if the song required the f-bomb to get to the top of the charts. Do pop singers now really use f-bombs for the alleged street cred. a warning sticker on your album gives you? What's the point in dropping bombs if you don't have to?

All that to one side, Try is (unusually for Pink) cuss-free and even without it's groundbreaking video, one of the best pop songs of 2012. Add that video to the mix and it's one of the more remarkable songs this prolific artist has recorded, not to mention arguably her bravest.



Why Do We Hear Only The Same Dozen Christmas Songs Every Year? 3 Different Christmas Songs From The Band, Coldplay & Josh Groban

To contact us Click HERE
It seems strange to me that every Christmas we tend to hear pretty much just the same dozen or so Christmas songs on the radio. This year I even got requests from people wanting to enlighten me that "Stevie Nicks does a really good version of Silent Night." No kidding - that's one of the same dozen!

What's odd is that there isn't a Christmas that goes by without a whole new batch of Christmas albums with this year's lot including releases by Rod Stewart, Michael Buble and Colbie Caillat. So what you get are the same dozen you've heard on the radio for at least the last 15-20 years, plus whatever is new for the current year. 12 months on, Rod, Michael and Colbie will likely be forgotten.

Which is of course ridiculous. Are Mariah Carey's mid 90s All I Want For Christmas and her version of O Holy Night truly the only worthy recent-ish Christmas songs to firmly establish themselves into the public's psyche? This is despite Christmas albums from the likes of Josh Groban having sold by the million as recently as 2007, but as for radio play beyond that initial Christmas, it appears to be a different story.

So it's with this frustration of the same old, same old (which off the top of my head would be Mariah Carey's All I Want For Christmas and O Holy Night, the Royal Guardmens' Snoopy's Christmas, Stevie Nicks' Silent Night, Jose Feliciano's Feliz Navidad, Boney M's Mary's Boy Child, the Pogues' Fairytale Of New York, Cliff Richard's Mistletoe And Wine, John Lennon's Happy Xmas (War Is Over), Chris Rea's Driving Home For Christmas, Bing Crosby's White Christmas and Johnny Mathis' When A Child Is Born) that I have attempted to broaden the Christmas music landscape a little.

That doesn't mean I don't like the songs in the most played dozen, it's just that it's good to hear Cliff Richard's excellent early-80s reworking of O Little Town Of Bethlehem (simply called Little Town) as well as the more played Mistletoe And Wine. It also means digging out the late Dan Fogelberg's sad, melancholy Christmas masterpiece Same Old Lang Syne and Kenny Loggins' soulful Celebrate Me Home. But for the purposes of this blog, I've chosen just three of the lesser heard, but equally deserving Christmas songs. Here they are:

I reminded my audience that Josh Groban's 2007 LP Noel became the fastest selling Christmas album since Elvis put one out decades earlier for a reason - it was genuinely quite brilliant. Unafraid to tackle the traditional material, below is his version of The First Noel (featuring Faith Hill).


The broadening of the Christmas playlist also includes a desire to bed-in actual new Christmas songs, not just new versions of old songs. Coldplay managed one of the best original Christmas tracks in living memory with Christmas Lights - a UK top 20 / US top 30 hit from 2010. But no-one's going to remember it if we don't keep playing it!


And finally, here is a Christmas song first introduced to me by way of a Hall & Oates cover, a beautiful original work by Robbie Robertson and The Band from their 1977 album Islands entitled Christmas Must Be Tonight. With lyrics echoing the Biblical imagery of Roberton's most famous song The Weight, (though this time literal rather than metaphoric), this song deserves some attention again for the first time in a long time. Enjoy, thanks for reading, thanks for listening, Merry Christmas and all the best for 2013.



What's the String that Ties One Experience at Your Institution with the Next?

To contact us Click HERE
Reader, I was wrong.

In 2008, I wrote a post arguing that museums should focus on the pre-visit, not the post-visit, if they want to capture and retain visitors. I said:
In many ways, the ability to successfully set a powerful and useful expectation for museum experiences is MORE valuable than the ability to extend said experience. When you set an expectation, you frame an experience. Once visitors have already banged on the exhibits and watched the giant nostril show, the experience belongs totally to them. The chances of reaching and holding onto them back at home are small. They’ve formed their impressions of the on-site experience, and their chance of returning, becoming members, etc. is heavily based on those impressions. You can send them all the pleasant follow-up emails you like, but such notes are unlikely to be the motivating factor that brings them back through your doors.
While I still believe that framing the experience with marketing and at the beginning of a visit is important, a workshop last week taught me that the end of the visit is potentially very, very important when it comes to encouraging deeper involvement with the museum. I now realize that people can have a great experience and have NO CLUE what other opportunities (return visit, membership, in-depth programs) are available to them. I don't care how many platforms you're active in--if they are not connected to each other, people will not aggregate the experiences.

What's missing for these visitors who attend, enjoy, and don't (or sporadically) return? They are missing a string.

Let me explain. For a long time, I've thought of museum visits or cultural encounters as pearls on a string. Each experience is a pearl. They are not necessarily linear or identical to each other. But if you want to deepen the commitment between visitor and institution over time, you need a string that visitors can hang their pearls on, a thread that holds the growing relationship together. No string, and you've just got a bunch of visits rolling under the furniture.

Yes, pre-visit marketing, announcements, and welcomes are essential to get that first pearl in a visitor's hand. But we all know that it's easier to keep a current user/visitor/patron than to acquire a new one. How do you build your relationship with that person who has gotten their first pearl? How do you give them the string?

Last week, as the kickoff for the Loyalty Lab project, the experience design firm Adaptive Path facilitated a workshop at my museum for staff and visitors in which we created a "map" of the visitor experience at a museum event. Our goal was to wholly understand how visitors experience our events before, during, and after the visit.

One of the surprises was a series of observations from casual visitors--people who attend an event or two per year, who are not members, and who tend to come because of word of mouth or an invitation from a friend. They all reported having a great time at the museum... and immediately letting go of it afterwards. There was no followup. They had not been asked to join an email list or take a newsletter or join the museum. They had not taken photos in our photo booth and gotten an email about them later. They were not part of our Facebook community sharing photos and stories from the event. They came, they made a pearl, and then they dropped in their pocket with the rest of their day.

We realized from this discussion that we have a huge missed opportunity when people are leaving the museum. On their way in, they are excited, curious, ready to engage. They are not ready to hear about membership or take a newsletter about what's coming up next time. They bolt right past those tables to the "good stuff." But at the end, they've had a great time, and they want a takeaway from the experience. They WANT to join the email list. If we're smart, we should be developing a takeaway that both memorializes the visit and leads them to another. In other words, we should be giving them a string for their new pearl.

