<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed version="0.3" xmlns="http://purl.org/atom/ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xml:lang="en">
  <title>J.D. Ashcraft&apos;s Blog</title>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/" />
  <modified>2008-01-04T21:05:33Z</modified>
  <tagline>I&apos;m knee deep in marketing most of the day and spend allot of time thinking about things like sponsorships, market share, brand awareness and  conversion ratios, but I&apos;ll try to keep my posts a bit less dry.

This introduction brought to you by Reemco.  </tagline>
  <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2008:/j.d.ashcraft//10</id>
  <generator url="http://www.movabletype.org/" version="3.2">Movable Type</generator>
  <copyright>Copyright (c) 2007, j.d.ashcraft</copyright>
  <entry>
    <title>Dilemma - Spout vs. the Onion</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/013238.html" />
    <modified>2008-01-04T21:05:33Z</modified>
    <issued>2007-04-12T16:42:55-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2007:/j.d.ashcraft//10.13238</id>
    <created>2007-04-12T21:42:55Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">The good folks over at Spout have been nominated for a Webby, in the best podcast category. I heard about this and hoped over to cast my vote when I saw that they were up against another favorite of mine, the Onion. Ack! Decisions decisions! The Webby&apos;s usually have interesting nominees, one or two end up in my favorites each...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>The good folks over at <a href="http://www.spout.com" target="_blank">Spout</a> have been nominated for a Webby, in the best podcast category. I heard about this and hoped over to cast my vote when I saw that they were up against another favorite of mine, the <a href="http://www.theonion.com" target="_blank2">Onion</a>. Ack! Decisions decisions!</p>

<p>The Webby's usually have interesting nominees, one or two end up in my favorites each year, or were already there, like when indieWIRE was nominated (and eventually won.) </p>

<p>if you're really into the awards thing, or just want to support a particular site, you can register in two minutes and then vote and comment yourself: <a href="http://pv.webbyawards.com">http://pv.webbyawards.com</a></p>

<p>I found the podcasts in question at:</p>

<p>Websites > Connections > podcasts<br />
</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Sneak Into this Movie</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/012962.html" />
    <modified>2007-03-09T14:56:50Z</modified>
    <issued>2007-03-09T09:45:08-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2007:/j.d.ashcraft//10.12962</id>
    <created>2007-03-09T14:45:08Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">this came across my desk and gave me a chuckle:...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Marketing</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>this came across my desk and gave me a chuckle:<br />
<a href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/SkillsSmall.jpg"><img alt="SkillsSmall.jpg" src="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/SkillsSmall-thumb.jpg" width="292" height="407" /></a></p>

<p><a href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/Skills_window.jpg"><img alt="Skills_window.jpg" src="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/Skills_window-thumb.jpg" width="400" height="115" /></a><br />
</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>indie champ moves on, Paul Bales leaves SAGINDIE</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/011912.html" />
    <modified>2007-06-25T19:22:55Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-12-06T11:50:14-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.11912</id>
    <created>2006-12-06T16:50:14Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">I just found out (having somehow missed the news last week) that Paul Bales has left SAGINDIE to help friends manage a growing production company. For those of you who don’t know Paul, he is a very sharp (and entertaining) communicator, a web 2.0 frontliner and he has been an important bridge between the business of Hollywood and the needs...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[I just found out (having somehow missed the news last week) that Paul Bales has left SAGINDIE to help friends manage a growing production company. For those of you who don’t know Paul, he is a very sharp (and entertaining) communicator, a web 2.0 frontliner and he has been an important bridge between the business of Hollywood and the needs of indies. You can <a href="http://www.sagindie.org/spotlight.html">read more </a>about him in his farewell interview with SAG Indie<a href="http://www.sagindie.org/spotlight.html"> here</a>. I am sure he leaves us in good hands but I don’t envy his replacement and the shoes he/she will have to fill. ]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>A True Loss - Ann Richards Passes</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/011281.html" />
    <modified>2008-01-04T21:06:00Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-09-14T12:24:11-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.11281</id>
    <created>2006-09-14T17:24:11Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">I was shocked an saddened to learn that Anne Richards passed away yesterday. The former Texas governor accomplished a great many things in her 74 years with us, including breaking a 50 year dry spell for women in Texas state politics, but I remember her most for her razor sharp wit. An oft quoted line was uttered to Larry King...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Personal</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>I was shocked an saddened to learn that <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060914/ap_on_re_us/obit_richards">Anne Richards passed away </a>yesterday. The former Texas governor accomplished a great many things in her 74 years with us, including breaking a 50 year dry spell for women in Texas state politics, but I remember her most for her razor sharp wit. </p>

