The Evolution's been redacted or at least TWIT has

It's the chat room's fault...

Of course! It's all those horrible weirdos with no lives who caused all the trouble with Leo's photo album...

It's June 3rd and the TWIT chat links on twit.tv still work.  

In a not so stunning half-hearted reversal it appears the chat room survives although it's not as central as it used to be to the daily going's on at TWIT. 

Apparently the May 27th announcement of their demise was premature.  In the intervening week there's been some softening of the position that's allowed the chat room to continue.  Whether or not the show you're watching is live,  however, is a big secret. 

In the early chatter between Laporte and Steve Gibson during the Security Now broadcast stream (6/2/2015), Laporte discussed how the chat rooms would be maintained but it was up to the hosts as to whether or not they wanted them visible.  Showering pity on his chat moderators, Leo relayed a tearful tale of how one of his chat mods had quit due to the incredible pressure they were under from all those "weirdos."

He went on to explain that while he actually "owned" the chat room, it really belonged to the moderators and that faced with its demise they protested. 

So what have we learned...

1. The picture of somebody's junk was all the chat room's fault

2. Actually, everything is the chat room's fault...

3. Dictatorial chat mods on a power trip have feelings too

4. The chat room isn't central to TWIT programming anymore

5. Laporte is still delusional

6. TWIT brilliantly exemplifies the fallacy of the Straw Man 

In the weeks that follow you can expect more of the same as TWIT deemphasizes the interactive nature of its programming that it once championed.  You can also expect to see a more filtered version of Laporte even going so far as to cancel live events like the 24 hours of TWIT New Years broadcast.

Honestly, I could care less about the TWIT's chat room and haven't bothered with it for the better part of a year.  It was just far too tiring to frame every comment in a way that wouldn't run afoul of a code of conduct that could get the Pope banned.

Ok, it's a privately owned service and TWIT can run it any way they please.  That's understood.  We all know that free speech takes a back seat to corporate interest in the good old USA.  We have the freedom to censor anything we find unpleasant if it's under our control.  Whether or not it's freely offered to the public is of no consequence.

Perhaps all these changes at TWIT are a good thing although they're probably too late to save the network.  TWIT and Laporte in general could have perpetrated the myth of being "family friendly" if only we hadn't seen so much of that... raw sausage.

Laporte could have been lewd, dictatorial and creepy all he wanted and none of us would have been the wiser. 

But that didn't happen.  We saw the stark contrast between the man and the image and we didn't like it. 

The proverbial cat's out of the bag.  Maybe if TWIT survived another 10 years all of those unpleasant memories would fade.

Thing is, the Internet is forever and try as you might it doesn't forget.

"The evil that men do lives after them"...etc...etc.. (The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, Act 3, Scene 2)

TWIT: The scandal behind the "Evolution"

The "Evolution" of TWIT Wankergate

I don't like to report rumors or present editorial opinion as fact.  If it's from the horses mouth I'll always give you a source.

So this latest wrinkle has me perplexed.  By now the TWIT UN-faithful have born witness to what promises to be the most lewd episode from Daddy Laporte yet.

That being, of course, the now infamous picture of someone's male genitalia showing up in Leo's Iphoto Album during Sunday's (5/24) Tech Guy radio broadcast.

Totaldrama.net was on the scene and has provided photographic and video evidence of this latest debauchery by the TWIT front man.  Evidence that I prefer not to reproduce on this blog simply because I don't want to keep seeing it every time I go looking for an image for one of my articles.

Let's leave the elephant in the room for now and ignore the question of why a picture of somebody's junk is mixed into the family photo album.  I really don't care whose it is, it should never have been there especially on a device that could find it's way onto a live broadcast.

Nonetheless, there it was in all its sad glory.  Which apparently was the catalyst for everything that's transpired since.

Some are reporting that the coming changes to TWIT have since been cancelled.  As of this writing, however, I still see no official indication of that from any TWIT at TWIT.  We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

Till then, here's a screenshot of the announcement posted on the Inside TWIT blog on the 27th.  Click on it to see a readable version.

