Mediaboss Marketing

Evan Krell July 31st, 2020 - 6:47 PM

The rise and rapid expansion of video sharing sites like YouTube have given people all over the world a voice and a platform to talk about film and other forms of entertainment. Its done plenty of good by promoting more independently created content and breaking down a lot of boundaries between creators and audiences. Movie making, discussion, and critique is easier than ever. YouTube however has become a breeding ground for alt-right groups of internet trolls posting hour long videos complaining about films featuring women and people of color in prominent roles. This groups often have their origins in nerd culture and their roots can be traced back to the mid 2000s when the internet was still relatively new, all things considered.

In 2004, amateur filmmaker James Rolfe inadvertently started a trend when he uploaded the first video in his Angry Video Game Nerd series. This series featured Rolfe portraying the titular character of the Angry Video Game Nerd, a foul mouthed, ill-tempered video game player who would review bad video games in a humorous manner. These reviews would usually feature skits, running gags, and slapstick interwoven with actual criticism of the games. When the series hit YouTube in 2006 it gained immense popularity and paved the way for the angry reviewer archetype.

Perhaps most famous of these was Doug Walkers character the Nostalgia Critic. The shows format was very similar to Angry Video Game Nerd, only centered around films instead. The Critic would go through the movie, picking it apart, performing skits, all the while screaming and swearing. Countless imitations would pop up over the years, almost all of which would focus on bad movies or video games. The biggest allure to the series wasnt the actual criticism though. People were drawn to these videos because of the over the top personalities and the humorous skits. Neither series really provided great critical insight, but they served their purposes as light bits of humor, often appealing to teenage audiences.

Both Angry Video Game Nerd and Nostalgia Critic (pictured above) are still running today with new episodes. Though the landscape of the internet and YouTube have changed drastically since both series were created. In the early 2010s both Screen Junkies and CinemaSins would get their start on YouTube. Screen Junkies biggest claim to fame is their Honest Trailers series. These videos are set up like a traditional movie trailer but poke fun at the movie by pointing out shortcomings and what not. CinemaSins features a narrator going through a movie scene by scene, pointing out every single little problem or inconsistency with the film and adding it to the sin counter with the total being shown at the end of the video. Like the angry reviewers before them, these videos became immensely popular and still rake in hundreds of thousands of views today with new videos. Unlike the earlier reviewers, these shows will focus on recently released popular movies rather than poor quality films of the past.

In recent years, people have begun flocking to these kinds of videos and putting them on a pedestal as the gold standard for film criticism. Despite these internet series starting off as being nothing more than comedy, people have begun to take their word as gospel and point to them in an attempt to discredit people who happen to like a film that has been covered. Many filmmakers have spoken about the prevalence of these kinds of channels. Jordan Vogt-Roberts, director of Kong: Skull Island stated, These guys are just trolling the art form we love and profiting from it while dumbing down the conversation. Many other directors and writers have agreed, stating that these types of videos are reductive and replace the nuance of film criticism with nitpicking and mean spirited complaining.

A lot of this rallying behind voices like CinemaSins stems from a disdain for mainstream movie critics. This has been especially prominent in so called nerd culture with one of the most notable examples being the response to the DC Comics superhero films. The films of the DCEU have done relatively poorly with critics and many hardcore fans of DC have claimed that its an elaborate conspiracy of critics paid off by Marvel and Disney to give their competitors lower scores. People like to flock to these internet personalities because they tell it like it is, which naturally ends up drawing in alt right circles. Despite many championing these internet personalities as voices of reason, any attempt at criticizing them results in a response of its just satire, stop taking it so seriously. If it fits their narrative, its gospel. If it doesnt then its just a joke.

