#where’s that post about how consuming problematic media actually helps you be aware of issues within the world | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

polandspringz · 3 years

Text

Poland’s Thoughts on the OM Angel Event

AKA- I’m trying to bridge this divide in the fandom that only seems to worsen with every piece of new content

So, I just finished the new event, but before I even finished it I saw in the tags a lot of people posting about it and the majority of the reactions were negative. There’s a chance I’m reading the language in the posts a little too strongly, but I think that a lot of this anger towards the developers is misplaced, and this isn’t just limited to the OM fandom, but it is one example that can be representative of a growing issue in how we as fans consume media and interpret content, especially when it extends to how we interact with the creators of said content.

To begin, I understand what people are angry about with this event. They disliked the way the brothers were forced against their will (consent is a term I am seeing thrown around on a few posts) to act righteous, due to the bangles Simeon gave on them that were imbued with magic. People are upset seeing the brothers acting so unlike themselves, Diavolo’s role in it, as both an instigator and bystander, and how Simeon was characterized throughout this event as he largely did not see much wrong with what was happening.

I think the reason so many players are leaving this event with a sour taste is because of the lack of closure. I was taking notes on the entire event and waiting for the end to undo everything like usual and we get the characters discussing how happy they were to be back to normal again or we at least get some of their own thoughts on the experience. I was surprised that we did not get that this time, instead, we only see all the brothers continue to act unlike themselves under the spell, way too cheery and perfect with only Lucifer having partially broken the spell and watching on amused, acting as another bystander in the event. We are given the implication that the rest will return to normal in due time (somewhat like the ending of the Paws event, if I am recalling correctly) but it’s not concrete enough. We should have been given at least an extra few lines of dialogue of the characters back to normal giving their comments on the situation they went through, but because we didn’t, they don’t have any autonomy still, and we as the players are left uncertain about what is our interpretation and what is canon.

However, despite us missing this ending scene, I think the narrative of the event is undeniably still about the idea of one’s true self being important, flaws and all, and I think a lot of players are missing this concept.

When I said earlier that I think many fandoms are suffering from this problem, I’m referring to this problem where fans will gleam a theme from a work, often times it is a theme meant to showcase something problematic, and then the fans will turn on the authors and go “well it’s problematic so the creators’ are in the wrong”, forgetting that the only reason they’re interpreting it as being wrong is because the creators’ intentionally added that frame into the story. I have more strong feelings about this in the BNHA fandom, but for now, let’s stick to the OM fandom and this specific event:

1) Players are mad that the brothers were forcibly changed and not acting like themselves.

This is a valid thing to be angry about, but I am surprised seeing how many people are ignoring the fact that you as the player are given options to acknowledge that you dislike the “righteous” way the characters are being forced to behave. There are multiple points throughout this event where, when the brothers are apologizing or explaining the MC how much they’ve changed, that you can chose an option to say “I liked the old you”, “There’s something off,” or something akin to that. OM does have an issue with a lot of the dialogue options for the MC being a bit too passive, but in this event, you are not forced to like the behavior. During my playthrough of it, I actually refused to kiss some of the characters and almost exclusively told them I disliked the way they were acting even if it was something good like giving to charity in Mammon’s case.

In terms of the brothers’ being forced to act this way against their will, although the overall event does not paint this in a dark tone (it treats the brothers’ actions the same way it does any of their individual scenes with MC in other events), there are pieces of dialogue that help create this theme of choice and free will. In the first set of lessons, Beel says to the MC “It’s something I want to do, not because I’m obligated to.” A few lessons later, Belphegor says “It’s the first time I’ve felt so free.” There is blatant irony in these lines because we as the players know that there is nothing about freedom or wants/personal desires coming from these characters in this state. It’s not even dramatic irony because the MC witnessed and knows that the brothers are under a spell, hence why you can still say you miss how they were acting and that Solomon even acknowledges that things feel wrong. When I see players comment about how they are upset about the brothers being forced to act this way, I don’t understand how they are mad at the writers when it is written in the way that you are supposed to know their words are disingenuous. I will admit that the light hearted tone does offset it and make it seem as if the developers are painting their actions in a good light, but we as the MC are constantly given the option to say that something is wrong. This is not a matter of the developers seeing it as a “good” thing, but they leave it up to the player to make the choice to choose whether to embrace the way the brothers are acting as a positive thing (and personally all the options where you agree with the controlled actions of the brothers’ made me feel as though- if I chose them- that MC was not in a healthy, truthful relationship with the brothers).

In terms of the “consent” argument being thrown around, it is a valid word choice to use in this situation, however, I am surprised to see no one talking about the scene with Lucifer directly involving consent with MC. In lesson 1-12, when you are in his room with him, he asks you to get on the bed, and then pushes you down before the spell controlling him corrects his actions and he apologizes. It is not shown that he pushes you, but the flow of the scene is this-

Lucifer asks MC to get on the bed. Noise is then heard as if someone was putting weight on the bed and Lucifer says “You really trust me quite a lot,” before he says “I didn’t mean to push you down like that.”

Some players may have read it as the MC getting on the bed themselves, and whether Lucifer pushed them onto the bed is debatable, but it’s heavily implied that he at the very least pushes you down onto the bed. I think if anything, the use of the word consent in terms of this event needs to be applied here, as Lucifer forces the MC down without their consent (player is not given an option about whether to comply with his request) before the angelic-form makes him apologize for what he did. I normally am against the people who dislike how evil the demons act (they’re demons! They’re meant to be acting sinful or wrong or disagreeable with our own morals) but I just thought that if people are going to talk about consent in terms of the brothers, we should acknowledge how the theme of consent and choice is also shown in scenes like this, where the spell on Lucifer actually does a good thing by correcting his behavior when he was doing something wrong.

However, there is one more point I want to make about this event, and it follows this discussion about the demon’s behavior-

2) This event, had it been given closure, would’ve had a strong theme of accepting oneself.

This is most clearly seen with Levi and Satan. With Satan, we are aware of his dislike of his rage, his wrath. He does not like to get angry, and puts on masks to try and seem better than his core sin makes him feel. However, when he gets turned into an angel, he specifically says:

“Perhaps that’s why I feel so strange. I don’t feel like myself at all. I end up thinking about if I were an angel, would i have looked and felt like this? And then... I get a foreboding feeling. Like, my heart... becoming tranquil. Normally, that wouldn’t seem like something bad right? Something isn’t right.”

Once again, I would like to point out that the reason that players are able to look at this event and say, “The brothers are being forced to not act like themselves, and that’s bad and upsets me as a player” is because the writers themselves are writing into the story that it is bad. Satan is directly acknowledging that he dislikes what is going on, hence why we as players can say that something is wrong. This isn’t my core analysis of this dialogue, but once again, it is something I am growing tired of seeing people attack or complain about the creators for writing something that is “bad”, as if the creators did not write in the fact that “this is a bad thing.” You can criticize media and the way things are written, but if you are going to ignore the fact that what you’re claiming the writers are ignoring has already been written, your criticism holds little weight.

Moving on, my main takeaway from this scene was that Satan, a character who has spent so long loathing his anger and how he loses himself during it, was upset by his lack of it. We as the MC got very little dialogue in this scene to push the idea further, but to me it was clear that had the story been given more closure, or the events having more story to include more focus on each character, we could have gotten more of a direct statement from Satan of something like “I always disliked my rage, but without it, I don’t feel like me. I’m who I am because of my rage, it’s not something I should be ashamed of.” If that had been included, I’m sure players would have once again been much happier about this event. However, we shouldn’t need such a direct statement of character development to understand that development has happened. One of the biggest techniques about writing dialogue is the idea that when people talk, they don’t say everything, which I see a lot of fandoms griping about when characters don’t directly express things like trauma or abuse in concrete terms or have conversations where they directly say things like “You did something bad to me and I won’t forgive you for that” (I can’t think of the best example right now because it’s 2 AM but again, I have better examples when talking about the BNHA fandom). Ernest Hemingway and his iceberg technique focused on this idea of people rarely saying what they mean, and it’s a much more realistic approach to dialogue.

I’m not saying the writing of OM is anything near the works of great writers. However, I am saying that we shouldn’t need characters to be so unnatural and direct in their dialogue to be satisfied that development has been had or resolution has been met. It’s not natural for them to outright say so, and as readers we shouldn’t need such explicit confirmation of such things (note: when using “confirmation” I am only talking about instances of development, and not things like confirmed representation of LGBTQ or characters expressing their sexuality. Those are entirely different situations requiring different discussion. Please do not misconstrue my words).

Back to the themes of the choice and accepting oneself, I want to end this on the character that truly got the short end of this event- Levi. Levi was so instantaneously changed to have righteous actions and a similar mindset, and there was very little discussion on it within the game itself. However, although Levi does not express much outside of his “controlled” state in this event, when he talks about his “old lifestyle”, we as players can still get a lot from it:

“Huh? My identity? Was my identity solely based on me being an otaku? I’ve been using anime, manga, and games to hide all this time... Always looking down on others while locking myself away in my own world. But not anymore! Instead of spending all my time and energy on 2D stuff, I’m going to spend it on nurturing my relationships in the real world. Doesn’t that sound wonderful?”

It does not sound wonderful, because it brings up the questions of “Was there anything actually wrong with Levi’s lifestyle to begin with?” Sure, he was a shut in, and that can’t be healthy, and he had a bad self loathing issue, but, he found happiness in anime, manga, and games. He found happiness in sharing it with you the player. We know this from the main storyline, and so we know that Levi is obviously not truly thinking this, but unfortunately we never get to see a conclusion of his thoughts on this, and he is given no autonomy by the end of the event to comment on his words here. I will agree with people that Levi’s is the most upsetting, partially because it makes my fanfiction writer mind spin into thoughts of him trapped inside his body wanting to keep his things but being forced to throw them out. That is upsetting. But it is not something we should be attacking or getting mad at the writers for, because if you are reading the story right, it can be seen as meant to evoke that reaction. Likely if you are Levi stan, this scene upset you, and you should be unhappy to see him acting this way. You should know something’s wrong, because there was nothing wrong with how Levi was living before. But, the last big theme of the event is the idea of good vs. evil, or right vs. wrong, and as we are playing a game where the main idea is to romance demons, we are always going to be skewed to see the traditional “good” side (of Simeon and the angels) as not truly good, and the “bad” side (of the demons) as not really that bad. We can sympathize with them, we understand and feel upset at seeing them slighted by what is considered “good. I saw one person bring up the idea of this event evoking questions of ethics, and I agree, but I’m better at explaining things through philosophy. This event, especially for Simeon’s character, brings to mind questions of if the Celestial Realm in the game’s universe is actually good and has the best interests of others in mind, or if it is actually deeply flawed by its staunchness to what is considered goodness? (We can see similar discussions in shows like Good Omens.)

To conclude, I just want to finish up on Simeon’s character in this event. I saw many exclamations of “why would he do this? What’s wrong with him?” and I like to present the idea that Simeon is much stronger of a manipulator than we have been viewing him through the lens of “holy angel”. He writes TSL based on the brothers, he likely views them as content to inspire him. He does not care for them as deeply as we as the fandom may be twisting him to be. Overall, I find all these problems with reading and analyzing media to stem from people having trouble interpreting morally gray characters, themes, and actions, and often they claim an author is making something black and white when the author is actually directly telling the reader things are not black and white. OM is such a small fandom in the grand scheme of things, but rather than me rehashing an argument in a much larger fandom, this seemed like a refreshing, safer place to start.

If you read through all this, I do hope you enjoyed. My ask box is always open if you want to hear more of my thoughts.

#obey me #shall we date #obey me shall we date #obey me mammon #obey me lucifer #obey me leviathan #obey me satan #obey me beelzebub #obey me belphegor #obey me asmodeus #obey me simeon #obey me angels #obey me devs #poland's thoughts

79 notes · View notes

tinysatansierra-blog · 3 years

Text

Markiplier manor is toxic here’s why

So Markiplier manor (Markipliers official discord server) has gotten a surplus of new people in it, this happened a few weeks ago the manor itself though has been up for awhile. originally a members only server it was eventually opened up for everyone and yes there are alot of genuinely good people and the mods are alright but unfortunately its becoming a toxic environment.

SO EDIT i have discussed with the mods that being said ... im keeping this up as a reminder of we can do better we can help people who are struggling through something instead of shutting them down we can listen to people who are being oppressed and bravely point out new media that only worsens that oppression and stigmatization and not just the mods who i was kind of harsh towards but who are human everyone as a community can do better and this is a large community think of the work we can do just doing the basics like boycotting problematic content and helping those who cry out for it who need it (and noticing and shutting down manipulative/toxic behaviors) ... i dont know if im going to go back to the manor yet tho im going to let this sit give it a week yall can agree or disagree but know that if you try to be an ass your going to get shut down and your feelings are going to get hurt

