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

Super Bowl Consulting

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

Super Bowl Consulting

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Fighting the High Velocity California Wind Fires with Water Misting.

Apparently Dec. 07, 2017 early Thursday morning the Fire Index is going to have the highest number ever recorded. The Fire Index uses a combination of Wind and other factors to calculate the danger level for fires to thrive. A High Fire Index apparently means the danger for the Southern  California Wild Fires to continue and expand is off the charts.

So taking a step back, we have a situation never encountered before, therefore AlexLOGIC would like to suggest a suggestion probably never tried before, fighting the High Fire Index with misted water for the following reasons. 

High winds are probably the most lethal aspect to fighting a fire, think of it as a fire overdosing on oxygen. Since this overnight there will be a combination of high winds and relatively low temperatures of anywhere from the mid 40's to the mid 50's, what if the firefighters could create a water misting firefighting effect that literally weighs down the winds, cools the temperature and increases the moisture content of the cooler, moisture infiltrated winds so the winds slow down their race towards the wildfires?

Is it possible that a very fine water mist could prove the most lethal method of containing and possibly controlling the wildfires?

Is it possible that being able to spray fine misting water high into the sky could be the best way to fight these wind driven fires?

What if the water dropping helicopters simply dropped a perpetual mist and let the wind take it?

AlexLOGIC says its worth the try. Remember, the present combination of extremely high winds and the rash of wildy expanding wildfires has never been this extreme before, so trying something never tried before logically configured might be worth a try, yes?

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

Super Bowl Consulting

The True Meaning of the Second Amendment, there is something in there for Everybody.

One of the ironies of the second amendment is the attempt from both sides in the gun control battle to only see one meaning. 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

So why do both sides of the gun control issue only see their side when a blending of both sides is the obvious remedy? The first portion of the second amendment means a local, state or federal militia that has followed the law, aka well regulated, can carry weapons.

However, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a separate but equal issue. My interpretation is any property owner can own weapons and these weapons are meant to protect their own property and home.

The second amendment issue that keeps getting blurred and obfuscated is the DIFFERENCE between owning weapons that one keeps on their own property versus weapons that that same gun owner transports off of their own property.

The type of weapons that are permitted to be carried off of one's property are not identical to those that are permitted on one's property, there is a difference, and that is where ALL gun control discussion should be focused upon.

One solution could be to have guns that are Travel approved, and guns that are not Travel Approved. This takes the discussion away from "the government is trying to take my gun away" to, "Which guns can I travel with, and which guns can't I travel with".

If every gun that was not travel worthy had a GPS indicator in it that activated if the gun was moved off of one's property, Law enforcement could instantly be notified. The GPS indicator could not turn off the gun, but it would provide the location of where the non legal travel gun was at all times. If the GPS was messed with, that could mean a stiff fine and even a court date.

Everybody gets what they want. Instant notification when a non approved gun has traveled off of one's property, and the gun owner still gets to own guns for the purpose of protecting their own property, both of the Travel and the Non Travel variety.

As for rapid fire assault weapons, that discussion could follow once a travel / non travel designation has been established for all guns. I personally cannot see it as ethical to legally allow a travel permit for a rapid fire assault weapon off of one's property. I am not even convinced they should be allowed on one's property, but if I had to compromise, then allowing some type of rapid fire gun on one's property, properly registered, would be ok as long as the gun had a GPS that would alert officials if the gun was moved off of the homeowners property.

Although having to wage a conflict against a rapid fire weapon is not even fair for our police officers. The bottom line is, the NRA keeps trying to paint the other side as wanting to "take your gun" when the reality is the other side doesn't want gun owners taking their guns everywhere they go, especially in crowded, public areas.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Defusing the North Korea situation by granting North Korea MNNA, Major Non Nato Ally Status.

Wikipedia identifies MNNA. One way to resolve the North Korean situation is to give North Korea MNNA status in exchange for the dismantling of North Korea's Nuclear Weapons program.

Why reward a country like North Korea for basically putting their nuclear weapons program above all else? Perhaps because rewarding North Korea for their Nuclear Weapon's program may be the best way to remove North Korea's nuclear weapons.

North Korea has spent decades teaching their people that the rest of the world is basically like their country, and that the United States is the devil that wants to harm North Korea. So if the United States harms North Korea, or their leader Kim Jong Un, then that could make North Korea's depiction of the United States a self fulfilling prophecy.

Removing Kim Jong Un from power, while possibly allowing many North Korean's to breathe a sigh of relief, could allow for the rise of splinter, rogue groups of Kim Jong Un supporters who may continue to detest America and attempt to do America harm.