Even if reviewers like CinemaSins are just meant to be viewed satirically and not seriously, it doesnt help that the creators dont make this clear at all. Even more so, the type of people being drawn to these reviewers arent being satirical at all. With a sizable alt right presence, the conversation drifts towards people complaining about films that dont conform to white, male, hegemonic expectations for films. Perhaps most infamously was the response to The Last Jedi, featuring an unprecedented amount of vitriol and debate among the Star Wars fan base. The film despite being praised by critics for its inventive story, fleshed out characters, and stunning visuals was met with an extreme amount of backlash by many fans claiming that it ruined the franchise forever. To this day its hard to mention the film in any capacity online without someone starting a debate about it.

Any attempt at nuanced criticism was buried by the hordes of people tearing the film down as disgrace to Star Wars. The most vitriolic hate was directed towards the female characters of the film, labeling the protagonist Rey as being too perfect and a Mary Sue, a reductive name given to characters who have no flaws. Perhaps most egregious was the way members of the cast were treated by these internet trolls. Rose Tico actor Kelly Marie Tran ended up leaving social media entirely due to the constant harassment from the trolls targeting her because of her gender and race. Some radical alt right internet users even went as far as to create an entire cut of The Last Jedi that removes almost all of the female characters, running at just 47 minutes. This goes beyond just mere satire and is symbolic of the deep rooted misogyny in many of these pop culture circles.

To say that entities like CinemaSins singlehandedly created the alt right movement would be too much. These types of people have always been around and the internet has only further radicalized them and given them a more vocal platform. However, its important to realize how intertwined they are. It started with angry comedy reviewers and evolved into channels entirely dedicated to making surface level judgements and nitpicks on films under the guise of genuine critique. The audiences grew and grew, drawing in the alt right crowds from nerd circles, many of whom have developed a deep resentment towards women and define themselves by their hatred. This comes from deep sexist roots of othering women and feeling like they, straight white men, are entitled to sex. And much like the bad faith internet reviewers, they use their platform to tear down movies for having women and people of color in prominent roles. There is no nuance, no genuine critique. Just pure hatred.

This issue is much larger than just angry Star Wars fan boys. The rise of the online alt right can be found in every facet of life and has become especially prominent on video streaming sites. Additionally, YouTube has taken very little action against the hateful content on their site despite literal Nazis posting videos. YouTubes algorithm makes it such that its impossible to watch anything Star Wars related without the recommended videos section becoming flooded with vitriolic rants directed at the women and people of color involved with the franchise. Its important to always be mindful of the content youre consuming, and to take a stand against bigotry and hatred where it manifests. The internet has, and continues to do plenty of good. Creators from marginalized backgrounds are getting more exposure then ever and people are able to engage with media like never before. The ugly, hateful underbelly of YouTube still festers and needs to be uprooted entirely to ensure a healthy online environment.

Link:
How the Internet has Warped Film Criticism - mxdwn.com

Conspiracy theorists, alt-right memers and prominent white nationalists have frequently appeared at properties owned by President Trump, where theyve hosted gatherings, mingled with officials and spent money, according to research obtained by Salon.

Trump properties are well-documented hot spots for MAGA-world luminaries and hangers-on, particularly Trump International Hotel in Washington, where the lobby is frequently a blur of lobbyists, administration officials, lawmakers, corporate leaders and foreign dignitaries the physical embodiment of the presidents numerous conflicts of interest.

But in a sense those properties are also real-world iterations of the presidents Twitter feed, a running scroll of the same groups. Both are also sprinkled to varying degrees with influential right-wing extremists and internet trolls (Diamond and Silk kicked off their 2019 Chit Chat Live tour at Trump Hotel D.C.), some of whom now are now moving into legitimate electoral politics under the auspices of the Republican Party in various states, including Oregon, Colorado, Georgia and Trumps new home state of Florida.

Get reliable, independent news and commentary delivered to your inbox every day.

And though Trump fandom is little more than an ironic lark to young fringe-right adherents, who see themselves as more pure, edgy and extreme, those places draw an older generation that has influence, but might be looking for someone who knows better how to wield it today.

Trump properties are the place to be if youre an elected Republican looking to dip your toe in alt-right waters. So no one should be surprised that once-mainstream Republicans and the NRCC are now backing the very QAnon supporters and fringe factions theyve mingled with for years, said Kyle Morse, an American Bridge 21st Century spokesperson.

