I know, it’s a cliche now, but I still think it’s an important bandwagon to be on.

Here’s how it works: you go to the ‘feed the duck’ page and fill in all the fields with whatever you like. Do this step a few times if you can.

Next, you go to the synopsis page and see the results. The system takes all the things everyone’s input, randomizes them, and makes a story synopsis out of the parts. It probably makes very little logical sense, but that’s important.

Next, you take that synopsis and turn it into a story outline. I’ve got a nifty little page built that lets you click on various sentence fragments to edit them. This way, you can make your very own story out of a distributed set of craziness.

Finally, you can take that story and turn it into whatever you like. It’s easy, it’s fun, and it doesn’t cost anything. Except maybe your soul. I’ll get back to you on that.

This process is basically how professional screenwriters create scripts for TV, except I’ve 2.0′d it by using AJAX! Cha-ching!

Really, this is all just for fun. So have fun. And send me any cool things you dream up.

The Friends of Canadian Broadcasting go even further, maintaining that “Canadian broadcasting policy should recognize new delivery systems such as MP3 players, satellite radio receivers, and interactive Web clients as part of the new Canadian broadcasting system. If the commission is unable or unwilling to regulate their content, it should be charged with ensuring that a percentage of the revenue they generate from the distribution of these services is circulated into the system.”

I like the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting. I agree with a lot of what they say, most of the time. But in this case, they’re looking for cash that doesn’t belong to them. The revenue generated from new media enterprises should not be circulated into the system, because the system is not built to support new media.

Could the system be adapted to handle both major broadcasting and on-the-fly online entertainment? Let’s think of how that works: I am a webcaster in Vancouver. I am required to send 10% of my revenues to the Canadian Television Fund to support Canadian Content. Of course, in return for that, I’ll want to be able to apply for funding from the CTF, because otherwise I’m being unfairly taxed with nothing to gain.

To meet CTF standards, I have to meet all sorts of requirements that push my production budget from $50,000 to close to $200,000… because I’m no longer allowed to do things cheaply or quickly. The bureaucracy involved in TV production is staggering… everybody at every stage along the way wants their piece of the pie, and it inflates costs beyond what a rational person would expect. And even worse, if I have my special effects team in Holland (which is plausible for a webcaster), and my writer’s in London, all of a sudden I don’t even qualify for CTF funds at all.

So now if I can’t find another $150,000 to finance my project, I can’t do it. Or I can do it without CTF money for $50,000, and give away 10% of my profits for nothing. Either way, I’m getting a bad deal, and I’ll either give up on the idea, or leave the country to get it done. The current make-your-own-luck online environment will be replaced with paperwork and forced mediocrity, because that’s what Canadian Content is all about.

New media is the one area where regulation has not yet managed to suck the innovation out of entertainment. If the CRTC gets into the game now, all they’ll be doing is lining the pockets of the established players, and locking out the next generation of content creators, who stand a good chance of making Canadian Content accessible and plentiful within our borders, and beyond.

* Stems from my younger daughter asking at dinner last night: “Daddy, can we watch the Ninja tonight?”. I swear she only saw episode 10. Honest.

However, I will say this: I think agents for various people in the web world should stop looking for big Old Media deals and start looking for corporate partners to beef up the online presence. Looking at the budgets and salaries out there, you can get paid a nice hefty amount for appearing on a weekly TV show, but if your vidcast were sponsored for a year by one company at a rate comparable to just a single primetime TV ad spot, you would make a lot more cash, and have more freedom.

I guess it’s the fame thing, too, though. People want to know people know them. If you believe Nielsen ratings are accurate, vidcasts still have a ways to go before they are in the same league… but the gap is closing fast.

So to some enterprising former-advertising-exec out there: start a new business connecting vidcasters with sponsors, take a cut, and become rich quick. All the other agents are looking in the wrong direction!