<p>An oft quoted line was uttered to Larry King in response to Texas redistricting:</p>

<p>"Well Larry, I could drive down Interstate 35 with both my car doors open and be in three different congressional districts at one time."</p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<p>The above linked article says more about her life and accomplishments than I can. But on a personal note, I regret  missing two opportunities to meet her in person.  The closest I came was through indieWIRE's Brian Brooks who <a href="http://www.indiewire.com/ots/onthescene_050314ipop.html">snapped a wonderful shot </a>of her (5th pic down) at the Texas Hall of Fame ceremony at <b>SXSW 2005</b>.</p>

<p>I would wish Anne a peaceful afterlife but I have no doubt that wherever she is, peaceful she is not and she wouldn't have it any other way.</p>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Simple Gestures</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/010988.html" />
    <modified>2007-06-26T14:07:46Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-08-11T09:17:44-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.10988</id>
    <created>2006-08-11T14:17:44Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Retiree William Fogarty restores Officer Chris Amos&apos; faith in mankind with a $1 money order....</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Personal</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Retiree William Fogarty <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/old_parking_ticket">restores Officer Chris Amos' faith in mankind </a>with a $1 money order.</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Sponsorship Fun</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/010735.html" />
    <modified>2007-08-07T14:15:57Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-07-17T14:15:10-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.10735</id>
    <created>2006-07-17T19:15:10Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">A fella going by the name Mr. Safety having some fun vamping on sponsorships, and get&apos;s some community feedback......</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Marketing</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[A fella going by the name <strong><a href="http://www.smpfilms.com/">Mr. Safety</a></strong> having some fun vamping on sponsorships, and get's some community feedback...

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zDlpY2110M8"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zDlpY2110M8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>DJ Shadow Vid</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/010694.html" />
    <modified>2007-06-25T19:25:05Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-07-13T12:26:10-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.10694</id>
    <created>2006-07-13T17:26:10Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Ran into this great clip on Veoh...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Music</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Ran into this great clip on Veoh</p>

<p><embed src="http://www.veoh.com/flvplayer.swf?autoStart=false&videoId=67030&permalinkId=e67030ew5eNPNK&file=d9cc16a788d93896e92218b27e51ef7b4840352d&id=209237" width="425" height="340" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"></embed><br />
</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Michael Moore Sued by Guardsman</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/010259.html" />
    <modified>2007-06-25T19:25:40Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-06-01T14:44:01-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.10259</id>
    <created>2006-06-01T19:44:01Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Natalie Finn reports that &quot;A Massachusetts national guardsman filed an $85 million lawsuit against Michael Moore in Suffolk Superior Court last week, accusing the filmmaker of distorting a TV interview to portray the soldier as anti-war in his scathing 2004 documentary about the Bush administration post-Sept. 11, 2001. &quot; Get the whole story here....</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<b>Natalie Finn</b> reports that "A Massachusetts national guardsman filed an $85 million lawsuit against     Michael Moore in Suffolk Superior Court last week, accusing the filmmaker of distorting a TV interview to portray the soldier as anti-war in his scathing 2004 documentary about the Bush administration post-Sept. 11, 2001. "

Get the whole story<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/eo/20060601/en_celeb_eo/19163;_ylt=AgHuK39ijtcgfNhzVzmRItkDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBhZDhxNDFzBHNlYwNtZW5ld3M-"> here.</a>
]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Promise to be Gentle at indieLOOP</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/010209.html" />
    <modified>2007-06-25T19:26:29Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-05-26T09:46:10-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.10209</id>
    <created>2006-05-26T14:46:10Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Romping through indieWIRE this morning I see in indieLOOP a new group being promoted: &quot;Promise to be Gentle&quot; a group of first time filmmakers. The group is open to the public so if you&apos;re working on, or exhibiting, your first film, check them out, it&apos;s a good group of fellow filmmakers. http://social.indiewire.com/group_features.php?gid=19ca14e7ea6328a42e0eb13d585e4c22 If you haven&apos;t seen indieLOOP yet, it&apos;s the...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Romping through indieWIRE this morning I see in indieLOOP a new group being promoted: "Promise to be Gentle" a group of first time filmmakers. The group is open to the public so if you're working on, or exhibiting, your first film, check them out, it's a good group of fellow filmmakers.</p>

<p><a href="http://social.indiewire.com/group_features.php?gid=19ca14e7ea6328a42e0eb13d585e4c22">http://social.indiewire.com/group_features.php?gid=19ca14e7ea6328a42e0eb13d585e4c22</a></p>

