Liz of the getinmybelly blog has provided a overwelhming documentation that the Cadillac Ranch is an absolutely horrid establishment.
I most readers know the treatment "the ranch" gave to MidPoint Artists last year, but Liz has shown how poorly they treat paying customers.
Showing posts with label Local Blogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Local Blogs. Show all posts
Monday, May 03, 2010
Thursday, April 29, 2010
A 2009 Self Assessment From Plum Street Studios
Earlier this month E. Gooding from the Plum Street Studio Blog scored his performance in predicting the 2009 City Election.
The result: he gives himself an A+. Any independent graders care to take a crack at that assessment?
The result: he gives himself an A+. Any independent graders care to take a crack at that assessment?
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Back the Food Truck Up.... (Bumped and Updated)
Over at Wine Me, Dine Me, Julie posts a press release issued by the operators of the food trucks that have recently sprouted up in Cincinnati. Apparently, the trucker-chefs are concerned that City Council is going to act to regulate the trucks. In their defense, Tom Acito, who owns Cafe de Wheels, says, "Our goal of being a mobile restaurant isn’t to steal business from local restaurants in the Over-the-Rhine and downtown areas. Rather, we hope to situate ourselves in areas where we will not directly compete with independent restaurant owners."
As far as I can tell, the trucker-chefs' concerns are fueled by John Curp's comment to Polly Campbell that "it's safe to say that the city is looking into the issue to see if there's need for additional regulations."
I'm not certain that Acito is really serious about not competing with local restaurants. Cafe de Wheels' typical lunchtime spot is on Walnut just off of Court Street. Assuming the truck stays there, it will definitely compete with Avril-Bleh's sidewalk grill, which is set to re-open April 5.
But more importantly, the trucks' primary competitors are not restaurants. After all, if you own a restaurant and find yourself at a competitive disadvantage to a guy who cooks his food in a UPS truck, it may be time to find a new profession. Instead, the trucks are really competing with sidewalk vendors.
The vendors are, of course, regulated by the city. And the trucker-chefs don't want to be. My question: is that fair? Sidewalk vendors run a pretty low-margin business. They are licensed by the City, and their location is subject to City approval. (In fact, the City has recently adopted a lottery through which street vendors' locations will be determined. This was first mentioned last year in a Jane Prendergast blog post. The HamCo Common Pleas Court recently issued a temporary restraining order delaying implementation of the new system. If I can find the complaint, I'll write a post on this issue.)
I know that the food trucks are the current darlings of the "cool kids" in the blogosphere. I like them (the trucks), too. (You haven't really lived until you've had Cafe de Wheels' grilled cheese and pulled pork sandwich.) But I wonder: why is it fair that the food trucks operate outside the rules that everyone else has to play by? Will a licensing fee and some rules about their location really put them out of business? Or would those things just put them on a level playing field with their competitors?
Finally, can anyone speak with certainty as to what Council committee would tackle this issue? I assume it's the Livable Communities Committee, chaired by Roxanne Qualls, but I'm not sure under the 2010 committee structure.
UPDATE (3/25/2010): Polly Campbell has this blog post on the topic, in which she quotes Tom Acito as saying that he and fellow trucker-chefs aren't presently petitioning the city. I'm not sure why he sent Julie a press release heralding the formation of his not-yet-formed group, then.
As far as I can tell, the trucker-chefs' concerns are fueled by John Curp's comment to Polly Campbell that "it's safe to say that the city is looking into the issue to see if there's need for additional regulations."
I'm not certain that Acito is really serious about not competing with local restaurants. Cafe de Wheels' typical lunchtime spot is on Walnut just off of Court Street. Assuming the truck stays there, it will definitely compete with Avril-Bleh's sidewalk grill, which is set to re-open April 5.
But more importantly, the trucks' primary competitors are not restaurants. After all, if you own a restaurant and find yourself at a competitive disadvantage to a guy who cooks his food in a UPS truck, it may be time to find a new profession. Instead, the trucks are really competing with sidewalk vendors.
The vendors are, of course, regulated by the city. And the trucker-chefs don't want to be. My question: is that fair? Sidewalk vendors run a pretty low-margin business. They are licensed by the City, and their location is subject to City approval. (In fact, the City has recently adopted a lottery through which street vendors' locations will be determined. This was first mentioned last year in a Jane Prendergast blog post. The HamCo Common Pleas Court recently issued a temporary restraining order delaying implementation of the new system. If I can find the complaint, I'll write a post on this issue.)
