#for the record i also hate monopoly

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Your car spies on you and rats you out to insurance companies

I'm on tour with my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me TOMORROW (Mar 13) in SAN FRANCISCO with ROBIN SLOAN, then Toronto, NYC, Anaheim, and more!

Another characteristically brilliant Kashmir Hill story for The New York Times reveals another characteristically terrible fact about modern life: your car secretly records fine-grained telemetry about your driving and sells it to data-brokers, who sell it to insurers, who use it as a pretext to gouge you on premiums:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/technology/carmakers-driver-tracking-insurance.html

Almost every car manufacturer does this: Hyundai, Nissan, Ford, Chrysler, etc etc:

https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2020/09/09/ford-state-farm-ford-metromile-honda-verisk-among-insurer-oem-telematics-connections/

This is true whether you own or lease the car, and it's separate from the "black box" your insurer might have offered to you in exchange for a discount on your premiums. In other words, even if you say no to the insurer's carrot – a surveillance-based discount – they've got a stick in reserve: buying your nonconsensually harvested data on the open market.

I've always hated that saying, "If you're not paying for the product, you're the product," the reason being that it posits decent treatment as a customer reward program, like the little ramekin warm nuts first class passengers get before takeoff. Companies don't treat you well when you pay them. Companies treat you well when they fear the consequences of treating you badly.

Take Apple. The company offers Ios users a one-tap opt-out from commercial surveillance, and more than 96% of users opted out. Presumably, the other 4% were either confused or on Facebook's payroll. Apple – and its army of cultists – insist that this proves that our world's woes can be traced to cheapskate "consumers" who expected to get something for nothing by using advertising-supported products.

But here's the kicker: right after Apple blocked all its rivals from spying on its customers, it began secretly spying on those customers! Apple has a rival surveillance ad network, and even if you opt out of commercial surveillance on your Iphone, Apple still secretly spies on you and uses the data to target you for ads:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar

Even if you're paying for the product, you're still the product – provided the company can get away with treating you as the product. Apple can absolutely get away with treating you as the product, because it lacks the historical constraints that prevented Apple – and other companies – from treating you as the product.

As I described in my McLuhan lecture on enshittification, tech firms can be constrained by four forces:

I. Competition

II. Regulation

III. Self-help

IV. Labor

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/30/go-nuts-meine-kerle/#ich-bin-ein-bratapfel

When companies have real competitors – when a sector is composed of dozens or hundreds of roughly evenly matched firms – they have to worry that a maltreated customer might move to a rival. 40 years of antitrust neglect means that corporations were able to buy their way to dominance with predatory mergers and pricing, producing today's inbred, Habsburg capitalism. Apple and Google are a mobile duopoly, Google is a search monopoly, etc. It's not just tech! Every sector looks like this:

https://www.openmarketsinstitute.org/learn/monopoly-by-the-numbers

Eliminating competition doesn't just deprive customers of alternatives, it also empowers corporations. Liberated from "wasteful competition," companies in concentrated industries can extract massive profits. Think of how both Apple and Google have "competitively" arrived at the same 30% app tax on app sales and transactions, a rate that's more than 1,000% higher than the transaction fees extracted by the (bloated, price-gouging) credit-card sector:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/07/curatorial-vig/#app-tax

But cartels' power goes beyond the size of their warchest. The real source of a cartel's power is the ease with which a small number of companies can arrive at – and stick to – a common lobbying position. That's where "regulatory capture" comes in: the mobile duopoly has an easier time of capturing its regulators because two companies have an easy time agreeing on how to spend their app-tax billions:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/05/regulatory-capture/

Apple – and Google, and Facebook, and your car company – can violate your privacy because they aren't constrained regulation, just as Uber can violate its drivers' labor rights and Amazon can violate your consumer rights. The tech cartels have captured their regulators and convinced them that the law doesn't apply if it's being broken via an app:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/18/cursed-are-the-sausagemakers/#how-the-parties-get-to-yes

In other words, Apple can spy on you because it's allowed to spy on you. America's last consumer privacy law was passed in 1988, and it bans video-store clerks from leaking your VHS rental history. Congress has taken no action on consumer privacy since the Reagan years:

https://www.eff.org/tags/video-privacy-protection-act

But tech has some special enshittification-resistant characteristics. The most important of these is interoperability: the fact that computers are universal digital machines that can run any program. HP can design a printer that rejects third-party ink and charge $10,000/gallon for its own colored water, but someone else can write a program that lets you jailbreak your printer so that it accepts any ink cartridge:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/11/ink-stained-wretches-battle-soul-digital-freedom-taking-place-inside-your-printer

Tech companies that contemplated enshittifying their products always had to watch over their shoulders for a rival that might offer a disenshittification tool and use that as a wedge between the company and its customers. If you make your website's ads 20% more obnoxious in anticipation of a 2% increase in gross margins, you have to consider the possibility that 40% of your users will google "how do I block ads?" Because the revenue from a user who blocks ads doesn't stay at 100% of the current levels – it drops to zero, forever (no user ever googles "how do I stop blocking ads?").

The majority of web users are running an ad-blocker:

https://doc.searls.com/2023/11/11/how-is-the-worlds-biggest-boycott-doing/

Web operators made them an offer ("free website in exchange for unlimited surveillance and unfettered intrusions") and they made a counteroffer ("how about 'nah'?"):

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/07/adblocking-how-about-nah

Here's the thing: reverse-engineering an app – or any other IP-encumbered technology – is a legal minefield. Just decompiling an app exposes you to felony prosecution: a five year sentence and a $500k fine for violating Section 1201 of the DMCA. But it's not just the DMCA – modern products are surrounded with high-tech tripwires that allow companies to invoke IP law to prevent competitors from augmenting, recongifuring or adapting their products. When a business says it has "IP," it means that it has arranged its legal affairs to allow it to invoke the power of the state to control its customers, critics and competitors:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

An "app" is just a web-page skinned in enough IP to make it a crime to add an ad-blocker to it. This is what Jay Freeman calls "felony contempt of business model" and it's everywhere. When companies don't have to worry about users deploying self-help measures to disenshittify their products, they are freed from the constraint that prevents them indulging the impulse to shift value from their customers to themselves.

Apple owes its existence to interoperability – its ability to clone Microsoft Office's file formats for Pages, Numbers and Keynote, which saved the company in the early 2000s – and ever since, it has devoted its existence to making sure no one ever does to Apple what Apple did to Microsoft:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/06/adversarial-interoperability-reviving-elegant-weapon-more-civilized-age-slay

Regulatory capture cuts both ways: it's not just about powerful corporations being free to flout the law, it's also about their ability to enlist the law to punish competitors that might constrain their plans for exploiting their workers, customers, suppliers or other stakeholders.

The final historical constraint on tech companies was their own workers. Tech has very low union-density, but that's in part because individual tech workers enjoyed so much bargaining power due to their scarcity. This is why their bosses pampered them with whimsical campuses filled with gourmet cafeterias, fancy gyms and free massages: it allowed tech companies to convince tech workers to work like government mules by flattering them that they were partners on a mission to bring the world to its digital future:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/10/the-proletarianization-of-tech-workers/

For tech bosses, this gambit worked well, but failed badly. On the one hand, they were able to get otherwise powerful workers to consent to being "extremely hardcore" by invoking Fobazi Ettarh's spirit of "vocational awe":

https://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2018/vocational-awe/

On the other hand, when you motivate your workers by appealing to their sense of mission, the downside is that they feel a sense of mission. That means that when you demand that a tech worker enshittifies something they missed their mother's funeral to deliver, they will experience a profound sense of moral injury and refuse, and that worker's bargaining power means that they can make it stick.

Or at least, it did. In this era of mass tech layoffs, when Google can fire 12,000 workers after a $80b stock buyback that would have paid their wages for the next 27 years, tech workers are learning that the answer to "I won't do this and you can't make me" is "don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out" (AKA "sharpen your blades boys"):

https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/29/elon-musk-texts-discovery-twitter/

With competition, regulation, self-help and labor cleared away, tech firms – and firms that have wrapped their products around the pluripotently malleable core of digital tech, including automotive makers – are no longer constrained from enshittifying their products.

And that's why your car manufacturer has chosen to spy on you and sell your private information to data-brokers and anyone else who wants it. Not because you didn't pay for the product, so you're the product. It's because they can get away with it.

Cars are enshittified. The dozens of chips that auto makers have shoveled into their car design are only incidentally related to delivering a better product. The primary use for those chips is autoenshittification – access to legal strictures ("IP") that allows them to block modifications and repairs that would interfere with the unfettered abuse of their own customers:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-demon

The fact that it's a felony to reverse-engineer and modify a car's software opens the floodgates to all kinds of shitty scams. Remember when Bay Staters were voting on a ballot measure to impose right-to-repair obligations on automakers in Massachusetts? The only reason they needed to have the law intervene to make right-to-repair viable is that Big Car has figured out that if it encrypts its diagnostic messages, it can felonize third-party diagnosis of a car, because decrypting the messages violates the DMCA:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/drm-cars-will-drive-consumers-crazy

Big Car figured out that VIN locking – DRM for engine components and subassemblies – can felonize the production and the installation of third-party spare parts:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/08/about-those-kill-switched-ukrainian-tractors/

The fact that you can't legally modify your car means that automakers can go back to their pre-2008 ways, when they transformed themselves into unregulated banks that incidentally manufactured the cars they sold subprime loans for. Subprime auto loans – over $1t worth! – absolutely relies on the fact that borrowers' cars can be remotely controlled by lenders. Miss a payment and your car's stereo turns itself on and blares threatening messages at top volume, which you can't turn off. Break the lease agreement that says you won't drive your car over the county line and it will immobilize itself. Try to change any of this software and you'll commit a felony under Section 1201 of the DMCA:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/02/innovation-unlocks-markets/#digital-arm-breakers

Tesla, naturally, has the most advanced anti-features. Long before BMW tried to rent you your seat-heater and Mercedes tried to sell you a monthly subscription to your accelerator pedal, Teslas were demon-haunted nightmare cars. Miss a Tesla payment and the car will immobilize itself and lock you out until the repo man arrives, then it will blare its horn and back itself out of its parking spot. If you "buy" the right to fully charge your car's battery or use the features it came with, you don't own them – they're repossessed when your car changes hands, meaning you get less money on the used market because your car's next owner has to buy these features all over again:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/28/edison-not-tesla/#demon-haunted-world

And all this DRM allows your car maker to install spyware that you're not allowed to remove. They really tipped their hand on this when the R2R ballot measure was steaming towards an 80% victory, with wall-to-wall scare ads that revealed that your car collects so much information about you that allowing third parties to access it could lead to your murder (no, really!):

https://pluralistic.net/2020/09/03/rip-david-graeber/#rolling-surveillance-platforms

That's why your car spies on you. Because it can. Because the company that made it lacks constraint, be it market-based, legal, technological or its own workforce's ethics.

