#tim drummond

[meadow-dusk]

[hoppkorv]

Sip The Wine Rick Danko Rick Danko (1977)

[moviesiveseenandwanttoremember]

Neil Young’s “Harvest Time” December 1st, 2022.

[carbuckety]

Rolling Stone Snippet 3

Happy birthday, Bob Dylan! :D

Dylan in the Rolling Thunder Revue tour bus, 1975.

On his 1975 album, Blood on the Tracks . . .

As some 17 songs filled the red notebook, Dylan began to hone his work further by playing it for friends coast to coast. On July 22nd, he performed eight or nine songs for Stephen Stills and bassist Tim Drummond in a hotel room after a Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young show in St. Paul. "We were on twin beds, sitting across from each other," Drummond told Rolling Stone. "Oh, God, I can't tell you how great it was." Stills was less impressed. After Dylan left, according to Graham Nash, Stills said, "He's a good songwriter... but he's no musician."

[nedison]

Shot Of Love - Bob Dylan (July 25, 1981 - Palace des Sports, Avignon, France)

Just an absolute barnburner from Gospel Bob and company. Top-tier live Dylan right here with Clydie King just ripping it up on backing vox.

[mitjalovse]

Neil Young's discography and my discussions of the latter show quite a peculiar opinion of mine. I mean, I like Neil Young, when he's pissed. Thus, On The Beach might be one of my favourite albums of him – you can be certain the other is Trans –, since he presents his eclectic side. Sure, this is what a Neil Young LP with all what the latter phrase entails should be, yet the whole thing also plays with his persona at that point. Therefore, I propose a strange theory – I tend to believe one can understand the conflict he had with David Crosby by listening to On The Beach, i.e. Crosby was an idealist and he was a pain in the ass about that, whereas Neil Young always had a funny side of him with which he fought against the bleak reality.

[longliverockback]

Neil Young  Time Fades Away 1973 Reprise ————————————————— Tracks: 1. Time Fades Away 2. Journey through the Past 3. Yonder Stands the Sinner 4. L.A. 5. Love in Mind 6. Don’t Be Denied 7. The Bridge 8. Last Dance —————————————————

John Barbata

David Crosby

Tim Drummond

Ben Keith

Graham Nash

Jack Nitzsche

Neil Young

* Long Live Rock Archive

[spilladabalia]

Neil Young - Time Fades Away

[torneio-sexymen-brasil]

[mariacallous]

In March 2007, Google’s then senior executive in charge of acquisitions, David Drummond, emailed the company’s board of directors a case for buying DoubleClick. It was an obscure software developer that helped websites sell ads. But it had about 60 percent market share and could accelerate Google’s growth while keeping rivals at bay. A “Microsoft-owned DoubleClick represents a major competitive threat,” court papers show Drummond writing.

Three weeks later, on Friday the 13th, Google announced the acquisition of DoubleClick for $3.1 billion. The US Department of Justice and 17 states including California and Colorado now allege that the day marked the beginning of Google’s unchecked dominance in online ads—and all the trouble that comes with it.

The government contends that controlling DoubleClick enabled Google to corner websites into doing business with its other services. That has resulted in Google allegedly monopolizing three big links of a vital digital advertising supply chain, which funnels over $12 billion in annual revenue to websites and apps in the US alone.

It’s a big amount. But a government expert estimates in court filings that if Google were not allegedly destroying its competition illegally, those publishers would be receiving up to an additional hundreds of millions of dollars each year. Starved of that potential funding, “publishers are pushed to put more ads on their websites, to put more content behind costly paywalls, or to cease business altogether,” the government alleges. It all adds up to a subpar experience on the web for consumers, Colorado attorney general Phil Weiser says.

“Google is able to extract hiked-up costs, and those are passed on to consumers,” he alleges. “The overall outcome we want is for consumers to have more access to content supported by advertising revenue and for people who are seeking advertising not to have to pay inflated costs.”

Google disputes the accusations.

Starting today, both sides’ arguments will be put to the test in what’s expected to be a weekslong trial before US district judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia. The government wants her to find that Google has violated federal antitrust law and then issue orders that restore competition. In a best-case scenario, according to several Google critics and experts in online ads who spoke with WIRED, internet users could find themselves more pleasantly informed and entertained.

It could take years for the ad market to shake out, says Adam Heimlich, a longtime digital ad executive who’s extensively researched Google. But over time, fresh competition could lower supply chain fees and increase innovation. That would drive “better monetization of websites and better quality of websites,” says Heimlich, who now runs AI software developer Chalice Custom Algorithms.

