I was following the b3ta thread about Cillit Bang and it’s viral marketing (hey an intentionally bad advert! That’s NEVER been done…sigh) – in a nutshell marketing types have been posting on serious blogs ‘in character’ as a promo for their crappy product; raising issues of where and when blatant advertising is appropriate.

It’s a bit like the endless current spam going on in blogs at the mo with ‘I like your site…’ – I got 30-40 such comment spams in one DAY recently…grr.

But following the thread I stumbled on this post – from 2003 from Danny O’Brien (ooh NTK? I used to read that!) about the boundaries between public vs. private and how the internets and blogging (and duh - podcasting - but he wouldn’t know that then) will break down the distinctions.

Sample quote:

We’ll learn a kind of tolerance for the private conversation that is not aimed at us, and that overreacting to that tone will be a sign of social naivete.

Question – has this happened? Did the public and private merge somewhat or did new fences arrive? ; I’m not sure that the sneering sarcastic subset has gone away (thinking of a podcast I used to listen to last year that repeatedly mocked one blog by a teenage girl, gave me a bad taste in my mouth so I stopped listening, the guy’s sneering tone put me off)…but broadly in the blogging/podcast community there does seem an unusual tolerance and different tone – try writing about say, your cleaning efforts in drag (Wanda) or just your day-to-day bikeride in Amsterdam (bicyclemark) on a messageboard and see what happens…lack of content, dead air, or crossing the private/public divide is not a crime in this space it seems.

Is podcasting a part of this breakdown of the public vs private or are new distinctions emerging, like a sort of privic or publate (as in I’ve got to write this blog I’ll be late down the pub )? I’ve been background-thinking about this recently and that post just brought it to the fore.

Podcasting seems like the battleground of public vs. private – I could write you a thesis on public vs private on land usage, squatting and rambling since that’s one of my partner’s favourite political footballs and I get the earbashing; but to some extent those areas have been delineated over time even though there is a constant tug o’war there. Podcasting and blogging are so new in comparison; that the private can become public (such as being dooced) and can cause bigger erruptions, like losing your job.

Certainly there is a list of things I generally don’t talk about; work being one, family being another (although lack of interest on my part for those 2 is more of a reason!), or talk much about other people without their knowledge. It’s access all areas for other subjects though…as if there is a 3rd space, a grey area between private and public that constantly fluctuates.

The other reason I’m thinking of this is that I’m editing show 50 and it’s sounding good, but parts of it I wonder ‘what’s other people going to make of this?’.

Question is, should I edit for public or private?

The jokes even the in-jokes are part of mine and Kirk’s world, not intentionally exclusive but part of our ‘patois’ I suppose. To edit them out gives a false impression of how we are, and I probably am underestimating other people’s references/experiences/tolerances.

But there is always that fear that I’ll put out a gibbering mess that no-one will understandand, and will put people off…the private (it doesn’t need to be explained you see, it’s for an audience of 1 or 2, not more, exclusionary, smart but maybe geeky or cliquey, but can connect in a ‘real’ sense) or the public (it’s explained in words of 1 syllable, ultimately accessible but can devolve into public radio, dumbed down or so general it loses it’s edge).

Hmm. At the moment I’m kind of walking the thin line (or slash!) beween public/private, especially when I involve other people…that’s what sometimes makes it a headache of an edit job…

1. Having Truly Scrumptious from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang running round constantly your head. Probably the most horrible and over-sachharated tune ever, so of course I’m using it for a mix…

Hmm…as the dust has settled on the John Peel day/week/memorial single activities I can see more clearly why was beginning to be bemused by this John Peel Day and Radio 1 spectacular...

Firstly (and most importantly) the music they played was great – I really wished they’d do this more often; rather than a public broadcaster aping commercial radio and playing anodyne crap (of all sorts, from Jo Whiley coffee-mug indie to Pete Tong and his bangin’ nonce-sense) – to hear silly hardcore tunes sampling Chicago nestling next to the Wedding Present, Ivor Cutler and Napalm Death was a joy to hear. And reminded me what was so special about John Peel was his catholic taste in music. They played some tracks I’d not heard before; and like a schoolkid I taped them via MP3 (well cassette is a bit old skool now) and then ran off to the great big interweb to see if I can find them…;-D

That reminded me of exactly the excitement I lack when I listen to radio nowadays. The marketing and PR departments have won and you know what’s going to be released months in advance by who gets interviewed that week and is doing the rounds…sadly it’s only when you get a Crazy Frog or a Hamster Dance does it actually come from nowhere, record company PR-wise anyway…

All the other acts have their pre-release schedules, slots, previews and exclusives to the point that you’re bored of the bleeding song (or the band as they are so finely demographically niched that their lifespan is now listed in nano-seconds).

But the presenters on the John Peel Day show and inane babble was depressing and showed exactly what’s wrong with Radio 1 – you don’t talk down to your audience, you don’t do I’M SO wAcKy aNd zAney (lOwe) and talk like a bad Avid Merrion spoof of a DJ, be ’90’s throwback Jo Whiley’ as 2 seperate friends coined her, and do the tacky ‘on-the-spot- factless reportage that stands for ‘reality’ radio nowadays. *shudder*. Actually the only surprise was that Colin and Edith were seemingly bearable with some decent music for a change, and Colin admitting that John Peel would in fact be horrified that he was doing it and hated his taste in music…:-D

I think the most important point (one that a few blogs I’ve read have missed) is that I’m sure that John Peel would have been touched by all the gigs and that his fans genuinely still cared…that was the bit that Radio 1 did get right apart from the playlist – many of the songs were suggestions and they played phone calls from the public talking about the gigs they’d arranged and memories of him.

Thing that stuck out most was a bit they played from John himself saying to a 14 year old girl that wrote in and was having difficulties with her parents. He said that yes it is hard sometime, and here’s the record you wanted and I hope it makes you feel better.

That’s why the man was special; not charidee records featuring past-it stars or memorial days or radio show tributes.

I hope my John Peel podcast (ooh the irony!) and other podcasts like it were more fitting tributes than the radio show – who knows? But I felt the man should have some sending off, something I didn’t do last year.

I do know the best tribute is to go and listen to some music you’ve never heard before tho; and tell someone about it..

…so there’s this breakcore act called Bong Ra right…;-)

I always find it funny the changing allegiances between all the tech-pundits, Dave Winer among them. It usually goes something like this, this week the writer loves Yahoo, and hates Google, whereas last month he (for invariably and sadly they are always male) was praising Google and hating Yahoo…they all seem to do that.

Maybe not Scoble since he can’t fall out with his Lord and Ma$ter, but others can. And then make up. Then fall out…on and on infinitum.

It’s like watching the tech versions of goldfish, strangely mesmeric, but about as productive.

The irony about all this Web 2.0 babbling is a) it’s already here, stop branding what already exists, it’s not new unless you want to go get VC money like podcasting and pretend it’s all shiny and cool and b) umm, what about invariably Web 3.0 coming along and shaking it all up? What’s called Web 2.0 (Google, Yahoo et al) is already old technology, and strategy, as it’s now out there. Shouldn’t we be looking to the future rather than thinking up wanky names for the present? Or have I missed something here?

Having been through a few of these web booms and busts (being a Web 1.0 sort, well it was more like Web always in alpha then) I reckon that when the new thing arrives – not neccessarily web based; or internet; a new set of pundits will arrive making the present set irrelevant.

Thus kind of making their goldfish bowls a little, well, ornamental?

I’ve uploaded pictures from the classic ‘Smallest Rave on Earth’ All Hands on Decks event 2 weeks ago – they’re on Flickr here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/37582170@N00/sets/1080519/