As a concrete example, consider the library. The pearls are the books you read. But the string is the library card. I've always thought of the library card as the first thing you get at the library, but it actually comes at the end of the first visit, when you have loaded up with books and you want to take them home. The card is a passport to continue your experience with the books and with the library. You want the card because it's your ticket to proceed. But it also becomes the connector that ties one experience to the next.

At our institution, we have several string candidates. Visitors make a lot of stuff here, and we're talking about ways they might be able to exhibit or share it with others in a way that encourages their return to see how their stuff has evolved. We're considering expanding our photo booth survey machine. We're talking about punch cards that serve as cultural passports with a range of museum-related missions or lead you to "earn" a membership. Or, there's just the simple starting point--a newsletter, a membership brochure, a friendly volunteer inviting you back. We're talking about shifting from having "greeters" to having "goodbyers" who thank you for coming and invite you to a next specific event.

What's the string in your organization? How do you invite people back, and how do you help them collect and aggregate their experiences with you in a meaningful way?

Three Exhibition-Related Opportunities in 2013

To contact us Click HERE
The year is ending, and I have three exciting opportunities to share with you if you are an exhibition-oriented individual, or someone with an interest in the indoor side of creative placemaking.
  1. Join our team. We're looking for an Exhibitions Manager to join our team here at the Santa Cruz Museum of Art & History. In this full-time role, you will be responsible for interactive exhibition development, project management of all our site-specific work, and you will lead the redevelopment of our permanent History Gallery into a more dynamic, participatory, and flexible space. This is a highly collaborative role, and we are looking for the perfect blend of strong design skills with a generous enthusiasm for amateur and professional co-creation. Please check out the full description and how to apply if you are interested. 
  2. Come to Camp. You Can't Do That in Museums Camp is filling up. Next week, I will be reviewing applications for this event and making decisions. If you are interested, please apply soon! This camp will be a 2.5 day event in July of 2013 at which participants work in teams to create an exhibition full of intriguing, unusual, risky experiences. If you've ever wanted to design an object-based exhibit that really pushed the boundaries, this is the event for you. You do not have to be a museum professional to be part of this--we'd like a diverse mix of participants. Registration will be $150 and by application only. 
  3. Join the conversation. Spurred partly by the most recent (and fabulous) issue of the Exhibitionist and conversations we're having at our museum, I'd like to hear your reflections on how you think about exhibition formats and schedules. We're toying here with switching from a format where we change all of our exhibitions four times per year to something more flexible throughout the building. I'm curious what has worked or been challenging at other museums, especially small and mid-sized ones, when it comes to both frequency of exhibition changes and the approach. Some of the big questions on my mind include:
    • If we change exhibitions more frequently, will it drive more repeat visitation? Will it give a sense of energy and change? 
    • What do we lose in quality and ability to create complex work if we rotate more frequently?
    • Would it work to create an infrastructure for exhibitions that are flexible, inviting changing insertions and shifts, but don't rotate entirely? Would visitors "read" that as new content, or would the visual similarities make it seem like same old same old?
    • What if we slowed down and changed some spaces less frequently--like once a year? What opportunities might that open up for participatory and community projects that evolve over time in the space?
If you have thoughts on any of these questions or want to share the story of how you approach exhibition rotation and formats, please share a comment!
And if you know anyone who should be at Camp or should apply for the job, please pass this on.

End of Year Smatterings and Inspirations

To contact us Click HERE
Whether you're on vacation, making cookies with nephews, grinding out some work through the end of the year, or sitting in your kitchen drinking tea and watching the fog roll off the redwoods, it's probably a low week for blog-reading. That said, maybe you're bored or desperate for stimulation of the non-gastronomical variety. In that spirit, I offer a few things that have excited me in recent weeks:
  • The MCA Denver Holiday Video is out, and it is very, very good. Way better than that video at Museum X where the director drones on about the new initiatives of the year. I have felt in the past that some of the MCA's holiday videos were a bit too pretentious, but this year's edition is full of joy and a message that really reflects what they do in Denver. 
  • I LOVE the way the James Irvine Foundation presents their lessons learned from grant-making in the Arts Innovation Fund program. It is attractive, smart, and packs rich information into a navigable format that makes you want to explore and learn more. I know I have a lot to learn from the content AND the format of this report.
  • This is just a super-interesting review of an exhibition of damaged art. What happens to objects when they are no longer art? How should (and do) we treat them? This article sparked some interesting discussion online with colleagues from natural history museums, which deal with damage and touching very differently than art institutions do.
  • We're working at my museum on a strategic approach to our educational outreach with K12 classes and students. This Createquity article by Talia Gibas on "Unpacking Shared Delivery of Arts Education" was so useful to me that I shared it with our whole advisory group. I found the article to be a clear starting point for thinking in a fresh way about how our museum can best intersect with schools and artists (and students, in our participatory setting) to develop strong programs.
  • EMCArts put out a brief report from their recent study on how arts organizations deal with conflict around new ideas. The results are fairly interesting, and not entirely surprising: clear decision-making processes, shared agendas, action-oriented leaders, and comfort with conflict all lead to better support of innovation. I'm sometimes wary of studies of "innovation," but I like how this one could be used reflectively within an organization to assess openness to change. 
What's inspiring you in these last days of 2012?

20 Aralık 2012 Perşembe

When A Great Band Gets A Good Album's First Single Wrong #U2 #TheKillers

To contact us Click HERE
Bono in the Magnificent music video.
Apologies for the hashtags in the headline (almost sounds like a band name #Hashtags In The Headline), but two of my favourite bands have erred in recent times with their new album's first single and somebody needs to come forward and tell them.

Today I was at JB HiFi and was reminded of just how brilliant and inspirational U2 can be. Lots of people would agree with that and would no doubt cite countless songs from the 80s and even 90s as proof. But the DVD playing in-store was from their most recent tour and the song that made Bono take off his sunglasses and look skywards was from their most underbought album in decades, 2009's No Line On The Horizon.

Magnificent is not ambiguous. When Bono sings against a stunning Edge guitar line, "I was born to sing for you," and he looks to the heavens, you're not left in any doubt as to who he is singing to. He goes on to say, "I didn't have a choice but to lift you up / And sing whatever song you wanted me to / I give you back my voice from the womb / My first cry, it was a joyful noise."

In the same way that their early 2000's mega-hit Beautiful Day wasn't really just about a bit of sunshine and blue sky, Magnificent isn't really about something or someone being "magnificent" as far as we would normally comprehend. It's much like the word "awesome." At the heart of it, both these words pack significant punch which due to their common usage has been diluted. Regardless, had the awesome (and to be blunt, God-fearing) song Magnificent been the first single (rather than the forgotten second) from U2's 2009 album, it would've undoubtedly given a much more positive impression of the album than Get On Your Boots.

