How Twilight Works!!

A few weeks ago I had the miserable experience of reading Twilight. A friend bought it for me and I took it with me to read on a long flight from Seattle to Houston. I knew it was going to be crappy, but I thought it would be a guilty pleasure kind of crappy – where you know it’s bad but you still get enjoyment out of it. I actually managed to power through around 400 pages until I gave up and started reading Sky Mall. I’ve been seeing Twilight everywhere lately, especially with Vampire Teens II New Moon’s release, so I thought I’d break down why chicks go apeshit for it.

First off, the author creates a main character which is an empty shell. Her appearance isn’t described in detail; that way, any female can slip into it and easily fantasize about being this person. I read 400 pages of that book and barely had any idea of what the main character looked like; as far as I was concerned she was a giant Lego brick. Appearance aside, her personality is portrayed as insecure, fumbling, and awkward – a combination anyone who ever went through puberty can relate to. By creating this “empty shell,” the character becomes less of a person and more of something a female reader can put on and wear. Because I forgot her name (I think it was Barbara or Brando or something like that), I’m going to refer to her as “Pants” from here on out.

So after a few chapters of listening to Pants whine about high school, sucking at volleyball, and being the center of attention, the second major character is introduced. Imagine everything women want in a man, then exaggerate it by ten thousand – and you’ve got Edward Cullen. The level of detail that the author goes into while describing Edward’s appearance is remarkable. At one point while reading I started counting the number of times the author used the expression “Edward’s perfect face,” and it was far into the double digits. The author excruciatingly details his muscular pecs, clothing, hair, eye color – even his goddamn breath (I’m not joking).

Edward intensely listens to everything Pants has to say, even if she’s bitching about she had diarrhea on Christmas or her preferred method for cutting a sandwich in half. As far as the reader is concerned, Edward cares about nothing in the world more than Pants. What the author has done is created a perfect male figure – a pale Greek statue which the reader can worship and in turn be worshiped by.

So what about men that like Twilight?
If you’re male and you like Twilight, you’re gay. I don’t mean that in the derogatory sense, I mean it in the “you want to put your testicles against another man’s testicles while gripping handfuls of chesthair” kind of way.

And the movie?
The movie is just the same uninspired crap shat out onto a film reel. If you like the taste of horse manure on your bologna sandwiches, you’re probably gonna like it on your birthday cake as well. The same principle applies with Twilight.

Beyond that, it’s just a romance novel with the occasional vampire teen drama bullshit peppered here and there. It doesn’t really break any new ground in the realm of vampire fiction, other than portraying vampires as a family of uncomfortable retards who prance around the woods eating deer and bunny rabbits. There’s lots of nervous lip-biting, tender kisses between Pants and Edward, and lengthy descriptions of every feature of Edward’s body. Pants is a static character who never really progresses beyond being an insecure vampire fangirl who obsesses over Edward. Whether her character grows beyond that is unknown to me, I’d stopped reading by then and shifted my attention to an electric butt-massaging chair in Sky Mall.

Just a little piece I read somewhere, written pretty amaturely but still says a lot..

I went to a party Mom,
I remembered what you said.
You told me not to drink, Mom,
So I drank soda instead.

I really felt proud inside, Mom,
The way you said I would.
I didn’t drink and drive, Mom,
Even though the others said I should.

I know I did the right thing, Mom,
I know you are always right.
Now the party is finally ending, Mom,
As everyone is driving out of sight.

As I got into my car, Mom,
I knew I’d get home in one piece.
Because of the way you raised me,
So responsible and sweet.

I started to drive away, Mom,
But as I pulled out into the road,
The other car didn’t see me, Mom,
And hit me like a load.

As I lay there on the pavement, Mom,
I hear the policeman say,
“The other guy is drunk,” Mom,
And now I’m the one who will pay.

I’m lying here dying, Mom….
I wish you’d get here soon.
How could this happen to me, Mom?
My life just burst like a balloon.

There is blood all around me, Mom,
And most of it is mine.
I hear the medic say, Mom,
I’ll die in a short time.

I just wanted to tell you, Mom,
I swear I didn’t drink.
It was the others, Mom.
The others didn’t think..

