Fads seem to come and go in waves, just as babies being born within generational circles. During the process every one adapts to the latest pediatric care trend to facilitate a healthy baby. As the little one grows, everyone baby proofs their home for each visit of the toddler. And, children’s films and theme parks are frequented once the preschool years hit.

I’m amazed at how much our lives change by our own choices in order to encourage the next generation. Even our finances shift to help improve their lives and help prepare them for outrageous college fees (An estimated $300,000 for those born this year).

Society doesn’t see things in the same way. Rather than helping the child to be a kid and kept innocent during their early years of development, commercial companies push to develop them as their own brand baby. The race to drive them into being the ideal consumer is launched at birth, especially with corporate America attempting to preprogram children in time for their critical job of driving family buying decisions once they become teens.

Disney studios determined that a push every seven years introduces another group of growing children into the world of Disney and forms them as a brand junky for life. I recently read that in the county where I live allowances are up to $40 a week, driven by the commercial explorations our kids are surrounded by daily. Even Coke and Pepsi get exclusive contracts in our kids’ schools for the sake of building life long brand junkies.

So the question I have is, do we teach our kids about how the media manipulates their buying decision so they can make better choices, or do we keep them away from the onslaught of commercialism as long as possible? Since I can’t be with my kids all of the time, I chose to educate them on advertising, public relations, and product placement.

The stealthiest form of advertising is called gorilla advertising. In adult circles, it’s when a company hires two sexy women to sit in a bar all night flirting with men and drinking their product, or smoking their cigarettes. In Jr. high, it shows up in the form of a popular guy who is given a free cool product to show off at school, driving dozen of purchases over the next two months. Junior clothing is the biggest influx of gorilla advertising.

Those who get sucked in to buying $120 jeans are most often the recipient of being targeted by well planned gorilla advertising. It is so subtle that most people buy into the concepts and dreams without one thought of having been targeted.

When I was a senior in high school and the leader of the drum section, a new type of drumstick came out that was black. It was original, artistic and a result of a new cutting edge production technique. I was given a couple new pairs by the music store and told to use them in all of the bands and orchestras I played in, which back then included four groups. The result was numerous purchases that led to hundreds of dollars in add on sales.

The manufacturer gave every music store a couple free pairs to be given away in gorilla advertising. I later learned that every pair generated about $2,000 in various sales for the store and $600 for the manufacturer. The promotional costs to the manufacturer were only $0.50 per pair of sticks, generating a great return on its money. Everyone won, except for those people who had a fine pair of sticks that didn’t need replacing.

Even the two ladies that invented the Post It notes used gorilla advertising. After the executives of 3M turned down their idea, they started using the Post It notes internally. After a few short months, the demand for more notes was raised to the point where 3M was forced to manufacture the product for their internal use. It wasn’t long before it became a steady seller at office supply locations and department stores.

The most successful brand managers take advantage of the wise proverb, “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.” The question is, at what point do you stop changing your life to fit the child’s and begin training the child about how to make decisions in the commercial world we live in?

It might not be wise to let your child figure things out for themselves during their early childhood years, as corporations are ready to train up every child. That’s why I taught my kids how the media worked and hoped that they would assess every message before accepting it. After all, the corporations weren’t going to stop broadcasting their messages on TV, radio or in the schools.

The proverb is true and corporations want to get to every child before the competition. There are even political indoctrination programs for young kids in order to submerge them in certain philosophies before they become teens. The key question is, are you an active parent or grandparent that is helping your kid or grandchild to understand family wishes and heartfelt desires, or are you leaving it up to corporations?

Copyright © 2011 By CJ Powers
Photo © Olga Sapegina – Fotolia.com

There is one thing that drives the devastation in the corporate world that is warned about in the religious world – Unbelief. When employees lose the corporate vision or leaders forget to paint the vision, employees change their behaviors and become less productive. We’ve seen the effects of it many times and will soon see it again with the reduction of service at the post office.

It amazes me that during the generation of service, the postal office has determined the best way to reduce its expenses is to slow down its service – Can they get any slower? I’m a firm believer that the postal service doesn’t have a visionary encouraging workers to be faster and thereby reducing the need for certain expenses. After all, visionaries are always about finding ways to make things better, cheaper and faster.

The total blame can’t be put on the corporate visionary, as it’s the people who decide what they want to believe. This is true when it comes to following any of society’s bibles. Some follow the “green” bible with all diligence in recycling, the avoidance of fossil fuels and managing organic composes. Others subscribe to the bible of political correctness. And, many hold to the teachings of the Holy Bible.

Regardless of ones perspective, it takes belief to follow any bible religiously. It takes even more belief to evangelize one’s viewpoints in today’s society. Proselytizing someone with a mantra about carbon emissions takes even more belief due to our love of cars. After hitting many brick walls of apathy, few will continue to get the word out.

If we were to take the lead from the religious world, we would know that “sin” is the greatest hinderance of employees fulfilling the corporate vision. While many would suggest that sin in the corporate sense includes the distractions of the marketplace, I’m a firm subscriber to it being about disbelief. After all, in the religious world sin is more about not trusting God to do what he says he will do, which leads to people taking life upon themselves and choosing a vice for comfort rather than turning to God for their answers.

