Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Does Age Really Matter when it comes to the Value of a Person's remaining time on Earth?

In the past 20 hours Alex LOGIC has found two TV shows, made 50 years apart, that cast doubt that having a limited time left to live means one's life has less value. The first was "The Fugitive" starring David Jansen and guest star Telly Savalals. Telly's wife discovers that Telly only has 10 months to live, and she points out how lucky he is to know he has 10 months to live, that many others never get any kind of a warning.

Then just 20 hours later on the 2018 Season Premiere of the TV show "Bull", the same argument is made about a women who will be given an extra 36 months to live if she gets a liver transplant. To that woman those extra 36 months will seem like a lifetime because she knows that is all she will have.

So you lawyers out there, fight the good fight when it comes to taking medical malpractice cases for the aged and disabled. In 2017, apparently zero dollars were awarded in malpractice cases on behalf of people aged 90 or older. Unless you have hung out with the elderly, please don't discount the value some elderly place on their remaining years as being nothing more than a mathematical computation.


If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Thursday, April 19, 2018

Two of my favorite AlexLOGIC articles. Celebrity Apprentice Cast to Star in New Star Trek Series, Cosmopolitan goes too far.

Donald Trump as Commander of the Federation, boy did I call that one.

Then there was my complaint about Cosmopolitan Headlines  at Target Check out lines in 2013. Walmart dropped Cosmopolitan from their check out lines in March of 2018. And Target apparently has as well. AlexLogic was over 4 years ahead of its time on this one.

If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Heroism Vs Humanity.

I just watched Good Morning America's segment regarding the tragic loss of one life on board the Southwest Airlines 1380 flight out of New York. The flight was headed towards Dallas but made an emergency landing in Philadelphia because an engine literally blew up while in the air.

As I watched the Good Morning America segment I was suddenly struck by the Heroism vs Humanity struggle our planet seems to be stuck in. The first person interviewed seemed to smile a lot while recounting the heroism that took place on the plane immediately after the Engine blew apart which was then followed by one of the windows breaking apart. 

My mind immediately went to Donald Trump's comment about John McCain being a P.O.W., I don't recall the exact comment but it was something about "I like soldiers who aren't captured". As boorish as that comment may sound, I think the point Trump was making was that everyone was honoring John McCain, Presidential Candidate at that time, for being a prisoner of war survivor. In this instance, the interviewed person was talking about the heroism involved in the actions taken immediately after the two explosions on Flight 1380. Except that the victim died. So, it's still a heroic act, but with a sad ending. 

I don't blame the interviewee for smiling, maybe that is how they are coping with the sadness over the loss of life. Maybe they were just nervous. They didn't ask to be put in that situation in the first place so there is no point in making a big deal out it. But the Good Morning America segment did remind me of the often ignored battle between Heroism vs Humanity, and that Trump is probably one of the biggest supporters when it comes to Heroism over Humanity, or Heroism as a means to thwart those who are against Humanity. 

I feel like everywhere I turn we are being dealt the Heroism card and that the only time we see humanity is if it is glorify Heroism. I thought Humanity trumped Heroism, not the other way around.

I can personally recount a small sample size of the same people who normally probably do heroic things on a daily basis in the E.R., discarding my 91 year old mother without treating her wheezing, a temporary condition brought on by a cold she had that had gotten worse.  

By the time I had pleaded and begged for anywhere from 1/2 hour to an hour in the E.R. for someone to examine my mother's wheezing while she was still in her E.R. bed, not one nurse would go up to my mother to acknowledge her wheezing. Not one chest x-ray was done.

After my quixotic nightmare in which nothing I said mattered to the nurses who had gathered in the ER room after I had videotaped the non treatment of my mother and a Code Gray being called. A security guard ripped the small camera from my hand and erased my video, "because it was a H.I.P.A.A. violation". We were then forcibly removed from the ER by that same Security Guard who ironically was a former veteran.

My mother died in my arms three days later, at home, when she should have been in a hospital being treated for her wheezing, and I am inconsolable. Would you have refused to treat this beautiful, inspiring 91 year old women if she had been wheezing (which was not a normal condition) and was in your E.R.?


