Do yourself a favor and watch it with the sound off. Apparently it's really old but hey, at least YouTube is working! I enjoyed it a great deal and laughed very, very hard because this is pretty much exactly how I feel today.

An alleged employee of The Box told Down By The Hipster that the club is drastically cutting costs: cutting performers' pay, firing the band and the stagehands, cutting performances, and hiring cheaper doormen and performers. Well, that would make The Box pretty much like every other club in NYC. As long as there are twins left to do sex toy fetish shows, there is hope.

[DBTH. Pic via]

The Wrap is reporting that the studio already has nixed the scene where LaToya eats sushi off a naked Latino gardener and Bruno fiddles with her PDA. Supposedly this kind of extremely last-minute (the film comes out on July 10th) edit will cost Universal millions.

Kim Masters writes about the "controversy" in a more speculative tone, wondering if the edit is even necessary.

"It so transgresses the question of taste-you cut it, I think," says a former studio president not associated with the film. "You certainly have a conversation about it. You examine it very carefully."

A veteran marketing executive disagrees. "It wasn't like they shot it and [Michael Jackson] was 85 years old and they expected him to die," she says. "It's just another one on the list of controversial issues surrounding Brüno." But if the Jackson family asks that the sequence be deleted, she adds, that will create a problem.

The point about the expectation of death is a good one. To avoid the matter entirely, to blot it out like it never happened, seems a bit scaredy-cat. The intentions are what ultimately matter, and while Sacha Baron Cohen's intentions are never altruistic, he certainly never intended to make a morbid death joke.

But, yeah, if the family asks nicely? We say cut the damn thing. There's always the Special Edition "Wacko Jacko" DVD, after all.

We'll note up front that this piece is not nearly as offensive as it could have been; the anonowife acknowledges that hers are "luxury problems." That said, she never should have written this, for chrissakes. Daily Intel beat us to the "Guess Who?" angle here, ID'ing the writer as (probably) Liz Peek, a former NY Sun business writer and wife of CIT Group's Jeffrey Peek (pictured). Liz, if it was you—you should have known the angry media hordes better than to go and write about troubles like these:

1. "[I] am using my credit balances at all the major department stores for important gifts and other necessities."

2. "I haven't even looked at spring clothes... Like so many others, I'm shopping in my closet."

3. "If I buy a present for someone, I have the package sent to their home. I don't want to be spotted climbing into a taxi, laden with Bergdorf Goodman shopping bags."

4. "This year, of course, entertaining our crowd [for my husband's birthday] at our usual multi-star Michelin hotspots would simply not do...We ultimately picked the cozier restaurant-even though it ended up costing us more, so eager was the more chic outfit to host the party. Why spend the extra bucks? Because our chosen place is distinctly low-profile and rarely mentioned in the press."

5. "We've picked up new habits, like making donations anonymously and sneaking in late to black-tie galas after society photographer Patrick McMullan has packed up his camera and gone home."

6. "Like most Americans, we are worried about money. Our net worth is tied up in stock that is down 95 percent."

7. "In an effort to conserve cash, we are eating out less frequently, meaning that I've been turning out some pretty dreadful lasagna."

8. "I drive the family crazy by switching off the lights every time we leave a room."

9. "Using the company plane is now out of bounds; we've heard there are reporters staking out the private airports."

10. "One daughter recently mused about going back to business school. I hope she didn't notice my instantly negative reaction, stemming completely from concern about the cost."

Sounds awful. If only there were some good news too. Oh, what, there is? "The good news is that Americans have short attention spans. Before long, some other group will come along to absorb all the frustration and anger."

Such as: Rich wives.
[Portfolio, Daily Intel. Pic via]

There is a "text-messaging hoax" going around 16 states (!) saying hey, if you go stand out in front of your local Wal-Mart for this, you will be killed.

The text messages appear to be tailored to local conditions — warning of gang activity in areas where gangs are active, but vaguer threats in areas, such as Walmart's home of Northwest Arkansas, where they aren't.

A text rumor making the rounds in New Mexico says three women are to be killed in an initiation rite for a Mexican gang.

Only if you make it past the razor blade Halloween candy and the ghost that comes out of the mirror when you say "Bloody Mary" three times! I'm not saying this is kinda funny, I'm just saying. [Ad Age. Pic via]

Imagine, if you will, that you're a business reporter. You spent years schmoozing and hobnobbing and shoulder-rubbing and other body part-caressing to build up all these sources inside massive Wall Street firms that will, officially, give you only robotic press releases. The entire enterprise of quality business reporting—particularly in the finance sector, which is a pretty fucking newsworthy sector at the moment—is built upon having a list of company insiders willing to speak to you on background to tell you what's really going on.