lets start with the basics “triggering topics” triggering topics can be anything in particular but it generally means a topic that relates to another persons trauma. Now while it is important to acknowledge a persons trigger words and try to keep the conversation respectable ive also noticed people use it to shut down people who come on freaking out because their dealing with a stressful situation/something traumatic just happened. This has happened to me personally and to a friend with me it was about being pro choice and having to in short make that actual choice. i was discussing this in the bathroom because i (like anyone else who comes in with baggage) did not know about any pro choice discords at that moment and was afraid of being stigmatized or going onto a discord that says its a safe space only for it to be filled with trolls. Mark manor is labeled as a safe space and many people come on there looking for support with me no one told me that the topic was triggering to them (which apparently it was because a friend of theirs had to make the choice not her herself think what you will) they just went to a mod early on when i just found the server as a member a friend (who i wont name) had gotten.... assaulted majority of her werent online and as someone who has been there and yes when she told me it did trigger my own trauma she needed moral support... the mod shut her down and deleted her comments and didnt give her a pointer to any other discord where she could discuss the topic openly and get moral support and be pointed to resources (it actually took me ten minutes to find and confirm a lgbtq therapy chat earlier this year for another individual discussing mental health) this was before i had gotten on for that day but i noticed those messages and i contacted her when she told me what was up yea it triggered my memories and its not fun but I FUCKING HELPED HER i made sure she went to the police to atleast file a statement (while the police dont always help it is good to have it on file) i even made her a plush and shipped it out to her and i would do it again and again because its not good to basically tell another person to shut up because it triggers others not without atleast trying to help them find another fucking place and making sure their actually ok and in a physical safe place next is them claiming the manor is a “safe space” a safe space is by definition “ a place or environment in which a person or category of people can feel confident that they will not be exposed to discrimination, criticism, harassment, or any other emotional or physical harm.” you would also think that the manor would be a safe space in the fact that marginalized and oppressed groups of people would be able to point out problematic content and have an open and free discussion about it and how it makes them uncomfortable. especially people of lgbtq community which alot of people in that chat are. yesterday (and this was what caused me to officially turn away from the server) in the patio (which is the members only chat) a Transgender individual pointed out the problematic content that is huniepop and how it fetishizes trans people as well as other minorities now this game i hear tries to make itself out as a “parody” .... its not its a sexual dating sim what would make it a parody is if sex noises were replaced with donkey sounds and the lewd pictures were replaced with poorly drawn doodles of tits or what have you its a game for incels marks hilarious when he plays it because he doesnt take the game seriously my issue isnt with him its with the developer. and if you did not know (which apparently people dont) the character poli is described as “a girl with a dick” the individual pointed this out because they felt like it dehumanizes them and paints them as nothing more than a fetish... and also apparently you can “choose” is poli is trans which kind of gives off the message that people can ignore trans peoples identity if it makes them uncomfortable... or if they dont sexualize them. and the muslim community is more or less in the same boat i come from the bible belt in usa im not muslim i am not trans but i do have a reason for standing with both and i will get to that in a bit so i was raised in a christian household in a christian setting like muslim women were basically told we cannot have sex and any sexual thought is sinful and we will be punished blah blah blah your even more closeted if your gay or bi because then you can face ... violence that being said to make the woman from the middle east hyper sexual like they did is kind of shitty even for a incel pleasing sex game. the individual who thought it would be ok to discuss this in the server because its labeled as a safe space and is generally “lgbtq” friendly thus believing he would have people agree and discuss ... was unceremoniously shut down by their peers and a mod was notified this person was not hostile maybe a bit frustrated because he wanted to talk about it and thought he would have this genuinely helpful conversation and people would listen and spread the word because to have problematic content be popular can isolate the oppressed group even more so WHEN NO ONE WANTS TO LISTEN TO THEM. if a group of marginalized people notice something problematic with content and you claim to be an ally of said group then you need to acknowledge and support what they say. they told him to go to twitter where he could potentially be bullied and written off ... because again its an INCEL PLEASING SEX GAME.(which means incels if you ever dealt with them will go and say anything to justify the game even using slurs and bullying) and to put the icing on the cake to change the topic they brought up robin ... i actually dont know who robin is as i dont really focus much on youtube creators personal stuff (it feels off for me to not personally know an individual but know their personal stuff without having actually talking to them its weird i know its a thing i have in my head) but apparently they recently came out as female and good for them im super proud of him and the patio members were discussing how they were proud of him as well for beginning to wear makeup and making themselves more feminine which would be great if they werent trying so hard to shut down the trans male who was trying to spread awareness on problematic stuff .... something he pointed out ... and something they gaslighted and said he was being hostile. really its almost as if they only care about trans issues when its someone famous discussing them so what can we possibly do about huniepop being transphobic and the answer is very easy BOYCOTT IT like... yall were up in arms and boycotted jk rowling with snap and a turn do we only cancel the old and ugly? do we only cancel those who we dont think is funny? mark is not at fault he probably doesnt realize it and any comments made on the issue are talked down upon or drowned amongst other comments im not saying to cancel him im saying to cancel the game HARD. ignore the posts bitch at the dev demand refunds for your game. like consumers have infinitely more power than corps want to admit. so you basically have a community that claims to be a safe space but only if you want to talk about sunshine and rainbows and its highly hypocritical of them to claim safety. another thing is emotionally abusive/manipulative people hide in the server and the mods dont ever seem to acknowledge it. i cannot tell you how many times ive gotten into arguments with people who seems nice then turn into assholes then claim to be the victim when i or others go off on them. if you recognize my name you know i dont stand down when it comes to having a snarky or rude comment thrown at me if your going to be an ass were fighting i dont care how nice you seemed beforehand and you dont get to call a mod just because i actually stood up for myself or others sorry not sorry dont be a bitch nuff said. now why would i care so much about problematic content? why would i care and stand by the transgender and muslim people (aside from being ya know... an actual ally and not someone who claims it for sympathy and brownie points?) its because i am autistic i am also able to function well on my own but there is a movie created by the famous singer sia it is called music it is a movie frowned upon by the autisitic community because infantizes and dehumanizes non verbal autistic people i am fortunate and unfortunate in not having to deal with much stigma unfortunate because i wasnt diagnosed until i was 17 alot of answers about my behavior could have been answered if i had been diagnosed earlier but considering society loves the quiet timid female and i functioned “well” for neurotypicals i was ignored. so yea you bet your ass im standing with them and raising awareness about huniepop and their was this one person when i mentioned this point i cant remember there name nor to do i give a shit about them because when i mentioned how autistic people ... how i was in the same boat with music by sia (again i advise that no one target the actress who was under contract target sia and please boycott her so she knows she cant get brownie points or money for a movie that stigmatizes who she claims she wants to “help” (*cough* profit off of *cough cough*) and only serves as a feel good movie for neurotypicals and ignorant people) they said “i heard people who hated the movie i heard people who found it alright people are ALLOWED to like problematic content” ... and like ... does anyone else see the problem here? its not hard at all to boycott celebrities for making content and im going to repeat this point IF A GROUP OF MARGINALIZED, STIGMITIZED AND OPPRESSED PEOPLE CALL OUT SOMETHING FOR BEING PROBLEMATIC AND YOU CLAIM TO BE AN ALLY YOU FUCKING LISTEN TO THEM AND DONT SHUT THEM DOWN I DONT GIVE A SHIT YOU DONT HAVE A FUCKING EXCUSE. if you cant bring yourself to boycott a piece of media and replace it with the infinitely more suitable forms that supports the group you claim to be for your not an ally your a fucking hypocrite and that is why i left markiplier manor i am still a youtube special ... thingy member and i will continue to be a member to support mark i want people to overall listen to those who speak up against a creator and a piece of media and listen to us all no matter how “good” something seems. .. also there is a video called listen it was created by nonverbal autistic people and communicationFIRST a group that sia apparently communicated with for her movie... and then ignored https://youtu.be/H7dca7U7GI8

#markiplier #transphobia #trans pride #lgbtq #muslim #huniepop #markiplier manor #pro choice #toxic groups #toxic fanbase #sia #music the movie #problematic content #huniepop2 #albeism #hypocrisy #hypocrites #discord

17 notes · View notes

fozmeadows · 5 years

Note

1) I was binge-reading your Wordpress blog a few days back and came upon a post you made where you talked about the ubiquity of really bad/rapey/abusive relationships in SFF and how early exposure to those stories changed how you looked at real-life and fictional romances, and it got me thinking: how can we talk about the real challenges and troubles of Problematic Fiction without, like, giving everything over to the antis? because as somebody who cares about the messages in media but who also

It’s a hugely important issue, I think - and my short answer is, it hinges on context, circulation, criticism and conversation. When you look at a fanfic on AO3, the tagging system means that you, the reader, are either forewarned about the presence of any dark or squicky themes at the outset, or are made aware via the ‘author chooses to use no archive warnings’ tag that you’re venturing into the unknown. I’ve said this before, but to me, knowing the author knows a particular theme or relationship is badwrong, dubcon or otherwise fucked up allows me to enjoy the story in a way I otherwise couldn’t, because it changes how I receive the narrative - letting me know if I’m meant to accept the characters and their narration as correct, or if I’m meant to be reading critically. Some stories achieve this function with narrative framing - as in, something within the story itself lets us know that particular actions or characters are Bad, or at very least morally grey - but when a story is depicting dark themes without internal commentary, authorial intent becomes vital to interpretation. This is, for instance, why so many fuckboys think Tyler Durden is a hero in Fight Club instead of a terrifying asshole: they missed the fact that Chuck Palahniuk was writing ironically, and so took away the exact opposite message to the one intended.

Likewise in the case of Fight Club, the context and the circulation matter hugely to the impact. The film was a mainstream product with widespread distribution, and it came out in 1999, three years after the book was written. The idea of the protagonist lamenting belonging to a disenfranchised generation without a war to define them - aside from being inaccurate in the first place - was obliterated by the political landscape of the early noughties in the wake of 9/11, which in turn changed how the film was perceived in our cultural memory. All that being so, I’d argue that it had a much more toxic effect than was ever intended, in large part because the idea that the characters should be critiqued rather than lauded was missed in the mainstream dialogue around it for a long time. In the same vein, I’ve never held to the idea that fanwriters should be free to write whatever because stories don’t impact readers or reality - manifestly, stories *do* matter, and they can certainly impact their audiences in ways their creators don’t necessarily intended. Rather, I’ve held that fanwriters should be free to write whatever because, firstly, there’s no sensible, foolproof way to censor fanworks anymore than there’s one to censor other forms of art; and secondly, because fanwriting in particular is currently far ahead of the mainstream in its use of tagging and criticism, which are the real tools needed to navigate art and our reactions to it in the first place.

When I read fucked-up romances in mainstream SFF as a teen and absorbed the message that those romances were cool and normal and a little bit thrilling, it wasn’t because those stories should never have existed, or even because I shouldn’t have been allowed to read them; it was because they - and I - existed in a critical vacuum about their contents. I didn’t have an IRL or online community where I could go and talk about my favourite books and read enlightening essays about the character dynamics, and I didn’t have access to any older SFF fans who, just by virtue of having more adult experience in the world, could’ve helped me clue in by saying something like, “I love the magic and worldbuilding, but man, X novel is rapey.” We don’t learn how to be critical of media - how to analyse it, how to love a thing while still acknowledging and understand its flaws - as an automatic process: we have to be taught, or actively undertake the task of teaching ourselves. A lack of critical thinking about the narratives we consume and create - just like the cultural and political narratives we consume and create, for that matter - is the real cause of harm to readers; which is a major reason why fandom, for all its flaws, is so hugely important: it makes us think.

So, to answer your question: the problem I have with antis in this context is the idea that one piece of fiction is all things to all people: that there’s only ever one valid reaction to any one work, and if just one person has a bad reaction, then the work - and other works like it - is therefore inherently Bad. Purity wank deliberately elides the distinction between authorial intent and critical reception, arguing that the only way to prevent Bad Reactions To Fiction is censorship, instead of - as is actually the case - self-curating what we read, analysing the contents and thinking about their impact, while accepting that different people might have wildly different, yet still valid, needs and reactions to us.

#foz answers things #foz rants #fandom #purity culture #fanfic #fanwriting #narrative #criticism

433 notes · View notes

la-knight · 5 years

Photo

Books I Read in 2016_::_The Sinister Sweetness of Splendid Academy by Nikki Loftin

“When my mom was alive, she read me stories every night.

‘Use your imagination, Lorelei,’ she’d say, ‘and your whole life can be a fairy tale.”

I wanted that to be true. But I should have paid more attention to the fairy tales.”

When Lorelei’s old school mysteriously burns down, a new one appears practically overnight: Splendid Academy. Rock-climbing walls on the playground and golden bowls of candy on every desk? Gourmet meals in the cafeteria, served by waiters? Optional homework and two recess periods a day? It’s every kids’s dream.

But Lorelei and her new friend Andrew are pretty sure it’s too good to be true. Together they uncover a sinister mystery, one with their teacher, the beautiful Ms. Morrigan, at the very center. Then Andrew disappears. Lorelei has to save him, even if that means facing a past she’d like to forget – and taking on a teacher who’s a real witch.

What Lorelei and Andrew discover chills their bones – and might even pick them clean!

1.85/5 stars

So I read this book a while ago, and the first time I read it, I really liked it. Not love, but I enjoyed it just fine. I’m not snobby about the target age of my reading material: I love Dragons Love Tacos as much as I love Red Queen as much as I love The Night Circus as much as I love Aru Shah and the End of Time. And I read The Sinister Sweetness of Splendid Academy at a dark time in my life (I have many) when my depression went undiagnosed and therefore untreated and I couldn’t handle much in the way of length or high-high stakes or grimdark or anything like that. So this book was perfect because it had stakes but it’s easier to care about one kid’s life than about, say, the war for the Iron Throne on top of all your faves possibly getting killed by ice demons or zombies. And I enjoyed this book.

More recently, I’ve reread it, and…well, I didn’t love it or like it as much as I had the first time. I didn’t hate it, but I definitely didn’t love it.

People talk about purity culture, which is hecka toxic, and I’m not here for that (I don’t judge people’s reading material unless it’s something drastic, like shouting from the rooftops how much they enjoyed Mein Kampf because, um, yikes). If there’s a book that I’ve heard is problematic, I may or may not read it for myself, depending on the nature of the issues and whatever. No media is perfect, it’s a balancing act. If I’m titchy about the person getting my money, I’ll buy that book secondhand so they don’t get any of my money (this is what I did with Stephenie Meyer, Suzanne Collins, Cassandra Clare, Anne Rice, James Dashner, & JK Rowling, for example). Not difficult to do. The obsession with consuming so-called “pure media” can be super bad and result in things like anon harassment or even death threats. I’ve seen this happen. On the flip side, the push against both problematic content and purity culture, when dealt with rationally, has led to some really great discussions regarding media analysis and critical thinking with regard to story consumption, and that’s great.

Why is this relevant?

So I reread Splendid Academy after some exposure to articles, essays, blog posts, and tumblr posts about several topics - including the pervasiveness and lethality of fat-shaming (among other things, like the silencing and condemnation by society of justified female anger). I did not go looking for these posts, they just trickled into the fringe of my social awareness as a result of using social media. I’d read them, reblogged and retweeted them, but I didn’t consciously try to apply those posts to Splendid Academy when I reread it. But this time through, the book made me super uncomfortable, although at first I didn’t quite understand why. I had to sit and, as they say, “think muh thoughts” all the way through a few times before I figured out what was bothering me.

The very basic dual premises of this book are sexist and fat-phobic. Now, I’m fat. There’s a lot of stigma around being fat. I mean, people have died of treatable, not-fat-related medical ailments because their doctor refused to look for those things, falling back on “just lose some weight and you’ll be fine” instead - and then boom, it’s something like cancer (which is not exacerbated by being fat) and the person dies.

(I am not Google. You can Google this information if you really want to. It’s all over Tumblr, Twitter, and Google. Don’t bother me about it)

The sinister nature of Splendid Academy is that its run by three witches fattening up all the kids to be eaten. Typical “Hansel and Gretel” motif, right? Except! In “Hansel and Gretel,” the kids are literally starving when they come upon a food source, an adult tells them to eat and eat and eat (it’s not their idea), and Hansel ends up locked in a cage by the witch and force-fed because the witch* threatens to kill his sister if he doesn’t. A lot of fairy tales (original ones in Grimms collections and by Andersen and whatnot, I mean) have morals of various types. The moral of “Hansel & Gretel” is not “gluttony should be punishable by death” or “being fat makes you a worthless human and it’s why bad things happen to you.”

(*By the way, the stereotypical long-nosed warty witch who eats Christian children is an anti-Semitic caricature of Jewish women and it’s gross; luckily the author doesn’t do that)

But in this book, the kids almost seem to bring their imminent demise on themselves by eating too much junk food. Sort of like how the narration says Augustus Gloop ended up turned into semi-sentient fudge in Charlie & the Chocolate Factory because he was a greedy glutton and not because Willy Wonka is a colonizing* sociopath who should never be in charge of minors.

(*Three words: Fucking. Oompa. Loompas.)

All but one of the kids attending Splendid Academy are snackers. These twelve- and thirteen-year-olds will snack on Skittles or sunflower seeds or whatever while they do homework or school work. They’re fed gourmet breakfasts and lunches in the school cafeteria every day. The food is enchanted, of course, to be highly addictive and also enchanted so that it transforms immediately into fat, apparently? Bypassing the stomach entirely, I guess, because the kids never get full and literally just eat all day every day that they’re in school.

Wait, you say. If the food is enchanted, it’s not the kids’ fault they’re eating it. That’s not fat-phobic at all. What?

I said all but one kid has fallen for these magical machinations. One boy (not our protagonist Lorelei, but her friend Andrew) is basically immune to the call of the candy. If the One Ring of Power was candy, he’d be movie!Faramir and Lorelei would be Frodo. And why is he immune? Because he’s got a fairy godmother? He’s magical himself? He’s a total nerd and studied mythology and knows how to spot ensorcelled edibles a mile away?

Nah. It’s cuz he went to fat camp.

Y’all can’t see my face right now.

Now, to be fair, apparently Andrew was a compulsive eater and needed some kind of intervention because he was out of control (which, also being fair, is a ridiculous and tired trope about how fat people can’t control themselves around food and we need to kill that with fire and not spoon-feed the idea to tweens, thanks). But even with the blegh back story of compulsive eater, YOU DON’T SEND A TWELVE-YEAR-OLD TO FAT CAMP, OHMIGAWD. Unless he’s got PICA (that mental illness where you compulsively eat dangerous or non-food shit like glass or soap or carpet lint) or whatever, he’s not compulsively eating because he’s the next Augustus Gloop and he’s a spoiled brat who hates the word “no.” I used to be a compulsive eater as a kid (which is oddly not how I got fat). I developed the habit if “eating my feelings” because I WAS SUICIDAL AND FOOD WAS THE ONLY THING THAT EVEN HELPED A LITTLE BIT.

And you know what helped me curb my compulsive eating when my depression got really bad? It wasn’t the taunting about being fat or my mom telling me I needed to go on a diet or my dad asking me constantly if I really shouldn’t put back that second cheese stick or applesauce cup. What really helped me stop compulsively eating WAS TREATING MY FREAKING DEPRESSION.

Ahem. However, the book does do one thing sort of right with this kid - because he HAS UNTREATED DEPRESSION went to actual therapy (for the compulsive eating specifically and not anything else that might be wrong) while shipped off to fat-person exile because his parents are horrible people, he can recognize “trigger foods”* - the foods that he would compulsively eat and would make him overeat when he was upset, foods he now avoids. They got that part right. But it also means he’s more selective about what he eats (which is fine) and has more self-control than the other kids (um…), self-control he learned thanks to an entire summer at fat camp (UM…), and his sheer determination alone to not “stuff his face” helps him shake off the herion-addictive magic laid on the school food.