Until TWIT indicates otherwise, it will have to serve as their official position.

http://twit.tv/2015/05/27/evolution-twit-live

The DE-Evolution of TWIT

4 Days....

You Have 4 days (assuming you care) to enjoy the last few hours of the TWIT you knew.  Starting June 1st TWIT is changing the rules.

"...we have recently decided to make a few changes that are going to affect our live audience.

Part of this is the TWiT chat room, which offers direct access to our hosts and guests. Our volunteer moderators have always been diligent [AKA draconian...] in keeping the chat on topic and not letting a few troublemakers [non-fanboys] derail the discussion. But it's gotten to where moderating the chat and people's frustrations with that have become a distraction..." insideTWIT 5/27/15

You heard that right.  Gone will be the live chat room and with it a shakeup of the schedule (again) that will preclude the goings on behind the curtain that faithful viewers have come to expect. 

"This level of behind-the-scenes access also has another serious downside: Not everyone wants to spend their working hours under a microscope." inside TWIT 5/27/15

Uh, if you don't like people watching you then why are you working in a broadcast medium?

I've said before that the turning tide against TWIT likely came about because we saw too much of the sausage being made.  A privilege that showed us the stark contrast between who we thought we knew and who they really were.  The episodes of  sometimes callous and often creepy behavior were there for all to see free of any video editor's sanitizing.  Episodes of which Laporte frequently played a starring role.    

That can have an effect over time...

Most of us came to the network with a longing for what we'd lost when TechTV left the airwaves.  We missed the warm and friendly Laporte and co. solving all our techie woes.  It was with a gentle hand and a kind word that TechTV could console our geeky insecurities with the affirmation of, "It's not your fault!"

It was the first time that anyone bothered to embrace the geeks.  That guy on your TV actually knew what he was talking about without relying on the teleprompter for the answers.  He was one of us...

But perhaps that was just the naiveté  of someone who believed that anything they saw in a heavily scripted TV show could reflect the reality of its hosts.  It was a TV network after all albeit a small one.

It's a rare celebrity whose personality matches their public persona.  Sadly, that truth was evidenced by simply watching TWIT the past few years.  Many fans went from disillusionment to outright hatred of Laporte when the family friendly teddy bear of tech appeared to be anything but.

"The term "troll" gets thrown around a lot. We get it: it's the Internet, and trolls, snarkiness, and differing opinions come with the territory. But it seriously crosses a line when it becomes targeted harassment, cyberstalking...

" inside TWIT 5/27/15

Increasingly anyone with a modicum of intelligence would soon realize that despite claims to the contrary, TWIT was becoming less about the fans and more about the product.  A product based on a facade with Laporte plastered on it like Orville Redenbacher on a box of microwave popcorn.

Speaking of popcorn.  We've born witness to a network whose advertising used to be dominated by the likes of Ting and IFIXit now pushing mattresses and mail order gourmet whose only claim to tech is a website.

If the technology marketplace doesn't believe in what TWIT's doing why should anyone else?  Where are the Lenovo, HP, Apple and Microsoft ads?  You'd think the de facto "President of the Internet" would have tech companies beating down his door to buy advertising.

But Laporte claims there's a higher standard at play.  Apparently one that values shaving kits and granola bars over tech.

Perhaps the best evidence of the impending doom of TWIT comes with an ever increasing paranoia...

" As some of you may know, we received a bomb threat a few weeks ago--and this isn't the first, second, or even third instance of the sort that we've had to deal with. 

We've also had people show up at our house, we've received threatening phone calls and emails, had our comings and goings tracked, been doxxed, and had our personal information distributed. This isn't limited to our hosts: our guests, mods, staff, families, and sponsors have also been the targets of these threats and abuse."

and...

" ...there are threats of violence--especially when your children are in the crosshairs. "Trolling" you can ignore, "stalking" is a different matter.

We take all of this very seriously. Being a target is scary and emotionally trying in a way that I wouldn't wish on anyone--and even more so when your friends and family are put at risk. We ask that you please respect any safeguards we must put in place as a result. Ultimately, we do believe this will result in a better TWiT experience for all.