AlexLOGIC, in this one instance, believes it is best to reward North Korea's behavior if it leads to the dismantling of their Nuclear Weapon's program.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Why are millions who stare at their social media devices suddenly planning to stare at the sun during the Eclipse and go blind?

AlexLOGIC just doesn't get it. 

Whenever AlexLOGIC is out and about he sees the MAJORITY of people staring at their social media devices. So why on earth would these same social media device starers want to take a moment to STARE AT THE SUN during a solar eclipse and risk losing their eyesight?

AlexLOGIC would like to suggest that the millions upon millions of people planning to stare at the sun through sunglasses they have not tested simply find the solar eclipse being streamed live and just watch it on their social media device, assuming that their social media devices while wearing sunglasses won't burn out their eyeballs.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Allyson Felix Robbed of Gold Medal by incomplete Olympics rules regarding diving versus leaning.

Update May 24, 2020: Not only do runners occasionally dive for the finish line, they also may lunge, or plunge for the finish line, yet no rules seem to exist for any of these out of the norm methods of finishing a race. The only ones who are governed by the rules appear to be the ones who run though and lean for the finish line. If rules were written for those who decide to "leave their feet", isn't it possible the criteria used to decide what part of the body constitutes crossing the finish line might be different? The reason a running lean at the finish is acceptable is because runners start the race in a somewhat similar position whether standing or when in the racing blocks for shorter distances. So if a different method than a running lean is allowed for the finish, then why not use a different set of criteria to determine what part of the body has to pass the finish line before the diving, lunging or plunging runner is considered "across" the finish line? - End of May 24, 2020 update.
--------------------------------------------

The definition of the word torso in present day vernacular should acknowledge the words Torque, Torsion, and Trunk. Torque is created by the pelvis region of the body, as is Torsion. And the Torso, also known as the trunk, as in the trunk of a tree that holds all the weight of the tree, is also found in the definition of the backend of a car, analogous to the pelvic region of a human being which supports all the weight above it.

However, since the lean at the finish line has long been accepted as a method for crossing the finish line in a track race, we should also consider that it has never been when the tip of a finger or the top of the head crosses the finish line.

Although AlexLOGIC still prefers which pelvis crosses the finish line first as the most authentic form of deciding a winner in a track race, the Olympic rules for crossing the finish line of a race as they presently stand are incomplete, and they failed Allyson Felix last night in her race against Shaunae Miller.

If both runners are upright at the finish line, then sure, use the lean rule as it presently stands to determine the winner, which I think refers to the chest area crossing the finish line, although it really should be when the pelvis crosses the finish line. 

But if one runner leans while the other runner dives, the diving runner's bottom part of the front of their pelvis crossing the finish line should be used to determine when the diving runner actually crossed the finish line.

Last time I checked runners don't run with their torsos parallel to the ground, so if a runner chooses to dive across the line, it should be the lowest front part of the pelvis that is used to determine when they actually cross the finish line. 

A lot of time and attention has been paid to the rules that govern the start of Olympic track races, however not enough time has been spent analyzing what part of the body should be the point at which a runner officially crosses the line when they dive across the line.  

Allyson Felix's pelvis is actually ahead of Shaunae Miller's pelvis as Miller is about to dive across the finish line, yet Miller's time is recorded as being 7 one hundredth's faster than Felix's time, and AlexLOGIC finds that to be illogical, and incorrect.

Allyson Felix was robbed of a gold medal by a pedantic misunderstanding of what a torso actually is in real life on a real, living person, and Allyson Felix was also robbed of a gold medal by allowing runners who dive to have the wrong part of their body used to determine when they have crossed the finish line.

If runners are allowed to use two different methods to cross the finish line, then it is logical to assume that there might need to be two different methods used to determine when each runner actually officially crosses the finish line.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

The Robot Revolution and the 15 Dollar Minimum Wage.

The harder people fight for a 15 dollar minimum wage, the faster their jobs will be taken over by robots. We've seen videos of robots that frankly remind me of the RoboCop movie. The movements are eerily fast, smooth, and scariest of all, very balanced.

The 15 dollar an hour fight is why progressives bug me and why I am a moderate instead. The formula for the minimum wage is one that uses the national hourly average, and cuts it in half. The national hourly average is around 24 dollars an hour, so the minimum wage should max out at 12 dollars, with variances in each state based on the acknowledged wage scale in the suburbs versus the big cities.

I would raise the minimum wage to 10 dollars an hour immediately for most places, then offer an incentive in which the wage is raised every so often by 50 cents. The idea of a newbie getting 15 bucks an hour is absolutely ridiculous and insane. 

