// nicole cifani

My friend Leila is seeing two guys. I say, good for her! It’s interesting because she communicates with each of them in two totally different ways.

The first has absolutely zero presence online. No profile on a company website, no Facebook page, no Flickr feed of his latest holiday or comments left on blogs for her to dissect. He’s a young attorney and “doesn’t have the time”.  In fact, according to Leila he’s even elusive on e-mail. Basically she can’t find any dish on him at all (c’mon, you know you Google your dates too!).

They primarily communicate by speaking over the phone a couple of times a week (yes he does have a RAZR) and they see each other a couple of times weekly.

The second guy she’s dating is totally plugged in. He’s on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Myspace, Vimeo, Digg, you name it.

They communicate several times a day via iChat, SMS/MMS text, and e-mail. They’re “friends” on Facebook. And, thanks to Twitter she always knows what he’s up to. Is he seeing anyone else? Who needs a magic 8 ball – ask Twitter!

Interestingly enough, although she communicates much less with guy #1 she feels closer to him.

While communication with guy #2 is consistently frequent it feels superficial because she doesn’t have his undivided attention. Oh, and it doesn’t help that she rarely sees him in person.

Guy #1, while she sees him on a regular basis, has more to talk about with IRL (In Real Life…hah). She also has no pre-conceived thoughts about him that she’s garnered herself from digging up dirt online; no assumptions as to who he may be as a person. She’s gotta find this all out on her own.

If we communicate more frequently with someone thru different mediums does it necessarily promote a healthy relationship?  it doesn’t appear that we’re getting to know a person on a truly deeper level, maybe even at all. With so many of life’s distractions online and in real life, is communicating with anyone on a meaningful level even possible? Have we become all “action” and no “talk”?

A relationship of any kind is meant to be rewarding. Each party wants validation from the other. In a narcissistic world where most online profiles are carefully self-groomed for vanity, the concept of nurturing any kind of relationship becomes a hall of mirrors where each friend appears just like the next.

Maybe the relationships of the future will revert to old-school techniques and mannerisms – like sitting down in person and having a conversation. Even then the smoke and mirrors ambiance of a dimly lit restaurant, music, and people-watching exist. Perhaps just having the opportunity alone to get to know someone – who they really are, not just online and via mass-emails – is what creates a meaningful relationship.

What do you think? Leave your thoughts by clicking on the comments field at the top of this post.

I just finished The Four Agreements by Miguel Ruiz, a suggestion from my close friends Walsh and Schmalz. The book offers insight on how to live your life based on four simple agreements you choose make with yourself. It really resonated with me and I highly suggest checking it out. It’s an easy weekend read.

Have you read it? If so, what did you think? Leave your comments below.

>The Four Agreements on Amazon

>More on Toltec wisdom

Spotify, a music service currently only available outside of the US, is a social streaming site that allows instant listening to specific tracks or albums.

Users can easily share their library with friends and collaborate on playlists.

Although ownership of music is important to users in general a more pressing issue is accessibility. Sites like Hype Machine and Imeem allow us to share songs with friends, but we can only share the content that those sites have available to us.

By employing the peer-to-peer model like Spotify does, I can upload those special gems and curated playlists I spend weeks agonizing over. My friends can then stream the music and click-through to purchase for legitimate ownership of the song.

Spotify takes advantage of the “cloud“- data living over the internet as opposed to locally on your computer. We can peruse music quickly this way without downloading it first. Then, if a user wants ownership of the song, it can be purchased – supporting the artist rather than jacking it from a blog.

Makes sense to me.

What is Spotify?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotify

Twitter

My 5 year anniversary with Los Angeles is today.

I love this town. I feel blessed for the opportunities I’ve had and the many experiences I’ve encountered, good and bad, that have helped to shape me into a stronger and more mature person.

Around the dinner table the other night was a musician, an advertising exec, a writer, a designer, a video games producer. And me.

We tossed around ideas. We picked apart nuances. We heckled, we gossiped.

I left feeling inspired and renewed.

