“Since we started GeekBrief.TV, I’ve studied media successes to learn techniques for growing an audience and keeping them interested. Publicly writing something controversial is usually a very good thing to do. You don’t loose as many people as seems logical because people want to stick around to see what you’ll do or say next.” -Neal Campbell

Really… controversy… I guess it works for the people who actually know what they are talking about, people who usually have a good theory that will cause controversy because it clashes with the common watered-down stuff that the people have heard. Also people don’t stick around due to the controversy, they stick around because they light what the guy is saying and they want to hear more. I suspect this is the guy who used to watch “Rikki Lake” and “Jerry Springer” because they’re “controversial.”; I suspect he stopped this because he wanted to look more “smart” then he really is.

“When Cali found out what I did, it obviously it made her angry.  To her, politics is private and divisive. She doesn’t enjoy it in the least. I apologized, but also argued my case about the benefits of the controversy. We had recently had dinner with John C. Dvorak and he explained how he has used controversy in his long career as a tech writer to keep people paying attention. I thought Cali bought-in to the idea of creating controversy, but I was wrong.” -Neal Campbell

Well you’ve been married to her for like, I don’t know, 11 YEARS!!! You should know Cali at the time you impersonated her and posted that tweet about global warming. Not only does it show that you do not respect your wife’s wishes, it also shows that you’re 100% intent on controlling her career. Here’s what I think Neal Campbell was thinking in his head.

“Hmmm… If I impersonate Cali Lewis and if I post a controversial tweet then it will make my wife more famous! And it will also make me “Neal Campbell”, recognizable as the husband of a famous celebrity!” -The Thoughts of Neal Campbell

You seriously couldn’t consult Cali before you did this? Maybe she would do it, maybe she would say not; the point is, you impersonated her without consent for personal gain. And when you realized that Leo banned her from TWiT, then you realized you were wrong; because with that, your business opportunities started to go down the drain.

“She was deeply hurt by what I did. She is the kindest person in the world and she didn’t want to embarrass me. She’s lived with letting everyone believe it came from her because of our relationship.”-Neal Campbell

This is what also angers me. You hurt her, you posted that tweet and after all of that, she defended you… Woman should not have to defend Men from their mistakes; if Men never experiences the consequences brought on by their mistakes then they should not deserve to be called Men, just cowards. Worst of all; instead of apologizing for what you have done, you have instead let Cali take the blame. Not once did she feel obligated to say that it was you who did it; she let many business opportunities slip and it’s all because of you.

“The only way I can make it right is to publicly apologize.  A private apology is utterly insufficient because what I did pushed her into a public, political battle she didn’t want to fight. She lost friends and business opportunities because of what I did. I hope this blog post will mend some of those relationships. I also want to apologize to friends of GeekBrief.TV and followers of Cali’s tweets. The controversy experiment just wasn’t worth it, especially without her participation. I’m sorry.” -Neal Campbell

You know what’s even more insufficient, not apologizing at all… and now you apologize for placing her in a battle she didn’t want to fight in the first place. You know what, you’re not sorry; you did this “experiment” without consulting her, you did this because you thought this would help her career, but mainly you did this entirely for yourself. What surprised me is that Leo Laporte posted the first comment, and after reading that comment I found some words of text which really proves that you’re a shallow person. Note the highlighted words around a big red circle.

According to the highlighted text, he apologized way back then. Which means that Leo had at least enough emotion to contact Cali and apologize to her. You, you waited a year after the incident you caused and then you posted your “public apology”. While some people may hate Leo for his views on Global Warming and his views on the then 2008 presidential campaign. He is at least more human and less shallow then you will ever be in your lifetime. The conclusion, well it’s obvious. Cali divorces you; seriously. In my personal opinion, she does not deserve scum like you. While you guys used to love each other back then, I think it’s different now. When Cali became a micro-celebrity, it made you think “I’m going to make her into a celebrity, and then I shall bask in the fame and move to Hollywood as the husband of a celebrity.” If you were truly in love with her then you should not let the ideas of fame and success affect your head. Continuing on, it’s a “well known fact” that he produces the show… I’m wondering, isn’t this the reason why the show looks unprofessional.

