'Powerbands' consumer investigation in Australia

Some of the more astute readers may remember a post I did a while back on those mysterious 'Powerbands' that claim to improve balance and athletic performance.


It seems the lawyers from the ACCC have stepped in, probably after they bought a whole truckload of the bracelets so as not to be humiliated in the Christmas company picnic cricket-match and were still spanked by the guys over at payroll.


Story: Powerband marketing is 'misleading'

There is absolutely no proof of this but I will unashamedly claim that the ACCC were alerted to this scandal through my own remarkably unapologetic and thorough investigation and subsequent treatise on the shady matter of these bracelets.


I expect Ping to be brought to its knees in days.

Amazon Studios

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
Winston Churchill

Starting with a wanky and pretentious quote is a great way to begin a blog post, as it quickly establishes that I, the author, am much smarter than you (it takes a lightning quick wit to type ‘democracy quote’ into Google, I can assure you. Can you imagine how hard people had to work to be pretentious before the internet? They probably had to read books). Pretension aside, I have actually included Winnie’s wise words for a reason; and that is to introduce the theme of democracy into this article, and, more specifically, introduce the follies of democracy, especially when it comes to www.amazon.com’s new project: Amazon Studios.

Amazon Studios is a world first open community film-making project, in which anybody can upload a script to the Studio’s website. Once a script is uploaded people can rate it, discuss it and even revise it, making the changes they would like to see and then re-uploading. These scripts can then be made into ‘test-movies’, a sample video clip (again made by anybody who has the time/commitment to do so) which will give the world-wide community an idea of the finished film product. The idea behind all this is that extensive world-wide collaboration will produce scripts which are good enough to turn into Hollywood blockbusters.

The encouraging aspect of Amazon Studios is that they’re not just pissing in the wind when they say that there is a chance for your movie to be discovered. They have a ‘development deal’ with Warner Bros. Studios, and have some well-known film-makers and writers who judge the monthly contests which are meant to weed out the cream of the crop in collaborative online filmmaking. These contests are serious business: 1.1 Million dollars is up for grabs for the best film script/idea uploaded to Amazon Studios in 2011.

Why it will work

One thing that Amazon Studios has going for it is its funding. This isn’t a small start-up from some Hollywood hovel by a bitter and resentful writer who couldn’t crack it into the big-time. These guys have some serious financial muscle behind them (Amazon.com’s revenue in 2009 was close to US$25 billion), evident in their development deal with WB and huge cash prizes offered in the writing contests. This financial backing adds credibility to the product, and provides incentive for artists to work hard.

In addition to their financial position, Amazon Studios bring a revolutionary idea to the table. The concept of user-made content could potentially revolutionise the way the film industry works. Who knows better what the people want than the people themselves? And the internet, the crux of the whole project, provides the basis for global collaboration. This project is directly born out of the existence of the ‘net; it could not possibly work without it. It is an example of an innovative way to harness the highly developed connectedness of the globe.

Why it won’t work

But within the idea of a revolutionised movie-making industry lies the problem: the movie industry doesn’t need to be revolutionised. The people who work in Hollywood are the best in the business*, and the cut-throat nature and competitiveness of the industry demands the survival of the fittest. You could argue that a similar cut-throat industry could develop via Amazon Studios, but I would contend that Hollywood has just the right amount of competitiveness; and it is competitiveness against professionals. Amazon Studios, on the other hand, has the potential not to produce brilliantly collaborated ideas but actually destroy feasible projects due to amateurism. An analogy may be handy at this point: imagine the original concept of a movie as a tiny seed. In Hollywood, this seed is cultivated carefully; its care is placed (more often than not) in the hands of experienced writers, producers and directors. These people care for the seed and nurture it, so as to give it the best possible chance of becoming a majestic flowering Oscar-tree.

Amazon Studios, on the other hand, begins with the seed, but it is in danger of being over-watered and trampled. Because anybody can edit and change anybody else’s project; a really great idea can turn into a lousy one quickly.  Amazonian apologists will argue that this is counteracted by the democratic nature of AS, that bad ideas will never find favour with the public. My counter-argument is that the people who give the green-light to a project in Hollywood know a lot more about good movies and ideas than people who vote for a project on AS. A really ridiculous and silly idea for a movie (say a huge ship which is declared unsinkable gets sunk on its maiden voyage...yawn) may find favour with Amazon Studios because the prime voting audience might be thirteen year old boys with nothing better to do than vote for stupid movies. Sure, the judges who oversee the monthly and annual contests are qualified, but for the movies to get looked at by those judges they first have to find favour with a potentially idiotic public.

This is where our old mate Winnie’s quote comes back into it: do you really want to trust the average person to decide which movies get made? Or would you rather trust the ponytailed, fast-talking Hollywood exec who reads Variety and whose primary interest is reading scripts and producing movies? It’s a tough one, I know, but for me the exec just wins out. Let me put it this way: would you want your house designed by a committee of Joe Schlubs or by one qualified architect?

I have tried to reach this conclusion in the most even-handed way I could. I don’t want it to seem like I’m poking holes in Amazon Studios’ concept for the sake of it. I think it would be fantastic if an online community-produced feature got made into a blockbuster. But think of it this way: if a supposedly democratic society can vote G.W Bush in twice, can we really trust democracy with our movies?  

Check out: http://studios.amazon.com/

*Small and purposely hard-to-read disclaimer: I am aware I have made the rather ungainly assumption that 'Hollywood' is where all the best people are. Film industries in other countries make fantastic movies too. In the context of Amazon Studios, however, it is the most relevant film industry to relate to.