There’s opportunity in this town and creative people want to connect.

There have been times when I’ve been frustrated. I live in a tiny overpriced apartment. I’m friends with everybody but never quite sure who my real friends are. The traffic can be beyond maddening.

But it’s a fun process getting to wherever I’m meant to be.

I hit Hollywood or Silverlake to see bands play, I meander among gallery openings in Culver City. I travel downtown for fashion shows in dirty warehouses and discover secret speakeasies along the way. I go to beaches in Malibu and somehow find myself at random parties at ridiculous homes. I meet musicians, artists, entrepreneurs, stylists, and acrobats. I receive gift bags with free shampoo.

Creative people are feeling the recession and as a result we’re banding together, somehow knowing that creatives are becoming less fringe and more a part of the mainstream American landscape.

And when it comes down to it, everyone is adapting to change – even my friends and family back in Cleveland.

Here in LA, it’s challenging. You have to work hard to make it happen. Everyday is a fresh start full of possibility.

Plus, that tiny overpriced apartment IS 28 blocks from the ocean. And at least I have a steady supply of free shampoo.

For this year’s Coachella Music Festival – a holiday of sorts for Los-Angelenos in the music industry – I chose to forgo the long lines, blistering heat and nutty ravers to spend a weekend of leisure in the desert area. And of course hit some pool parties along the way.

I think the decision to sit this years’ fest out was a blessing in disguise. I encountered many up-and-comers at these little parties – too small to hit the festival circuit, but absolutely rockin’ nonetheless.

When I returned to LA a couple of DJ friends at KCRW asked if I had managed to see any good acts. Nosaj Thing immediately came to mind. His glitchy, dub-step, sampled electro groove had the Imeem/Indieoasis party rockin’ and I was transfixed.

It was truly amazing to watch someone so young and forward thinking totally kill it. I can’t wait to see what he does next.

The album dropped Tuesday on Alpha Pup Records.

Emusic

Amazon

Twitter

Nosaj Thing on Imeem

Nosajthing.com

MySpace

I’m quite excited to see the film Banksy’s Coming For Dinner from Director Ivan Massow. It stars Joan Collins, her husband Percy and various other guests as they gather for a dinner with the infamous street artist. Banksy is known for his anonymity, prefering to keep his true identity under wraps. Based on his artwork I wonder just how much of it will be real.  And I also wonder what he’ll bring to dinner.  A casserole, perhaps?

*Bonus: music for the film is arranged by Mr. Scruff

Lush soul music from an artist who is the real deal. Lee Fields recorded and released on his own independent label in the 70’s and has returned with “My World”, produced by NYC’s Truth & Soul label and production team.

Lee Fields’ voice, not just his name, may also sound familiar as he’s made appearances in the past on Sharon Jones’s critically acclaimed album “Naturally”, and recorded alongside French house producer Martin Solveig.

This one goes out to all you soul-revivalists out there.

http://www.myspace.com/leefields

http://truthandsoulrecords.com/leefields

On the homepage of a typical social network like MySpace or Facebook, I can see as-they-happen updates from a vetted group of friends, networks, groups and organizations. The answer to the open-ended question “What’s on Your Mind?” gives way to a cacophony of information equivalent to a bunch of people shouting into space. Twitter, perhaps the most extreme exercise in brevity, allows for detailed minutiae of one’s inner monologue in 140 characters or less. 

A new form of communication has been born: a medium that allows top-of-mind banter to be shared with whoever has the will to read it. Lifestreaming. Thoughts, images, links and video of the very innate variety can be posted for the world to see. There’s no excuse for someone with access to an Internet connection to not have the opportunity to be heard. 

Is this the new public forum – a place to openly hash the public sphere and allow for interpersonal discourse at the local and international level? Or is it passive and mundane chatter amongst so-called “friends”? Because these sites vary by locality – decentralized as Twitter, Tumblr, Friendfeed or Facebook – it’s hard to say. Each island has it’s own population and the inhabitants are speaking a dialect to everyone, yet no one at all.