The idea of a worker who started out at 10 bucks an hour and by staying at the same place raised their wage in 50 cent increments to 12 or 13 dollars an hour, makes a lot more sense.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Cincinnati Zoo Gorilla Protocol left out one important detail about the death of Harambe.

Opposing viewpoints in the Cincinnati Zoo Gorilla tragedy can cite evidence from the video that was shot to bolster their own position.

AlexLOGIC would like to suggest that an additional protocol be taken if this type of scenario ever happens again. MOVE THE ONLOOKERS back and away from the scene of the problem. I would allow anyone videotaping the incident to keep videotaping as long as they remain quiet.

If all the onlookers had been immediately moved away, the ensuing silence might have provided less agitation to Harambe, the 17 year old Gorilla who was put in the unenviable position that no matter what he did, people were yelling at him. 

Would silence have changed Harambe's demeanor? Of course we'll never know, but in the future the first step that should be taken is to lessen the impact the sounds of human screams may have in a zoo setting to any animal suddenly caught in an unusual situation.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

How the NBA, MLB, and NHL have screwed up their Television contract deals.

Today is memorial day, a day to remember that millions of american soldiers sacrificed their own comfort, and in many instances their lives, whether they wanted to or not. Many times we only focus on those who "gave" their lives, or "sacrificed" their health as a soldier. The presumption being that they wanted to either give or sacrifice their lives. I would suggest it does not matter whether a soldier wants to sacrifice, or not, if their lives were forever altered by being in a war time situation, it's an epic act.

There are probably veterans out there who cannot afford cable tv and are also big time sports fans. It seems cruel that people who actually put their life on the line in war, can't even sit in their own residence on Memorial day and enjoy the seventh game of the NBA Western Conference finals between Golden State and Oklahoma City, because it is only on cable. I just find this so offensive and I'm not a vet.

The irony of doing lip service at each and every professional game that is played by singing the national anthem. In baseball, there is even a seventh inning stretch God Bless America.  Yet Veterans can't even turn on a television and watch a ballgame after putting their lives on the line.

What is even more freakishly wrong about this situation is its just bad capitalism. No matter what deal professional sports works out with the television industry, veterans should be allowed to watch playoff games even if they can't afford to pay for cable.

As for the rest of the country, the free-TV'rs who miss out on 75% of all playoff games of the NBA, MLB and NHS  because they are only on cable tv, one would think the NBA, MLB, and NHL would provide some type of rider in their contract in which a network could put sports programming on their free tv channels if its obvious that the audience would explode.

These sports conglomerates enjoy many perks because they are free to run their sports empires without being under the  magnified eye of the federal government with the exceptions being scrutinized for safety, health and fraud issues. It seems that since our professional sports system enjoys many tax free perks, that the least they would do is offer more free tv options, most definitely for all veterans, and even for the american who cannot afford cable tv.

Which brings  us to the seventh game of the Golden State vs Oklahoma NBA western conference. Irrespective of how well the ratings are for TNT, the ratings would be five times higher if the game was simulcast on a major network. One would thing some creative contracting would reward TNT handsomely for "sharing" the game with a network, while still reaping rewards for the network, free tv fans, and our vets.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Police Perform Completely Unnecessary Execution by Firing Squad in San Francisco, they could learn a lesson from Charlie's Angels.

What's really wrong with this video of a man being executed by a large group of police officers? 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3343872/It-looks-like-execution-Cops-surround-gun-black-man-San-Francisco-street.html#v-1132948120880135237

The police officers appear to have no fear that something bad could be happening behind them. All the officers are staring down one man who is against a wall because he may have previously attacked somebody with a knife, but the police people's backs are exposed and unprotected against any possible action that could occur behind them.

In essence, the more than half a dozen police officers have no fear about anything behind them, just what is in front of them, which means this should have more easily been de-escalated than death by firing squad.

Maybe the police can take a clue from Charlie's Angels.  

Even though there is a fiery explosion in the background, the Three Angels, unlike the over half a dozen donut fueled police officers, are facing in opposite directions to ensure there are no additional threats besides the OBVIOUS one in the background. That's how real security enforcement works, there is no lets all gather around a guy who is standing against a building and all fire on him at the same 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

Super Bowl Consulting

Police can change how they answer calls to reduce deadly outcomes.

When I shot and directed video interviews I would remind the interviewee to repeat the question before answering, this technique helped prevent yes or no answers that would then force the editor to use the question being asked by the interviewer even when they did not want to hear the interviewer's voice.