Who are these mysterious sources? Disgruntled people, often! People who hate their jobs, or their bosses, or are trying to stab their superiors in the back in order to ascend into their positions—these are the people who make all those Wall Street Journal fly-on-the-wall of the boardroom stories possible. Yes, there are friendly PR people who'll let actual facts slip on background, and various execs who will tell the truth if their name's not attached, but for the most part, a good source is one with a reason to enjoy seeing someone in their firm have their ass nailed to the wall in the print.

Now imagine: it's layoff time! They guys at the top decide who goes. That means those they don't like get pushed out in favor of those who kiss their asses. That means that the more likely someone is to be a good source, the more likely they are to get laid off. Simplistic but true. And already, reporters who cover Wall Street are finding that their best leakers are now pursuing new careers as personal trainers, just when we need them the most.

Wall Street executives: please retain the people who hate you, for the public good.

Obama's first Commerce nominee was Bill "Beard" Richardson, who withdrew because of an ethics investigation. So they went and picked Gregg. The major benefit of having him would have been, hey, one less Republican in the Senate! The drawbacks, though, turned out to be more important. Namely no Democrats like the guy, and he, in turn, just does not like the Commerce Dept., or Obama's plans for it! He opposed the stimulus package and he opposed Obama's plan to have the Census director start reporting to the White House. Turns out this was not a recipe for success:

"It has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the census there are irresolvable conflicts for me," Gregg said in a statement to be released by his office. "Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns."

So now Obama can either keep going further down the same path and nominate George W. Bush himself as Commerce Secretary; or, nominate a non-bearded Democrat. Or hell just let Rahm take care of it, cut the bullshit. [WP, NYT]

"And advertising, he says, requires neither special degrees nor a particularly keen intellect: 'Madison Avenue is one of the last places where undereducated whites can still make big money.'"

First advertising, then hockey. [Adweek]

Wieden & Kennedy (also behind this Nike campaign, incidentally) spent four long years working for Starbucks, and, according to an excellent Ad Age story today, none of that time was particularly happy. But Schultz was pals with Wieden's founder, so it went on and on. The conflict can be read either as a case of a prima donna client, OR the case of prima donna ad agencies not feeling "appreciated" for their brilliance:

"Wieden always felt like it was a one-way relationship," said an executive familiar with the matter. "They felt like they presented a way to drive the brand forward, and Starbucks wasn't receptive."...

Other agencies that have worked with Starbucks have felt frustration with the marketer too. Rich Silverstein, co-founder of Omnicom Group's Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, which did two stints representing Starbucks, said much of the fault lies with the mercurial Mr. Schultz. "He does not appreciate advertising," he said. "Any agency that comes in has one foot out the door already."

"Wah wah" would be the knee-jerk reaction to this—but keep in mind that it must have been actually really bad in order for an agency to walk away from an account of this magnitude.

Unrest at Starbucks is hardly new. The company has been described as a difficult client for many years. It's infamous for greenlighting projects and later withdrawing approval. For instance, the chain made its TV-advertising debut during the last holiday season, but a broadcast campaign had been under way at least once before.

Oh well. Starbucks has never had a truly great ad campaign, anyhow. Can you name one? I can't. So it's probably no great loss on either side. Starbucks is in a bad place, with the economy how it is, and no ad agency will be able to stop that.

Anyhow, Starbucks needs to focus on its hand herpes problem first.

[Ad Age]

Experts have discovered that Americans no longer go to work to perform actual work; they simply go to work to send and receive email about what would happen if they theoretically were to do some work. When they're not doing this, they're mentally recovering:

According to a report to be published in October by the New York-based research firm Basex, interruptions such as spam, other unnecessary e-mail and instant-messages take up 28% of the average knowledge worker's day.

On top of that is what Basex chief analyst Jonathan Spira refers to as recovery time — the time to get back to where you were before you were interrupted, which Spira says is 10 to 20 times the duration of the interruption. These interruptions account for up to 2.1 hours per worker per day. Multiply that by 56 million knowledge workers in the U.S., he calculates, and the cost is $650 billion per year.

By my calculations, that means that after you spend your 2.1 hours per day using email, you spend—on average—another 31.5 hours per day recovering from these hectic interruptions. Email is therefore responsible for a full 33.6 hours per day of your time.

It's certainly getting to be a problem.

[LAT]

Former Gawker-er Alex Balk needs every bit of his energy and concentration to be focused on the delicate task of editing Radar's website. But how can he, when he's on the verge of heat stroke because of a shamefully malfunctioning AC unit? Earlier today he reported he was "entirely covered in sweat." He even wanted to take off his shoes! Later he said the AC in Radar's office might be working "within the hour." Well, we certainly hope so, for god's sake!