" inside TWIT 5/27/15

We've moved from the delusional to the ridiculous.  TWIT has gone from the "CNN of tech" to the Fox News of tech.  

As though somehow criticism is equivalent to some Clear and Present Danger.  Sure, bomb threats happen and so does cyberbullying but everyone knows that if you put yourself out there it comes with the territory. 

I mean c'mon now, has Leo never looked at the comments on any of TWIT's YouTube videos?  Is a down vote now cause for a restraining order?

Or is Laporte finally circling the wagons in a desperate attempt to recapture the glory of his Tech TV days using this "abuse" as an excuse to shield TWIT from criticism.

In the end, we see TWIT moving toward the same "video on demand" model as other podcast providers meaning it's rapidly losing its niche.  

Ask all the former hosts of Revision 3 how well that model worked out for them.

There are far better sources for tech news (Have you seen Elgan?) and tech lifestyle programming out there.  TWIT has simply lost too much talent to survive on its content alone.

When the end finally comes for the podcasting network, shed no tears for TWIT. 

Leo's no Ben Kenobi and these are definitely not the droids you were looking for...

TWIT: The 10th Anniversary episode

Yesterday was the 10th Anniversary of the first episode of This Week in Tech, TWIT's cornerstone podcast.

Ten years ago a half dozen lost souls from the former Tech TV sat around a table slamming beers and musing on the sad state of technology broadcasting. While bemoaning their poor treatment at the hands of corporate media they suddenly found purpose.

The rest as they say, is history...

Which may be apropos to the current state of the network.  Yesterday's episode (506) seemed as it Laporte was preoccupied with the glory days of TWIT's more humble past (aka: cottage days.)

Surrounded by a cadre of "original" TWIT cast members including Patrick Norton, Robert Heron, John C.. Dvorak and others, it was a stark representation of the few remaining TechTV alumnus that still hold any regard for Laporte or TWIT.

I take such a dire tack because mixed in with well wishes from TechTV alumnus (who managed to steer clear of TWIT employment) and TechTV show clips were stills of long departed TWIT hosts. Interestingly, if their names happened to be anything resembling Merritt, Lane or Brushwood they were barely acknowledged and nowhere to be found during the broadcast.  Were the prerecorded accolades of the likes of Morgan Webb and Chris Pirillo  (who've never worked on TWIT) more relevant to TWIT's history than Tom Merritt or Bryan Brushwood?  

Were they even asked?

Perhaps most telling was the on camera chatter before the episode began with Laporte ruminating over past TWIT group photos.  It seemed he could remember every name in every photo except for one,  Erik Lanigan.  I won't belabor that observation other than to say it was a display of bad taste.

Although presented as a celebration of TWIT's longevity the negative pall that hangs over TWIT was undeniable with Laporte spouting self deprecation that bordered on gallows humor at times.  Perhaps that's why the broadcast seemed to conveniently omit the events of TWIT after 2011.

It's clear that the intention was to focus on the "glory days" of TWIT none of which take place in the present.  The constant TechTV clips were soon followed by the announcement of a new show starting on May 2nd, "The New Screen Savers" complete with a campy TechTV-esque show opener.

With G4 now defunct and parent NBC Universal caring little about the former TechTV intellectual property rights it seems it would be the ideal time to resurrect the dead.  To that end it appears Laporte's plan is to reach into the past to try to secure a future for TWIT.

The New Screen Savers will feature rotating co-hosts consisting of current TWIT staff and co-hosts like Patrick Norton, Megan Morrone and Mike Elgan.

Hindsight truly offers superb vision and on reviewing the episode (offered below) it seems Laporte believes he can stop the hemorrhaging by throwing former fans a bone that will obscure their collective memory of the past 4 years.

Unfortunately, bones are all that's left of TWIT but watch for yourself and draw your own conclusions.  The entire episode is offered with commercials edited out and much of the shows Pre and Post chatter from the RAW feed.

TWIT: The last straw

I Hate TWIT...

Over the past 3 years I've had my criticisms of Leo Laporte and his TWIT podcasting network but in every case I hoped to offer constructive criticism without passing final judgment. 