I remember a time when I found a music video for Geoff Smith’s “Hello, Hello” and it was just, horrible. During the duration of the song, he focused on Cali buying the iPhone. While I do admit that the song was good, he could of done a few things; adjust the contrast of the video, shot it at a slower framerate and at least took the effort to make it a proper music video. This is the same for the video podcast itself; I read around the web that “GeekBrief.TV” has a certain “professional” element to it, I found myself to be more wrong. No offense to Cali Lewis on the more recent episodes but the ones she did with her husband in 2009 are in my opinion campy, unprofessional, cheap-looking and horrible. Not once did the guys even consider getting the lighting right, the obvious production errors fixed up or even the presentation right. Now while I’m mainly interested in the news when I’m looking at a podcast, I consider the presentation to be the most important thing I look for. Whether the host is likable, relatable or knowledgeable, and whether it will make me want to come back for more. I should not have to be focusing on obvious errors such as the ones found in your special you produced on “Leo Laporte”.

I just loved how you overlayed a title over another title, and I absolutely loved how you did not take more then 1 camera into the cottage. I swear that as I watched the videos you produced, I saw Leo suddenly get less clear and muddy throughout the video. I don’t know, you did not have the skill to have a camera directly facing Leo? Superproducer my bottom, you are the tech version of Solar, a guy who claims to care about her only to use and abuse Guru for his own personal gain; and Guru was lead to believe that there was nothing he could do to stop him, he was even forced to perform on stage despite Guru’s health, all for his own benefit. And the quality of the product, there was no effort put into the product; it was all rushed just to cash in. Sure the music’s good but the product feels like there hasn’t been any care put into it.

Also, his political views aren’t really the ones anybody political would recommend. Sure he’s against Obama but for one reason, what he’s going to do to his wallet. Not universal healthcare, not the fact that he isn’t really all that different from George W. Bush, but money. In this world, the rich control everything while the poor have to survive off of scraps. The world loves people who can make money in an economy like this and continue to make money, they are the ones who will survive into the future because they can afford all of the life extension technology. If his political views consist of only what he’s trying to do to his wallet then that’s pretty shallow in my book. I mean just because banks aren’t accepting mortgage offers like they used to after George W. Bush ruined the economy, that is no reason why you should start going all political. I mean just because they denied you for the mortgage (which could be for many reasons; bad credit score, history of underpayments, the fact that they think you will not pay it back in full) does not mean that the world is going to end, in fact it should of made you do things like get more sponsors for your tour or at least rent the damn bus; not go all political just because someone denied your mortgage application.

And closing out my argument is how he tried to save his marriage. Apparently he has gone to 2 support groups because Christians don’t believe in psychology. My advice; they should of just saw a psychologist to at least try to resolve their issues instead of a support group. Which leads me to my next issue; he should of just admitted her love for her instead of trying to find out what’s wrong and fixing it. You couldn’t of just walked up to Cali Lewis and say “I love you with all my heart, I know that I shouldn’t of placed you into a battle based on a hunch, but everybody learns from mistakes and we, we could overcome any mistakes if we stick together.” He couldn’t even do that? I thought you were a Christian… Which Christian represses their feelings of love for trying to find out what’s wrong with the marriage. Additionally, he even claims that he realizes that he has been reborn and now realizes that the marriage he had was magical… During the 11 years he was married to her, did you ever think that you think the marriage was magical? I guess he doesn’t know what he got until it got up and walked away from her, now he’s talking about how he’s reborn, how he wants his wife back and spiritual BS which I just plain don’t believe in (sorry believers of religion.). Neal, the day you started becoming a bad husband was when in my opinion, you started to use her for your own personal gain and when you started to subconsciously think you were bigger then god. Neal Campbell you are a shallow, ignorant, pathetic piece of human flesh and you should of never gone onto her Twitter in the first place and posted that message in the first place, and that is why you fail.

Mostly he is insane, the reason being is that it’s censorship, meaning that anything objectable, or anything that could be harmful, dangerous to children or might promote terrorism is immediately blurred out or removed as soon as possible. I understand that there are many guides on the internet that show people how to do these things and mostly 30% or more of the internet is potentially offensive, but the fact that anything could be considered a threat to terrorism is partially stupid. The reason why I use partially stupid is because there are mostly some things that could be used for terrorism that we don’t know about yet but come on, we’re mostly prepared for a terrorist attack that hasn’t happened yet or possibly will not happen. I understand the safety of everyone and the thought of preventing terrorism once and for all and this might have a very, very small chance of working but I think the bill is stupid and the guy doesn’t have an idea how it works, though I do applaud his bravery.

