Whacked By Shecky Magazine
Update: I failed to mention Traci Skene initially in the article that follows. My bad. A specific article directed at her and her comments about me and my Comedy Evaluator Pro software can be found here.
I feel compelled to respond to the scathing article about me on his stand-up comedy blog called Shecky Magazine concerning my software and reality TV show concept involving comedians (Traci Skene and Brian McKim).
Shecky—well done! I am more than familiar with “controversy” marketing. Trying to ride my stand-up comedy coattails to promote your blog or whatever is NOT a new concept.
But before I respond to Shecky comments, let’s be fair:
Here’s the link to the Shecky Magazine article that lamely attempted to attack my Comedy Evaluator Pro software, my reality TV show concept and to discredit me:
Click Here To Read The Article That Tried To Discredit Me
First, Shecky—let me say thank you for exposing my software and my concepts to your readers. Once they hit my blog, I knew instantly that your readers were far, far smarter than you thought them to be, mostly because…
I had a drastic increase in sales of my products from traffic generated by your blog post. Whoops!
But let’s get down to some real stand-up comedy business, shall we?
I checked out your stand-up comedy videos on YouTube (Brian McKim). I thought your PAR Score results would be higher…
[ ** Sorry... This content is available exclusively for SCP Blog Members ONLY. Please Login or Register to access this MEMBERS ONLY content ** ]
Still, I appreciate your “controversy” marketing technique—great strategy to get attention to your blog from MY hard work—work that actually HELPS comedians succeed in this very difficult show business art form.
And I simply cannot deny the traffic you have sent to my blog from yours. Heck, I sure couldn’t get that kind of attention if I requested it (not that I ever would). Thank you very much!
So keep up the good work! Spread the news about how “far out in outer space” my stand-up comedy concepts/software really are. You have it so dialed in. You are my hero!
Again, your blog post is very much appreciated, no matter how caustic it may be.
And God forbid, should you either of you ever want to get funnier yourself…
Naw. Let’s not go there. You surely don’t want that, not with all those TV credits and massive stand-up comedy achievements that have your laurels already resting comfortably on YouTube.
So, just keep your “finger on the pulse”. I always love the “alternative” view from so-called “real” stand-up comedy pros.
And serve up some more of that controversy marketing, will ya? I’m really digging all the traffic… 
Cheers,
Steve Roye
The Professor of Funny for Money
For more information about Steve Roye, author of this blog and the Killer Stand-up Online Course, click here.
Tags: Brian McKim, comedian, PAR Score, reality tv show, Shecky Magazine
Steve,
You may have done this already, but perhaps you should offer to run a set by McKim on the Comedy Evaluator Pro? Reckon he’d take you up on the offer?
MG
Great suggestion Mark — but I kinda covered that in my response.
I have a bit available on this blog called The Best Story I Know. That bit was not my usual stand-up comedy material and the recording is the very first time that I did the story on stage.
The PAR Score for that is about 7-8 points higher than McKim’s stuff on YouTube and I had been a comedy pro for only about 30 months when the recording was made.
Some comics are going to criticize my software and my approach to stand-up comedy no matter what. But the hard cold reality is this:
TV appearances DO NOT make a comedian funnier. Longevity in the business alone as a comedian does not make a comedian funnier.
And Comedy Evaluator Pro will continue to be the true objective measure of “funny” based on the actual laughter, cherring or applause generated by a comedian — no matter who’s making fun of it.
The Prof
Jase,
Your comments are spot on as usual.
The problem is that they come from a position of reason and wisdom — that which is not overly common in the stand-up comedy world.
Well done! Don’t stop…
The Prof
Hey Steve,
For a somewhat respected online rag, I would have thought McKim would have been a little more thorough in his understanding of what the Comedy Evaluator Pro and a PAR score is and does.
As I read his article, and reread his quote from ‘Chuck’ I suddenly realised something they missed…
Everyone is saying the PAR won’t cut it because “…the only way to judge a comedian is to be there live and see how they perform and if they are funny or not to you the individual.” But what they seem to be forgetting or neglecting to understand is that the PAR is the measure of the laughter that was in the room at the moment of the performance, not of someones reaction to it later.