I've said more than once, "I don't hate TWIT" because I really didn't want to take sides even if my observations appeared otherwise.

Sadly, that ended today.  My catalyst for judgement came after watching the latest Triangulation episode with Leo Laporte and his guest, Personal Capital ( and Paypal) founder Bill Harris.

Bill Harris is in a word (or more accurately a phrase) the typical Silicon Valley "Suit."  Which is just like your normal everyday "suit" but with the added facet of living in the delusional reality that is any business based in the Silicon Valley.

His resume includes not only his current gig, Personal Capital, but also Intuit, Paypal and even a stint with Earthlink among others.

Personal Capital is an online wealth management service that advertises on TWIT.  As such there's been plenty of ad copy over the last year praising its merits to varying degrees.  Of course it's not of much use to anyone who has a net worth less than 7 figures but who cares, right? 

But really, I could care less about Bill Harris, it's TWIT that's the problem.

The Cliff Notes version is this. 

This week's episode of Triangulation would make for a great "Meet the CEO" employee indoctrination video for Harris' Personal Capital.  In it Laporte fawned, gushed and feigned interest in a man who had as much in common with TWIT viewers as Justin Bieber's hair stylist.

It was for lack of a better word, disgusting. 

The whole interview revolved around tales of Harris and his millionaire buddies like Elon Musk flying around the country "effecting change" from their Lear Jets with regular calls to "Madison Avenue" to create the buzz on their latest antics.

So who is Bill Harris to the average guy watching TWIT?  Absolutely nobody.  Like I said, he's just another suit who happened to use his Harvard education at the right place at the right time.  Just another perpetrator of the Silicon Valley serial startup.  

In short he's not like you and you'll never have anything in common with him.  It's doubtful he ever had to live on ramen noodles or worry about paying off his student loans.   

However, If you're still interested, here's a link to his bio on Bloomberg for those of you with posters of Warren Buffett above your bed.

The dime-store summary of Bill Harris' career includes such winners as: Earthlink an early national  ISP,  Paypal, the de facto Internet payment service and TurboTax, the most recognizable name in tax preparation software.  

What do all these companies have in common? great marketing for so-so products...

Earthlink was among the earliest national dial-up ISP's and was also one of the first communication services to lock customers into multi-year commitments without any guarantee of service. If you think data caps are bad try being forced to pay for a service you can't even use...  

Then there's Paypal which was a good idea at the beginning but has earned the nickname "PayPay."  A label earned by the service (and its parent company Ebay) for high percentage fees and a tendency to tie up bank accounts on a whim.  

Then there's Intuit's TurboTax, which regularly makes headlines for screwing users out of tax refunds due to flaky formula calculations.  Lest we forget security holes that have left many a taxpayer on the hook with the IRS through no fault of their own.

That's the thing.  These companies were all good ideas at the start but have had troubled histories since.  However, I'm not suggesting that Bill Harris was directly involved with anything scandalous concerning them.  To the contrary, he's a "big picture guy" who gets out just before the lawsuits start coming in.  

Which means he's about creating wealth not social change.  If he happens to do the world a good turn in the process it's likely by accident.  He is a businessman, marketer and salesman.  Nothing more.

In the classic TWIT context his experience has no more in common with viewers than the average Wall Street CEO.  Meaning it's irrelevant information to the TWIT viewership

Ok, so my hatred for Bill Harris' resume aside, the point is this...

It's one thing to pander to advertisers, it's another to be their lap dog.  We've seen this behavior before but for me the final straw came before the start of the episode.

In the pre-show, Harris happened to notice that someone in the chatroom said something about "vomiting" which brought swift response from Laporte directing his studio flunkies to shut down the "chat" on set.  

That was followed up with threats of banning chat users and a statement from Laporte to Harris that effectively disparaged the value of the chatroom on TWIT. 

So in effect, Triangulation became Bi-angulation.

On more than one occasion Laporte has called the chatroom the third side of the "triangle" since the departure of co-host Tom Merritt.  

That makes its removal a violation of a sacred TWIT tenet and creates a void  that even Laporte's sizable ego can't fill.

