There has been quite a bit of hype recently around the anti-Hillary Clinton spoof of Apple’s 1984 ad. While some have been elated and others outraged by the video, it has no doubt created trouble for both the Clinton and Obama campaigns. All the buzz emphasizes the increasingly prominent role the Internet–and its savvy users–are beginning to play in political posturing, campaigning and debating.

The Washington Post article: “A Brave New World of Political Skulduggery? Anti-Clinton Video Shows Ease of Attack In the Computer Age” portrays de Vellis’ creation as evidence and inspiration; the video demonstrates the benefits of politicking via the Internet and in doing so, has provoked a number of similar videos in response.

The article also states:

“The imbroglio highlighted not just how the power to push a message has shifted from big campaign organizations to lone operators with rudimentary video skills, but how technology makes subterfuge easier to accomplish — and easier to detect.”

Individuals may be able create a political stir over the Internet, but anonymity may be harder to come by with the use of new media. I imagine Internet users will be willing to accept this though, and as the 2008 Presidential Race progresses it will only be a matter of time before the next big hit political video surfaces. It may not be an anonymous medium but it is just too simple for people with strong opinions to pass up the opportunity to voice them.

(when video attacks is a recurring feature that exploits the embarrassment of others in a world where everyone and their uncle owns a camcorder)

Today’s submission isn’t even in English, but you do not need to understand the language to see the humor. Our lottery hostess with the most-est is doing her best to maintain her composure when the ball machine (got a better name for it?) has a major malfunction, however she seems at a loss for words.

This week News Corp.’s MySpace.com announced the Internet site Impact Channel. The site features voter registration information, job postings, news, videos and–perhaps most interesting of all–presidential candidate profiles. Eleven 2008 presidential hopefuls currently have profiles on the site and have begun the social networking competition over who can amass the largest number of Internet friends. So far Barack Obama tops the list with his friend network–not surprising given his popularity with the younger generation as evidenced by the myriad Facebook groups dedicated him.

Rudy Giuliani is the only candidate so far who has chosen to set his profile to private–meaning only those who choose to be his online friends have access to his information. This is an interesting choice; it adds an extra step before Impact Channel users reach Giuliani’s message creating “private” publicity for the candidate. Perhaps it will entice more people to join his friend network in order to gain access. We will have to wait to see whether his strategy is helpful or detrimental to his campaign in the long run.

For more on the 2008 candidates check out PodZinger’s Presidential Hopefuls channels at www.podzinger.com.

Airplanes have always captured the imagination of children and adults alike from around the world. Today, Americans imagination will be captured by Airbus’ super jumbo A380 which is scheduled to land in New York J.F. Kennedy airport this afternoon with more than 500 passengers on board. Airbus is betting BIG money this super plane will become the darling of airlines from around world in years to come, to move more passengers over longer distances in what’s becoming a crowded and not so friendly skies.

To lure airline customers, Airbus is packing the A380 with all sorts of amenities, and flexible plane configurations to expand or decrease the economy section. Do you want a full-service bar, TVs on the back of every seat or showers for first-class passengers? Not a problem…the A380 is configurable enough to suit customer’s needs. It is this same customers need that have pushed out the delivery date of the 1st commercial A380 by at least two years, since wiring of the plane has had to be reconfigured to accommodate all those amenities promised to customers. Whether or not the A380 super jumbo ever makes a dime for its parent company, Airbus, many people like me can’t wait for the opportunity to fly on the A380, and marvel at all the technology and space that it offers to passengers. There’s no doubt this plane will redefine aviation in the years to come once it becomes fully operational.

Video: Airbus A380 Superumbo

airbus a380 This 29HD Network feed includes the best of all 29HD Network - Gadjit Guide-Airbus A380

This entry is a follow up to the previous one I wrote last week titled: What’s Worth More: Online Eyeballs or Digital Media Content written right about the time the drums of war between Google and Viacom were being heard ’round the world. As the whole world knows by now, Google finally got sued over its subsidiary’s (YouTube) claimed copyright infringement of Viacom’s content. Many experts in the field had anticipated that YouTube would eventually get sued (including Google…the company set aside a couple of hundred million dollars as part of the YouTube acquisition to fight copyright infringement litigation) for allowing its users to upload video content on the site, with little to no screening of the content to make sure such content truly belongs to the user uploading “the stuff”.

