Paul McCartney has won many awards and honors in his time. He’s been knighted by the Queen, won Grammies, humanitarian awards, and is easily one of the wealthiest entertainers in the world. And, amazingly, Sir Paul managed to achieve all of these things without the benefit of university degree. But Yale University decided it was time to rectify this omission once and for all.

On Monday, the former Beatle was awarded an honorary doctorate degree in music from Yale University. The Yale faculty pointed out that no single songwriter could compare with McCartney’s hundreds of classic tunes. As a musician, singer and songwriter, McCartney virtually has no equal. His self-penned song “Yesterday” is the most recorded tune of all time, and his back catalogue boasts hundreds of chart toppers and critically acclaimed songs.

McCartney was made a Knight of the British Realm in 1996 by Queen Elizabeth II, joining Elton John, Anthony Hopkins and other world-famous entertainers who have received the honor. And at 65, McCartney is still pushing boundaries and releasing critically acclaimed albums, proving that he’s not simply resting on his many laurels
and accolades.

In bestowing the honorary Doctor of Music degree, Yale University said that Sir Paul had “awakened” an entire generation of music lovers, and breathed fresh life into the well-worn rock, and rhythm and blues genres.

Yale University also played host to another famous Brit over the weekend: former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who was chosen to give the commencement address for this year’s graduating class. The Yale Daily News reported that Sir Paul McCartney, Tony Blair and Yale University President Richard Levin were spotted having dinner together on Sunday night.

The following day at his commencement speech, former Prime Minister Blair mentioned the dinner with Sir Paul McCartney while encouraging students to persevere in times of hardship. Blair noted that “the first record company the Beatles approached rejected them as a band no one would want to listen to.”

Yale has a long history of awarding honorary degrees, usually during their commencement events. But unlike many “fly-by-night” institutions, Yale is not known for simply handing out honorary doctorates simply because a person is famous, or has achieved notoriety in some way. The governing board of the university is notoriously picky when choosing honorary degree recipients. Thus, an honorary degree from Yale is certainly an accolade worth boasting about.

But even with Yale’s stringent standards about awarding honorary doctorates, there is likely no better suited recipient of the degree than Sir Paul McCartney. His body of work, and decades of involvement in humanitarian causes make Sir Paul worthy of the highest honor any university could bestow — even Yale.

Netflix has just introduced a new “set-top” device to compete with Apple TV. The unit allows Netflix subscribers to stream movies and television shows downloaded online from their computer to their home TV set. Netflix, which is now the largest video rental service in the US, developed the new set-top device in conjunction with Roku, a manufacturer of consumer electronics.

The new Netflix device will retail for $100, a bargain compared to Apple TV, whose least expensive streaming movie box is priced at $229. The unit is also smaller and less obtrusive than the Apple TV device, and includes a remote control and a variety of outputs ranging from HDMI, S-video and both digital and analog stereo audio connections.

The Netflix player also features both ethernet and WiFi connectivity for transferring movies and other video programming directly from the computer to any standard home television. Netflix claims that their “queuing” protocol for streaming films is simpler and more user-friendly than its Apple TV counterpart.

Content-wise, the new set-top device will offer Netflix subscribers immediate access to over 10,000 movies and television programs, though that number is expected to grow substantially over the coming months. Currently, Netflix has a rental catalog of more than 100,000 videos to choose from, and eventually most of these are expected to be available for streaming directly to TV.

There are a few catches however: in order to use the new device to stream movies from computer to television, users must subscribe to Netflix’ unlimited monthly subscription plan for a recurring fee of $8.99 monthly. Another downside is that, unlike Apple’s service, Netflix will not offer movies on the same day as their DVD release. Netflix movies are also only available in standard definition, compared to Apple TV’s HD quality with Dolby sound.

On the plus side, Apple TV doesn’t offer a subscription service at all, but instead uses an à la carte pricing structure which charges between three and five dollars for each new release. For heavy film buffs, those individual fees could add up quickly, meaning that a Netflix unlimited subscription could wind up saving the user a lot of money.

The Netflix device will also include automatic upgrade software, so that the operating system can be kept current at all times. And although the device may not have some of the more robust features of Apple TV, Netflix claims it is simpler to operate and more stable for the end-user. Besides all that, there is a huge price difference between $100 and $229, so when you take that into consideration, the new Netflix player begins to look like a pretty good deal.