The more high-profile of these patron-extremists include:

Trump properties are a particularly popular draw for the Fuentes-led Groyper movement, a loose affiliation of far-right and alt-right nationalists who peddle racist and anti-Semitic tropes while mocking mainstream conservatives including some less radical white nationalists as phonies.

As with most things born in the nether regions of the internet, the origins of the Groyper movement are not easy to understand. Its name is drawn from a specific Pepe the Frog pose, in which the alt-right cartoon mascot rests his chin on his interlinked hands.

Marilyn Mayo, senior research fellow at the Anti-Defamation Leagues Center on Extremism, described the movement in a 2019 interview.

What theyre trying to do, theres this whole grouping who refer to themselves as the dissident right, they want to move the Overton window, said Mayo, referring to the shifting spectrum of acceptable ideological and political discourse. They want to make racism and anti-Semitism mainstream.

Trump made waves this January when he retweeted a clip of Michelle Malkin, the self-described mommy of the Groyper movement, complaining about online censorship. Trump added his own caption, thanking her:

The Radical Left is in total command & control of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google. The Administration is working to remedy this illegal situation. Stay tuned, and send names & events. Thank you Michelle!

That Malkin clip was produced by Fuentes internet show, America First.

Donald Trump is watching America First Clips, Fuentes tweeted.

Fuentes has attended events at Trump International in Washington, including with friend and fellow Groyper Megan Harris, and both appeared there during the conservative gathering CPAC this year, as documented in a since-deleted Instagram post. The two were joined at CPAC by musician and Groyper Ricky Rebel, who shared a number of pictures from Trump International on his Instagram story.

Fuentes, like several other fringe-right personalities, has also patronized Trump National Doral, the presidents golf resort near Miami, where he appeared in an Instagram photo with alt-right internet personality Baked Alaska (Tim Gionet).

One of the more well-known names is alt-right personality, Pizzagate truther and noted misogynist Mike Cernovich, whom Gionet engaged in multiple projects. Cernovich has spent considerable time at Trump properties.

Gionet once spent Christmas with blogger Chuck Johnson, the aforementioned most hated man on the internet, who reportedly had a hand in vetting Trump Cabinet picks during the transition (working with Facebooks Peter Thiel) and may have acted as an inadvertent conduit between WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and Donald Trump Jr.

In January 2017, Johnson posted on Facebook that he was building algorithms to ID all the illegal immigrants for the deportation squads. HuffPost quoted a source claiming to have seen Johnson discussing that same project with a whole bunch of really important people at the Trump hotel in D.C. Former Breitbart editor Katie McHugh has said that Johnson asked to be connected with senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller so he could pitch a way to identify every illegal alien in the country.

In 2018, Johnson was also spotted at Trump International Hotel in Las Vegas.

Then theres the Posobiec, who while not exactly a Groyper is a fringe conspiracy theorist with anti-Semitic views whom Trump has retweeted a number of times. Posobiec and his wife met Brexit architect Nigel Farage at the Trump Hotel in Washington in February, 2017, and have spent both Christmas and New Years holidays there.

In July 2019, Posobiec joined QAnon acolyte Tracy Beanz, MAGA alt-right memesmith Carpe Donktum and former White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders for a conservative conference called AMPFest, held at Trump National Doral. Documents obtained by The Washington Post showed that the Florida propertys revenues were in steep decline at the time.

Posobiec spread the debunked conspiracy theory that the Las Vegas mass shooter was affiliated with ISIS, but was challenged for credit by right-wing provocateur, Islamophobe and Trump patron Laura Loomer. The two seemed to smooth things over before AMPFest 2019, where Loomer appeared alongside Posobiec.