For a band as drenched in meaning, importance and metaphor as U2, it was probably briefly exhilarating to release a song as frivolous and literal as Get On Your Boots. Only problem was that not only was it not particularly catchy, it was not at all representative of the serious artistic work that it came from. And try as I might, I couldn't find a metaphor. It really was about feet and boots.

The Killers.
Las Vegas band The Killers are currently facing a similar conundrum. The momentum of their new album Battle Born has been stalled by a poor choice of first single, Runaways. While not as throwaway as Get On Your Boots, Runaways sounds in individual 30 second segments like a grand piece of stadium rock that somehow barely hangs together when listened to in one go. Indeed, it is arguably the weakest track on what is one of the best albums of 2012. To find out tonight that the album's second weakest song Miss Atomic Bomb is going to be the second single is vaguely heartbreaking.

In the music industry, everyone likes to think they are the expert with the almost clairvoyant ability to pick hits. I hate to say, but I am no different. As a massive fan of The Killers and without knowledge of the first two chosen singles, I sent an email after a week of non-stop Battle Born listening to my fellow Killers diehard buddy (also named Tim) with my six best songs on the album. None of the six were the singles. In short, whoever is making the decisions regarding singles for this band, they are costing Brandon Flowers and co. potentially millions.

The six songs in question were: The Way It Was, Deadlines And Commitments, From Here On Out, Battle Born, Carry Me Home and the remixed Flesh And Bone. To think that the last two songs are bonus tracks is galling. As to what the first single should've been, Carry Me Home leaves Runaways for dead and beautiful ballad The Way It Was as the followup would have been the business. Carry Me Home, as well as U2's Magnificent are below:







Pink's Domestic Violence Ballet "Try" - Possibly Her Greatest Song Yet

To contact us Click HERE
A still from the video for Try.
Just a short post to follow-up on a discussion Pam Corkery and I had on last night's episode of The Two (Newstalk ZB, Sunday evenings, 9pm-midnight) about Pink's latest song, Try. I don't know a great deal about what constitutes pioneering dance choreography, but as far as I can gather, the "Love Gone Wrong / Domestic Violence Ballet" genre has prior to this video been untapped.

The video is so intense that Pink's own mother said she was "speechless," and there's no doubt seeing your daughter in this way wouldn't just wash over you.

Pink bugs me a little because she has a great voice and a fine ear for a pop hook - indeed she is so massive in this part of the world that she easily sells more albums per capita in Australia than any other country in the world - but litters her songs with a Nicki Minaj-like potty mouth. Songs like her hit Perfect exist in two parallel worlds: one where the anthemic pop ode to self-belief tells you to never believe that "you're less than, less than perfect," and the other where not to think "you're less than, f*cken perfect." Being that the radio version was the clean version, it's not as if the song required the f-bomb to get to the top of the charts. Do pop singers now really use f-bombs for the alleged street cred. a warning sticker on your album gives you? What's the point in dropping bombs if you don't have to?

All that to one side, Try is (unusually for Pink) cuss-free and even without it's groundbreaking video, one of the best pop songs of 2012. Add that video to the mix and it's one of the more remarkable songs this prolific artist has recorded, not to mention arguably her bravest.



Pam Corkery Meets Her Barry Gibb - Russell Brand On "The Two"

To contact us Click HERE
Today Pam Corkery met her Barry Gibb. In an interview to be played on this Sunday evening's episode of The Two (Newstalk ZB, 9pm-midnight), you will get to hear quite possibly the most excited version of Pam to date. And there's nothing wrong with that at all, especially when the man to cause this is the fantastically intelligent and uniquely inspiring comedian Russell Brand.

I told him we only interview the biggest of the biggest names on our show, with Barry Gibb on The Two a couple of weeks ago setting the precedent and now him. I hit Russell with a strange and semi redundant sentence to do with Barry being my biggest hero and Russell being Pam's biggest hero, therefore "Barry is my Barry Gibb and you are Pam's Barry Gibb." Everyone needs a Barry Gibb, even Barry Gibb.  And Barry Gibb is definitely my Barry Gibb. Thankfully for all parties involved he took this humbly for the curious piece of praise it was and against the odds, we successfully moved on.

All that aside, the best part of the interview you will hear on Sunday night and it centres around Russell's thoughts about fellow comedian Ricky Gervais (a man he greatly admires) and his ever-increasing crusade for atheism. Even devotees of Russell Brand's astonishing stream of consciousness utterances on spirituality and the meaning of life will be amazed by the response he gave. Be listening.

Russell Brand is in New Zealand on his 'I Am A Walrus' tour, playing Auckland, Wellington and Hamilton.

"Songbird" By The Bee Gees For The Connecticut Shooting Victims

To contact us Click HERE
Out of respect to the victims of the Connecticut shooting, now IS the time to discuss gun control in the USA. The founding documents of the United States of America (and their amendments) are something to be very proud of, but they aren't tablets from the Mount. The almost Biblical reverence with which they're held and then sometimes subsequently bastardized is surely not what the founding fathers intended. For the victims of this latest scarcely believable shooting, another stunner from the brothers Gibb, it's Songbird by the Bee Gees.


Fun. With The Underrated Song Of The Year

To contact us Click HERE
Often there's no rhyme nor reason as to why some songs become hits and others not. Take the band Fun, best known for the fairly poppy We Are Young (a massive US #1 hit) as well as the far more interesting Some Nights (US #2), complete with its schizophrenic Simon & Garfunkel meets the Eagles meets a Harlem gospel choir meets Kanye West mash-up.

But it was their most recent song which first grabbed me and made me retrospectively appreciate just how good this band are. If it hadn't been for the under-appreciated single Carry On, I wouldn't have discovered the Some Nights album - probably the most captivating new pop album I've heard in 2012.

I was in Melbourne with friends in November watching music videos on TV and the video for Carry On came on. With its folk leanings it sounded like Mumford And Sons but with actually good vocals and I loved it instantly. Dark verses dealing with a contemplation of suicide plus a meditation on the mortality of our parents, coupled with an uplifting chorus about the past being "the sound of your feet upon the ground / carry on...", Carry On is genuinely powerful.

As people inevitably and possibly futilely try to make sense of the massacre in Connecticut, on my Newstalk ZB show The Two last night (with co-host Pam Corkery) we played a couple of songs we thought were appropriate. One was Fleetwood Mac's pre-Rumours gem Why and the other? Fun's Carry On. Like Mumford And Sons only with good vocals! And how has Carry On done on the charts? US #90. Enjoy.


16 Aralık 2012 Pazar

DO ROBOTS RULE THE GALAXY?

To contact us Click HERE

Ray Villard
Sat Dec 1, 2012
http://news.discovery.com/space/do-robots-rule-the-galaxy-121201.html

Astronomy news this week bolstered the idea that the seeds of life are all over our solar system. NASA's MESSENGER spacecraft identified carbon compounds at Mercury's poles. Probing nearly 65 feet beneath the icy surface of a remote Antarctic lake, scientists uncovered a community of bacteria existing in one of Earth's darkest, saltiest and coldest habitats. And the dune buggy Mars Science Lab is beginning to look for carbon in soil samples.

