Impact Accelerator Gets Funding to Bring Silicon Valley's Approach to Hollywood
Sam Blake
Sam primarily covers entertainment and media for dot.LA. Previously he was Marjorie Deane Fellow at The Economist, where he wrote for the business and finance sections of the print edition. He has also worked at the XPRIZE Foundation, U.S. Government Accountability Office, KCRW, and MLB Advanced Media (now Disney Streaming Services). He holds an MBA from UCLA Anderson, an MPP from UCLA Luskin and a BA in History from University of Michigan. Email him at samblake@dot.LA and find him on Twitter @hisamblake
Hollywood took another step closer to Silicon Valley today.
San Francisco-based venture capital firm Benchmark is investing a Series A round into a new "creative accelerator" founded by film and TV heavyweights Ron Howard and Brian Grazer.
The Academy Award-winning duo founded Imagine Impact in September 2018 to bring new voices to an entertainment industry that can be difficult to break into.
"The old way of sourcing talent in the entertainment industry is based on who you know, which presents high barriers-to-entry for the fresh voices we need to hear from," Benchmark general partner Bill Gurley said in a statement. "Impact is knocking down these barriers through a marketplace model that reduces information asymmetry and levels the playing field. Ultimately this leads to more opportunities and better outcomes for everyone involved."
Modeled after influential Silicon Valley startup accelerator Y Combinator, the program takes applications and connects participants with mentors to develop their projects and conducts speaker series with the likes of JJ Abrams and Malcolm Gladwell.
Benchmark's investment, which is reportedly in the range of $10 - $20 million, will create a new standalone company called Impact Creative Systems ("Impact"). Tyler Mitchell will be its chief executive and Howard and Grazer will remain involved as founders.
On a panel Thursday hosted by TechCrunch featuring the three, Howard said Grazer developed the model for the accelerator based on his realization that creating a show or movie is much like developing a startup: it requires building a product, a team and finding a product-market fit.
Gurley, somewhat of a superstar in the venture world, was introduced to Grazer through Michael Lynton, former Sony Pictures chairman and chief executive and current chairman of Santa Monica-base Snap Inc. Gurley, who spearheaded the deal, will sit on Impact's board.
The accelerator evaluates about 2,000 applications a week with the help of technology, Mitchell said on the panel. It has also built out a "LinkedIn-meets-Slack" marketplace called Creative Network, which the company says is currently used by producers and executives from across the entertainment industry, including Amazon, Netflix, Warner Brothers and many others.
Having Gurley on board will help Impact to further build this marketplace out. Many of his investments at Benchmark have been in tech companies with a similar two-sided supply and demand component, including Uber, Ebay, OpenTable and Yelp.
"Sitting around a white board meeting with Bill Gurley talking about our business and where it could go as a central clearing house for jobs – it's exciting, it's creative; I find it really creatively stimulating," Howard said on the panel.
The Impact accelerator has developed 72 projects, 25 of which have gone on to major studios. One example is Tunga, an animated musical from Zimbabwean screenwriter Godwin Jagangwe, who was connected via the accelerator to Bojack Horseman creator Kate Purdy to develop the idea, Mitchell said.
Beyond embracing tech industry funding models and product development approaches, Howard and Grazer have turned to tech platforms to distribute their films and shows. The Impact accelerator has sold a project to Quibi, and Jax Media, another one of their companies, is doing projects with the L.A.-based short-form streaming app.
Impact also recently launched its own podcast, announced a deal with Netflix to source and develop content from across the world, and opened an accelerator program in Australia last month.
Grazer also said that he and Howard recently signed a deal with an unnamed celebrity to turn one of his Instagram Stories into a major motion picture. Grazer said the video he saw included a large man with two donkeys named Whiskey and Lulu. That description points pretty squarely to Arnold Schwarzenegger.
"I think we're going through a creative renaissance," Grazer said, noting that media that has been disconnected from Hollywood — such as social platforms and podcasts — are becoming more ingrained in the entertainment landscape.
Subscribe to our newsletter to catch every headline.
Minutes into filling out my absentee ballot last week, I was momentarily distracted by my dog Seamus. A moment later, I realized in horror that I was filling in the wrong bubble — accidentally voting "no" on a ballot measure that I meant to vote "yes" on.
It was only a few ink marks, but it was noticeable enough. Trying to fix my mistake, I darkly and fully filled in the correct circle and then, as if testifying to an error on a check, put my initials next to the one I wanted.
