My Random Thoughts on the World of Blogging

My intro to blogging

We have to flashback 3 years ago in 2006. This is when I read my first blog online. The blog was titled "Awful Announcing" and it focuses on sports media, especially when announcers screw up or say something questionable.

http://awfulannouncing.blogspot.com/

I had never seen something quite like this online. There were constant updates throughout the day, new videos posted, and it was all in this one little space.

Soon, I began exploring other sports-related blogs and realized that this was becoming pretty popular around the internet. Since then, reading blogs has become part of my daily life. But, interestingly enough, I never ever thought of creating one myself.

That was until September 2009 when my Public Relations class began creating their own blogs.
This is how Kevin's Bacon came about. The name has nothing do with what I write about. You'll rarely see me talking about movies and actors, such as Kevin Bacon. It was just a lame attempt at a catchy name. Which is one of the first characteristics I noticed about blogs as I discoverd them.

There's some off-the-wall names such as The Sports Hernia, The Money Shot, Wizznuttz, and Boner Party. But how much does the name of the blog have to do with the viewership? I can't speak for everybody, but I know that the more crazy the name is, the more likely it is that I am clicking on it.

What I do on my blog

It didn't take too long to figure out what my blog was going to be based on. My life revolves around sports and music with a sprinkle of television and entertainment thrown in. And throughout my first month and-a-half of blogging, there have been a few posts from each of these categories.

One thing I have made sure to consider when posting blogs is that they're not all about one topic. Like everyone else who writes a blog, I want people to come and check it out. And, to my astonishment, not everybody cares about sports. So it wouldn't help if I wrote anti-Toronto Maple Leafs blogs every time.

(But one wouldn't hurt: http://kevinsbacon.blogspot.com/2009/09/toronto-maple-leafs-suck.html)

Which is why I mix up my topics from time to time. I've talked about Seinfeld, Metallica, the Trailer Park Boys, The Beatles and Tiger Woods.

Five things that don't really have a hell of a lot in common.

And I will always remember to make the title of the post catchy so I can hopefully suck the reader in to whatever crap I'm talking about.

Blogging and Rage

I've been in this boat before. Reading an opinion on a certain blog and voicing my displeasure by yelling out loud in front of nobody. When people have strong opinions, they're going to stick by them. And now that you can freely display your opinion on the web, we see these strong opinions on a variety of topics from politics to overpriced objects. I'm not afraid to admit that I get angrier faster than an average person. But I've only posted 2 angry rants on thsi blog. However, I can feel the anger brewing inside.

I am constantly hearing crappy bands popping up the radio station that I love, Power 97.

I am done hearing about Michael Jackson being dead, and Jon and Kate lurking in the news over and over again makes me sick.

My 2 favorite teams, the Montreal Canadiens and the San Diego Chargers are struggling.

Just a heads up to everyone, there are going to be some angry posts in the upcoming month.

No, I don't live in my mother's basement.

An interesting term I've heard journalists use to define bloggers is the whole "people with no life who live in their mother's basement" stereotype. Now I understand that they must get a tad frustrated with the emergence of blogs. But just take a chill pill, media members.

Why don't you just let people voice their own opinions without you guys telling us how many years you've been in the business and how good you are, etc...... We know that you're the professionals. You worry about your own job and we'll worry about pretending to do yours.

A computer?!?!?!?

Try talking about blogs to most people 60 years of age and up. This is what the conversation might look like:

Young man: Have you seen a blog before?

Old man: Yes, I've seen many frogs, especially out near th----

Young man: No, a blog. You know, on the internet?

Old man: ..................

Young man: The worldwide web?

Old man: .....................

Young man: The computer?

Old man: Bah. I don't need a computer. What do I need a computer for. So many bloody buttons. What has th.........

So to wrap it up, I intend to keep this blog going for as long as I possibly can. It makes me feel good to know that someone (hopefully) is viewing my opinions that I have shared for a while.

And if I'm lucky, maybe someone will comment on them and agree with my oddball opinions.

Buyer Beware: Think Before You Drink

Our buyer beware project consisted of our group of 4 investigating reusable water bottles. Water bottles are a pretty hot topic among consumers today and many people use them every single day.

We wanted to find out a few things about resusable water bottles:

1)Their impact on the environment
2)Their health issues
3)Their prices

Probably the three biggest things a consumer is looking for in determining which water bottle they would choose.

Our primary research involved a survey which we distributed to about 20-25 Red River College students to test their knowledge of water bottles and the issues associated with them.

Environmental Impacts

It is obvious that using a reusable water bottle is much more environmentally friendly than using a disposable water bottle. According to back2tap.com, only 23 per cent of water bottles are recycled in the US, and it takes up to 700 years for them to decompose in landfills.

The production of plastic bottles is a large drain on resources, without even considering the environmental impact of their shipment and the fact that less than ¼ of these bottles are recycled, even though the plastic they are made (#1) is the easiest to recycle. Disposable plastic bottles are clearly not an environmentally friendly choice.

