Graph by:

duopixel

Or a better question, people still watch television? Ms. Fix-It

Newspapers are now less important than the Internet as a source of information, yet the majority of online users say most online information is not reliable, according to the 10th annual study of the impact of the Internet on Americans by the Center for the Digital Future.

The study also found that 70 percent of online users believe that Internet advertising is annoying, yet 55 percent of users said they would rather see Web advertising than pay for content.

Among the study's findings:

• Americans on the Internet For the first time, the Internet is used by more than 80 percent of Americans now 82 percent. Weekly hours online The average time online has now reached 19 hours per week. Although more than two-thirds of Americans have gone online for a decade, the largest year-to-year increases in weekly online use have been reported in the two most recent Digital Future studies.
• Gaps in Internet use in age groups Not surprisingly, Internet use continues to increase as age decreases, with 100 percent of those under age 24 going online. However, a surprisingly high percentage of Americans between 36 and 55 are not Internet users: among respondents age 46 to 55, 19 percent are non-users; among those 36 to 45, 15 percent are non-users.
• Low adoption of new media Although new media is used by large percentages of Internet users age 24 and under, overall large percentages of Internet users never go online to do instant messaging (50 percent), work on a blog (79 percent), participate in chat rooms (80 percent), or make or receive phone calls (85 percent).
• Does technology make the world a better place The percentage of users age 16 and older who said that communication technology makes the world a better place has declined to 56 percent of users from its peak of 66 percent in 2002.
• Internet and Political Campaigns although more than 70 percent of users agree that the Internet is important for political campaigns, only 27 percent of users said that by using the Internet public officials will care more about what people think, and 29 percent said that the Internet can give people more of a say in what government does.
• Buying online 65 percent of adult Internet users buy online (the same as in 2008), and make an average of 35.2 purchases per year (up from 34.1 per year in 2008).
• Internet impact on traditional retail declines 61 percent of Internet users said that online purchasing has reduced their buying in traditional retail stores down from 69 percent in 2008.
• Top 10 online purchases 59 percent of Internet users said they purchase books or clothes online, followed by gifts (55 percent), travel (53 percent), electronics/appliances (47 percent), videos (46 percent), computers or peripherals (41 percent), software or games (40 percent), CDs (40 percent), and products for hobbies (38 percent).
• The study found that as sources of information their primary function newspapers rank below the Internet or television. Only 56 percent of Internet users ranked newspapers as important or very important sources of information for them a decrease from 60 percent in 2008 and below the Internet (78 percent), and television (68 percent).
• Even lower are the percentages of users who consider newspapers important as sources of entertainment for them, now considered important by 29 percent of Internet users, and down from 32 percent in 2008 also last among principal media.
• Eighteen percent of Internet users said they stopped a subscription to a newspaper or magazine because they now get the same or related content online down slightly from 22 percent in 2008, but nevertheless a strong indication that print newspapers can be sacrificed by a significant percentage of Internet users.
• Internet users were asked where they would go for information provided by their newspaper if the print edition ceased, 59 percent said they would read the online edition of the publication; only 37 percent said they would instead read the print edition of another newspaper.
• Twenty-two percent of users who read newspapers said they would not miss the print edition of their newspaper.
• Sixty-one percent of users said that only half or less of online information is reliable a new low level for the Digital Future Project.
• Even more disturbing is that 14 percent of Internet users said that only a small portion or none of the information online is reliable a percentage that has grown for the past three years and is now at the highest level thus far in the Digital Future Project.
• Also revealing is the percentage of users who have limited trust even in the Web sites they visit regularly: although 78 percent said that most or all of the information on the sites they visit regularly is reliable (a decline from the previous two years), 22 percent of users say that only one half or less of information on sites they visit regularly is reliable.
• Even search engines such as Google and Yahoo traditional stalwarts of online credibility have lost some of their luster. While 53 percent of Internet users said that most or all of the information provided by search engines is reliable and accurate, that percentage declined slightly in the current Digital Future Study and is well below the peak of 64 percent in 2006.
• 36 percent of users said only about half of information provided by search engines is reliable and accurate, and 12 percent said only a small portion or none of it was reliable.
• Only 46 percent of users said they have some trust or a lot of trust in the Internet in general. Nine percent of users have no trust in the Internet.

Among the study's findings:

