#it's the larger mainstream media and general audience

[orionsgirdle]

with a lot of this alicent hightower analysis something becomes very clear about how women are perceived in media. when she has a baby she gets the #MOTHER character tag and all other traits disappear. she must now exist solely for her children. all her motivations must be related to her children.

compare that to how viserys is treated by the fandom and the mainstream media. yes he is a father, but he's also a husband who loved his first wife (even though he killed her). he loved his brother. he loved his valyrian history, his little dragon figurines. people have no trouble understanding him as a full-fledged, flawed character with conflicting motivations.

alicent though? why is her sole focus not on making her son the king like in the book? how dare she have conflicting, contradictory desires outside of what her children want? it's like if a mother's reason for existing is not her children then what is the point of her being there?

[myemuisemo]

"On the Great Alkali Plain" part 2, from Letters from Watson, arrived in my inbox this morning, bringing with it a predictable cloud of dust from approaching horses (since this isn't a George R.R. Martin novel, so we're not going to introduce characters just to kill them off immediately).

But what a caravan! When the head of it had reached the base of the mountains, the rear was not yet visible on the horizon. Right across the enormous plain stretched the straggling array, waggons and carts, men on horseback, and men on foot. Innumerable women who staggered along under burdens, and children who toddled beside the waggons or peeped out from under the white coverings.

Either we're running late on the Oregon Trail (since Doyle did not have social media to live-blog progress across the dusty waste) or the year 1847 is important, and these are Mormons.

“Shall I go forward and see, Brother Stangerson,” asked one of the band.

These have got to be Mormons.

“Nigh upon ten thousand,” said one of the young men; “we are the persecuted children of God—the chosen of the Angel Merona.”

Tell me you're a Mormon without telling me you're a Mormon.

“We are the Mormons,” answered his companions with one voice.

OMG, they're Mormons.

This makes the geographic names a little dicey -- the Mormon Trail ran through Wyoming, similar but not identical to today's I-80, so the Rio Grande River should be nowhere nearby -- but Doyle didn't have access to Google Maps, and it's not like his readers in the UK would go factcheck. Even with the Transcontinental Railroad completed back in 1869, most places in the Great American Desert were still remote in the 1880s, and California on the far end was still feeling the effects of isolation. Doyle also misspells the Angel Moroni and uses a masculine-ending name on a Sierra, so he's working from popular myth and the memory of things he's read. I wonder how many letters with corrections he received.

(At the time Doyle was writing, "Mormon" was the term used by the group themselves. Since about the 1980s, church leadership started urging the use of "Latter-Day Saints" instead. When I lived in Phoenix, that's near a big LDS population in Mesa, so I wince at using the older term. From here on out, if I'm quoting Doyle, I'll use "Mormon," but if I'm talking, I'll stick to LDS.)

The big reason the LDS wagon train is headed west is because they practiced polygamy at the time, and this was considered both illegal and immoral in larger U.S. society. (That's not a critique of polyamory today, when enthusiastic concept and clear rules are normalized.)

So far Doyle's account of the LDS party is generally positive -- they're organized, efficient, knowledgeable about their surroundings, prepared for danger, and responsible toward people needing rescue, if a bit holier-than-thou -- but I can't believe he's going to handle polygamy with anything other than distaste.

Polygamy is the thing LDS have been known for (to their chagrin after the mainstream LDS church banned it), so at the end of this section, Doyle's original audience is split into two groups:

Readers who have no real idea what a "Mormon" is and accept it as just one more crazy American thing, who now figure Lucy is rescued and wonder what goes wrong later to lead to murder; and

Readers who know about polygamy and are feeling dread for Lucy.

[asexual-means-no-attraction]

Being in a very mogai-infested fandom is pain, but I'm probably most annoyed by demisexuality being so rampant as a HC. There is no reason for that label to even exist. I just came across a fanfic and decided to read it just to see what the author considers to be "demisexual" and:

[[Casual intimacy isn’t his thing if he’s being honest. The idea of sex without the weight of romance isn’t something he feels he’s comfortable with.]]

That's... literally normal. In fact, it's what I was specifically taught as a child was normal. That sex should only be had with the person I loved, and preferably was already engaged/married to. Because my family is catholic and that's their conservative opinion on sex.

It's totally fine to not be into one night stands or other hookups, but you are not a different sexuality because of it, otherwise being catholic is also a sexuality I guess.

(I didn't proof read any of this, so apologies now)

Gonna go off on a tangent here, but I swear it's related:

Growing up I watched a lot of Disney. And something I noticed a lot in any non animation show or movie, was just how rich everyone was. A house would have only a father and daughter, but have 5 bedrooms, 3 baths, a massive living room and dining room, and a state of the art full blown security system that at the time I didn't actually believe could actually exist cuz no 'normal' person could have that. And that would be the standard for many movies that were very much supposed to be realistic in the settings. They'd even say these people have average jobs. Even the apartment in wizards of Waverly place was HUGE. With each kid having their own bed rooms significantly larger than mine. They literally own a family restaurant that they live upstairs in. But the apartment was bigger than my childhood home. And this is coming from a kid who grew up middle class, the most well of between all my friends. If I were to base what the normal American home looks like based on the media I watched as a kid, I would have a very warped idea of what homes look like. If you actually look at the stats, not even my middle class home is normal.

Mainstream media is produced by rich people (the workers under them not so much, but the actual person in charge generally), and that can easily give a bias or warped view of what's "normal." This is even more exaggerated by the fact that characters in mainstream media are designed to be interesting not normal.

So if you're basing your idea of attraction, dating, sex, etc on what you see in the media, it's going to be warped. Which I feel like ties into your comments quite well.

Usually when I see people try to explain what is and isn't normal for experiences of attraction I get examples of media and fiction. Usually examples of characters having one night stands or being playboys. Which:

1. Flirty play boy characters are common in the media because it's easy to make them a dynamic character. Giving them character development or to gain special feelings quickly give them a whole new perspective that audiences love (this isn't a bad thing for the record).

2. Most irl people who are like these fictional characters don't get nearly as many one night stands as they or the media claim. They aren't nearly as much of a player as they seem. And they're also usually pretty annoying unlike the characters in the shows who are made to be likeable. It's unrealistic in the first place.

3. Media itself is not a good standard of what is normal as it's entirely biased on what the producer deems as normal or average. See my tangent at the beginning. The characters aren't a good way to figure out what's "normal."

