Lost in the Context Shuffle

I was reading a great article from the Washington Post last Sunday, titled "Pearls Before Breakfast" by Gene Weingarten. The article studied the effects of our busy lives, more specifically, an exquisite what-if scenario of placing one of the world's musical virtuosos, playing one of the finest crafted instruments ever made, performing some of the most heralded compositions known to man. In this case, it was violin impresario Joshua Bell, playing the Gibson ex Huberman while performing Bach's "Chaconne" and Schubert's "Ave Maria."

While the otherwise momentous event would have had people flown in from the world over, this performance took place in one of the most mundane of settings - the morning rush hour in the Washington D.C. subway, with Bell as street musician, violin case open to the rushing commuters, asking for whatever pocket change a person could muster within the 3-second sprint past this mere annoyance.

The performance, staged in January, had the reporter and his editors worried. The concern was Bell, a highly visible entertainment personality, would attract more than his share of onlookers - in fact, a small disruption of the daily commute might be at the cause of this experiment. But, fortunately (or unfortunately for some), during his performance of 45 minutes in length, only a few stopped, and even less recognized him.

The results are still in question, but I feel it was an appropriate result (particularly as a subway commuter myself). Out of context, the superstar wasn't so super - at least not to the passer-bys of the urban setting. Point being, even if the best of the best isn't presented in the right light, few will notice.

I bring this up as a perfect analogy to our beloved network of connected machines. Its become an agonizing reality on the internet - the noise-to-signal ratio is way on high. Is there another Joshua Bell playing to our eyes and ears? As the net comes increasingly saturated with all types of media, can we rely upon the collective to single out an incredibly gifted Machinima artist?

There's been recent discussion in the Machinima community as to how to get noticed. Its in an interesting quandary, on a stage where everyone has the same point of visibility. In this age of the infoglut, what's most powerful? Marketing, be it grass-roots/guerilla, or traditional to sites and blogs? Or the viral nature of the web - the word-of-mouse - that brings our attention to the "good" - in hopes that others will notice. For me, there's the middle ground - the editor. Once an editor gains the audience trust and respect (unless its already established), they become a go-to person to listen in for their opinions.

We all have our trusted sources of information, be it a friend, a reliable acquaintance, a website. Even our Machinima Festival, and the Mackies help on this front - looking at works over the course of a year, and selected by an experienced committee. The current range of sites that host Machinima are simply archiving works, and letting the ratings and user input define what's best. Additionally, sites that cater to the public ranking of "newsworthy" (Digg and others) has become the focus and filter of where to look. While I feel these serve a purpose, I also believe sites of trusted content (and somewhat subjective) will take focus again. Editorial input will give us yet another filtering option - for people of certain experience to say "Hey, here's one to watch!" Right now, bloggers serve this need to a degree - but usually don't have the same visibility that content hubs do (though some such as Robert Scoble will be an exception).

Machinima will hopefully have a foothold strong enough for sites (dedicated and entertainment hubs) to showcase works of notice, and apply editorial voice to help rise the signal above the noise. Whether that comes from a collective voice or from a respected individual remains to be seen. But until we are able to showcase that talent properly, only a few will stop to look.