Loomer is currently running as a Republican congressional candidate in Floridas 21st district home to Donald Trumps private Palm Beach club Mar-a-Lago, where she appeared at a 2019 winter gala that featured Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, former White House staffer Sebastian Gorka and guest of honor Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Just a few days after that, Trump tweeted his support for Loomers candidacy. And since the 21st is officially his district of residence, he will have the chance to vote for her should she appear on the ballot in November. (Her chances of winning are not strong: Incumbent Rep. Lois Frankel, a Democrat, was re-elected without opposition in 2018.)

On March 3, Loomer was back at Trump International in D.C.

See the rest here:
Trump's Properties Are a Playground for White Nationalists, Far Right Extremists - Truthout

David Harsanyi Published 11:00 p.m. ET July 29, 2020

Despite the occasional looting, chaos, property damage, trespassing, rioting, graffiti, assaults, arson and general mayhem, the media consistently assure us that antifa "protesters" are "largely peaceful." And since the majority of buildings in Portland, Seattle and Denver haven't been looted yet, who am I to argue?

Of course, it takes only a sliver of the population to transform downtowns into a mess and create quality-of-life issues for thousands of law-abiding citizens. And the mayors who surrender parts of their cities to left-wing "protesters" are tacitly endorsing lawlessness themselves.

There's little doubt that if alt-right activists had occupied a few city blocks in Seattle or tried to firebomb a federal courthouse in Portland, we'd be in for feverish wall-to-wall media coverage, engulfed in a national conversation about the perils of right-wing radicalism. Every elected Republican would be asked to personally denounce the extremists to make sure they take implicit ownership of the problem.

When a few hundred angry tiki torch-carrying Nazis marched in Charlottesville, you would have thought the RNC had deployed the Wehrmacht. Those who led the riot were even asked to opine on CNN. On the other hand, left-wing rioters the people Chris Cuomo and other journalists compared to GIs landing on Normandy are immediately transformed into apolitical actors, rogue "anarchists," as soon as any violence starts.

Who knows? Perhaps the majority of citizens and businesses in Portland, Seattle and Denver want their elected officials to let antifa act with impunity. Or maybe some of those citizens and businesses will begin fleeing those cities. Whatever the case, it's a local concern.

To a point. If mayors do nothing to stop anarchists from tearing down federal monuments or from defacing, vandalizing, and attempting to burn down federal buildings, the feds have every right to dispatch teams of agents to restore order.

None of which is to deny that there are legitimate concerns about how law enforcement is conducting itself. I'm sympathetic to criticisms of the federal officers who operate in camouflage and in unmarked vans. Cops should display badge numbers and identification if they truly aren't doing so right now otherwise civilians have no real way to hold those in authority accountable for their actions. But the claim that Pinochet-like secret police have begun snatching Portland protesters off the street and making them disappear amounts to the arrest of one man, who refused to speak without his lawyer and was released a little more than an hour later without any charges.

If it were up to me, I'd leave Portland to the anarchists and their political accomplices. But federal law enforcement including agencies such as the DEA, FBI, ICE, ATF, Department of Homeland Security and Marshal Service regularly operate across the country. Sometimes they make arrests, and sometimes they do so after going undercover. This happens under every administration, every day, and it often happens for far less compelling reasons. As far as we know, cops haven't broken any laws in the streets of Portland. The protesters who cover their faces have broken tons.

With this in mind, it's been instructive watching many of the same characters who cheer on governors who take undemocratic emergency powers and shut down houses of worship without the consent of the people and who sometimes arrest Americans for playing Wiffle ball, attending church or cutting hair act as if policing portends the end of democracy. The same people who incessantly clamor to empower the federal government when it suits their purposes now act as if protecting a federal courthouse is the Reichstag fire.

MSNBC's John Heilemann says that Trump's sending federal police into Portland is a "trial run" for using "force" to "steal this election." In a piece titled "Trump's Occupation of American Cities Has Begun," Michelle Goldberg, somehow still allowed to freely opine at The New York Times, says that "fascism" is already here. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls the police "stormtroopers" who are "kidnapping protesters."