I have had people explain things usually actual people as examples which I think ties into my earlier rant in exactly the same way.

How you view the people around you (or more accurately your perception of them) is biased. You have a limited social circle and can't really base what's standard for society off of it. I'm guilty of this too. We all are. It's a very natural thing to assume everyone is like the people that you have experienced with-- for better or for worse..

If you're in your teens and have teenage friends, it's gonna be really easy to feel like they're all obsessed with sex or dating. It's a new thing that you're (hopefully) just now really learning about and exploring. It's easy to go a little overboard with something new. And it's also normal to not be interested in something new. Some kids are gonna be really into dating while others aren't. Some are gonna go from one person to another, others aren't. Cuz no one knows what they're doing. No one knows their boundaries yet. No one knows what they want outta relationship yet. They're figuring it out. Whether you are interested in it or not-- both ends of the spectrum and everything in between is totally normal.

As a young adult you're still figuring things out so it's the same thing. Your own journey to figuring out what/who/how/where you want a relationship is gonna be unique then someone else's. It's normal for each person to have a different journey. This alone isn't some new identity.

Lastly, on a final note. The amount of people who want "sex without romance" is a lot smaller than we're led to believe. And the people who do feel that way are the ones who are abnormal. They may have trauma that influences it, they may not. They could be likeable, they could not. They may be abusers who just want someone to abuse, they may not have any ill will at all. They may be a shitty person, they may not. Regardless, our society pushes "romance goes with sex" a whole hell of a lot more than "sex and romance are separate." Like... a lot so. Historically and in the modern day.

So if your entire reasoning for a whole brand new identity is "I want to connect before we date or have sex," I need you to know how much that is actually extremely normal. And how much you've been influenced by biased media, possibly a shitty friend or ex, and just a warped pov in general (not necessarily of any fault of your own).

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Adam Wren at Politico Magazine:

NEW YORK CITY — Brian Glenn was about to go live. Amid the hundreds of reporters crowded outside a Manhattan courthouse on the first morning of Donald Trump’s criminal trial last week, Glenn, the director of programming for Right Side Broadcasting Network, would be delivering the news from the circus straight to hundreds of thousands of faithful MAGA viewers. Glenn looked like a typical television newscaster, but a bright blue and white pin he wore on the lapel of his suit set him apart from others in the press corral: It featured a big, bold “47” — a nod to Trump’s possible return to the presidency, which was gifted to him by the Trump campaign. Surrounded by Trump fans, Glenn cut the figure of a former homecoming king navigating the crowd at the big game. People wearing red caps kept coming up asking to be interviewed, a request he repeatedly obliged. In between, he pulled out his iPhone and flashed me photos from when he had shown up at this same spot to cover Trump’s arraignment last April. Pointing to one image, he singled out his girlfriend, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. (He calls himself the other half of “MAGA America’s favorite couple.”) He recounted how his crew had to cut their coverage short that day after Greene was mobbed by press and onlookers. “I probably physically bulldozed a dozen people getting her out of there,” Glenn said.

As Glenn spoke, he stopped mid-sentence, a voice breaking through his AirPods. “30 seconds?” I heard him say. He quickly returned to his mark and began to broadcast to an audience of what would soon blossom into more than 200,000 RSBN viewers spread across YouTube and Rumble, the right-coded video service. “This is Biden’s witch hunt,” Glenn told his viewers. “This is what this is. This is Biden’s trial. This is his ability, or effort right now, to take President Trump off the campaign trail.” Right Side Broadcasting Network dates back to 2016, when stay-at-home dad Joe Seales launched the online channel in order to live stream Trump rallies. Eight years later, RSBN has grown into a full outlet that employs roughly a dozen people and features a website full of stories. RSBN is like NFL RedZone for Trump rallies, covering them hours before any speakers approach the dais. Now, as Trump’s general election campaign kicks into high gear, it has also cemented itself as the pro-Trump media outlet of record for the MAGA base. The network boasts 1.64 million subscribers on YouTube (a larger subscribership than One America News Network) and another half a million on Rumble.

Glenn is the star who Seales has largely handed control over to. He is the Trump rally gameday host who plumbs the depths of MAGA America in the crowds wherever Trump goes. Glenn is fast becoming one of Trump’s favorite reporters, likely racking up more one-on-one interviews with Trump in the last year than any other journalist. During gaggles, Trump often singles him out for positive-slanted questions after entertaining a series of hardballs from other reporters. Christina Bobb, one of Trump’s revolving cast of attorneys, is a regular guest alongside Glenn on RSBN’s coverage of the trials.

[...]

RSBN has developed a reputation for going nearly everywhere that Trump ends up. Thanks to that flood-the-zone mentality of documenting Trump’s every move, it’s likely your favorite mainstream media reporter’s go-to method for keeping tabs on Trump on days that they’re off the campaign trail. Filipkowski and Glenn have formed an unlikely friendship online over direct messages that have spanned years, something I did not expect when I reached out to Filipkowski, a prominent X personality who made his name by spending almost every waking moment dunking on Trump and the MAGA movement. “I actually have found them to be the most valuable resource over the last four years to understanding MAGA — more than any other source,” Filipkowski told me. “I’ve probably posted 50 or 100 Brian Glenn interview clips of Trump, probably even 200. I find those clips incredibly valuable, because you’re getting it unvarnished. That’s when [Trump] lets his guard down a little, when he’s got a friendly face.”

What Filipkowski and many reporters most appreciate about Glenn’s coverage is a simple open-ended question he asks MAGA stans: What is it that you love most about Donald Trump? “If you say ‘I’m from the New York Times,’ his fans at rallies say ‘you’re fake news’ and don’t talk to you,” Dave Weigel, a Semafor politics reporter who relies on the site, told me. “That’s obviously less interesting than somebody saying, ‘We love you guys. Let me explain to you all my views in an interesting way,’ which is what Right Side Broadcasting does.” RSBN has “replaced mainstream media in the needs of your average Trump supporter: Why would you turn on Fox where they’re going to cut away when you can watch this website, and they’ve also got more access,” Weigel said.

Politico Magazine reports on Brian Glenn, the boyfriend of far-right extremist Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA). Glenn is a host for far-right MAGA propaganda outlet Right Side Broadcasting Network (RSBN).