Look, I get it, you don't want to piss off an advertiser especially if they may be a potential buyer for your failing enterprise.

However, passing off a corporate propaganda video as content is inexcusable.  Regardless of how interesting the life of Bill Harris may have been, the information is of little value when the interviewer has a vested interest. 

Meaning there's a bias in place that invalidates objectivity.  In the case of this episode of Triangulation, Laporte turned TWIT into a Bill Harris infomercial.  Perhaps Leo's really that enamored with the guy but it's far more likely he's protecting advertising revenue. 

Coincidentally, pulling the ads from TWIT was a joke Harris made repeatedly before, during and after the so-called "interview."

That's not friendly, that's Freudian suggestion my friends.

Because of this final and blatant violation of principle there can be no redemption for TWIT.  A line has been crossed and I'm off the fence now.

As the Shark Tank's Mr. Wonderful (Kevin O'Leary) often says,

"You're dead to me...  "

The episode has been provided below, judge for yourself.  Maybe you'll be inspired to go out and buy a new suit.

How to get more visitors to your blog, e-commerce site, YouTube channel...blah blah blah

I know why you're here...

I got lucky and somehow Google determined I had just the right metadata to put me higher in the list of search results. 

Yup, I'm right up there with all the sites that promise Internet millions and no-down real estate deals.

Well, at least that's my hope but with Google selling AdWords to drive traffic and sponsored links chances are this article wasn't in the mix.

I've been blogging for around 4 years and been running a YouTube channel (now 4) for 3.  In that time I've never managed to get more than 150 subs on Youtube or more than 50K visitors to any of my blogs. 

In other words, I'm just like you. 

The little bit of information you'll get from the "experts" out there will  try to pound it into your head that the key to success is comprised of a few key tenets.  Most of the time they'll bury them in a bunch of vague marketing speak designed to get you to ante up the plastic to get the "secrets."

I'll save you a few bucks and spell them out minus the long-winded sales pitch.

1. Have interesting content!
2. Be consistent and post/upload on a regular basis
3. Collaborate with others
4. Use social media and cross promote

Great, now you know exactly what you need to do right? 

Of course not.  It's all ambiguous and misleading as hell.  

What you need to realize is all those sure-fire strategies are nothing but link-bait.  None of it is any more useful than a late-night infomercial.  They're selling a fantasy and making money with every duped visitor to their page.

So what's wrong with the "Tenets?"

Let's go by the numbers...

   Have interesting content!  -- Ok, define "interesting"  some people think knitting is interesting others think Pewdiepie is a phenom.  What does that make you?  The cold truth is that most of the popular people on the web were already popular somewhere else.  There's very little "organic" fame to be had meaning you might be the next Spielberg or Hemingway but nobody is going to know who you are unless you find popularity somewhere else.

   Be consistent and post/upload on a regular basis -- This one annoys me the most.  How many mindless blog posts or boring cat videos have you seen just because somebody followed this advice?  If you have something to share then by all means share it but don't put crap up just to fill space.  Nothing turns off an audience faster than having to sift through a bunch of half-hearted crap.   

   Collaborate with others -- It's nice to share but to be honest I can't stand 90% of the content creators on the Internet so why the hell would I want to collaborate with them?  Really now, If  I'm just going through the motions then why am i bothering at all?  Hey, if you've got a friend with similar interests great but otherwise leave it alone.  Nobody collaborates out of the goodness of their heart, they're looking for more traffic just like you and if you don't have anything to offer you're not going to get many opportunities.  It's kind of a catch-22 in that you need exposure but nobody is going to help you unless you already have it.

   Use social media and cross promote  -- This one kind of goes with #3.  Everybody thinks they're going to get on Twitter or FaceBook and suddenly have 100's of followers.  Except that most social media is siloed meaning you're going to spend most of your time communicating with people you already know.  Spamming other peoples pages with "Come see my stuff" posts will get you the opposite result.  Social media really isn't that social and unless you're already famous nobody is going to come looking for you.

So is all lost?  Am I just a Debbie Downer to your Internet dreams?