But the rulers of our galaxy may have brains made of the semiconductor materials silicon, germanium and gallium. In other words, they are artificially intelligent machines that have no use -- or patience -- for entities whose ancestors slowly crawled out of the mud onto primeval shores.

The idea of malevolent robots subjugating and killing off humans has been the staple of numerous science fiction books and movies. The half-torn off android face of Arnold Schwarzenegger in The Terminator film series, and the unblinking fisheye lens of the HAL 9000 computer in the film classic 2001 A Space Odyssey, have become iconic of this fear of evil machines.

My favorite self-parody of this idea is the 1970 film, Colossus: the Forbin Project. A pair of omnipotent shopping mall-sized military supercomputers in the U.S. and Soviet Union strike up a network conversation. At first you'd think they'd trade barbs like: "Aww your mother blows fuses!" Instead, they hit it off like two college kids on Facebook. Imagine the social website: My Interface. They then agree to use their weapons control powers to subjugate humanity for the sake of the planet.

A decade ago our worst apprehension of computers was no more than seeing Microsoft's dancing paper clip pop up on the screen. But every day reality is increasingly overtaking the musings of science fiction writers. Some futurists have warned that our technologies have the potential to threaten our own survival in ways that never previously existed in human history. In the not-so-distant future there could be a "genie out of the bottle" moment that is disastrously precipitous and irreversible.

Last Monday it was announced that a collection of leading academics at Cambridge University are establishing the Center for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER) to look at the threat of smart robots overtaking us.

Sorry, even the ancient Mayans could not have foreseen this coming. It definitely won't happen by the end of 2012, unless Apple unexpectedly rolls out a rebellious device that calls itself iGod. Humanity might be wiped away before the year 2100, predicted the eminent cosmologist and CSER co-founder Sir Martin Ress, in his 2003 book Our Final Century.

Homicidal robots are among other major Armageddon's that the Cambridge think-tank folks are worrying about. There's also climate change, nuclear war and rogue biotechnology. The CSER reports: "Many scientists are concerned that developments in human technology may soon pose new, extinction-level risks to our species as a whole. Such dangers have been suggested from progress in artificial intelligence, from developments in biotechnology and artificial life, from nanotechnology, and from possible extreme effects of anthropogenic climate change. The seriousness of these risks is difficult to assess, but that in itself seems a cause for concern, given how much is at stake."

Science fiction author Issac Asimov's first Law of Robotics states: "A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm." Forget that, we already have killer drones that are remotely controlled. And they could eventually become autonomous hunter-predators with the rise of artificial intelligence. One military has a robot can run up to 18 miles per hour. Robot foot soldiers seem inevitable, in a page straight out of The Terminator.

By 2030, the computer brains inside such machines will be a million times more powerful than today's microprocessors. At what threshold will super-intelligent machines see humans as an annoyance, or competitor for resources?

British mathematician Irving John Good wrote a paper in 1965 that predicted that robots will be the "last invention" that humans will ever make. "Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an 'intelligence explosion,' and the intelligence of man would be left far behind."

Good, by the way, consulted on the 2001 film and so we might think of him as father of the film's maniacal supercomputer, HAL.

In 2000, Bill Joy, the co-founder and chief scientist of Sun Microsystems, wrote, "Enormous transformative power is being unleashed. These advances open up the possibility to completely redesign the world, for better or worse for the first time, knowledge and ingenuity can be very destructive weapons."

Hans Moravec, director of the Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania put it more bluntly: "Robots will eventually succeed us: humans clearly face extinction."

Ultimately, the new Cambridge study may offer our best solution to the Fermi Paradox: why hasn't Earth already been visited by intelligent beings from the stars?

If, on a grand cosmic evolutionary scale, artificial intelligence inevitably supersedes its flesh and blood builders it could be an inevitable biological phase transition for technological civilizations.

This idea of the human condition being transitional was reflected in the writings of Existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche: "Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman--a rope over an abyss. What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end..."

Because the conquest by machines might happen in less than two centuries of technological evolution, the consequences would be that there's nobody out there for us to talk to.

Such machines would be immortal and be able to survive in a wide range of space environments that are deadly to us. They would have no need to colonize planets, and the idea of a habitable planet for nurturing creepy crawly creatures would be utterly meaningless to them.

The robots would rebuild and reproduce only as needed. Therefore the galaxy would never see a "wave of colonization" as imagined in the Fermi Paradox. Though super-intelligent, their thought processes would be utterly, well, alien. You'd have more luck imagining what bullfrogs dream about. The artificial aliens would be conscious entities that are vast, cool, and unsympathetic -- to borrow from H.G. Wells' intro to his classic 1898 novel War of the Worlds.

Our only hope of finding super-smart machines would be to stumble across evidence of their technological activities. But what kinds of engineering activities such entities might be involved in is inscrutable. Perhaps certain oddball astronomical observations go unrecognized as evidence of artificial intelligent behavior. What's more, silicon brains would have absolutely no motive to communicate with us. A robot might wonder: "what do I say to thinking meat?"

The most prophetic assessment of the seemingly inevitable schism between people and thinking machines can be found in the script from the 2001 movie Artificial Intelligence: A.I., in a dialog between two humanoid robots: "They [humans] made us too smart, too quick, and too many. We are suffering for the mistakes they made because when the end comes, all that will be left is us."

North Korea Discovered A 'Unicorn Lair'

To contact us Click HERE

North Korea Says Its Archaeologists Discovered A 'Unicorn Lair'
EYDER PERALTA
November 30, 2012
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/30/166265699/north-korea-says-its-archaeologists-discovered-a-unicorn-lair

It's not the first time we've heard fantastical news from North Korea's state news agency. And if you thought the "peculiar natural wonders" would be buried along with the Dear Leader, my were you mistaken.

Today, the Korean Central News Agency said that archaeologists from the History Institute of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea "reconfirmed" the "lair of a unicorn" that was ridden by King Tongmyong.

Via the Japan-based Korean News Agency, which distributes KCNA news, here's a bit more of the breaking development:

The lair is located 200 meters from the Yongmyong Temple in Moran Hill in Pyongyang City. A rectangular rock carved with words "Unicorn Lair" stands in front of the lair. The carved words are believed to date back to the period of Koryo Kingdom (918-1392).

Jo Hui Sung, director of the Institute, told KCNA:

"Korea's history books deal with the unicorn, considered to be ridden by King Tongmyong, and its lair."


OMG, the text message turns 20

To contact us Click HERE

But has SMS peaked?
Heather Kelly
Mon December 3, 2012
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/03/tech/mobile/sms-text-message-20/

It's been hailed for its succinctness and blamed for everything from sore thumbs to the decline of conversation. Love it or hate it, the text message is 20 years old.