Then I worried. As a reporter who has previously covered election security for years, I went on a mini-quest trying to understand how a small mistake can have larger repercussions.
As Los Angeles County's 5.6 million registered voters all receive ballots at home for the first time, I knew my experience could not be unique. But I wondered, would my vote count? Or would my entire ballot now be discarded?
<p>There are reasons enough to worry about mail-in-ballots counting, even without the appearance of fake ballot boxes and the unfounded rhetoric that has filled the nation's airwaves over the last months. After all, much of the information I found online told me to notify a poll worker if I made an error. Alas, no poll worker at home.</p><p>"I don't think your experience is unique, and it's exacerbated by how big L.A. is," said Eddie Perez, election administration and technology expert with the nonpartisan, nonprofit <a href="https://www.osetfoundation.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">OSET Institute</a>. "These experiences are happening across the country [as] many voters are voting by mail the first time and they don't know what to do. It's a microcosm of all of this change."</p><p>Part of the problem was that I didn't receive my sample ballot beforehand and so didn't engage in the practice round I typically do. Worse though, the instructions that came with my ballot said nothing about what to do if you accidentally make the wrong choice. The only advice is to call a phone number or go online and request a new ballot. Does that mean the whole thing won't count? But it was such a small mistake.</p><p>"That's a failing right there, the fact that they didn't include it on the instruction sheet," said Perez, who previously worked for Hart Intercivic, voting technology company, and has made thousands of ballots in his career. He noted that in Colorado, the instructions for how to correct a mistake are on the ballot instructions.</p><p>I called the phone number, but couldn't get through to a person. I then sent an email to a recommended public address asking if my ballot was "spoilt" and if I needed a new one.</p><p>Then, for hours into the night and through early the next morning I searched the vastness of the internet for an answer.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://dot.la/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDUxMjgwOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxODEyMTM1NH0.eGBNQueLJopk_XhIaWqmpFPgnsHuEk1qVeQmRMH-DY4/image.jpg?width=980" id="3663d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3a4af8f33f024f411c8cfef27e2678a1" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
My distractingly sweet dog, Seamus.
Photo by Tami Abdollah
<p>Someone <a href="https://www.kvue.com/article/news/investigations/defenders/can-i-correct-a-mistake-on-my-mail-in-ballot-with-wite-out/269-3f248b3a-ee4d-41ec-94bd-a0af4a8670d3" target="_blank">asked about whether you could use whiteout</a> to blot out the mistaken choice. The consensus online seemed to be "no" that the ballot could seem tampered with. One <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/all-opinions-are-local/wp/2018/01/02/its-an-invalid-ballot-period/" target="_blank">Washington Post opinion article from 2018</a> argued that any efforts to rectify a ballot should invalidate it entirely. <a href="https://www.kqed.org/news/11840343/how-to-make-sure-your-mail-in-ballot-isnt-rejected-in-california#mistake" target="_blank">Another recent article by KQED said</a> that you should put a line or X through the wrong choice and that would be fine. Sadly, I'd already made a different mark by the proper choice. I read <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/4-common-mistakes-that-could-get-your-mail-in-ballot-rejected-and-how-to-make-sure-your-vote-is-counted-11601579628" target="_blank">stray marks can also be a problem</a> and invalidate the ballot. Are initials considered stray marks?</p><p>Kim Alexander, president of the nonprofit, nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, empathized, noting that "vote by mail shifts the responsibility of getting it right from poll worker to a voter, and that's a big change. It's not insignificant" or easy, and the rules usually differ between counties.<br></p><p>The next morning I called the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's helpline and was connected to a worker whose garbled voice seemed to match my emotions. I presented my dilemma.</p>
<p>"Hmmm it doesn't say anything about that here," the worker told me. "I'll have to put you on hold."<br/></p><p>After several more minutes of terrible hold music, she told me her connection was bad because she was working from home, and she would call me back. It didn't happen.</p><p>When I called the registrar's office back, I was told there was a 35 minute wait for a human being.</p><p>The worker who called me back told me that the specific measure I improperly filled out would not get counted, but the remainder of my votes should. I asked if my initials would present as stray marks and invalidate my ballot, and she said it shouldn't.</p><p>Over the course of those two days, I wondered if it was best to get the ballot sent in early even if one measure didn't count, or if I should just go vote early in-person.</p><p>Because Los Angeles County ballots go through an optical scanner, I wondered whether a human being would review the ballot or if any discrepancy is tossed. There is little reporting about how the county handles mail-in ballots, especially at scale. Is there a human being who reviews the process? A bipartisan team? How technically savvy is the scanner and what exactly can it differentiate?</p><p>The registrar's office never replied to repeated official calls and emails for answers to those questions.</p><p>Perez, the elections expert, told me that in his experience a mistake should not invalidate the entire ballot and that most modern digital scanning technology "should flag contests with questionable marks and present them to human reviewers" who can discern the voter's intent and make sure it's properly recorded.