ExCUSE me???

(*Side note, I’m on meds now for non-food stuff that screw with my appetite and also I’m a broke bitch but as a kid/teen, my trigger foods were bread, apple pie, cake, waffles, and fruit bagels. I can still, if I had money, eat an entire angel food cake but that’s not a trigger, it’s just super fluffy and delicious)

So our sidekick is a former fat kid with untreated mental health issues who got sent to fat camp and thanks to the miracle of fat camp has now overcome his unhealthy dependence on food AND has the will power (forged from denying his inner fatty) to throw off three witches’ worth of addictive magic. Something Lorelei only manages to do after she eats magical dead-kid bone chips. Because she and the other kids have no self-control and so just eat and eat...apparently.

Alrighty then…

But Andrew’s not our lead. Lorelei is. And Lorelei interesting as a middle grade protagonist. Her mom recently died of cancer and Lorelei blames herself (because that’s what kids do) and she’s filled with even more confusion, fear, self-hate, and anger than a typical tween girl as a result both of her mother’s lingering illness and ugly death as well as the fact that Lorelei at one point jerked away from her mom during an argument and, due to chemo-induced weakness, her mom lost her balance, fell, and broke a bone.

Lorelei is lost and angry. She makes friends with Andrew and finds out about the witches and their cannibal plot while still struggling not only with her mom’s death and her own guilt, but the screwed-up situation with her family. What situation? Her dad and older brother are 100% emotionally abusive and treat her like she’s some kind of bratty little monster because she’s feeling sad and guilty and scared and angry all the time.

HER MOM JUST DIED YOU BUTTHOLES, SHE’S GOING THROUGH PUBERTY WHICH IS A HORMONAL HURRICANE OF DEATH THAT RUINS EVERYTHING, AND YOU POOP-WAFFLES ARE HELPING NOT AT ALL AND YOU SUCK.

This is a MAJOR pet peeve for me because too often emotional abuse is normalized in middle grade fiction, especially when it comes from parents (this book, The Night Parade by Kathryn Tanquary, All Four Stars by Tara Dairman, Young Wizards by Diane Duane, and even in Harry Potter, perpetuated by some of the so-called heroes) and it drives me bat-crap.

This is a middle-grade review, so I’m trying to keep it PG13.

The head witch, Ms. Morrigan, is drawn to Lorelei because of her anger and how lost she feels, and instead of eating her, wants to adopt her and make her into a baby cannibal-witch. This would be kind of a cool angle except once again, it reinforces that Lorelei being angry about her mom being dead is a flaw iin her character and not a completely understandable psychological response to a tween’s universe being ripped in half by the concept of her mother being gone forever.

Her dad and brother are “good guys” and disturbed/horrified by and condemning of her anger, grief, guilt, and fear, and they punish her for it. Ergo, according to the narrative, her anger is bad. The evil witches who literally eat children admire her anger and say it proves she should be one of them, too. Ergo, her anger is double bad. She only stops being tempted to join with the witches once she realizes being angry about her mom dying is “immature” and “bad.” Ergo, blah blah blah, girls should never be angry, it’s unladylike and turns you into a flesh-eating witch.

My parents spoon-fed me “demonstrating anger in any way for any reason is bad” along with a HUGE helping of “being angry about feeling powerless makes you a bad person” for six years of my adolescence, then wondered why I started self-harming, developed depression, and attempted suicide on multiple occasions before I was twelve. The message that a child’s anger in the face of powerlessness, death, or sudden and unpredictable changes to their homeostasis is an inherently bad thing that should be punished and makes them bad or evil can be incredibly damaging. Her mom died. A twelve-year-old girl is allowed to be confused and sad and hurt and angry about that.

Like I said, I didn’t hate the book (although these two things I ranted about made me suuuper uncomfortable while reading and the more I thought about them later, the angrier I got). But I didn’t love it, and I didn’t like it as much as I did during my first read-through. The fat-shaming was annoying and gross, and I’m suuuper tired of angry girls being shamed for their feelings, especially teens and kids. Young people feel things so intensely. And they don’t always have the experience or the vocabulary to parse out how certain aspects of a story make them feel or why, or resist internalizing toxic messages about how feeling intensely or feeling a particular way at all is bad. Thre’s a big differene between asking an eight-year-old to consume their media critically and someone twice or thrice that age. And yeah, parents have a responsibility, family discussions, if they rely solely on books society has failed them, blah blah. Unfortunately, a lot of parents suck and a lot of parents shame their kids for having feelings the parets don’t think they should. Especially young girls. The normalizing of emotional abuse by parents in middle grade books proves how “normal” many adults think such things are.

Did I Enjoy This Book: yeah, for the most part, I guess. But I won’t be reading it again anytime soon.

Would I Recommend It: No, I wouldn’t. I can’t think of anyone I would feel comfortable recommending it to, who would actually enjoy it.

Plot: .35 star

Word Choice: .5 star

World Building: .5 star

Characters: .5 star

Realism: .75 star

-¼ star for fat-shaming

-¼ star for normalizing emotional abuse

-¼ star for shaming female anger

Total Score: 1.85/5 stars

________________________________________________________

Nicole Kidman as Principal Trapp Michelle Pfeiffer as Ms. Morrigan Bryce Dallas Howard as Ms. Threnoddy

#book review #aesthetic #nikki loftin #sinister sweetness of splendid academy #suicide m #fat shaming tw #sexism #misogyny #middle grade #food tw #emotional abuse tw #character death tw

2 notes · View notes

violetganache42 · 6 years

Text

My Thoughts on the Logan Paul Controversy

WARNING: The following post contains descriptions of the graphic material that was recorded on Logan’s most recent vlog, which was thankfully taken down. It also consists of opinions on his and Jake’s unforgivable actions prior to this incident, as well as cursing and the possibility of some heated rage, in which I would like to apologize for in advance. If I also come off as rude in some aspects, then I’m sorry for that too. No one ever thought 2018 was going to start off like this and leave them with intense fury over it. I would also like to apologize if the topics of depression, mental illnesses, and suicide upsets or triggers anyone who is reading this. That is not my intention whatsoever. This is my overall opinion on a very controversial issue and I don’t mean to upset or trigger anyone in doing so. With all that said and done, reader discretion is advised.

Okay, I never talk about them, but because of what recently happened, I want to quickly address the elephant in the room: I hate Jake and Logan Paul. Actually, “hate” is not the right word to describe them; how about “loathe?” Maybe “despise?” “Spite?” “Resent?” Whatever the word choice is, the two are both terrible celebrities together and individually for a variety of reasons.

As you already know, both Jake and Logan achieved their fame back in 2013 when Vine was around, achieving 5.3 million and 3.1 million followers respective by the time of its shutdown. When they switched over to YouTube on November and September of 2016 accordingly, it all went downhill from then on. In general, they spew diss tracks at each other, churn out frantic videos in order to gain viewership and consume free online content, and sell merchandise from their clothing lines instead of being TV actors. The only problem is kids between the ages of 8 and 15 aren’t necessarily part of America’s economy, so combining their focus on this specific demographic with their insatiable thirst for fame and greed, it’s basically a lose-lose situation for them. But that’s not all I have to say about them because looking at them individually, they have their own brand of problematic behaviors and content.

In Jake’s case, he endured the most controversy because he’s been exposed as nothing but an annoying douchebag who did the following: made racist remarks on his minor characters in his videos, accused of emotionally abusing and manipulating his ex-girlfriend Alissa Violet, cyberbullied and brought down people online, constantly disrupted his peaceful neighborhood and his neighbors with his stunts and pranks, delivered pop culture phrases in an obnoxious manner during an interview that came off as—how the kids describe stuff nowadays—“cringey.” Not to mention his atrocious music video for his song “It’s Everyday Bro” dealt some serious damage to his career by receiving over 3 million dislikes on YouTube. He even got fired from Disney mid-season of Bizaardvark on July 24 for acting like his fame gives him the freedom for doing whatever the fuck he wants. What grinds my gears about him is he made all these apology videos and keeps claiming that he’s changed and moved on, but there is strong evidence that proves otherwise.

As for Logan, he has managed to escape controversy up until now by having roles on films and TV shows like Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, Weird Loners, Airplane Mode, the YouTube Red film The Thinning, and in the upcoming movie Valley Girl, taking part in a partnership with Dwayne Johnson, and opening his own brand called Maverick. Heck, his diss song, “The Fall of Jake Paul,” had managed to gather better reception from his fans, scoring only 173,000 dislikes, which is far less than the 3 million dislikes from “It’s Everyday Bro,” because of the actual effort put into it and the massive controversy Jake currently has. Of course, it still doesn’t change the fact that he is still a horrible person when you consider the info above, and his newest vlog helps showcase it. Without further ado, it’s time for me to stop talking about the past and focus on the present… and boy, do I have a lot to say about this.

For those of you who not aware or are just hearing about this, allow me to explain what exactly happened; however, I am generously giving you the choice to skip this because what I am about to describe may make you feel uncomfortable. For those of you brave enough to read the issue, please keep scrolling.

Earlier this week, on New Year’s Eve, Logan and three of his friends were traveling in Japan when they stumbled upon Aokigahara, which is best known as the country’s “Suicide Forest.” They all ended up going in the forest when they discovered the corpse of a man who hung himself, one of the most common methods suicide victims use to kill themselves in there. One of the friends was feeling uneasy about what they were witnessing, and despite his seriousness, Logan laughed it off and soon referred to it as “a moment in YouTube history,” only for him to get one hell of a reality check. As of now, so many people via YouTube and Twitter have reacted in absolute anger and/or disgust at what he had done and have been calling out on it, including Robyn from Anime America, Joey the Anime Man, Gaijin Goombah, Lost Pause, Game Theory, Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul, Game of Throne’s Sophie Turner, JackSepticEye, Stefan Karl, and even PewDiePie of all people. The immense amount of backlash had gotten to a point where he deleted the video and posted two apologies, one each on Twitter and YouTube. I will get to those later, but for right now, let me give my input on this.

First off, let’s break down the group’s reaction. Since the video was removed, I was able to find snippets of their dialogue from it thanks to CNN, which can be found here.

Logan: This is a first for me. This literally probably just happened.

Friend: I don’t feel good.

Logan: What, you never stand next to a dead guy?

Friend: No.

Logan: *laughs* It was gonna be a joke. This was all a joke. Why did it become so real?

Friend: Depression and mental illnesses is not a joke. We came here with the intent to focus on the haunted aspect of the forest. This just became very real.

Oh, boy. Where do I even begin with this? Logan, your friend is absolutely right. Depression and mental illnesses are not jokes, let alone FUCKING suicide! This was his first time seeing an actual dead body with his own two eyes and you laughed it off like it was nothing! For all we know, this could’ve been your first time seeing like this too, but why the fuck would you joke around like that if you were originally planning to explore the Suicide Forest’s haunted atmosphere?! It completely depletes the initial intent of your plans for your vlog all because of your “humor” in this! On a side note, whoever his friend is, can we please give him a round of applause for having the knowledge to understand what is and isn’t a joke? Because at least he gets the situation they were in.

And that brings me to another point I want to bring out: why he was joking around with what he saw. After they all ran out of the forest and into the parking lot, Logan said this that really caught my attention:

Logan: “…the smiling and laughing… is not a portrayal of how I feel about the circumstances. Everyone copes with shit differently… I cope with things with humor.”

WHAT?!

I’m sorry, but no! That is utter bullshit! Using humor to cope with something such as fear is fine, but using it to deal with the fact you stumbled across a REAL corpse?! That’s crossing the line! It helps illustrate that what you did was inhumanely wrong, and you know what?! The backlash proves it! When it became known to the public with around 6.5 million views, the viewers were repulsed by what you did! You showed them, from fans and people who don’t like to YouTubers, celebrities, and the media, that you have zero respect for the suicide victims through your insensitivity and voyeurism of this seriously important subject!

Not even your “Viewer Discretion is Advised” banter helped prevent this from happening, which leads me to readdressing your target demographic! For all we know, there could have been little children watching this and they would have either been scared that they saw the same hanging corpse or influenced negatively as shown by this tweet below!

“The other day my 7 year old sister showed me logan pauls video on the dead body and i was disgusted and told her to turn it off.My sister is 7 YEARS OLD and loves and watches logan paul all the time. later we went outside to do painting and she painted a hanging man in a forest” — Aoife Dormer (@aoife_dorma)

If anything, you could have emphasized your warning on how there are graphic material that are not suitable for children/minors, replaced “Advised” with “Recommended,” and made the video 18+ so that they would’ve been unable to watch it! Even so, it still didn’t change the fact it broke one of YouTube’s policy: prohibiting the depiction of violent, gory, or graphic material in a shocking, sensational, or disrespectful manner unless the footage is used for educational or documentary-based purposes. I’m not gonna touch upon how the staff aren’t pressing this forward or why they didn’t react sooner, but I digress. In my opinion, not changing the rating of your vlog—and having it violate a YouTube policy regardless—was part of a completely careless move on your part.

Oh, and this doesn’t end there; this actually leads into my next point: the apologies and the aftermath.

In the midst of the swift outcry of the enraged public, Logan deleted the video and tweeted an apology on New Year’s Day at exactly 10 PM about what he posted, but instead of taming the flame, it made things worse… and I can easily tell why. Much like the last remark, this one contradicts what he says.

“I didn't do it for views. I get views. I did it because I thought I could make a positive ripple on the internet, not cause a monsoon of negativity. I intended to raise awareness for suicide and suicide prevention and while I thought, 'if this video saves just ONE life, it'll be worth it,' I was misguided by shock and awe, as portrayed in the video.”

Dear God, there is a shit ton wrong with this tone-deaf apology it makes me want to scream! What pisses me off the most is his claim and there is strong proof in not only this tweet but also in my thoughts on the vlog that highlights how that is bullshit as well!

You should’ve thought about your actions ahead of time! You were given multiple choices on what to do when you and your friends encountered the hanging dead body in Aokigahara: “Should I keep this vlog?” “How should I feel about or respond to this?” “Should I edit it out or leave it in?” “How will everyone else react?” At the end of the day, you chose the wrong choices and it resulted in heated negative consequences.

You were NOT raising awareness for suicide prevention, which is the main reason why this tweet makes me livid! The vlog proves you laughed at what you saw and cracked jokes about it, despite your friend’s input on this unsettling discovery! A lot of people, even YouTube, agree that the material was shocking for the viewers, you sensationalized at said material, and you were outright disrespectful about it by treating suicide like a fucking joke through your “coping mechanism!”

You were not “misguided;” basically, this third reason ties in with the second one.

Because of this, an insane amount of criticism was unleashed, with Sophie calling Logan “an idiot,” his claim “mocking,” and his apology “self-praising,” Aaron referring to him as “pure trash” who can “go rot in hell,” and surprisingly Rebecca Black stating that how someone with “such power and influence could intensify “an entire family’s grief beyond measure.” And guess what? She is right! One of the people calling out on him was Anna Akana, who and her brother both had to deal with the loss of her sister after she committed suicide! Not only that, but there are also people struggling with depression and have contemplated suicide, especially in Japan, who are infuriated and sickened by what they watched/heard because they knew what he did was an epitome of bad publicity... No, “bad” isn’t the best way to describe this; what they discovered was appalling publicity! It’s even worse when you realize publicity is one of the main contributors to suicide contagion, especially when a young age group is exposed to it! Given Logan’s fanbase mainly consists of children and young teenagers, that vlog was a repulsive influence on them and would most likely worsen suicide contagion despite it being removed from YouTube, which reiterates Aoife’s tweet about her younger sister painting a lynched man! The damage has already been dealt and it pisses me off so much that he would influence minors like that!

And that is just the tip of the iceberg because he posted a longer apology video on YouTube the next night amid the rampaging counteraction. Did it do anything to at least settle this dispute? Let’s find out.