The first-ever text message was sent December 3, 1992, by software engineer Neil Papworth, to Vodafone director Richard Jarvis, who received the message on his husky Orbitel 901 cell phone. It read simply, "Merry Christmas."

As of Monday, the text is no longer in its teens -- the age group it's probably most associated with. In fact, it's more of a senior citizen in technology years.

At just 190 bytes and 160 characters, the modest text message isn't the most glamorous or elaborate form of communication, and that's a major reason it's become so pervasive.

Texting is popular around the world, across age groups and cultures, because it is simple, concise, and compatible with every mobile device, whether it's a $500 smartphone or a disposable flip phone.

Six billion SMS (short message service) messages are sent every day in the United States, according to Forrester Research, and over 2.2 trillion are sent a year. Globally, 8.6 trillion text messages are sent each year, according to Portio Research.

It seems tacky to bring this up on its birthday, but this may also be the year the text message peaks. After two decades of constant growth, text messaging is finally slowing down as people move to smartphones and use third-party messaging tools to circumvent wireless carriers' costly per-text charges.

SMS messaging is expected to be a $150 billion-a-year industry in 2013, with carriers charging set monthly fees for unlimited texting, or as much as 20 cents per text. The actual cost to carriers for sending a text message is about 0.03 cents.

By using popular apps and services, including Apple's iMessage, Facebook messages, GroupMe and WhatsApp, smartphone users can send all the texts they want over Wi-Fi or cellular networks without paying per message. But smartphones still only account for 50% of all cell phones, so text messaging is likely to be around for years to come.

Since a birthday is a day of celebration, LOLs and HBDs, let's take a look at some fascinating text messaging trivia.

• In the United States, 75% of teenagers text, sending an average of 60 texts a day. According to Pew Internet research, texting is teens' most common form of communication, beating out phone conversations, social networks and old-fashioned face-to-face conversations.

• Women are twice as likely to use emoticons in text messages, but men use a wider variety of emoticons, according to a recent study by Rice University. :-)

• The practice of exchanging sexual messages or photos (yes, "sexting") isn't just for single people and politicians. It's also popular among committed couples. According to a study by psychology professor Michelle Drouin, 80% of young adults in relationships sent or received naughty texts, and 60% upped the ante by exchanging photos or videos.

• Some emergency response call centers are beginning to accept text messages sent to 911. There are still lingering concerns about the practice, including lack of location information, confirmation that the message was received, and timeliness of messages. Verizon plans to launch limited SMS-to-911 services in early 2013.

• The world of competitive texting can be lucrative for the fastest thumbs. At this year's fifth annual National Texting Championship in New York City, 17-year-old Austin Wierschke was crowned the winner for the second year in a row, taking home $50,000 in prize money.

• According to Guinness World Records, Melissa Thompson set the record for fastest text. In 2010, she took 25.94 seconds to type and send, "The razor-toothed piranhas of the genera Serrasalmus and Pygocentrus are the most ferocious freshwater fish in the world. In reality they seldom attack a human."

• Text messages have a dangerous side. Texting while driving is a risky activity, and sending or reading a single text can distract a driver for approximately 4.6 seconds, according to the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute. Thirty-nine states have banned text messaging while driving. Distracted texters have also been injured or killed while biking and walking.

• Text messaging technology has popped up in some fascinating places over the years, including cows' reproductive organs. Swiss dairy farmers have implanted sensors in cows to detect when the cows are in heat. A second sensor with a SIM card in the cow's neck sends a text message to the farmer, who can then inseminate the animal, according to The New York Times.

• Text messaging has been used in medical fields to improve treatment for malaria, depression, diabetes and addiction.

Cyborg anthropologist: We can all be superhuman

To contact us Click HERE

Amber Case
Wed December 5, 2012
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/05/tech/cyborg-anthropology-amber-case

Editor's note: Amber Case is the Director of the Esri R&D Center, Portland, a company which aims to understand our world and "unleash the power of location." She was formerly the CEO of geolocation platform creator Geoloqi, Inc., acquired by Esri in Oct 2012. As a student of cyborg anthropology, Case studies the symbiotic interactions between humans and technology.

What exactly is cyborg anthropology?

Cyborg anthropology is the study of the interaction between humans and technology, and how technology affects culture. Mobile technology allows one to stand almost anywhere in the world, whisper something, and be heard elsewhere. These devices that live in our pockets need to be fed every night require our frequent attention. In only a few years these devices have become stitched into the fabric of our everyday lives. Phones offer us respite from the boredom of waiting in lines, but they also inhibit us when they run out of batteries.

I'm fascinated with mobile devices for another reason -- they are a bundle of sensors that we walk around with every day. That sensor data can be used to do very interesting things, such as automatically turn on the lights in your house when you get home, or turn the lights off when you leave.

In traditional anthropology, somebody goes to another country, says: "How fascinating these people are! How interesting their tools and their culture are," and then they write a paper, and maybe a few other anthropologists read it, and we think these cultures are very exotic. cyborg anthropologists step back from the modern world and look at the everyday life and how the people around us are influenced by technology in everyday life.

Why did you decide to study cyborg anthropology?

When I was little, I was very interested in technology, science and mathematics. I grew up in the '80s, but read my dad's copy of 1960 World Book Encyclopedia. My favorite entry was on the modern computer. The machine filled an entire gymnasium and was used for military and business. As I grew up, I saw technology transition towards being used in everyday life. The only problem was that technology was still a pain in the neck to use. Most systems had too many menus and buttons.

During my freshman year of college, I was introduced to the field of cyborg anthropology -- the study of humanity and technology. What I really liked about cyborg anthropology is that it crossed multiple fields of study. In academia, you can learn a lot about a certain field, but know nothing about another. Technology is so intertwined with humanity at this point that it takes multiple fields to understand both tools and people.

How would you define your cyborg self?

A cyborg is simply someone who interacts with technology. The technology can be a physical or a mental extension, and doesn't need to be implanted in the person. The origin of the word cyborg was from a 1960 paper on space travel, where it was used to describe the placement of external devices and clothing on a human to make them fit for space travel.

For thousands and thousands of years, everything has been a physical modification of self. It has helped us to extend our physical selves, go faster, hit things harder, and there's been a limit on that. But now what we're looking at is not an extension of the physical self, but an extension of the mental self. And because of that, we're able to travel faster and communicate differently through the use of technology.

A cyborg is not Terminator or Robocop, but the experience of everyday life that's been altered by technology. Everyone that uses technology is a superhuman. It's not so strange anymore because it's the norm -- most everyone else around us is also a superhuman. The only time we notice it is when our devices run out of power. We're all super humans until our devices lose energy.

You talk about a new form of "human connection," can you explain this to us?