He was probably at the same party as I.
The only difference is, he drank
And I will die.

Why do people drink, Mom?
It can ruin your whole life.
I’m feeling sharp pains now.
Pains just like a knife.

The guy who hit me is walking, Mom,
And I don’t think it’s fair.
I’m lying here dying
And all he can do is stare.

Tell my brother not to cry, Mom.
Tell Daddy to be brave.
And when I go to heaven, Mom,
Put “GOOD BOY ” on my grave.

Someone should have told him, Mom,
Not to drink and drive.
If only they had told him, Mom,
I would still be alive.

My breath is getting shorter, Mom.
I’m becoming very scared.
Please don’t cry for me, Mom.
When I needed you, you were always there.

I have one last question, Mom.
Before I say good bye.
I didn’t drink and drive,
So why am I the one to die?

After closing the social network platform SpotM, Yahoo has launched Meme, in English, to take on microblogging site Twitter. The company had launched this service in Spanish and Portuguese languages earlier this month.

Meme is currently in an invite-only mode, similar to few microblogging services like Tumblr, Twitter, Pownce and others. After creating the account, users get a blank blog for micro-sharing text, images, music, videos or mash up of all these things.

It also offers the facility to add new friends by searching the internet, which is quite similar to Tumblr and Twitter.

The company’s previous efforts to capitalize on the social networking domain kept failing in spite of repeated attempts. The recently launched ‘Know Your Mojo’ also failed along with the Indian social network, SpotM, which was closed down less than a year after its launch. Well Yahoo has a reputation of not being consistent with its products, they disappear and the accounts close down.

Meme does not allow much in terms of customization. The users cannot customize the themes with background images and custom CSS to style the text, as this facility is available with Twitter and Tumblr. Both these services have a rich faux-cabulary, which defines how a person uses the service. Meme does not lend on a particular vocabulary. The setting panel has minimal options like Meme title, 100 character description, avatar/photo and notifications. It also shows the comments posted by the users recently.

Yahoo Meme can have a big advantage over Twitter in terms of reliability. Twitter’s image has suffered for frequent service outages, with its “Fail Whale” graphic appearing whenever the site is overloaded, emerging as the company’s unofficial logo.

Several technology sites like TechCrunch and paidContent are not pleased with Yahoo’s move, they said, “Meme seems to lack in its features and in potential to surpass its competitors.” They also pointed out that the company has a spotty record with Mash and SpotM.

The death of Saad khan has slowly made its way to the mainstream media. I have been hearing that GEO and Dawn have recently covered it. Meanwhile there has been a lot of discussion,heated debates,questions and grief over the incident on twitter and Facebook. The news was first brought up by Farrukh Ahmed, his message on twitter made the most impact it read:

@Farrukhahmed: is thinkng while we sleep, some1 is lying in a casket in a foreign land waitng 2 return only 2 B put away 6 feet undr. RIP Saad Khan

@Farrukhahmed: 2 all blaggers: need your help in raising voice against a miserably organized game show arranged by unilever which took the life of a good friend. unilever is refusing to disclose the details / video footage of the event. pls RT

Today am trying to do my part in highlighting the freak accident that took Saad’s life. Saad a champion swimmer,a banker, and most importantly a 32 year old father of four has left behind a widow and a grieving family. One can only imagine the condition of his friends and families, their never ending questions that have only met silence so far. Saad was participant in a reality show commissioned by Unilever and mind share, two multinational giants, who still have not been able to elaborate the circumstances in which the tragic accident took place.

Here is what we know:

Photo Courtesy- Paksatire

Pakistani contestant Saad Khan, 32, was swimming across a lake while wearing a 15-pound backpack when he called out for help and then disappeared underwater, according to Fareshte Aslam, information officer for Unilever Pakistan, the show’s sponsor.Horrified co-contestants and crew rushed to try to save him but could not find him in the murky waters of the lake in the Thai capital of Bangkok, where the show was being filmed, according to Aslam, who was recounting reports of those on the scene.Divers later recovered the body of Khan, she said.The death came during filming of the show’s 10th episode on Aug. 19, but it was not publicized until Khan’s body was returned home to Karachi.