[thedanceronthestreets]

Just saw this post on my dash and wanted to comment on this keeley bit cause i've seen this argument made a few times now and i just feel like i wanna add my own carrots to the soup:

Am i pissed off that people keep forgetting keeley's queer? Absofrigginlutely. Am i pissed off that a character can't casually mention her attraction to women and be taken seriously for it? You BETCHA. But the sad truth is that if i asked my family whether they thought keeley was bisexual and showed them the evidence they'd all go 'it's just a joke'. Which, yeah, is homophobic (rural queer rite of passage 😌) and sucks balls. But to me it proves the point that in mainstream media, we've just not reached the point yet where keeley's off-hand comments about her sexuality are enough to make an audience question its own homophobic bias. And i think it's easy to forget that in our tumblr bubble, as op mentioned in their above post, all of these takes and accusations around whether someone is acting homophobic or not (this applies to tedtrent shippers accusing tedbeccas of homophobia as well, though i've only seen that on twitter so far) are so far removed from the ACTUAL homophobic takes that are prevalent in the larger fandom of white conservative christians who think ted lasso is about how to have a positive attitude towards capitalism. Queer people saying 'i wish the ted lasso writers took keeley's sexuality more seriously' are not the enemy, just as much as queer people saying 'let keeley be silly and goofy about liking women' aren't. It's casual audiences who are so oblivious to any sort of queer insinuation that even if keeley were to kiss rebecca on the mouth, they'd probably call them very good friends. And while i think it's flipping fantastic to see keeley be unashamedly bi while being in a relationship with roy (well yknow, hopefully again soon), wanting something more explicit on tv that will cause obvious discomfort in the very specific homophobic audience niche of sports fans and karens is perfectly valid. AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH CHARACTERS WOULD ENGAGE IN SUCH A PLOTLINE. I think many people flocked to tedtrent because people started laying out (very sparse) arguments within season 1 and 2 that could be read in a queer way and now that not only ted is a main character but also trent a title character the ship was bound to gain more popularity as that's just how these things work. But if in the end tedbeard turned out to be canon i would eat my own arm (out of positive emotion and delight). If colin and isaac turned out to be a couple i might worry that the storyline lasts for 1 episode and nothing more due to the size of their roles, but ultimately i'd sob at the tv and wouldn't shut up about them ever again. It really doesn't matter WHO challenges the general audience as long as it happens. And as much as i love keeley, her comments so far haven't managed to trigger that sort of uproar in the audience that would kick off an avalanche of arguments around queer characters and their space in media (and i wanna specify again that this refers to the general audience, not the queer tumblr-residing one that has obviously had this discussion around keeley). Anyway ted lasso writers, let keeley and jodi balfour's character get nasty on screen please 🫶

(Also, i keep seeing posts insinuating that the tedtrent fandom has turned awful and i'd be much obliged if someone could enlighten me on that front as i don't know whether i'm just entirely oblivious in my own bubble of people but whenever i check the tedtrent tag all i see is gifs, theories for the upcoming episodes or people going 'haha i know i have shit brain fungus but what if')

[xtruss]

“The Zone of Interest: The Banal Dreams of Nazi Settler Colonialism”

In Jonathan Glazer's Oscar-Winning Movie, You Do Not See Auschwitz the Camp; You See Auschwitz the Colony. Neither Exists Without the Other

— Hazem Fahmy | 11 March 2024 | Middle East Eye

English Director Jonathan Glazer Poses with the Oscar for Best International Feature Film for "The Zone of Interest" during the 96th Annual Academy Awards on 10 March, 2024 (AFP)

In the 1965 Soviet Film Ordinary Fascism, Also Known as Triumph Over Violence, director Mikhail Romm’s voiceover implores the viewer to pay attention to the petit-bourgeois quality of fascism in general, and Nazism in particular.

Over archival footage of German small-business owners leaving their stores in uniform and hopping onto bicycles, he remarks, almost comically: "Here is a butcher, and there goes a baker." This brief scene succinctly captures Hannah Arendt’s (by now highly cliched) notion of the "banality of evil", a phrase she coined while covering the trial of Adolf Eichmann, known as the "architect of the Holocaust".

But Arendt’s own refusal to interrogate the inherently colonial nature of European fascism, a refusal inseparable from her own racism and western chauvinism, has blunted the sharpness of that term’s capacity for critical insight. Yes, the Holocaust was engineered by middle managers, but to what end? What did they get out of the horrific affair, besides satiating their sadism?

A simple answer is Jonathan Glazer’s Academy Award-winning film,The Zone of Interest: land - more specifically, enough land to replicate the expansionism of American manifest destiny, to recreate the German Aryan into the fascist ideal of the Ubermensch.

Over the weekend, the film won the Oscar's best international film award. In his acceptance speech, Glazer told the audience: "Right now we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people, whether the victims of October 7 in Israel or the ongoing attack in Gaza."

The story follows the mundane domestic lives of Rudolf Hoss (Christian Friedel), the longest-serving commandant of the Auschwitz concentration camp, and his wife and children, as they go about their days in their idyllic house adjoining the camp grounds.

As the primary subject is the Holocaust, the film has been widely noted for its refusal to visually depict any of the atrocities that occurred within the camp, though the audience frequently hears gunshots and screams from over the wall. This bold narrative and political choice has been consistently misread in mainstream film criticism as a simple affirmation of Arendt’s limited perspective on the "banality of evil".

It is far too simplistic to describe the film as a truncated biopic of its subject, nor is it accurate to reduce it to a formal experiment; a film about the Holocaust in which you do not see the Holocaust. In other words, The Zone of Interest is not simply a film about the Nazi official as a middle manager, but is much more importantly a film about the Nazi official as a settler.

Cartoon Villains

Since 1939, mainstream western education, media, and discourse about World War II and the Holocaust have strived to depict Nazism as a catatonic movement of unbridled hate, rather than a settler-colonial one in continuum with those of other western powers.

Nazis tend to be portrayed as larger-than-life cartoon villains, rather than quite ordinary monsters, easily comparable to their colonial brethren in the Belgian Congo, French Algeria or British India, among countless other places around the world that have had the misfortune of experiencing western occupation and colonialism.

Writers and scholars from across the Third World have, of course, long questioned this narrative. One of the most notable and succinct critiques was levied by Aime Cesaire in his Discourse on Colonialism.