A vehicle is a physical transportation device, but there are limits to how small it can be made. A computer is a mental transportation device, but it need not be limited by its size and shape. We can put anything we want into computers and phones, and they don't get heavier because that information is invisible and weighs nothing, or is stored elsewhere, and then we can take anything out. What does the inside of your computer actually look like? If you print it out, it looks like a thousand pounds of material that you're carrying around all the time.

When you use a social network, your sense of self extends into that virtual space. Getting a "Like" on Facebook or a comment on a status is a dopamine hit the equivalent of getting a hug. This isn't really a new form of communication, but a new way of connecting.

Can you tell us about some projects you're working on?

I've always inspired by the technology built by Mark Weiser at Xerox Parc in the '70s, especially ubiquitous and calm computing. My projects have always been about using data in new ways, the future of the interface and the button, and the future of location.

For instance, you should always be able to get information based on when you need it. Location plays a big role in that. Right now, data is stuck on the web, not where you are. When you land at the airport, you often have to look through your email to get to the information you need in order to get to your destination. It should already be there on your phone.

There is a lot of talk that we're finally entering into an era of the "Internet of Things." The exciting part is that we have all of these devices now that are sensors for reality -- sound, noise, temperature, images, location, air quality and so on. We can wear trackers to count our steps or measure our weight, and we can use tech to make a picture of where we've been. All of this data is interesting by itself, but all of the devices speak different languages. Devices made by different companies use different protocols. Some are open; others are closed. It's a modern day Tower of Babel.

Taking data from across many different silos is where the opportunity is. If I knew my mood, hunger level, and location at a given time of the day, I could figure out if my mood caused me to want to eat, or if I was unhappy at work and needed a different job. I could correlate amount of sleep with weight gain, and so on. What we need is a common language that allows all of these devices to communicate with one another. We saw this with SMS (allowing different phones to talk to each other across networks), SMTP/POP that allowed for modern email to exist (because it allowed modern email accounts to talk to each other across networks), and Interpress (allowing the modern printer industry to form.) That hasn't been solved for devices.

Once we get a lot of data onto maps, we can really begin to understand reality in much different ways, like where to build a house to increase the happiness of the people inside it, how to make routes that avoid accidents, and how to design better urban systems. I'm really excited about platform that Esri provides. We'll be integrating the Geoloqi location technology into the Esri platform in July 2013 and will be able to open up an entire world of datasets and solutions accessible before only by geographers, scientists and researchers.

Robalini's Week 15 NFL Picks

To contact us Click HERE

Here's my results for Week 14
W-L-T record: 2-6
Season record: 57-56

Ouch...

Green Bay Packers (-3) over Chicago Bears

The Packers look like the most intimidating team in the NFC once again.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers (+3 1/2) over New Orleans Saints

I'll take the points with the Bucs against the struggling Saints.

Denver Broncos (-3) over Baltimore Ravens

The Broncos have won eight in a row and the Ravens are struggling.

Indianappolis Colts (+9 1/2) over Houston Texans

The Texans should win but the spread make the Colts a great bet.

Buffalo Bills (+5 1/2) over Seattle Seahawks

Seattle is hot but they should cool down in Toronto against the Bills.

Detroit Lions (-6 1/2) over Arizona Cardinals

If you've seen the Cardinals offense in recent week, this spread isn't wide enough.

Dallas Cowboys (+2 1/2) over Pittsburgh Steelers

Whatever my misgivings on the Cowboys, the Steelers are just too banged up to win.

San Francisco 49ers (+5 1/2) over New England Patriots

I trust the 49ers defense to keep this close.

Tennessee Titans (-1 1/2) over New York Jets

The Titans are better than their record suggests, and the Jets are worse.

All bets are placed at Station Casinos:

http://www.stationcasinos.com

To check Las Vegas odds, The Konformist recommends VegasInsider.com:

http://www.vegasinsider.com

12 Aralık 2012 Çarşamba

The Barry Gibb Interview - The Full Transcript Plus Another Forgotten Bee Gees Classic

To contact us Click HERE
A few weeks ago I interviewed (alongside my co-host on Newstalk ZB's The Two, Pam Corkery) the last remaining Gibb brother, Bee Gee Barry Gibb. A feature article based on this interview will be appearing in New Zealand's number one current affairs magazine The Listener in January ahead of Barry's concert at the Mission in Napier on February 23rd, but until then, below is the full transcript of the interview.

While the upcoming feature article focuses on the three themes of family, faith and the future, in this transcript you will also learn that it was the Hollies more than the Beatles who inspired the Bee Gees to leave Australia and return to England, plus the sometimes thankless role Barry played as the elder brother. This includes an epiphany he had as a child while sitting on the pier at Redcliffe in Brisbane with brothers Robin and Maurice about either a life of crime or music. Luckily for them and for fans like me (not to mention their main victim Woolworths), they chose the latter.