Apple is currently negotiating with HBO to sell movies and programs from the pay-cable network on its iTunes web site. Wired.com is reporting that executives from Apple have confirmed the two companies are in negotiations and nearing a deal to secure HBO programming for iTunes.

This is just the latest in a string of good fortune for iTunes, which as of February this year became the largest music retailer in the United States, surpassing even Wal-Mart. And even though iTunes is facing increasing competition in its downloadable music department from Amazon.com and others, the company is continuing to expand its offerings to include more video, television and film programming.

The inclusion of HBO’s acclaimed miniseries’, film’s and comedy specials should be a big draw for iTunes, though it will be a few weeks before the HBO content is available, according to insiders.

Details of the iTunes-HBO agreement are still sketchy, but it appears that HBO has negotiated a higher price for their content than other films and television shows available on iTunes. This will be the first time that iTunes has deviated from their flat fee for video content. The company normally charges $1.99 for all titles. Clearly, HBO successfully lobbied to receive a larger cut for their programs.

Other networks have failed to convince iTunes to raise their standard $1.99 fee, including NBC, which withdrew its content from iTunes last year after the company refused to negotiate a higher fee for NBC programs.

On the rebound, NBC made a deal with Microsoft to feature its programs on their Zune web site. In hindsight though, this appears to have been a strategic mistake for NBC; Zune has never really taken off with the public, and continues to be trampled by iTunes in both popularity and profitability.

Perhaps HBO was able to succeed where NBC failed because of the quality of its programs. The network has produced scores of award-winning and critically acclaimed miniseries, comedy specials and weekly talk shows, such as “Real Time with Bill Maher” and “The Chris Rock Show.”

The new HBO deal should also help Apple increase sales of its struggling Apple TV device. The unit allows users to instantly rent and buy content online and have it sent directly to their television for viewing, instead of using the computer.

HBO also stands to benefit from the arrangement. The network has a large back catalogue of programs that could prove profitable on iTunes. And of course, HBO’s recent offerings, such as the critically acclaimed “John Adams” or “Rome” miniseries’ should also be big hits online.

While details of the deal have not been revealed, for now, it appears that HBO and Apple have negotiated a win-win agreement. The biggest winners, though, are the viewers, who will soon have a greater choice of quality films and programs to choose from on iTunes.

Many successful celebrities and actors started their careers in modeling, and reading this article might make you one of them someday.

Many ambitious young women dream of walking in the catwalk of Milan, Paris, Barcelona, New York or seeing themselves on famous fashion magazine covers. Although most of the models came from well known families, or clan of public icons and celebrities, there are other ways for ordinary people to become a successful model. Knowing things that are involved in modeling career is the first step.

Misconception

A very common misconception for women is that, one has to be thin, tall, and slim to be a model. Although most of the models and even supermodels in fact possess these physical attributes, there are also needs for men and women who are not slim in some areas of modeling. Not all models need to be thin. It depends on what kind of work you want to do. There are child models, fat models, petite models, and models for all ages.

Body part modeling

Most people who are looking to enter into modeling career think of modeling with regards to fashion. They do not consider other areas of modeling industry like introducing commercial products where body part modeling is necessary. For example, there are commercials for personal care products such as hand creams or body lotions where aesthetically appealing body parts are used to maximize the promotional effect.

Modeling agents

So how can you start a lucrative modeling career? In major cities especially in US and Europe, you’ll often hear of some modeling agents or modeling companies holding auditions. Parents in particular must be aware of what most of these opportunities can do to their son, daughter, or kids, who wanted to be models. But be careful, some of them are just seeking students for their modeling school. And modeling schools are often too expensive. They always promise great return after the while when course is done, but most of them have nothing to do with actual applications.

Portfolio of professional images

One of the best approaches is to have professional photographs of yourself and create a portfolio so that you have something to show to legit modeling agencies. These photographs must come in different settings. Make sure to include some important details like modeling experience (if you have), and some modeling work. Having the said portfolio will boost your chance of having a good offer. If you want to apply online, you can upload these photos to the agencies’ websites for their consideration.