But such perspectives have been uncommon within the US. With the exception of Isabel Wilkerson’s Caste, which has frequently been criticised for oversimplifying the primary terms of its investigation, writing on the intimate connections between western, and very specifically American, colonialism and Nazism is often marginalised. Scholars such as Carroll P Kakel and Edward B Westermann are few and far between.

The beauty of these scenes begs the (rhetorical) question: what is the difference between Hoss's family and that of any other frontiersman?

This connection is laid bare in The Zone of Interest, both visually and politically.

The amount of screen time dedicated to the lush vistas of the Nazi-occupied Polish countryside, in which Hoss and his family hike, swim and play, evokes the frontier romanticism of classic western films such as The Naked Spur, Shane and Johnny Guitar.

Being Hollywood productions, these stories, of course, implore the viewer to identify with the settlers’ yearning for the vast landscapes they seek to conquer and rid of their indigenous inhabitants.

In The Zone of Interest, the gaze is identical, but it is now one of a Nazi as opposed to that of a noble American pioneer. The beauty of these scenes begs the (rhetorical) question: what is the difference between Hoss’s family and that of any other frontiersman?

Pivotal Scene

Glazer’s identification of Poland as a frontier for Nazi German expansion is one shared unambiguously by his characters. In a pivotal scene, Hoss and his wife Hedwig (Sandra Huller) argue as to whether they should leave Auschwitz. He has been reassigned elsewhere by his higher-ups and his instinct, as that of any family man, is to take his wife and children with him.

But Hedwig refuses: “Your work is in Oranienburg now. Mine is raising our children.” When he insists, she delivers the final blow: “This is our home. We’re living how we dreamed we would since we were 17 - beyond how we dreamed. Out of the city finally. Everything we want, on our doorstep. And our children strong and healthy and happy. Everything the Fuhrer said about how we should live is exactly how we do. Drive east, Lebensraum. Here it is.”

Hedwig’s impassioned plea emphasises what the vast majority of western media narratives seek to suppress: that genocidal fascist projects are always about reproduction as much as they are about destruction. This is why Lebensraum, German for "living space", is so seldomly discussed in mainstream depictions of the Holocaust.

The Nazis’ ideology of eastward settler expansion did not simply echo American manifest destiny, but considered it a blueprint. This is why the robotically repeated line that the film is about not depicting, or “looking away” from Auschwitz is patently false. You do not see Auschwitz the camp. You see Auschwitz the colony. Neither exists without the other.

Ironically, and despite being the only filmmaker at the 96th Academy Awards to explicitly acknowledge the situation, Glazer himself apparently failed to see the resonance of his own work to the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza. In multiple interviews, he has responded meekly when asked about Israel’s mass slaughter and starvation of Palestinians since 7 October, with a shallow lamentation for “both sides”. He repeated this liberal sentiment during his acceptance speech for Best Foreign Language Film, ignoring how the Hoss family has been reborn time and time again in Sderot and Ashkelon and all the other settlements of the so-called Gaza envelope.

Anyone uncomfortable with such comparisons needs only to listen to the words of Israeli leaders speaking of Auschwitz as their end goal for Gaza. I wish Glazer had done so, rather than fall into the tired old trap his own work so brilliantly escapes.

When it comes to colonialism, what most urgently demands our attention is not the banality of evil, but the evil of banality.

[amorficzna]

TBH I feel like people have always gone to creators to ask for changes or to tell them what they thought was "canon" aka it's not really anything new. That's what happened partially with Supernatural, right (as in - fan input altered some of the story trajectory, for better or worse or whatever)? And I mean with a whole ton of other media.

I think with games it feels different because they, especially nowadays, are such fluid artifacts. There's a reason that game companies have feedback forms along with bug reports. Sometimes they don't, and it's because they don't want feedback and don't take generalized feedback into account when releasing/updating aka the majority of games. So it feels strange now to put stuff into the ether and see that artifact has changed, whether that be fan interpretation not matching what the developers intended, blind spots, etc. It's more difficult to see that fluid change in a published book, even if it gets re-published in the future. It's also different because generally you don't have access to the original artifact, which is such an interesting discussion in and of itself.

Anyway all this to say I think the changes happening to BG3 are fascinating from an artifact perspective, as well as a social and cultural perspective (for example, what do the changes they're making say about the audience/people giving them feedback? What does it say about the developers and their priorities? What does that say about gaming culture as a whole? What influence do people really have versus what are things the developers are already considering and so changing regardless aka correlation vs causation?).

And y'know... How that relates to Wyll not getting more content, and how there are such big discrepancies in larger games still. Hegemonic forces of racism are alive and well in "mainstream" game studios and it's disappointing to see. I've seen it with my own eyes. It's there, it's nefarious, and it fucking sucks.

But wrt fluid works I'm neutral on this because I think things are changing, boundaries are shifting, artifacts are becoming more fluid, and I think that's a cool discussion to be having! It's just something new to think about in the zeitgeist of works :)

Sure, don't bother developers unnecessarily, but they have a feedback form for a reason! And they can say no if they want to!

[robotlyra]

I saw your post about how the characters in Trigun were basically reduced to tropeified versions of themselves in Trigun Stampede, and it just made me think of something that’s been rattling around in my brain since it first started airing; it seems as though with reworking different elements for TriStamp, almost every effort was taken to conform it to generic anime tropes as possible to make it more digestible to a modern anime audience, using whatever’s popular among the mainstream anime scene right now. Which is especially feasible since in its first run Trigun flopped in Japan but became a cult hit in the west.

The reduction of the Christian symbolism and the spaghetti western aesthetic to go for a much more sci-fi angle, the “generification” if you will, of the characters and their dynamics like making Vash a stock sad softboi protagonist, Wolfwood a typical edgy tsundere, Meryl the token cutesy uwu waifu whose main job is to look cute and fawn over the protagonist like a schoolgirl (despite being, what, 23? barf), Knives being a yandere obsessed with his brother, Elendira being turned into one of the worst anime tropes in existence, turning Rem into the classic dead mom trope, etc etc…

It all feels like it deliberately panders to whatever Studio Orange must feel like modern anime audiences are looking for, especially when it comes to the shipping side, with Vash and Wolfwood’s dynamic being reduced to a teenage Yaoi shippers bad fanfic(honestly, that scene where Vash makes goo-goo eyes at Wolfwood is a textbook yaoi fanfic scene), and whatever is going on with Vash and Knives. It’s no coincidence that the amount incest fanart of Vash and Knives has skyrocketed since TriStamp premiered.