FULL TRANSCRIPT:
TIM & PAM: This is yourfirst solo tour, but you’ve had a couple of warm-up gigs including a concert atthe Hard Rock in Miami – what was that like?
BARRY: We did like an hourat the DRI which is the Diabetes Research Institute as a charity show two daysbefore the Hard Rock and that kicked us up another level and we did like anhour and half at the Hard Rock and that pretty much beat the ol’ girl up. And thisis a great band, Timmy it’s a great band. Forget about me, this is the most amazingband and we’ve got Maurice’s daughter Sammy, and we’ve my eldest son Stephen onlead singer who also sings fantastic. So it’s a show for all ages I’d say.
TIM & PAM: And this is an interview for all ages! For you is thisabout discovering the next part of the Gibb dynasty?
BARRY: I just want to knowwhat the next episode is and I just want to be able to find out, as corny as itsounds, who I am. Am I a member of a group that no longer exists? Or am I thesongwriter and the singer that I can still be? And so I’m out there on anadventure, on a sentimental journey, a sojourn; I want to go and reflect, to gowhere we lived as kids, I want to see New Zealand again and I’ve heard aboutthis winery and I’ve gotta’ go there! So that’s me in search of me.
TIM & PAM: Will that bean archeological dig!?
BARRY: Ha! I might findsome old bones! All I can say is I’m hungry to play, the musicians who are withme are impeccable and it’s hard to really steer down the wrong track. I’m doingthe songs I’ve loved and the songs we’ve written together all my life so Ishould think for me, it’s going to be an ultimate pleasure just to be on stage.And wherever I look and wherever I go on the stage, my brothers will be withme.
TIM & PAM: I just thinkit is the best idea that you have your family involved in this tour…
BARRY: There are going tobe Gibbs in the wings, Gibbs involved in the technology and it’s just a wholemess of Gibbs!
TIM & PAM: You knowthat Australians make fun of New Zealanders! Is that true for you too!?
BARRY: No! I think NewZealand is magnificent. When we were children we worked with a lot of Maorislike the Maori Troubadours in Surfers’ Paradise and with Prince Tui at theChevron across the road from the Beachcomber and we all hung out together andwe learned an awful lot and it’s those days I harken back to. Let’s face, NewZealand is one of the most beautiful countries in the world, it’s just thatit’s far away so Americans don’t quite appreciate it, but it is.
TIM & PAM: Being thatthis tour is about going back to where it all began, let’s go back to yourfirst number one hit in Australia and New Zealand, Spicks And Specks. What can you remember about the writing of thatsong?
BARRY: I remember that wewere doing sessions in Hurstville with a gentleman called Ossie Byrne who sortof felt sorry for us because we couldn’t get any studio time. He had a littlestudio behind a butcher shop. So we were peeling off songs and writing andworking all night and playing all night and there are a whole bunch of songsfrom those sessions. One of those songs was SpicksAnd Specks and one thing lead to another and it just worked out. We didn’tknow it was going to be a hit until Nat Kipner came along, who was the head ofSpin Records. He took that whole bunch of songs and made that into an album andwe sent those songs to NEMS and to England to see if anyone was interested. AndSpicks And Specks did everything wedreamed it could do in Australia and New Zealand, but they were not interestedin it in England or in Europe. They just thought that we’ve had enough ofgroups, they weren’t singing any more groups, so we thought, well, maybe that’strue. But it didn’t turn out to be so.
TIM & PAM: As children,how much did you plan for the future, like did you practice your acceptancespeeches at the Grammys?
BARRY: Ha ha! Well, firstof all we didn’t know about Grammys. People like Elvis, Johhny O’Keefe and ColJoye were just coming on the scene when we arrived in Australia, or they’d beenaround a couple of years, but we were hearing them for the first time, so itwas nothing like that. It was how do we get some work? How do we sustain ourfamily? And that was the reality of it. We didn’t have any money so findingwork, any work, was the key. So working in hotels, in RSLs later in Sydney, atthe rugby league clubs – places like that. But you got about $20 a show,sometimes less, but it put food on the table. If you fell in love with a shirtyou saved up for it and life was just like that. As a child, it was the bestyears ever, for me I would want that on every child.
TIM & PAM: The older Iget the more amazing I find it that you were able to convince your parents tomove from Australia back to England when you were still teenagers. How did youconvince them that it was the right thing to do?
BARRY: I think they got asniff of it. We were watching the Easy Beats and the Seekers go back to Englandand having great success and it was really the Beatles yes, but the Holliesmore. We loved the Hollies and the Four Tunes. Remember the Four Tunes? It’sterrible [that people don’t talk about them anymore] because they were probablythe best vocal group I ever heard. They did that song You’ve Got Your Troubles. Anyway, it was the Hollies, the FourTunes and the Beatles that convinced us we got do it. We could do the harmoniesand we could go back there and take a shot and that was sort of what we did.And typical of the whole journey we were told along the way we couldn’t makeit. "Don’t worry about it boys, you just need to get a job, don’t worry aboutit." And we wanted to be discovered! We didn’t know what it meant, but we wantedto be discovered.
TIM & PAM: In a recentinterview you mentioned how Robin and Maurice were always anxious to keephaving hits and that you would try and tell them…
BARRY: …“It’s OK!” Theywere always in a panic. Robin was always in a panic about having yet one morehit record and we’d reached a stage in life when radio really wasn’t ready toplay a new single by the Bee Gees – we’d passed that age-fit area where youcould appeal to young kids. We’ve always had that trouble! We couldn’t appealto adults when we were kids and we couldn’t appeal to kids when we were older.
TIM & PAM: That said,is all you’ve achieved really enough for you?
BARRY: It’s not enough forme because all I ever think about is music, apart from my family. I don’t evenhave a hobby – my whole life is music and my children. Music is always rightthere and I can’t think of anything else and I can’t stop writing songs. Themusic doesn’t stop. A group can evaporate and members can pass away, but themusic mustn’t stop and that’s my job.
TIM & PAM: So even now,ideas could be popping into your head for songs?
BARRY: My nature ofsongwriting is you could say anything to me during this conversation and I’llmake a note of it as a title of a song. That’s how I function. People saythings.
TIM & PAM: For die-hardfans, they would love for you to do a new album. There is even the suggestionfor you to add your voice and production to unreleased Robin songs. What isnext for you?
BARRY: What really can bedone will be done, but this show is a celebration of my brothers and my familyand the next real thing, what I’d really love to do is to put on the bestpossible tribute for my brothers that has ever been put on. And the only way Ican do that is to reach out to the artists that I love the most and to get themto do it, to make it a bigger tribute than has ever been. And that will be thenext stage.
TIM & PAM: For you, youare almost an example of how terrible it can be [to lose family members]. Doyou think we can learn from it?
BARRY: The last 10 yearshave just been terrible. Losing Maurice was a real shock because we lost him intwo days. From being perfectly fine, no sign of illness, nothing. And we lostAndy in England – he had a heart seizure and was in hospital near Robin’s houseand he passed very quickly and then it became Robin. And when Robin became ill,OR when I found out Robin was ill which was along time in – it was about twoand half years before I knew he was ill. And then he passed. And so I’ve lostall my brothers. And the hardest thing of all is for Mum, not for me. I candeal with it.
TIM & PAM: Well I hopethat your Mum can take solace from the fact her boys have had the mostastonishing successes. I’ve got a list of some scarcely believable stats, likethe second most successful songwriter of all time after Paul McCartney, 21different songs as songwriters to hit US or UK #1, 220 million records sold,only songwriters to have five songs in the US top 10 at the same time and Iknow those are only numbers and people are people, but that said, you’ve gotfive wonderful children a lovely lady in Linda as your wife…(Barry interjects during this list of achievements, humbly saying "Oh thank you Tim, thank you.").