“I've made a severe and continuous lapse in my judgment and I don't expect to be forgiven. I'm simply here to apologize. So what we came across that day in the woods was obviously unplanned and the reactions you saw on tape were raw and they were unfiltered. None of us knew how to react or how to feel. I should have never posted the video. I should have put the cameras down, stopped recording what we were going through. There's a lot of things I should have done differently but I didn't and for that from the bottom of my heart I am sorry. I want to apologize to the internet, I want to apologize to anyone who has seen the video, I want to apologize to anyone who has been affected or touched by mental illness or depression or suicide but most importantly I want to apologize to the victim and his family. For my fans who are defending my actions, please don't, they don't deserve to be defended. The goal with my content is always to entertain, to push the boundaries, to be all inclusive. In the world I live in I share most everything I do. The intent is never to be heartless, cruel or malicious. Like I said I made a huge mistake. I don't expect to be forgiven. I'm just here to apologize. I'm ashamed of myself. I'm disappointed in myself. And I promise to be better. I will be better. Thank you.”

*frustrated sigh* Oh, dear Lord. There is a reason why posted the transcript of his apology than share the video itself, which I’ll get to after I give my two cents on this. ...Ever since last night, I had a difficult time trying to find a way to reply to this. I read a couple articles saying the video was emotional and somber because of how he was on the brink of tears and it left me at a point of uncertainty; I kept asking myself if he really does deserve to be forgiven or not, but after seeing other posts and getting an update on his newest video, it snapped me out of my state and told me that forgiving Logan would mean defending him, just like his fans... and there was no way in hell I would succumb to a level as low them supporting him. So with my spark reignited, it’s time for me to break this shit down once again!

Logan, let me start this bit off by saying this: it is far too late for you to apologize. What you did was irredeemable, vulgar, disgraceful, and plain rude of you to not only those suffering from depression, mental illnesses, or suicidal issues, but to the entire country of Japan. During your trip, you behaved immaturely by making a complete racist jackass out of yourself in front of foreign tourists/residents while wearing a kimono and made a complete fool out of Americans and Westerners, but your vlog on New Year’s Eve took it too far! You desecrated a corpse, went through him to see if he had any of his belongings with him, laughed and joked about it, and showed no remorse or empathy about what you and your friends came across! Because of you, Japan is now coated in anger; you made them hesitant on us being part of the 2020 Olympics, Tokyo tweeted at you to get out, and you’re now denounced by the Japanese Suicide Prevention Group all because you ridiculed their strict laws and significant efforts into helping lower suicide rates and gave a giant middle finger to country in general by treating it like it’s a fucking playground! What you did was an act of pity because of the imminent backlash and I will never. Forgive. You.

That’s not all; as it turns out, even though Logan clearly said he doesn’t expect forgiveness, his fanbase—like I’m gonna call them by their referred fandom name—still forgave him because they believe “he didn’t mean it” and even had the audacity to attack a Japanese vlogger named Reina Scully in a racist manner all because she criticized his Suicide Forest vlog. ...Okay, first: WHAT?! Second: THE FUCK?! Like before, I apologize for suddenly snapping, but that’s NOT how you defend someone! You do not make harass the harasser by sending them racist remarks, let alone telling her and the Japanese to kill themselves! That is just sick and inhumane! No wonder people are telling others to stop supporting the Paul brothers; their fans are worse than the commonly known bad fandoms! *sigh* Well, at least it was best of me to not apologize to Logan because there was no way I was going to stoop as low as them. It was also perfect timing on my part because I recently discovered on that his apology video was monetized; in other words, he made thousands of dollars off of it...

Holy fuck! This is all kinds of despicable and messed up! Making between $8.5K and $68.1K off of a simple apology?! Now I am so glad I ultimately kept to my opinions about this sicko instead of accepting him like his other fans because this is one of the many examples of being greedy and money-hungry.

Because of this, people immediately took to Twitter to repeatedly slam him until it was promptly demonetized. Shortly thereafter, conflicts began to surface regarding YouTube; a petition opened up calling for Logan to be banned from the site (which now has over 130K signatures) and many are giving the website and its staff flack for being hypocritical of the way they review the content of videos. To be honest, I don’t blame them. Although I’m glad they commented on the issue, it obviously wasn’t enough. What used to be a site that got its start from cat videos has become its own economy with terrible decisions they’ve made, from the Fair Use dilemma to labeling LGBT+ videos as “mature content.” Seeing how significant the past few days has become, they really need to wake up, get their humungous sticks out of their asses, and actually contribute than just simply stating what rule Logan violated. Regardless, with all of these factors combined into one, it is easily safe to say this second apology was typically a clear bust.

And what does Logan do now that both apologies were shown to be practically useless? He announces his hiatus last night on Twitter, stating he is “taking time to reflect.” Of course, and not surprisingly, there is a long thread which consists of a division between his effortlessly influenced fandom of youngsters and those who despise him for what he has done, both over the years and on New Year’s Eve.

...I’m done. I’m fucking done. I’m not dealing with this shit anymore. Everything about this is wrong and I am certain I am going to get a headache out of this. I don’t care if he is “reflecting;” knowing him, he is still going to be the same idiotic frat “celebrity” that he is, especially when Maverick Apparel came forward today to say they lost $4 million in profit because of him… and Jake dissed in him in one of the most inappropriate ways ever. Ugh!… Can this nightmare end already?! I swear, it keeps finding ways to make me want to continue this rant! Well, guess what? Not. Anymore. I am concluding this right now and I don’t care what will happen to these two sickos in the near future.

*sigh* Well, to wrap things up, Logan is nothing but a stupid, inane, thick-skinned, money-hungry, thoughtless jackass who only cares about getting richer and, much like Jake, using his fame to do whatever the fuck he wants because he believes there is no such thing as “bad publicity…” until now, that is. He may have been able to dodge controversy in the past, but thanks to his obnoxious, immature personality, he has made him a danger to three important fields after his trip to Japan; he has demonstrated how much of an inadequate influence he is to juveniles countless times in the past and has managed to do so once again with his now-deleted vlog, he has made the entire Japanese country hate him for even stepping foot on their cherished land, and he has sparked yet another battle against YouTube’s policies and regulations.

Logan, I’m going to say this once and only once: it is your fault you showed Japan just how disgustingly inhumane you are by not only fucking around with their cherished laws, traditions, culture, history, and landscape. It is your fault for recording the footage of the corpse, laughing and joking about it, and not giving a single shit about suicide, depression, and mental illnesses. It is your fault you unleashed hell on earth that pitted most of the social media users against you. It is your fault for creating your half-hearted apology tweet and your equally monetized apology video that only added fuel to the fire. It is your fault Japan hates you for treating them poorly. It is your fault you’re now facing serious consequences after showing the world what you did in front of that dead man. It is your fault for ending 2017 and starting 2018 on abysmal notes. I hope your multi-millionaire empire crumbles by having the YT staff banning your vlog channel. I hope the actions you—and Jake—have illustrated over the years and the consequences you face will deal more major blows to your precious careers.

To everyone reading this, I want to say I am genuinely sorry that you saw that vlog or heard what has been going on. I am even sorry at myself for subjecting myself to this horror of learning who the Paul brothers are just to get this rant out of the way. They have a horrible sense of humor and none of the stuff they do is funny, let alone how serious suicide is.

Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the US, claiming an average of 44,965 American lives every year, and for every 25 attempts that are made, it annually costs the country $51 billion. In Japan, despite now having over 21,000 people claiming their lives every year—with the majority caused by men—and its suicide rate declining, it still remains as one of the highest rates when compared to other countries. The most common place for the Japanese to kill themselves is in Aokigahara, which has received its infamous nickname, “the Suicide Forest.” It earned its name and has become the 2nd most suicidal place on Earth because around 100 Japanese residents travel there to commit suicide because of its thick trees and its seclusion; two of the frequent ways they kill themselves is through drug overdose or by hanging themselves though other methods are not uncommon. Since then, Japanese officials have been putting their best efforts to decrease the suicide rate.

Suicide is an urgent situation, with depression being the #1 cause of it if left untreated, undiagnosed, or ineffectively treated and mental illnesses, disorders, and contributors such as physical ailments, previous suicide attempts, limited access to mental health treatment closely following suit and cannot be left unnoticed. If you or a loved one is experiencing suicidal thoughts or actions or have had a series of suicidal thoughts or actions, it is not too late to seek help. Whether it is in America, Japan, or anywhere else in the world, call the numbers below based on what country you live in:

United Kingdom: 116 123

United States: 1-800-273-8255

Canada: 5147234000

Mexico: 5255102550

Ireland: 116 123

Brazil: 212339191

Argentina: +5402234930430

Spain: 914590080

Portugal: 225 50 60 70

France: 0145394000

Greece: 1018

Germany: 08001810771

Italy: 800860022

Poland: 52770000

Holland: 0900-0113

Denmark: +4570201201

Sweden: 46317112400

Finland: 040-5032199

Norway: +478153300

Belgium: 1813

Austria: 017133374

Switzerland: 143

Egypt: 7621602

South Africa: 0514445691

Israel: 1201

India: 8888817666

Australia: 131 114

New Zealand: 045861048

Singapore: 1800 221 4444

Philippines: 028969191

Russia: 0078202577577

China: 85223820000

South Korea: 112

Japan: +810352869090

You can also donate to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, the Suicide Prevention Lifeline, or any resourceful suicide prevention organizations you know because your gifts will serve them as a reminder that you are contributing to fight against this worldwide epidemic.

Don’t wait. Call now or donate to help save a life.

#my post #rant #logan paul controversy #anti logan paul

11 notes · View notes

sumukhcomedy · 6 years

Text

Facebook: The Millennial Mental Illness

In the fall of 2004, I was a junior at Miami University. By this point, other students had already begun talking about The Facebook. It was a website that had reached our campus, and relying on .edu email domains, became a way to connect with other students at your college and at other colleges. I knew it was created at Harvard. I knew its creator was some guy whose silhouette was the logo for the website. I knew that I had no interest in joining it.

By my final semester at Miami (spring 2006), Facebook had simply become a norm. Every party that I attended was documented on Facebook. Any photo people took that I was in they would tell me “it’s on Facebook.” So I caved mostly just to see hilarious photos. In a certain way, it seemed relatively pointless to join a website aimed at college students just as I was leaving college but I did it anyway.

As I graduated, Facebook proved a nice way to keep in touch with those individuals I met in college especially since I had now moved to Columbus and didn’t particularly know anyone. At the time, Facebook was the perfect level of innocence and immaturity. Everyone could be themselves without any consideration of the impact of having such social interaction on the Internet nor with any anticipation of what Facebook would become.

That same year, I began to do stand-up comedy. At the time, mySpace was the website to be on if you were a performer of any kind. There were plenty of comedians I knew that hadn’t even joined Facebook yet likely because it still was being targeted to college students and they saw no value in the site for their comedy career and promotion. At the time, Facebook always seemed like it would be something specific to being in college. It never seemed like something beyond that. It just seemed like Mark Zuckerberg wanted to create a website, not that he wanted to ascend to being one of the most powerful businessmen in the world.

The shift came when Facebook opened itself up to everyone. I recall thinking that was stupid. Here was this kind of exclusive website to college students and now our parents or other members of our family were joining. This always seemed like a website for our generation and now every generation was getting involved. It also pretty much opened itself up to every jackass with an email address which, as we’d find out, would lead to plenty of faces, fake accounts, and the rise of terms like “trolling” and “catfishing.”

Here’s one of my early Facebook profile photos and now my reaction to almost everything happening on Facebook.

Due to the now mass of people joining Facebook and mySpace’s inability to advance themselves to the quality of Facebook or handle major issues with spam, it started to turn where, as a comedian or anyone with any need for marketing a business, it was essential to be on Facebook. However, unlike mySpace, Facebook was never created to care about artists or small businesses. It’s why it has now smartly suffocated its reach for Pages and pushed boosting posts and sponsorship to gain attention. The revenue helps Facebook and puts the small business in need of raising awareness on social media into a corner: have your page remain relatively unknown or pay up and reap some benefits for everyone’s eyeballs being on Facebook.

This proliferation of information and emotions has totally changed how our minds interact with each other. Everything that we want or could be interested in is now focused into one central area called a “News Feed.” It’s led a majority of people to read and react more than to think and investigate. We’ve been granted a News Feed that is neither particularly news nor particularly healthy to be consuming. “Feed” seems an appropriate description. We seem no better than farm animals feeding, consuming, and accepting what is blasted into our eyes as we scroll through a website. It feels no different than eating McDonald’s all day long and thinking that is a healthy approach for our bodies.

In comedy, I became aware of Facebook’s uselessness fairly early on. I only looked at the website as a place for fun and as I began to see how people were getting emotionally affected in a variety of ways I preferred to satirize it. I “turned heel” in early 2012 and began to post as a pro wrestling heel character mocking the nature of people’s Facebook posts. It was enjoyable at the time and served whatever purpose it may have served both for me and for those who were my friends and found it entertaining. But, as I revealed before, it actually proved to be a more problematic revelation of what was to come for how we interact with social media. I’m not patting myself on the back saying “I told you so” about Facebook by being a Heel. I actually had anticipated and hoped that we would be better and that Facebook wouldn’t be as relevant at this point and that society would have moved on to the next advancement in Internet communication.

Instead, the advancements came within Facebook and they in fact advanced us in going backwards. Facebook now became the focal point as to how adults gained information whether it be news or events or the dumb jokes myself or other comedians may post. These posts now all still follow an algorithm—an algorithm that of course will succeed based off the most interaction to a post and the most interaction to a post no doubt comes from the most controversial or most emotional or most paid for posts.

Facebook has brought out how much we can be assholes. That’s certainly been the case within the comedy community but probably the case with every community that exists on the site. Arguments exist regularly and unlike Twitter where it at least involves opening up a tweet to see random commentary, the comments of other individuals are right there for everyone else to see. It opens the possibility of more arguing.

Public posting is even more irritating for general users. For general users who do click on the trending topics and most popular news stories, beyond the links to certain website articles, the News Feed on Facebook delivers public posts by the most divisive and random Facebook accounts. The most interacted comments even on the most popular articles clearly seem like stock commentary by fake accounts. Facebook has done nothing with their algorithm to address this issue and it only divides our perspectives on the news as badly as 24-hour cable television does.

Public posting by comedians is similarly ineffective. I don’t personally do it but I have friends who do and it only seems to open the door to the most random people choosing to comment on jokes or on opinions. Then, all of a sudden, the comedian gets into an argument with this random person/possible fake account. I’m not sure how this helps to advance the comedian’s career but it points to a serious problem both in how the comedian interacts with social media and with what social media is really doing for comedy. Very few comedians have become famous thanks to Facebook and, if they have, it's usually because they created videos that went viral. People may have had jokes or points shared a lot but it didn’t necessarily prompt a bunch of people to be interested in their comedy or go see live shows. Facebook has never proven to be as effective as Twitter was in that and, as I mentioned, that is because Facebook never pushed itself as being beneficial to artists.

Now over 10 years later, it’s unbelievable to me that some random thing I joined in college for fun is now the source of how people get their information, voice their opinions, and have clearly affected their personalities and emotions so much so that an attorney for this website had to speak in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on how our Presidential election could have been interfered via this website.

Part of this amazing but absurd experience that has been Facebook is that Mark Zuckerberg is my age. It’s hilarious and strange to follow along on the same path as the man who was responsible for this site. My generation and I progressed with Facebook’s birth to the point that we are at now. I watched myself be in photos drunk at the age of 21 to now watch those same friends I was drunk with have children and be arguing over something political on this same website.

Nothing may have represented the absurdity of Facebook quite like the aftermath of the white supremacist stupidity in Charlottesville. My best friend, who rarely even posts on Facebook, all of a sudden was in an argument with one of my former roommates about this incident in the comments field of a post. What is happening here? Why are two people who ten years ago probably just had a drink together pleasantly are now interacting in this way? And why am I sitting here being the glue between them just observing and reading it? It’s fascinating in one sense but ultimately weird in another.

Over the past couple months, some of the individuals who once were at the forefront of Facebook but have since left the company have made comments about the effect the website has had on society and psychology. Personally, I don't find it far off. I've felt Facebook affect me over the years (again, I turned heel on it) but I've seen it far worse in some of my friends, particularly ones in comedy, who are otherwise kind people in person but who seem to take on completely different personas in social media. That's fine if that is what they want but my bigger concern is if the already present misery that comes with comedy isn't pouring itself out to an even greater and more troubling extent via Facebook.