I am beginning to think the repeat the question technique might reduce violent calls when police respond to a police dispatcher's call. When the police dispatcher sends out a call that there is a belligerent pregnant bi-polar woman wielding a 3 inch knife, usually the police closest to the incident will respond that they can take "the call".

But is it enough to simply acknowledge "the call"? What if the police officer was required to REPEAT the call verbatim from the dispatcher. The dispatcher calls out a report of a belligerent bi-polar pregnant woman wielding a 3 inch knife. I believe the officer taking the call should respond "Car 123 can respond to the report of a belligerent bi-polar woman wielding a 3 inch knife". The repeating of the dispatcher's call gives the police officer a chance to hear themselves state the situation and may give them a better sense on how to handle the call.

I believe the police officers or enforcement officers who took the following call may have handled the result in a more intelligent way, such as using either a stun gun or an 18 inch to 36 inch baton to separate the woman from her knife, if they had been required to repeat back to the dispatcher what they had heard from the dispatcher. 

Instead we have execution by gun from a very safe distance.  My apologies, the video I linked to is no longer available.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Why Isn't the US building a fresh water pipeline from the midwest to drought plagued areas in the U.S.?

Why isn't the U.S. building a fresh water pipeline from the over flooded, overwintered midwest and east coast to the more frequently drought stricken areas of the U.S.? I'm not talking free water, I'm talking creating a revenue stream for the midwest and east coast in which excess fresh water run off is diverted to other parts of the U.S. and the midwest and east coast is paid.

The fresh water pipeline could even help prevent flooding along the Mississippi River. The U.S has been so intent on ramping up oil production in the past few years while apparently not prioritizing how a fresh water pipeline could evenly distribute fresh water in the U.S.

A water pipeline could provide much needed jobs to veterans as well. Apparently California has one year left of water, wow. California provides the bulk of certain foods for the entire U.S., so why isn't a water pipeline even being talked about by our media that seems enthralled about going on and on about Hillary Clinton's emails.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Revisiting The Emperor's New Clothes.

First the crowd has been oogling and ahhing the emperors "new clothes," then a kid points out that the emperor is not wearing any clothes at all. Isn't the real ending to this story the one in which the kid is declared a witch by all in attendance, beaten, and burned to a crisp?

What world do you know where the adults appreciate being outed as fools by a child? 

One of my fears about my www.debtneutralitypetition.com and my idea for reducing the income disparity between the rich elite and the rest of the planet is that the ideas are so simple and somewhat obvious those who SHOULD have ALREADY suggested them won't because they either didn't think of the ideas or were too afraid to try to get the ideas approved by the public.

Who would really support my ideas after never offering similar solutions themselves over the last 10 years when these two ideas should have already been implemented. Well its a big planet, not everyone has to like the ideas for them to be implemented, or to work.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Sports Illustrated 2015 Cover Model Photo Hannah Davis Bikini Bottom Image, Hands are Nuanced in the Wrong Direction.

Sports Illustrated gets an epic fail for their lack of nuance. If SI feels the need to show practically all of Hannah Davis's groin area in their 2015 cover photo, at least have the class to make it look like the bikini bottom is being lifted up, not being pushed down. 
I'm not even going to post the image nor a link to the image since I can't stand it when people screw up the minute details and still expect to be rewarded with social media hysteria.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Why shooting down Drones that go onto "your airspace" is probably a bad idea.

A Drone flys over your backyard and you decide to shoot it down since you correctly believe that the airspace above your yard is yours. How high ownership of airspace above your home is yours I don't know, but some of the airspace height above your yard is yours. Perhaps one could argue if you can see the drone, than its in your airspace.

But before you start shooting at the invading drone ask yourself this question, do you have the legal right to launch bullets from your backyard onto public streets and other people's yards; unless those locations are firing at you, no you do not have the legal right to launch bullets into other air space and eventually land space. Even if you hit a drone with a bullet, the odds are very good that the bullet will still travel at a high rate of speed onto somebody else's property.

The impression that an invading drone gives one the legal right to shoot it down if it invades our own space is only logical if and only if the method used to shoot the drone down DOES NOT leave our own property. 

The next time you envision yourself shooting down a drone that is on your airspace property, pretend the drone is not there and that you are actually shooting off your gun into the air. Then ask yourself if you are not the one that is actually invading other people's spaces who did you no harm, with your bullets 

Be patirent, you can probably look forward to the invention of a street safe drone killer, probably on someone's design table even as I finish this article.

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

Super Bowl Consulting

Kulak's Woodshed in North Hollywood California 2014 IndieGoGo Fundraiser.

Please click the image below to learn more about Kulak's Woodshed. You can view the live shows from anywhere in the world via their internet feeds.





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

Super Bowl Consulting