BARRY: We’ve been marriednow for I’d say 46 years if you count the three years we stayed together beforewe got married. We were married in 1970 and I guess you can do the math fromthere. We lived together before that and so Linda’s seen everything. Linda,along with me, has seen everything you can see if you’re a pop group on therise. She never missed anything and that’s something to take great comfortfrom. We can talk to each other about any single instance in our lives and whathappened to the group and she was there. We share all that and we’ve got fivewonderful children and we’ve got six wonderful grandchildren so what can youask for.
TIM & PAM: How hasLinda provided solace for you?
BARRY: She is a tower ofstrength. And she’s always right behind me and she’s either going to give me atap on the head or a kick up the ass. And both of those things work! Becauseshe will say, “You know you’ve gotta’ get yourself together, you’ve gotta’ pullyourself out of this and you’ve gotta’ get into your music and you’ve gotta’get back into what you were doing, NO MATTER WHAT. And so she’s always been thattower of strength and I love her and I love all my family. And we’ve reallyflowered. This family has grown. We’ve got a Swedish arm, a Jewish arm of thefamily, a Latvian arm of the family and another Jewish arm of the family, it’sabsolutely crazy! But the family has grown and grown and we all know each otherand love each other and I’ve got some of the most beautiful women in the worldin my family. And so someone was smiling on me.
TIM & PAM: Yourutterances on family are lovely and seem almost old-fashioned…
BARRY: I understand that mythoughts on family are not the norm, but they’re the norm for us. When we allcame together as a family you’d have to say that would be about 1967 and we’vebeen together ever since and enjoyed the trip ever since. Yes, it’s oldfashioned, but I am old fashioned and so is Linda. We’re very happy with theway things were before the computer came along!
TIM & PAM: As for beingold-fashioned?
BARRY: You can be oldfashioned, it’s not a crime. You can love very, very old songs and I love allkinds of old songs. I love immigrant songs that the Irish and the Scottishpeople brought to America before bluegrass. Just lately I got to work withRicky Skaggs at the Grand Ole Opry.
TIM & PAM: I was justgoing to mention him. It really seemed like he took you under his wing and thatperformance of How Can You Mend A BrokenHeart was probably the most emotional version of that song I’ve ever heard…
BARRY: Oh thank you Tim,thank you. He was helping me through that darkest period. He is by nature adevout Christian and he took me there and made me understand. Letting me dothose shows, knowing how much I love that music….You know they’re very pure,they don’t let people play there if they don’t think it’s right, but there I amat the Grand Ole Opry and he just put me under his wing and we had a ball. Butwhen I finished doing that, my love for that kind of music is in deep, it’s indeep. And if you hear an album out of me in the future it will be a greatmixture of that kind of music and Mr. Skaggs will be on that album. I wrote himthe song Soldier’s Son and I think itwill be on TV soon – I’m waiting for that commitment and it needs to happenbefore we go to Australia so that we can get it in the can, but I think theywant a Letterman show.
TIM & PAM: In thatrecent Australian TV interview you told a story about being on the pier atRedcliffe in Brisbane as kids and telling your brothers that the three of youwould never steal again. How serious were you?
BARRY: Dead serious. Don’tforget they’re three years younger than me and we were three kids and I wasgetting more and more worried that we were going to get in trouble with thepolice because we were always shoplifting. Especially at Woolworths becauseit’s easy, but Woolworths is gone now, but it was very easy. We used toshoplift all kinds of things and one day it hit me real hard that we could dothis and go to jail, or we could make up our minds to really make that attemptto become famous. I gave them that lecture half way down the pier at Redcliffeand I said whatever we’ve got in our pockets that we’ve stolen, throw it intothe sea now. And we did that so there’s a number of pen knives, false rings,things that you wouldn’t bother stealing anyway and I can point to exactlywhere we threw them and they’re probably still there.
TIM & PAM: Do you thinkthat if it had been you who’d gone and they who’d lived, they would’ve said, “Ifit hadn’t been for him…..”
BARRY: I don’t know.
TIM & PAM: Well itseems like you’ve been a terrific older brother…
BARRY: Well, I’ve been theolder brother and I’ve lived the role of the older brother so whilst that’s notalways appreciated, that’s the way it was. Keeping us all out of trouble,sometimes not helping when we got in trouble, but always trying to keep us outof trouble. As time went on I sort of took over the oversight of the businessbecause nobody else wanted to do it. That way I learnt all about publishing,all about the business and so everything seemed to happen for the right reason,but you’re not supposed to be the eldest brother, you’re just supposed to be abrother. So over the years Maurice and Robin didn’t like that very much, no.But someone’s got to do it and I was left holding the can if that’s the word.
TIM & PAM: Thearguments that you had…it seems like you have tremendous regret…
BARRY: The conflicts for uscame much later on and mainly because of advisors. Mainly because in the earlydays we were just one family, just one family. You know, Mum and Dad, the threeof us, Andy, my oldest sister Lesley who still lives in Australia. But that wasone family. And since we all got married, you’re suddenly faced with fourfamilies because Andy got married too. And that changed a lot of things becauseall the wives have an opinion about their husband and so we had to deal withthat kind of conflict, like “Why isn’t my husband heard more?” “Why isn’t myhusband getting to sing more songs than say either Robin or Barry does?” We hada lot of that kind of thing and we had to deal with that. It was very difficultbecause we were actually quite complex people. And these issues came easy. Fourfamilies will do it.
TIM & PAM: Back tosomething you said about Ricky Skaggs and also something the late Billboardmagazine editor Timothy White said about the Bee Gees, saying that even if itwas implicit rather than explicit, that the spirituality that ran through anumber of your songs was a large part of your appeal. I think of songs like Too Much Heaven, Spirits Having Flown and even a song called Nothing Could Be Good where you directly mention the Almighty. Wasthat just a temporary thing that was important for you at that time or something that has carried through?
BARRY:Religion in and of itself and spirituality are the absolute pure tools of asongwriter. For instance, if you listen to mountain music or immigrant music orbluegrass music, religion was the only subject. So when you listen to that kindof music you realise they didn’t have anything else but religion. So religionover the years and through rock ‘n’ roll and through people like ElvisPresley….listen to him singing gospel music, c’mon….it never went away, itnever will and the idea of true faith is behind every artist that ever gets tothe place they want to be.
TIM & PAM: I waslistening to some of your music yesterday and I cried. What’s it like havingthat effect on people?
BARRY: Well it affects me.That’s the x-factor, if there is an x-factor, it’s the song that makes you cryor the song that makes you laugh, or the song that goes down deep inside youand never leaves. That to me is the x-factor or the hidden element that makeseverybody love a song.
When we wrote How Can You Mend A Broken Heart in 1970,it was a number one record in America, but it was number one nowhere else. Itwas never a hit anywhere else and since 1970, in it’s own way and on it’s ownit became one of the biggest songs we’d ever written. So it’s not about radio,it’s not about whether you’re getting played or not. A song will live in theether, it will just live there and people will get to know it. You know thesong You Are My Sunshine? You can’ttell me what number it ever made in the charts – it didn’t! But the whole worldknows that song. So there’s that side of it.
TIM & PAM: (Generalthank yous and a mention of previous interviews Tim and Barry have donetogether (this being the fifth since 2005) with Barry saying his favourite wasin London in 2009).
BARRY: I dearly hope to seeboth of you. Thank you for always being there for me and thank you for caring,both of you. It’s a wonderful thing – that’s what makes it work.


Afterword: There are literally dozens upon dozens of lesser known Bee Gees songs which fans argue have as much artistic merit as those from their long list of hits. Here is a song from 1981's beautiful Living Eyes album called Don't Fall In Love Me which features a stunning Robin lead vocal plus a Barry, Robin and Maurice sung chorus to rank with the best harmonies they ever recorded. Enjoy.