One common critique of my enshittification hypothesis is that this is "kind of sensible and normal" because "there’s something off in the consumer mindset that we’ve come to believe that the internet should provide us with amazing products, which bring us joy and happiness and we spend hours of the day on, and should ask nothing back in return":

https://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to-have-great-conversations/

What this criticism misses is that this isn't the companies bargaining to shift some value from us to them. Enshittification happens when a company can seize all that value, without having to bargain, exploiting law and technology and market power over buyers and sellers to unilaterally alter the way the products and services we rely on work.

A company that doesn't have to fear competitors, regulators, jailbreaking or workers' refusal to enshittify its products doesn't have to bargain, it can take. It's the first lesson they teach you in the Darth Vader MBA: "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/26/hit-with-a-brick/#graceful-failure

Your car spying on you isn't down to your belief that your carmaker "should provide you with amazing products, which brings your joy and happiness you spend hours of the day on, and should ask nothing back in return." It's not because you didn't pay for the product, so now you're the product. It's because they can get away with it.

The consequences of this spying go much further than mere insurance premium hikes, too. Car telemetry sits at the top of the funnel that the unbelievably sleazy data broker industry uses to collect and sell our data. These are the same companies that sell the fact that you visited an abortion clinic to marketers, bounty hunters, advertisers, or vengeful family members pretending to be one of those:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/07/safegraph-spies-and-lies/#theres-no-i-in-uterus

Decades of pro-monopoly policy led to widespread regulatory capture. Corporate cartels use the monopoly profits they extract from us to pay for regulatory inaction, allowing them to extract more profits.

But when it comes to privacy, that period of unchecked corporate power might be coming to an end. The lack of privacy regulation is at the root of so many problems that a pro-privacy movement has an unstoppable constituency working in its favor.

At EFF, we call this "privacy first." Whether you're worried about grifters targeting vulnerable people with conspiracy theories, or teens being targeted with media that harms their mental health, or Americans being spied on by foreign governments, or cops using commercial surveillance data to round up protesters, or your car selling your data to insurance companies, passing that long-overdue privacy legislation would turn off the taps for the data powering all these harms:

https://www.eff.org/wp/privacy-first-better-way-address-online-harms

Traditional economics fails because it thinks about markets without thinking about power. Monopolies lead to more than market power: they produce regulatory capture, power over workers, and state capture, which felonizes competition through IP law. The story that our problems stem from the fact that we just don't spend enough money, or buy the wrong products, only makes sense if you willfully ignore the power that corporations exert over our lives. It's nice to think that you can shop your way out of a monopoly, because that's a lot easier than voting your way out of a monopoly, but no matter how many times you vote with your wallet, the cartels that control the market will always win:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/05/the-map-is-not-the-territory/#apor-locksmith

Name your price for 18 of my DRM-free ebooks and support the Electronic Frontier Foundation with the Humble Cory Doctorow Bundle.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/12/market-failure/#car-wars

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[harrysfolklore]

hey could u do masie peters as a face claim with singer yn

i was dying to do tom x singer!yn and i this came up ! i really really hope you like it as much as i do !

AND HAPPY 29TH BIRTHDAY TO THE MAN THE MYTH THE LEGEND TOM BLYTH. ILY

MASTERLIST | MY PATREON

liked by rachelzegler, oliviarodrigo and 836,038 others

yourinstagram the good witch as been out for a week and i just want to say thank for all the love 🥹 here’s a pic of me right before recording the saddest song on the album lol

view all 18,037 comments

ynfan1 IM SO PROOOOUD

ynfan2 i love her so bad

troyesivan absolutely obsessed with every track

ynfan3 WE NEED THE DELUXE VERSION

rachelzegler I’m sooo obsessed with this album, I’ve played it on set like a hundred times this week I’m pretty sure all the cast is sick of me lol. LOVE YOU CONGRATS ❤️

↳ yourinstagram rachh 🥹🥹 thank you for your support ! means the world to me and i hope your cast mates don’t hate me lol. good luck on filming and i can’t wait to see the movie !!

↳ ynfan1 QUEENS SUPPORTING EACH OTHER

↳ ynfan3 i love them so much

liked by hunterschafer, yourinstagram and 486,529 others

tomblyth HG film dump. Just some of the many people I love who breathed life into this movie. @songbirdsandsnakes opens tomorrow 🤍

view all 11,160 comments

tomfan1 CRYING

tomfan2 this movie is about to change my life

mtv new crush unlocked

florencepugh ❤️

tomfan3 i love this cast so bad

rachelzegler LOVE YOU ALL 💘

tomfan4 my man my man my man

liked by shawnmendes, tomblyth and 840,726 others

yourinstagram MANCHESTER THAT WAS AWESOME !! and london you’re next 🥹

view all 18,937 comments

ynfan1 BEST SHOW IN THE WORLD

ynfan2 my turn when

madisonbeer superstar 🤍

rachelzegler I can’t wait to see you live !!

↳ tomblyth I’m tagging along

↳ tomfan1 WEEE TOM A YN FAN SO TRUE

↳ yourinstagram you guys are welcome anytime

ynfan3 she’s a celebrity to celebrities omg

mtv yn x tbosas cast? a yes from me

INTERVIEWS FROM TBOSAS PROMO

INSTAGRAM STORIES

//

liked by tomfan1, tomfan2 and 10,837 others

tomupdates TOM ARRIVING TO O2 ARENA IN LONDON TODAY?

view all 943 comments

tomfan1 OMGGG

ynfan1 YN HAS A SHOW THERE LAJSKA

tomfan2 he’s really seeing yn live😭 such a fanboy

ynfan2 that’s it. i ship them

↳ tomfan3 SAMEEEE

ynfan3 MY FAVES

liked by ynfan1, ynfan2 and 13,378 others

ynupdates “Tonight’s show is special. Not only because we’re at the O2 arena which is absolutely freaking cool, but also because we have some friends coming to see us, and it’s always a pleasure to play for old and new friends.” - YN at tonight’s show !

view all 966 comments

ynfan1 OMGGG

ynfan2 I LOVE HER

tomfan1 omfg is this about tom ???

tomfan2 TOM WAS IN THE AUDIENCE

ynfan3 she’s not sneaky

liked by conangray, tomblyth and 845,380 others

yourinstagram LONDON THAT WAS ONE OF MY FAVORITE SHOWS EVER !! thank you to everyone who came 🤍

view all 18,038 comments

ynfan1 I CANT BELIEVE I WAS THERE

ynfan2 POP QUEEN

oliviarodrigo best show ever 💜

tomfan1 i bet tom was fangirling the entire time

hunterschafer I LOVE YOU SO MUCH

tomblyth Amazing show and amazing performer, I'm blown away

↳ tomfan2 AHHHH

↳ tomfan3 i literally ship them so hard

↳ ynfan3 thats a MAN

FANS VIA TWITTER

//

liked by yourinstagram, hunterschafer and 764,093 others

tomblyth Afterparty-ing 🥂

view all 17,394 comments

tomfan1 YEEEEEES

tomfan2 HE WENT TO YN'S AFTERPATY

rachelzegler 👯‍♂️

ynfan1 hes so hooot yn better give him a chance

↳ tomfan3 chill they're just friends

yourinstagram thank you for coming 💕

↳ ynfan2 THE EMOJIII

↳ tomfan2 i'm trying so hard to be normal and not ship them

TEXTS BETWEEN TOM AND YN

//

liked by gracieabrams, lauraharrier and 876,309 others

yourinstagram unfiltered friday dump

view all 18,275 comments

ynfan1 i live for this

ynfan2 her monopoly obsession is still going strong

rachelzegler You sneaky shits! Invite me next time

↳ ynfan3 WHAT DOES SHE MEAN ?

↳ yourinstagram i’ll make sure snow lets you know next time

↳ tomfan1 SNOW ?? TOM??

↳ tomfan2 AHHHHH

tomblyth It was such a pleasure to beat you at Monopoly

↳ tomfan1 AH SO SHE WAS WITH TOM

↳ ynfan3 IM THROWING UP

↳ yourinstagram shhh don’t let everyone know🥲

↳ ynfan3 😭😭😭

liked by yourinstagram, maya_hawke and 630,998 others

tomblyth I made a new friend 😊

view all 18,937 comments

tomfan1 MY HEART

ynfan1 THATS YN’S DOG STFU

rachelzegler I keep getting excluded from this relationship 🥲🥲

↳ tomfan2 RELATIONSHIP???

↳ ynfan2 NOT RACHEL OUTING THEIR BUSINESS

hunterschafer babies

yourinstagram i can’t believe i’ve been replaced

↳ tomblyth Sorry love, I’m just really charming

↳ ynfan1 STOOOOOP

↳ tomfan3 HE’S SHAMELESS

DEUXMOI VIA INSTAGRAM STORIES

//

liked by tomfan1, ynfan1 and 40,826 others

celebrityleaks TOM BLYTH AND YN OUT IN LOS ANGELES TODAY

view all 2,927 comments

tomfan1 LORD

ynfan1 I KNEW IT

tomfan2 THAT ESCALATED QUICKLY

ynfan2 AHHHH I LOVE THIS SO MUCH

tomfan3 the couple we never knew we needed

ynfan3 we literally saw this relationship come to life I LOVE IT

tomfan4 byeee yall already claiming they’re in a relationship when they could be just friends

↳ ynfan1 you’re delulu

↳ tomfan1 the denial stage i see

liked by tomblyth, teddysphotos and 837,937 others

yourinstagram we’re in the middle of a tour but i couldn’t help myself and i got into the studio to pour out my lovey dovey feelings and ‘glue song’ came to life ! it’s going to be available everywhere on feb 2 (💓), i hope you like it 🥹

view all 19,045 comments

ynfan1 OH MY GOD ??

ynfan2 AHHHHHH WE WON

sabrinacarpenter such a sweet song i love it 🥰

tomfan1 IS THIS ABOUT TOM ??? BECAUSE IF IT IS I MIGHT CRY

gracieeabrams in your lover era 🥺

ynfan3 SHES DOWN BADDDDDD

tomfan3 HOLD ON. SHES RELEASING IT ON TOM’S BDAY !!!?