I sure hope so but not because I want you to fail, I just want you to get real. 

Look, it's really simple.  There's no such thing as get rich quick in the real or online world.  If you're just doing it to turn a buck then I hope you do fail.  I mean that.  Not because I'm some vicious troll but rather because I'm tired of content for content's sake. 

It clutters up the Internet with the online equivalent of junk mail and infomercials. 

Put up all the content you want but do it because you want to not because you're following some formula you read about from a Google search.   Blogs are great for creating a body of work.  Take it seriously and it may even spawn a career.  YouTube can be a great outlet for budding filmmakers, educators and new media content. Social Media can be a powerful tool if used wisely.

I've been creating content for awhile now and I can say with conviction that I never have nor would put up anything I didn't believe in.  Even if it never got a single view.  I can stand being unpopular, I can't stand adding to the cruft.

I may not be a "success" story but at least I'm genuine.  Forget the Leo Laporte's and Pewdiepie's of the online world.  Hell, even old Leo is getting a hard dose of reality these days and once Pewdiepie hits 30 he's over with.

So keep this in mind.

Do what you do but make sure it's really coming from you.

...consider the soapbox put away.

TWIT: NSFW 218 becomes night of 1000 redactions!

Talk about circling the wagons!

This will be short but it seems I and others may have touched a nerve at TWIT as it appears that all evidence of the final NSFW show #218 has been removed from popular media outlets.  That apparently includes me as the link to the final NSFW broadcast now only offers up "This video is Private" when the embedded video link on my February post is activated...

I know I've had to change the source link 3 times since publishing the article on NSFW's final broadcast on TWIT and now the show is nowhere to be found.

On Sunday October 5th's This Week In Tech there was some discussion concerning the possible "banning" of NSFW hosts Justin Robert young and Brian Brushwood from the network but little more was said.

Now it appears that copies of the final NSFW broadcast have been withdrawn leaving viewers with only Pre and Post show video captures.  

I've recently been informed that this move wasn't an isolated event as archives of past TWIT shows featuring departed TWIT hosts have reportedly been removed from public view.

The move seems retaliatory which is unfortunate.  Considering NSFW 218 was nothing but conciliatory and praising of Laporte it makes no sense to withdraw it from public view.

But then, this is the "new" TWIT.

Stitcher still has an active link to the audio MP3.  

You can find it below, at least until someone yanks it down too....

TWIT: Say goodbye to being social

...and the hits keep comin!

I'm starting to feel like a gossip columnist but it's an occupational hazard when one follows the sinusoidal wave of chaos that TWIT appears to be lately.

While the bulk of TWIT programming has soldiered on with little change since my last article, when changes do happen they can be dramatic.

Take for instance the latest installment of Lisa Kentzell's "Changes at TWIT" found on the TWIT.TV home page and perhaps updated a bit too frequently.  

In it we find out:

• ·         OMGCraft is moving off the network
• ·         RedditUp is on hiatus
• ·         Marketing Mavericks is getting a new time slot (again)
• ·         The Social Hour is cancelled

Let's ignore the elephant in the room for a moment and deal with the less weighty of our little punch list.

OMGCraft:

While OMGCraft's appeal was admittedly niche, it was arguably a better show than say "Marketing Mavericks" with more of a following if it's companion YouTube channel is any indicator.  

Considering what the show started out as and what it became after joining TWIT's "official" lineup it's understandable that host Chad "OMGChad" Johnson would choose to take it off network.  If it returns to the more freeform format of its TWIT "beta" days it should do well for Johnson and I honestly hope that comes to pass.

RedditUP:

While mildly entertaining I never quite understood the point of this show.  Co-hosted by Sarah Lane and Chad Johnson, It covered the happenings of the social network that isn't, specifically Reddit.  While Lane and Johnson did their best,  the show was the equivalent of somebody building a podcast around their twitter feed. 

But at least it wasn't...

Marketing Mavericks:

So the wildly successful (that's sarcasm folks) marketing podcast is getting moved to another time slot, again.  This is the TWIT podcast that introduces viewers to those giants of industry that brought the world opt-out spam, singing chickens and pop-up ads.  