<p>If you haven't seen indieLOOP yet, it's the new social network arm of indieWIRE. It's free with your indieWIRE account, which is also free. There are over a thousand people taking part in indieLOOP already but it's still a tight group of working filmmakers and film professionals, there is very little "noise" in the discussions taking place and the accounts come with an abundance of networking and announcement making tools.</p>

<p>You can find indieLOOP under the "community" button on the indieWIRE top navigation or at: <a href="http://social.indiewire.com/index.php">http://social.indiewire.com/index.php</a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Another Perspective on Caveh, Cuban and Comcast</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/007750.html" />
    <modified>2008-01-18T16:53:37Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-04-06T16:21:11-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.7750</id>
    <created>2006-04-06T21:21:11Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">I know I am going to lose points with people for posting this but I can&apos;t help but chime in on the Sex Addict/Landmark issue. While I agree that such a last minute decision to pull the film is in poor taste and a one-time reversal for the opening would win Cuban and Landmark fans, I also find all the...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>I know I am going to lose points with people for posting this but I can't help but chime in on the Sex Addict/Landmark issue. While I agree that such a last minute decision to pull the film is in poor taste and a one-time reversal for the opening would win Cuban and Landmark fans, I also find all the complaining a bit off-the-mark, so to speak. </p>

<p>The reasons to pull are clear and logical, Cuban is fighting to have HDnet included in a distribution chain he (and all the films that go with him) is currently locked out of. One could argue that bowing down to corporate monoliths, as is being widely encouraged, is anti-indie. </p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<p>Film distribution and exhibition is a no-holds-barred business across the board. Ask any theater owner which indie distribs. play these same hardball games and the answer likely to be short - all of them. And as <a href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/caveh/archive/007745.html">Eamonn points</a> out on Caveh's blog, so do the affiliated theater chains. </p>

<p>Caveh is caught in the middle and that is a shame but Caveh chose to go the corporate acquisition route and these issues will *always* be part and parcel with taking that road, even if they aren't always so public. </p>

<p>So if we're to pick a team here, let's ask a few questions about the specific players - </p>

<p>Does Comcast care more about indie films or Landmark? </p>

<p>Has Comcast's CEO posted to Caveh's blog? Does he/she care enough to openly describe their position? </p>

<p>Overall, this situation is a great case study for why indies should self-distribute. Aside from that though, Cuban and Landmark get kudos in my book for being open, honest and engaged in the community. That is so much more than we get from most others. </p>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Full Frame Having Fun</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/007139.html" />
    <modified>2006-02-28T15:06:05Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-02-28T10:03:57-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.7139</id>
    <created>2006-02-28T15:03:57Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Full Frame (the high profile doc fest, in it&apos;s 9th year, for those out of the loop) is having a little fun with their website. If you check out the site today, you&apos;ll that it is burning, as it has been for a couple days now. A click through to the &quot;evacuation&quot; page provides some in-character details on the fire,...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Full Frame (the high profile doc fest, in it's 9th year, for those out of the loop) is having a little fun with their website. If you <a href="http://www.fullframefest.org/">check out the site today</a>, you'll that it is burning, as it has been for a couple days now. A click through to the "evacuation" page provides some in-character details on the fire, complete with press conference transcripts where a local fireman calls the blaze a "zero alarm fire." </p>

<p>Seem like a fun way to make an announcement and draw attention to what is sure to be a site re-launch.</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Film London organizes push for more film funding</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/006967.html" />
    <modified>2006-02-06T15:49:39Z</modified>
    <issued>2006-02-06T10:18:18-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2006:/j.d.ashcraft//10.6967</id>
    <created>2006-02-06T15:18:18Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">Here in Florida, our lottery &quot;funds&quot; education but in England, their national lottery funds all sorts of things, including film. The government has opened the table for discussion on funds distribution and London filmmakers, among other groups, I&apos;m sure, are making a push for a bigger share. According to this article, Film London has already distributed lottery funds to over...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>Here in Florida, our lottery "funds" education but in England, their national lottery funds all sorts of things, including film. The government has opened the table for discussion on funds distribution and London filmmakers, among other groups, I'm sure, are making a push for a bigger share. According to <a href="http://www.filmlondon.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=592">this article</a>, Film London has already distributed lottery funds to over 40 films and a number of incubation efforts. </p>