• Americans on the Internet For the first time, the Internet is used by more than 80 percent of Americans now 82 percent. Weekly hours online The average time online has now reached 19 hours per week. Although more than two-thirds of Americans have gone online for a decade, the largest year-to-year increases in weekly online use have been reported in the two most recent Digital Future studies.
• Gaps in Internet use in age groups Not surprisingly, Internet use continues to increase as age decreases, with 100 percent of those under age 24 going online. However, a surprisingly high percentage of Americans between 36 and 55 are not Internet users: among respondents age 46 to 55, 19 percent are non-users; among those 36 to 45, 15 percent are non-users.
• Low adoption of new media Although new media is used by large percentages of Internet users age 24 and under, overall large percentages of Internet users never go online to do instant messaging (50 percent), work on a blog (79 percent), participate in chat rooms (80 percent), or make or receive phone calls (85 percent).
• Does technology make the world a better place The percentage of users age 16 and older who said that communication technology makes the world a better place has declined to 56 percent of users from its peak of 66 percent in 2002.
• Internet and Political Campaigns although more than 70 percent of users agree that the Internet is important for political campaigns, only 27 percent of users said that by using the Internet public officials will care more about what people think, and 29 percent said that the Internet can give people more of a say in what government does.
• Buying online 65 percent of adult Internet users buy online (the same as in 2008), and make an average of 35.2 purchases per year (up from 34.1 per year in 2008).
• Internet impact on traditional retail declines 61 percent of Internet users said that online purchasing has reduced their buying in traditional retail stores down from 69 percent in 2008.
• Top 10 online purchases 59 percent of Internet users said they purchase books or clothes online, followed by gifts (55 percent), travel (53 percent), electronics/appliances (47 percent), videos (46 percent), computers or peripherals (41 percent), software or games (40 percent), CDs (40 percent), and products for hobbies (38 percent).
• The study found that as sources of information their primary function newspapers rank below the Internet or television. Only 56 percent of Internet users ranked newspapers as important or very important sources of information for them a decrease from 60 percent in 2008 and below the Internet (78 percent), and television (68 percent).
• Even lower are the percentages of users who consider newspapers important as sources of entertainment for them, now considered important by 29 percent of Internet users, and down from 32 percent in 2008 also last among principal media.
• Eighteen percent of Internet users said they stopped a subscription to a newspaper or magazine because they now get the same or related content online down slightly from 22 percent in 2008, but nevertheless a strong indication that print newspapers can be sacrificed by a significant percentage of Internet users.
• Internet users were asked where they would go for information provided by their newspaper if the print edition ceased, 59 percent said they would read the online edition of the publication; only 37 percent said they would instead read the print edition of another newspaper.
• Twenty-two percent of users who read newspapers said they would not miss the print edition of their newspaper.
• Sixty-one percent of users said that only half or less of online information is reliable a new low level for the Digital Future Project.
• Even more disturbing is that 14 percent of Internet users said that only a small portion or none of the information online is reliable a percentage that has grown for the past three years and is now at the highest level thus far in the Digital Future Project.
• Also revealing is the percentage of users who have limited trust even in the Web sites they visit regularly: although 78 percent said that most or all of the information on the sites they visit regularly is reliable (a decline from the previous two years), 22 percent of users say that only one half or less of information on sites they visit regularly is reliable.
• Even search engines such as Google and Yahoo traditional stalwarts of online credibility have lost some of their luster. While 53 percent of Internet users said that most or all of the information provided by search engines is reliable and accurate, that percentage declined slightly in the current Digital Future Study and is well below the peak of 64 percent in 2006.
• 36 percent of users said only about half of information provided by search engines is reliable and accurate, and 12 percent said only a small portion or none of it was reliable.
• Only 46 percent of users said they have some trust or a lot of trust in the Internet in general. Nine percent of users have no trust in the Internet.

On Thursday, July 23rd 2010, Entertainment Weekly held a panel at Comic-Con entitled The Visionaries, which was basically a discussion with geek gods J. J. Abrams (Star Trek) and Joss Whedon (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) on the future of pop culture conducted by EW's Jeff Doc Jensen.

EW presents an in-depth conversation with these two creative geniuses about how technology, gaming, and global culture are reshaping how we tell and consume stories on television, film and the web. Plus: Is the superhero movie waning, or is it on the cusp of reinvention? And what do they think the pop culture universe will look like a decade from now?

We transcribed the entire hour-long discussion for those of you who couldn't make it to the Con, and posted the first part on Friday (click here to read it now). Hit the jump for the second (and final) part of the discussion. We've also included video of the whole panel.

Moderator: Joss, with all that said, is there a Dr. Horrible sequel in the works, or is that just like a question of time availability of your talent?

Joss: You know, works is a strong word. It's in turnaround; the studio of me. You know, it's me and Jed, Marissa and Zack going, Man! I've written a couple of songs. We've got to get together! Yeah, we totally gotta do that. That's going really well.

[laughter]

You know, if we had the time, we really do feel like we know what the movie is, and we really want to do it, and we want to do it on our terms. But our terms seem to be interminable.

Moderator: You guys have your own production companies and we know their names very well: Bad Robot, Mutant Enemy.

JJ: They should fight!

Moderator: Who would win?

JJ: Or kiss!

[laughter]

Moderator: In the new media future, could these be like channels on the Internet? Like will there be sort of like a bad robot channel in the future that is programmed with material, or a Mutant Enemy Channel that is programmed with material?

JJ: For me, the problem with a channel is, to actually keep up with the amount of material that you need the one day, which would be like day two, if someone goes there and they are like, Oh, nothing new. It's like, you are over. So in theory it is great.

I would rather do Bad Robot buttons that appear in various places on the Internet, and when there is something new you click on it and you go there.

Joss: I always dream of a channel. I go, Ooh! I've got all these ideas! And then I realize, But then I'd have to write them. And yeah, day two, you are like, It's coming any minute now! Stay tuned! You'd have to basically build your entire product long before you showed anything.