This unbelief also holds true in the corporate world. If we don’t buy-in to the corporate vision or it wasn’t painted for the employees, most will eventually gravitate to anything that the crowds are doing. This mentality comes from the idea that it must be right if so many people have made the decision to do it. Unfortunately, fortune 100 greatness has only come about through true evangelists that stand their ground in spite of the sense of isolation that they live with.

Steve Jobs was one of those evangelists who was fortunate enough to draw in a group of true believers to his products, like the iPad I’m typing this blog on while riding the train into Chicago. Not only did I become a believer in Apple products that are easy to operate, but I’ve made it a part of my lifestyle. I find myself using my iPad 1-2 hours a day. Can you imagine the results of people spending 1-2 hours a day developing religious morals or sharing compassion?

Regardless of which bible we follow in life, the real question is do we believe in it to the point of making life changing decisions as a result of it?

The test of any belief system is how we act it out. In the corporate world our actions reveal our beliefs. The people we follow or trust, and the action steps we take toward our objectives or into the minutiae that doesn’t matter, all speak to our belief system. Just as religion drives us to live moral upright lives, the corporate financial and innovation goals drive us to improve our services and products through better quality, cheaper pricing, and faster delivery and production cycles.

I’m not convinced the postal service has a bible, let alone subscribes to any visionary. But what about us? What of our actions reveal what vision we follow? Do we believe in it enough to evangelize it like Steve Jobs? A moment of self reflection on our actions can quickly bring perspective to what is in our hearts and minds. Frankly, I think it’s time we make the decision to walk away from apathy and put some energy behind what we believe in.

There are several types of auditions for film and television, but the most common is the screen test. The actor is given a page or two of a specific scene that will reveal at least one aspect of their character. They will then be given ample time (about 30 minutes) to review the script pages and rehearse their lines.

When its time to film the actor, the director will review the character and the scene. The typical items discussed are the character’s “moment before,” their “fighting fors” and their goal or motivation. Sometimes a director will also review the conflict within the scene, but that is typically left for the actor to determine, as the shifting of power at key points within the dialog is up to interpretation.

Sometimes the actor will be auditioned with an actor that is already contracted on the picture. Other times, they will play across from a neutralized actor – One who reads the lines in a monotone, so as to not give the actor any interpretation of the scene.

The goal of the director during the screen test is to learn if he can work with the actor. To do so, he will give various adjustments to the actor and learn if he gets what he is looking for. The interaction between the actor and the director makes up 75%of the casting decision. After all, only those who can act are brought in for screen tests.

The shooting set up typically includes a camera and a boom microphone. Lights are seldom a part of the screen test, although many studio pictures that use lights will also incorporate costumes and sets. The camera and boom mic help to establish the right level of acting and response (voice volume and movement) from the actor.

If the screen test is treated like a stage audition, the actor’s motions and voice will be too big and give an inaccurate reading of his performance. This may completely undermine the process of the screen test, but will still give the director an opportunity to interact with the actor.

Unfortunately, few independent casting calls are set up to give the director what is needed to determine who should be cast. Auditions turn more into a competition of personalities and a measurement of who has the longest list of credits. This type of audition typically finds an upset director well into the shoot once he realizes a couple of the actors are very wrong for the roles, as he watches the roles conform to the actor’s whims or his desire for a certain type of clip for his demo reel.

The key to a good screen test is to create a shooting environment that includes interaction between the director and actor. They need to learn if they gel and if the actor can give the subtle performance that the director requires in those difficult character development scenes. Few independent directors actually walk away with this type of knowledge from the screen test, as they don’t have a clue of how to conduct the audition.

I auditioned last Saturday for a role in a webisode that is to be shot in the spring. The audition was handled like a stage play, but taped for later review. There was no interaction with the director during the performance, nor was any instruction given. This typically suggests they were just looking for who has some form of raw talent for future projects, rather than looking for specific things for the webisodes. In fact, they even mentioned the myriad of projects they have in queue.

The audition was a common one for theater, which is very uncommon for screen. Each actor was asked to prepare a monologue rather than working with script pages from the story. The camera was far enough back to cause the actor to project his voice, rather than giving the intimate performance that cinema requires. Stage audition styles are actually more common than you’d think with independents, because most only have high school experience conducting an audition for the stage.

My directing experience suggests that a five-minute conversation with an actor can give me more of a glimpse into his performance than what the “cattle call” stage type of audition would give me. After all, cinema is about intimacy, not projection. It is also about interaction with the director with every performance, unlike the stage actor who only prepares with the director and then performs on his own with every open curtain.

The stage audition style is also detrimental to the actors, who need the immediate feedback of their performance. While amateur directors tend to only suggest improvements, actors need verification that the director got the exact performance and shot he needed or the actor’s performance will start to waver and weaken as shooting continues.

The actor is counting on the director to only keep the one take that makes them look good and will trust the director to tell them when that shot is achieved. The actor needs to take the guessing work out of the shoot, so everyone can perform at their peak. This also holds true for screen tests.

The silent director is the one who actors should avoid like the plague, especially during screen tests. After all, if the director can’t interact during the inexpensive audition process, how will he interact when he’s burning thousands of dollars an hour during a shoot and has to meet a deadline. It won’t bode well for the actor.

Copyright © 2011 By CJ Powers
Photo © seandeburca – Fotolia.com