Apparently some have forgotten that the biggest part of Heroism is their Humanity, not the other way around.  Attorneys seem to have forgotten how to fight for those who truly live a life of integrity and are entitled to their MediCare Benefits no matter how old they. My mother did not deserve to die simply because a small rogue group of E.R. nurses lost their way, and their humanity. 


If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Sunday, April 8, 2018

Los Angeles Emmy Winning old school guy views Video Podcasting Revenue Method as Archaic.

I am an old school guy who believes youtube videos changed the podcast video narrative agenda in a bad way. As a Los Angeles Emmy winning editor with over 25 IMDB credits, a Tongal top 25 lifetime Ideationist, and a former Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Internship Scholarship Winner in the commercials category, I believe in editing.

The concept of elongated youtube videos and Video Podcasts is not my preference unless I am showcasing stock footage. It appears as if the genre of Video Podcasts has gravitated to a slower moving, less edited motif that has resulted in Video Podcasts not charging to be viewed. Instead Podcasts try and get "sponsors" or podders to purchase an ongoing monthly subscription.

Having a sponsor can mean the Video Podcast product in some way is either unconsciously re-sculpted to meet the Sponsor's criteria, or the entire concept of complete independence could become compromised as the sponsor reviews analytics. "Your show is popular but we are not getting the follow through for our product that we require" is probably a meme that talented video podcasters have already heard.

But there is an even bigger Video Podcasting issue to address. As an editor, I have no desire to subject my prospective viewers to a 10 minute or longer  Video Podcast  that relies on my performance ability to hold court with Viewers. My goal would be to make a wonderfully short video, a glimpse into a moment, perhaps a moment no one else can recreate while giving the viewer more of the rest of their day to  possibly watch other Podcasts.

What is it Jerry Seinfeld's TV show used to remind us, it's the walk off, and the show is right. Walk off after 3 minutes making the audience want more than overstay one's welcome in the Quixotic quest that a longer Video Podcast is somehow more bankable. If I had my druthers I would rather have people remember and enjoy a 2 minute podcast video then have them wanting a 10 minute video to be over already after they had thoroughly enjoyed the first three minutes.

I blame Youtube and unedited videos for the present day Video Podcasting paradigm. I would rather my prospective viewers watch one or two of my short videos every morning while they drink their coffee versus having an expectation the same viewer has a 10 minute or longer window of time to watch my Podcast video as if the rest of their world has stopped. God bless those who are in the top 99.9% of the  Video Podcast community who can make podders stop to watch their entire video, I don't believe I will ever be one of them when it comes to long form Podcast videos.

I had presumed that if I make Podcast Video snippets anywhere from one minute to 3 minutes in length that I could possibly charge 10 cents per Video Podcast. If the viewer really hated the short Podcast, they would be out 10 cents. If they loved the short Video Podcast and I have a 100 of them posted, they can choose whether to binge watch my short Podcasts or enjoy them over a few months time. Either way the cost is negligible versus the opportunity to enjoy a glimpse into someone else's story telling.

AlexLOGIC envisions Happy Video Podcast viewers appreciative that for 20 cents worth of Video Podcasts they could enjoy their 6 dollar StarBucks super drink and even have time left over to watch another Podcasters sponsored or subscription video as well. Is not viewing 2 Video Podcasts plus a sponsored Podcast by a different Podcaster, while drinking one's favorite drink worth 20 cents?

Apparently in Video Podcast land the answer is, "We don't charge a penny for our Podcast, instead we try to get sponsors, advertisers, or monthly subscriptions". If AlexLOGIC has a relatively low production value content that relies on the actual content over form, does AlexLOGIC still have to have a sponsor intercede? 

Another Podcasting revenue option AlexLOGIC has researched are monthly subscriptions. On the surface monthly Video Podcast subscriptions are an intriguing option, but it may require the Video Podcaster produce entertaining content presented at a mind numbingly slow speed. Suddenly longer is better when it comes to monthly Video Podcast subscriptions. Lets say I wait until I have 20 short podcasts before I go public. Lets say someone thinks that's worth a monthly subscription. What if I can't come up with another 20 for the second month? The customer is going to think I fleeced them.