But I think the idea of a channelI mean you just devolved it into a buttonit's changing. It's going to be something very different. I do think if I saw something that said Bad Robot, I would push that button, or hit that widget, or touch that 3D holographic knobwhatever in the hell you are supposed to do to get to it. I would kiss that robot.

[laughter]

Moderator: In about 10 minutes, little less, we are going to open it up to questions. So where's the microphone? Well anyway, just start lining up. I know you have a lot of questions.

Joss, you just got done; Dollhouse has come to an end, unfortunately.

Joss: What?!

Moderator: And you produced Dollhouse after being away from television for a while. Now that Dollhouse is over, how are you feeling about television? Kind of like, what lessons have you learned about sort of what television wants and supports right now?

Joss: I don't know this question sounds a little bit like, Well are you proud of what you did? Maybe you should sit in the corner and think about it!

[laughter]

Joss: That might just be me projecting.

[laughter]

Joss: You know, it must have been the wrong place, and it must have been the wrong time! I definitely was trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. And we, I think, both benefited from the great square hole of television, the WB, where they were just interested in people like us who had a story we knew how to tell, and they let us do that. That is very rare. It doesn't exist anymore, literally; the WB doesn't exist anymore.

And my experiences at FOX have not been successful. And ultimately, it is just because there is just a certain kind of incompatibility that is very easy to miss. Because I like genre stuff, that's what they wantedyou know, you say the word sex, they think that's sexy, but, Can you not mention sex?

I clearly have more of a cable mentality that I realized. And I've been away from television and I didn't know that. I didn't know how much things had changed. I didn't look at Janet Jackson's nipple, and I didn't know how much trouble it caused!

[laughter]

Joss: What I learned was know your audience. And your first audience are the people who are paying you to make the thing. Which is why right now, you know, I'm at Marvel, I'm extremely happy working with Kevin FeigeIt's a very different experience. Kevin and Jeremy, the two people I work with, the executives, they are the studio. They are the producers. It's the same entity, and they know what they want. They're upfront. They are very clear when they don't get it. They know what they want and that's a great experience. The other one is doing stuff on the Internet, the smaller stuff, where I am the boss, but I have to call my friend to see if he has any outfits. And both of those are great for different reasons.

Television I love. I love serialized storytelling. But yeah, I didn't quite think that one through.

Moderator: You love serialized storytelling. Is there still a market right now for, like, intensely serialized stories? I mean Lost is over now, unfortunately. And it seems that as it kind of went out, it seems that the TV landscape kind of turned against intensely serialized stories. Do you sense that TV networks are not interested in that kind of format right now?

JJ: I think typically they are not. They want shows that can repeat. They want shows that will syndicate, and serialized shows. I'm just personally less interested, naturally interested, in non-serialized shows. I enjoy the investment and the anticipation in the characters and what's going to happen, and what conditions are really going on.

To me, that's the thing that always grabs you. And I think they want it too, they just don't know it. When they talk about stories, stories imply time. Stories imply inevitability in some kind of progress. And so I think that the trick isAnd I know that the show runners on Fringe have been working really hard to kind of maintain an ongoing story as well as keeping every episode feeling as much as a self-contained thing as possible. But I'm personally drawn to that.

This new show that we are doing on NBC, Undercover, is a show that is much more self-contained, but it naturally will have, and as we've been working on the episodes, developed a story that is being told over time. You don't need to watch one through five to get what's happening in six. But to me, that's the story that, for whatever reason, I am naturally drawn to that kind of story.

Moderator: Joss, did you want to take that question at all?

Joss: I think the networks will never ever ask for that. They will never admit that people want that, because they do see the easy cash cow of, The Mentalist! Let's all make The Mentalist! And when Lost first hit and was just blowing up huge, and everybody was loving it, we were all so into it, they were still like, We don't want that. That successful Emmy winning thing? No, we don't want that. I mean they would speak against serialized storytelling while it was the only thing people were watching on television, because they are just thinking bottom line. It's very weird.

Because ultimately, the serial is always going to be the thing people are going to remember. What do they remember about Cheers? Sam and Diane, not a great joke from cheers. They remember that.

I like both. I like to have some sort of resolve so I don't feel like I justI'm still angry about The Empire Strikes Back, OK? That movie doesn't have an ending.

[laughter]

Joss: So, you know, I like to spit the diff. But yeah, the progression is what it's all about. Well it doesn't! He's frozen in carbonite!

[laughter]

Moderator: Before we open it up to questions, I'd love to know, what's inspiring you guys right now? We talk a lot about your influences. We talk a lot about relationships in your past. But like right now, who is doing things that are like, you know, inspiring you visually? Who's doing things that are inspiring you in storytelling?

JJ: I love Edgar Wright. I just saw Scott Pilgrim. Scott Pilgrim is awesome, and I loved it. There are a lot of different people who are doing stuff. You know, Chris Ware, who is an amazing comic artist. There is stuff he does with time and kind of stopping time and taking you on these tangentsThere are certain people who just blow my mind.

But usually I just feel likeThere are a lot of people. I could go down this huge list, but I would be even more boring.