Why are we so eager to participate in a phenomenon without a distinct cause or purpose driving the madness? Maybe in part because most of these services are free, but what’s the real motivation?

Not too far in the distant past, privacy on the web was a hot button issue. We were hesitant to use real names in email addresses, give clues to things like real age, location, race, and gender, let alone details of political views or religious beliefs. 

Despite the fear of releasing personal identity, the willingness to openly communicate with others remained clear. Chat rooms, message boards, emails…all lit up immediately with a new way of reaching out to the rest of the world.

Today, the thought of strangers openly chatting in online chat rooms seems dull. Gone are the days of emailing total strangers or using handles to appear anonymous or intriguing. We now strictly communicate in methods we have absolute control over with those we know – or audiences we feel comfortable sharing with.

We allow constructed personalities and messages to become on display in a one-way feed by communicating specific bits of information to these enabled groups or communities. We’re keen to openly divulge personal information – because we’ve come to realize that we have total control over what is being revealed. 

This evolved way of communicating creates a one-sided conundrum whereby we are ultimately talking to ourselves.  

We’re sharing information as a way to connect with others to fulfill individual needs of the ego. The reflection of who we present online is a reflection of the ideal self. We are not creating outlets for self-expression or meaning, but rather building upon an artificial construct of self consisting of imagery, text, number of friends – a pastiched cultural relevance that the ideal me would find significant to present to others.

We are an amphitheatre full of egos all shouting for recognition and importance – if only from ourselves.

Later in the series, I’ll take a look at how this affects the concept of the public forum by taking into account issues at the local, national, and international level.

More:

Twouble with Twitter:

Note: This article is syndicated at made this for you.

When it comes to media management, iTunes is a staple for handling my music library. A self-professed music junkie, I need a library that’s seamless to navigate, highly organizable, and can accommodate a limitless amount of files in a variety of formats.

I don’t infrequently tie my needs to any particular brand or product line. Although I love Apple products and require them to function on a daily basis, I try to switch it up whenever possible by incorporating tools and technologies from a variety of sources.

And I thought nothing could top iTunes until I discovered what Songbird can do.

Songbird offers the basic functionality of iTunes – unrestricted file capacity and unlimited playlists, navigational ease, import/export options; but tricks it out on many levels.

The open-source software offers total customization of your audio player. It offers plug-ins called “add-ons” that pull in bonuses while your music plays like concert info, data from last.fm, Shoutcast radio, and more. The MashTape add-on looks for related content like photos, video, and reviews from your bands by pulling in data from Flickr, YouTube, and Amazon. Online digital music store 7Digital recently partnered with Songbird to offer full integration. The store, currently in beta, will offer 320 kbps DRM-free MP3 downloads. They also promise to offer custom recommendations in the future based around what you’re playing from your library.

With all of these features, Songbird is a serious contender in becoming a viable alternative to iTunes. The only major downside is that Songbird doesn’t seamlessly connect to AirTunes allowing wireless playback from Songbird to a home stereo. A quick fix is a tool called Airfoil from Rogue Amoeba (the same company that created Audio Hijack). Although it will set you back $25 it seems to do the trick.

Songbird is an open-source, fully customizable music player built on the open-source media framework Gstreamer. You can participate by hacking on the software and trying out new builds before they’re released. A developer Recipe Book offers code snippets for “Featherers” to tinker with.They sell some pretty kick-ass t-shirts too!

Contribute: http://getsongbird.com/contribute/

Get Songbird v 1.1.1 now: http://getsongbird.com/

Facebook and Twitter allow me to tell you what I’m doing, where I’m going, and how I’m feeling from almost any place at any time.

And anyone can see.

Brands aside, how does this new form of communication affect our relationships with others? It appears that we may be more connected yet becoming increasingly distanced from each other.

And by the way, who exactly are we talking to?

Is this an example of how we can use the internet to improve public discourse – or is it all banal chatter?

I’m beginning a series of long-form essays to explore answers to some of these questions. More to come.