↳ tomfan1 YOU’RE RIGHT

↳ ynfan2 and just like that im sobbing again

tomfan2 i want to be stuck to tom like glue too

tomblyth ❤️

↳ ynfan3 SOBBING

↳ tomfan3 THIS IS CONFIRMATION

liked by yourinstagram, hunterschafer and 702,825 others

tomblyth What the bracelets say ❤️ @yourinstagram

view all 17,937 comments

tomfan1 STOP IT

ynfan1 i’ve died dead

rachelzegler MY BABIES MY LOVES 😭💘

↳ tomfan2 if you think about it rachel was lowkey the matchmaker here

↳ tomfan1 hunter aswell !

hunterschafer 🥲🥲🥲🤍🤍🤍

ynfan2 SHE DESERVES A HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP IM SO HAPPY

tomfan3 couple of the century for real

ynfan3 THE FRIENDSHIP BRACELETS 😩

yourinstagram love you be stuck 2 u you and your early morning karaoke 💘 happy birthday my love

↳ ynfan1 AHHHH

↳ tomfan3 WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THIS INFORMATION

[vinylfoxbooks]

August 22 - Card | @jartylusmicrofics | wc: 615

Game nights have become relatively normal within the Potter-Black-Crouch household because all of them are incredibly competitive and don’t like to back down from a challenge, they’re also all the type of people to overthink games and become quickly hated by their friends when they’d play together because of that. Each of them have games that they’ve banned in the house through process of elimination: Monopoly, any of the Mario games, Settlers of Catan -- after a particularly heated competition between the three of them all on 8 or 9 points before James won, Barty flipped the entire board, and Regulus didn’t talk to them for the rest of the day -- Uno twice, among many others.

And they’ve decided, this game night, that card games were their best approach for the safety of their house, relationship, and sanity. The thing is, James isn’t the best at these games, they can admit that. They do well with the games that they do play, and they were also part of the reasons behind some of these games getting banned from their household, but there’s never been anything that they’ve banned because they were too good at it like Regulus with Monopoly. 

Until they’re on their third card game, Regulus and Barty have only won thrice, collectively. James has won every. Other. Round. That they played. James has a track record of 16 out of 19 games.

“I’m going to kill you.” Barty mutters, looking James dead in the eye, “I swear to God if you win again, your body will not be found.”

“Okay,” Regulus hums, pushing Barty away from the table where, thankfully, James and Barty are sitting opposite each other, “I think card games are getting banned from game night, too.”

“We’re going to run out of games to play on game night soon.” James says, although they admittedly have a cocky smile on their face as they place down their hand, showing that they’ve won. Again. Barty nearly flips the table. Regulus gently takes the cards from both of their hands and cleans the ones on the table, putting them back in the box before walking over to the ‘banned’ shelf that they have and putting the pack on it.

“Running out of games or not,” Regulus states, “We’re done playing games tonight, I think we’re too high strung.” James agrees and goes to start making the three of them some hot chocolate to ease some of the tension that they’ve caused. 

When they’re done and Regulus has calmed Barty from the edge of murder -- Barty asks him how he’s not upset at James winning constantly, and he is, but he’s calmer than Barty and therefore needs to calm him down -- and the three of them are settled down on the couch with a comfort show, Barty finally asks, “How are you so good at card games?”

James takes a second to answer, “My dad really liked playing card games when I was young, that was usually what we ended up playing and if you think that I’m good at card games, you should never play with my dad. It also became a thing that since Peter was good enough at chess, I could never beat him, so we’d start playing cards and he’d get frustrated then it was a back and forth of us going between chess and cards.”

“Which is why you two don’t play games together.”

James nods, “My dad is incredibly strategic and, to beat him, you had to learn how to best him in his own game.” 

“Well, it’s just another banned game.” Regulus rolls his eyes, pressing a kiss to both of their lips as they fully settle down.

[howlsofbloodhounds]

Oh how I've been waiting to send these all in. My time has finally come.

(Cw/tw: drinking mention, depression, suicidal ideation mention, hallucinatiom and possession mentions)

- They have a rule where none of them are allowed to drink alone (Epic scared the shit out of them one specific time, both Delta and Color have landed themselves in jail from doing dumb shit before), so if one drinks, they all drink together. If Beta gets uncomfortable, they will stop. However, them all being some form of drunk means Beta gets recording and blackmail privileges.

- They all need different ways of comfort (Epic needs physical/verbal reassurance and distractions, Color needs verbal reassurance as touch can be too much for him at times, and Delta needs physical touch and to talk about what's bothering him).

- They all speak multiple languages (since Delta and Epic's creators are both from the Philippines, I imagine they'd both speak Tagalog, Filipino and Spanish. Epic also probably knows Japanese. Color can speak Arabic since his creator is from Egypt (from what the wiki said).

- They have definitely blown something up as a group before. I will let you decide what that something will be.

- Delta has blown up a microwave before on accident (and gets clowned for it).

- They all forget to eat sometimes and need to be reminded.

- They are all banned from UNO, Monopoly, and Mario Cart. Especially Delta.

- They know about Epic's depression and help pull him out of depressive ruts when needed.

- They know how to calm Delta down and distract him if he's getting too angry.

- They know how to comfort and gently but bluntly correct Color's hyper-empathy if it's causing him too much stress.

- They all love Zorox so much and probably give him too many treats.

- They have all had some form of an identity crisis at one point or another.

- On the alignment chart: Color is lawful good, Epic is true neutral, and Delta/Beta is chaotic good.

- They are very protective of each other. If someone is talking shit, they will handle it differently; Epic will 'jokingly' threaten to shut them up, both physically and verbally. Color will correct their behavior and scold them, maybe guilt trip them a bit. Delta will probably threaten to beat the shit out of them if they don't stop.

- They all experience PTSD nightmares.

- Epic is the reason they found out Beta gets sugar rushes (and since they affect Beta, then it would probably affect Delta too? Their ADHD would probably be off the charts).

- They all drink way too much caffeine (Delta is forced to drink half-caf bc Beta goes off the fucking wall Bonkers if they get any of it).

- Due to trying to avoid sleep, Epic sometimes experiences hallucinations/delusions if he goes too many days without sleeping.

- Delta/Beta are the most chaotic obviously, therefore need to be watched over to make sure they won't do anything crazy or stupid.

- They can all be a bit dramatic at times.

- Beta has definetly tried to see if they could roast marshmallows from the heat of Color's flames before.

- Beta is the little brother of the group and is treated as such.

- They all know ASL.

- They probably know Morse Code.

- They do NOT like creepy dolls or figures. Including mannequins. Epic and Color are disturbed by them and dislike them, but Delta/Beta HATE them.

- Epic takes great joy in annoying them with brainrot slang.

- They'll just. Pick each other up sometimes. Sometimes it'll be for a reason, like if they have to put Delta/Beta in air jail, but other times it'll be just for fun.

- I'm not sure how to explain it but their ages vs. how they act goes like this: Epic is the oldest but acts the youngest, Color is the middle but acts the oldest, and Delta/Beta is the youngest but acts the middle (Beta acts their age).

- During their haunted explorations, sometimes the ghosts will attack Beta, mostly because he's another ghost but in a different way. The rest of the group protects him (usually Delta switches out with him).

- Also during their haunted explorations, Delta has gotten possessed before. It was not fun. They no longer play mirror games or do seances. His tells for possession are: eye flickering (his eyes will flicker-change colors to whatever the Soul color is of the possessing ghost), going nonverbal, sudden aggression, acting like who's possessing him (ex; if the ghost possessing him likes to hide around, Delta will suddenly run/teleport off and hide from the others. They will have to find him, and if Delta doesn't want to be found, he won't be for a while.

- If one of them (usually Delta) says something particularly unhinged, the others will gently but firmly either whack him upside the head or bonk him to correct him.

- Sometimes Delta will need to ask permission to beat the shit out of someone (usually this is directed at Cross and Killer if they do something dumb). They made their own little signs to ask so no one outside of their group would be able to understand. He is usually told no (there was one rare occasion he was allowed to rock Killer's shit, and it made his entire fucking week).

- (This is inspired by that one ask talking about how Delta would try to sacrifice himself in battle) Delta has little to no self preservation skills. Like worse than the other two. He will not think ahead to how certain actions could affect the future unless its during a fight or dire circumstances. He has had suicide issues in the past and his friends know about it (hence one of the many reasons no one's allowed to drink alone).

- (Also inspired by the same ask as above) whenever Delta tries/does stupid and/or harmful shit, his friends do not let him get away with it. They have had to drive him to the hospital on more than one occasion depending on how hurt he is. They will talk about it with him no matter how much he doesn't want them to.

- Even though he doesn't like Cross and Killer, if he notices or is told that something he's doing is bothering them, he will stop immediately. No questions asked. He may dislike them and want to fight them, but he won't disrespect or purposefully trigger them.

- Beta likes to bite on random. Delta could literally just be working and all the sudden Beta tries to bite his hand. Like a puppy. Along with that, if he feels like he's not getting enough attention, he will start bothering them or try to play-fight.

- Yk that challenge where you fill your mouth with water and then smack someone with a tortilla? They've done that challenge before.

- Beta likes bugs. And also likes to scare the others with them.

Yay more headcanons!

Although I tend to lend more towards Color being Neutral Good, according to this description;

“Neutral good is a character alignment that describes someone who acts altruistically and without regard for rules or tradition. Neutral good characters are often willing to cooperate with lawful officials, but they don't feel obligated to them.

They may also do the right thing, even if it means breaking the rules. Examples of neutral good characters include healers who treat both sides of a fight and people who feed the starving during a war.” But lawful good seems to fit pretty well too.

And I can imagine that both Epic and Color are very protective of Delta and helping when whenever he hurts himself, not only because he’s their friend and because they care about him, but because Delta is in large part the only reason they’re able to still keep going in the day to day.

Delta was very helpful and inspiring for them both. Meeting Delta when he did is the very reason Color was even able to help Killer at all, let alone keep going without also getting himself killed. And im sure Delta has managed to help and support Epic in ways he’s not been supported—wouldn’t allow himself to be—in a very long time.

And tbh cross and killer probably have a lot things to thank Delta for. Bro’s the unsung hero. (Not that Delta would ever think of himself that way. That’s all because Epic and Color so both unbelievably strong and brave in his eyes.)

And ngl I wanna know what was the occasion where delta was allowed to absolutely rock killers shit cause lords know he deserves it (coming from someone who isn’t nightmare or Chara of course.)

Now ngl im kinda curious what everyone thinks the Epic Sanses’ + Beta’s Myers Briggs personality types could be.

[thesoftboiledegg]

On Saturday, I visited the bigger mall for the first time in a minute. Barnes and Noble had season seven on DVD ready to go. Physical media is slowly dying, but I guess huge franchises still get releases.

Rick and Morty merchandise tends to congregate around the trinkets and accessories. I wandered to the game section and found...playing cards! I'm still waiting for Adult Swim to sign off on licensed tarot cards. Other franchises have, including Marvel.

The toy store had a different game: Monopoly! Explore the world of seasons one and two.

The first couple of seasons are basically their own isolated little world that produced 90% of the general public's perception of the show (aside from Pickle Rick.) It's 2024, but everyone still thinks the entire series is about gloopies and shleemies and Rick turning himself into a pickle, then saying "wubba lubba dub dub" and doing a little dance afterward.

For the record, that's not a bad thing--it's the same for most entertainers and franchises. Their peak/early years create their enduring public images.

Speaking of seasons two and three, the same store had these pins:

Rick and Morty falling out of an overturned ship...that's a new one.