Joss: I'm just going to say I'm making The Avengers. That's cool, so I must be awesome.

[laughter]

Joss: But I'm also watching a lot of stuff; just sort of looking for moods and things. You end up watching a lot of films. And I will say not inspiring, but I have had actual moments of sheer fucking panic because I love Star Trek so much.

[applause]

Joss: I just keep watching it and going, No, I'm sorry. You have to hear this. It's time the children knew!

[laughter]

Joss: I honestly watch it and I go, This is the gold standard for a teen movie, for a summer movie, for any movie that has come out in the last 10 years. Gold standard.

[applause]

Joss: And it makes me throw up with fear.

[laughter]

Joss: So I have to stop watching it.

Moderator: OK. We have some questions.

Audience Question: JJ, Joss, it's good to see you here again. My question is, as directors and people who are involved in the entertainment field, how important is it to you to be here and have this fan interaction with what you do in future projects? How does that affect what you do?

Joss: Well, have you got a pitch? What did you call it?

[laughter]

Joss: Really? I thought I heard something else. Sorry. We're here all week.

[laughter]

Joss: Apart from the fact that it's really nice to find out that people still care about the stories that you are telling, it's just a little of an unreality check. It's a little bit of sort of reminding myself of that bizarre world that I come from. And you do get a sense of what people are responding to and what they are not, when they say things like, I hated that thing or that character, and everybody claps.

[laughter]

Joss: And we drink, and cry, alonethe mini-bar. But mostly it's good. It's totally good. You know, it's like just returning to ground zero, to home base.

JJ: I was very excited and honored when Entertainment Weekly asked us to come to do this. I was excited just to hear Joss and to come and be here. But I'd be here anyway. I love it here. It feels like the place that you want to go because you see like-minded people doing things that they love. And genre is my favorite thing. So to be at this place

It's a logical question, but the truth is I just love being here because I love the stuff here. The people here are great in sprit and passionate, so it feels like, you know, an odd second home.

[applause]

Audience Question: Hi. My name is Ben. I'm a young filmmaker and writer. So I was wondering, which do you like to do better, TV shows or movies, and what unique element do you bring to each?

Moderator: Did you ask do they prefer film or television, and what unique quality do they bring to each?

Audience Question: Yes.

Moderator: Let's start with film or television. Like in terms of storytelling, like you guys are definitely known for long form storytelling. Does that come more naturally to you?

Joss: I don't think there is a better. I think it's apples, oranges. What you can do in a movie, what you can accomplish is so extraordinary and so fulfilling, and you get to be done. Which, believe me, is a huge relief.

But being able to tell a story over, say, seven years, or even just 15 episodes, 11 of which they are out of order, is so

[applause]

Joss: Until now! But that's a different kind of fulfillment that isit's kind of a slow burning thing. But to me, it may, gun to my head, be the greater of the two. And then, what quality do I bring? Gah, I can't answer that!

Moderator: Well, you know, one quality that we associate with you, Joss, is just your dialogue. At what point does that come into your creative process? I mean is it something that you find over countless drafts, or is it something that just comes very naturally?

Joss: No, that's just people talking. I don't write second drafts, really. I mean obviously you have to, but to an extent, I don't put anything down until it's right. Unfortunately, sometimes I write before I come up with a plot, and then I have to search and figure out how to get to it. Which is a little awkward; I gotta work on that.

JJ: You don't do second drafts? Bastard!

[laughter]

Joss: I can name at least six episodes where it shows.

[laughter]

Moderator: Next question.

Audience Question: Bad Robot! Nah, just kiddingMy question is obviously for JJ. With Lost, just the way that it ended, was it everything that you expected from the beginning? Without giving everything away, obviously, with spiritually, science-wise, everything. I mean was it everything, now looking back on it, is it what you wanted? And it's awesome, by the way. I love it.

JJ: Well, thank you very much. And awesome impersonation at the outset.

[laughter]

JJ: First of all, Damon Lindelof, with whom I created the show, and Carlton Cuse ran the show for the six seasons. It was an amazing thing. When we first started, before Carlton was even there, it was like Damon and I were in this sort of crazy panic, and we wrote this bible of what it would be. And we wrote a whole bunch of ideas. And you sort of throw out the best ideas, and it's very optimistic, and it's a huge leap of faith, and you think, This is what this show could be. And a lot of those things ended up being in the series, most of them did not.

And over the course of time, thank God Carlton came on board and started to work with Damon. The two of them, I can't describe how great they are. They and the writers and directors, Jack Bender, they all started working on making this thing what it became.

There were ideas that I know, in the first season, we thought, Oh, this would be cool, and this is what it will mean, but you must be fluid and flexible. Even if you have a ton of time to write every episode of every season for six seasons, you'd be doing yourself a disservice. Because you would not anticipate, and could not, Michael Emerson coming on board for what was supposed to be a couple episodes. And you just realize, Oh my God, Ben is critical to this story, as Damon and Carlton did and wrote to it.

So you have to be sort of dogmatic and know what you want to do, but you also need to be entirely flexible and listen to the show, and go where it tells you. And I've personally, even though I know there are a lot of people who have dissenting opinions, I personally believe that Damon and Carlton kicked incredible ass and wrote an amazingly emotional episode for the finale that wrapped it up very well.