To me it also speaks to a larger issue e in anime; homogeny. Many mainstream anime in the modern anime scene are becoming increasingly bland and samey while unique, nuanced stories are either being swept under the rug or becoming sleeper hits and relegated to the “underrated” category because they aaren’t as hyped up as more mainstream fare.

It ultimately makes me sad because Trigun and everything that makes it unique among anime combined with Orange’s animation could have made for something truly unique among the anime scene, but every effort was made to homogenise it and water it down to the point where it feels like just another sci-fi anime.

Yeah, Trigun Stampede very much feels like "We're going to remake this so it's a POPULAR anime" and the fact that large groups of people are so defensive of it kind of speaks to how successful it was at that task. Part of me doesn't want to be TOO antagonistic towards it, cuz after years of watching anime dancing non-comittally around "should we REALLY care about fangirls as an audience," every piece of media that DOES go hard in for "yeah we're going to give them exactly what they want" feels like a long-in-coming feast. But at the same time, even though I do enjoy shipping characters in Trigun, making them into flattened, tropey versions of themselves to do it feels way less enjoyable. The biggest tell for me was how many instances of fanart I saw comparing Tristamp Wolfwood's threats towards Vash to the scene in Princess Mononoke where San threatens Ashitaka but all he can do is call her beautiful. That a more nuanced Vashwood ship of differing philosophies but steadfast friendship turning into a romance just gets turned into a standard tsundere/taming of the shrew type pairing feels like something was lost in the quest for an easier, more popular shipping dynamic.

[davidmariottecomics]

Brandifying the "Geek", or How Funko Became the Band-Aid

Hello again! 

Last week, I was talking about comics job (in)security, particularly in light of the majority of Comixology staff being let go, and also touched on the continued migration of comic creators to Substack, despite some public problems that platform's had.

Discussing both of those things had me thinking about the safety of a default, which is going to be a lot of what we're talking about today, and we're going to be talking about that through the highs and lows of association with a brand. I'm not here to specifically call out or bash anyone's interests or even any big companies, so much as using this as a chance to talk about trends in the larger sphere of "nerd culture" that effect audience expectations and, often, the thought processes of creatives and creative companies--the parts that actually matter to people trying to make and tell stories.  

Why Brands Like Being Brands Starting at the most basic level, let's talk about what makes a brand and why they're important to this conversation. 

Take a look at your stuff. Chances are there's a lot within pretty easy reach that you call by a brand name, rather than a generic name. Band-Aid (bandages), Tupperware (plastic containers), Kleenex (tissues), whatever.

Or maybe you don't always refer to it by the brand name, but you make assumptions about it related to the brand: tablets are iPads, cell phones are iPhones, simple and cheap furniture's from IKEA, plastic building blocks are LEGOs, sodas are Coke, and sports drinks are Gatorade. That sort of thing.

Brands like being brands because when their name is commonly associated with a product, it's good for business. More name recognizability, easier market penetration. The more a brand exists in the cultural consciousness, the more self-sustaining it is, allowing for longer lifespans and more money. If a business is lucky, at some point they corner the market and either really or artificially box out their competition and become a default. We'll get more into this later on how creators engage with each other and their audience, but keep that in mind. The other key to having a "default" is it sets a sort of standard that people can judge against, but it may or may not actually speak to quality or reliability. 

Ready Player One

If you've been reading through my blog for a while, you'll know I've been slowly making my way through the Blank Check Podcast back catalog. I'm finishing up Spielberg right now and was just listening to the Ready Player One episode. And part of their discussion, which at this point is 5 years old anyway, is the change in the pop cultural landscape between the release of Ready Player One the book and RPO the movie. The book released in 2011. I really enjoyed it on my first read as a young man who liked older pop culture and was looking forward to this crazy idea that there could be a good Avengers movie on the way because outside of X-Men, team superhero movies were practically not a thing and even something so mainstream to me as a comic reader felt like a major crossing-over event in the wider public consciousness. But by the time RPO the movie came out, the Avengers were about to have an Infinity War with characters from a dozen other movies. The language of Cinematic Universes was well established. Star Wars was back and doing a new trilogy! And Hot Topics around the world had walls of little toy statues making every property imaginable a uniform little big-headed guy. 

There's a lot I could talk about in terms of how nostalgia plays into all of that or Warner Bros. multiple attempts at creating a "multiversal WB brand" between RPO, Space Jam 2, MultiVersus, Etc. But why I'm actually bringing it up is in the past little over a decade--and particularly over the past few years as the state of the world has necessitated changes to both shopping and media consumption habits--the brandification of "nerd culture" or "geek culture" or "collector culture" or whatever you want to call it has exploded as businesses have really tried to expand their brands to become pillars of the pop culture landscape. And I think that has started to influence not just the audience, but creators too. 

The Brands of Geekdom

If I go into my local Target, chances are I'll stop by the "Collector's Spot" or whatever they call it. It's a little section by the books, video games, and whatever remains of their movies & music, usually within eyesight of, but not part of, the toy aisles. It makes sense. According to a recent report, "kidults" or--checks the description--anyone 12 or older who enjoys toys (rolls eyes), make up roughly 1/4th of overall toy sales.  At my local Targets, at least, it always seems like an odd selection. There are usually some of Super7's ReAction Figures, but specifically ones where there isn't a space in the toy aisles for the rest of the line. Star Trek & TMNT & horror movie figures end up here while G.I. Joe and Transformers sit with their kind a few aisles away. Also there are Sanrio crossover plushies, NECA figures for TMNT and Gargoyles and horror characters, sometimes the Godzilla toys, and of course the wall of Funko Pops (which is different from, but very similar to, the Hot Topic wall of Pops mentioned above). If you have ever liked a property and wanted to see it made into a physical commodity, there's a Funko Pop for that (okay, looks like ALF only had a Wacky Wobbler from Funko, but still...). 

The reason I focus on Pops is A. They're all over the place. They have an amazing amount of market penetration and there are still stores that exist primarily as Pop retailers. B. Because they work with so many other licenses, they're a good gauge of what's actually catching on--when a Pop is a shelf-warmer, it is a SHELF-WARMER. If people didn't want Ready Player One Pops, you knew. C. Points A and B have made Pops, whether you like them or not, a cornerstone of the general perception of "things nerds like." And it's one that overlaps with the others more than almost anything else--I'd contend that the GoodSmile Company has a pretty robust catalog too, but with a key difference.