As for reusable water bottles, stainless steel is generally considered an environmentally friendly product, as it is 100 per cent recyclable. Aluminum is also 100 per cent recyclable. According to Winnipeg’s recycling information line, however, stainless steel, aluminum and number seven plastic bottles can all be recycled in the city. Therefore, there is not much difference in the environmental impact of aluminum, stainless steel or plastic reusable bottles, as long as all three can be recycled in this area. They are all a much more environmentally friendly consumer choice than disposable bottles.


Health Issues

Bisphenol A, commonly known as BPA, is a chemical that is used to make the plastic hard in objects such as children’s toys, food containers, and water bottles. Public concern over BPA has risen since 2008 when Canada became the first country to ban baby bottles containing BPA. Since then, other products that are known to contain BPA have been called into question, specifically water bottles, according to an article on the CBC website. BPA is most prevalent in polycarbonate water bottles.

Polycarbonate water bottles, and any other hard, plastic food container marked with the recycling number seven is said to contain the most BPA. Nalgene, a plastic container company that also produces polycarbonate water bottles, released a statement on their website saying that they are confident that their products are safe. They cite that Health Canada, the first organization to label BPA a dangerous toxin, admitted in a report that the average adult would need to consume at least 1,000 litres of water in a polycarbonate bottle for the BPA amount to be of significant harm. However, presumably to keep up with the competition (stainless steel and aluminum bottles), Nalgene did release a line of BPA-free water bottles.

Stainless steel water bottles, including the original line, Klean Kanteen, have zero BPA in them and as long as they are kept clean, there should be no negative health effects. Aluminum water bottles, such as SIGG, are also considered to be safe, but this reputation has become tarnished as the liner of the water bottles were revealed to contain BPA, according to a story in the Calgary Herald. SIGG corrected this mistake and released new water bottles that are BPA-free. The BPA-free bottles can be identified by their pale yellow coating, as oppose to the old models that had a copper bronze finish.

Price Comparison


Disposable Plastic

To examine the cost of using disposable plastic water bottles, we will use Aquafina. You can purchase a 24-pack of 500 ml bottles for $9.99. But, if you drink 1 bottle a day for two-and-a-half months, you would have already spent as much money as if you were to buy a reusable SIGG bottle. Disposable plastic is not an economical choice.

Non-Disposable Plastic

Moving on to non-disposable plastic water bottles, we will use the popular Nalgene brand as an example. Nalgene-outdoor.com sells 16 ounce bottles for up to $9.50 and 32 ounce bottles for up to $11.50. For the average person who does not care what their water bottle looks like and who is not concerned about BPA, this is probably the best option due to the low price.

Stainless Steel

According to their site, Klean Kanteen sells 18 ounce bottles for $16.45, 27 ounce bottles for $17.95, and a massive 40 ounce bottle for $25.95. Anyone still concerned about BPA should consider these bottles, as it is allegedly a safe choice.

Aluminum

The aluminum SIGG bottle is one of the most popular brands in the world. According to SIGG.com, 20 ounce bottles (.6 litres) are priced at $21.99 and the 33 ounce bottles (1 litre) are cost $24.99.


Conclusions
The results of our study led us to conclude:

1. BPA seems to have a bad reputation. However, BPA appears to only be harmful to infants, fetuses and pregnant women. There are only trace amounts present in some water bottles, we have determined that it should not be a determining factor in choosing a reusable water bottle.

2. Environmentally speaking, in most regions, aluminum, stainless steel and plastic reusable bottles are all recyclable. They are all much more environmentally friendly alternatives to disposable bottles.

3. There are a variety of reusable bottles, all in different price ranges. While more expensive ones, such as SIGG and Klean Kanteen, are often overpriced simply because of good branding and advertising, a better quality bottle may last longer, if one does not intend on replacing it every year or two.

We recommend that consumers do not worry about health issues or environmental concerns when choosing a reusable bottle, but rather choose a bottle based on what they are willing to pay and how important quality and branding are to them.

Fire the Fans

First off, let me just state that I am not a Winnipeg Blue Bombers fan and I am not a CFL fan. It just so happens that I live in the city of Winnipeg and I am forced to hear about the crap that is the Winnipeg Blue Bombers Football Club.

I planned to talk about this a few weeks ago, when it was more of a hot-button issue. The issue involves the fans of Winnipeg and their beloved head coach named Mike Kelly.

It's clear that these fans of our football club have no real knowledge of sports, even though they would deny that statement. If they knew about sports, they would understand that a team doesn't win games right away with over 20 new players and a new head coach. It just doesn't happen. It doesn't help that the players are complete garbage, but that's another story.

And the Bombers actually did better than they should have by starting the season a respectable 2-3, and after 8 games, sat at 3-5. But then the Saskatchewan debacle happened and the fans unleashed their frustration. Understandable, when you lose 55-10 to your rival.

But the last 3 weeks have seen the Bombers leap up the East standings by winning 3 straight games to push their record to 6-8.