I know that the food trucks are the current darlings of the "cool kids" in the blogosphere. I like them (the trucks), too. (You haven't really lived until you've had Cafe de Wheels' grilled cheese and pulled pork sandwich.) But I wonder: why is it fair that the food trucks operate outside the rules that everyone else has to play by? Will a licensing fee and some rules about their location really put them out of business? Or would those things just put them on a level playing field with their competitors?
Finally, can anyone speak with certainty as to what Council committee would tackle this issue? I assume it's the Livable Communities Committee, chaired by Roxanne Qualls, but I'm not sure under the 2010 committee structure.
UPDATE (3/25/2010): Polly Campbell has this blog post on the topic, in which she quotes Tom Acito as saying that he and fellow trucker-chefs aren't presently petitioning the city. I'm not sure why he sent Julie a press release heralding the formation of his not-yet-formed group, then.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
What is Content Stealing?
As I mentioned in the previous post, the Enquirer has rolled out a "First in Print" strategy, through which on Sundays certain articles will appear only in the print edition until Monday morning, when they will then become available online. One justification cited by editor Tom Callinan is the blogosphere's theft of his paper's content:
When does a blog or website (why does the Enquirer's style book still require the capitalization of "web"?) "rob" a newspaper's content? Are Griff and I among the robbers responsible for the demise of the print media?
Neither Griff nor I has ever claimed to be a reporter. (To the contrary, I have repeatedly disclaimed any such notion.**) Instead, our typical post is a comment on a news story published elsewhere. We always reference--and link to--the source of the story. (In fact, when Griff initially invited me to blog, the only rule he gave me was to link to any story about which I post.) That's the same practice followed by other blogs I read. Is that robbery?
As I noted below, even the Enquirer follows the lead of other sources. The "Vanity Fair controversy" originated at Kate's Random Musings. Callinan himself wrote about it, attributing the story to Katy. The Enquirer reported on CityBeat's story about the unfortunate email from Monzel's aid, once again properly attributing its source. Was that robbery? And even in the Cole piece I talk about below, Jon Craig remarks that Cole's appointment "drew scorn from some bloggers." Really? Which bloggers? How about a link to one or more of the bloggers? Does Craig mean Griff? I hope not, because Griff's post doesn't criticize the appointment itself, only Cole's decision to leave her current post early.
So here's my question: what does the Enquirer consider fair use, and what, according to Callinan, is robbery? And how do the paper's own practices differ from those they condemn?
In this environment, the Enquirer isn't likely to create new positions anytime soon. But it should seriously consider the addition of a public editor or ombudsman who would write a weekly column. If the Enquirer is serious about consistently generating a quality product, it ought not be afraid of an independent person to perform a quality-assurance function.
*This sentence is a clear illustration of the utility of the serial comma. Until I got to "has long been a vexation," I thought that "watching broadcast outlets" was something websites and blogs did while robbing newspapers of their reporting. Once again, Judge Painter is correct; check out Rule 24 in the linked book. Of course, this is a "talking footnote," a Judge Painter no-no; see Rule 12.
**Obviously, there are exceptions. Griff typically "reports" on MPMF. If I happen to notice a restaurant opening or closing, I'll "report" on this--but even then, I'm usually scooped by Polly Campbell or Julie Niesen, to whom I link, if I know they've posted.
Watching broadcast outlets, Web sites and blogs essentially rob newspapers of their hard - and expensive - reporting has long been a vexation, but not a mortal threat.*
When does a blog or website (why does the Enquirer's style book still require the capitalization of "web"?) "rob" a newspaper's content? Are Griff and I among the robbers responsible for the demise of the print media?
Neither Griff nor I has ever claimed to be a reporter. (To the contrary, I have repeatedly disclaimed any such notion.**) Instead, our typical post is a comment on a news story published elsewhere. We always reference--and link to--the source of the story. (In fact, when Griff initially invited me to blog, the only rule he gave me was to link to any story about which I post.) That's the same practice followed by other blogs I read. Is that robbery?
As I noted below, even the Enquirer follows the lead of other sources. The "Vanity Fair controversy" originated at Kate's Random Musings. Callinan himself wrote about it, attributing the story to Katy. The Enquirer reported on CityBeat's story about the unfortunate email from Monzel's aid, once again properly attributing its source. Was that robbery? And even in the Cole piece I talk about below, Jon Craig remarks that Cole's appointment "drew scorn from some bloggers." Really? Which bloggers? How about a link to one or more of the bloggers? Does Craig mean Griff? I hope not, because Griff's post doesn't criticize the appointment itself, only Cole's decision to leave her current post early.