Think about it, if a normal people were to be looking for a hospital of some sort, let’s say that they’re sick or that they need urgent attention. They would find that the hospital is blurred out for some reason, prompting some confusion as to why an average hospital would be blurred out. Or if they needed directions of a school of some sort, they would find it blurred and would also prompt confusion as to why the school is blurred out. I don’t know why a hospital or a school would need to be blurred out considering that as said above, it’s a top down map only and Street View does not allow you to view the campus or the back of a hospital. Furthermore if there were an impeding Terrorist attack, they would most likely be able to evacuate everyone safely and be able to defuse the bomb or shoot down the missile or whatever the terrorists might be doing. Also they would need blueprints of some sort because they would not know the interior or the structure of the building as Google Maps and mostly other map programs only show the roof.

Also, because the governor issuing the bill might not know that the bill applies to the US only, which means that the aformented things listed above will only be blurred in the United States and any other potential terrorist targets outside of the US will not be blurred. If the governor realizes that Google Maps may be used to plan Terrorist attacks in the US may be used to plan attacks in other countries such as Asia, Africa, South America, Russia, and other foreign countries. I’m not saying that I support the attacks on other countries but I’m pointing out a minor flaw in his bill. It would be that America is potentially safer and the other countries are even more vulnerable and valuable since it would be easier to plan out using Google Maps or any other mapping program that he might mention. Additionally, this would lead to some invasion of some other country or a crippling of another country of which a terrorist group could do for some reason or another.

More importantly, the plan of blurring out parts of a map is considered censorship to some. Let’s say that you liked something, something that was enjoyable, influential and risky, something that was released long ago. Let’s say that you saw the same thing a few years later, your favorite parts of the book are either changed, toned down or removed entirely. That’s what censorship is like, forcing people to remove or change the things they say in order to appeal to people who are either overreacting, are offended or believe that what they’re saying aren’t right at all. Mostly this feels wrong because people are going to be in a uproar because the government or a bill forced Google or Yahoo to blur out or remove any offensive, inappropriate or classified content, people feel that the way the internet delivers content is screwed up because companies and groups are confused by how they should deliver it and how it might cause an uproar or something.

I appreciate what he’s trying to do but I don’t think this bill is ever going to work. For one, it’s forcing companies to censor their content which people will complain over because the internet is supposed to be a free way to express opinions, two is that how is this going to help prevent terrorism since mostly Google doesn’t have any serious terrorism planning abilities, the blurred out areas are going to be obvious to terrorists, and it’s limited to companies located in California, which means that a company like Microsoft will have clear shots of those areas and it may be used as a terrorist tool itself, and it only covers the US which means other countries are not covered as described above, also the terrorists could use paper maps and phone books to find out places to strike. Three is that it’s poorly planned out, I mean if he truly wanted to prevent terrorism, he would want to take the issue to the United Nations and let them make a decision of whether to blur their terrorist targets or not.

I’m not saying that I support the bill, but with the emphasis on censorship and the fact that it’s poorly planned, I don’t think that it will ever work out. I personally think that there is no probable way to stop terrorism without causing a panic or some controversy but I think that some places are properly prepared after 9/11 to be ready to face this threat should it ever become a reality again, though I do hate the censorship that did come after 9/11 what with shows cutting scenes that involve buildings crashing and all that and that was a major blow for TV shows and media altogether. But I don’t think that maps should ever have to blur out anything just because it might cause some potential harm, mostly all censorship has done was sprout up paranoia and other kinds of fear because what they’re hiding or what they’re doing to free speech or it could be inappropriate for children or whatever insane reason there is and it’s brought no good for everyone except the people who think that it’s right.

Now before I go on I must say that I do not watch FOX News, I am not a regular government believer, in fact my father is an activist and has really thoughtful words to say about politics, the government and anything altogether, nor do I believe in the propaganda. Mostly these truth sites force you in by saying “The government may seem nice on the outside but there is loads of corruption and things the government does not want you to see in the inside. Stop believing the government’s lies and let us show you the truth that they do not want you to see.” Now that’s how they grab you but what you see inside is more lies, lies even much more deceptful then the government.