[applause]

Moderator: Next question.

Audience Question: Hi. I just wanted to thank you on behalf of the audience for actually giving us content that makes us think and challenges us. My question is, did any of you get to keep any paraphernalia from your movies and series, specifically, any Rambaldi items?

JJ: It's from Alias, Joss. It's a show. It was on NBC for five season. Five glorious seasons. I have page 47I have the box, the Rambaldi box. I have a bunch of cool Rambaldi things. And I was lucky from Star Trek to get some phasers and some cool gear. And Mission Impossible, the mask machine.

So I do love that stuff. I don't want to hoard it and be a scary person that is on the show hoarders. Have you seen hoarders, by the way? Who in the shit? How can that be a show? How many hoarders? It's unbelievable!

[laughter]

JJ: AnywayI'm scared of becoming a hoarder!

Joss: No Rambaldi stuff. It's weird, because I ordered some online and it didn't come.

[laughter]

Joss: I do have all the props and costumes from Dr. Horrible, which I was planning to sell at some point to help fund the next one. I don't get terribly attached to things, or people.

[laughter]

Moderator: Next question.

Audience Question: My question is for Joss Whedon. You are taking on the Avengers movie that has an established tone, an established back-story and mythology, and you have one of the most unique voices in Hollywood yourself. So how are you going to reconcile those two sort of established style?

Joss: [in funny voice] I'm going to sound like me! No problem!

[laughter]

Joss: The fact is, the first job I had outside of television was a script doctor. And what you have to do in that situation is blend in. I also, a lot of the way that I speak and write comes from reading these comics. I think it's very easy to fall into the aesthetic of something that you love. Obviously I am going to bring something of myself to it. I am an artist who wishes to create something that comes from within. But at the same time, yes, they do have an established tone. I am going to be very respectful of that. I am going to try and find ways to work

I mean the thing is, they not only have an established tone, they about seven, because I'm culling things from all these different movies. I have to blend all of that. I think ultimately that would result in something unique anyway.

So that doesn't really seem like a challenge to me at all. When I write Tony Stark, or Steve Rogers, or any of these people, they sound like them, particularly because I already know who's playing them.

Audience Question: I have kind of a general question about comic books. The last few decades they've really swung back and forth between light and silly and dark and gritty, while these days it's kind of balanced. Do you see the pendulum starting to switch back and forth in the future or do you think they will stay balanced for the time being?

JJ: Wait, are they light and gritty now, or are they dark andwhich one are they now?

Audience Question: Well, there are elements of both. They are more dark, but the lighter stuff is starting to come back.

Joss: I will say this, that I do feel like there was an element of nihilism that started to eat itself; where things got so dark that they couldn't maintain, except, for some reason that I still can't quite understand, the walking dead, which never gets old, never gets tired.

But I did feel like even in some of the mainstream comics, they were getting really cavalier about killing lots of people, and everybody dark. I think, ultimately, that does have to swing back a little bit, too. They are heroes, right? They are a better version of us in some way. That's mainstream. The indiesI don't know if Chris Ware has gotten to gritty lately.

JJ: Gritty but very, very clean. Very clean lines.

Moderator: Next question.

Audience Question: Hi guys. I was wondering what you thought about film school. Do you think it's worth the time and the money, or do you think you should just go your own way?

Joss: Just go your own way.

JJ: Do film school.

[laughter]

JJ: I think that now, given the technology that exists, the resources, the fact that you can watch movies and then make them sort of at home all day, it feels like there is less of a need for it, but it is certainly nice. The best thing about it is the community that can develop, I think, being at film school. Having said that, I did not go to one, so I personally feel like

My father gave me advice when I was going off to college, which was, Go learn what to make movies about, not how to make movies. And it was sort of the best advice I ever got.

Joss: Where did you get that father? That's awesome!

[laughter]

Joss: My dad just said, Don't be a writer. It's too much work.

[laughter]

Joss: He said many very sage things. I just want to say I did go to film school, or studied in undergraduate, and I happened to study with the greatest teachers imaginable. It's kind of a crapshoot, though. It's very easy to, like drama or any other creative subject, have just one teacher who can suck the joy out of the medium forever.

So it's dicey. And I think what I remember about it was not just what I learned in film school, but the fact that it was in me all the time. That after a day of watching movies all day, which we couldn't do then. There was no home video back when I was a lad and hamburgers were a nickel.

[laughter]

I would go home and watch Beastmaster at 3 o'clock in the morning because I just needed more film. So it was the internalization of the thing that really mattered, and that is something you can do without the school. If you love it, if you need it, if you are obsessive about it, the school is where you find it.

Moderator: OK, we have time for one more question.

Joss: It better be the best one. The best.

[laughter]

Audience Member: OK. I'm asking a question on behalf of my brother who couldn't be here. He's a writer and he just started. And he lets me read his stuff up until about a month ago where I gave him advice he didn't like. And so I was just wondering on his behalf if any advice is better than no advice when it comes to writing.

Joss: Definitely the best, by the way. Definitely the best. You guys are pikers. That's a question!