So here's my question: what does the Enquirer consider fair use, and what, according to Callinan, is robbery? And how do the paper's own practices differ from those they condemn?
In this environment, the Enquirer isn't likely to create new positions anytime soon. But it should seriously consider the addition of a public editor or ombudsman who would write a weekly column. If the Enquirer is serious about consistently generating a quality product, it ought not be afraid of an independent person to perform a quality-assurance function.
*This sentence is a clear illustration of the utility of the serial comma. Until I got to "has long been a vexation," I thought that "watching broadcast outlets" was something websites and blogs did while robbing newspapers of their reporting. Once again, Judge Painter is correct; check out Rule 24 in the linked book. Of course, this is a "talking footnote," a Judge Painter no-no; see Rule 12.
**Obviously, there are exceptions. Griff typically "reports" on MPMF. If I happen to notice a restaurant opening or closing, I'll "report" on this--but even then, I'm usually scooped by Polly Campbell or Julie Niesen, to whom I link, if I know they've posted.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
A MMA Blog, Really?
Cincinnati.com/Enquirer has started a mixed martial arts blog called MMA Nati and I honestly don't know why. I'm way out of touch with this sport, in the sense that my knowledge of it comes from the Jon Favreau story arc on Friends, so when I wonder how this warrants any more attention then say NASCAR or Professional Wrestling, my ignorance may be in the way. I really wonder about that, though, I'm not totally out beyond niche culture to miss the local appeal. Maybe I am just getting a bit old.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Building Cincinnati Likely to Cease Publication
Yesterday Kevin LeMaster, Editor and Publisher of the Building Cincinnati Blog, announced that his blog likely will cease publication. His hope had been to turn the website into a full time endeavor, but at this point it has not met his expectations. The website has been one of the best blogs in town and provided the best coverage of development in the city and surrounding area.
I personally hope Kevin can continue his blog in any form possible. His voice is important to the Cincinnati area blogging community and he has and hopefully will continue to contribute to the development of Cincinnati and its urban core.
I personally hope Kevin can continue his blog in any form possible. His voice is important to the Cincinnati area blogging community and he has and hopefully will continue to contribute to the development of Cincinnati and its urban core.
Thursday, January 07, 2010
So, Who's BossSexy?
Regular Cincinnati Blog commentor BossSexy has taken the next step and started his/her own blog.
The tag line is "A collection of thoughts and commentary on Cincinnati life that is too short to be taken seriously and too long to end up on Twitter."
Have a read and send your nutty comments to him/her!
The tag line is "A collection of thoughts and commentary on Cincinnati life that is too short to be taken seriously and too long to end up on Twitter."
Have a read and send your nutty comments to him/her!
Monday, November 02, 2009
Queen City Survey Signs Off
Dan from Queen City Survey posted yesterday that his blog is ending. He may spin off some of his featured content in other forms, but the blog will end, at least for now. Good Luck Dan and I hope to keep reading your interesting take on Cincinnati in other forms.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
New Local Political Blog: Plum Street Studios
E. Gooding has a new blog called Plum Street Studios and has a good post tearing apart the Enquirer's Council Endorsements.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
FTC Says Bloggers Must Disclose Freebies
Cincinnati-area bloggers, beware: The Federal Trade Commission has codified new guidelines that require bloggers to disclose any freebies, payment, swag, or other gratuities they get when they review a product.
In promulgating the guidelines, which apply for the first time to "new media," the FTC offers the following explanation:
There's a lot of hysteria in the national blogosphere (particularly in the legal blogosphere), most of which is probably unjustified. Check out PCWorld's extremely layperson-friendly guide to the new guidelines. As the article notes, most bloggers who review the free stuff they receive already disclose the potential conflict. Still, though, local bloggers who get swag (hey Griff: where's my swag?) and talk about what they've received should take a few minutes to familiarize themselves with the FTC's new interpretation of federal law.
Disclosure: I have not received money or other consideration from the FTC, PCWorld, or (sadly) Griff to comment on any of those entities' or individual's merits or shortcomings.