While I was in college, Facebook seemed so innocent. It was just a fun place to party and say stupid stuff with your college friends. But, as it progressed and opened itself up to more people, it also wanted us to share more. And what we've discovered over 10 years is that what we want to share has been insane.

#facebook #comedy #stand up comedy #psychology #social media #charlottesville #mark zuckerberg #miami university

1 note · View note

anneapocalypse · 7 years

Note

[tone of genuine curiosity, as clarified in an elcor-esque fashion because the internet renders all emotion an uncertain factor] You're welcome to skip this ask if you ain't up for it, but re: the perpetual debate over Problematic Subjects In Media, I've seen you in the past write many a critique on how fandom writes/treats women / BDSM / etc. Does this not fall under the idea that the writer has a responsibility in how they handle / frame certain issues in their writing?

Hi Silt! I’m up for it, but buckle in, because this is gonna get long. :)

Okay so the thing is, this is a broad topic and these days I try to resist treating it as a zero-sum game with “No Critique Allowed” on one side and “Relentlessly Harass People Who Make Bad Content According to Our Arbitrary But Obviously Correct Standard” on the other.

Let me state clearly for the record: both of those options are terrible. Fortunately, it’s not all or nothing, and those aren’t the only horses in the race.

The way that female characters, characters of color, disabled characters, and other representations of marginalized groups are treated in media remains very much of interest to me. That hasn’t changed. My approach has changed somewhat over the years (as I’d hope it would, if I’m continuing to grow as a person), largely due to understanding that some rhetorical styles are more effective than others when you actually want to reach people or change something.

If I gave the impression that I want to absolve creators of all responsibility, that was never my intent. In fact, I mentioned critique and growth as part of the process in one of my recent posts. I do critique the media I regularly consume, and in fact the more heavily I am immersed in something, the more in-depth my criticism, because we’re best able to examine the things we know best.

What I do feel is that creators need room to grow, and fandom can be a great test bed for exploration, where creators work with elements of established media to explore different ideas and techniques. I’m not saying fandom is only a test bed, or like, a trial run for original work, because I don’t think that; I think fanworks are worthwhile in their own right, written for enjoyment and personal indulgence. But the fact is that many of us do or will create original work, and for many of us, creating fanworks helps us build a skillset we’ll use for original work too.

That said, the cultural impact of fandom is more limited than that of popular media. I’m not saying it has no impact–and indeed, in a time when we have multiple known works of popular published fiction that are retooled from fanfics, when TV writers are on twitter regularly interacting with their fanbases, it’s probably safe to say fandom has more impact on popular media than it ever has before, but neverthelesss, its impact is still limited. The average piece of fanfiction does not reach an audience on the scale of a piece of popular media, that’s just a fact.

Does that mean we shouldn’t bother looking at patterns in fandom and fanworks? Hell no! Fandom is a microcosm–the patterns we see in fandom do absolutely reflect wider social patterns and in fact for very immersed fans it can make those patterns more apparent. And I think it’s good for us to discuss them, address them, become more aware of how we play into them–especially if we’re creating or planning to create original work.

Because these kind of discussions, when they are actually discussions, do work. I talk about the season 10 climate in the RvB fandom a lot, but even back then, I saw people change their minds about Carolina, not because they were accused of internalized misogyny or told to feel guilty for not liking her (shockingly, shaming people for their taste doesn’t have a high success rate in changing their minds), but because someone presented them with a compelling case for a more nuanced reading of her character. My experiences in past years led to me almost checking my watch to see fans turn on RvB’s newest female character this season, and you know what? It hasn’t happened. Things do change, and I don’t think fandom turnover is the sole reason. I would love to see some shifts in other patterns as well. For example, I would love to see trauma in female characters given as much weight as it is given in male characters. I would love to see more artists willing to draw Tucker with brown eyes. Those will be discussions, and we’ll continue to have them.

What I’ve seen happening in recent years, though, is a turn toward a certain ideal of purity in fanworks. It’s not an ideal of working toward more complex and thoughtful portrayals of characters; rather, it’s an all or nothing attitude that says some characters and ships and topics are Good and worthy to be explored in fanworks, while other characters, ships, and topics are Bad and anyone who touches them or likes them is Bad, and also fair game for targeted harassment.

I keep drawing comparisons between fanworks and original work for a reason–the attitudes that I find most unsupportable in fandom are the same ones I find untenable when it comes to original work, and when you apply them to the latter, their limitations are far more obvious.

One example: the idea that it’s wrong to find any reasons to sympathize with an antagonist, or to look for an interesting and complex backstory, one that might make sense of (not even to say justify) their actions. That’s all well and good when you’re engaging purely from a fan perspective I guess, but what happens when you want to write a novel? If it’s morally wrong to find complexity and interest in villains, are you morally obligated to make your antagonist as bland and cartoonish as possible, to be sure no one could possibly relate to them? Is that good writing? Is that what we want?

Or take the idea that it’s morally wrong to ship unhealthy ships–and this attitude in fandom goes that shipping certain ships is wrong regardless of how or why, to the point that people will proudly identify themselves as “anti-[ship],” thus building a kind of identity around not shipping a Bad Ship (and giving rise to the umbrella term “antis” to refer to this attitude). Carry this into original work and… you’re not allowed to write unhealthy relationships? You’re not allowed to write any conflict into a relationship between two “good” characters lest it be perceived as “abusive” or “toxic?”

Then there’s the idea that it’s morally wrong to write fic with dark subject matter, which is what my most recent posts were about. I’m never going to argue these things can’t be done badly but I’m absolutely going to push back against the idea that they can’t be done at all. And I could write paragraphs more about how incredibly reductive I find the whole idea that certain topics are just off-limits for fiction, that art isn’t allowed to be catharsis (especially in a tiny niche setting like fandom, for corn’s sake) but this post is long enough, so I think I’ll put a lid on it here. ;) But frankly, if someone’s going to write dark fiction insensitively, in bad taste, or just plain poorly, there are worse places for it to exist than on AO3 tagged with content warnings, where nobody’s paid a hot cent for it and the way out is just clicking the back button.

#writing #fandom #sedimentarydearwatson #ask anne

24 notes · View notes

sigurdjarlson · 7 years

Text

We need to talk about Kevin fandom (tw: rape, abuse, pedophilia mentions)

this discourse gets me so pissy so here’s a vent post

(1) "They're coping mechanisms are unhealthy’ it's only unhealthy if it harms them or someone else. Ask any decent mental health professional.

(2) you don't get a say in someone's mental health. Maybe it is unhealthy for them but unless they're causing REAL harm to someone or they ask your opinion it's none of your business. You are not their mental health professional

(3) using abuse/rape in fic to cope has been proven beneficial for many survivors. It's a way of taking back the power they've had taken away. There's a lot more to it as well.

(4) "you can only do this if it's for coping" how do you plan to enforce this rule? Force every single person to talk about their incredibly private traumatic experiences just so you seem whether or not it's okay for them to do something? I'm sorry that's disgusting. That's absolutely disgusting.

(5) You do not speak for all survivors even if you are a survivor yourself. Your experience is not universal. Everyone's experience is different and everyone copes and reacts in different ways. I am one and I don't speak for all of us..

(6) it makes you uncomfortable? Okay!! That's alright. Totally understandable!! You want to police others because it makes you uncomfortable? No!! Not okay.

(7) you have the responsibility to take care of yourself. There are steps you can take to avoid this kind of media. Trigger warnings, tags, summaries, blocking systems..those are all there for a reason. Please make use of them.

(8) "think of the children" this could be used for any kind of adult content. "Violent video games cause violence!" First off no they do not and also they come with ratings that blatantly say it's not for children. Its properly rated. It's not the creator of the game's fault if a child gets hold of it. To sum it up: that's the parent's job. I read erotic fic before I was 18 and it's not the author's fault lmao.

(9) "people will act it out" oh my god oh my goddd I can't stand this. No!! They won't. If they do? They already had very severe problems to begin with. It was not caused by this "problematic" piece of fic or art. Do NOT take the blame off the people that actively choose to hurt others by saying ~they read some problematic things so this must have caused it uwu~ you know what caused it? Them choosing to do the act. Most people have a healthy distinction between fiction and reality.

(10) "this happened to me" I'm sorry you went through something like that. I truly am. But you still don't have the right to tell other people what they can and can't do. Take steps to protect yourself. No one else can do that for you. Your mental health is your responsibility and yours alone. You do not have the right to put that responsibility on complete strangers. It's not their job. The world cannot nor should it have to cater to you..

(11) "this thing makes me uncomfortable so therefore it must be bad and if it's bad the person writing it must be bad" is the logic here and it's incredibly faulty. Once again. Your experiences are not universal. Something that makes you uncomfortable might not make someone else feel uncomfortable. For things that have a tendency to make a lot of people uncomfortable there are these things called trigger warnings and warnings in general.

the person is not bad. They are not supporting or normalizing this behavior just by writing a fanfic. Are they saying "it's okay to rape people everybody should go out and do it"? No? then no they're not.

(12) fanfic, fanart, etc are such small medias that they don't effect or influence society In the way something like say "50 Shades of Grey" would. That's the stuff we should be concerned about and focused on criticizing. It's blatant misinformation.

(13) if half the effort people put into these crusades against ships was used to help actual survivors..there would be a lot of good being done in the world. These are fictional characters. We joke around a lot but you don't have to protect them. They are not real. Real people are more important than fictional ones. So, please if you spend so much time and effort on these things, channel that energy into something good and positive instead of harassing and harming real people on the internet over /fictional things/.

(14) “Fiction effects reality.” You’re right it does. However it does not directly cause these bad things. It’s what people choose to do with fiction that matters. Choices. Choices. Choices.

(15) Fiction does not have to be pure. Fiction has always been a platform where people can explore the darker things in life. It’s interesting to some people. Personally I like a lot of dark shit because it’s interesting. It’s so incomprehensible to me that people can do these awful things that I find it interesting to explore why these people may have done them through fiction.

(16) Liking something in fiction does not mean you support it. I’d hate most of the fictional characters I absolutely adore if they were real.

(17) Some of the kindest people I’ve ever met are part of problematic fandoms and some of the worst are the people who scream that they’re trying to protect the world from that problematic fandom. You see there’s no correlation between what you like in fiction and what kind of person you are in real life. You know what is a great indicator of what kind of person you are? How you treat real, live people and the choices you make.

(18) I get it. These things elicit very strong emotions in people and for very valid reasons but that does not mean it should not be allowed to exist. Like I said it is your responsibility to create your own safe space. Blacklist/block/unfollow do whatever to keep those things out of your space. And...Don’t go looking for these things god damn it? If you see (tw: rape) and then go into the fic anyway and get upset? That’s not the author’s fault. They put the proper warnings in place. You ignored them.

If there isn’t a proper warning. Perhaps consider kindly asking them to put some up? Maybe they forgot. It happens. People make mistakes.. If they refuse to do so they’re kind of a dick but it’s better to just ignore/unfollow/avoid/block that person and move on.

(19) Lets make a summary.

You are responsible for your own safe space and taking care of your mental health.

Fiction does not CAUSE bad things to happen. People who choose to do those bad things do.

“This upsets me” does not = “it’s bad and shouldn’t exist and the person making this thing is bad” your logic is faulty m8

If something is properly tagged and has the proper warnings then it’s not the author’s fault if others ignore it and get upset. They did their part.

Fictional characters are not real. You don’t have to protect them. Harming real people over fictional ones is absolutely reprehensible.

It’s no one’s job to parent other people’s children. No, children shouldn’t be looking at this content but it’s the parents’ job to keep their children away from those things. (proper warnings, tags, etc are important too but that itself is not a guarantee)

Liking something in fiction does not = supporting it, condoning it, normalizing it. It just means you like something in fiction. Most people have a healthy distinction between fiction and reality. If someone does act on it..they already had very severe issues to begin with.

Survivors are never obligated to reveal their personal experiences in order to be “allowed” to consume or make certain things.

A coping mechanism is only unhealthy if it’s hurting the person or others. (it’s not hurting anyone by existing) It might not be healthy for you but that does not mean it’s not healthy for that person. AND it’s not your job or place to decide whether or not something is healthy or unhealthy for a person unless you are their mental health professional. Stay in your lane.

People don’t have to be using it as a coping mechanism! Maybe something really is just their kink. Maybe they find it interesting or whatever. Who cares as long as they’re not out doing it in real life. Who cares as long as they have a healthy distinction between what is okay in fiction and what is okay in real life. Mind your own business honestly.

I think some of these people really do have good intentions. They think they’re helping the world or others somehow. But having good intentions does not mean you are right. Be aware of what you’re doing and how it’s effecting others. Channel all the energy you put into hating things into doing something good in the real world. Or use it to create and enjoy things you do like or enjoy. Why focus on the things you hate?

And some of these people don’t have good intentions. For some it’s just a self righteous circle jerk. It makes them feel better about themselves. It’s a “I’m more morally enlightened than you” contest. These people don’t care about the issues they claim to care about or the people involved. They just want to make themselves feel good by making others feel bad. And that? That’s horrible.

They’re just using serious issues as buzzwords (which takes away the impact that word makes and THAT is a bad thing) Rape, pedophilia, abuse, etc. These are very, very serious issues.

When people roll their eyes when they see someone claiming “pedophilia’ because there are people on here seriously accusing people of being pedophiles for shipping a 17 year old with an 18 year old or shipping some characters with an age gap?

(which for the record. Talking about people who are of age and with a partner that’s significantly older than them. it’s untrue that all relationships with an age gap are unhealthy. is there a possibility for it to be unhealthy? certainly but that’s not a guarantee that it is. Your experiences are not universal. Every situation and every person is different.)

There’s a problem because you’re making people take these things less seriously. Have you ever heard the story of the boy who cried wolf?

You do that and sadly no one will listen when you actually find something to worry about. Is that right? No. But it’s the truth. No one will take you seriously.

You don’t accuse people of these things willy nilly. You can ruin people’s lives. Are they doing those things in real life and hurting real people? Do you have solid proof that they are? Yes? (Fictional media is not proof unless they admit to doing something) By all means step in and get the authorities involved. That’s absolutely awful. Is it just fiction? Take a step back, block/unfollow/blacklist and move on.

What people do in real life matters. That’s it. That’s the key. Stop harassing people over fictional crap because THAT...shows what kind of person you are and it’s not a good one.

#nerd ramblings

6 notes · View notes

tetragon4-blog · 7 years

Text

The Final Curtain: Why Sherlock Failed Me

A couple of hours ago, I watched my first Sherlock AMV since I quit the fandom last year. And I realized something: I was more interested in the music than in the actual video footage. I still care about Sherlock and John as characters, but it felt like meeting a friend that I fell out of contact with. I was mildly interested in knowing how they were doing, but I couldn’t bother to be annoyed about their fate anymore. Nowadays, I feel much closer to other fandoms. At the same moment when I realized this, I also noticed that my head was much clearer than when I wrote my last meta on the show. I was rather unfair to Sherlock back then, and although it’s a distant memory, I would like to pay tribute to the joy the show once has given me.

I came for the quirkiness:

Sherlock was not meant to be such a large production: It was a three-part special, dedicated to the works of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and as such, the budget did not allow for bombastic special effects like the big explosions and gun fights in the Downey Jr. movies. The closest the show came to “special effects” were some random words floating around mid-air, and this is typical of British adaptations. Around 2010-2012, there was another pseudo detective show of similar down-to-earth character: Dirk Gently. Both shows prove that you do not need giant fireballs hurled at the protagonist to make the audience care for them: It’s the characterization, not the story, that drives these shows forward.

Sherlock aired at a time when detective shows turned extremely dull, because they were competing in gruel depictions rather than in complex protagonists. It is enjoyable to watch two characters have a seemingly pointless conversation over dinner, because this is something that would get cut in more commercially oriented shows. Sherlock defied the formula of “corpse, investigation, solution” by offering multiple cases or telling us the identity of the culprit, but not the reason. Since it was three episodes, they got away with it: People would either watch all or none. There was no need to make it easier for casual viewers to enjoy the show. It is a piece of self-reference and experimentation. Honestly, I doubt this show would have attracted that much attention if it were not for Cumberbatch and Freeman. Dirk Gently also breaks with a lot of traditions, but its leads are not as aesthetically pleasing to the masses, I guess.