Pops reflect a general audience--sure nerds/geeks/collectors/etc may like them, but they're also something a grandma might buy for you because it's cheap, it's of a thing you like, and your grandma's heard of a Pop before. But something like GoodSmile, be it Nendoroids or Figmas or other lines of figures/statues, are not as uniform and not as accessible, even if they have a lot of variety. They tend to be sought out by people who have that interest, rather than distributed to be easily findable for anyone and everyone. 

The other cornerstones that I think are often looked at in modern "nerd culture" understandings include the Disney Trifecta (Disney/Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars--less the latter, but how many of us have heard someone refer to an animated movie as a Disney movie, or a superhero movie as a Marvel movie, when the Disney Company had no involvement whatsoever), Pokemon, Studio Ghibli, Stranger Things, Dungeons & Dragons, and in some cases where people find themselves incapable of separating their interests from the damage done by the brands' creators, Rick & Morty and Harry Potter. While I may not cater to those last two and don't personally really like Stranger Things, I certainly enjoy stuff from the rest. I even own a few Funko Pops. So, again, I'm not trying to say these things are inherently bad or markers of a false "nerd" or whatever. I'm saying that they're common and because of that, they are getting to be viewed in that default status, which can set a very strange standard which changes how we interact with stories because of the brandification of pop culture.   

A Ranger, a Warrior, and a Bard Walk Into a Bar...

The other part of why this is on my mind is that there's been a lot of conversation about Dungeons & Dragons recently. Most recently, they've reversed their position on becoming more restrictive of their open game license, and have committed to having D&D be under a form of creative commons license. And while I think that's the right decision, and am happy to have worked on a couple of D&D things in the past, I also found the conversation really interesting because I think in some ways, D&D has become an interchangeable term for some people with both tabletop role-playing and Fantasy in general. 

It makes sense, right? D&D's 5th edition is pretty popular as a game. It's got comics from IDW. There's an upcoming D&D movie. Plus, it's central to the premise of Stranger Things and is the game that like half of all podcasts play. This sort of brand rehabilitation--from the Satanic Panic era--has really built D&D into a powerhouse. Regardless of how many other tabletop RPGS there are, the controversy around the open game license inherently revolved around how many businesses and resources have been created specifically based off of and in interaction with D&D. 

And that's one of the kind of downsides to this, right? There is so much wrapped up in the understanding of what D&D is and what is and isn't allowed within it's framework. Beyond this one issue, Wizards of the Coast has been dealing with the ways in which the tropes of D&D have been harmful and how they can minimize some of that harm going forward. But because it has built into a "default" brand, it also means there's a lot of shorthand that comes to talking about setting up fantasy worlds that still uses some of the worse D&D tropes. Or, on the flip side, there are people pitching every property in the world as having a Fantasy version, but are specifically trying to get it tied to D&D for the name-recognition, regardless of whether or not what they actually would want to do with it works within that D&D framework.

Again, this is not me saying that I haven't had fun playing and working on D&D in my time. I have. It's more to say that sometimes I see conversations speculating how much fun it would be to put whatever franchise in a D&D world (often through the characters playing the game) that spends so much time figuring out the ways in which to incorporate those characters and their attributes into D&D, it kinda ignores that it isn't a story being pitched, or that it doesn't further the understandings of the characters at all. Which is fine in casual conversation, but I'm sure myself and other people in my type of roles have also had to have these types of conversations about the other "default" brands and the things that are made within their terms. The more the Marvel movie method becomes understood as superhero storytelling, the more complicated conversations about the nature of comics storytelling, particularly with first time and non-regular comics readers becomes, right? 

When the Default is Unsafe

That all gets us back to what I was talking about last week and my larger point about keeping an eye on these trends. Comixology became the default for digital comics retailer and now is going through being killed by their parent company and that's leaving an uncertain gap in the market, uncertainty in how digital comics will continue to be fostered and grow and become more accessible, and a lot of people out of jobs. Substack brings new people in for a number of reasons, but not the least of which is enough reputable people have taken to it that it's getting name recognition. 

Or, to look at it another way, I'm sure many of us unfortunately still use Twitter. Even with all the problems and the criminal owner, by virtue of being the default social media for years, it is where the majority of creators remain and their fans remain and our conversations as a community remain. And when we tried to diversify, it split too much. Not only did audiences not follow, it was hard to just find your friends and peers again. And that is unfortunate, but one of the considerations we make to keep in touch and the never-more-unified community together, even if we're all kinda still certain it'll all fall apart any day now. 

All of which is to say, I guess, be wary of what we look to as the default--in the larger pop culture landscape and the ways in which criticism of Marvel movies gets projected onto different types of storytelling or popularity is defined by Funkos or whatever to the styles you see other artists using and getting work with and the platforms we use to promote our work and engage with each other. Because while the default might be familiar, that doesn't mean it's the best representation of what could be. 

Next week: I dunno yet. We'll talk about something else.  

What I enjoyed this week: Blank Check (Podcast), Honkai Impact (Video game), House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski (Book), 17-21 by Tatsuki Fujimoto (Manga), Nope (Movie), Black Adam (Movie--No doubt, it was kind of a mess, but I'm a sucker for the JSA, so it was nice seeing my friends, I guess), Persona 4 Golden (Video game), Poker Face (TV show), The Savior's Book Cafe Story in Another World (Manga), Gundam: The Witch from Mercury (Anime), working on some wedding planning/registry stuff, bought a new mattress that should be here tomorrow (please buy stuff from Becca and me because we just spent a lot of money buying a new mattress). 

And for the sake of something fun, here's a roundup of the webcomics/comics I read digitally most weeks and when I read them: Nancy (daily), Gil Thorp (daily except Sundays), Lore Olympus (Sundays), Zatanna & the Ripper (Sundays), Batman: Wayne Family Adventures (Sundays), Vixen: NYC (Sundays), Skullgirls (Sundays), Aeonian Red (Sundays), Alfie (Wednesdays & Fridays--ADULTS ONLY), The Rock Cocks (Mondays & Fridays--ADULTS ONLY), Blissverse (Mondays--ADULTS ONLY), 1.1.23 (As I catch updates), and then my Shonen Jump block: Chainsaw Man (Tuesdays), Jujutsu Kaisen (Sundays), My Hero Academia (Sundays), Witch Watch (Sundays), Fabricant 100 (Sundays), Spy x Famiy (Sundays), and One-Punch Man (Sundays), with other stuff that updates less frequently sort of thrown in whenever I remember.     