In promulgating the guidelines, which apply for the first time to "new media," the FTC offers the following explanation:
The Commission does not believe that all uses of new consumer-generated media to discuss product attributes or consumer experiences should be deemed "endorsements” within the meaning of the Guides. Rather, in analyzing statements made via these new media, the fundamental question is whether, viewed objectively, the relationship between the advertiser and the speaker is such that the speaker’s statement can be considered “sponsored” by the advertiser and therefore an “advertising message.” In other words, in disseminating positive statements about a product or service, is the speaker: (1) acting solely independently, in which case there is no endorsement, or (2) acting on behalf of the advertiser or its agent, such that the speaker’s statement is an “endorsement” that is part of an overall marketing campaign? The facts and circumstances that will determine the answer to this question are extremely varied and cannot be fully enumerated here, but would include: whether the speaker is compensated by the advertiser or its agent; whether the product or service in question was provided for free by the advertiser; the terms of any agreement; the length of the relationship; the previous receipt of products or
services from the same or similar advertisers, or the likelihood of future receipt of such products or services; and the value of the items or services received. An advertiser’s lack of control over the specific statement made via these new forms of consumer-generated media would not automatically disqualify that statement from being deemed an “endorsement” within the meaning of the Guides. Again, the issue is whether the consumer-generated statement can be considered “sponsored.”Thus, a consumer who purchases a product with his or her own money and praises it on a personal blog or on an electronic message board will not be deemed to be providing an endorsement. In contrast, postings by a blogger who is paid to speak about an advertiser’s product will be covered by the Guides, regardless of whether the blogger is paid directly by the marketer itself or by a third party on behalf of the marketer.
There's a lot of hysteria in the national blogosphere (particularly in the legal blogosphere), most of which is probably unjustified. Check out PCWorld's extremely layperson-friendly guide to the new guidelines. As the article notes, most bloggers who review the free stuff they receive already disclose the potential conflict. Still, though, local bloggers who get swag (hey Griff: where's my swag?) and talk about what they've received should take a few minutes to familiarize themselves with the FTC's new interpretation of federal law.
Disclosure: I have not received money or other consideration from the FTC, PCWorld, or (sadly) Griff to comment on any of those entities' or individual's merits or shortcomings.
March For Healthcare on 10/18/2009
Supporters of the President's efforts to gain healthcare reform are organizing a March For Healthcare. Marchers are meeting on Sunday October 18th at 11:30 AM on the corner of Walnut and 5th Streets. Come out and add your voice to the effort to improve our healthcare system, make it affordable, and protect patients.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Local Blogger Exposed By John Matarese!
Well, not really. But I'm pretty sure I saw Kate the Great on the news last night. Matarese did a piece on how the United Way uses donations. (It's a very favorable piece, without even a hint of a scandal; Matarese must be losing his touch.) Katy was United Way's spokesperson for the story.
The WCPO story is online here. And if you've got a few extra bucks, make a donation. (Maybe they'll give Katy a raise!)
The WCPO story is online here. And if you've got a few extra bucks, make a donation. (Maybe they'll give Katy a raise!)
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Provost Schools Dean
In one of the more affective uses of disdain, The Provost of The Phony Coney Blog gets all Catholic-School-Nunish on Jason Haap, with a ruler to the knuckles and more.
UPDATE: It appears this post was taken down, so the link above doesn't work. Here is the Cache version. Would the party's involved care to comment?
UPDATE: It appears this post was taken down, so the link above doesn't work. Here is the Cache version. Would the party's involved care to comment?
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
New Website: The Cincinnati Man
If you are a man or want to know what these men are writing about, then The Cincinnati Man may be a website worth checking out. It comes from a group of mostly Northern Kentuckians, so we are very glad they think in the broader "Cincinnati" area vision. It also gives a counter weight to the mostly female bloggers around town, who lend the most cultural critique of the City and its happenings.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Time To Close The Book On Shadowhare
After several quiet weeks, "Shadowhare" made another public appearance, this one at Mt. Adams Pavilion. (His appearance was not spontaneous; it had been listed as a selling point for the DERF Happy Hour in the Enquirer's "Five things to do: Friday" feature.) Mayoral candidate Jason Haap (through his own alter-ego, political performance artist "Dean of Cincinnati") currently has several Shadowhare-related posts, including video of the young, masked man at the Beacon.
I think it's time the media--both "mainstream" and "alternate"--stop giving "Shadowhare" the attention he so obviously craves. (Yes, I know: I just wrote a blog post calling attention to someone I think we should all ignore.) Based on what I saw in the videos at the Beacon, I strongly suspect that there are is some sort of mental illness that underlies Shadowhare's behavior. Even Jason's co-blogger, Justin Jeffre, agrees that Shadowhare may have a problem:
I feel sorry for the guy if he really suffered the kind of abuse that he claims he did, but I think this guy might have some serious mental health issues and should probably talk to a mental health professional.