Sherlock was quirky. It was essentially British; it was stubbornly refusing to let itself be categorised as a drama or a detective show or a comedy.

I stayed for the drama:

The second season had big shoes to fill, especially since there was no true storyline yet. The first season was just as much an iteration of disconnected events as most of the short stories. However, Sherlock seemed to be there to stay, and that is why the writers had the guts to go one step further. In the second season, they would build up towards a full dramatic arc: Moriarty would truly be involved, not just some hinted shadowy figure. This way, the cases would be personal. The focus shifted towards the interpersonal relationships between the characters, and this also explains why Mycroft was suddenly pulled to the front. Any progress, any obstacle during the investigations had to be connected to the human network surrounding the protagonists. There was no room for chance, for some outside force. The second season is built on drama, not on cases. Instead, the characters are pitted against each other.

I fell out of love when the show reoriented itself:

During the great hiatus, I consumed a lot of fanwork, and, admittedly, this raised my expectations of the third season. There had been a lot of predictive meta, a lot of great fan continuations. In truth, Sherlock had no chance to live up to the hype. There was no way they could cram Sherlock’s return, fiendishly difficult cases, a homosexual relationship, a sob-story past for Sherlock, a credible theory for Moriarty’s survival and a drama arc concerning John’s alcoholic sister into three episodes. The average post-s2 story covering these topics is about 150 k words!

No, season three was fated to disappoint, because it could not possibly satisfy all the subgroups of the fandom. Due to the previous multi-facetious approach, there were shippers, there were genuine Holmes fans, there were those that were in for the human drama, and those that simply liked detective shows. Additionally, the show had crossed a lot of borders: The writers were no longer writing for the BBC, but for the world, which means that cultural quirks only work to a certain degree before they become incomprehensible or unacceptable.

And that’s when the writers lost me, somebody who joined the fandom for the original pilot, not the drama of the second season (although it was an added benefit): They decided to reorient the show, to make it more mainstream, more accessible. At the same time, they felt obliged to satisfy the “original” crowd by offering us meaningless references to the past. They attempted to do a little of everything. They would hint at Johnlock, they built up a mastermind villain who fell short at the decisive moment. They gave us a great return drama, but glossed over the emotional upheaval because… time. The off-switch on the bomb, that’s essentially the off-switch to the drama. They had to move on to the next fan wish. Sherlock was hurt badly, which satisfied the whumpers. They tried their best to address all the needs, at the cost of being indecisive, yes, baiting, even. It became virtually impossible to pick a main theme running through the season, because they poured all the ingredients into one giant bowl and mixed them until it the distinctive flavour of the original products is lost.

Season three is not a good example of a homoromantic forerunner of its time, because the Mary arc destroys the message.

It is not a good example of a continuation, because it fails to address the questions left unanswered by its predecessor.

It is not a good example of detective show, because the cases are not presented as the main attraction. It is difficult to guess alongside Sherlock without being given the necessary clues.

It is not a good example of a drama, because the dramatic turns are not addressed in terms of their consequences. Sherlock’s fake death remains without lasting consequences as does Mary’s attempt at murder, and let’s not mention Magnussen’s death.

Season three has so much to offer, but essentially, it fails to find its own theme. The characters and plots are yanked all over the place to fit the new audience’s demographics.

As soon as I sobered up, I quit:

I cannot say much about the fourth season, only having watched the first trailer. However, the interviews and spoilers showed me that the cast were extremely pleased with their previous achievements. I doubt they reflected how much their show had changed, and especially their comment on how they were able to create the show they had wanted to create helped me sober up. By this date, Sherlock had become a highly commercialized, close to mainstream work drama. If this was truly what the writers wanted to create, then season four had nothing to offer to me.

I no longer suffered from the illusion that Sherlock would address the flaws of the third season or return to being about crime solving. At this point, I had turned into a serious Johnlocker. To me, it seemed the only way to save the show from becoming forgettable. If it could not become a legend from an in-story perspective, then it could write history for the depiction of a homoromantic relationship on a large scale. Sherlock attracted a huge audience in countries where such topics are highly problematic. It seemed like such a good idea to use this falling star as a missionary for social awareness. Since Brokeback Mountain, the depiction of gay people in the media has increased, but it is still about stereotypical behavior, and usually, these people don’t experience a lot of happiness. It would have been nice to watch a show that would address the issue in a subversive way. That would have been modestly refreshing.

However, I realized that there would be no grand scheme to put forward a message to the society. No, just another three episodes of mainstream explosions, gun fire, pointless squabbling to create drama, and some backstory that would please the whumpers. Of course, Mary also had to die after giving birth, which satisfies the haters and invites the fluff fans to praise the resolution of the arc.

Sherlock had, essentially, become predictable. And predictable is boring, because it’s exceeding the expectations that makes a show great.

And now?

Am I disappointed in Sherlock? Actually, no, I am not. I suppose I had been disappointed last year, but since then, I moved on. I’ve accepted that I am a picky viewer, and that this was just another failure in a long list of forgettable shows that did not live up to my high expectations.

Addendum:

By the way, there’s a Japanese show that recently had the guts to portray a gay couple without a tragic end or defining the characters by their sexuality: Yuri on Ice. The protagonists are professional figure skaters and the show is mostly concerned with their work experiences. It is a well-written and highly popular sports series, in my opinion.

I am somewhat surprised that the very conservative Japanese managed to beat us when it comes to this.

#sherlock meta #bbc sherlock #sherlock #meta #bbc sherlock meta

5 notes · View notes

buzrushcommunity · 4 years

Text

Content Marketing & Content Creation

Content Marketing & Content Creation is the procedure of developing priceless, associated articles to draw, attain, and participate your listeners. Buyers and customers immediately are inundated by a lot more promoting and advertising information than previously-well over 2,900 each and every day, by ongoing estimations. This generates an surroundings of recognition shortage, problematic advertisers with the work of developing involving article content that won’t go missing within the fixed. A highly-created content internet marketing strategy different places your organisation through the situation of a believed head, making label personal taste as you notify and inform consumers. Rendering valuable and fun information can style a solid bond in between the brand and customers that carries on to strengthen and grow after awhile.

Conventionally, entrepreneurs experienced to “rent attention” off their people’s advertising by exhibit advertising on web-sites, booths at industry events, or email messages brought to thirdly-party displays. As an example ,, in cases where a brand will pay you out huge amount of money for that Very Dish advertising, these are getting the attention that this Tv set companies have developed. Website content promoting, then again, permits on-line marketers to end up being web publishers because they build their unique people and appealing to their own personal special attention. Marketers increase their brand awareness and preference by establishing a relationship of trust with consumers as they move through the sales funnel, by creating and distributing content that buyers find useful. In addition, material online marketing may be known as a cheaper technique than some many people. It can have somewhat of a slower start up whilst your posts collection reaches and grows an increased audience.

At this time, 41Percent of B2B marketing experts look into article content tied to the getting vacation associated with a customer, however many organisations neglect to yield custom made website content focused entirely on all step of this selecting period. Custom text messaging doesn’t just result in focusing on by group or filmographic considerations, it implies proactively supplying website content that is suitable for each and every position within the buyer’s adventure. Eighty-five percent of clients faith options that invest time to walking them because of a variety of ways for preferences rather than just attempting to make that choice for them. This material shows consumers that you agree to and appreciate their ability to evaluate and make conclusions by themselves.

“Successful articles online marketers arrive at all steps for the home buyer path-from start to finish. Most makers are really above-weighted in the bottom belonging to the funnel. Plus they fail to see significant chances to interact with potential customers at the purpose of really need.”

- MichaelBrenner and CEO, Promoting and advertising Specialized Group

Typical problems that articles promotion can fix

Content marketing and advertising is actually a thoroughly extraordinary technique of involving with prospective buyers that circumvents a portion of today’s best agony spots, specifically in digital area.

•Dilemma: I need to increase the level of my pure hunt. Your audience can’t buy from you if they can’t find you, and today up to 93% of buying cycles start from a search engine. According to Kuno Creative, 51% of content consumption derives from organic search, so content marketing is a great way to build organic awareness, additionally. If your helpful content material positions hugely on yahoo and google, or perhaps provided vastly on social media sites, you are building product attention at no cost, and also, since your articles are only mutual when it’s related, your target audience would be fewer likely to tune it all out.

•Concern: I have to establish make personal preference. Getting posts marketing causes taste thru thought management by designing you a trusted method of obtaining education and information. In addition you can generate selection throughout human relationships, that are strengthened whenever your content material entertains or assists your potential buyers. Customers will probably purchase from organizations with whom they already have marriages.

•Issue: It’s not engaging my customers, even though i have a content marketing plan. Content material promoting will guidance your customers, not target them. Once you openly give your crowd anything so worthwhile that they’d be inclined to pay for it, you create depend on, which, ultimately, are you finding your most powerful supplying method.

•Concern: I have to accomplish significantly more prospects, whilst keeping my costs lower. According to Forrester research, today’s customers distrust and resent marketing that interrupts or intercepts them. Engaging content material promoting must be an important part of an all natural talking with current and potential clients, be connected to their hobbies and actions, and make a persistent story after a while. Website content marketing and advertising makes sense benefits for a very long time, this kind of appearance multiplies when you develop from the content and articles library.

•Problem: I am undecided how to present the return on your investment (Return) of my article content marketing strategy. On the whole, posts online marketing will help you to multiply website traffic, guidance guide certification (especially when content is produced by state), and, essentially, head conversions into product sales.

Since you now be aware of what challenges content and articles selling can solve, read about the dilemmas in order to prevent when launching your articles selling organize in the manual 8 Best Goof ups Content On-line marketers Make and the ways to Avoid Them.

Aspects of subject matter online marketing

In order to do it right, you’ll need to determine what type of content your potential buyers prefer to consume, content marketing can take various forms, and.

•Blog articles. Distill your content marketing strategy inside your web page schedule or methodology. The seller web site should and can be utilized to go across-stimulate other article content, which supports continue content with a reliable itinerary. Whenever you do not get a promotion workforce participant who seems to be well-versed in website seo (Website positioning), this is actually an area where by you should consult with an expert.

•E books. Guide subject matter should observe some kind of narrative format, including a lot of superior, visual pattern. It’s important to keep language consistent with your brand voice, even though the goal of an ebook is to educate.

•Videos. The key to efficiently employing video footage with regard to a article content strategy is maintaining it as a incredible as you can so that you aren’t instructed to consistently dedicate time and money making additional. Large-good quality online video material may also be used to show your trademark to YouTube’s active and large crowd.

•Infographics. Use as little word as it possibly can and allow images say to the plot. Find a talented freelancer who can make something beautiful and informative if you don’t have a killer in-house graphics artist.

•Cheat linens. They are shorter-two or three web pages at most. Which means there will not be many place for big pictures, so you will wish to use wording formatting and have them as possible for a audience to fast check out throughout. Connection or examine other practical information on much more in-range figuring out.

templates and •Workbooks. These solutions are best ways to you want to keep trademark ahead of potential buyers when continuing to inform. They should be devised for print out and generated as interactive and practical as they possibly can.

•White papers and reports. White papers and reports are generally less graphically designed and use language that is a little more professional, even though these materials are similar to an ebook in that they are primarily educational. They are able to also make chance to lover with the other groups.

•Slip decks. Slip decks are a smart data format for deteriorating difficult guidelines into simple steps or chew-size articles. Maintain your glides simple and easy: Use low textual content in a single font and big visuals right through.

•Condition experiments. Put together condition analyses with authentic figures and finished experiences. This will aid keep the material devoted to the results and value, not the emblem.

•Demos. This is where a freeevaluation and assessment. Alternatively, trial works nicely to start the dialogue and to begin to fully qualify your most interested leads. If you have an e-commerce-based product, you can leverage a discount code to use at the time of the transaction to establish some urgency around making the purchase.

•Distribution channels.

•Possessed: Showing your site content in the brand’s very own social media marketing stations-like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter or Pinterest-may be a instant, easy to customize, and no cost ability to correspond with your potential audience.

•100 % natural: Weaving some Search engine optimisation most beneficial practices in to the content material can certainly help get a beneficial perception with Google and bing and relocate your web blog in the search positions listing. The strength of a good quality website content marketing plan is inside offering the information and answers that your chosen customers wants, so be certain that he or she can discover it.

•Paid: Most social networks permit some form of paid back advertising and marketing, which includes sponsored content, shell out-each-simply click (Paid advertising), search engine marketing (Search engine marketing), show, and retargeting. Complementing a network’s demographics with all your brand’s personas will allow you to determine where you can make an investment.

•Accumulated: This is the most valuable, but hardest to create. Attained social networking promotional comes about when your crowd selects to discuss your site content making use of their system.

Get more info Visit BuzRush

Join: - Question & Answer Platform https: //community.buzrush.com/

#BuzRush

0 notes

coldstreams · 4 years

Text

Energy: Should you buy carbon offsets, an EV or solar PV to reduce your environmental impact? It depends.

Some people think they should buy carbon offsets to reduce their environmental impact.

Others think that by switching to an EV, they will reduce their CO2-emissions.

And of course, some think that installing solar PV panels, they will cut their CO2-emissions.

The reality is far more complicated.

Does your electrical utility source most of its electricity from fossil fuels?

Do not buy an EV. Install solar PV panels instead.

If you live in area where all or most of the local electrical utility’s power comes from burning coal, oil or natural gas, then your purchase of an EV will yield a minimal CO2-emissions reduction (and may result in producing more CO2 when the vehicle’s lifetime energy use, half of which typically comes from its manufacture, is included, as it must be).

Installing solar panels will directly reduce your use of their fossil-fuels. Buying solar panels is a more effective first step. Although this too “depends”. If you live in a location beset by endless cloudiness, then you might have to double the solar PV investment to a cost prohibitive level.

If you already drive a relatively fuel efficient vehicle, the best possible choice for the environment is to keep driving that vehicle as long as possible. That’s because of the large amount of energy consumed during the manufacturing of vehicles (for many fuel efficient vehicles, their largest consumption of energy and production of CO2 was when the vehicle was made – not while it is being driven.)

If you replace your existing vehicle with an EV, think through the details.

You either sell your vehicle so someone else uses it to emit CO2, or you junk the vehicle, thereby throwing all the energy used during the manufacturing of the vehicle. The more fuel efficient your existing vehicle is, the larger the percent of lifetime energy was used during its manufacture.

You then buy a new EV, which consumes large amounts of energy in sourcing its raw materials, transporting sub assemblies between factories and vendors, manufacturing and delivering the vehicle. All so you can decrease your usage of gasoline while increasing your local utilities burning of coal, oil or gas and increasing their CO2 emissions!

Details matter!

Does most of your electrical utility power come from “green” energy?

If you live in an area where your local electrical generation comes all or mostly from “green” power such as hydroelectric power, then purchasing an EV or plug in hybrid EV will likely reduce your CO2-emissions.

Installing solar PV may have minimal impact on CO2 reduction – and including the panels raw materials, manufacturing, shipment and installation – may even produce more CO2 emissions.

Is your goal virtual signaling and money is no object?

Install solar PV and buy an EV.

Unfortunately, a survey by Volvo found that about 75% of EV buyers today are doing so for virtue-signaling reasons yet, paradoxically this “helps them to feel better about making less environmentally conscious decisions in “other areas of life.”‘

Wow. That last part is revealing and scary – and likely leads to such individuals increasing their CO2-emissions, rather than decreasing – because people have little understanding of the energy inputs or CO2-emission outputs of their choices.

For example, I know some people who drive one or more expensive Tesla EVs – while living in an area where almost all power comes from non-CO2 emitting hydropower. Their use of a Tesla EV has them feeling self righteous even though their CO2 emissions reductions are nil.

Worse, as wealthy individuals, they take a number of airline flights to Europe and Asia for vacation trips. They likely view their use of a Tesla EV as offsetting their airline CO2 emissions -but they are not even close to doing so.

Consequently, virtue signaling choices can lead to increasing CO2 emissions while falsely believing they are acting good for the environment.

What about carbon offsets?

As noted a day ago, the carbon offset field has its own problems with scams. These include paying people not to cut down trees that they had no plans to cut down anyway, as one example.

