Hollywood raises $1 billion for a dud. The future isn't mobile. It isn't even Hollywood.


Hollywood made itself by literally projecting larger-than-life images on a movie screen.

And then, over time, that screen shrunk into television, though the average size of a TV has increased to project larger images.

And now Hollywood is hedging their bets that the new wave is the smartphone and raised a billion dollars to fund a new venture called NewTV. Ten minute shorts on your phone.

The future isn't the smart phone. It isn't even Hollywood.

Because the lines in the sand have been redrawn, but it has only dawned on the old money that they have let things go too far for too long.

You have Big Tech -- all Rich White Men who have now censored another man who speaks to the poor white guys, and that changes the centre of gravity in an interesting way.

Big Tech aren't just faceless conglomerates, and neither is Hollywood. Their top brass have very public profiles. If I were to mention the company, you would know who is the leader. If I were to show their pictures, you would know who they were and what company they ran and/or founded.

And they all have something in common: all men. All white.

They can push for diversity all they want, but when you have a cabal of a single shade of white in a single gender, the message is disingenuous, and even taunting.

But when the ones with money start to break away from their poor relations, what happens is that gender and race become irrelevant, and then it all comes down to money.

The US has been having classist tensions to go along with their gender and race tensions. The 2016 election was all about economic disparity: rich white people backed Hillary Clinton. The poor white people backed Donald Trump.

That is the dirty secret that has been simmering in the background in the US, and while those rich white folks have been seething and pulling every trick in the book to shame the poor into not supporting Trump, it didn't work; and they couldn't take it anymore and then took their frustrations out on Alex Jones, making a bigger mess of things than they actually realize.

It is not one of those death blows, but it is a bigger grain on the scales than necessary. A simple change in an algorithm or extra publicity on someone else could have diverted attention away form Jones.

But those in power could not take it anymore. If only those poor people would just stop blogging and posting their different views on social media and just hand over their wallets and labor, then everything will be great again.

The ones with too much money are becoming increasingly removed from the rest of the population and there are consequences for it.

Once upon a time, you had Bill Hewlett and David Packard know their every employee by name. Layoffs would happen, but they would ensure people would get back on the job as soon as possible.

People worked their way up and they knew their employees and customers. You had intermingling of the classes, and that keeps people of different statuses connected and relatable.

Not anymore, and it is beginning to show. Big Tech think that a computer program can be a superior shortcut: monitor people's online habits and you can go all Big Brother on them.

Except it doesn't work that way. There is feel and connection. You make a promise to liberate people and you enslave them or confine them, they do retain that reality somewhere in the back of their minds.

It reminds me a lot of what happened to former icon Madonna. When she was young and her songs and ways promised girls from the wrong side of the tracks that putting out and being scantily clad was the answer to winning at life, they supported her career. Papa Don't Preach was a song about a teenaged girl getting knocked up and her hot boyfriend agreed to marry her. She was their prophetess and they bought her songs and went to her concerts, living vicariously through their Material Girl. They could relate to the sassy and cocky Detroit girl from a working class family.

But as both the prophetess and her flock began to age, Madonna became less like them, while her subtextual promises never materialized for them. She started sporting some strange British accent, indulged in some spiritual rich white stuff, and her face froze funny, while her flock toiled and got wrinkles and no hot guy to marry them no matter how much they emulated her.

We don't talk about Madonna much these days. The new generation never bought into her act because they never knew her origins of being a working class girl dressing up like all the glamorous sirens of the Silver Screen. Her rhyming couplets and falsetto were not ground-breaking.

And so, her legend faded, the way other legends begin to fade when they have nothing in common with the base that gave them the goodwill to succeed.

Big Tech is swimming in those same waters. They resonated with middle class people who sent their brats to good universities, with the same sorts of promises. Big Tech became robber barons, and actively engage in tyrannical practices, and got so used to those games that they decided to play Big Brother in a year where they were caught invading everyone's privacy.