All of these contentions are ugly conspiracy theories, hyperbolic allegations meant to fuel partisan paranoia before an election. Even if we accept the criticisms of law enforcement, the driving problem, and it's been happening to various degrees in a number of major cities, is that mayors are allowing "protesters" to trample on public and private property. They allow it because they share the same left-wing sensibilities. But protesting should never be a license for anarchy.

David Harsanyi is a senior writer at National Review and the author of the book "First Freedom: A Ride Through America's Enduring History With the Gun." T

Read or Share this story: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2020/07/30/opinion-problem-portland-isnt-law-its-lawlessness/5535192002/

See the article here:
Opinion: The problem in Portland isn't the law; it's the lawlessness - The Detroit News

You might have seen articles or comments on social media lately alluding to sovereign citizens, or SovCits for short, with some reports suggesting COVID-19 government restrictions have driven a surge of interest in this movement.

So, who are these self-styled sovereign citizens, and what do they believe?

Sovereign citizens are concerned with the legal framework of society. They believe all people are born free with rights but that these natural rights are being constrained by corporations (and they see governments as artificial corporations). They believe citizens are in an oppressive contract with the government.

SovCits reportedly believe that by declaring themselves living people or natural people, they can break this oppressive contract and avoid restrictions such as certain rates, taxes, and fines or particular government rules on mandatory mask-wearing.

The SovCit movement arose in America decades ago, with roots in the American patriot movement, some religious communities, and tax protest groups. It has also been known as the free-man movement.

Read more: 'Alt-right white extremism' or conservative mobilising: what are CPAC's aims in Australia?

SovCits see themselves as sovereign and not bound by the laws of the country in which they physically live. Accepting a law or regulations means they have waived their rights as a sovereign and have accepted a contract with the government, according to SovCit belief.

The SovCit movement doesnt have a single leader, central doctrine or centralised collection of documents. It is based on their reinterpretation of the law and there are many legal document templates on the internet for SovCit use to, for example, avoid paying fines or rates they see as unfair.

SovCits tend not to follow conventional legal argument. Some have engaged in repeated court action and even been declared vexatious litigants by the courts.

The SovCit movement has many local variations but there are some key commonalities across the Australian SovCit movement.

A central belief, according to news reports, is that the Australian government, the police, and other government agencies are corporations. Believers feel they must be on guard to avoid entering into a contract with the corporation. They often do this by stating, I do not consent and trying to get the police officer or official to recognise them as a living or natural being and therefore as a sovereign.

SovCits are often careful to avoid showing ID such as drivers licences or giving their name and address. Saying I understand also risks being seen to agree to the contract so SovCits will repeat the phrase I comprehend to show they are refusing the contract.

Many reject their countrys constitution as false and reportedly refer to the Magna Carta of 1215 as the only true legal document constraining arbitrary power.

SovCits often come to the attention of authorities due to driving offences. It is a core belief of the movement that sovereigns have the right to travel freely without the need for a drivers licence, vehicle registration, or insurance.

Until COVID-19, the main threat seems to have been in committing road offences. More recently, actions protesting measures aimed at limiting the spread of COVID-19 have been linked to the sovereign citizen movement.

Here is the original post:
'Living people': who are the sovereign citizens, or SovCits, and why do they believe they have immunity from the law? - The Conversation AU

Its been about two weeks since a bunch of well-intended liberals and lefties wrote an open letter in Harpers Magazine, denouncing intolerance on the left.

Well, if the conservative crowd appreciated the gesture, they have a funny way of showing it. Lets just run down a few of the insulting, degrading, racist, anti-Jewish broadsides emerging from figures on the right over the last few days . . .

Congressman Ted Yoho called congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a fucking bitch. Then when she called him out for it, he said he didnt say iteven though a reporter for the Hill said he did say it.

Senator Tom Cotton said slavery was a necessary evil. When he was called out, he said hed been misquoted and that what hed actually said was that the founding fathers thought slavery was a necessary evil.

As if that clarification is any less offensive. Or historically accuratecause its not at all clear that many slave-owning founding fathers thought there was anything evil about owning slaves.