So who cares? If all Shadowhare does is show up and entertain drunk YP's on a Friday night, what's the harm? The problem is twofold. First, I doubt he's going to stop at just entertainment. Eventually, he's going to do something dangerous. He'll hurt himself or someone else. And then we'll all wring our hands at why we didn't get this troubled young man some help, rather than encouragement. Second, he encourages and emboldens others to act without appropriate training or knowledge. If he continues to garner attention, someone who is like him--ill but functional--will think "crime-fighting" in a mask is appropriate, attempt it, and get hurt.
A couple caveats:
I don't have any formal training in diagnosing mental illness. But I work with individuals who suffer from various mental illnesses on a daily or weekly basis, and watching the videos reminds me of the interactions I've had with some of them.
Second, I don't blame or in any way condemn Jason for posting about Shadowhare. Shadowhare was first publicized by the traditional media, and the blogs have simply followed along. (Jason, of course, is behaving typically--like a pitbull with a young child's leg in its jaws--by putting up multiple posts, suggesting (or at least hinting) that Shadowhare should be prosecuted, and posting about a fictional organization that jokingly opposes superheroes.) But maybe, on careful reflection, those of us in the "alternative media" should show the restraint and responsibility so often lacking in the legacy media these days. And in the meantime, we'll all hope that there's someone in "Shadowhare's" life who is close enough to him to get him the help he needs.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
New United Way Campaign
Kate the Great needs a diaper.
Err, no, that's not quite right. She just wants a diaper. Or she wants you to buy other people a diaper.
Seriously....the United Way has a new campaign: the Give 5 -- Diaper Drive. The idea is to give five bucks, which the Greater Cincinnati United Way will then spend on diapers. The diapers will be given to a bunch of local agencies who will distribute them to needy families in Cincinnati.
It's not a need that people like me (single and childless) typically think about, but it makes sense that this is an unmet-need for poor families. So go check out KRM or the United Way site for the details. There's also some sort of twitter thing, but not being hip enough for that, I'm sticking with the websites.
Err, no, that's not quite right. She just wants a diaper. Or she wants you to buy other people a diaper.
Seriously....the United Way has a new campaign: the Give 5 -- Diaper Drive. The idea is to give five bucks, which the Greater Cincinnati United Way will then spend on diapers. The diapers will be given to a bunch of local agencies who will distribute them to needy families in Cincinnati.
It's not a need that people like me (single and childless) typically think about, but it makes sense that this is an unmet-need for poor families. So go check out KRM or the United Way site for the details. There's also some sort of twitter thing, but not being hip enough for that, I'm sticking with the websites.
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Neckties for the Stars
I'd encourage you to enter this contest, but frankly, I'd rather you didn't: I'm trying to elbow my way into a group date that'll include Kate the Great and Red Kat Blonde (even though they're trying to pretend as if Kwame Jackson is the top draw).
And 5chw4r7z: don't think I haven't noticed that you entered twice.
And 5chw4r7z: don't think I haven't noticed that you entered twice.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Imports At It Again
At cincinnati imports (someday soon I'll find out why "liz" is so opposed to capitalization), Liz announces a couple of upcoming events. On March 21, the plan is to head out to Cincinnati Gardens to cheer as Lauren (known by her rabid fans as Miss Print) and the Cincinnati Rollergirls as they take on the Hard Knox Rollergirls in the season opener.
Plans are also in the works for a Happy Hour on April 1st. No location has been announced.
I'm somewhat embarassed that I never posted on the imports' first Happy Hour. It was a great event! I was thrilled to meet some of the best bloggers in town. Liz and Lauren have pictures here. This last one is important: it memorializes the historic first meeting between Griff, on the right, and myself (note the somewhat awed look in my eyes). That's right, Griff and I had never met before that night. Anyhow, the event was fun enough that I'm looking forward to the April Fool's Day event. And it's so fun to hang with that crowd that I just might have to figure out what a twitter is and crash the next tweet-up....
Oh---for those of you who are concerned by the picture: the pornstache was a very, very, very, short-lived experiment in facial hair, and ended shortly after that night.
Plans are also in the works for a Happy Hour on April 1st. No location has been announced.
I'm somewhat embarassed that I never posted on the imports' first Happy Hour. It was a great event! I was thrilled to meet some of the best bloggers in town. Liz and Lauren have pictures here. This last one is important: it memorializes the historic first meeting between Griff, on the right, and myself (note the somewhat awed look in my eyes). That's right, Griff and I had never met before that night. Anyhow, the event was fun enough that I'm looking forward to the April Fool's Day event. And it's so fun to hang with that crowd that I just might have to figure out what a twitter is and crash the next tweet-up....
Oh---for those of you who are concerned by the picture: the pornstache was a very, very, very, short-lived experiment in facial hair, and ended shortly after that night.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)