Tim Vanderhook, CEO of ad-buying software developer Viant Technology, which both competes and partners with Google, believes that consumers would encounter a greater variety of ads, fewer creepy ads, and pages less cluttered with ads. “A substantially improved browsing experience,” he says.

Of course, all depends on the outcome of the case. Over the past year, Google lost its two other antitrust trials—concerning illegal search and mobile app store monopolies. Though the verdicts are under appeal, they’ve made the company’s critics optimistic about the ad tech trial.

Google argues that it faces fierce competition from Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and others. It further contends that customers benefited from each of the acquisitions, contracts, and features that the government is challenging. “Google has designed a set of products that work efficiently with each other and attract a valuable customer base,” the company’s attorneys wrote in a 359-page rebuttal.

For years, Google publicly has maintained that its ad tech projects wouldn’t harm clients or competition. “We will be able to help publishers and advertisers generate more revenue, which will fuel the creation of even more rich and diverse content on the internet,” Drummond testified in 2007 to US senators concerned about the DoubleClick deal’s impact on competition and privacy. US antitrust regulators at the time cleared the purchase. But at least one of them, in hindsight, has said he should have blocked it.

Deep Control

The Justice Department alleges that acquiring DoubleClick gave Google “a pool of captive publishers that now had fewer alternatives and faced substantial switching costs associated with changing to another publisher ad server.” The global market share of Google’s tool for publishers is now 91 percent, according to court papers. The company holds similar control over ad exchanges that broker deals (around 70 percent) and tools used by advertisers (85 percent), the court filings say.

Google’s dominance, the government argues, has “impaired the ability of publishers and advertisers to choose the ad tech tools they would prefer to use and diminished the number and quality of viable options available to them.”

The government alleges that Google staff spoke internally about how they have been earning an unfair portion of what advertisers spend on advertising, to the tune of over a third of every $1 spent in some cases.

Some of Google’s competitors want the tech giant to be broken up into multiple independent companies, so each of its advertising services competes on its own merits without the benefit of one pumping up another. The rivals also support rules that would bar Google from preferencing its own services. “What all in the industry are looking for is fair competition,” Viant’s Vanderhook says.

If Google ad tech alternatives win more business, not everyone is so sure that the users will notice a difference. “We’re talking about moving from the NYSE to Nasdaq,” Ari Paparo, a former DoubleClick and Google executive who now runs the media company Marketecture, tells WIRED. The technology behind the scenes may shift, but the experience for investors—or in this case, internet surfers—doesn’t.

Some advertising experts predict that if Google is broken up, users’ experiences would get even worse. Andrey Meshkov, chief technology officer of ad-block developer AdGuard, expects increasingly invasive tracking as competition intensifies. Products also may cost more because companies need to not only hire additional help to run ads but also buy more ads to achieve the same goals. “So the ad clutter is going to get worse,” Beth Egan, an ad executive turned Syracuse University associate professor, told reporters in a recent call arranged by a Google-funded advocacy group.

But Dina Srinivasan, a former ad executive who as an antitrust scholar wrote a Stanford Technology Law Review paper on Google’s dominance, says advertisers would end up paying lower fees, and the savings would be passed on to their customers. That future would mark an end to the spell Google allegedly cast with its DoubleClick deal. And it could happen even if Google wins in Virginia. A trial in a similar lawsuit filed by Texas, 15 other states, and Puerto Rico is scheduled for March.

[meadow-dusk]

Neil Young + The Stray Gators ©️ Joel Bernstein, 1972

[rustvisioneil]

Neil young Nicolette Larson Tim drummond

[dollarbin]

Shakey Sundays #26:

Tuscaloosa

My buddy Greg has a screw loose. He opined in a recent email stream that he preferred Eddie Vedder's vocals to Kurt Cobain's. This was part of a longer Nerd Club level discussion involving my famous brother focused in on Jackson C. Frank's palpable merits alongside Sandy Denny's transcend ones, as discussed in yesterday's post.

Greg thinks Sandy is too operatic; like I said, he's all jam packed into a Costco sized bin of mixed nuts.

I like my women divine (see Denny, Sandy, Ronstadt, Linda and wife, mine) and my men pedestrian (that's me, in all things). And so I prefer warped but playable records and I prefer Neil Young when he's altered on stage.

And that brings us to Tuscaloosa, Shakey's alternative to Time Fades Away, which came out 5 or so years ago. I picked up my first vinyl copy this weekend while on holybobs for the very Dollar Bin price of just $14.99 because, you guessed it, "LP2 Warped - Plays Fine" was scrawled beside the price tag.

