Thursday Goodies: Porn as a leading indicator, Netflix prize, Distribution roulette podcast, and more...

- It's always fun to debate whether porn is a "leading indicator" for the way other media will go.... and this NY Times story will get you thinking. Given that much of the porn industry is abandoning narrative for short, "chunkified" content, is that the wave of the future? From the piece:

Vivid, one of the most prominent pornography studios, makes 60 films a year. Three years ago, almost all of them were feature-length films with story lines. Today, more than half are a series of sex scenes, loosely connected by some thread — “vignettes” in the industry vernacular — that can be presented separately online. Other major studios are making similar shifts.

- Seems like a team of programmers has managed to improve Netflix's movie recommendation algorithm by more than 10 percent, potentially winning the $1 million Netflix prize.

- CineVegas just posted this great distribution podcast, where a panel of experts talk about how they'd handle distribution of several different kinds of indie films, like an "edgy, sexy film," a "subculture doc," or a "quirky character doc." (You can read IndieWire's summary of the panel, too.)

- Here's an interesting read on why Hulu succeeded in attracting an audience, while other sites like Veoh and Joost didn't. I'd note that Hulu still isn't a notable financial success, given the cost to produce all that network programming (nor is YouTube.)

- The LA Times is reporting from the annual Allen & Co. Sun Valley summer camp for media moguls, where at least some of the talk is about monetizing content.

- I did an interview to promote Fans, Friends & Followers with the music site zed equals zee, Their first question:

Q. So, one of the themes that I took from the book is the ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’ approach – that there is a diversity of ways to use the Internet to share your creative efforts. Anything that you think is an absolute necessity? Anything that you would recommend against?

A. One thing that’s a necessity: carving out the time and the energy to spend cultivating your fan base, and communicating with fans. There should definitely be a dedicated person in any band who’s responsible for audience-building (that’s a term I like better than “marketing”), or maybe someone you know who isn’t in the band but really understands the Web and social media well. I think in the 20th century, your label took care of all that stuff. In the 21st century, it’s your responsibility. One thing I recommend against is building a super-fancy, expensive, Flash-heavy Web site that no one can update except for the original designer. I can’t tell you how many bands do that — and the result is that fans visit your Web site once or twice, but never come back because it never changes. (And people assume that because your last gig listed is in 2007 that you must have broken up!) Even if you have a bare-bones MySpace page or blog, it’s better to have something you can continually add content to than something better-looking that stays static.