Unilever Pakistan accepts no liability for Khan’s death, Aslam said, but added that the company is in discussions to provide for Khan’s wife and four children ‘out of rightness.’

For over a week now I have been urging people (on twitter and facebook) to stop jumping to conclusion. Hence wait for an official release and work our way forth from there onwards. However the ‘out of rightness’ philosophy by Unilever makes me want to join in the bandwagon of online crusaders. Coming back to sanity I must use my rights to ask questions which Unilever might as well answer ‘out of rightness’ or a more appropriate corporate term ‘out of liability’. The project was commissioned by Unilever (with multiple vendors involved ), and therefore, they owe the public an explanation, supported with concrete evidence. Consequently the public has all the right to know and as consumers have the right and responsibility to demand explanation and documentary evidence.

Sabeen Mehmud’s blog on Saad’s death elaborates further on how the corporation works, further elaborating on how the corporate world is a soulless machine. However Saad is no more and we should not let heartless corporate world snub the mourning.

Our struggle is to obtain documentary evidence of Saad’s death. Not only that but also assurance backed with evidence that all types of security measures were taken to prevent accidents. Saad’s death raises a lot of questions regarding the importance of safety and precautions for these reality shows.This is a serious issue which has cost a young man his life. Unilever and Mindshare owe explanations to the grieving family.This was not a one of a kind reality show, many reality shows of the same caliber are aired in various countries. This incident also open doors to the world of freak reality shows in Pakistan where security measures are never considered. Many tv channels still air reality shows where the participant is meant to prove his/her ’strength’ by participating in dangerous stunts , with no apparent security measures. The question now regarding the creditability of these kind of entertainment shows– least concerned about security measures– should we allow them to continue airing for the sake of entertainment and commercialism?

via: http://sanasaleem.com/2009/09/04/saad-khan-death-by-reality-tv/

A very sad sad tale indeed

In their quest to produce a western copy of thrilling and adventurous reality show, Poor and substandard arrangements have become the reason of the killing of a young man Saad Khan. According to the news circulating around and the word of mouth. I got this information from a colleague who knows the victim.

Saad Khan lost his life in the recording of the show when the host Amina Sheikh (Mrs Mohib Mirza and a known actress) gave an under water challenge to him. TSaad lost his control and shouted for help but the lame safety and lifeline measures failed to rescue him from the deep water and the young man, the father of four had to suffer.

The blame goes straight to the producers of the show, apparently who are Unilever and their agency – Mindshare (Mr. Taher A Khan’s property, TV1 as well) for hiring such a sub standard team and the cheap arrangements that became the cause of his death. For now, the mainstream media has rejected to air any such news as they get a fair amount of advertising business from Unilever. And spokespersons of these two companies have been shamelessly calling the incident a mere accident.

Mansoor Khan, the cousin of the victim demands that “ALL CONCERNED PEOPLE OF UNILEVER & MINDSHARE MUST BE PUT BEHIND BARS.”

Mansoor doesn’t want you people to boycott Unilever Products, all he wants is that the culprits who gambled with the life of the participant must be brought to the court of justice.

I got a chance to see the much talked about and much awaited documentary by Ayesha Khan “MADE IN PAKISTAN”. I must say its yet another masterpiece from the Indus Valley Productions, Made in Pakistan is a documentary film that aims to portray the true picture of Pakistan that is often misrepresented to the global masses.

The story revolves around the four Pakistanis namely; Rabia, the working mother and journalist! Waleed, a lawyer with the beard who returned from London! Tara, the outgoing single publicist and Mohsin, the aspiring politician. A very critical thing shown in the documentary is the black political mission of Talibanization.

Moreover, the story features Pakistan’s internationally acclaimed talents such as fashion, style, music, drama etc. The movie also vows to discredit the sensationalists foreign media who have been creating hypes by pronouncing Pakistan as the most dangerous country.

As the trailer of the documentary shows a foreigner says: ‘I don’t find an ounce of like danger here’ Nasir Khan, the director of the film expresses “the sensationalism of men in beards stalking the streets of Islamabad may sell newspapers abroad but the country and its silent urban majority such as the four individuals featured here also hold high stakes in what Pakistan is and what it will become in the future.”