Like grains of sand, scandals build up over time. When you try to appease one group as you attempt to isolate another, alliances are always fragile because deep down, everyone knows that alliances can change on a dime.

And when everyone has access to a global audience, it becomes that much easier to see that reality everyone tries to deny so long as they think they are also getting a slice of the pie.

The US has a cabal who are shutting down an opposing voice to appease one group that is splintering -- and when it splinters, the factions turn on one another before they turn on you.


Big Tech is more primitive and boorish than old money. They do not have the same strategic refinement, and as the old saying goes, what makes you, breaks you. Big Tech gained dominance not because they were smarter, but because they had something different that had a subtext of a big promise: you can be rich and famous if you use this product.

In that regard, Big Tech rode on the coattails of Hollywood -- a place that perpetuates the misconception that if you are famous, then you must be rich by default. It always spun stories about how small town boys and girls got "discovered" and were turned into famous people -- who by some default, also became rich.

Fame is the commodity that is highly revered in modern society because if you are famous, you become rich, according to middle class logic. I cannot tell you how many times when people discovered I was a journalist they said to me with a straight face, "You must be a millionaire."

It doesn't work that way.

But when social media hit the scene, it allowed anyone to post stuff to the world, and many people who spent their lives taking music and dance lessons and wrote manuscripts saw it as a shortcut to success. They would be famous singers and authors. They had no idea of the politics behind fame and power.

I did.

But not because I came from money. It was true that my maternal grandparents once had money: my grandmother's family owned a large forest in Bosnia-Hercegovina, but then the Ustashe took it and slaughtered almost the entire family when my grandmother was a girl; so she never had benefit from it, and neither did I. My grandfather made a vast sum during the Second World War, but then Tito's Communist regime took the reins of power in Yugoslavia, made the currency worthless as they seized assets of the wealthiest citizens, and that worthless currency was literally used in the fireplace.

I was from a kid with a middle class background, I had no connections, but I was a driven and had a peculiar drive for research for as long as I could remember.

When I began to work as a journalist, I kept my ear to the ground in several ways, but one of the ways was to strike up conversations with people who worked for those in power, from maids, nannies, janitors, chauffeurs, seamstresses, secretaries, and the like.

A lot of those people came from other countries, but they weren't poor or illiterate. Many were middle managers or even well-to-do in their own countries, but life at one point decided to thrash them about. Divorces, deaths, civil unrest, war and other traumas forced them to make changes. 

Some decided a clean break without the baggage of a high-powered job was the way to go; so they went to North America, and opted for a Joe Job.

And they would be hired without anyone realizing the maid may have more universities degrees than they did.

I would talk to people who worked for the rich, and I learned a lot because you had the arrogant rich honestly believe their nanny couldn't read a spreadsheet or wouldn't know what the conversation was about.

You had rich people have lavish parties to fundraise to buy weapons for other countries, and then go out in public and tell the little people that gun control was the answer to everything.

Really? What about weapon control? I think the rocket launchers you're buying are even deadlier than the guns you want off the streets.

But these conversations were spoken in front of the servants out in the open.

Then there were all the mistresses and their spending allowances.

Listening to wealthy white men spew about how they support #MeToo when they have a half dozen mistresses and a penile pump is also a hoot.

These tidbits became part of my Method Research because a lot of the information was about those titans in the communications industries, but there were those in banking, retail, real estate, entertainment, Big Tech, Big Pharma, what have you.

I started graphing the information, looking for patterns, but what it revealed to me was interesting.

New money and old money had two different problems that would eventually collide in different ways.

Old Money never got the nuances of the Internet. It is why Hollywood is blowing a billion dollars on a dud. Mobile isn't the future. It's a phase. Had they ponied up ten years ago, maybe, but you had Icebox have short animated cartoons online, and it faltered because the Internet is about grassroots, Left or Right.

And Big Tech shutting down one man lockstep with each other is a gross violation of the unspoken rule.

Which brings us to New Money.