If I were to produce 100, 30 second to 2 minute video Podcasts, my goal would then be to produce perhaps 4 or 5 per month thereafter. Lets say a one month video podcast subscriber pays lets 5 bucks and exhausts my entire 100 Video Podcast content in one month, won't they then feel ripped off I don't continue to come up with another new 100 short Video Podcasts every month.

AlexLOGIC (aka Alessandro Machi) believes that starting with a lot of short Video Podcast content, then building that content slow and steady every month can only work if the Podcast viewer is paying a very modest sum per Podcast so they can opt out and opt back in with little hassle. Or, maybe a yearly subscription is the answer? Instead of 5 bucks per month maybe one charges 20 dollars for a year subscription but there is a limit on the number of podcast that can be viewed per month?

Present day Video podcasting success stories seem to revolve around finding a sponsor or garnering monthly subscriptions, but this seems to encourage longer form Video Podcast content. AlexLOGIC believes it is up to  creative and considerate Video Podcasters to edit their content for maximum impact into a minimal time frame, while charging a "juke box fee" or "pay as you go" for each short Video Podcast. The Video Podcast viewer is paying for the most efficient use of their time. Viewing 3 entertaining short podcasts at 10 cents each might be a better value than watching a 10 minute podcast that has its moments and is free.

I don't want viewers binge watching my Podcast content because I won't be able to produce a large amount of Podcast content month after month. I would rather my prospective Podcast viewers enjoy coming back every day or two, or maybe once a week and spend quality time versus quantity time enjoying content. 

Sponsored Video Podcast content that requires a viewer watch a 10 minute Podcast or longer can cost the viewer much more of their day then paying 10 cents per Video Podcast to watch a memorable 2 or 3 minute Video Podcast. AlexLOGIC asks, "why can't I want what I want, and then get what I want", when it comes to video Podcasting? 

Are there options out there where AlexLOGIC can literally create a low cost Video Podcast Jukebox where prospective viewers can decide if spending 10 or 20 cents for a couple of short Video Podcasts while they enjoy their 6 dollar Starbucks, or take a break from work, is even a possibility?

I presume the low cost per short Video Podcast view does not fit into any billing paradigm that is presently offered. So why doesn't someone create a Video Podcasting micro billing app, isn't it time?

If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Thursday, April 5, 2018

Swap all Black Colored Guns and Black Cell Phones with White ones and Minority Killings at the hands of Police Officers would probably Decrease.

Sometimes crazy ideas can net positive results. One aspect of Police officer shootings involving darker skin races is the fact that most guns are similar in color to the skin color of the victim.

If I have a darker skin tone and the appearance of carrying something in my hand, an adrenalized, jumpy police officer is likely to assume I have a weapon in my hands.

So lets just say it, Darker skin color creates more fear in a police officer both during the day and most definitely at night because because most hand held devices, be they guns or cell phones, tend to be black and therefore are more difficult to ascertain what such a person "might" have in their hands, even if they have nothing in their hands.

If we outlawed all black guns and only allowed the legal use of white guns, Police Officers would have a much better contrast, both day and certainly at night, when interacting with a suspect with darker skin tones.

Rather than talk about Gun Control or accusations of the government wanting to take every one's guns, the U.S. Government should offer a FREE gun swap, you give up your black gun, and you get an exact replica, in white, perhaps  even a glow in the dark gun.

A free, "black gun exchanged for a white gun" program would keep gun Manufacturers busy for quite a while. A gun exchange program is far superior to increasing the total number of guns in the world by many millions more every year because guns never really go obsolete. Even a gun that has rusted or is out of alignment can be repaired. Guns are like cockroaches except they never truly die unless they are actually crushed, which is much harder to do with a gun versus crushing a cockroach.

If I were protesting officer involved shootings of innocent, darker skinned people, I would be demanding "White Guns Only" because if our society only allowed white guns to be legal, Police Officers would have an extra moment to decide if a suspect actually has a gun or not.