Onto a clothing store, which had a new set of boxer shorts. Why do undergarments always get the best designs? Nobody sees them but you!

Spencer's had the Rick and Morty cubes neatly lined up on a shelf. They're not sure how to feel about it.

I don't drink alcohol (I'm not against it, I just hate the taste), but I love this Pickle Rick shot glass. He emerges from the jar to tell you what's what! 🖕

New blankets! I enjoy seeing their awkward hug everywhere.

Today, I visited the smaller mall. One of the "nerdy" stores had a few Funko Pops scattered around. A Funko knock-off in a sea of collectibles, Dorbz Beth smiles from the top of the heap.

They also had TWO Mad Max Summers. Her "normal" counterpart stood nearby, but she was engrossed in her phone.

Another season seven DVD, this time with anti-theft packaging.

Spencer's had new ear gauges. Zap!

I usually stop by the other "nerdy" store before I leave. Today, they had exciting merchandise that I'd never seen before: a giant diorama.

I love finding unique merchandise beyond the usual Funko Pops and boxer shorts. It's like spotting a rare Pokemon. I don't physically collect merchandise because I don't want to spend the money--instead, I collect it mentally, which is just as good!

[hudson-whorenet]

I’m bored so here’s my Doc head canons! I think about these a lot lmao (these are vaguely humanised)

After his big crash at Fireball beach he developed a fear of the ocean and beaches in general, which is why he moved to a landlocked state like Arizona, quite possibly the driest place he could’ve moved. (It’s actually on my writing list to write a short fic about him making peace with the memories while in Florida with lightning for a race, but alas I haven’t gotten around to it)

He has a great singing voice but hates singing in-front of people, until one night he has too much to drink and gets up on the karaoke mic at Flo’s and shocks everyone

Speaking of music, he ironically loves the Beach Boys and other rock and roll artists, he also enjoys Tom Jones. He likes to listen to his records when he has a lot of work to do, he feels it helps him focus and stops his mind wandering

He just forgets to sleep sometimes, he’ll get so adsorbed in his work that he doesn’t realise how late it is, and by then decides going to bed isn’t worth it anyway. Sheriff has had to knock on the clinic door multiple times in the small hours of the morning to tell him to go to sleep.

He rarely looses him temper, unless things he love are at stake, as seen with how angry he is with lightning in the first movie. He really values his community and feels an obligation as their judge and doctor to keep them safe.

Saying this though, he does get competitive when playing board games and is a frequent rule checker when he’s loosing, playing monopoly with him is a nightmare.

He values his appearance but isn’t obsessed with it, he likes to appear well dressed and sharp but sometimes slips up if he’s tired or overwhelmed.

[edmundhoward]

soo ... about that seymour adaptation...

edward seymour

i adore his whole ‘prodigal son’ vibe; norton repeatedly calls him “the star of the seymour family”. scard recounts his position as the second son as: “the eldest surviving son, john, may have lived until he was about 20 but he appears to have been overshadowed from an early age by his brother edward”. because edward does have a good start to his career, in some ways paralleling anne boleyn: he is selected to be a page of honour to the king’s sister, mary, when he was about fourteen years old. he therefore spent time in france, with scard pointing out that edward was a part of “one of the grandest households in europe”, before being the first recorded seymour to study at oxford.

i think his treatment of his first wife and their children is probably less to do with any kind of quasi-incestuous, patrilineal affair between katherine and his father (although, i am not opposed to that being included in an adaptation — with the stipulation that her youth and john’s position of authority over her be sufficiently acknowledged; i really enjoy the dissonance of two teenagers playing at adulthood, playing house while edward’s father accommodated them) and more to do with a ruthless willingness to take advantage of the system for his own benefit. he would similarly meddle “very craftily” (according to cromwell and audley) and “aggressive[ly]” (according to scard) over land ownership. he was ruthlessly opportunistic, “adept at trying to manipulate legal loopholes for his own benefit”; he would later attempt the same with katherine parr (frustrating her so much that she ranted to his brother that she would have bitten him). one contemporary professed “it is hard trusting to his courtesy, for he hath small conscience”.

likewise, he also aggravated the howards, through being of lower birth and newer money. i do not care for whether or not it is factually accurate, i very much intend to have henry howard, who hated edward, punch him in the face. (also iirc, edward later struck gardiner in the face. fabulous.) i would very much want to keep that element as a throughline in an adaptation; this monstrous class system, with it's horrific wealth divides, and the absurdity of old versus new money — especially given edward’s later complicity in the desperately punitive vagrancy act. the aristocracy of england is monstrous, and the howards and seymour exemplify different facets of it’s monstrosity: the ancient, old feudal monopoly of lands and resources (and that sense of innate superiority to others), and the ruthless drive to bleed resources dry in a constant pursuit of more. i have no interest in shying away from that; the sumptuousness of edward's career was paid for with the toil of the commons. somerset house, the grand and beautiful renaissance residence he built, was built at the same time and nor far from the religious houses edward tore down for building materials: st john of jerusalem (smithfield), was “undermined and overthrown with gunpowder” for it’s stone, st paul’s cloister and charnel house was partially demolished for rubble, the bones of those laid to rest there dumped in finsbury. he was granted and spent thousands on syon abbey. plundering of religious buildings and desecration of human remains was inexorably tied to the wealth and prestige of edward seymour’s (and the howards) career; “if the seymours had drunk innocent blood, then the howards had allowed them to do so” (childs). (“and thus behold my kind, how that we differ far; [...] i can devour no yielding prey, you kill where you subdue. my kind is to desire the honour of the field, and you, with blood to slake your thirst of such as to you yield. [...] and if to light on you my hap so good shall be / i shall be glad to feed on that that would have fed on me.”)

i think his marriage to anne stanhope, would be fabulous as a relationship dynamic. it seems like a successful marriage; the pair are active at court and are, certainly, the centre of the seymour faction at court, in the 1530s. it is the pair who facilitate jane seymour’s courtship with henry viii, for example. under edward vi they occupy the awkward position of functional royalty, with no real claim to it (yet, who is to say they are autocratic power-grabbers when assuming they have no legitimate claim to that power and wealth assumes it is possible to ever have a legitimate claim to that level of power and wealth). they had several children and through his disinheriting his children by katherine filliol, he sought to protect his family with anne, with the same ruthlessness we should come to expect from him.

good wolf imagery with anne stanhope's family emblem being a wolf. thumbs up.

his successful career as a military man, despite his inflexible, abrasive attitude makes me think that his otherwise promising career was handicapped by flaws in his personality rather than his skillset. van der delft recorded that edward was “looked down upon by everybody as a dry, sour, opinionated man”. i feel like he fundamentally failed to co-operate at court, amongst those more attuned to courtly love tropes etc., arguably in-keeping with the idea of the seymours being less chivalrous/romantic, and more practically minded, a la edward’s sisters being educated in bastard script.

(also arguably a foil to anne boleyn in that idea of two up-and-coming, humanist leaning, reformist courtiers (with slightly controversial betrothal/marriage histories prior to court) whose talent is undermined by their arguably ‘unpalatable’ personalities and their overreaching ambition... could be fun to play on that as edward undermines anne in 1536, especially when he has to carry her motherless (made motherless by his actions) daughter for his nephew’s baptism, and ultimately they wind up buried together.)

tbh the way i envisage edward is summed up nicely by this quote from tudor times: “it may be that his talents fitted him to be a second-in-command, but that the very attention to detail that had made him a successful commander in the field, made him unsuited to the strategic vision and ability to delegate and consult that mark out the true leader. consequently, he became defensive, unwilling to take advice, and quick to take offence”.

primary sources: margaret scard, tudor king in all but name: the life of edward seymour; stephen alford, kingship and politics in the reign of edward vi; diarmaid macculloch, tudor church militant: edward vi and the protestant reformation

henry seymour

kind of obsessed with second sons, the embodiment of ‘the spare’ (henry was born around the same time as henry viii ascended to the throne, so he’s named after another spare).

he entered royal service in 1526, so a few years ahead of jane seymour probably going to court — which is also interesting considering they both joined catherine of aragon's household. i actually would like their relationship explored more — jane’s will bequeathed him “several valuable chains”, and he named his daughter after her.

i actually have zero interest in the idea that henry was the ‘good’ brother… he was clearly very much part of the seymour ‘faction’ of the 1530s — he was willing to pick at the carcass of anne boleyn’s household, as he took mark smeaton’s position after anne boleyn’s fall. likewise, jane rewarded him with several offices and entrusted him with administering her estates as queen. so, whilst he may not have been as ambitious as his brothers, he was clearly an active part of the seymour family’s ambitions, and was adaptive and willing to reap his spoils at court.

in spite of norton describing him as “content to remain in the country”, a man who “never sought the glittering careers of his siblings”, he was at court for a significant time, occupying significant positions. he ultimately did not seek, or at least did not achieve (as we don’t know enough about him to conclude he did not want them) the kind of promotions his brothers achieved, but i don’t honestly think his career was distinctly less ‘glittering’ than thomas’ or his father’s…

and his court career otherwise argues for him to be of more significance than he gets recognised for. the idea that henry “remained in the shadows” (scard) is rather difficult to reconcile with someone who held onto such a ridiculously expensive and coveted position such as queen’s carver under multiple queens. given the prominence of strict hierarchy in carving and serving food, henry would surely have been well-versed in the court dynamics, the politics of meat (to steal the phrase).

his responsibilities and seeming skill as carver also lend itself to imagery of hunting and butchery that goes so well with wolf hall and savernake forest. henry would have been skilled at carving and dismembering animal carcasses for the queen — which would be potent imagery to play with considering the seymour rise (like a phoenix) out of the ashes of anne boleyn, an old, dead bird (falcon); more bluntly with the imagery of carving and meat and picking at the remains of anne boleyn's carcass....