[laughter]

Joss: You know, what's more fun than getting notes? It's really the joy for a writer.

[laughter]

Joss: I think ultimately, you have to walk a razor's edge of being able to hear what other people think, to really listen to them, and know when to shut them out. But shutting them out doesn't mean never showing it to anyone, because then the film doesn'tthey don't see it.

So I mean you categorically will have to listen to people. And in your career you will have to listen to some people who don't know a damn thing, but who have the big pockets full of gold. But even that person can tell you something that is necessary for your story, as long as you are listening. If you feel confident about the story yourself, if you feel you understand where it's coming from and what it's trying to accomplish, and how it's doing that, then you should be able to withstand what other people think and incorporate what's good about what other people think. And I don't just mean compliments; I mean criticism as well.

If you can't withstand that, then maybe there is something wrong with what you are making. I think your brother needs to chill.

[laughter]

JJ: He gave you the script to read?

Audience Question: Yes.

JJ: And he asked you for notes.

Audience Question: Yes he did.

JJ: And you gave them to him.

Audience Question: Yes.

JJ: And he yelled at you?

Audience Question: Well, he stopped talking

JJ: What's his number?

[laughter]

JJ: No, here's the thing. Joss is right, that when you have an idea and it's faulty, and someone gives you a note and it can't' defend itself, then there's something that's wrong with it. So I think what you said is right, that he's probably in defensive because he's unable to defend the very thing that he gave you to read.

But he gave it to you and asked for notes, and you gave it to him. You didn't steal the script and read it, you did your job.

[applause]

Moderator: I guess that's the end of our time. On behalf of Joss and JJ, thank you.

Here is video of the whole panel from Buffyfestblog:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

• Comic-Con: JJ Abrams and Joss Whedon [Part 1]
• The /Filmcast: Bonus Ep. - Lost Series Finale and Wrap-Up (GUESTS: Katey Rich and Myles McNutt)
• Comic Con: Marvel Assembles The Avengers in Hall H
• Joss Whedon Officially Directing The Avengers
• Joaquin Phoenix in talks to play The Incredible Hulk in The Avengers?
• Edward Norton's Agent Says Marvel's Statement About Hulk Recasting is Misleading, Inappropriate

What do you do with your down time?

The average Canadian watches more than 25 hours of television every week (depending on which survey or research report you believe). On top of that, the average Canadian is also watching close to 12 hours of online video every month. Comparatively, the average American is watching close to 40 hours of television every week and about four to 12 hours of online video (the difference is probably related to both connectivity and culture). As busy as your life may seem, imagine what you could do with all of that free time? Let's agree that no one is ever going to ditch television (or watching YouTube videos) completely. What would happen if you suddenly had half of that time - which would be close to 60 hours every month? Would you watch more episodes of America's Got Talent or The Bachelorette?

We have to be able to recognize that television culture has done a lot more to us - as a civilization - than simply to entertain and (sometimes) educate the mass populous.

Television has changed who we are. We sit in front of this box as a way to kill time and as a way to relax (although we should be hard pressed to see how anyone could relax watching the news on Fox or Lock-Up). In its primal form, TV is probably a lot closer to what Paleolithic man did after eating and in between hunts -which is waiting to die (sorry for being so morbid, but it's true).

The act of actually creating something vs. sitting around and consuming content is one of the pivotal components that make the Internet and Web culture such a huge shift in the media landscape and who we are as a people.

That is the crux and main thrust behind the newly published business book, Cognitive Surplus - Creativity and generosity in a connected age, by Clay Shirky (Penguin Press, June 2010). In Cognitive Surplus, Shirky argues that now, instead of just sitting idly by and watching TV, this (fairly) new technology mixed in with Social Media can put our "untapped resources of talent and goodwill to use at last." Basically, television was (and still is) the main driver that is sucking this cognitive surplus out of humanity. The book isn't about turning off the boob tube to become an activist, but it is about the potential for human beings to see, do and create a whole lot more. Much like Shirky's first book, Here Comes Everybody - The power of organizing without organizations (Penguin Press, 2008), Cognitive Surplus is not only a pleasure to read because of Shirky's writing style, but it is a much needed, deeper look into what is happening now online.

Social Media and the advancement of things like the iPad, smartphones and more places us - as a civilization - in the middle of a new renaissance period.

And, it's hard to know that we're in the middle of a new renaissance period until after it is over and we have had the time to sit back, review the results and reflect on these many changes. No one will argue that business, technology and media have changed dramatically in the past two decades because of the Internet, but the question now becomes: what are we going to do with our free time now that we don't have to simply be a passive audience (or as NYU professor and media pundit Jay Rosen defines us, "the people formerly known as the audience")?

A glaringly obvious example of how to harness this cognitive surplus is Wikipedia (love it or hate it).

Suddenly, it is not incumbent on a group of PhDs and peer review to decide what constitutes the collection of knowledge and information that human beings have discovered. And suddenly, we can all contribute, edit, add, revise and yes, debate not only the content, but its accuracy. Shirky explains that Wikipedia took about 100 million hours of cumulative thought to build when compared to the reality that on average Americans watch about 200 billion hours of television every year. "That represents about 2,000 Wikipedia projects worth of free time annually," the book argues. "Even tiny subsets of this time are enormous: we spend roughly 100 million hours every weekend just watching commercials."