I've had plenty of chances to buy a pristine copy for $30-$40 any day of the week in the past few years but I never even considered it. After all, I've always had the album ready to rock on my trusty Steve-Jobs-was-still-alive-and-grumpy era IPod, and so I held out for an ugly cousin copy instead of every minty record out there.

Why own something normal and new when you could own something compromised and helpless? Well, there's the whole I'm-a-cheapskate angle, sure; I do like my gin generic.

But there's another reason in my back pocket, a reason which is hopefully more interesting. You see, my warped copy of Tuscaloosa was so sad in its bin; it longed for companionship; it longed to spin on the turntable of life. But just like me in every elementary school sports side picking process, it just kept getting passed on by.

David Berman understood this whole gesture and explained it better in song than I ever could here in print. Like poor old Dave, I can't stand handsome grandsons; give me the fat ones, the bald and the goateed.

Eddie Vedder? Yuck. The guy sounds like he once took a singing lesson; plus he looks like the grown up version of every fifth grader who sighed and said, "well, I guess you're on our team; but don't get in the way" when all the side picking was done.

Give me poor old Kurt's tortured pain and voice cracks every day of the week.

And give me Tuscaloosa! Neil is hammered and stumbling throughout, searching for vaguely familiar notes and just barely holding it together.

Just check out After the Gold Rush. Neil dedicates the song to the groundlings in the cheap seats, blows more than a few of the opening chords and then announces that "Drummond's drumming" instead of "drummers drumming". His bass player on the tour was named Tim Drummond so the confusion is reasonable; no, never mind that: his confusion is awesome!

The song's whole performance is wrecked and staggering. Between the second and third verses it sounds like Neil loses the thread altogether. I love this take as much as I love my sad new vinyl copy. Warped: that's what I like.

But perhaps the least slick and most loveable part of the whole show is Neil's attempt at building a musical intro for the band. Take a listen:

They never do get the tempo right... But, like Neil's famous handwriting, perfect has no place on Planet Shakey.

Young was famously disgusted with this whole band and tour. He fired the Chewbacca of all drummers, Kenny Buttrey, soon after this show and replaced him with a guy from The Turtles. He then did his best to write off the whole experience by refusing for a long time to reissue Time Fades Away.

I feel for him. But at the same time, I really don't care: I'm too busy sitting on my rented ocean view porch and grooving to Tuscaloosa.

What's the best part of my view, you ask? Check out all the stunted trees and the uncut wild grasses that are blocking the postcard perfect view...

I'm in a Shakey house and on a Shakey vacation. And it's perfect.

[recentlyheardcom]

At the height of the “boys think about the Roman Empire daily” discourse of mid-September, when everyone on the internet seemed to be saying what their “Roman Empire” was, @thenoasletter issued a tweet that went viral and quickly got millions of views: “my mom just said her ‘roman empire’ is how the pioneer woman’s family owns all the land killers of the flower moon is about.” Is this really true? Did the family of Ree Drummond—the folksy ranch wife, blogger, and Food Network star, famous for her cans-based approach to cooking and for being married to a guy she calls “the Marlboro Man”—somehow end up holding the land in Osage County, Oklahoma, where greedy white settlers murdered members of the Osage Nation for their mineral rights during the 1920s, the “Reign of Terror” that became the subject of a bestselling David Grann book and a forthcoming Martin Scorsese movie?The person to ask about this history is Rachel Adams-Heard, a Bloomberg reporter whose 2022 podcast, In Trust, looked at what happened to the Osage Nation’s land and mineral rights after the Reign of Terror. Adams-Heard shows how the transfer of wealth from Osage to white hands wasn’t just a matter of murder, but also happened within the boundaries of the law. Because many Osages were assigned white “guardians” by the state, and couldn’t make financial transactions without their approval, there was ample room for corruption.The Drummond family that the Pioneer Woman married into, some members of which acted as guardians for Osage wards, ends up being a big part of this story. Adams-Heard interviews several present-day Drummonds, including Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, about what she finds out. I spoke with Adams-Heard this week. Our conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.Rebecca Onion: Let’s look first at the numbers. How much of the former Osage land is actually currently Drummond land, in that area?Rachel Adams-Heard: Osage County is almost 1.5 million acres, which is massive. It’s bigger than the state of Delaware. When you add up all of the land that the extended members of the Drummond family own today—or as of last year, when we did our analysis—it is nearly 9 percent of the entire county. My colleagues Linly Lin and Devon Pendleton also valued the land. It’s valued at $275 million at least, because this land is really prime grazing land. It’s covered in bluestem grass, which is one of the best ways to fatten cattle.One thing the Drummonds we interviewed would stress to us when we brought them these findings is that they respect each other’s fence lines. So it’s not that all of that 9 percent is owned by one immediate family. We’re talking about second, third cousins in some cases.Some of the biggest single ranches in the Drummond family are the one run by Ree Drummond’s husband, Ladd, and his brother Tim, as well as the one run by current Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond.If people have read David Grann’s book, they know that the dispute covered in it is not about land, per se—it was about what was called “headrights,” which was about Osage access to money from the oil that was making that land so valuable. Oil isn’t such a big factor in Osage County now, 100 years later. So what’s at stake has changed.Yeah. It might be helpful to do a little history here. Osage County, we already established, biggest county in Oklahoma. You’ll hear “Osage County” and you’ll also hear “the Osage Reservation,” and they have the same boundaries. Former Osage Chief Jim Gray explained it like this to me, which I found helpful: Basically, when Oklahoma became a state, Osage County was established directly on top of the Osage Reservation. Through this policy called “allotment,” the surface land was divided up into these individual parcels and distributed to individual Osage citizens. But all the mineral rights beneath the surface were put into one big pot and divided into equal shares, between 2,229 Osage tribal members in all, and those are what later became called “headrights.