Undoubtedly, just as Volvo found that EV purchasers are virtue signaling and then using that as an excuse to make worse environmental decisions, the same occurs with purchasing carbon offsets.

Carbon offset purchases also have built in inefficiencies – you need to purchase them through the equivalent of a broker who likely extracts perhaps a 15% royalty for managing the process. That’s 15% that is not accomplishing any CO2-emissions reductions. Does the broker also verify that the underlying “CO2 asset” is doing what they claim its doing? There are costs associated with insuring compliance and scam avoidance.

A FAR BETTER CHOICE THAN BUYING OFFSETS

If living where your electricity comes from coal and fossil fuels, help your neighbors to:

Reduce their energy consumption by eliminating waste. This includes improving home insulation and minimizing electrical usage (such as incandescent lighting). Consider more efficient appliances, especially including refrigerators, freezers and clothes dryers. Add an insulation blanket to water heaters and/or consider replacing with on-demand water heaters.

Help them install or purchase a solar PV system.

If living where your electricity comes from green sources, then instead of installing solar PV, switch to an EV and/or help your neighbors directly to purchase EVs.

These are examples of taking direct actions where you can see the result without going through brokers (carbon offsets) and potentially investing in scams.

Disclaimer

I began making posts about energy and transportation issues because I am interested in EVs. I think they are neat. But as I did my homework, I realized that purchasing an EV is problematic for me in that it would be mostly charged by fossil fuels, and there are very, very few public charging stations within 150-200 miles of where I live, rendering cross country travel difficult, or at least risky. I learned that plug-in hybrid EVs make far more sense for us – but I also learned that environmentally, it is actually better to drive my 2015 Honda Fit getting about 42 mpg for as long as possible. That’s because most people ignore the invisible energy/emissions used/created during their vehicles manufacturing.

Separately, I run a blog on the widespread use of propaganda to influence individuals and the public, called Social Panic. Even before I read Dr. Hans Rosling’s book Factfulness, I was well aware that what we think we know is often untrue. I read his book just before I began looking at EVs and as I did my own reading, I became aware of widespread misconceptions about climate, EVs and solar PV.

While posting items on this blog about energy and transportation, I have simultaneously been writing at Social Panic about the distorted thinking that has resulted from faulty climate communications. Much of that propaganda is back firing and turning people off to understanding the issues and instead causing them to tune out. Many others with far more qualifications than I are also starting to see this problem.

We have reached a state in social media that I call the “culture of perpetual outrage”. Anything anyone says that you may disagree with (even if you beliefs are poorly sourced and even wrong) is grounds for outrage. Consequently, I end every post on climate communications with the following.

tandard Disclaimer Applies: How to Do Climate Communications – Never Cry Wolf

As I previously wrote

The Nature Conservancy should focus on facts of atmospheric CO2 levels rising, land and sea surface temperature anomalies, ice pack changes, ocean Ph and sea level change (IPCC Synthesis Report, Figure SPM.1) – as reported by reputable scientific bodies, but they did not. Instead they went straight for hyperbole and making untrue claims to promote fear and hysteria.

Stick with the facts of CO2 rising, sea level ice and temperature changes, ice mass changes or risk tuning all of us out. Shrill terminology designed to create emotional outrage and responses is a total turn off.

and

The facts are sufficient. The impacts of untrue propaganda hysteria, on the other hand, are to turn off the target completely. We have learned nothing from the parable of the boy who repeatedly cried Wolf!

The propaganda messaging methods in use are leading to public opinions that are not based in facts, logic or evidence. In the U.S. 51% of those aged 18-34 believe humanity may become extinct within 10-15 years, even though there is zero evidence to support such a conclusion. This disconnect between belief and reality risks the potential for major backlash against taking action to reduce CO2-equivalent effects on climate.

Some suggest focusing on solutions and opportunities – instead of unrealistic, dystopian catastrophes designed primarily as click-bait – would be a more effective and positive way forward for climate communications. Instead, we get intense negativity – and falsehoods – that have led to children and adults to seek mental health treatment for induced anxiety.

Personal Notes on Climate Realism

We are taking direct actions to reduce our CO2-equivalent emissions. In late 2019, we are spending $18,000 (before credits) to install a solar PV array that will reduce our home’s annual grid-provided electricity to net zero (likely less). Our utility generates 56% of its electricity by burning coal and 14% by burning natural gas (about half the emissions of coal). Solar PV directly cuts our portion of those GHG emissions to zero.

We are spending over $5,000 to upgrade 40 year old R-19 attic insulation (which has settled such that it is less than that) to R-49 building code standards. For an all electric house, we currently use 1/3d the amount of electricity of similar homes. We heat using locally sourced wood pellets and our home is cold most every winter day. I drive a Honda Fit averaging about 42 mpg and after researching the reality of EV usage in my climate, my geography and within my fossil-fueled electric utility footprint, I plan to keep driving it as long as possible.

While spending an amount similar to a low end electric vehicle, our solar and attic upgrades we will have a far greater reduction in CO2 emissions than buying an EV. About half of an EV’s lifetime CO2 emissions occur during its manufacturing and if you live where your electricity is generated by burning coal, your overall CO2 emissions reductions are small. While EVs will generally reduce CO2 emissions, for many they seem to be primarily a virtue signaling device (a survey by Volvo found about 75% of purchasers said this, and selected an EV because paradoxically it “helps them to feel better about making less environmentally conscious decisions in “other areas of life.” – ouch.)

I post this at the end of each climate communications post because merely asking any questions about climate change results in being called a climate denier or a Nazi.

Call me a climate realist but don’t call me a denier or a Nazi.

0 notes

chestnutpost · 5 years

Text

Self-Care For Women Is More Work Than Buying Products

This post was originally published on this site

What Women Want Now is a program by HuffPost and her sister sites dedicated to creating content about the issues and stories that matter most to women. Read more here. Join the conversation with #WhatWomenWantNow.

I think about self-care more than the average person. I’ve been a wellness writer and editor for more than half a decade, and in that time I’ve published probably hundreds of stories on managing burnout, stress, self-esteem and anxiety. I can recite data on mental health more easily than I can recall my mom’s cellphone number. I’ve tried my best to help people live better, happier lives. However, I’ve also noticed ― as a journalist in this space and as a consumer in general ― how oversimplified self-care guidance really is.

Self-care isn’t some new concept (although Americans have Googled the term more in the last three years than ever before). Hell, it was discussed long before I was even born ― first medically, and then, during the civil rights movement, more politically. But the concept of self-care has shifted toward the notion that improving our well-being is only a product away. Take one look at Goop, with its suggestion that adding moon dust to your morning smoothie can help boost “your spirit.”

That’s not nearly adequate to help us survive in the world today.

A bubble bath may help my muscles relax but isn’t going to wash away the dirtiness I feel after a man brazenly gazes at my breasts on the subway. A face mask may remove my blackheads but it isn’t going to extract the shame I carry over my student loan debt. Going for a jog may take my mind off my to-do list for a little while but it isn’t going to help me outrun the emotional labor I have waiting for me at home.

Self-care shouldn’t be reduced to a fleeting activity or dispensable product. It shouldn’t even just be considered a wellness phenomenon. For women, it’s a difficult but necessary act that helps us survive in a world with work demands, family pressures, duties at home, rampant incidents of sexual harassment, a relentless news cycle, financial worries and more. Inner reflection takes time and energy ― resources we’re already lacking. Self-care is hard work.

This is rarely acknowledged. There’s something missing when we talk about self-care, both in the media and on our own. So I asked several women what they find problematic with our collective discussion about the concept ― and what taking care of yourself actually means to them. Below is their advice. Consider it a real guide to real self-care (no purchases necessary).

Self-care is… ‘not attending some extravagant spa day with the girls, but rather being able to identify when I need to slow down and perhaps cancel that spa day.’

Katie McCartney

Katie McCartney had practiced what she thought was self-care for years, sometimes turning to articles on how to have a better life. But the Michigan resident said she had a terrible sense of self-worth, often not extending herself compassion or respect.

That finally shifted about two years ago, when she decided to go to therapy and learned the way she was treating herself undid anything she did for her well-being.

“For me, it was a learning experience that took a brutally honest self-assessment leading to awareness, which led to motivation for change,” McCartney, 33, said. “It is often falsely assumed that as women we should know these things, but in truth … there is a tremendous need in this country for a reassessment of what it takes to take good care of ourselves.”

“It is often falsely assumed that as women we should know these things, but in truth … there is a tremendous need in this country for a reassessment of what it takes to take good care of ourselves.”

– Katie McCartney

That means ignoring alluring ads and articles promising a better mentality could come from an expensive product or day out.

“In my opinion, self-care is not attending some extravagant spa day with the girls, but rather being able to identify when I need to slow down and perhaps cancel that spa day,” she said.

McCartney also said an hour of mindfulness meditation and getting adequate sleep each night is critical for her.

“I’ve never needed these skills more than I have currently with global morale seemingly hitting an all-time low,” she said.

McCartney said she hopes women ― especially those with a public platform ― continue to discuss what self-care habits work for them as a way to normalize the subject. She pointed to the discourse around women in politics and how they publicly talk about what eases their stress.

“I don’t want to see our president make fun of Elizabeth Warren for being herself and putting out a video where we see her genuinely happy at home with her husband,” McCartney said. “I want Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to be validated by the media for being able to recognize that she needed a break.”

“Life is hard,” she added. “It is high time we drop the glittery facade and accept that, while happiness very much is a choice, it is dependent on our individual understanding of ourselves.”

Self-care is… ‘based on age, demographics and lifestyle.’

S. Angelique Mingo

S. Angelique Mingo is tired of reading the same narrative.

“I find mainstream media doesn’t speak to women of color about self-care,” said Mingo, a 40-year-old from New Jersey. “Self-care is a broader conversation based on age, demographics and lifestyle. … Our stressors are different and we are constantly burning the candle at both ends like, ‘You can do it all, #BlackGirlMagic.’ So finding ways to take care of ourselves when we’re usually taking care and putting others before us doesn’t feel very realistic.”

“Our stressors are different and we are constantly burning the candle at both ends like, ‘You can do it all, #BlackGirlMagic.’”

– S. Angelique Mingo

It wasn’t until about a year and a half ago that Mingo realized she was burning out. She said she had adopted unhealthy habits due to a busy schedule, which included working on new projects as the creative director at a lifestyle and communications agency as well as serving as a part-time caretaker for her grandmother.

“My mom had been nagging me to take care of myself for a long, long time. … She sat me down for a frank conversation where she said, ‘Where is my daughter? I no longer recognize you,’” Mingo said. “That evening, I looked at myself in the mirror and did not recognize myself either. It was at that moment I had to re-elevate how I was treating myself and do something about it.”

Mingo started by examining her relationship with food.

“I was always eating on-the-go, having something delivered or dining out,” she said. “When I looked at myself in the mirror, I could physically see the problems with living that way.”

She began cooking more regularly, which became a self-care ritual she can no longer live without.

“I spoil myself by indulging in my flavor cravings or trying a new recipe I see on my social media feed,” Mingo said. “It is my time to pay attention to what type of fuel I am giving my body to nourish my insides and satisfy my tastebuds.”

Mingo hopes there’s more diverse public information on what it means to take care of yourself, including advice on “how to squeeze in self-care as parents, caregivers, entrepreneurs and as we age in our retirement years.”

“More importantly, [we need] a more inclusive conversation so black and brown people no longer feel like the media does not speak to them,” she said.

Self-care is… ‘about mitigating what harm cannot be avoided.’

Stella Sacco

For Stella Sacco, self-care is a taxing act that requires being aware of ugliness ― both in personal habits and in society.

“It’s being cognizant of feelings or behavior that harm you in some way ― overwork, self-hate, conflict avoidance, etc.,” said Sacco, a 33-year-old American now living in Denmark. “Of course, in everyday life, some degree of harm is unavoidable. I will always be tired after a week of work, for example. Self-care is about mitigating what harm cannot be avoided. As a trans woman, I recognize that I will never be free of the psychic harm that transphobia causes. I cannot avoid it, so through self-care, I have to try to mitigate it.”

“As a trans woman, I recognize that I will never be free of the psychic harm that transphobia causes. I cannot avoid it, so through self-care, I have to try to mitigate it.”

– Stella Sacco

She does this by tapping into a supportive community and reframing damaging thoughts when they pop up.

“If transphobia has made my dysphoria particularly bad one day and I start zeroing in on things that are ‘masculine’ about my appearance, I recontextualize it [by reminding myself] almost anything I could hate about my body, a cis woman somewhere is feeling too,” Sacco said. “If I see the government using its power to diminish and frighten me, I recontextualize it [by thinking about how] black folks have been dealing with these kinds of monstrous laws for centuries. … History tells us there is power in solidarity, so finding it and taking it seriously is my self-care.”

Sacco said the concept of self-care “has been co-opted and marketed mostly to well-off white women” and she detests the idea that it implies avoidance ― especially when that can be more harmful in the long run.

“I hate that it tends to be portrayed as just doing whatever you feel like doing,” she said. “Part of self-care is understanding your own patterns of behavior and trying not to do things that will feed into negative patterns.”

“For example, opting not to wash the sink full of dishes today might feel like self-care when you’ve had a long week and feel like you need a break. But will those dishes sitting there contribute to you feeling bad tomorrow?” she said. “Sometimes, self-care means doing the dishes.”

Self-care is… ‘typically more difficult and less glamorous than treating yourself.’

Emily Bilek

Emily Bilek is on a mission to have her patients ― and herself ― view self-care as something greater than the “treat yo’ self” mentality on social media.

Bilek, a clinical assistant professor at the University of Michigan’s Depression Center, said the Instagram version of self-care and what it actually means to take care of yourself are two very different things.

“Don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with treating yourself, and it has an important place in the priorities I set for my own time and money. However, conflating self-care and ‘treating yourself’ is misguided and potentially harmful,” Bilek, 34, said. “When self-care becomes a competitive and performative ritual on social media, it defeats its purpose.”

“When self-care becomes a competitive and performative ritual on social media, it defeats its purpose.”

– Emily Bilek

Bilek, who is also responsible for helping others come up with strategies to protect their mental health, personally chooses self-care in the form of enforcing healthy lifestyle habits. (And then breaking or adjusting as necessary.)

“Good self-care is typically more difficult and less glamorous than treating yourself,” she said. “It means doing things like having good sleep hygiene, getting a little more exercise, staying hydrated, taking medication as prescribed, eating at regular intervals, creating healthy boundaries and taking a break from social media.”

Ultimately, Bilek has to remind herself and the people she treats that self-care is hard work that’s only going to be rewarding in the end. No clever status, flattering photo filter or hashtag is going to enhance it.

“Self-care isn’t glamorous. It’s the everyday work you do for yourself to make you a little bit happier and healthy,” she said. “If I had a self-care Instagram account, it probably wouldn’t be very popular ― there are only so many creative ways to take pictures of a water bottle or broccoli ― but self-care isn’t for other people, it’s just for you.”

The post Self-Care For Women Is More Work Than Buying Products appeared first on The Chestnut Post.

from The Chestnut Post https://thechestnutpost.com/news/self-care-for-women-is-more-work-than-buying-products/

0 notes

davidamosley · 6 years

Text

The Art of Instagram Etiquette

"I'm so happy I found your account! I see your work all over the place, but I never knew who made it!"

This was a comment I received on Instagram last week, and it's not the first of its kind. Last week I hit the 100,000 follower mark on Instagram, which, silly as it sounds, was a big deal to me. I know I'm supposed to act like I don't care about followers and these numbers don't matter, but when you're a brand — when you work hard to put up content almost daily and the number of people you reach correlates to your ability to actually afford groceries and rent — these numbers do matter. It was a really exciting milestone for me, but its brought to the surface some really mixed feelings I have about Instagram.

I love Instagram, obviously, and I want the platform to continue to thrive, but there are some major downsides for creators. Creators post on there, driving traffic to the app, but, unlike a platform like YouTube, creators aren't compensated for all of the work they do to bring people to the app. That's a big scale problem, and one that I don't have the capacity to directly address, but there's also the sharing (and, all too often, stealing) issue, which is what I want to talk about here.