It turns out that even a massive project like Wikipedia takes up only a small amount of our cognitive surplus when broken down.

Now, we can do even more amazing things, projects and initiatives because of our connectivity and the publishing platforms that the Internet affords us. The question becomes this: are human beings naturally lazy or are we naturally hungry to replace our primal hunting instincts with a new hunt for information, content curation, creativity and publishing? As Shirky points out so eloquently in Cognitive Surplus, "Access to cheap, flexible tools removes many of the barriers to trying new things. You don't need fancy computers to harness cognitive surplus; simple phones are enough. But one of the most important lessons is this: once you've figured out how to tap the surplus in a way that people care about, others can replicate your technique, over and over, around the world."

This could well be the next phase of human evolution...

How we use our time to connect, share and build things (ideas, movements, social change, businesses, political change, helping those in need, etc.) in an era where everyone is connected and we push toward the last mile of connecting even those who are not in the developed world.

What are you going to do with all of this free time? What do you make of Clay Shirky and his concept of Cognitive Surplus?

The above posting is my twice-monthly column for the Montreal Gazette and Vancouver Sun newspapers called, New Business - Six Pixels of Separation. This blog post is also a part of a Blogger outreach program by TLCBooktours. They sent me a review copy of Cognitive Surplus and invited to join this group of distinguished Bloggers participating in Shirky's blog tour. I cross-post it here with all the links and tags for your reading pleasure, but you can check out the original versions online here:

• Montreal Gazette - Tapping into people's free time can help create a powerful resource.
• Vancouver Sun - Connectivity could lead to next phase of evolution.

Tags: americas got talent audience blogger business business column civilization clay shirky cognitive surplus connectivity content education entertainment fox news free time here comes everybody human evolution information internet culture ipad jay rosen knowledge lockup mass media media landscape montreal gazette newspaper newspaper column nyu online video penguin press press think publishing renaissance period smartphone social change social media technology television television culture the bachelorette tlcbooktours tv commercials vancouver sun web culture wikipedia youtube

Shared by phillip
hmm

Comments (38)

Recommend (26)

By COLLEEN SURRIDGE

Parsons Sun

PARSONS Freelance photojournalist Steve McCurry, whose work has graced the pages of National Geographic, laid 36 slides representing the last frames of Kodachrome film on the light board sitting on a counter in Dwayne's Photo Service in Parsons.

He placed a lupe - a magnifier that makes it easier to view film - over one frame and took a closer look at the film.

McCurry told Dwayne's vice president Grant Steinle how he had chosen to shoot the last roll of Kodachrome produced by Eastman Kodak by capturing images around New York.

"Then we went to India, where I photographed a tribe that is actually on the verge of extinction. It's actually disappearing, the same way as Kodachrome," he told Steinle.

Kodak announced last year that it would retire Kodachrome, a brand name of color reversal film it had manufactured since 1935. McCurry, well-known for his 1984 photograph of Sharbat Gula, or the "Afghan Girl," published on the cover of National Geographic magazine, requested from Kodak to shoot the last roll of 36 frames it manufactured.

National Geographic has closely documented the journey of the final roll of Kodachrome manufactured, down to its being processed. Dwayne's is only photo lab left in the world to handle Kodachrome processing, so National Geographic Television producer Yvonne Russo and National Geographic magazine senior video producer Hans Weise found themselves in Parsons Monday, along with McCurry, with the final roll of the iconic film of the 20th century.

As a professional freelance photographer, McCurry has used Kodachrome film for 35 years.

"It's definitely the end of an era," he said of Kodachrome. "It has such a wonderful color palette ... a poetic look, not particularly garish or cartoonish, but wonderful, true colors that were vibrant, but true to what you were shooting."

There are definite advantages to digital photography by comparison to film, McCurry said.

"You have the ability to view, edit and monitor what we are doing as we go. We can evaluate the light and composition and the design instantly. And we can shoot in extremely low light, which was impossible with film."

Regardless, digital photography is simply not the same.

"I like having something to hold in my hand," McCurry said. "With digital photography, it's just a hard drive. With Kodachrome, the film is real. You can touch it, put it in a drawer, and come back to it later. It's tangible. It's an object. With digital, the pictures only exist in a hard drive, in a memory chip."

A photographer since 1974, and photojournalist for National Geographic for 30 years, Kodachrome has been a part of McCurry's professional career.

Russo said they documented McCurry shooting the final roll of film in New York, then traveling to Bombay, India and Rajasthan, India, then back to New York, shooting along the way several iconic personalities of the world of filmmaking.

McCurry said he spent about two months shooting the images, which also included some scenic photos, as well as serendipitous moments on the streets of New York.

"And I actually shot the last three frames here in Parsons," McCurry said.

As Kodachrome is no longer manufactured, Steinle said that on Dec. 10 Dwayne's Photo will end its processing of Kodachrome.