(fabulous wolf imagery continues with him marrying barbara wolfe.)

i think it’s interesting that of all john’s sons, henry’s seems to follow his most closely. he has a decent career at court, and clearly enjoys favour (being made knight of the bath & receiving royal grants of land under edward vi) with some military positions, but never seems to establish himself as a major personality. he ultimately establishes himself more locally, elected the mp for hampshire, and serving as high sheriff of hampshire between 1568-69.

as for family motivations, he may well have been close to his family as he was the sole executor of his mother's will. but when edward seymour asked him to send troops for support, henry supposedly ignored him and did not reply. he also did well under john dudley's administration, showing the same ability to reap the spoils of someone's fall as he did during anne's fall, only this time it was his own brothers.

it must also have been a challenging time for him in the 1560s-1570s; he was with his mother when she died, and had (at this point) lost his father, jane, thomas, edward, and three other siblings. it seems like he had lost a few children of his own at this point, too. his niece, mary seymour, quietly disappears from the record, and probably dies young, removed from her seymour family. he is presumed to be the last seymour child of this generation to die.

therefore, henry seymour (alongside sisters dorothy and elizabeth) becomes witness to the decline of the seymour family that he knew — the family would remain prominent (edward’s children, for example, retained careers and significance at court) — but in many respects the seymour ‘faction’ was obsolete at this point, and because he was at court, i feel like his perspective of this decline is the most significant: he would have seen the highest highs, in ways his sisters would not have.

primary sources: david loades, the seymours of wolf hall; elizabeth norton, jane seymour: henry viii’s true love

thomas seymour

🐀

firstly, i think it’s profoundly significant that thomas seymour would have been at wolf hall when katherine filliol came into his father’s house. he and katherine were around the same age. he would have been about eleven when katherine gave birth to her baby, john, in 1518. i think it’s really worth remembering that thomas seymour may well have witnessed his father groom his teenage ward. the set up for thomas’ relationship with lady elizabeth is there from the beginning.

his first position, under francis bryan, can be dated to the mid 1520s — so there seems to have been a mass exodus of seymour children from the family home to court (as henry and jane also come to court around this time), and in more than one case, probably in connection to francis bryan. which i think makes for fun potential, considering the dormer’s allegedly not wanting to associate with the seymour's on account of scandal, which has been attributed to the vicar of hell’s reputation.

in an adaptation, he’s a fabulous foil to edward: he seems to have been considerably less able, his career far more being credited to the successes of his immediate relatives, his blood carrying him further than any innate talent. throckmorton’s decription of him — “hardy, wise and liberal […] fierce in courage, courtly in fashion, in personage stately, in voice magnificent, but somewhat empty of matter” — creates this fun parallel of thomas having the charisma that edward lacked, but none of his ability; as elizabeth described him, thomas was “a man of much wit, but very little judgement”, or, according to nicholas throckmorton, “somewhat empty of matter”. norton likewise describes him as: “he was not a man of half measures. he entered into everything with gusto and determination, but not always skill or foresight.”

and there is something poignantly frustrating about how impotent and insignificant thomas seymour is, as the youngest seymour son (even if henry arguably had a less distinctive career, it seems considerably more stable, and he was with their mother when she died). his personality was praised, he seems to be popular with members of court, but he seems to fail to achieve much off of that in his own right. his first known role was in the service of his kinsman, described as “servant to sir francis bryan”, so a minor role at court and likely a family affair. he was made a gentleman of the privy chamber in october 1536, almost certainly on account of his sister's marriage to the king, and had the honour of being one of the gentlement who held the canopy over baby prince edward’s canopy at his christening in 1537, and knighted at the same ceremony that saw edward made earl of hertford. numerous grants of lands and titles probably can be attributed to his (and his family’s) friendship with thomas cromwell — “these two are more likely to have come via cromwell's mediation rather than that of the queen”. whilst edward was inducted into the order of the garter in 1541, thomas took longer to get there, despite being nominated every year from 1543 to the year of his eventual induction: 1547.

so there is this strong set up for a resentment and jealousy, not specific to edward, but to this general sense of resistance to his own juvenile status. which is, to some extent, an inevitability within a system that relies of primogeniture: he is the third surviving son, after all. he has no claim to a solid inheritance. but it also smacks of entitlement when you remember how privileged he was, and how many rewards he enjoyed on behalf of his family. we can’t identify these thoughts or feelings in the historical man, and assuming them of him would be an anachronism, but i think it would be interesting to explore in an adaptation.

still, i think he could be interesting as a man desperate to assert himself: loades speculates that presumably thomas was a gentleman volunteer on the king’s ships for some considerable time before his being made captain of the sweepstake in 1537, as such a position would demand experience of which no evidence survives. i do enjoy the idea of this, and would like to carry it through into an adaptation - of thomas throwing himself at opportunities to try and make his mark. clearly, he otherwise must have proved himself, since he did receive rewards in 1532 - his first grant, forester of enfield chase, which he likely did not obtain through his brother or bryan, and certainly not his sister jane. so, it would not be unreasonable that thomas was capable of progressing his career on his own merit. but, i think there’s something significant in the fact that most of his ‘achievements’ were granted by virtue of his blood rather than any personal achievement, both as an indication of how parasitic the court world of tudor nobility was, but also as characterisation of a man who had a lifelong relationship with doing the utmost to climb to the top of said parasitic ladder. thomas was a monster a monstrous system created.

so he's tossed about in marriage negotiations with mary howard, up until around 1540, which he seems enthusiastic about (irrespective of the fact that mary very much is not), and these two families that do not like each other are forcibly trying to force themselves to be tied to each other, all in the name of the prestige of being a little closer to the royal circle.

on that note, it would be interesting to adapt his time as ambassador to the king of hungary in 1542, where he travels to nuremberg with charles howard, both brothers to late queens of england (katherine howard, and jane seymour), especially after thomas seymour was the one to confiscate the queen’s jewels from katherine. fun foreshadowing for the later drama between his wife (katherine parr) and anne stanhope, as well as a play on the timeline of his relationship with katherine parr, as their courtship is interrupted by henry viii’s marrying katherine, in an ironic repetition of recent history as the same seems to have taken place between katherine howard and thomas culpeper.

by 1543, he has met katherine parr, and she later claims that she would have married thomas after latimer died, but it's not known what thomas felt about her. perhaps controversially? i do think he had feelings for her: she was an attractive, resolved and intelligent woman. norton points out that they shared a common interest in religious reform, and arguably one can see a compatibility between them, considering parr’s noted love of finery. and moreso in an adaptation, if we characterise thomas as ambitious and trying to accumulate more wealth, power and prestige for himself, i don’t think parr was enough of a notably, wealthy widow to be that attractive to him without some kind of personal incentive. and i am not interested in characterising thomas (or any of these people) as fundamentally incapable of love.

and i do think thomas, with that constant, entitled sense of juvenile inadequacy, raging against the patriarchal, primogeniture system, while still determined to co-operate within it, and seemingly only able to cope with it if he is able to be at the top of the pecking order he feels he is oppressed by... being in a competition over a woman with henry viii, himself an aberration against the ideal of masculinity (old, obese, his virility thoroughly undermined in both his ability to father sons and his being cuckolded). well, i adore exploring toxic masculinity with sensitivity, but also, it’s fascinating and very funny. it completely exposes the ridiculousness of these systems and structures.

it’s the same with his relationship with edward vi: whilst i don't doubt he may well have felt genuine affection for his nephew (and i did like how the brothers saw edward, in part, as an extension of their dead sister in becoming elizabeth — and i am shamelessly stealing that idea), edward vi is also the embodiment of peak masculinity whilst inherently an inversion of it by virtue of his age.

primary sources: david loades, the seymours of wolf hall; elizabeth norton, catherine parr; elizabeth norton, the temptation of princess elizabeth; stephen alford, kingship and politics in the reign of edward vi

[persephones-domain]

Within the echo chambers of Zionist and Western enablers, it always winds back to the following discourse, like a broken record: "Why can't we establish our own Ethnostate? After all, other peoples have theirs, so why not us?"

I want to take this notion head-on to dismantle it: Does the current manifestation of Israel truly have an inherent right to exist? The unvarnished truth? No. The concept of nationhood need not adhere rigidly to ethnic boundaries, nor should it privilege one ethnicity over others. Numerous examples exist of nations whose identities encompass diverse ethnicities harmoniously.

An ethnostate, however, embraces the trappings of statehood—recognition, sovereignty, a monopoly on violence, and delineated borders—while concurrently restricting membership (citizenship, privilege, power) to a singular ethnicity. Essentially, it embodies a neo-colonial fascist regime metamorphosed into a pariah state. How can anyone, in good conscience, advocate for the perpetuation of such a system, knowing full well that Israel's very existence necessitates the continuous displacement, mutilation, dehumanisation, and slaughter of the indigenous population, i.e Palestinians? Ask yourselves: why do we persist in legitimising the existence of a state built upon the blood-soaked foundations of oppression and injustice? It's a question that demands not only introspection but also collective action in pursuit of genuine justice and reconciliation.

When you say it as it is, you get labeled as antisemitic, a facile retort that conveniently sidesteps the crux of the matter.

If you don't support Israel, then you obviously hate Jews, right?

"Why can't Jews have their own land? Are you saying Jews should be extinguished then?" - sounds familiar, right?

I'm going to momentarily set aside the deliberate conflation of Jewish identity with Zionist ideology, reserving that discourse for another time. Instead, I want to focus on a critical inquiry:

There's such a profound ignorance permeating this discourse as it reveals the stark misunderstanding of the not-so-nuanced dichotomy between IMMIGRATION and the pernicious scourge of SETTLER COLONIALISM.

Israel is based on the latter, not the former.

It's so important to underscore this critical distinction in emphasising that if Jewish individuals had undertaken a mass migration to Palestine to coexist symbiotically WITH Palestinians as equals, the root causes of this protracted conflict genocide would be swiftly eradicated, or better yet, it never would have existed in the first place.

Do you lot comprehend this logic or not? Can you grasp the heart of the issue? Our grievance, the grievance of the pro-Palestine crowd, does not stem from the presence of Jewish communities in the land, it comes down to the revulsion we feel at the ruthless expulsion of Palestinian families from their ancestral homes and lands; it's not a matter of an excessive influx of Jewish inhabitants, it's the rage at the brutal manifestation of forcible dispossession, deportation, mass killings, mass rape, torture, ethnic cleansing, dehumanisation of Palestinians.

It was never a matter of "too many Jews," it was always a matter of the fact that Palestinian land was stripped from its indigenous inhabitants to create a predominantly white, ultra-nationalist state that benefitted the West and acted as thorn in the flank of middle eastern countries - it's the exploitation, it's the fact that Palestinians were robbed of the right to their home, of the right to state-hood, of self-determination, it's the fact that there COULD have been a Palestinian State in which Jewish communities coexisted peacefully, as many had done in past centuries, but instead that strip of land was violated by an imperialist, ethnonationalist movement, which by the by had many commonalities with nazism: Zionism.

Do you lot grasp the crux of the matter now, or not?!

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Live Nation/Ticketmaster is buying Congress

I'm touring my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me THURSDAY (May 2) in WINNIPEG, then Calgary (May 3), Vancouver (May 4), Tartu, Estonia, and beyond!

Anything that can't go on forever eventually stops. Monopolies are intrinsically destabilizing and inevitably implode…eventually. Guessing which of the loathesome monopolies that make us all miserable will be the first domino is a hard call, but Ticketmaster is definitely high on my list.

It's not that event tickets are the most consequential aspect of our lives. The monopolies over pharma, fuel, finance, tech, and even beer are all more important to our day-to-day. But while Ticketmaster – and its many ramified tentacles, like Live Nation – may not be the most destructive monopoly in our world, but it pisses off people with giant megaphones and armies of rabid fans.