I am sure you people must be much excited to watch this documentary out. So tickets are now available and you can check this out. And for now, watch out the Promo.. cuz i couldn’t post the entire video here (:

Remember that your mind can defy the laws of the universe in one crucial way. It can go backward. Time can’t, nor can events – but your mind can. Let’s say you go into your office, and the first thing you notice is that an important report you needed was not written. The incomplete report tends to put in a less than resourceful state. You feel mad. You feel frustrated. You’re ready to go out and scream at your secretary. But screaming won’t produce the result you want. It will only make a bad situation worse. The key is to change your state, to back up and put yourself in a state that will allow you to get things done. That’s what you can do by rearranging your internal representations.

You are a sovereign, being in control, running your own brain. Now you are seeing the way to do it. In just some few exercises one can see that one has the ability to totally control your own state. Think what your life would be like if you remembered all your good experiences as looking bright, close, and colorful as sounding joyous, rhythmic, and melodic; as feelings soft, warm, and nurturing. And what if you stored your bad experiences as fuzzy little framed images with almost inaudible voices and insubstantial forms you could not feel because they were far away from you? Successful people do this unconsciously. They know how to turn up the volume of the things that help them and turn off the sound of the things that don’t.

It is suggested you ignore problems. Some things need to be addressed. We all know people who can go through a day in which ninety-nine things worked out right and come home totally depressed. Why? Well, one thing went wrong. They may have turned the one thing that went wrong into a big, bright, blustery image and turned the others into small, murky, quiet insubstantial ones.

Lot of people spend their whole lives like this. There are people who keep telling, “I’m depressed”. They almost say it with pride, because it’s become so much a part of their world view. Well, many therapists would begin with the long, arduous task of unearthing the causes of that depression. They’d let the patient talk for hours about his depression. They’d rummage through the patient’s mental garbage bin to uncover seminal experiences of gloom and past emotional abuse. Of such techniques are very long and very expensive therapeutic relationship s made.

No one is always depressed. Depression is not a permanent condition like losing a leg. It is a state that people can pop into and out of. In fact, most people who are experiencing depression have had many happy experiences in their lives – may be even as many or more than the average person. They just don’t represent these experiences to themselves in a bright, large, associated way. They may also represent happy times as far away instead of close. Take a moment now and remember an event that happened last week and push it far away. Does it seem as recent an experience to you anymore? What if you bring it closer? Doesn’t it now seem more recent? Some people take their happy experiences of the moment and push them far away so they seem like long ago, and store their problems up close. Haven’t you ever heard a person say I just need to get some distance from my problems? You don’t have to fly to some distant land to do this. Just push them far away from you in your mind and notice the difference. People who feel depressed often have their brains filled to capacity with big, loud, close, heavy, insistent images of the bad times and only thin, gray wafers for the good times. The way to changer isn’t to wallow in the bad memories; it’s to change the sub-modalities, the very structure of the memories themselves. Next, link what used to make you feel bad to new representations that make you feel like taking the challenges of life with vigor, humor, patience, and strength.

Cristiano Ronaldo has the potential to replace David Beckham as the footballer who earns the most money from endorsements following his world record 130-million dollar move to Real Madrid, experts say.

“There is certainly a vacancy for a football central brand right now,” said Simon Chadwick, professor of sport business strategy and marketing at Coventry University in England.

“Beckham, because of his age and the stage of his career, has lost it. And Ronaldo is ideally placed to assume the mantle of ‘brand Beckham’, especially among young kids and teenagers,” he told AFP.

Chadwick, who has studied what makes a strong sports player brand, said Ronaldo has many of the required qualities: he is highly skilled, has a good physique, plays at a successful team and has enjoyed “sustained” success.

The 24-year-old Portuguese winger has already appeared barechested in adverts for Pepe Jeans, as well as in campaigns for Nike, Coca-Cola, the video game FIFA Street 2 and Indonesian energy drink Extra Joss.

He earned 19.6 million dollars a year at Manchester United off the pitch from product endorsements, compared to 42.5 million dollars earned by the 34-year-old Beckham last year, according to British media reports.