</p><p>Both Perez and Alexander also introduced another potential wrinkle I had not even thought about: In some states having personally identifiable information on a ballot — possibly like my initials — could invalidate the ballot because state laws could see that personal information as a violation of the secrecy of the ballot. Ack!</p><p>Perez said part of the problem with mail-in ballots is that unlike the traditional Election Day infrastructure, unless election officials make proactive efforts to provide more details, there is less knowledge about how votes are processed and counted when they are mailed in.</p><p>"It places a really big burden on the election officials [to] have resources to answer all these questions," Perez said. "How are you ensuring you have good factual information and you're passing it to all the worker bees you just hired?"</p><p>Neither Perez nor Alexander could say for sure what would happen with my initials on the ballot. Both thought it <em>should </em>probably be fine, but perhaps it would violate vote secrecy.</p><p>"You stumped the band," said Alexander, who added she was considering updating their own FAQ for voters.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://dot.la/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDUxMjgxNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NjQzNTgwOX0.SiflyT6B6FbAoPLrIrMVk01oeGw7_HIsZS7b4jQc7Lc/image.jpg?width=980" id="ef35d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="54ab7d5c08029f153009ed6bc7ef15cd" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
<small class="image-media media-caption focus-visible" data-focus-visible-added="" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">My sadly imperfect ballot.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Photo by Tami Abdollah</small></p><p>There are many more ways to make a mistake when mailing in your ballot, in one fashion or another. <a href="https://apnews.com/article/a45421048cd89938df7c882891a97db5" target="_blank">The Associated Press reported</a> this summer that "more than 100,000 mail-in ballots were rejected by California election officials during the March presidential primary." Among those were 27,525 which didn't have a signature or didn't have a signature match the one on record. A friend of mine was one of those, and she trekked out to vote early and in-person because she couldn't recall what her on-file signature looked like.<br/></p><p>I had no issues with my signature, it's been the same for decades, but I felt a little bereft over my supremely non high-tech problem. I continued to cull through the interwebs.</p><p>It was only much later, after searching diligently online by various keywords, that I stumbled upon a seemingly definitive answer in the latest version of <a href="https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/uniform-vote-counting-standards" target="_blank">California's Uniform Vote Counting Standards</a>. It turns out, whiteout, check marks, X marks and even writing "no" or "yes" can help confirm the vote you meant to cast. It's unclear what the optical scanner can do or whether the county has a human involved in the process though. And there was, sadly, nothing about whether initialing a choice would invalidate the secrecy of my ballot or be considered an invalid "random marking."</p><p>My angst was alleviated when the decision was taken out of my hands. The registrar's office emailed me back, and without answering my question about if the ballot would have been counted, they told me a new one would arrive in five days.</p><p>The reply did open up a whole new line of unanswered questions. I mean, is the existence of a second ballot invalidating? I emailed back: "What happens to my old ballot? How do I get rid of it?"</p><p>(The first ballot is automatically suspended to issue a second one, I later learned. And you can tear it up or put it through a paper shredder.)</p><p>And still, the question remains — what if I had mailed in that ballot.</p><p>Alexander also went down the rabbit hole with me, emailing me on a Saturday morning that she "woke up annoyed by our collective inability to answer" the question. She dug around and found that a <a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120SB183" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">2011 California law known as the "Doodle Law"</a> would have likely been applied in my case. <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_0151-0200/sb_183_cfa_20110824_171242_asm_floor.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">It states</a> that rather than reject a ballot that is marked in a way to identify a voter, that election workers separate and duplicate the ballot (without the problematic identifier) like for other defective ballots, before running it through the scanner.</p><p>So there it is, my vote would have probably counted if I had mailed in my ballot. But now I'll be sending a brand new on instead. In the end, it's clear that the state and local authorities have tried and are trying their best to ensure that all mail-in ballots count regardless of very normal human mistakes (see <a href="https://dot.la/voting-by-mail-tips-how-to-avoid-pitfalls-2648194341.html" target="_blank">this sidebar</a> on how to up those chances).</p><p>But my takeaway lesson from all this is that it's probably <a href="https://dot.la/voting-by-mail-tips-how-to-avoid-pitfalls-2648194341.html" target="_blank">best not to make a mistake in the first place</a> when voting by mail, oh, and maybe put your dog in a separate room while you vote.</p><p><em>___</em></p><p><em>Hit me up if you have any other election and voting-related questions. My DMs are open on </em><a href="https://twitter.com/latams" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><em>Twitter @latams</em></a><em> You can also email me at tami(at)dot.la, or ask for my contact on Signal, for more secure and private communications.</em></p>Related Articles Around the Web
Read more
Show less
Less than seven months after launching, the high-flying streaming service Quibi has shut down.