It's been a minute since Ticketmaster was last in the news, so let's recap. Ticketmaster bought out most of its ticketing rivals, then merged with Live Nation, the country's largest concert promoter, and bought out many of the country's largest music, stage and sports venues. They used this iron grip on the entire supply chain for performances and events to pile innumerable junk fees on every ticket sold, while drastically eroding the wages of the creative workers they nominally represented. They created a secret secondary market for tickets and worked with ticket-touts to help them run bots that bought every ticket within an instant of the opening of ticket sales, then ran an auction marketplace that made them gigantic fees on every re-sold ticket – fees the performers were not entitled to share in.

The Ticketmaster/Live Nation/venue octopus is nearly impossible to escape. Independent venues can't book Live Nation acts unless they use Ticketmaster for their tickets. Acts can't get into the large venues owned by Ticketmaster unless they sign up to have Live Nation book their tour. And when Ticketmaster buys a venue, it creams off the most successful acts, starving competing venues of blockbuster shows. They also illegally colluded with their vendors to jack up the price of concerts across the board:

https://pascrell.house.gov/uploadedfiles/ful.pdf

When Rebecca Giblin and I were writing Chokepoint Capitalism, our book about how tech and entertainment monopolies impoverish all kinds of creative workers, we were able to get insiders to go on record about every kind of monopoly, from the labels to Spotify, Kindle to the Big Five publishers and the Google-Meta ad-tech duopoly. The only exception was Ticketmaster/Live Nation: everyone involved in live performance – performers, bookers, club owners – was palpably terrified about speaking out on the record about the conglomerate:

https://chokepointcapitalism.com/

No wonder. The company has a long and notorious history of using its market power to ruin anyone who challenges it. Remember Pearl Jam?

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/pearl-jam-taking-on-ticketmaster-67440/

But anything that can't go on forever eventually stops. Not only is Ticketmaster a rapacious, vindictive monopolist – it's also an incompetent monopolist, whose IT systems are optimized for rent-extraction first, with ticket sales as a distant afterthought. This is bad no matter which artist it effects, but when Ticketmaster totally, utterly fucked up Taylor Swift's first post-lockdown tour, they incurred the wrath of the Swifties:

https://www.vox.com/culture/2022/11/21/23471763/taylor-swift-ticketmaster-monopoly

All of which explains why I've always given good odds that Ticketmaster would be first up against the wall come the antitrust revolution. It may not be the most destructive monopolist, but it is absurdly evil, and the people who hate it most are the most famous and beloved artists in the country.

For a while, it looked like I was right. Ticketmaster's colossal Taylor Swift fuckup prompted Senator Amy Klobuchar – a leading antitrust crusader – to hold hearings on the company's conduct, and led to the introduction of a raft of bills to rein in predatory ticketing practices. But as David Dayen writes for The American Prospect, Ticketmaster/Live Nation is spreading a fortune around on the Hill, hiring a deep bench of ex-Congressmen and ex-senior staffers (including Klobuchar's former chief of staff) and they've found a way to create the appearance of justice without having to suffer any consequences for their decades-long campaign of fraud and abuse:

https://prospect.org/power/2024-04-30-live-nation-strikes-up-band-washington/

Dayen opens his article with the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, which is always bracketed by a week's worth of lavish parties for Congress and hill staffers. One of the fanciest of these parties was thrown by Axios – and sponsored by Live Nation, with a performance by Jelly Roll (whose touring contract is owned by Live Nation). Attendees at the Axios/Live Nation event were bombarded with messages about the essential goodness of Live Nation (they were even printed on the cocktail napkins) and exhortations to support the Fans First Act, co-sponsored by Klobuchar and Sen John Cornyn (R-TX):

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/08/arts/music/fans-first-act-ticket-bill.html

Ticketmaster/Live Nation loves the Fans First Act, because – unlike other bills – it focuses primarily on the secondary market for tickets, and its main measure is a requirement for ticketing companies to disclose their junk fees upfront. Neither of these represents a major challenge to Ticketmaster/Live Nation's control over the market, which gives it the ability to slash performers' wages while jacking up prices for fans.

Fans First represents the triumph of Ticketmaster/Live Nation's media strategy, which is to blame the entire problem on bottom-feeding ticket-touts (who are mostly scum!) instead of on the single monopoly that controls the entire industry and can't stop committing financial crimes.

Axios isn't Live Nation's only partner in selling this distraction tactic. Over the past five years, the company has flushed gigantic sums of money through Washington. Its lobbying spend rose from $240k in 2018 to $1.1m in 2022, and $2.38m in 2023:

https://thehill.com/business/4431886-live-nation-doubled-lobbying-spending-to-2-4m-in-2023-amid-antitrust-threat/

The company has 37 paid lobbyists selling Congress on its behalf. 25 of them are former congressional staffers. Two are former Congressmen: Ed Whitfield (R-KY), a 21 year veteran of the House, and Mark Pryor (D-AR), a two-term senator:

https://www.bhfs.com/people/attorneys/p-s/mark-pryor

But perhaps the most galling celebrant in this lavish hymn to Citizen United is Jonathan Becker, Amy Klobuchar's former chief of staff, who jumped ship to lobby Congress on behalf of monopolists like Live Nation, who paid him $120k last year to sell their story to the Hill:

https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/lobbyists?cycle=2023&id=D000053134

Not everyone hates Fans First: it's been endorsed by the Nix the Tix coalition, largely on the strength of its regulation of secondary ticket sales. But the largest secondary seller in America by far is Live Nation itself, with a $4.5b market in reselling the tickets it sold in the first place. Fans First shifts focus from this sleazy self-dealing to competitors like Stubhub.

Fans First can be seen as an opening salvo in the long war against Ticketmaster/Live Nation. But compared to more muscular bills – like Klobuchar's stalled-out Unlock Ticketing Markets Act, it's pretty weaksauce. The Unlocking act will "prevent exclusive contracts between ticketing services and venues" – hitting Ticketmaster/Live Nation where it hurts, right in the bank-account:

https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/4/following-senate-judiciary-committee-hearing-klobuchar-blumenthal-introduce-legislation-to-increase-competition-in-live-event-ticketing-markets

It's not all gloom. Dayen reports that Ticketmaster's active lobbying in favor of Fans First has made many in Congress more skeptical of the bill, not less. And Congress isn't the only – or even the best – way to smash Ticketmaster's criminal empire. That's something the DoJ's antitrust division could power through with a lot less exposure to the legalized bribery that dominates Congress.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/30/nix-fix-the-tix/#something-must-be-done-there-we-did-something

Image: Matt Biddulph (modified) https://www.flickr.com/photos/mbiddulph/13904063945/

CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

--

Flying Logos (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Over_$1,000,000_dollars_in_USD_$100_bill_stacks.png

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

[0-theeshine-0]

Soooo, this is Olly!! Olly Armstrong!

Yesterday I posted my OC Kenneth and mentioned this lil cutie patootie. He’s more of a recluse and is sorta shy, but when he’s comfortable he can be HILARIOUS. Some interests he has are reading, listening to Jazz, and going on nature walks.

Fun fact: Armstrong is not his real last name! It’s one he picked out for himself. The backstory about this isn’t so fun though… His family has an extremely horrible criminal record, so as a way to separate himself he created a new last name for himself. Since he loves Jazz, he took the same last name as Louis Armstrong since he is one of his favorite musicians. He then moved away, became a scholar, and found a better life with a new religion and set of virtues.

The way Kenneth and Olly met was on accident… Olly was sitting at a café enjoying a cup of tea and reading his book on the outside patio. However, Kenneth was running from a pack of wild dogs and sped by… Olly, this poor clueless owl, was then grabbed and used as a human shield. Surprisingly… it worked? The dogs sort of just… looked at him. Anyways, Kenneth basically carries him all the way inside the café while backing away slowly from the dogs, separating him from his tea and book. Clearly, Olly was very stressed, shocked, and upset. He snapped at Kenneth once they were inside! But all Kenneth could do was leave his number on a piece of paper with the words “Sorry! Running from someone!” And disappeared… Olly was so offended. But eventually they work it out yadda yadda blah blah blah.

Olly is always one to help! He loves to be of service and is always prepared. He’s terrified of life’s unpredictability, so he tends to have plenty of plans, routines, and patterns. Preparation might as well be his middle name. And honestly, I think that’s why he and Kenneth get along. They’re so opposite that they compensate where the other lacks… For example, Olly realllllllyyyyy struggles with spontaneity. But Kenneth is a “go with the flow” kind of guy that drags Olly out of his comfort zone.

Oh yeah! To follow up on the board games thing… Olly said, “Oh my gosh. He is SOOO unfair. One time we were playing Monopoly and it was pretty neck and neck. But then the minute I got 100 dollars more than him he FLIPPED THE BOARD GAME??? WHY?? HE WAS DOING JUST FINE… Oh also! I wanna address the hygiene thing and for the record, I tried to help… He just hates it. No idea why…”

Anyways, yeah. This is basically Olly! He’s such a cutie pie!

[louisisalarrie]

Hi! Let me start by saying that I am a follower of your blog because I enjoy your take on things. Not because I hate follow you like some people seem to do. With that said, I’m very excited you get to meet Louis on Sunday! How fun for you! But I have an honest question. Not one to argue with you or even question you. But something I’ve wrestled with myself. Since you know all of the lies we’ve been fed about F being his son, and you see the gaslighting that goes on regularly from Louis to his fans. Most recently, the infamous chicken parm tweet, how do you separate that as a fan of his? How do you get so excited to meet him without wanting to look him in the face and say please stop lying. Maybe it’s just me. I’m just having a hard time with him continuing to lie to us and scold us and then out of the other side of his mouth he says he has the most freedom he’s ever had. That just tells me he choosing to lie and use F for his gain. His gain means money and fans. I don’t know… again, not trying to judge you. Just trying to understand and figure out where my brain is. I hope you have a wonderful time at the show!

Hey anon! Thank you for the kind words. It’s perfectly normal to feel this way, and a lot of us have these moments as well! So don’t stress x

I think what’s important here overall is to remember that record labels, managers, everyone involved in Louis’ team make money from Louis’ fame and publicity too. It’s certainly not just louis, and a huuuuuge chunk of it goes towards them, particularly if he’s signed to a Global Deal which I imagine he would be. Remember how in one direction they were worked to the absolute bone? Barely having a break, nonstop touring, recording every second they could (a good example is that one scene from This Is Us where zayn was asleep for 10 minutes before he was woken up to record more vocals) and they were just kids. They signed a contract without a personal lawyer due to X Factor rules, were taken advantage of, and used as a money making machine for S*co and his bunch of monkeys. But I’m sure you’re already very aware of this, so let’s fast forward to 13 years down the track with this in mind…

Louis was roped into a wild stunt contract, also known as bbg, with a half assed promise of more freedom for him, a potential end result of him and harry coming out, and probably a bunch of other promises and opportunities thrown his way if he signed off on it. He received solo PR while still being in a band, meaning he had a bit of a safety blanket if the band broke up and wouldn’t immediately disappear from the public eye (like Liam did). And you know what? BBG was probably meant to go for a much shorter time than it has. I imagine the proposed stunt, and the alterations it’s had over the years, look pretty bloody different. But without going into too much detail on that stunt specifically, Louis is incredibly smart in the way he communicates with us. He does juuuuust enough to meet his contractual obligations. He knows what he can get away with. He knows his fandom is majority larries. He knows what we talk about and what we say.