What you see is a lot of christan propaganda, you know with every truth-seeker being a christan and all, they’d probably connect with god not approving with the government doing the things that they want you to believe that they’re doing. But what they’re doing is not what they’re even doing at all. They claim that they’re poising you with common household materials to make you dumber and make you believe everything the government is doing is a good thing, they claim that AIDS and HIV are curable and a scare tactic that is used to convince people to get the shots which somehow introduces a chemical that changes your body to make you much more closed-minded, also debatable is the claim that you can cure AIDS and HIV naturally and that you get sick because of all of the medicine they give you. Please, if AIDS and HIV is so “curable” then Eazy-E would be alive by now and cranking out hit rap records.

First of all, how can the government include chemicals that taste exactly like the food it taste likes? It would take a lot of money to engineer the chemical to have the exact same taste as the billion types of food out on the market today. And why would they waste millions of dollars trying to get the people to dumb down and believe in the propaganda? I mean aren’t people already stupid enough to believe in anything, as evidence by the millions of idiots flooding the idiot today believing in anything told to them, mostly they’d be the target demographic they’d want to spread the “truth” to. Besides, with everybody under their control, how will they create the illusion of the “American Life”, spending most of their money trying to control them and all? It’s just blatantly stupid.

Also, answer me this question. How in the world could your body get sick from medicine? They act as if the medicine taken doesn’t allow people to procrastinate, reduces their brain function and makes your white blood cells weaker. And they blame it as the basis for the common cold, flu, basically every disease there is. I’ve taken lot of medicine and I have not gotten sick, once. This reveals another thing with “truth-believers”, they’ll do anything to get you to believe in the truth, even if it is deceiving you. If you look at most of the “proof” they have, you’ll see that it’s very, very fake. Here’s how they make you “believe”.

1. Create a claim so over-the-top that it’s got to be real.
2. Subject won’t believe so it’s forced on him over and over again
3. Proof created using Photoshop or staged as a video “documentary”
4. Subject begins to worry, brain starts to think that it’s real
5. Subject actually believes that the claim is real
6. Profit!

Simple right, simple forcing fake proof like Barack’s voting record which was obviously created in Photoshop to suggest that he’s the same like George W. Bush, at least McCain was actually twisted and involved in a Ponzi scheme where he stole from the banks a lot of money. This is just suggesting that every president is the same corrupt, world ruining guy just wanting the seat of power, wanting to get rid of freedom, wanting it all for the money, that’s just crazy stupid. Also to make you believe that they don’t even care about the first amendment, they put themselves of situations of controversy… By stepping up to the office, saying that they’re protesting, then change the story that they’re not protesting and that they’re just at a disagreement, and get this, they actually jump cut it to make it appear that they’ve been arrested for violating the 1st Amendment. Wow, it’s almost like the government is behind these videos.

Also, subliminal advertising. Really, really, really stupid. To think that companies, actual companies, could insert subliminal advertising in their advertisement. First of all, the human eye is able to detect every frame of video or what they’re seeing, so I’m sure they’ll be able to detect the “subliminal advertising” on the “18th frame”. I have nothing against advertising, but these people make a big deal of it. I’d admit that the commercials are too long, take up too much time and also take up too much space, but they’re not forcing you to buy the products, it’s not like the advertising is telling you to actually buy the product. Besides, without advertisements, companies wouldn’t be able to make much money, websites wouldn’t be able to support itself and local places would likely close up without anyone knowing it exists, how much they cost and the wonderful experience you could have there.

Now imagine a world as these people who believe in the “truth” imagine it to be. Imagine if albums like Nine Inch Nail’s “Year Zero” Nas’ “Untitled”, Young Jeezy’s “The Recession”, Metallica’s “…And Justice for All” and Megadeth’s “The System has Failed” never existed. There would be no expression, no freedom of speech, because that would be restricted in a perfect world. People aren’t being allowed to do what they do, people following a forced regimen, people being controlled and forced with much more propaganda then there is. All other religions not existing, no chaos, no balance, everything would just be love, happiness, and perfect. Everything would be same on the radio and the news and people would probably go insane from all of the peace and order.

That’s the kind of world that could theoretically exist but considering that every person is genetically different and probably has different needs, then the world would not probably work out for everyone. It may not matter for everyone but I am tired of these “truth groups” going out and spreading lies about everything just so they can destroy the government and have her very own way. I know that the government lies about some things and try to cover it up, but under the Obama administration, I think that’ll stop. Goodbye people trying to launder money and goodbye USA trying to get Oil so they can get a financial benefit.” I feel that the War on Iraq was mostly for Oil because mostly they want to control all of the Oil and get all of the profit. Anyways, that’s it for me…

Karras out!