”So before allotment, all the land had been owned by the Osage Nation. It was for the nation to decide how it would be used. But now it was all divided into sections. Some were too small to profitably farm, so it was these headrights that ended up being far more lucrative in this time period, because oil production took off in the 1910s and ’20s. Because of the way that those headrights could, for the most part, be transferred only through inheritance, that was when you saw these horrible schemes like the ones depicted in Killers of the Flower Moon.But yes, the bulk of Killers of the Flower Moon really focuses on the transfer of those headrights, not necessarily the land itself. But land was still a huge part of all this. William K. Hale [played by Robert De Niro in the movie], who was convicted for aiding and abetting the murder of the Osage man Henry Roan—he was a rancher. That was one of his biggest business enterprises. When he was arrested, he sold his land to a partnership between the Drummond family and another prominent Oklahoma ranching family, the Mullendore family.So, if you’re talking about the surface land in Killers of the Flower Moon, you might be thinking about that land, the land that William K. Hale owned when he was arrested.If you search for “Drummond” in the Kindle version of Grann’s Killers of the Flower Moon, there’s only one appearance—a citation to a biography of A.A. “Jack” Drummond, one of the generation alive at the time of the Reign of Terror. So it’s not like you’re going to go to the movie and see, Oh, look, it’s Pioneer Woman’s husband’s great-grandfather.A lot of Killers of the Flower Moon looks at one particular community within the Osage Reservation, the Fairfax/Gray Horse District, and where the early Drummond family members in Osage County primarily had their businesses was around Hominy. We’re talking about the same county, but it’s a slightly different community. Hominy doesn’t really come up as much in the book.One of the more interesting and probably more relevant-to-the-movie things that we found was about the William K. Hale land that was sold. It was a big contiguous position, which was hard to come by at the time because allotment had divided the land into such small parcels, and there were a lot of rules around how and when Osage families could sell that land. After I found out that the Drummond family was part of this partnership that bought it, I just kept an eye out for anything that indicated how they paid for it, what they ended up doing with that land.As part of this collection at the University of Central Oklahoma that one of the Drummond brothers’ biographers donated, there’s this memo between two of the original three Drummond brothers who really started the big ranching enterprise. It seems to indicate that they borrowed $15,000 from their Osage ward to pay for the land that they bought from William K. Hale. There’s no other indication that I’ve seen of that borrowing, in any of the other records, so we’re not sure what actually happened.This particular Osage man, Myron Bangs Jr., he was incredibly skeptical of his guardians. He on several occasions wrote U.S. officials and suggested that he thought that his guardians—one was Roy Cecil Drummond, and later it was Fred Gentner Drummond—were improperly using his land, that he didn’t trust the way that they were managing his money. But because U.S. policy basically determined that Osage citizens were incompetent, he really had no power to get out from under that guardianship. So to see that he might not have known that his money was used to purchase this land from a man who was convicted of aiding and abetting a murder of another Osage man—I mean, that was really striking to see.It was very interesting to hear Gentner Drummond’s reactions to the documents you brought him, about the Bangs guardianship. His reaction was—I wouldn’t say defensive, but he said, since the federal judiciary found that there was no wrongdoing in the guardianship, that’s what he was going to focus on, not on Bangs’ allegations.