With his move to Real, where he will play alongside other big-name new recruits like Kaka and Karim Benzema, Ronaldo is following in the footsteps of Beckham who also left Manchester United for a successful spell at Real.

“He is in a fantastic position. Both clubs are very good at marketing their brand and players and have a huge fan base,” said Jamie Wynne-Morgan, managing director of M&C Saatchi Sport and Entertainment.

“He needs to be careful not to be overexposed and make the right strategic decisions, not do lots of little deals,” added Wynne-Morgan, whose agency advised on a deal that saw Ronaldo sign up as a “global ambassador” for engine oil company Castrol earlier this year.

Ronaldo, the 2008 FIFA world player of the year, signed a six-year deal with Real worth 94 million euros and will reportedly be paid 13 million euros each season, making him the world’s most expensive player.

His appeal to the youth market coveted by advertisers was underscored at his official unveiling on July 6 at the Santiago Bernabeu stadium as nearly 80,000 ecstatic fans, mainly teenagers and young adults, turned out to welcome him.

Ronaldo however lacks the seemingly stable family life which Beckham, who now plays for Los Angeles Galaxy, enjoys and is often accused of not being a team player, two factors which could decrease his “likeability” factor and appeal to advertisers.

“Beckham was so successful at Real in part because he was seen as playing for the team. I don’t think Ronaldo has that. Off field Ronaldo needs to get married, settle down with a nice girl, and start a family,” said Chadwick.

How much Ronaldo earns from endorsements will ultimately depend on his performance on the pitch since companies seek endorsements from top players like Ronaldo because they want to be associated with their success.

“They want to be seen as young, goodlooking, funky, successful brands so therefore they want to have young, goodlooking, funky, successful icons promoting their name,” said veteran football agent Jon Holmes, who managed former England international striker Gary Lineker.

“He is a good looking guy and I would say his level of articulateness is about the same as Beckham’s. I don’t know about his intelligence or anything like that but he is not dissimilar in some ways,” he told AFP.

“He is probably a better player than Beckham in that he is more versatile. Beckham is a workhorse of a player, Ronaldo seems to be a more natural player.”

If you’re reading this blog, the chances are pretty good that you’ve signed up for one or more email alerts, e-newsletters, or automated updates over the years. Plus, if you work inside almost any part of the media industry, the odds are also good that you or your company sends out bulk emails.

And if you’re by any chance a blogger (like me ), you’d be hard put to build an audience if you didn’t at least try the F&F approach via email now and again.

A new report from Return Path indicates that not as many of those email alerts may be reaching your intended audience as you might have expected. Based on 500,000 email-based campaigns in the first half of 2009, the company said more than one in every five — 20.7 percent –of the consumer emails never made it to the intended recipient.

B2B emails performed even worse, with 27.6 percent undelivered.

Spam or junk filters were not a significant factor, causing only 3.3 percent of the failures, but a surprising 17.4 percent of the emails were not delivered at all. The report notes that this contrasts to what marketers are normally told, which is that the percentage “delivered” ranges from 95 to 98 percent.

The differential is whether “delivered” means the message reached the email-host as compared to whether the host passed it through to the intended recipient’s in-box. Factors that affect this include how each email provider rates the sender’s reputation, as well as a mix of other, proprietary filter settings.

But, the report suggests that technical issues are not the main factor at work here, rather that emailers are not following best practices that would improve their chances for success.

In its summary of the report, the Center for Media Research states: “Most of the major drivers of poor deliverability rates are the direct result of marketing practices, not technical ones. These include complaints when email is unexpected or undervalued by the recipient, and spam traps, which are most often found on lists that are old or have been built with poorly sourced data.”

Recommendations for improvement include better subject line messages, clear opt-out procedures, and making sure you have appropriate “permission levels.”

What compounds this for those in media trying to communicate via email is the extreme fragmentation of the email market. The most recent data I could lay on hands on quickly comes from Hitwise, and indicates that the top email services in the U.S. as of late 2008 were Yahoo Mail, with a 4.7 percent market share, followed by Windows Live (1.94 percent), and Google Gmail (0.8 percent).