What’s a kicker to me is that both Google and Viacom were rumored to be in serious negotiations to put Viacom’s content on the YouTube site, in exchange for some type of revenue guarantee by Google, just before it fell apart last week. Google is known in the search industry for paying top dollar to partners to become their exclusive provider of Web Search solutions (that includes web search and sponsored listings), see Google press release Time Warner’s AOL and Google to Expand Strategic Alliance. It’s not hard to imagine that Viacom tried to arm wrestle Google and get them to agree to some outrageous revenue guarantees in exchange for Viacom’s content.

If that’s how the negotiations between these two companies happened, well I don’t think Google was ready to open its wallet and sign that big fat check as they’ve done in the past. In the absence of a negotiated agreement, often times companies resort to suing other companies claiming all sorts of outrageous violations to see if one sticks in front of a judge. In the case of Viacom, I find it hard to believe a judge is going to buy their claim. Viacom’s lawyers and executive team rolled the diced to go for the big pay check. In the end, when all this mess is settled, I think they’re going to wish they had taken Google’s offer, whatever that was.

This past Monday Andy Plesser of Beet.TV posted an interview with PodZinger’s CEO Alex Laats on www.beet.tv. The article, Exclusive: Defense Contractor has Analyzed, Transcribed and Organized 1.5 Million YouTube Clips, features a video of the interview in which Alex explains PodZinger’s technology and why it is valuable to consumers, content owners and advertisers alike. Alex’s interview speaks to PodZinger’s desire to bring search capabilities and content to the consumer with greater ease.

Yet the article itself, as evident from the title, focuses on PodZinger’s role as a subsidiary of BBN Technologies and the relationship between BBN’s government funding and public Internet videos. Interestingly, this spin on PodZinger’s evolution and the roots of our speech-to-text technology plays into the unique fears of a post 9/11 world. One can perceive a slight, Big Brother is watching your YouTube videos message–particularly from the article’s title. We are certainly living in a different world today–one where a company’s connection to a defense contractor can make people slightly nervous or paranoid. It seems ironic to me however, that people might worry about the “government crawling” of user-generated content on public Internet websites. If I can watch your videos online, members of the White House staff could too–albeit some might need help from their kids to find the content.

For more interviews with Alex Laats check out www.podzinger.com.

In one corner, we have online search giant Google weighing in at a market cap of $139 billion dollars with a record of several online acquisitions (most recently YouTube.com), and 0 losses. In the other corner, we have old-school Media Company Viacom weighing in at a market cap of $27 billion dollars with a record of owning hit TV shows like The Daily Show and the Real World, and few losses here and there. This bout promises to be one for the ages and fans on both sides of the ring will get what they came to see: A street brawl between two media giants fighting for control of our eyes when we go online, and become the sole recipient of advertising dollars spent online.

Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt recently went in public saying old-school media companies like Viacom will need Google’s online properties like YouTube to remain relevant with viewer demographics of interest. In his argument, Mr. Schmidt went on to say that an aggregation of desirable online eyeballs, or users, have more intrinsic value then the media content produced by media giants like Viacom for the consumption of those desirable eyeballs. With his statement, the old-argument that content is “king”, or “if you have the content, users will come” goes out the window. Such argument by Mr. Schmidt kind of resembles the argument: Which one came first, the chicken or the egg?

It’ hard to say what has more value: content or online users, but given Google’s outstanding record in everything the company pursues, it’s not hard to think they will come out victorious in this bout. Google has the clout, the money and the “do-no-evil” credibility to convince media companies (perhaps not Viacom), that making their digital media content available for distribution across the Google properties is the only way for these companies to reach desired audiences, stay relevant with their target demographics and make a few bucks along the way.

Daily 49er