New Releases this week (1/25/2022): Godzilla Rivals: Round One TPB (Didn't work on this, but plugging Zilla)

New releases next week (2/1/2022): Off week for my books!

Final Order Cutoff (1/30/2023): Godzilla Rivals: Mothra vs. Titanosaurus (Editor)

Announcements: Arizona Comic Book Arts Festival - 2/25! Less than a month away! It's a one day comic-focused event in Phoenix, AZ. Tickets are only $10. Attending artists include me, Becca (who once again is dropping some new stuff on their Patreon, see below), Mitch Gerads, Steve Rude, John Layman, Henry Barajas, Jay Fotos, Jeff Mariotte, Marcy Rockwell, John Yurcaba, Andrew MacLean, Alexis Zirrit, Meredith McClaren, James Owen, Ryan Cody, and many more! Come and see us! Becca'll have some very cool new merch, too!

Becca contributed to Aradia Beat, a Magical Girl Anthology Magazine! It's now on Kickstarter! It's both a tribute to 90s magical girl stories and part of a larger project about the overall preservation and mutual support of magical girl stories!

Pic of the Week: Caught the cats looking really goofy! 

[edvinception]

I’m happy that they did interviews with queer media while in New York, but I was hoping for something bigger, like Buzzfeed, Vanity Fair, etc, that has a larger audience and is more mainstream. Maybe next year?

I love that too. These medias probably showed interest in them too which helped.

I would love to see other bigger media outlets interview them but at the same time the bigger the more generic.

But can we get them to play with kittens or puppies?

And there's definitely opportunities next year. If Netflix US was behind Jimmy Fallon they might promote it more.

[kawaiinachobasement]

The Evolution of Bollywood: From Silent Films to Global Blockbusters

Bollywood, the Hindi language film industry based in Mumbai, India, has undergone a remarkable transformation since its inception in the early 20th century. From its humble beginnings with silent films to its current status as a global powerhouse, Bollywood has captivated audiences worldwide with its unique blend of storytelling, music, dance, and cultural richness.

The Silent Era and the Birth of Talkies The first Indian silent film, "Raja Harishchandra," was released in 1913. The silent era was characterized by elaborate sets, dramatic gestures, and intertitles to convey dialogue. However, with the advent of sound technology in the 1930s, Indian cinema entered a new era. "Alam Ara" (1931) marked the birth of talkies in India and revolutionized the industry. The ability to incorporate dialogues, music, and sound effects opened up a whole new world of storytelling possibilities.

The Golden Age and the Rise of Bollywood The 1950s and 1960s are often referred to as the Golden Age of Bollywood. This era saw the emergence of legendary actors, directors, and music composers who shaped the industry's identity. Films like "Mother India" (1957) and "Mughal-e-Azam" (1960) achieved both critical acclaim and commercial success, establishing Bollywood's presence on the global stage. These films explored social issues, historical epics, and romantic dramas, resonating with audiences across generations.

The Masala Era and the Commercialization of Bollywood The 1970s and 1980s witnessed a shift towards commercialization in Bollywood. This era, often referred to as the "Masala Era," was characterized by a formulaic approach to filmmaking that blended action, romance, comedy, and melodrama. The rise of Amitabh Bachchan as the "Angry Young Man" and his iconic films like "Sholay" (1975) and "Deewar" (1975) cemented this trend. Bollywood films became known for their larger-than-life characters, extravagant song-and-dance sequences, and escapist narratives.

The New Wave and the Rise of Parallel Cinema While the commercial cinema thrived, a parallel movement known as "New Wave" or "Parallel Cinema" emerged in the 1970s. This movement sought to explore more realistic and socially relevant themes, often deviating from the mainstream Bollywood formula. Filmmakers like Shyam Benegal, Satyajit Ray, and Mrinal Sen gained recognition for their thought-provoking films that tackled issues like poverty, caste discrimination, and political corruption.

The Globalization of Bollywood and the Digital Age In the late 20th century, Bollywood began to gain international recognition. The diaspora communities played a crucial role in spreading Bollywood's reach beyond India. The advent of satellite television and the internet further accelerated this process. Bollywood films found audiences in diverse countries, especially among the South Asian diaspora.

The digital age brought about significant changes in Bollywood. The rise of social media platforms and streaming services democratized the distribution and consumption of films. Bollywood embraced digital marketing strategies to reach a wider audience. The industry also witnessed a surge in independent filmmakers who experimented with different genres and storytelling techniques.

Bollywood Today and the Global Impact Today, Bollywood is a global phenomenon. Its films are released worldwide, and its stars have a massive following on social media. Bollywood has become a cultural ambassador for India, showcasing its rich traditions, music, and dance to the world. The industry has also embraced collaborations with international filmmakers and actors, further expanding its global footprint.

Bollywood has come a long way from its silent film roots. It has evolved into a dynamic and diverse industry that reflects the changing aspirations and sensibilities of its audience. With its vibrant storytelling, catchy music, and captivating dance sequences, Bollywood continues to enthrall audiences worldwide, leaving an indelible mark on the global cinematic landscape.

[sexymemecoin]

The Phenomenon of Meme Coins: Humor Meets Cryptocurrency

The world of cryptocurrency is known for its rapid innovations and diverse applications, but one of the most fascinating and unexpected trends to emerge in recent years is the rise of meme coins. These digital currencies, inspired by internet memes and popular culture, combine the worlds of humor and finance in a way that captivates a broad audience. Meme coins are not just a novelty; they represent a significant shift in how digital assets can be perceived and utilized. This article explores the origins, characteristics, and future potential of meme coins, with a brief mention of one of the notable projects in this space, Sexy Meme Coin.

The Origins of Meme Coins

Meme coins first gained mainstream attention with the creation of Dogecoin in 2013. Dogecoin was initially conceived as a joke by software engineers Billy Markus and Jackson Palmer, who wanted to create a fun alternative to Bitcoin. Featuring the Shiba Inu dog from the popular "Doge" meme as its mascot, Dogecoin quickly garnered a dedicated following. Its community-driven approach and lighthearted nature set it apart from other cryptocurrencies, paving the way for a new category of digital assets.