Now back to the fans....

(Let's just clarify that I'm not talking about every single fan. In fact, during the CreComm Bomber assignment, I talked to many Bomber fans who were not very fond of the treatment Mike Kelly was recieving. This is dedicated to those special fans out there who bitch and complain every chance that they get.)

Most CFL experts declared the team was supposed to win 7 to 9 games this year and finish 2nd or 3rd in the East Division. Were the fans expecting a dominating first-place finish and 13 wins? It sure seemed that way when they called for Mike Kelly's head.

The "Fire Mike Kelly" signs appeared at the games.

The Facebook groups were created.

If the Montreal Alouettes had began the season at 3-8, then I would understand the crazy fan reaction, due to the fact that they were supposed to win the East and the Grey Cup this year. The Bombers were expected to be an average team but the fans acted like they were Grey Cup contenders. Do the Oakland Raiders fans hold up "Fire Tom Cable" signs? No, they know their team is bad and they are taking all the losses as best they can.

Face it, the old Bomber club was going nowhere anytime soon and new blood was needed. So in came Kelly and over 20 new players. This club is in rebuilding mode. Rebuilding teams do not win instantly.

Now the team is winning. Should we fire the coach now, guys? I want to talk to the guy that created the Facebook group and just grill the shit out of him. I would make this guy cry.

And all those other people that jumped on the "Fire Mike Kelly" bandwagon, how about you jump on the bandwagon right out of CanadInns Stadium? If this team keeps changing coaches every couple of years, there will not be a Grey Cup parade on Portage and Main for a long, long, time.

I have an idea. When a fan decides to bring signs putting down someone on the team, get security to immediately remove them from the premises. "Fire" the fans. How are the teams going to perform better when somebody is ripping them over and over again?

In conclusion, the Blue Bombers are a terrible football team. But the team is miraculously 6-8.

Who gets the credit? Yes, the players should get a lot of it, but for all of them to completely turn around the season like this in a span of 3 weeks requires a bit of good coaching. Mike Kelly may not be Vince Lombardi but he's not an idiot, either. The negative Winnipeg fans are the real idiots.

It appears the players are finally adapting to Kelly's system and the dividends are paying off.

Hold up those "Fire Mike Kelly" signs now, folks, and see the reaction that you get.

The Best Thanksgiving Ever

As some of you know, Thanksgiving 2009 featured heavy-metal legends Metallica, my favorite band, playing at the MTS Centre to a sold-out crowd of almost 16,000 people.

After careful deliberation, I have determined that this was the best concert I have ever seen. To prove my unbiased opinion, here are a few reasons why:

-Metallica puts their stage smack-dab in the centre of the arena, making every seat in the place that much better and that much closer to the action. Everyone in the arena could feel the heat on their faces during some of the pyro.

-Metallica is great with the crowd, as lead singer James Hetfield constantly talks to them between songs and each band member also has interactions during the show from time to time. They managed to give away at least 50 guitar picks at the end of the show, and they would all throw their drinks into the crowd to give the fans surprising souvenirs

-As for myself, this is the first concert where I sang the entire time. I felt my voice slowly start to go during the 4th of 18 songs during the night. The voice was a little rough Tuesday morning, but it was most definitely worth it.

-Another first: The first time I heard a band play new stuff and virtually everyone stayed and sang the lyrics. Metallica's new album "Death Magnetic" has been out for over a year now, which is a big reason for the love from the crowd, and has featured the band writing songs that remind us of the Metallica from 1986. After the St.Anger debacle in 2004, the fans have warmed up to this material.

(Side Note: I'll rank it their 3rd best album ever)

-So to wrap it up, a majority of the concerts I have attended have featured a show that is one of these two things:

1)The band is up there just for the music and there is not really any pyro or light show happening (I am not saying this is bad at all, just telling you what I see)

2)The band(usually a huge one) brings the light show and the pyro to the stage, yet they barely interact with the fans. They play their show and get the hell of the stage and on to the next city.

(Eg. Eric Clapton said 2 words during his entire Winnipeg show back in March 2007......"Thank You".......that's it)

Metallica was the first band I have seen that didn't fit one of these two circumstances.

What a show.

Here's a little audio:

"Of Course I'm Not Cartwright!!!!!"

Time for another classic Seinfeld moment.

This is from "The Chinese Restaurant" episode which featured Jerry, George and Elaine waiting for a table in a restaurant throughout the entire episode.

The moment you are about to see is one of the most bizarre in Seinfeld history.





Anytime George Costanza freaks out, it is golden.

And the dialogue between Jerry and George at the end of the clip is the icing on the cake.

I have no understanding of the Cartwright part at all. My only guess is that Larry David (co-creator of Seinfeld) had a similar real-life experience and wrote it into the show as he did so many times throughout the series. However, it just seems so bizarre to have actually happened.

This episode confirmed the whole "show about nothing" claim, as it based the entire plot on waiting for a table at a restaurant.