Now I guess the big question is whether the next generation of shows will be made for millions of dollars, elevating the current web class, or if this means the slow demise of the hugely-expensive broadcast show? Probably somewhere in the middle, I reckon. Hopefully, anyway.

Details of the project are still being hammered out, but Congdon said she’s aiming for a multiplatform property that will be integrated with original video content online. She intends to write and star in the series.

The word “multiplatform” makes me cringe these days (it’s like “pervasive in 2000), but other than that, this sounds like a great gig. I’m interested to see how far HBO is willing to go down the multiplatform road, especially with a New Media player’s show. Their recent efforts have felt a lot like “the web’s a promotional medium only”, rather than giving it any kind of real weight. Hopefully this’ll help turn the tide.

Here in Hollywood-land-world, we’ve moved away from that motif, because stars have carefully-crafted auras they want to protect at all costs… and besides, no one’s able to get that many big names together anyway. A key prerequisite for this kind of entertainment is that the cost of engaging the participants has to be low enough that you can afford to have a room full of celebs in the first place. In a world with $20M+ pay days for ho-hum actors, it becomes less and less viable.

Vidcast stars are ideal for this model. They’re already humble, they’re already a bit unstable, and by and large they’re not paid enough to reasonably demand a lot of cash to appear. What they need is exposure, a chance to impress, and (bluntly put) another easy outlet they might turn into a second (or third, or fourth) hit show.

Right now these stars are working alone or in pairs, designing a unique look and feel that best showcases their talents, and doing the true Internet schtick by not deferring to some controlling entity. There is not, as of yet, an NBC of the web world. Every vidcaster is an island, and they like it that way. But perhaps the desire to build and maintain so many unique little stages has blinded people to the value of ALSO getting together on a common stage for a time. It’s not a question of replacing the independent streak, it’s a question of complementing it. Enhancing it.

Andrew Baron, producer of Rocketboom, likes to imagine that the objective of this New Media world should be to do one thing, charge a lot for it, and live a life of luxury… basically emulate Hollywood until you are Hollywood. But Hollywood’s current business model is in grave danger, and a smarter direction would be to embrace a sustainable plan that keeps everyone gainfully employed while doing things they enjoy. Otherwise you’re desperately scrambling to get aboard a sinking luxury cruise-ship. The pretty chandelier won’t look quite as glamourous at the bottom of the ocean.

The current stars of the vidcast world need to work together more often, in different combinations, with different themes, to create a viable alternative to TV. I currently watch over 3 hours of vidcasts a week, and that’s only because there isn’t much else that interests me right now. Stick Ze Frank, Alex Albrecht, the Ninja and others in a room with beer, and have Amanda Congdon as host… you’d make hours of great comedy with ease, and have a massive audience to boot.

The key to success in the New Media world is not simply to develop new styles that Hollywood hasn’t imagined yet… it’s to re-examine the styles they discarded as they became as bloated as they are today.

If blogs are the op-ed pages of the 21st century, and some of the most interesting commentary originates there, you can’t automatically dismiss those pieces as amateur garbage without reading them. I’ve read great posts submitted to Digg that were dugg down by folks who obviously didn’t read the source, saying “personal blog, no digg”. While it’s true that many personal blogs spew crap all over the place (like me!), you should at least give the first paragraph a read before you pass judgement on something.

I find it funny how people tout Digg as the replacement for big media newspapers, putting control of the stories back in the hands of the public… and at the same time they refuse to grant the slightest shred of credibility to writers who don’t collect a paycheque from old media enterprises like the New York Times.

Or, put another way: don’t judge a book by its cover, and certainly not just by the URL you found it at.

Update: Excellent follow-up and further exploration at isolationism.com. I didn’t actually read it all, I just wanted to be the first to link to it.

Update 2: I kid! I kid!

Update: Okay, I’m weak, I updated the wiki and made it live. I hate you all for forcing it on me. (I may or may not be talking to the voices in my head)