Senator Hillary Clinton Thinks She's JFK! - Trying To Steal Barack Obama's Style Not Likely To Work

I just saw this article in the New York Post where Senator and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's comparing herself to John F. Kennedy, apparently hoping to both fire up her supporters and take some of the "Kennedy" tag off Senator Barack Obama.

Well, one thing I've learn is to let others call you JFK and not yourself. Remember Dan Quale? Recall the debate with the now Late Senator Lloyd Bentson, where he says to Quale, "I knew John F. Kennedy, and you're no JFK!"

Seems Hillary just set herself up for the punchline.

YouTube - Did-It's Mr. Mark Simon Presents Copyright Problems As End-All; They're Not - "The Rules Of Industry Dynamics"

I just read a post on "Search Insider" -- a blog presented by MediaWeek -- which proves once again just how little many, even some of those who are in search engine marketing, understand how YouTube's used, let alone what its advantages are.

For evidence, I present the blog of one Mark Simon, the VP of Industry Relations at Did-It in New York City. He had the never to try to make a jump from stating that Google may be harmed by the growing Social Networking wave, to the now tired idea that YouTube, which is owned by Google, will fall on its sword because of copywrite problems. Implying that YouTube's content is not original.

As I explained in the response to his blog, his argument is not logical because YouTube has a great deal of original content. Mr. Simon writes "By providing the capability to easily search for copyrighted material, YouTube --which is to say, Google -- makes YouTube a more effective hosting service for pirated content, even if it conducts that hosting against its will. That opens Google up to copyright complaints...For media sites like Yahoo and MSN, which have large amounts of unique content, these problems are far less serious. First, their unique content creates other avenues of monetization, should copyright issues ever threaten a part of their search business."

That's one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read. YouTube has a milions of video clips that are original, from Renetto, to LonelyGirl, to Kate On Sports, the list goes on and on. This -- Mr. Simon's article -- is yet another expression of East-Coast misunderstanding of, and lack of respect for, the growing video distribution industry, of which YouTube is the current leader. This is a constant song -- so common I liken it to the old desire that California fall into the Pacific Ocean.

YouTube's located in San Bruno, California, in the San Francisco / Oakland / San Jose Bay Area -- ok, the Bay Area but I did that for those who don't know what it is.

Mr. Simon, here are some basic rules of industry dynamics I want you to pay attention to:

1) The video distribution industry will grow in indirect proportion to the ease of use of video recording devices, their decrease in price, and the ease of use of systems to upload material they produce.
2) "Dynamics Rule One" will continue the reduction in the "barrier to entry" for those who want to make video shows.
3) The combination of Dynamics Rules One and Two will maintain a constant demand for and production of original content on all of the 77 "YouTube-type" video distribution portals.

Given those rules, you're absolutely wrong regarding Google / YouTube, but I enjoyed reading your take nonetheless.

CNN's Paul La Monica Says YouTube Not The Ememy

CNN's Paul La Monica , he's got the right idea, but the "controllers" -- i.e. the big media companies -- will not get it until it's too late. We're in an era where media content can't be controlled. People will get what they want and if they can't, then they will make it themselves.

Chicago Bears Not Given Head Coach Lovie Smith New Contract; Team Upset - Profootballtalk.com

Profootballtalk.com reports on this terrible state of affairs.

MUTINY BREWING IN CHICAGO - Profootball talk.com

Keep a close eye on the situation in Chicago, where the Bears have still not given coach Lovie Smith a new contract, and where there is no evidence that significant discussions between the team and the Super Bowl coach aimed at extending the deal that expires after the 2007 have begun in earnest.

A source with knowledge of the situation tells us that some members of the team have agreed among themselves to refuse to do any contract extensions or restructurings until Smith gets rewarded for the team's performance on his watch.

And there's also an intention among some of the players to be candid with the free agents whom the Bears plan to target in March, with some current Bears players ready and willing to tell any new recruits not to count on Smith being around in 2008.

We think the team should move very quickly to lock Lovie up for the next four or five years, at $4 million or so per season. That's fair value for a guy who has one Super Bowl appearance and three years of total head-coaching experience.

The sticking point could be that the Bears hope Smith will have reduced expectations because the team lost in the Super Bowl. Then again, the guy who lost Super Bowl XL ended up with an extension that reportedly pays him $7.5 million to $8.5 million per year.

Smith would have had more leverage if he'd tried to do a new deal in the dead week before Super Bowl preparations, since there was a much better overall feeling in the air about the Bears and their coach before the team put on a so-so at best performance in the February 4 loss to the Colts. But Smith gambled that the Bears would win the Super Bowl, which might have put him in line for a deal worth more than $5 million per season.