Before I get into it, I have to admit that writing about this is difficult for me, because I feel the following:

Worried that I'll sound ungrateful for my audience

Silly for being angry about something like Instagram

Embarrassed that my ego is possessive of my work

Annoyed that I have to care about "credit" as a creator

But, as uncomfortable as I feel writing this, it's something I've been wanting to talk about for a long time. See, over the past few years, things have changed a lot in terms of Positively Present's content and audience. Part of this has been my personal growth, my desire to create and share art in addition to writing, and part of it is a shift in the way people consume content online. I used to just write (and occasionally create images or illustrations) here on the site. They would get shared, yes, but typically with a link to the site so it was a give-and-take situation: someone would take my work and share it and, in return, I would be given the opportunity to reach new people. But, with Instagram, all of that's different now. It's a lot more take than give. Because Instagram doesn't make it easy to share links (particularly if you don't have a large account) or credit creators, it's up to individuals to give credit, and many people don't know how (or even that they should).

I've shared guidelines before (the number of times a day I have to write "Check the FAQ story highlights for details on sharing!" is mind-boggling), but I thought I'd write them out again here. Keep reading for more on why these guidelines are so important for creators ('cause it's about way more than wanting more followers!).

PERSONAL ACCOUNT GUIDELINES

Creators love when personal accounts share their work because we're getting a real, positive promotion from someone who genuinely likes our work and wants to share it with family and friends. Unfortunately, because the everyday Instagram user often isn't familiar with Instagram etiquette, they often don't know to credit properly. Here's the deal:

Always mention the creator in the first two lines of the caption.

Always tag the creator in the image itself.

Never filter, crop, or edit the image (doing so is changing the work without permission).

Never share a bunch of one creator's photos in a row (it's just rude. and weird.).

Consider purchasing something from a creator, particularly if you share the work frequently.

Stop following freebooting accounts (see below) and follow creators instead.

BRAND ACCOUNT GUIDELINES Ideally, brands should be paying creators to make content for them — particularly the large brands — but since this isn't how things seem to work for the most part, at the very least, brands should do the following:

Always ask permission before sharing. Large brands that have shared my work, magazines like Shape, Glamour, and Teen Vogue, do this. Smaller brands frequently do not, and it's problematic because no creator wants their work connected to a cause / product / celebrity they don't support.

Always mention the creator in the first two lines of the caption. This is especially important for brands to do because, if you're getting content for free, the very least you can do is drive some traffic to the creator's account.

Always tag the creator in the image itself.

Never filter, crop, or edit the image (doing so is changing the work without a creator's permission).

Never share a bunch of one creator's photos in a row (it's just rude. and weird.).

Never imply the creator is a partner of or affiliated with the brand (unless a paid partnership is in place).

Never use an image to promote a sale, promotion, event, or other business-related content.

Hire the creators you really like to create custom work for you. It's way cooler than just reposting!

FREEBOOTING ACCOUNT GUIDELINES

Freebooting accounts are Instagram accounts (like this and this) that do not create any of their own content, but instead share only other people's content to grow their own page. I'm not fully aware of the purpose of this and, in many cases, I don't believe it's malicious, but it's still harmful to creators and particularly unfair when these freebooting accounts grow very large and receive compensation in the form of sponsorships, ads, and other partnerships — all while creating no work of their own.

Never share creators' work unless you're going to create work of your own.

If you want to curate things, hop over to Pinterest. That's what it's for.

Why are you doing this? What are you getting out of it? Likes? Stop it.

Just cut it out.

No.

Stop.

Seriously. Why?

So, why these guidelines? Why not just share my work and not worry about the credit? (A creator I love specifically says that anyone can share her work without credit and, as much as I love the idea of that — so selfless! so altruistic! — it plays all too well into the age-old tale of the starving artist, the notion that, in order to be creative, one doesn't actually make a living off one's work.) In reality, credit — as silly as it sounds — is a huge deal for creators.

As far as I can tell, there's never been a period of time in history where creators' works were just taken and used whenever and wherever. If, back in the day, you owned an art shop, you couldn't just take a painter's work and then sell it as your own without physically stealing the paintings. Now, it's just a few taps on your phone, and you can take creative content and share it. For free. All the sharing is wonderful in that in can, if an image is credited properly, drive traffic to a creator's account.

But, most of the time, creators' work isn't credited properly (or at all). I personally struggle with this a great deal. On one hand, I want to be open and carefree and think, I'm just generous creator and I'm happy to have my work shared and appreciated, even if I don't receive any appreciation or compensation for it. But another part of me can't seem to shake the notion that this work is mine. It whispers to me, You worked so hard on this. Why shouldn't you receive credit or, god forbid, compensation for what you've done?

I don't want to feel the "mine-ness" of my work, but I do. Every time I see my work shared without credit, it feels like a sharp sting, a pinprick in my heart. Every time I see my work with the signature removed — someone's deliberate attempt to claim it as their own — it feels like I've been shoved to the ground, wind knocked out of me.

This feeling of ownership is a strange mix of selfishness (That's mine!, my mind squeals like a toddler when her toy has been snatched away) and selflessness (Hey! When you just share others' work, you're really missing out on the joy of creating it yourself!, my mind also exclaims.) It sounds silly to say, but I almost feel guilty, being part of this culture that encourages people to look and share rather than make and create. Sometimes it feels like I'm spinning around on a giant dance floor — not the best dancer in the world, but having a damn good time — with all of these people standing on the sidelines saying, "Wow! I love your dance moves! That looks fun!" and I want to yell, If you like it, get out here! Try it. Make something!

It makes me wonder: Why are creators giving so much away for free? (Answer: Because they have to in order to gain followers and be considered "successful" enough to be worthy of brand deals, ads, book contracts, etc.) What kinds of creativity are we losing by staring at screens filled with things other people have made instead of making things ourselves? (Answer: Unknown, but probably a lot of cool stuff!) Maybe we'd be better off if people put down their phones and picked up a pencil or a paintbrush. Perhaps this makes me sound ungrateful and petulant, but I'm constantly conflicted by the desire to make work that is appreciated and the desire to work alone quietly, undetected. And, as strange as it might sound if you're not in the same position, it's actually really stressful to be torn between these two things.

You might be thinking at this point: If you're so bothered by this, why don't you just not share it? Or just post it on your website? There are two main reasons I continue to share my work on Instagram (and other social media platforms): (1) It's one of the best ways to grow an audience and, therefore, make enough money to (barely...) be able to afford food, and (2) I genuinely enjoy it and want to help people. Have you ever heard that old saying, What would you do all day if you didn't have to worry about money? Well, I'm doing it. I love writing and drawing and creating and sharing and helping other people with simple things that speak to them. I really do. I don't really care about getting credit — yes, there's a part of me that thinks "mine!" but most of me really just wants to make things, even if no one sees them — but I do care about making a living and, like it or not, getting credit indirectly leads to getting paid.

With this post, it’s not my intention to sound whiny or thankless — particularly amidst the joy of reaching a big Instagram milestone! 100k! Hooray!! — but, as much as social media feels like a frivolous time-waster, for a lot of creators — including me! — it’s really not. It matters. It's how we find work, sell products, build brands that will attract publishing houses or product distributors or whoever else can help us to grow our businesses. And, remember: the more a creator succeeds, the more content you'll likely get.

Mostly, I just wanted to get all of this out of my mind and into words. It's a weird and wonderful time to be a creative, and I'm incredibly grateful for all of the appreciation and opportunities that have come my way as a result of Instagram (and social media in general), but I think it's important for people who aren't creators — those who are consuming the content — to think about the other side to all of this free art. Creators are real people, people who work really hard to make things, and if you like what they do, you should support them — at the very least, by crediting their work, but, if you can, by actually paying for their work.

If you can, buy something from a creator you follow this week. Pick up an art print. Buy a book. Or, if that's not an option, try creating something yourself. Above all, that's what I'd really love to see: more people creating, fewer people consuming. (Stay tuned for more on this soon!)

I obviously had a lot to say on this subject, but I'd love to hear from you, too! Are you a creator? What is your experience with Instagram / sharing / social media? If you're not a creator, do you think about this? What are your thoughts now? Let me know in the comments section below!

0 notes

martechadvisor-blog · 6 years

Text

Separating Marketing Hype from What Really Works

Navigating buzzy marketing trends can be a chore. Beckon’s VP of Marketing, Amanda Roberts, shares concrete data on what actually works

Taking stock of what marketing trends to adopt and which to ignore is a challenge. We go to marketing conferences and get bombarded with “smart, must-do” marketing strategies—full of perfectly formulated anecdotes to support them. We read the trade press and get the “top 5” ways to improve ROI and the “3 things” every marketer should be doing now.

But do these things actually work? If you want to know the truth, you have to look at the data.

Luckily, at Beckon, data is something we have plenty of. We aggregate marketing performance and business outcome data for hundreds of global brands, helping them see what’s working (and what’s not!) across all channels, in real-time. In total, we have over $20 billion in marketing spend flowing through Beckon, giving us an objective, industry-wide view of performance trends for some of the world’s savviest marketers.

Last year we published the results of our first Marketing Truth or Marketing Hype report in MarTech Advisor, which put several of 2016’s hottest marketing trends to the test—content creation, working and non-working media spend, programmatic ad buying and agile marketing—to see if they actually delivered the results their proponents promised.

This year we’re back, with another report leaning on 2017 data highlighting new trends, and a few updates from last year’s findings around the areas of media planning and pacing, content creation, and viewability. The report slices and dices aggregate performance data from our system so we can do a deep dive into these themes and separate fact from fiction.

Although the data points below are averages from across our 2017 sample, it’s a great benchmark to see how your performance stacks up against industry averages. For instance, if you’re unhappy because viewability of your online ads is only around 70%—since our findings show an average of 54%, cheer up, you’re ahead of the p

Let’s jump into this year’s findings:

Finding 1: Agencies aren’t delivering the visibility they promise in the media plan.

Actual media spend and impressions are, on average, within 1% of a plan by the end of a campaign. However, most campaigns see a four-week to five-week delay before actual impressions catch up to the plan.

So, by the end of the campaign, planned versus actual tend to match up, and agencies generally deliver the visibility they promise overall. But for most, pacing to plan is the underlying issue, which may explain why your agency keeps missing their weekly or monthly targets.

Although some brands see a burst of impressions right out of the gate (because consumer interest was strong and spend wasn’t capped), more often, there’s a rush of activity at the end to catch up. Both scenarios—a flood at the start or a rush at the end—stunt performance and brand growth.

Flooding impressions up front means we don’t have time to test, learn and optimize. Consequently, conversion rates will likely be lower than we hoped and we may we have to allocate more spend in order to hit our sales targets.

More commonly, impressions roll in later than planned, and it’s even more problematic. Similar to the first scenario, it hinders our ability to test, learn and optimize because we have limited impressions to work with early on. What’s more, missed milestones for spend and impressions likely mean missed milestones for sales and conversions. You may get the conversions eventually, but telling your boss the sales numbers will probably hit a month late is never fun.

So what causes delayed impressions and what can you do about it?

Impressions are largely a function of spend, but optimal spending right out of the gate isn’t always straightforward. It can take weeks to understand the factors that are helping or hindering performance. Beckon data shows that planning for spend and impressions to ramp as the campaign unfolds is the best way to make the most of every dollar.

And paying close attention to how spend and impressions are tracking to plan is also a solid recipe for maximizing ROI. Beckon found that campaigns with close alignment between plan and actual throughout averaged 117% of planned impressions and used only 73% of their planned spend. In contrast, campaigns that strayed further from plan fell short of their targets, hitting 87% of planned impressions, and spending 86% of their planned budget.

Some steps to consider:

Agree on planned targets with your partners up front. Some brands even establish a service level agreement on pacing.

Make sure media plans are delivered at a weekly or daily granularity so you can track pacing, not just actuals. Set up a routine meeting to review how performance is tracking to plan. Use this time to both review what’s resonating (and what’s not), and strategize how to right-size spend accordingly.

If your campaign involves new channels, audiences and/or messaging, build in a window to test and learn by planning modest targets for spend and impressions that ramp up later in the campaign. If you can’t afford a temporary drop in total impressions, keep a high-performing campaign running a few weeks longer, overlapping it with the start of the new campaign.

Finding # 2: Content is king! The more content you create, the more consumers will engage with your brand by liking, clicking, viewing or sharing your content.

If you read last year’s report, you know that we found that this trend is just a myth. In 2016, a mere 5% of content pieces generated 90% of total engagement, with the majority of pieces getting almost no engagement whatsoever. Our hypothesis for this discrepancy had to do with two factors:

1). Differences in content quality (namely, a lack of quality), and

2.) Not enough media behind the pieces of content.

We suggested, in order to drive higher engagement at lower cost, brands prioritize performance instead of volume. We thought brands could benefit by examining the content and associated media strategy for the pieces that dramatically outperformed the rest, while doubling down on brand standards and content quality in an effort to generate fewer, better content pieces.

And good news! Our latest data shows that many brands heeded our advice. Beckon data shows that in 2017, 20% of content drove 90% of total engagement—a big improvement because it indicates consumers are engaging with about 4x the number of content pieces than they were the prior period. More importantly, brands secured 15% higher overall engagement with roughly two-thirds the content volume (meaning they accomplished more with fewer content pieces).

Digging into the number further we examined some of the companies that experienced the biggest change. One global brand completely revamped its content strategy to focus on creating fewer content pieces managed for optimal impact, and saw extraordinary success: Compared to the previous year, it garnered more than twice as many engagements per post, while reducing cost per engagement by 64%!

A few recommendations to consider:

A quality-based, “less is more” approach to content is more effective and much less costly than throwing oodles of content against the wall in the hopes that something sticks.

Track engagement closely to see what customers are responding to and work with your agency to understand what formats, channels, creative and messages perform best. Use this criterion for all new content and allocate more spend toward top performers.

Pay close attention to content with a high earned-to-paid ratio. This means your message is resonating well with customers, and their amplification (earned engagement) is helping your dollars go even further.

Consider ramping up your commitment to user-generated content (especially if you are a consumer brand). Listening to your audience and putting their stories in the driver’s seat has been shown to boost engagement for many brands.

Finding# 3: Viewability is the new KPI.

We all know ads must be 50% in-view for at least one second to be considered “viewable,” and ads that aren’t “viewable” don’t generate awareness or move consumers toward a sale. The real debate in the industry has been around how many advertising dollars are being wasted on ads that are never even viewed.

According to Beckon, an average 54% of impressions are viewable. That means 46 cents of every media dollar spent is wasted on ads that no one sees.

Now, this number can vary depending on the factors at play—programmatic or traditionally bought, ad size, country, ad vendor or channel, and so on. Still, given the billions of dollars spent on ads each year, everyone agrees it’s a problem. No matter where you are on the spectrum, marketers would rather spend more money on viewable ads and less money on non-viewable ads.

The bigger surprise then, is that Beckon data shows that only 8.5% of brands are tracking viewability.

The good news is that if you do track viewability it is easier to increase the percentage of ads that consumers see than you may think. And the brands that do reap the benefits. Our data shows that brands that track viewability alongside their other KPIs and make improvement a priority increased viewability of their ads by 27.5% over a 12-month period.

Here are some ways you can improve your viewability and boost ROI:

Partner with a neutral third-party like Moat that audits and tracks the viewability of your online display ads (note: if you want to see this side-by-side with your brands’ spend and performance data, you’ll need a dashboard or other solution that enables you to do that).

Have candid discussions with your agencies and challenge assumptions about your ads.

Request viewability metrics from your agencies. Many ad publishers report on viewability but it’s often left out of the reports shared with brands.

Ask your agency to negotiate make-goods or credits where you see low viewability.

The more data you take ownership of—either form your agencies, execution tools, etc.—and aggregate into a central marketing data hub or repository, the more you can slice and dice your viewability data. This will allow you to look for trends surrounding ad sizes, placements, types of creative, and publishers that perform best.

When it comes to marketing trends, what worked last year won’t necessarily work today (let alone tomorrow) so it’s important to listen to what your own performance data is saying. If we understand our own data and compare it to what the data shows for others, we can establish a plan forward and learn what’s best for our unique business along the way. As we move into the second half of 2018, we’ll continue to track the trends above (and others that emerge). And we always love input on areas of marketing to dig into. Are you exploring new initiatives this year that you wish you had hard data for?

This article was first appeared on MarTech Advisor

#martech #marketing #technology #business #cmo

0 notes