"All this is going to be discarded," McCurry said of the processing equipment for Kodachrome, " ... so it's just a piece of history. It's nostalgic. It's kind of sad. I have about 800,000 Kodachrome images in my lab and these will be the last."

If National Geographic does a spread on the journey of this final roll of Kodachrome, McCurry said it will likely come out in the spring 2011 and will consist of only four to six images selected from the roll.

However, Weise said, "The entire 36 frames shot will be sent to the Eastman House in Rochester, New York, where Kodak is based, and live there."

Looking through the lupe at each slide image, McCurry viewed his pictures of Robert De Niro, the Brooklyn Bridge, Grand Central Station, the tribe in India, the actors, actresses and models in India and the other images of life he had captured.

Among the images shot was one self-portrait of McCurry in New York. Symbolic of the yellow and red packaging of Kodak film, McCurry chose a Yellow Cab to pose by. He called Steinle to have a look through the lupe at the cab's license plate. On it were the letters PKR 36.

Steinle laughed, not believing his eyes.

"If I hadn't seen this come off the processor myself, I would have sworn you had photoshopped that," Steinle said, explaining how PKR 36 is representative of Professional Kodak 36 film.

As the two men stood talking of the end of an era in film manufacturing and processing that affects them both, McCurry presented Steinle with a proposal.

Rather than paying Dwayne's Photo in cash for the processing of the film, McCurry offered to cut Steinle a deal. In exchange for the processing, McCurry offered to create a special print of one of the slides and have it framed and mounted with a letter of authenticity included and send it to Steinle.

It was a deal Steinle accepted eagerly.

Russo said the National Geographic special covering the last roll of Kodachrome manufactured will likely air sometime in spring 2011.

The caliber of the partnerships that location-based startup Foursquare keeps landing continues to be impressive. A new tie-up with VH1 will see the cable network promoting Foursquare through the commercial below all Summer long.

Foursquare has had commercials before like this Bravo one in February but this one should be the biggest draw for the masses yet. Foursquare has linked up with VH1 and Live Nation for an unlock it to rock it promotion. The commercial not only plays up the ability to win Foursquare badges, but also a contest that will have a winner getting access to a year's worth of concerts for free.

The commercial showcases key Foursquare functionality: the ability to check-in to places around your city and get tips. VH1s Foursquare account also gives you the added bonus of getting tip from celebrities well, if you consider that a bonus.

It took quite a bit of time for other hot startups like Twitter to get this kind of mainstream exposure. Foursquare is getting it much, much faster. And again, this will be playing on VH1 all Summer (Foursquare head of business development Tristan Walker also hints that the promotion will extend past this Summer).

Bring it on: That was the message Netflix CEO Reed Hastings had for Hulu Plus during his company's second quarter earnings call. We take it seriously as a direct competitor, Hastings said.

Not only is Netflix aware of the threat Hulu Plus and its wide library of network TV content across multiple consumer electronics devices poses, it seems committed to fighting back by offering its own mix of exclusive and non-exclusive TV content. In his management commentary on the quarter, Hastings is quoted as saying:

In terms of streaming content, we are rapidly expanding our TV shows available for streaming and since our last call we have added thousands of TV episodes from new deals with Fox, MTV Networks and Warner Television. These shows include all seasons of 24, Futurama, Lie To Me, The Chapelle Show, Nip/Tuck and Veronica Mars, and in a few weeks all seasons of The Family Guy will be available to stream as well. We see TV shows as equally important to our franchise as movies.

By getting access to full prior seasons of content from the networks, Netflix is upping the ante for subscription TV services by boosting the number and the quality of shows available in its library. As a result, Netflix has the potential to beat Hulu Plus on its own turf, through a wide range of TV content.

But Netflix isn't just stopping at the ability to offer back seasons of the same TV shows that are also on Hulu Plus; instead it plans to push further into Hulu's territory by taking away potential content partners and signing exclusive deals for TV content. At this point we can start to afford some major TV shows and movies on an exclusive basis, and plan going forward on a mix of more-expensive exclusive content and lower-cost non-exclusive content, Hastings said in his management commentary.

Other interesting tidbits from the earnings call:

• Hastings said that the Relativity Media deal, which will give Netflix exclusive access to first-run content, won't provide a material step-up in streaming licensing costs until next year, when the film distributor starts delivering titles for the service.
• The company downplayed a drop in average revenue per consumer, as more of its new signups were for its $9 a month, one-DVD-out-a-month plan. if prices decline rapidly toward that one-out plan, that means steaming is catching on with consumers, Hastings said. Which, all things considered, is a good thing.
• DVD shipments continue to grow, but they're growing less quickly than Netflix management has anticipated. Netflix forecasts 2013 as the year DVD shipments are expected to peak, but slower DVD growth could mean that peak might come sooner than expected.
• Netflix will have a new user interface available on the PlayStation 3 sometime over the next three months and that new interface will not require a disc to play streaming movies, as the current implementation does.
• Netflix management doesn't see any evidence that consumers are cutting the cord or downgrading their cable service due to the availability of its streaming service.

Related content on GigaOM Pro: Slow and Steady, Netflix Pulls Ahead in Streaming Video (subscription required)