Mediaboss Marketing

I never knew what to make of the whole excitement over Milo. He always seemed, well, boring. I guess its because after almost four decades on the planet, Ive seen his act before Andrew Dice Clay, Howard Stern, Opie and Anthony, hell, even Gore Vidal. All edgy edgelords edging towards the edge of edgy edginess. Its a tired shtick, which has always made me wonder how the hell he ended up getting so much attention in the first place. He always struck me as sort of a bigotry-based cover band, and a bad one at that. The old saying "Those who cant do, teach" should have a counterpart that goes "Those without talent, shock." Before I get into the meat of this essay. though, I just have to get one comment out of the way frosted tips in 2017? Really?

Back to the main point. Milo is a guy who was born with the boring last name of Hanrahan and changed it to an unpronounceable Yiannopoulos, which is just as much of a pain to spell as it is to say. Of course this was just to try to get a one-name persona going in the vein of Stalin, Mussolini, or Mao, he was probably going for more of a Cher vibe though. He even created a logo for it that looks like it just ripped off the Rock Band font, which itself is a self-parody of bad '80s metal band logos. The image is meant to conjure up the Aquanet-powered masculinity of a man with big hair and a pink fishnet shirt, which is of course nonexistent, just like Milos edginess.

As I said previously, anyone who tries to tell you that theyre edgy, or, in Milos case "a dangerous faggot," is without a doubt not. His whole thing has been to say things that are deliberately offensive and then mock his way out when cornered. I figure the only way this ever made him stand out from the millions of other insufferable people was that he decided to market it. In the past, these Walmart-brand Oscar Wildes were content to snark from behind the straws of their cocktails about how bad drag queens were. Milo figured out he could make money off of it by making fun of not just peoples weight but their race, gender, and sexuality, and then packaging it as being the racist "cool gay friend" for a bunch of racists. If you look at what Milo has said, though, its boring and unoriginal. His first major foray into fame was rewriting forum posts about Gamergate into a form that passed as something better than meme-heavy ramblings. Milos claims that writer Shaun King is actually white werent originally his. Milos attempt to do performance art was to sit in a tub of pigs blood. Hear that sound? Thats the sound of performance artists groaning at how lame that is. Even Milos self-loathing anti-Semitism was so blatantly transparent the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer called him out on being unoriginal and a hack.

Roll that around on your palate for a few minutes and savor the complexity of the flavors. Actual neo-Nazis think Milo is an unoriginal hack when it comes to bigotry.

This should be the part where I go into Milos history of harassment and doxxing, especially with Leslie Jones and Ghostbusters, but I want to show you something beautiful. You see, back in 2012, Milo wrote an article for The Daily Dot actually condemning trolling and bullying. No, really, he did that.What moves it into jumping-the-shark territory is the opening paragraph:

Glibness and superficial charm. Manipulation of others. A grandiose sense of self. Pathological lying. A lack of remorse, shame or guilt. Shallow emotions. An incapacity to feel genuine love. A need for stimulation. Frequent verbal outbursts. Poor behavioural controls. These are just some of the things that social media are encouraging in all of us.

If you tried to introduce a plot twist like that to an editor, they would throw you out of their office and ban you from the building.

Thats ultimately why I could never be that shocked and surprised by Milo. He was always just in it for the fame and the money. So much so that he created a fundraiser to send white men to college, raised a quarter of a million dollars and paid out, you guessed it, nothing. Milo was always the basic bitch of bigotry and not even a good one at that. His comments were always meant to incite people by pressing the right buttons on people who had suffered past trauma or cared so deeply about something they would jump at any attack. He manipulated people using what Im told is supposed to be good looks and charm and chumming the waters of people's hatred and biases. He really was an internet troll come to life. Why am I referring to him the past tense, though? Well, because hes over; Icarus flew too close to the sun.

After he got invited to the Conservative Political Action Conference, which is sort of a conservative white peoples pep-rally/debutante ball, Milos interview where he defended not only pedophilia but priests abusing boys (he has said the person who abused him was a priest) hit the mainstream and it was over. Milos book deal was canceled before the books could end up in the discount bin at Barnes & Noble; the place where you can find all of Sarah Palins body of work. He was disinvited from CPAC and just fired from his job at Breitbart, a website so awful it has a "black crime" section. Of course he says hes going to start a new media venture, but so what? It wont be YouTube, which just gutted PewDiePie for being anti-Semitic. He cant make money off his Facebook, and hell, I have a website. He could beg for donations on Patreon, but its not like he draws hentai for cash, and theres plenty of free bigotry out there.