Despite a sold-out advertising slate, deals with A-listers and a $1.75 billion war chest from high-profile investors the former Disney executive and founder Jeffrey Katzenberg couldn't make the short-form mobile video platform stick.
<p>Katzenberg called investors on Wednesday to tell them Quibi would shut down, ending one of Hollywood's most high-profile streaming endeavors by a storied executive. The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/quibi-weighs-shutting-down-as-problems-mount-11603301946" target="_blank">first reported</a> the news. </p><p>Shortly after, Katzenberg and the company's CEO, Meg Whitman, published a post on Medium acknowledging the news and blaming it on a combination of the pandemic and the execution. </p><p>"Quibi is not succeeding," they wrote. "Likely for one of two reasons: because the idea itself wasn't strong enough to justify a standalone streaming service or because of our timing."</p><p>The two said they would return cash to shareholders and look for buyers for their remaining assets.</p><p>"While the result was not what any of us wanted, we did accomplish a number of things and we are very proud of what the talented Quibi team has built with the blood, sweat, and tears that they poured into this business over these past two years," they wrote.</p><p>Katzenberger had tried to sell Quibi to tech giants such as Apple, Facebook and NBCUniversal, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/quibi-explores-strategic-options-including-a-possible-sale-11600707806" target="_blank">The Information</a> reported. All passed. He also considered taking the company public to raise additional funds, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/quibi-explores-strategic-options-including-a-possible-sale-11600707806" target="_blank">according to the Wall St. Journal</a>. That didn't pan out either.</p><p>"Our failure was not for lack of trying; we've considered and exhausted every option available to us," Katzenberg and Whitman wrote.</p><p>Launched on April 6, with dozens of short-form original series, Quibi executives said they did not intend to compete with Netflix or Hulu. Instead, they hoped targeted viewers on their mobile devices for short-form content, aiming to catch them while they were waiting in line or looking for a quick entertainment fix in between other moments. But the company failed to catch on and faced fierce competition by YouTube, Facebook and other short-format video platforms that millennials and Gen Z have already adopted.<br/></p><p>Katzenberg had previously blamed lackluster user reach on the pandemic and the stay-at-home culture it created for putting an end to the commutes and time spent waiting in line where they hoped to meet their audience.</p><p>"The circumstances of launching during a pandemic is something we could have never imagined but other businesses have faced these unprecedented challenges and have found their way through it. We were not able to do so," he and Whitman wrote.<br/></p><p>Another disadvantage was the astronomical production costs for creating the content, were reported to be up to $100,000 each minute. Quibi had signed on stars <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/06/arts/television/quibi-shows-stars.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">like Chrissy Teigen, Tyra Banks and Tom Cruise</a>.</p><p>But with no hit show or catalog of familiar flicks, Quibi struggled. Plus, it arrived in the middle of the pandemic when mobile users were stuck at home, not waiting in lines or riding public transit.<br/></p><p>Quibi attracted investment from some of Hollywood's biggest players including the Walt Disney Company, 21st Century Fox, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., NBCUniversal, Viacom Inc and Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Quibi CEO Meg Whitman Sees a Renaissance in Hollywood - dot.LA ›
- Quibi May be Struggling With Advertisers - dot.LA ›
- Unboxing Quibi: Inside the New Mobile Streaming App and Its Shows ›
- Pegasus Tech Ventures' Anis Uzzaman On Why Quibi is Here to Stay ›
- Quibi Is Here: Will It Last? - dot.LA ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read more
Show less
RELATEDEDITOR'S PICKS