New Money never got the nuances of keeping power. They are like the schoolyard bully who blusters in, thumps his chest, pushes around little kids, shakes them down for lunch money, and then bosses everyone around.

Because they get away with it day in and day out, they think that's all there is to it.

Until either a bigger bully comes along and beats him at his own game, breaking his little clique of sycophants, or a bunch of terrorized victims get together at form a mutiny.

And with social media, we can always create an alternative to Facebook and Twitter.

Journalism used to be openly partisan in hopes of patronage appointments because that was a lucrative way of doing business, and then wire services showed that being neutral was more profitable, and then journalistic objectivity was born.

Social media is going in the opposite direction: they started unified, and now they have made it possible for others to fill in niches. Once those partisan niches are created, their clout wanes as they are now forced to do battle with other Big Tech titans, diverting their attention away from gaining more power, and being forced to hold on to the control they are losing.

And then a fifth medium comes along and dominates, turning Big Tech into an inert property as journalism.


I learned more about the wealthy from the poor they exploited than from listening to those wealthy players themselves. They always try to sell you something: a product, ideology, image, or other profitable lie.

I knew how horribly they neglected their children who grew more attached to the hired help than they were to their parents -- and the kicker was those nannies and maids were also attached to those children and became distressed when they had to leave for various reason: they didn't want to leave those children without protection.

Even those servile workers fretted and were bothered how the grown children of the wealthy were being treated by their parents. There would be horrific mind games, insults, manipulative favouritism to pit the children against one another -- the same way those parents pitted their employees against each other so everyone would be so emotionally drained and feral that they wouldn't see how they were also being exploited.

Divide and conquer.

I saved up those old charts and when I decided I wanted to experiment with different writing styles, I used that fodder for my fiction stories, such as The World's Most Dangerous Woman. 


But I also saw the patterns of the limits to those strategies.

Old Money can't figure out the future, though they are good at feints and ruses to take advantage of human nature.

The problem is with the Internet, people's thinking patterns have now altered, and those old tricks are slowly backfiring, meaning there is less control.

New Money overestimate their cunning. They understand the technology, but technology becomes obsolete. They bank on knowing things about their users, not realizing it is only as good as long as there is goodwill.

Once you lose that goodwill, people snap and revolt, and they become unpredictable.

And if they abandon the platform or jump on to a newer one, a source of intelligence is cut off.

Big Tech is in an absolute panic because they bothered with a small potatoes talking head like Alex Jones.

Far from showing strength, they showed weakness. It took the whole lot of you to censor some loud mouth?


You just made him forbidden fruit.

And old money pinning their hopes on short films on your smartphone. Hollywood's golden era has come and gone.

Journalism's demise has left a void, and we are starting to see other voids forming. They are pinholes, but so was journalism's.

And it imploded.

Journalism didn't inform a public on who their overlords really were.

I love this stupid and ignorant little propaganda poster.


Those who hid behind the "First Amendment" failed to inform you that those who control the wealth in your nation have all sorts of dirty laundry they kept hidden with ease.

The press is not your friend, either.

But that's what happens when you are trained into swallowing any narrative you hear without question.

Posters like that one are simplistic and do not take one grain of reality into account.

When one societal organ dies, it infects other ones as well.

And one upheaval incites another. Always bigger. Always creating another void more unpredictable then the one that sparked it.

When all those billions of meme posters fail to stop the changes, that's when the rage becomes unleashed.

And no ten minute short will bring reason.

I was always surprised that in the last twenty years, there wasn't any alternative methods of journalism created nor any new political thought.

It always went back to the old archaic models.

I found it worrisome. It is the same when you use old antibiotics on a new strain of virus: it doesn't work.

And for a medium that liberally refers to things as going "viral", you'd think someone would get the hint.

Old money, new money, young, old, black, white, male, female: no one was bothering with something genuinely new.

Well, I was, but who am I?

Just someone who sees the shifting tides and as has studied their grains up close, and sees where the grains are going -- and built her own new ship for when the storm finally hits...