<p>Although a lottery is a poor substitute for direct funding, as an additive, it's bonus money and a good use of those funds. Good luck with the lottery London filmmakers!</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>MTV Acquires iFILM</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/006038.html" />
    <modified>2007-06-26T14:06:41Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-14T09:35:02-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2005:/j.d.ashcraft//10.6038</id>
    <created>2005-10-14T14:35:02Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">MTV has acquired iFILM in a $49 million deal, reports Abbey Klaassen. MTV will leave iFILM as is, leaving it to operate and grow as it has been doing. The network seems most interested in iFILM as a porfolio piece and as a hand in the user genrated content arena....</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>MTV has acquired iFILM in a $49 million deal, <b><a href="http://adage.com/news.cms?newsId=46398" target="_blank">reports Abbey Klaassen</a></b>. MTV will leave iFILM as is, leaving it to operate and grow as it has been doing. The network seems most interested in iFILM as a porfolio piece and as a hand in the user genrated  content arena.</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>New law classifies many films as porn</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/006013.html" />
    <modified>2008-01-04T21:06:30Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-12T11:26:18-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2005:/j.d.ashcraft//10.6013</id>
    <created>2005-10-12T16:26:18Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">A clause buried in the Children&apos;s Safety Act of 2005, currently awaiting consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee, is likely to wreck havoc on filmmakers and state based film commissions and could have more far reaching effects, reports Brooks Boliek. The clause, which is intended to curb child pornography, essentially, under certain interpretations, makes simulated sex scenes equivalent to actual...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p>A clause buried in the Children's Safety Act of 2005, currently awaiting consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee, is likely to wreck havoc on filmmakers and state based film commissions and could have more far reaching effects, <b><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/porn_dc;_ylt=Ah6zyEOQxKlCyf.qOvASpXUDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl" target=_blank">reports Brooks Boliek</a></b>. The clause, which is intended to curb child pornography, essentially, under certain interpretations, makes simulated sex scenes equivalent to actual sex scenes in the eyes of the law. This could mean that any film with a sex scene is considered pornography.</p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<p>A clause buried in the Children's Safety Act of 2005, currently awaiting consideration by the Senate Judiciary Committee, is likely to wreck havoc on filmmakers and state based film commissions and could have more far reaching effects, reports Brooks Boliek. The clause, which is intended to curb child pornography, essentially, under certain interpretations, makes simulated sex scenes equivalent to actual sex scenes in the eyes of the law. This could mean that any film with a sex scene is considered pornography.</p>

<p>Being considered porn has a variety impacts on a film, most of them minor inconveniences really, but this could effect everything from where films are shot to what films get theatrical release. That in turn effects what films get made to begin with. </p>

<p>I don’t want to be chicken little here, the intent of the Act is not to curb free speech or legitimate free enterprise, and I imagine the wording of the proposed law will simply be clarified and the scope limited. However, the Act has already passed the House and should it be passed into law as is, I for one would not be comfortable counting on the courts to exercise common sense when interpreting and enforcing the law. So I'm red flagging this one.<br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Short Film Elicits Wailing Terror</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/archives/005998.html" />
    <modified>2005-10-18T16:00:50Z</modified>
    <issued>2005-10-10T10:27:17-05:00</issued>
    <id>tag:blogs.indiewire.com,2005:/j.d.ashcraft//10.5998</id>
    <created>2005-10-10T15:27:17Z</created>
    <summary type="text/plain">In a post-South Park world, it&apos;s hard to imagine being shocked by cartoon violence, especially if that violence occurs in the tame and eternally optimistic world of Smurfs. But an upcoming UNICEF campaign, meant to shock and engage the television viewing public by tapping into safe and warm childhood memories, features the unexpected bombing of a Smurf village. David Rennie,...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>j.d.ashcraft</name>
      
      <email>jda@radzone.org</email>
    </author>
    <dc:subject>Film Industry</dc:subject>
    <content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.indiewire.com/j.d.ashcraft/">
      <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2005/10/08/wsmurf08.jpg" align="right" hspace="6" vspace="4" alt="" border="0" />In a post-South Park world, it's hard to imagine being shocked by cartoon violence, especially if that violence occurs in the tame and eternally optimistic world of Smurfs. But an upcoming UNICEF campaign, meant to shock and engage the television viewing public by tapping into safe and warm childhood memories, features the unexpected bombing of a Smurf village. </p>

<p><b>David Rennie</b>, in a piece for telegraph.co.uk, <b><a href="http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/08/wsmurf08.xml<br />
" target="_blank">reports</a></b> that "Belgian television viewers were given a preview of the 25-second film earlier this week, when it was shown on the main evening news. The reactions ranged from approval to shock and, in the case of small children who saw the episode by accident, wailing terror.</p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

</feed>