The Sincerest Form of Flattr-y

Have you come across that really good blog post (like one of the many here on Daily Axioms) and wish you could reward its creator?

That's the idea behind European startup Flattr. Here's how it works: Flattr users deposit a small amount of money into their Flattr account. Then, users can click on Flattr buttons that content creators like bloggers put on their websites. Each month, the money in the user's account is divided by the number of Flattr buttons they've clicked, and the money is then distributed to the creators of that content.

It's essentially a Facebook Like button but with money involved.

Users decide how much money to deposit, and users decide where they want that money to go. According to Flattr, anything can be clicked, including blogs, pictures and videos.

As a blogger, I'm torn on this idea. I do understand the importance of driving original content creation,and money is a great incentive. However, I don't know how viable of an option this is. Here's a short list of what Flattr is up against.

Why Flattr could fail:

• There's a huge dependence on honesty from content creators not to steal content from other people. It wouldn't be too difficult to re-post something and add a Flattr button.
• Lawsuits will always be a looming fear, because if someone is getting paid for another person's work, you can be sure that person will be taken to court.
• The 100-million dollar question: Will users pay for content they already get for free? History isn't on Flattr's side, because several similar startups have folded in the past.
  

Why Flattr could take off:

• Flattr didn't put the cart before the horse, making sure they had a polished website and an active group of beta testers before moving forward.
• The whole concept of third-party website buttons has become increasingly prevalent over the past couple of months. Facebook Like buttons and TweetMeme buttons can be found everywhere these days.
• By having a user-determined monthly fee, Flattr avoids being accused of over charging. Users will be more likely to open up their checkbooks if they have that level of control.

It's hard to say what Flattr's future will be. While there are obvious monetization options for Flattr and financial incentives for content creators, this whole endeavor depends on users being willing to spend the money.

So, say what you want about imitation, this startup hopes to make money the sincerest form of flattery.

Online Audition Ends on a High Note

Two weeks ago, Sara wrote about the open casting call that Fox's "Glee" was holding on MySpace. She raised some good points about the potential reactions by both fans and professional actors alike.

And while her article ended on a note of uncertainty about the contest, the one thing that can't be argued is the success the online auditions have had since then.

The numbers don't lie, with over 85 million votes cast for the nearly 28,000 entries that were submitted throughout the month-long contest.

In fact, the online auditions were so popular that MySpace and "Glee" re-opened the auditions (which ended on Tuesday) for an additional 24 hours on Wednesday.

So even though fans of the show and professional performers will likely continue their debate about the validity of online open casting calls like this, the overwhelming reality is that more shows will probably try to emulate the huge success "Glee" was able to have.

Ex-Gleek Critiques

As an ex-show choir member, Fox’s “Glee” holds a special place in my TV heart. However, “Glee” complicated our relationship on March 30 when it announced its MySpace open casting call to “fill new high school student roles.”

With an increasing number of contest talent shows like “So You Think You Can Dance” or “Next Top Model,” there is no denying these types of casting calls are popular. But what’s the value of these casting calls among professional performers? I spoke with two of my friends, who also happen to be professional actors, on the issue.

Minnesota-based actress Elizabeth Grullon recently appeared in Mixed Blood Theater’s “Somebody, Nobody” and performed with the Hudson Valley Shakespeare Festival. Elizabeth mirrors my social media enthusiasm for the online auditions.

“I am not hesitant at all to do a video audition for something I am interested in being a part of. The heavy promotion makes me more likely to audition simply because I know about it and I know it is legit.”

Even though she sees the value in these auditions, she feels the her performance is skewed due to poor user-generated video production. The collective spirit of these types of auditions is exciting and you hope that people receive recognition that normally wouldn’t.

Sam Prince is a working Broadway actor who recently appeared in “Robin & the 7 Hoods” and “The Happy Elf.” Sam reflects the performer in me, and views the auditions with major skepticism, considering them part of the “quick fame propaganda.”

“You don’t really know who’s viewing these submissions and what level of professionalism they’re really looking for ... Since I am professional, I have a team of about six agents behind me, submitting me for jobs, dealing with contracts, etc. ... I view it more as viral marketing campaign if anything.”

Sam’s doubts are echoed by the Terms of Submission page for the contest, which never specifically defines the role or the pay, and includes a potentially dangerous promise that you will not have other contractual obligations. This will discourage many professional actors from even submitting.

Social media-based campaigns that include these open casting calls are exciting tactics, but it’s important to remember the experience and concerns of the participants. Social media has pushed public relations to be more transparent, the campaigns should reflect that trend. Be clear on what you are promising the lucky winner, and define the submission evaluation process in lemans terms, not only in legal speak.

“Glee,” it’s a speed bump in our relationship but I still love you, my heart will go on.

Norway ‘Wears the Pants’ in Vancouver

By: Steve Retka

Now that the 2010 Winter Olympics have come to a close, we’re left with a lot of lasting images. We saw a game-winning goal in overtime from Team Canada for the gold medal in hockey, and figure-skater Joannie Rochette win the bronze while dealing with the death of her mother. But there was one image in particular that captivated many people throughout the games...the checkered pants worn by Norway’s men’s curling team.

But are pants even worth discussing? Well, considering a quick Google search of “Team Norway’s pants” garners nearly 1.5 million hits, it’s worth examining. Facebook even has a Fan Page dedicated to the pants. Even more surprising, the page has over 580,000 fans, and that number continues to grow.

These huge numbers show that these pants have not only become a cultural sensation, but that they have pushed the sport of curling into the spotlight. Curling, which in the past has had to endure both limited national attention and being the butt of many jokes, received a big media boost due to the pants.

To tell the truth, I myself had never watched a single curling match before these games, and was really only interested in seeing the pants which seemed to be dominating the headlines. But once I started watching, I actually became fascinated with it and watched all of the remaining curling matches. And while this is of course just one example, it does show the power of the media.

Team Norway’s Chris Svae, who picked out the pants himself, feels the pants have been an overwhelming success, saying “It's bringing attention to curling back home in Norway more than usual."

So while the pants may just be a gimmick, it’s proven effective in raising awareness of the often-overlooked event. It will be even more interesting to see how social media embraces events like these in future Olympics.