Nope, Milo is over. Like all hacks, mediocrities, and shlock-shock artists, they fade away. When was the last time Marilyn Manson was shocking? Andrew Dice Clay is doing reality competition shows. Milo is going to be one of those nostalgia items only the dedicated still care about or remember. He really hasnt provided any legacy of work thats unique; hes unremarkable in his bigotry compared to his peers, and hes now cast out into the digital wilderness without a platform and a monetization scheme. The only time hes going to show up on a college campus again is when someone is turning in an undergraduate sociology paper that cites him. Milo will fade away, the Milli Vanilli of the alt-right. The next time we will probably hear from him again is when hes been arrested in a truck stop parking lot for trading sex for drugs or 750-word hot takes on PC culture.

AMANDA KERRI is a writer and comedian based in Oklahoma City. Follow her on Twitter @EternalKerri.

Read the rest here:
Milo, the Alt-Right Emperor With No Clothes, Is Mercifully Over - Advocate.com

The New Yorker

How Milo's downfall split the alt-right BBC News Leading figures and activists on the alt-right have split over controversial comments made by one of the movement's champions. Milo Yiannopoulos is a passionate supporter of Donald Trump and rose to fame as an editor at the right-wing website Breitbart. How Alt-Right Fellow-Traveller Milo Yiannopoulos Cracked Up the RightThe New Yorker Alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos resigns from Breitbart NewsThe Week Magazine Milo: The Rise and Fall of the Alt-right Darling and 'Brave, Conservative Standard-bearer'Haaretz Right Wing Watch -Media Matters for America (blog) -Facebook -Facebook all 1,149 news articles »

Read more here:
How Milo's downfall split the alt-right - BBC News

Heres a fact for the media to chew on: The deep state is here. As outlined in Foreign Policy, the concept of the deep state is nothing new. But the Trump presidency may serve as the galvanizing force that links some of the formal established Democratic opposition forces, including MoveOn.org, government unions and Black Lives Matter with the informal deep-state cadre of disgruntled liberal bureaucrats, the hostile mainstream media and the usual suspects on the left. Its a troubling phenomenon, with anti-Trump organizations and Democratic-aligned civil servants conspiring to actively work against the incumbent government.

There might not be any central command guiding the deep-state actions, but its not hard for card-carrying Democratic party members, the mainstream media, liberal think tanks, government unions and other anti-Republican liberals of various stripes to naturally form into a collective grain that runs contrary to whatever elected Republicans in Congress and now in the White House want to accomplish.Its just like when a school of fish move in unison, choreographed not because of some planned effort, but because it is in their nature. The bias against President Trump has become frantic, and the Democrats and their allies in the media overreach almost daily in attacking the president and Republicans in general.

Deep state is a sexy new label being used in Washington to describe embedded anonymous bureaucratic bias against President Trump and Republican rule. Specifically, the deep state is leaking documents, making confidential conversations public, pushing rogue social media accounts and otherwise acting in an underhanded manner to discredit the president, his Cabinet and the policy objectives of the Republicans. The use of encrypted chat programs to communicate and the continued leaks to various media outlets are just the start.Their tactics are beginning to spread to other Democratic sympathizers and form a continuous partisan assault both from within the government and from outside groups.

At some level, this shouldnt be surprising. The 2016 election was so vitriolic, and the Democrats belief that Hillary Clinton would be the next president was so strong, that their defeat carried extra weight. Members of the Democratic coalition are already firmly entrenched within the federal government and among the surrounding intelligentsia. They have the ability to feed their supporters information, giving the activists more reason to protest, which in turn conflates the liberal hype around the actions of the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress. Its a vicious cycle.

At the same time all this is going on, the left has taken to painting Republicans with a broad brush as the alt-right. Well, as best I can tell, the alt-right is just a new way for the left to call Republicans racists and Nazis without actually having to say those terms out loud. To me, the deep state is real. The alt-right is not. The deep state may not be fully developed quite yet, but as the Democrats regain their footing and begin to coordinate and try to further and further damage the presidents credibility, it will have a detrimental impact on how our democracy functions and will further erode the publics trust in government.

View original post here:
The 'deep state' is real. The 'alt right' is fake. - Washington Post (blog)

Comparing the language of Breitbart commenters to the language of the most aggressive far-right extremists online e.g. language used by Twitter users who advocate for violence against minorities and are openly pro-Nazi we can see a clear trend of increasing similarity over a three-year period, the bulk of it under Bannon. Bannon left Breitbart to join the Trump campaign in mid-August 2016 but the editorial focus of the site stayed the course he set it on.

Diving deeper into anti-Semitic sentiment we see a similar trajectory. In early 2013, the term Jewish was used in a similar way as white or black as a racial/ethnic descriptor, which is similar to how "Jewish" is used in the mainstream press. By 2016 on Breitbart, however, Jewish had morphed into an epithet, used in similar contexts as socialist or commie.

In a mainstream newspaper article, the word Jewish is statistically similar to words such as Muslim and Christian. This means that mainstream commentators usually rely on the word Jewish to describe someone or something religious. This was the case for Breitbart comments back in July 2013.