I would also mandate that all hand held social media devices not be black.

Because the exchange of a black gun for a white gun would have no cost attached, a gun owner's alleged constitutional right to own a gun is not being jeopardized.

Transitioning to a white gun only society could take several years, but once completed laws would be in the books that if one is caught with a black gun of any kind, they immediately are fined 5,000 dollars, and the gun is confiscated and a white gun is then given to the lawbreaker. Thus proving that the government is not after a person's guns, just after the black guns that make it harder for police officers to discern who is carrying a gun and who is not, especially at night.

For those who think this idea is wacky, just why are most guns black to begin with? Perhaps nobody gave it much thought, possibly a black gun is easier to conceal than a white gun, or maybe making a white gun is more expensive.
I would bet that if all guns were white, or glow in the dark, accidental gun deaths of innocents by police would be dramatically reduced.



If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Sunday, March 18, 2018

My Wonderful, Energetic, Strong, Adventurous 91 year old Mother was denied the Proper Service at an E.R., three days later she was gone. Please Share our Story.

Click here to learn how the E.R. spurned my mother's need for Medical Care and Forcibly Remove my mother from the E.R. Now she is Gone.

If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at

Thursday, January 18, 2018

2018 DACA Solution to help end the U.S. Budget Stalemate.

AlexLOGIC would like to offer a compromise solution regarding the 2018 DACA Impasse that could cause a government shutdown in the next day or two.

Compromise means both Republicans and Democrats give something up and neither side is completely happy with the solution. It's important to remember that the number of people who cut in line to become an American have possibly reduced or delayed the opportunities for others to come to America, legally. So based on that truth, here are AlexLOGIC's suggestions. 

  1. In exchange for allowing DACA designees to remain in the U.S., DACA designees would not be allowed to vote in a Congressional or Presidential Election until they reach a certain age or a certain span of time has elapsed. The age or span of elapsed time would be open to discussion between Democrats and Republicans.
  2. DACA designees would have to earn a certain amount of income or show a certain time span of employment, again to be determined by Democrats and Republicans, before being eligible for government programs and benefits outside of the education realm. The employment time span does not have to mean always working, but clearly show that each year in the U.S. they were employed for several months, were married, or a certified student.
  3. DACA designees would have to have a Sponsor family from the country they fled from who would take them in should they violate certain American Laws such as being involved in identity theft, drug dealing or felony drug usage, operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, or being prone to violence.
  4. DACA designees would always have the right to an attorney or be provided an attorney before any attempt at a deportation could be implemented.
  5. In exchange for allowing DACA designees to remain in the U.S., Special Drivers licenses would be issued that have the word DACA on them. While some may see this as discriminatory, the likelihood is that DACA designees would be treated sympathetically by many in the U.S. when they show their driver's licenses since it means they have had to follow a straight and narrow path to remain in the U.S. A DACA driver's license could actually become a license of honor and mean the person is a solid employment choice.
The above conditions are not forms of discriminations, rather they are reminders of how fortunate DACA's are for being allowed to stay in the U.S. when the original familial entry that led to their coming to America was illegal.

What do the Democrats gain in the above solution, no inclusion of the border wall in the DACA discussions, DACA's get to stay in the U.S.

What do the Republicans gain the above solution, they can state they supported DACA, there will be a cooling off period of time before DACA recipient's can vote in an election thus ensuring a more balanced DACA vote between Republican and Democrat candidates, and less budgetary resources going to DACA recipients until they have financially contributed to the U.S. economy. 

The DACA solution as described above can summed up as a compromise solution in which both Republicans and Democrats get a lot of what they wanted and the wall is neither thwarted nor connected to the DACA solution.

What about the parents of DACA? All AlexLOGIC can say is one step at at a time. Lets solve the issue of the DACA's themselves, first.

If you are planning on creating or broadcasting a commercial and want an objective, outsiders point of view about your commercial, contact Alessandro Machi about his consulting services at...
info at alexlogic.com
You can also view more
commercial critiques
by Alessandro Machi at