This leaves well over 90 percent of all U.S. emails to all of the other services out there, from Hotmail to Eudora to Mindless.

According to the Return Path study, the email service with the lowest percentage of undelivered mail was Cox, at 8 percent. Here were the worst six using the non-delivery metric (by percentage of emails sent):

1. Gmail           23
2. Hotmail       20
3. MSN              20
4. Comcast       17
5. AOL               16
6. Yahoo!           15

Microsoft Wins, Yahoo Folds, Google Still Reigns in Search Game

Microsoft gave Yahoo bare minimum terms in their new 10-year partnership: a fortified combined search engine off of which it can sell and retain advertising revenues, and a possible exit strategy down the road.  Either way Microsoft wins.

The long-anticipated search and advertising pact announced today did not include the favorable terms — primarily billions in upfront revenue guarantees– expected by disappointed Yahoo investors, who initially drove the company’s stock down 12 percent.

Whether by design or coincidence, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer played his cards well over the companies’ tumultuous three-year negotiations. Yahoo initially rejected a $47.5 billion buyout offer from Microsoft in 2008 as well as a proposed search partnership with a $1 billion upfront payout last year — both under the leadership of former CEO Jerry Yang.

By comparison, the pact finally approved by new Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz and Yahoo board members (including five percent activist shareholder Carl Icahn) is modest, complex and unlikely to create meteoric value. It’s almost as if there is another shoe to drop in the Microsoft-Yahoo two-step.

At best, Yahoo will realize $500 million in annual operating profit and is guaranteed only 88 percent of ad sales from its affiliated and owned search business in the first five years. Yahoo will see $275 million in cost savings and $200 million less in capital expenditures annually once the companies’ businesses are fully integrated in about two years. Weak advertising and shaky initiatives will depress 2009 operating cash flow 10 percent and drive down revenues 13 percent, analysts estimate.

In the end, Microsoft appears to have paid much less for what it wanted: a way to catapult its well-regarded new Bing search engine (with a mere three percent share) into second place by merging it with Yahoo’s 20 percent market share. It is the only way Microsoft search could get big fast and the only way Yahoo can bolster its waning fortunes.

By joining forces, Microsoft and Yahoo say they can be a more effective competitor, even though their aggregate affiliated 30 percent search share is less than half that of Google’s. Microsoft and Yahoo could grow their gross search revenues, after synergies, an average 6.6 percent annually over the next five years, analysts say.

But there is another way to look at this deal.

Yahoo has abruptly thrown in the towel on its decade-long pursuit of branded search that included investing $160 million to build Panama, the technology it will use to sell advertising across the companies’ merged search platform. Yahoo will receive only 88 percent (instead of 100 percent) of paid search revenues, hoping the balance will be made up from an expanded, improved search base. There is no evidence of the “boatload of money” in this deal that Bartz promises.

Bartz’s rationalizes that Yahoo has become less a portal and more of a content company, which seems to put it on the same migration track as rival AOL, another diminished Internet brand.

Even if a Microsoft-Yahoo cabal tried to acquire or align with AOL, when it is spun off from Time Warner later this year, the three companies’ combined search share would barely make a dent in Google’s nearly 14 billion domestic searches last month, or which accounted for 65 percent of that market. Still, that won’t keep Google from pressing for antitrust scrutiny, despite having been the one to “power” Yahoo’s searches years ago.

Some of the questions raised by this new search pact are far more intriguing than the details:

• How hard did Yahoo try to secure a $2 billion to $3 billion upfront payment of guaranteed revenue from Microsoft, and why didn’t they get it?
• Will the rationale of maintaining separate display ad operations be an effective deterrent to rigorous antitrust review?
• Why has Microsoft grossly underestimated the importance of mobile search by failing to include it in this deal?
• How will two companies that took three years of grueling negotiations to get this far successfully manage the integration and execution risks ahead?
• Is the five-year limit to Yahoo’s favored ad revenue split, after which Microsoft could resume its own ad sales, designed to force Yahoo into a full-blown merger?

Some on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley consider this deal a precursor to a complete MicroHoo union — and that just might be more lucrative and easier to effect.