The consequences if he didn’t sign this contract? Probably pretty dire, if I’m honest. When you have one of the biggest labels in the world (the other two are WME & Universal) throwing you a bone, it’s pretty hard to turn it down. These 3 labels (also known as The Big 3 in the industry) have a monopoly over the music industry and can make or break someone pretty damn quick. So I imagine he would’ve signed to cover his own ass and not lose his whole career, because he’s been manipulated into that. The music industry can be evil and brutal and it’s all about money. All about PR.

Particularly in this day and age where we are oversaturated with celebrities, media, etc., it’s hard to stand out from the crowd. The Big 3 are good at what they do, and that’s why they are The Big 3. They know how to do PR, they know how to write contracts and get artists to sign off on them, they know how to dangle carrots and make deals that benefit themselves greatly (oftentimes more than the artist). So being in louis’ position, it was more like he was coerced into it, if that makes sense?

Sorry, im tired from work and rambling now, but have you heard the phrase “separate the art from the artist”? It’s an interesting take that some people agree with, so they can enjoy that artist’s music while ignoring their faults/bad choices/problematic behaviour, because the music is what’s important. I don’t necessarily agree with that take, and I’m not gonna go down a rabbit hole on it, but I do think some fans do this with louis. And that helps them still enjoy the music, without getting involved in bbg or any other stunts, ya know? It helps to just think about the cutie happy wholesome louis that we know and love, and not his PR image. And that is absolutely fair enough, I just can’t do that because I know too much and I’ve been here for too long and I WILL see this through hahahah.

Okay now to actually answer your question, about me personally, of course I would want to tell him to leave his contract and get a better deal and come out with Harry and trust that his fans will still love him and he’ll still have a career, but that’s not possible. It’s not possible because I’d get throat punched by security, but it’s also not possible because that’s not realistic. He knows what we all say, and what we think of larry. He understands our frustration and can literally see it online every day. His hands are tied, until they’re not. And we can’t do anything about that. So it’s just about appreciating him and his music because we can’t control anything else.

So, just remember that he’s beautiful and sweet and caring, watch some old one direction videos/larry deep dives, and take a breath because we know him, and he’s not this asshole that his image has radically become.

[tessa-quayle]

I just wanted to say I love the positivity around the discussion of age gap fics and fics that don’t have age gaps because both sides have a mutual respect for one another and I think for me personally it all comes down to a preference on what I like (which is what makes fan-fiction so unique because there’s something out there for everyone) and I’m learning more about my own writing and how I am naturally trying to write more non age gap fics not because I don’t like them but just cause I want to make sure all of my readers feel included.

I think positive discussions such as this are so enriched and healthy for the fandom and I hope more of these can take place!

Anyway, enough of my rambling! I hope you have a wonderful rest of your Sunday honey bun 🩷

-Gi

Hello Gi!

Thanks for your lovely message - I am on the periphery of the fandom so I am glad to hear the discussion has been mostly positive and not too contentious.

But I also want to note that disagreement and discomfort are ok? We have our preferences with regard to what we want to consume or create, it’s human.

I see variations of these fandom (not unique to Pedro characters) tensions play out many times in other spheres, and what I hope for is that when people are confronted with reasons why some might find their work problematic (whether we’re debating canon compliant or divergent characterization, issues with age gap, or how some fics may have a colonizer gaze on Javi P, use of Spanish language, etc) or when -isms or issues with representation and inclusivity are pointed out, maybe we just sit with that discomfort (if the criticism is delivered respectfully, constructively) and just consider why it provokes that reaction even if we end up all doing our own thing and/or disagreeing.

(I mean - I write an OFC, everyone clowns on OFCs, I’m basking in my unpopularity knowing I am not entitled to an audience 🤣).

Disagreement or different preferences don’t mean hate, policing, banning, etc. from the beginning I’ve been a broken record framing these resources and fic rec lists as a “yes and” issue, you do you, this is not a zero sum game, let’s resist the scarcity mindset.

To put it in crass economic terms, it’s supply and demand. There’s a demand for a diverse array of fics, and there will be a supply that will attempt to meet it. Not everyone’s gonna buy what you’re selling (you being the collective you, not you personally 😜), and if you’re confident in your product and especially if you enjoy a healthy popularity (think profit) margin, and something else comes on the market? Keep doing you. It shouldn’t be a threat. Cause are we building community or wanting a monopoly?

Sorry for my rambling answer. Thanks for the ask and keep writing all your wonderful stories xo

- D

[theinconvenientlifestyle]

GB News has paid Conservative MPs more than £660,000 in appearance fees and salaries since it launched, against just £1,100 to Labour MPs, Guardian analysis shows.

The payments, recorded in the parliamentary register of interests, come amid growing concerns among centrists about the channel’s sway over the Tory party’s direction.

Some Conservatives also say they have worries that if Paul Marshall, the hedge fund owner who has a 41% stake in GB News, gains control of the Telegraph titles in a process that is due to resume next month, this could entrench a populist echo chamber for the party’s MPs and supporters.

“It would be a worry if we ended up with what you might call a monopoly of opinion in the Conservative media – as a party we’re not fans of monopolies,” one former cabinet minister said.

The amounts paid to MPs give only part of the story in that many other parliamentarians, including from Labour, regularly appear on the channel without payment. But the £660,262 handed to Conservative MPs in the past two years illustrates the way GB News has transformed UK political broadcasting by routinely using sitting Tories as presenters or contracted pundits.

The biggest single beneficiary was Jacob Rees-Mogg, with the former business secretary paid nearly £325,000 in the last year. He currently receives slightly more than £29,000 a month as a presenter for 40 hours of work, or £729 an hour.

Lee Anderson, who was hired as a Tory MP but is an independent since losing the whip at the weekend over alleged Islamophobic comments, is on a salary of £100,000 a year, plus £50 extra a month to display a GB News logo on his X profile page.

The other big earners are the husband and wife MP team of Esther McVey and Philip Davies, who have been paid just under £130,000 and slightly over £60,000 respectively as presenters.

The only two Labour MPs to have been paid for appearing are Rosie Duffield and Barry Gardiner, who were paid £500 and £600 respectively as one-off guests.

While Ofcom has investigated GB News on a number of occasions, a group of senior broadcasting veterans said last week that the broadcast regulator was failing to properly enforce impartiality rules for a channel that sometimes uses Conservative MPs to interview parliamentary colleagues.

Aides to Marshall say he has no editorial input into GB News and would not seek this if he were to buy the Telegraph titles. But some Tories worry that common ownership could see populist voices such as that of Nigel Farage – a GB News presenter who also writes a Telegraph column – increasingly dominate the Conservative discourse.

Marshall’s views came to prominence last week when the campaign group Hope Not Hate reported he had used a personal X account to like or repost messages including a post about potential “civil war” in Europe because of migration. A spokesperson for Marshall said this “small and unrepresentative sample” did not represent his views.

One centrist Tory MP said: “In theory, if Paul Marshall was going to become the Rupert Murdoch of the Conservative right, that would be a worry. But in real life I’m not sure him owning the Telegraph would particularly change what is there anyway. The Telegraph is already the broadsheet newspaper version of GB News. I’m not sure he would pull them much further to the right. I struggle to see how much worse it can get.”

The Barclay brothers, who ceded control of the Telegraph titles to Lloyds Bank last year after failing to repay a debt, are trying to sell the papers and the Spectator magazine to a consortium backed by the UAE.

The culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, triggered inquiries by Ofcom and the Competition and Markets Authority into the bid, which is led by the investment firm RedBird IMI. These are expected to report back from about 11 March and Frazer could make a decision soon after, with options including approval of the plan or more scrutiny.

If the Redbird plan is blocked, as has been advocated for by a number of Conservative MPs including Rees-Mogg on GB News, Marshall has been mooting a bid alongside the US billionaire Ken Griffin.

Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London and historian of the Conservatives, said the notion of Marshall helping shape Conservative views would in part simply mirror the party’s long history with supportive press barons. But there were some new factors at play, he said.

“The advent of the social media world, which, if you like, GB News is part of, has completely blown up the deference that once existed in the party. It provides an alternative route to fame and fortune for MPs, who probably we would never have heard of,” Bale said.

“In this attention economy, various platforms and outlets have to outbid each other for clicks. So if GB News becomes even more radically rightwing populist then the Telegraph, whether or not it’s owned by Marshall, will have to catch up in order to compete. So there is a kind a ratchet effect.”

A spokesperson for GB News said the lineup of presenters was “entirely a matter for the discretion of the editorial team”, adding: “For the avoidance of any doubt, Sir Paul Marshall has no involvement in editorial decisions.”

[fanficfish]

Ttte ranch au but its mdoern

im bored and listened to too much of the Peoclaimers again. Oops.

Main Post

None of this is canon to my au btw its all for funsies. Basically this is if the au was set in a time with like. Computers and cellphones and whatever.

Donald and Douglas have had "I'm Gonna Walk 500 Miles" throb at them so many times by both the other ranch hands (back when they first joined officially) and by visitors who heard their stories (later on). They don't mind, since they get to sing a good excuse to break out into song.

Theyre also the ones who own a shelf full of records and CDs and have a Spotify playlist for everything. They have one made for each person on the ranch that they interact with on a semi regular basis.

duck is into those true crime podcasts. Oliver is mildly terrified for his well-being but can't say anything when he himself has spent hours consumed by the Lords of the Ring. Yes he can speak Elvish, no he doesn't want to talk about if he can remeciste half the books by memory or not.

Gordon FaceTimes his brother, and even some of his cousins, all the tiem. Scott always shows off wherever he is in the world and Gordon grumbles wheneve this phone dies halfway through a call.

James has a tiktok. Undoetunatley.

Edward watches so much Maaterpiece. He's also watched Once Upon a Time. He sometimes even manages to con the others into joining him, and both Gordon and Henry hate that they somewhat enjoyed some of the series. Edward noticed and now there's three people running around on the ranch arguing over Game of Thromes and Downtown Abbey. Good times.

Tony loves monopoly. Especially with Thomas and Percy, with Daisy and Mavis for spice.

thomas has a mild kbsession with chocolate, as does Percy. On Easter and Halloween they can be found logging out kn candy. Toby enables them.

james got a tindr account and made a fiver sometime not long after his TikTok blew up. He defintiely gets small modelling jobs in his spare time, and gets it as a good chance for free cosmetic items.

