What's so funny 'bout peace, love and Lenny Kravitz

On a non-political note (ok, quick aside, I have to say, for the first time, I'm actually proud that I went to American University: Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Obama took place there (luckily, they've since re-named the pace, it's no longer the Adnan Koshoggi center), I suppose in part because JFK gave a somewhat famous speech there.)

But I digress . . .

I was reading the NYTimes yesterday (overpaid liberal that I am) and was reading an article written by Lenny Kravitz in which he wrote about his favorite new music artists and it hit me - again, the fundamental question is: how to choose?

We are living in a world of ubiquity. The constraints of the past have mainly been narrowed down to one: can you pay for it? If you have the money, you can get almost anything you want. Now comes the question: what do you want?

You can't google for it: that just helps you find things that already exist. You have to have it recommended to you. But who should you listen to?

I had a debate the other week with Lola's former bosses (used to run a jury consulting firm, now write the ethics column for Money magazine and who- in their spare time - review movies for the local paper) about the value of "experts". Does one require an expert to find something of value? What does an "expert" know about wine or art or food, really? Doesn't it depend on us as to whether or not we'll like it? I mean, sure, I liked "3:10 to Yuma" (ok, I loved it), but I also watch "The Last Dragon" whenever I get the chance. Is there anyone in the world who can tell me that they both have the same intrinsic value? It's more that they both have an appeal to me.

Would I recommend "3:10 to Yuma" to everyone? I don't know. What I loved about it was the underlying premise that (and here I quote another movie that I saw on the airplane) "the only force more powerful than a son's need to be adored by his father, is a father's need to be adored by his son." That's a message for me. Would a 20 year old get that? Doubtful. Does that make the movie better or worse? The movie is a vehicle of value only in that it connects with its audience. So, for me the value was there. The 20 year old may just have enjoyed the shooting. It's about the viewer not about the view.

So, what's my point?

My point is this: watch the web. It's coming (I'm sure some would say with Last.FM, Pandora, Yelp and even Delver (yes, there are dozens more) that it's here.) But the thing is this: right now, the democratization of reviews allows for a greater "wisdom of the crowds" view - which in theory gives a more balanced view of the product. But it's all still focused on the product, as if a restaurant were a stable thing. Will I like the restaurant is a better question, but still only part of it. Will I like this restaurant if I take a date there after a scary movie when it's raining outside? Now that's a question that I'd like the answer to.

(Of course the date would be Lola.)

But now we get into the question of identity (identities) on the web and in the world. Which is more than I can spend time on right now, as I'm supposed to be studying.