Put simply, if you make the audience that came to see you laugh, you will get a high PAR score. Have your audience lamely chuckle because they are embarassed for you however, and your PAR will suck. First comedian, good. Second comedian, need improvement.
Can it get any fairer than that?
Keep up the good work, Steve.
MG
Mark, I couldn’t agree more.
But we are quite biased, aren’t we? And rightfully so, I might add
Well put my friend. Just keep rocking those audiences…
The Prof
Hey
I’ve been following on with all the recent stories and guff from some quarters. For me, this is how it all boils down for comedians:
1. You need a system to create massive amounts of comedy material
2. You need to find a way to tighten that material in order to get massive, consistent laughs.
Whether you use the Comedy Evaluator Pro, and I think you’d be foolish not to, you need to be hitting 4-6 laughs per minute in order to even compete with your average headliner comedian.
Fine, count the laughs on your fingers and get a stopwatch or two.
I think it’s sad that there are people out there who glance at something and provide their “informed” opinion without even trying out the product or service. That makes it easier for them to criticise. You even offer a free trial of the software. How much EASIER can it be?
As you know, rather than criticising something I saw for sale on the web because I was scared of change, I decided to take a “risk” on your products back in 2005 and it was one of the best investments I ever made.
The thing is, when there are new ways of thinking or new ways of doing things there is always going to be resistance. Konstantin Stanislavski, the famous Russian acting teacher, received resistance to his ideas at the turn of the 20th century.
But he in turn influenced the Method Acting teachers in the U.S., which revolutionised the whole of the acting profession. He not only captured what all the decent actors were doing, but wrote it down and advanced some of those ideas on. That’s pretty much what you’ve done with your products and services.
And where else can you get free access to ideas from a comedian who has worked at a high level professionally for, what, 15 years?
People have a choice; use the “Hunt and hope” approach and hope you’ll hit comedy gold one day, or use a new way. They just have to know that there are other people out there adopting your methods who will be progressing faster that they will have to compete against.
You know what, if they don’t want to get serious about their comedy entertainment careers then that’s fine. Let them be left in the dust. More work for the rest of us.
Keep doing what you’re doing, people will keep buying them and keep having their whole art and craft revolutionised.
Cheers,
Jase
.-= Jason Peck´s last blog ..Humour and the Art of Non-verbal Communication =-.
That’s classic behavior with some people who feel they’ve “made it” in comedy. They try to keep everyone under the impression that the only way to make it is to do crappy open mics and suck up to club owners. That is a valid yet hard way, but it is not the only way.
To me it’s like the guys in a fraternity. They got hazed to get into the standup fraternity. And they don’t want anyone else to get in unless they go through the exact same hell they did. There are better reasons to get spanked with a paddle by a guy wearing a toga.
My experience in LA is that the majority of the people getting on stage are wannabe actors. They all read the same book of how to showcase yourself to producers by doing standup comedy. Most of these folks don’t really care about the craft of writing and performing comedy. It is just a stepping stone to their comedy career. They are called posers or in some cases waiters.
Comedians make it by working together.
I like some of Brian’s material. It’s clean and funny. I don’t understand why he thought it was necessary to take a shot at your system. Brian was standing up for a guy named Chuck to criticize your system without even reading or using it.
This is just classic internet tough guy behavior. I’ve got a blog and a following, let me skewer someone that could divert attention from me. I would take Brian more seriously if he had read your book and gave it a fair appraisal.
Keep up the great work Steve. You’re helping people. That will always upset the snipers.
I would have to agree with your assessment fully.
The real irony here is that so-called “real” comedians are anti-business and anti-promotion. In some obtuse way, it interferes with the “art”.
Yet it is those business and promotion aspects of show BUSINESS that cause the shows to happen in the first place.
I will be the first to admit that trying to climb the comedy club ladder is a very tough row to hoe, no matter how funny you may be.
But it is NOT the valid avenue for comedy talent. Brian has good comedy talent. But suggest that there is funnier talent, well…
There are guys working now who are hitting PAR Scores I never reached when I was performing (high 40′s — low 50′s). Doesn’t bother me at all and I applaud those who can totally destroy comedy rooms in the biggest way possible — without regard to the actual “content” being presented.
I guess it really boils down to this: I’m not in the “club”, nor will I ever be. Too much high school stuff going on in that crowd for me.
Thanks again!
The Prof