Considering the far more "niche" OMGCraft podcast consistently produces episodes that can crest 20,000 views on its associated YouTube channel, Marketing Mavericks by comparison struggles to reach 50.  Why this show continues while other more popular examples regularly get the boot is a continuing mystery.

Which brings us to the elephant in the room...

The Social Hour:

"...We are also retiring The Social Hour. Originally called net@night, it is one of our longest-running netcasts, starting when “social media” was still in its infancy. As the landscape has matured and trends have shifted towards apps, we feel that social media coverage is now a part of almost every show on our network..."

This one is almost on par with Tom Merritt leaving...

While admittedly "The Social Hour" at times seemed more like an hour spent with a couple of chattering valley girls, the content was nonetheless relevant to its audience.  With no social media rock left unturned even those with a passing interest could find something of use. 

Considering the strict adherence Laporte and Kentzell demand of TWIT shows to be profitable, it's longevity could only be a result of its popularity with viewers...right?

It's abrupt departure is likely more significant than it may seem on the surface.

The Social Hour debuted on March 30, 2011 picking up where its TWIT predecessor "Net@night" had left off with host Amber MacArthur and Sarah Lane taking over co-host duties from Laporte.  Meaning that some incarnation of the show had continuously ran for nearly 9 years on the TWIT network before being deemed "redundant."

The decision was apparently made within the last week as no indication of the show's cancellation was indicated during the most recent episode that found Lane closing with, "We will see you next week."

Apparently not Sarah...

There was no episode of "The Social Hour" (not even a rerun) during its normal timeslot this week making the hour long void between "Know How" and "Coding 101" conspicuously present. 

Even the show's icon had been moved to the "retired shows" section of the twit.tv website.  A small but powerful statement as most retired shows have historically remained in the "current shows" lineup for at least a month.

The justification, " ...we feel that social media coverage is now a part of almost every show on our network..." plays to the supposed redundancy of content.  Yet TWIT still maintains not one but 3 shows based on the Apple Ecosystem with Macbreak weekly frequently rehashing content from Ipad Today, I5 for the Iphone not to mention This Week in Tech.

And what of the lackluster Tech News Today (TNT)?  Are we to infer that because a topic is covered that any other presentation is considered redundant as well?

Then we must conclude that other TWIT shows like Windows Weekly, Security Now, This Week in Tech and a host of others that regularly cover the same content as TNT are also on the chopping block.

It seems a double standard is at play here...

Perhaps this is part of a grand plan to eliminate any show on the TWIT network that may threaten the relevance of the news department. 

Although I don't see how that's possible considering the lack of improvement in Elgan's performance on TNT after 9 months.   TNT is nowhere to be found on the Itunes top 40 tech podcasts.  Which begs the question, if TNT isn't popular any more and isn't making enough money for TWIT because of it then isn't TNT itself "redundant?"

If we apply the same standard to TNT as has been brought to bear on other TWIT shows that have been cancelled then TNT must itself be discontinued.      

Don't hold your breath...

Kentzell has stated in the past that her goal was to make TWIT less dependent on Laporte's persona and allow him more personal time away from the network.  Truth be told, by and large he has backed away from all but the core TWIT shows.  In that respect she's succeeded but even a cursory examination of Laporte's demeanor over the past year suggests that the changes may not have yielded the expected results.

Watch any recent podcast of "The Tech Guy," Laporte's syndicated radio show, and frequently the lovable teddy bear of tech is instead curt and irritable.  For example, a recent caller to the show found themselves on the receiving end of the "dump button" because Laporte was unhappy with the pace of the caller's question and later justified the action by saying the caller, "just wanted a free phone."  

It's not an isolated incident either...

Even Laporte's guests aren't immune as they're often talked over or cut off mid sentence regardless of the proximity of a commercial break.  It's almost as though Laporte is in a race to the finish of every show and would rather be somewhere else.

It's likely the result of stress but unfortunately it appears that even indulging in the recreation that only Laporte's wealth can bring still can't alleviate it.

For his own sake, perhaps Laporte should consider just leaving things be at TWIT for awhile.