For far-right wing extremists, the word Jewish is used in a totally different context. Instead, its use is statistically similar to words such ascommunist, homosexual, anti-white, and satanic. Within Breitbart's comment section, "Jewish" was increasingly used in contexts similar to "commie" and "socialist" or even "progressive."

After Bannon was appointed as chief strategist, his record as a far-right propagandist came under increased scrutiny. Most contested by Bannon and his defenders was his August 2016 comments to a Mother Jones journalist that Breitbart became the platform for the alt-right.

Trump in an interview with the New York Times argued that Breitbart News was just a publication. Breitbart also went on the offensive. On November 19, Breitbart published Steve Bannon: Zero Tolerance for Anti-Semitic, Racist Elements of the Alt-Right.

In the article, Bannon was summarized as saying:

Bannon also highlighted the diversity of views that were given a platform at Breitbart News, while also making it clear that both he and the site had zero tolerance for racial and anti-Semitic views.

Given the comment section analysis, however, it would appear Bannon and Breitbarts tolerance for anti-Semitic views was higher than zero. It confirms what Ben Shapiro, a former Breitbart editor, said when he claimed that Bannon turned the comment section into a cesspool for white supremacist mememakers.

On this point, Breitbart editors have repeatedly attacked critics who connect the website to the anti-Semitic elements of the alt-right by pointing to Jewish writers on staff and their editorial embrace of far-right Israeli politics. It is Breitbarts other coverage, however, that is most likely attracting these elements to the site.

A focus on globalist elites, traditionally an anti-Semitic dog whistle used by the radical right and a core appeal embraced by right-wing populists both in the US and in Europe today, was a rolling narrative covered extensively by Breitbart. One Breitbart London piece attacked Washington Post writer Anne Applebaum by calling her a Polish, Jewish, American elitist with global media contacts is the best example, which was roundly criticized as being anti-Semitic. Similarly, Breitbarts undeniably inflammatory coverage of the migrant crisis and terrorism resonates with the hard right, which includes anti-Semitic fellow travelers.

Bannon, however, in an interview with POLITICO after the first wave of criticism started to die down in late December, again embraced Breitbarts readership. As POLITICO reported, Bannon said the best things about Breitbart are the comments section and the callers.

It was always great to hear what the hobbits had to say because at the end of the day, what they had to say was what mattered most. This whole movement, its really the top of the first inning.

See more here:
Breitbart Under Bannon: Breitbart's Comment Section Reflects Alt-Right, Anti-Semitic Language - Southern Poverty Law Center

In the summer of 2014, years before he became the White House chief strategist, Steve Bannon gave a lecture via Skype at a conference held inside the Vatican. He spoke about the need to defend the values of the Judeo-Christian Westa term he used 11 timesagainst crony capitalism and libertarian capitalism, secularization, and Islam. He also mentioned the late Julius Evola, a far-right Italian philosopher popular with the American alt-right movement. What he did not mention is that Evola hated not only Jews, but Christianity, too.

References to Evola abounded on websites such as Breitbart News, The Daily Stormer, and AltRight.com well before The New York Times noted the Bannon-Evola connection earlier this month. But few have discussed the fundamental oddity of Evola serving as an intellectual inspiration for the alt-right. Yes, the thinker was a virulent anti-Semite and Nazi sympathizer who influenced far-right movements in Italy from the 1950s until his death in 1974, but shouldnt his contempt for Christianity make him an unlikely hero for those purporting to defend Judeo-Christian values?

Behind the Internet's Anti-Democracy Movement

His current popularity has several experts perplexed.

Bannon seems to be both [a] very religious [Christian] and a staunch capitalist, two things Evola didnt believe in, said Cas Mudde, a professor at the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia.

Francesco Germinario, a historian at the Luigi Micheletti Foundation specializing in far-right movements, went even further. I would not exclude the possibility that Evola is turning in his grave, he wrote in an email.

Born in Rome to an aristocratic family, Evola became fascinated with esotericism and the study of non-European religions in his 20s. He developed a strong rejection of modernityincluding egalitarian principles, democracy, and pluralismand yearned for a return to an ancient form of spirituality: Roman paganism. A hardcore nativist, Evola became enamored with the Roman religion because he saw it as Italys ancestral belief system.

When the fascists came to power in Italy in 1922, Evola jumped on board and became a regular contributor to the regimes mouthpiece magazine, Difesa della Razza (Defense of the Race). He devised his own brand of anti-Semitism, which he called razzismo dello spirito, racism of the spirit.

Fascist-era anti-Semitic ideologues fall under two categoriesbiology-based racists and nationalism-based onesbut Evola was something different, explained Valentina Pisanty, a semiologist at the University of Bergamo. As an occultist, he was convinced that the world contained some mysterious truths that only the initiated could see, and one of those hidden truths was a Jewish conspiracy to rule the world.