Tribune columnist John Kass wrote what I call a twofer column in which he dragged out an alt-right, anti-Jewish trope regarding George Soros to malign Black officials like Cook County states attorney Kim Foxx.

Thus, he managed to degrade Jewish and Black people in one swoop.

Meanwhile, Lori Lightfoots right-wing critics have called her a communist whose base, as Tucker Carlson put it, consists of angry Marxist rich kids with spray paint.

All because they didnt agree with her decision to take down the Columbus statues.

In the aftermath, there are no apologies, no regrets. Apparently, theyre proud of what they say and would say it again. As far as I can tell, they feel free to say just about anything they want.

It seems as though there are almost no consequences for right-wingers who spew mean-spirited, hate-filled invective. Tucker Carlson still has his job. As does Sean Hannity. Laura Ingraham. Rush Limbaugh. And John Kass. OK, the Tribune moved Kass from page two to the editorial page.

By the waymuch love to the Tribunes guild for taking a strong stand against Kasss Soros column.

The rights done a masterful job of flipping the switch on free expression. Theyve got the left on the defensive. As though right-wingers are innocent victims whose free speech has been stifled by the lefty political-correct police.

I almost have to give them credit. Theyve rigged the debate so that even many well-intended liberals have been brainwashed into thinking that political correctness exists only on the left.

Well, the right has its own version of rigidly enforced political correctness.

Among other things, you cant criticize Trump supporters for being utterly batshit crazy even when theyre saying things that are, you know, utterly batshit crazy. Like the people in Florida who testified against an ordinance requiring masks in public places. Becauseoh, hell, just watch them if you havent done so already.

But if you criticize them, youre an elitist.

Similarly, you cant criticize Trumpsters for forcing their religious beliefs on everyone else. Like the bakers in Colorado who went to court to win the right not to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple.

Then youre a secular humanist whos intolerant of religious beliefs.

The right recently convinced the Supreme Court to protect the religious rights of corporations to not cover the cost of contraceptives in their employees health-care plans. They even got two liberal justicesElena Kagan and Stephen Breyerto sign on to sending the case back to a lower court.

And they say the left is intolerant? Im still waiting for Justice Brett Kavanaugh to rule that doctors have a First Amendment protected right to talk about abortion with their patients.

Now, I guess were supposed to defend Tom Cottons right to describe slavery as a necessary evil and John Kasss right to employ anti-Jewish tropes. All in the name of free speech.

Generally, Im pretty open to free-speech arguments. But I dont get the feeling that its a two-way street.The obvious case is Colin Kaepernick. I dont recall many (or any) prominent Republicans defending his right to free speech when he got kicked out of the NFL for taking a knee during the national anthem.

Similarly, Trump says he supports the rights of his supporters to wave the Confederate flag.

Well, I guess I should say Trump doesnt limit that right to just his supporters. Though lets face itwho else but a Trump supporter would want to wave the Confederate flag?

Trump says waving the confederate flag is freedom of speech, even if that flag symbolizes an evil institution that is offensive to many people.

But then he turns right around and says flag burning should be against the law. "We ought to come up with legislation that if you burn the American flag, you go to jail for one year. One year, Trump said.

He says burning the flag is desecration that many people find offensive.

Oh, so when one group of people are offended, we need a law to protect them.

But when another group of people are offended, itsstop whining, snowflake!

Want another example?

Consider John Catanzara, the president of the Fraternal Order of Police. A few years back he made news when he posted a picture of himself in a Chicago police uniform holding a sign that read: I stand for the anthem. I love the American flag. I support my president. And the 2nd Amendment.

That president he supported was Trump. Well, you didnt think it was Obama, did you?

As a believer in free speech, I defended his right to post that picture.

But now hes threatening to expel any union member who takes a knee in solidarity with Black Lives Matter protesters.

And so it goes. When it comes to free speech, the right only wants it for themselves.v

Excerpt from:
Yoho and Cotton - Chicago Reader