Duck watches a lot of The Food Network, and some he, Percy, and Thomas have food network marathons. Duck loves Maaterchef, Perfy likes the Great British Baking Show, and Thomas thinks Chooped or Who Beat Bobby Flay are the best. (Man how did I not absorb any info when I watched so much food network? Huh....wild..-)

Duncan is a gamer and he, Rusty. peter Sam, and Sir Handel have some royal Mario kart tournaments. Compete with saltiness and a lot of swearing from certain parties when Rusty beats them all. Fred videos it and laughs.

Among Us

Henry is low-key considering becoming a park ranger. He settles for junior ranger books and the ranch life.

Someone turned the barn into both a wifi hotspot and a Pokémon go stop and everyone is denying this. Especially Donald and Douglas.

Football night is game night on the ranch and nothings stopping it from Happening, ever. Gordon's express doesn't run starting from the last minutes of the pregame show to the next afternoon, mail is delivered by either anyone not watching (usually Emily, she isn't as interested just opinionated on the matter), or alternate transport. Bertie the bus driver has his happiest and fulelst load days on these weekends.

Sir Topham Hatt joins in on the Super Bowl weekend fun too btw. If the team you cheer for wins and it's one he's cheering for, you get free rounds (read: he'll buy you abStarbucks drink.)

edward, Toby, and Duke all invest too much in Starbucks. (Adaptation of @weirdowithaquill 's thing in the ERS with engines and teabags)

Bill and Ben have too many whopper cushions and other prank items in their arsenal.

I'll add more if I think of any.

[mylittlegemlins]

Nimona Review part 2 (english)

Some of the transitions are pretty cool, the scene where Ballister leaves the house and goes straight to jail seemed perfect to me, but I see complaints about the closet scene as they go from arguing very intensely in a dark place to a scene where they don't there is more noise than that of Nimona coming out like a rhinoceros with a blow to a lighted room. Some of it doesn't feel right.

Turning to the characters, Nimona is the protagonist and she is someone who is easy to get attached to, her redesign is beautiful, her comedy, her expressions of fury are funny and her drawings are something I want to hang on my wall, but she is also someone who She has been through a lot of pain, and they are open with her boss about how she feels about it, her eyes full of disappointment in the strong scenes make me want to hug her.

When she shows herself as a villain she gives me vibes that she could perfectly well be the daughter of Dementia and Black Hat, since it is capable of generating a massacre in an epic sequence of one minute, I have never seen someone kick so many people in the form of an ostrich, it is impressive, Balliste has puppy eyes that make him adorable, but In addition to this, he is the father you always wanted, and the only one with enough patience to put up with Nimona, I feel that Golden did not shine much in this movie, but I like him much better than in the novel, the scene in which he yells at him queen that cutting arms is not a show of love, is the perfect representation of when you want to shout everything you think but you choose to fit into society.

However, when it seems like he's showing Ballister that he's being manipulated while watching the director's video only to finish it off with Nimona being the one manipulating him, it's a little disappointing but it shows you how much brainwashing there is in the institute, and How much trust there is between these characters, Balliste trusts Golden but also Nimona and Golden trusts the director despite being in conflict with her boyfriend. This is how perfect the relationship between the characters is built, the relationship between Nimona and Ballister fills me with tenderness. Nimona is the one who puts all the initiative to be able to be friends with Blackheart, she is the one who rescues him from prison and offers him her support, in addition to telling him directly that if everyone hates him, it is the same as her, as if he had no choice but to be their friend since they are all they have, not only is Nimona ready to make friends after 1000 years of being alone, but she wants to be with someone she admires because she identifies with him, starting from that point, the moments they have to Getting to know each other happens very quickly, one day they destroy the institute, in the afternoon they destroy the market, and it seems that at night they interview the guard who recorded the video, but I love that Nimona is willing to talk, she never reveals exactly what it is, but yes who come up and take the time to play monopoly and dance to celebrate. Those scenes fill me with tenderness, The scene where Nimona is having a nightmare and her paternal/boss/figure tucks them in and tells them that they are is home…. God I'm dying of love.

The movie slaps Disney in the face showing a clear romance from the first minute, and a kiss to end pride month with a flourish, I adore you Noelle. The fact that they premiered it at pride fits like a glove considering the problems they had producing this movie after Blue Sky closed, and yet they still put references to the studio in the movie! Stay to appreciate the credits for a moment because the song is gold, and me and my brother were dancing to the soundtrack, this girl has good taste in music, the song is called T-rex by K. Flay.

Overall it's a very funny movie. I also loved the world building. Something that goes against "Elements" that shows you almost nothing about the cloud people and the earth people, while in this movie the townspeople interact with the protagonists and with the press all the time, they show you what kind of world medieval futuristic is the one you find yourself in, they tell you about the wall of what was outside, the hatred towards the show and the devotion towards Gloreth that people had for generations, how advanced are their flying cars and their screens that put out the news live, contrasting with the army of knights and the statues of hundreds of years, and more importantly, it shows you a world where society is as classist and prejudiced as in reality, who prefer to leave a helpless baby as long as they avoid problems, that they do not respect the opinions of their own queen and that they believe the director's defense despite the fact that it took up to days in saying it. Of course, it has many exaggerations with the purpose of entertaining, but who has not seen the effect of certain societies such as the Asian one that does not dare to touch a colleague who faints just so that someone else takes the drama or even the medical expenses?

There are moments where you can see the 20% that surely they had to do fast, because I feel the scene of the demon baby is too bright Although there are many differences with the graphic novel, the message is the same, an allegory to the social rejection suffered by queer people, and they do not bother in the slightest to hide their hints (we can talk about "you're gonna die in the closet" lmao)

Nimona is obviously gender fluid, I love that they're so much more open and complains that they're the monster. Because both in the novel and in the movie, Nimona was not a serial killer when they started calling her a monster, but she became the """""monster""""" that the institute wanted her to be so that they would destroy her and remain like the heroes of his story.

By the way, the scenes in the previews in which Nimona is drawn as a bird or when he tells Balliste how to like the videos don't appear in the movie, so I'm happy they bothered to animate content to promote it. In this version there is no indication that GoldenLion has sliced off the arm of her boyfriend on purpose, something that seemed very accurate to me because it does sound toxic to go out with someone who disabled you. By the way, what the heck with the arrow scene, Nimona admits that it hurts her but she doesn't scream at her pain like a human being.

I like the ending. Far from saying goodbye, Nimona greets Balliste as soon as she manages to recover her form. I would qualify the film as +7 just because they kept 2 drops of blood. I am proud of Nate, I already admired her work on Netflix because of the She-ra reboot, it took her two studios to get her work recognized on Netflix even though she started as a simple graduation project. Now the whole world will be able to know your girl. Nimona.

spanish version: https://www.tumblr.com/mylittlegemlins/721658744305516544/nimona-review-spanish?source=share

part1: https://www.tumblr.com/mylittlegemlins/721661075018350592/nimona-review-english?source=share

[starmaniamania]

Starmania d'hier à aujourd'hui - Wodrascka

Just finished this book! I found it... not good! lol Basically mostly gossip about who liked/didn't like whom, a compilation of interviews and fan site pages, and suuuuuper dated language about LGBT themes even though the book was only written in 2018.

But a few interesting facts & tidbits that I didn't know/didn't remember:

Michel Berger's father was a pioneer of kidney transplants and dialysis and would see international stars like Rita Hayworth at his home office (before becoming partially amnesiac after a lung procedure he insisted on staying conscious for (??) and leaving his family behind as a result)

His mother was a concert pianist and the family's home had two grand pianos facing each other in the living room

Between his pop tunes and Starmania, Berger composed a conceptual piano/symphony/rock instrumental album called "Puzzle" (1971)

He lived in the USA for a bit and met/hung out with Ira Gerschwin (George's brother)

Everyone in the original Starmania troupe seems to have 1) admired France Gall's talent and 2) HATED HER lol

She says she was deathly afraid of singing "Monopolis" every night because the song wasn't written for her vocal range and she thought she wouldn't make it

Diane Dufresne told Balavoine that "French people can't sing" and he was devastated

She seems to have hated her role? Apparently she thought or had been told Stella would be the main character, but then they kept cutting the part (she says she "fished the Adieux d'un Sex Symbole" out of the trash can), maybe because Berger thought it was too outrageous. She refused to go on tour after the 79 Paris run, which might have killed it (when 30k tickets had been sold in France and Québec)

Tom O'Horgan wanted everyone to be naked during the "Procession du Gourou" bit which signified an orgy, but only 3 members of the troupe agreed and they ended up wearing little togas instead (except of course Diane Dufresne who was topless.)

[More under the cut]

The 1979 show's original stage was set at an incline, and opened up in the middle to reveal a 2-meter/6.5-foot deep pit which was the Underground Café -- and sometimes people fell into the pit.

It also made use of early laser technology, and the cast had to be careful not to be in the path of the beams because it would give you radiation.

Tom O'Horgan showed up in Paris with his full crew of stage techs and none of them spoke French. Berger & Gall had hired a very prim & proper translator who would very reluctantly translate the waves of insults he would shoot at the troupe, which he found unprofessional and bad.

If you believe Fabienne Thibault, she single-handedly cast all of Starmania and then saved it multiple times lol

President François Mittérand was a fan of the 88 version (which I knew) but comedian Coluche was too; he was petitioning Berger to have Johnny Hallyday record a version of "Stone." (Hallyday was going to be Johnny Rockfort in the original production but then Berger & Gall found Balavoine instead.)

Maurane famously left the 88 production in the lurch; she said she would only sign one-month contracts and renew them at the end of each month, but once she decided not to sign again she just stopped showing up instead of finishing her contract. Réjane Perry, who had never seen the show, was told she would have 3 weeks to learn the role and ended up having 2 days. She says she did her first show without rehearsing any of the duets or ensemble moments with the rest of the cast.

In 1988, Wenta as Sadia put out a cigarette into her hand during her jealousy fit over Johnny/Cristal; she had a thick band-aid in the palm of her hand to act as a protection but one night she missed it & burnt herself instead. She says she kept going and waited to be in her dressing room to scream "like a Tex Avery cartoon."

Fabienne Thibault says she hated the Lewis Furey version so much she was in tears by the end, and that it lacked vocal diversity: "On tombe dans l'uniformité canadienne, avec ces voix issues de la culture nord-américaine qui, à mon avis, distillent très peu d'émotion." "You end up with Canadian uniformity, with voices coming from that North-American tradition which, in my opinion, produce very little emotion." Tell us what you really think, Fabienne!

France Gall didn't authorize the Québecois lyrical versions of the show, which is why there's no official recording of them. Apparently she sicced her lawyers on Plamondon because of it.

The book ends with Plamondon talking about his new project, a 40-year anniversary revival which would be a "blockbuster" -- our 2022 production! :)

Onto my next book, which I think is Fabienne Thibault's own one and probably will tell me many more of her petty feelings towards France Gall lol