Further distinguishing Evola from other racist writers was the fact that he openly attacked the Christian religion, which he described as a Semitic superstition and as one of the main sources of the decadence of the West in his seminal 1928 essay Imperialismo Pagano. He opposed Christianity both because it was not native to Europe (an Asiatic movement born to a Jew) and because of its very message, which he deemed incompatible with fascisms aggressiveness. Which kind of State, not to mention Empire, can we build based on a Gospel preaching obedience the pre-eminence of the humble, the abject, and the miserable? he asked.

Evolas fascination with esotericism wasnt only abstract; he believed in the power of magic and tried to use it to restore Roman pagan religion. He joined an esoteric group called the Ur Group and performed rituals with the specific aim of drawing [the dictator Benito] Mussolini away from Christianity and toward paganism, said Simone Caltabellota, an editor and writer who researched the groups archives for his historical novel Amore degli Anni Venti, set in Evolas inner circle.

Evolas radical ideas about Christianity eventually put him at odds with Mussolinis regime, which signed the Lateran Treaty with the Vatican in 1929, establishing a special relationship between the Catholic Church and the Italian state. Evola wasnt an organic intellectual for the fascist government, but rather a merely tolerated one. Mussolini didnt like Evola, because he knew of the magic rituals. For his part, Evola thought that Mussolinis fascism wasnt extreme enough, Caltabellota noted.

Only after the end of World War II did Evola become the intellectual of choice for the far righttheir Aristotle, Germinario said. Both in Italy and in Europe, its hard to find a militant who hasnt dealt with Evolas writings.

Evolas once-marginal spiritual racism proved more fit to survive the fall of fascism than other ideologies from the Mussolini era, according to Pisanty. Biological racism fell out of fashion and nationalist racism eventually morphed into a more acceptable form of nationalism, the semiologist explained. But Evolas message, soaked in conspiracy theories, has quietly endured in the underground and has reemerged on the surface recently, thanks to the popularity of conspiracy theories.

Whats more, Evolas way of thinking resonates in a post-truth world, Pisanty said. For instance, in 1921, the philosopher wrote an introduction to The Protocols of the Elders of Zionan anti-Semitic text first published in 1903in which he conceded that the document may have been a forgery, but insisted that it nevertheless contained a deeper truth.

For some scholars, the fact that an anti-Semite is held in high regard by radical conservatives claiming to defend the Judeo-Christian West comes as no surprise.

When people from the far right talk about the Judeo-Christian roots of the West, often what they really mean is Christian. The Judeo part is just fig leaf, said Donatella Di Cesare, a philosopher at the Sapienza University in Rome.

For Di Cesare, its Evolas relationship with Christianity that makes his popularity within the alt-right uniquely perplexing. There are two approaches to religion [in right-wing identity politics], depending on how one views the relationship between Christianity and Judaism, she said. I can either be a neo-pagan right-winger and reject Christianity because it came from Judaism, or I can reconcile my right-wing views with Christianity by separating it completely from its Jewish roots. What I cannot do, however, is to be a neo-pagan and a Christian at the same time.

Nevertheless, Di Cesare noted that there are points of convergence between the Christian and the neo-pagan far right: In the end both approaches come down to the idea of defending ones identity at any cost, and religion is just an instrument [in this struggle].

This may explain why some far-right organizations that appeal to Christian values still appreciate Evola.

Matteo Cavallaro, a political scientist at Paris 13 University, said this phenomenon isnt limited to American groups. Forza Nuova, an Italian far-right political party that combines radical Catholicism with xenophobia, has likewise embraced Evola and has even organized conferences about him. Explaining how some Christians in the far right rationalize their fascination with the philosopher, Cavallaro said, They argue that Evolas main teaching was to go back to tradition, so we have to look for what incarnates the tradition today, which is the Catholic Church.

Toward the end of his life, Evola toned down his attacks on Christianity and on the Catholic Church in particular. While maintaining that Christianity was incompatible with his worldview, he claimed that, in an increasingly materialistic world, a sincere conversion to Catholicism could be an advancement for those incapable of embracing a more authentic spirituality.

But he found a new target for his invective: America.

Evola saw the advent of [what he described as] Americanismconsumerism and egalitarian valuesas the worst thing that could happen to Europe, Germinario said, adding that Evola was particularly suspicious of Anglo-Saxon cultures because he blamed Protestantism for having undermined the principle of authority.

So, even if liking Evola and liking Christianity arent necessarily mutually exclusive, those who do so in the context of the United States need to wrestle with the philosophers anti-America polemics.

If the Anglo-Saxon far right flirts with Evola, Germinario concluded, then it must first find a way to reconcile its being Anglo-Saxon with being far-right.

Follow this link:
The Alt-Right's Intellectual Darling Hated Christianity - The Atlantic