Entering into a modeling career is like applying for a flight stewardess wherein competition is terrible. Be ready for this and you must have a lot of guts. Modeling is not just for people who are good looking and blessed with physical attributes. Modeling is for all who are making their own way to meet their goal with perseverance and determination. There are many supermodels that can be considered “from rags to riches” but it is because of their determination that they are in the place where they should be now. Lastly, you must be resourceful and attentive to any available open auditions.

As the Internet continues to gain popularity as a source of news and entertainment, so-called “old media” outlets such as television networks and newspapers are steadily receding into the background. In April, newspapers in the US reported circulation decreases of 3.6% on average, according to Bloomberg.com.

One of the hardest hit major newspapers in the US was the Los Angeles Times, which reported a 5.1% fall in circulation over the last six months. The New York Times also lost readers, reporting a 3.9% drop in circulation in the same period. Overall, US newspaper circulation dropped from 42.6 million in the spring of 2007 to 41.1 million in March of 2008.

The only two major papers not to show a decrease were the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. In fact, USA Today actually gained readers, reporting a .3% increase in circulation over last year, though their results were certainly not representative of the industry as a whole.

Newspapers representing large metropolitan areas have seen the greatest declines in circulation over the past year. The Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune, the Detroit Free Press and New York’s Newsday were some of the hardest hit. The Dallas morning news even reported a profit-slashing 10.6% decline in circulation, with the Boston Globe close behind with an 8.3% decrease.

For the newspaper industry as a whole, these numbers represent an escalating trend; more consumers are turning to the Internet for their news and dropping their subscriptions to local papers. In fact, the newspapers which fared the best over the past year were national brands like USA Today and the Wall Street Journal that are not limited to one specific metropolitan area.

With circulations decreasing and this rate, it is looking increasingly inevitable that some major US cities will wind up without a daily newspaper at some point. It’s hard to imagine, but in the not-too-distant future, large cities such as Detroit, Dallas, or Atlanta may wind up without a daily paper.

But forward thinking publishers are taking steps to increase their online presence, in preparation for the day when it is no longer economically viable to publish newspapers. The New York Times, for example, has greatly expanded its online presence, as has the Wall Street Journal, the San Francisco Chronicle and the Washington Post.

The writing on the wall is very clear: if these “old media” publishers are going to survive, they are going to have to morph into “new media” publishers– and very quickly.

The WB network could never really seem to catch a break. The fledgling TV network began broadcasting in 1995, only to eventually close up shop in 2006, and their nine-year TV experiment contained many notable failures, and relatively few successful programs to bring in the all-important advertising revenue.

But the New York Times is reporting that the WB is about to return; but this time as a web site. The WB site will feature online streaming video of new original programming and classic shows from the Warner Bros. vault. Additionally, Warner Bros. is launching KidsWB.com, a complementary web site aimed at the younger demographic.

The new WB online network, called TheWB.com, is an interesting experiment, with the company seeking to create a profitable outlet for their original content via the Internet. The WB site hopes to take advantage of the emerging trend of watching “television” programs on the computer, something that is especially popular with the younger generation.

The network will use an ad sponsored revenue model to support free episodes of shows such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and The Gilmore Girls. In addition, episodes of other programs owned by Warner productions will also be streamed online, including “Friends” and “The OC.”

But the new online network won’t just focus on Warner Bros’ “greatest hits.” The site is also planning several new programs that are made specifically for the web site. With Fox, HBO and most other networks rushing to develop online content, the new WB site will have plenty of competition. And let’s not forget the free-for-all video popularity of YouTube, which is still the most watched video-related site online.

The WB web site will have to work hard to win over viewers that are used to short-form video comedies and other programming online. In addition, major networks like ABC are streaming episodes of their most popular programs online; not to mention NBC Universal, which has recently launched Hulu, and advertising-funded free video site that is gaining market share online quickly.

Whether the WB web site can succeed where the TV network failed we’ll have to wait and see. But it is clear that Warner Bros. is jumping into the online video race a bit late in the day. With so many other sites well-established online, simply garnering a loyal viewership could prove tricky.

At the end of the day though, it all comes down to the quality of the programming. If the WB site can produce content viewers want to see, it certainly stands a good chance of competing online. But if they’re simply rehashing episodes of 90s WB shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, they will likely find it difficult to attract a sizable audience. Whether online or off, viewers want new, original programming. If they can provide that, the WB online may just stand a chance.