These transactions, where the Drummonds ended up with land or the fraction of a headright they do have, were actually legal, so it’s hard to say where the wrongdoing lies.It’s really hard to look at individual land transactions and know the reason why that land was sold by an Osage family, or the reason why it was purchased by the original three Drummond brothers. That was one of the biggest challenges of reporting this. But what we were able to see is really that this family was able to amass so much wealth relatively quickly, in a place that had all been entirely owned by the Osage Nation just a decade or two earlier.It’s important to go back to their original business in Osage County, when the three brothers’ father, Frederick Drummond, first came to Oklahoma. This was before statehood, and he got into the trading business. He would sell goods to Osages. When their oil wealth took off, these trading posts run by white settlers were able to take advantage of that. They started charging more and more, and Osage families started shopping more and more, just like you’d expect any wealthy person to do. But these places weren’t really like a store, like we think of today. They sold farming supplies and food and clothes and even caskets. In fact, the undertaking business was probably one of the most lucrative parts.So you just had a tremendous amount of money coming through the door. Because there were all these restrictions by the U.S. government on how Osages could spend their own money, a lot of them wound up in debt, because they would have to buy things on credit at the store. What we can see from congressional testimony is that some families would be thousands of dollars in debt, which at the time was a tremendous amount of money, to the Drummonds’ store in Hominy. In some cases, we saw while a family was in $2,000 to $3,000 of debt, their land would be deeded over to a member of the Drummond family for what we can tell was a very low price. But again, it’s impossible to know for sure whether that land was used to settle that debt.And the other thing, too, is that it’s easy to look at the annual guardianship fees that were charged, $1,000 here or there, and think, like, Oh, well, that’s not enough to really change things, but it adds up over time. In the case of Myron Bangs Jr.’s guardianship alone, there was some $15,000 that ultimately went to his guardians as a fee, which is a quarter of a million dollars, at least, in today’s money.Then the other element to all this is the access to financing from Osage accounts the guardians had, because they were in charge and they and their friends and business associates were overseeing these Osage bank accounts. And so what we also noticed is that Osage money was being used to finance land purchases and land improvements by the Drummonds and their business associates.Another layer of wealth-building.With the Hale land, the Drummonds did end up selling most of that to the Mullendore family. And then a lot of that was later sold to other parties. But there was a portion that was passed on through later generations of Drummonds and eventually went to Charles Drummond, who was Ree Drummond’s father-in-law. In the early 2000s, he sold that piece, which was around 400 acres, along with many, many other acres, to Ted Turner, who ended up with a portion of what had been the William K. Hale land. But some 15 or so years later, Turner put it up for sale. It was the Osage Nation who ended up winning the bid.So that piece of land that had gone from Osage families, to William K. Hale, to the Drummonds and Mullendores, to the Drummonds, to Ted Turner, is now back with the Osage Nation.Have you heard anything from the Drummonds about your series since it went up?Generally speaking, they still stand by the idea that they never heard anything about their ancestors that alarmed them, or that indicated that they were anything other than trustworthy men. They said that they either didn’t know that their

ancestors were guardians, or if they did, they had always heard it was because they were trusted by their Osage neighbors.We never heard from Ree Drummond. We obviously reached out several times.Have you been to her businesses in Pawhuska? I’ve never been there. I think it’s interesting that she has a store there now. Very full-circle.Yeah. Every time I was in Pawhuska, the store was really busy. It’s called the Mercantile, and everyone calls it “the Merc.” Then she has a kind of high-end hotel or boutique hotel called the Boarding House. She has several other restaurants.A lot of Osage citizens have conflicted feelings when we bring up her name in Osage County, because a lot of people will say, “She’s done a lot for Pawhuska,” but it’s still a really difficult, challenging, traumatic history. It’s important to know that when I first stepped foot in Osage County, I was not the first to ask this question about the land, or to talk to people about it. This has been something that was circulating in Osage circles for a really long time.The Osage Nation has been very active through all of this. Myron Bangs was active in fighting his guardianship. Osage leaders back in the early 20th century were active in making sure that the mineral estate and their retention of all the mineral rights as a nation wasn’t terminated. The Osage Nation government is very active today in trying to buy back as much land as possible, and really use that ranch that they bought to further the interests of the Osage Nation as a whole. They would say to us, “We were really fighting for our sovereignty, and our future.”

[mitjalovse]

Neil Young was on the way to become a folk rock superstar, he just needed a platter to achieve this status. Well, Harvest was the album, where that happened. Everything clicked for him there, but why? One could say his personal and health issues caused him to find some solace in a studio – we mustn't forget his work with Crosby, Stills and Nash achieved one of the peaks at that point –, where he was getting better at his approach. However, we must state despite all his problems Harvest's not diaristic. While his emotions at the time do ground the LP from being too much, the disc also presents the latter quality of his as a feature, not a bug. Moreover, his biggest hit is there, check the link, and this is a song with such a staggering simplicity only he could've sung.