Furthermore, the Midtown offices of legal publisher ALM are sweltering! Hardly the conditions in which solid reporting about lawyers can be done. A tipster says there's been no AC for the past two days—throughout the worst of the heat wave—and they might not be fixed tomorrow, either. The company's solution for the restless staff? Ice cream sandwiches. But "the cheap kind!"

And Choire Sicha is reporting that the peons at the Observer are suffering from a broken AC as well! Can't Jared Kushner buy a truck full of ice?

How long must the media suffer? Send us your tales of woe. Together we will overcome!

[Also, don't Google image search "sweaty worker" unless you want to see a lot of porn. Pic of sweating Chinese worker via Great Commission was found with the more fruitful search, "sweating at work."]

[SIGH]

"They're the only owners who could make you wish for Murdoch."

"It seemed to show a lack of respect and a lack of desire to be helpful to your new property."

"People are so beaten down here there's not much of anything that could cause much of a reaction."

"Everything is different," said one. "The parking lot is half-empty, the cafeteria is half-empty. It's unbelievable. I remember when I couldn't get a space! You get to work after 10 a.m. or so, and the lines at the cafeteria used to be long. Now there's nothing. There's no one there."

Sounds like fun!

[NYO]

I wrote a column about this glaring deficit in the "Starbucks Experience" in 2004. Back then, nobody seemed to care about any negative publicity that might be associated with not offering lemons. But now that Starbucks is slipping, maybe they will listen.

In the past year, Starbucks stock has slid from $32 a share to $16.34 on Monday. Last week, it reported a 28 percent fall in quarterly profit.

Chief executive Howard Schultz is blaming the economy.

Ha, right. Lewis eventually gets Starbucks' executive vice president for global strategy on the phone. But she fails to see the light:

"In my world of new products and operations . . . believe it or not, bringing fresh lemons into our stores is a challenge," she said. "Because it's fresh fruit. How do you cut them? It's a big ordeal."

How about those little packets of concentrated lemon juice? I asked. Maybe put them on the condiment counter beside the sugar and the chocolate powder?

"That's prime real estate over there," Gass explained. "And we haven't really seen a big groundswell of requests for this."

Starbucks: you just lost $2.10.

[via Starbucks Gossip]

Where once they were young and upwardly mobile, now they're middle aged and standing still.

And I know this, because I was a Yuppy once - but now, like so many of my kind, I'm an Arrpy.

Nearly 20 years on, we are married or divorced, or both, have children or stepchildren, own nice homes and can look back over two decades in which we've had a fabulous lifestyle.

So how has your thinking evolved into your golden years?

And part of the problem is we've got so used to our spending habits we no longer understand the difference between a luxury item and an essential.

Gas, I've come to understand, is an essential, Giorgio Armani is not.

Food is fundamental, skiing is not.

Goodness! I hope it's not hitting you too hard.

Yes, the sad fact is that up and down the land the Arppies are obsessed with the cost of the bare necessities of life. And it doesn't stop with the food shop.

As retail analysts Mintel pointed out yesterday in their annual analysis of household spending, Arppies are cancelling family holidays.

Two of my friends have already scaled down their summer holidays, one cancelling the annual jaunt to Tuscany and even losing her £2,000 deposit on the three-week break.

Nooooooooooooooooooooooo!

But at least we Arppies are optimists and know things can only get better. Well, they couldn't get much worse.

[Daily Mail via Agenda Inc.]

The essential problem is this: toothbrush handles have gotten big, wide, and oddly shaped, whereas toothbrush holders have remained formatted for the popsicle-stick toothbrush handles of yore. It started with cutesy wide handles on kids' brushes, and has now spread to adult models. Americans too lazy to move their forearms in short back-and-forth motions have also increasingly turned to electric brushes, which save you from burning those valuable 3 calories that could later that day, through a series of unlikely events, be the only thing giving you the strength to pull yourself out of a remote desert crevasse.

So how to handle this toothbrush holder incompatibility? The Times points out some modern designs you can turn to, including one that costs almost $100. And finally it just admits: either use a cup (genius), or stop with the weird toothbrushes.

The sad fact is that those old-fashioned ceramic cup holders with toothbrush slots for the whole family may be hard to improve on. And according to Dr. Clifford Whall, director of the American Dental Association's seal of acceptance program, the Popsicle-stick toothbrushes that fit in them will clean teeth just as well as the attention-getting ergonomic models that now dominate drugstore shelves.

"The bottom line is, if you brush efficiently and for long enough you can reduce plaque whether you use many different kinds of manual toothbrushes," Dr. Whall said. "We haven't seen sufficient studies that any one brush is superior to another — whether it's power or manual."