Despite its humorous beginnings, Dogecoin has demonstrated remarkable staying power. It has been used for various charitable causes, tipping content creators online, and even sponsoring NASCAR teams. The coin's success has inspired a plethora of other meme coins, each seeking to capture the magic formula of humor, community, and financial potential.

Key Characteristics of Meme Coins

Community-Centric: Meme coins thrive on the strength of their communities. Unlike traditional cryptocurrencies, which often focus on technological advancements, meme coins rely heavily on community engagement and social media presence. This grassroots approach helps to build a loyal and enthusiastic user base.

Cultural Relevance: Meme coins are deeply rooted in internet culture and trends. They often reflect the latest memes, jokes, and viral content, making them highly relatable and engaging for users who are active on social media platforms.

Accessibility: The playful and humorous nature of meme coins makes them more approachable for the average person compared to more complex cryptocurrencies. This accessibility helps to attract a wider audience, including those who may not have previously considered investing in digital assets.

High Volatility: The value of meme coins can be extremely volatile, driven by social media trends, celebrity endorsements, and viral moments. While this volatility can lead to significant gains, it also poses substantial risks for investors.

The Appeal of Meme Coins

Meme coins offer a unique blend of entertainment and investment potential. They provide a way for people to engage with cryptocurrency in a fun and light-hearted manner, while still offering the possibility of financial returns. This dual appeal has helped to drive the popularity of meme coins, especially among younger generations who are well-versed in internet culture.

The community-driven nature of meme coins also fosters a sense of belonging and participation. Users feel like they are part of a larger movement, contributing to the success of the coin through their engagement and support. This collective effort can lead to a strong sense of camaraderie and loyalty among users.

Notable Meme Coins

While Dogecoin remains the most well-known meme coin, several other projects have emerged, each with its unique twist on the concept. One such project is Sexy Meme Coin, which combines the world of memes with innovative tokenomics and community engagement. You can learn more about Sexy Meme Coin at Sexy Meme Coin.

The Future of Meme Coins

The future of meme coins is both exciting and uncertain. On the one hand, their ability to capture the zeitgeist of internet culture gives them a unique position within the cryptocurrency landscape. As long as memes continue to be a significant part of online culture, meme coins are likely to maintain their relevance and appeal.

On the other hand, the high volatility and speculative nature of meme coins mean that they can be risky investments. Regulatory scrutiny and market fluctuations could impact their long-term viability. However, the community-driven approach of meme coins provides a strong foundation that can help them weather challenges and adapt to changing circumstances.

Conclusion

Meme coins represent a fascinating intersection of humor, culture, and finance. They have brought a new dimension to the world of cryptocurrency, making it more accessible and engaging for a broad audience. While they come with their own set of risks and uncertainties, the community-centric nature of meme coins offers a compelling case for their continued growth and evolution.

As the cryptocurrency landscape continues to evolve, meme coins like Sexy Meme Coin and others will play a crucial role in shaping the future of digital assets. By combining the power of memes with innovative financial technology, these coins have the potential to create lasting impact and redefine how we think about cryptocurrency.

For those interested in exploring the world of meme coins, Sexy Meme Coin offers a unique and entertaining platform. Visit Sexy Meme Coin to learn more and become part of this exciting movement.

[fashionguestpost]

Cardi B - From Social Media Star to Rap Royalty

Cardi B, the name synonymous with infectious beats, bold lyrics, and an unapologetic personality, has become one of the most influential female rappers of our generation. Her journey, however, is far from ordinary. Born Belcalis Marlenis Almánzar in 1992, Cardi B grew up in the Bronx, New York City. Her path to rap stardom wasn't a straight line, but a tapestry woven with social media savvy, reality TV exposure, and an undeniable talent for captivating audiences.

From Vine to Reality TV: Building a Buzz

Cardi B's rise to fame began in the trenches of the internet. In the early 2010s, Vine, a short-form video platform, exploded in popularity. Cardi B, with her infectious humor and outspoken personality, found a niche. Her witty social media commentary garnered her a loyal following, showcasing a personality that was both relatable and raw. This online presence transitioned to Instagram, where her unflinching honesty and signature flair for fashion further solidified her image as a social media star.

In 2015, Cardi B took a leap, joining the cast of VH1's reality show "Love & Hip Hop: New York." The show served as a platform for her to showcase not only her larger-than-life personality but also her burgeoning music career. Here, viewers witnessed Cardi B's hustle and determination as she balanced reality TV with recording music. The exposure skyrocketed her fame, propelling her from social media darling to a rising star in the music industry.

Mixtapes and Mainstream Success: "Bodak Yellow" and Beyond

Cardi B didn't waste any time capitalizing on her newfound fame. In 2016, she released her first mixtape, "Gangsta Bitch Music, Vol. 1," followed by "Vol. 2" in 2017. These mixtapes, brimming with raw energy and braggadocious bars, served as a calling card, showcasing her formidable rapping skills and signature New York flow.

The turning point, however, came in 2017 with the release of her single "Bodak Yellow." The song, with its infectious trap beat and Cardi B's self-assured delivery, became a cultural phenomenon. It topped the Billboard Hot 100 chart, making Cardi B the first solo female rapper to achieve this feat since Lauryn Hill in 1998. "Bodak Yellow" catapulted Cardi B into mainstream success, earning her Grammy nominations and solidifying her place in hip-hop history.

Invasion of Privacy: A Grammy-Winning Debut

Capitalizing on the momentum of "Bodak Yellow," Cardi B released her debut studio album, "Invasion of Privacy," in 2018. The album was a commercial juggernaut, breaking streaming records and becoming the best-selling female rap album of all time. It was critically acclaimed as well, winning a Grammy Award for Best Rap Album, a significant achievement for a female artist in the often male-dominated genre.

"Invasion of Privacy" showcased Cardi B's versatility as a rapper. Songs like "Bartier Cardi" (featuring Offset) displayed her braggadocio, while tracks like "Be Careful" revealed a vulnerability that resonated with listeners. The album cemented Cardi B's status as a force to be reckoned with, not just in rap, but in the entire music industry.

Beyond the Music: Fashion, Philanthropy, and Feuds

Cardi B's influence extends far beyond music. Her flamboyant fashion sense, with its daring outfit choices and signature red-bottom shoes, has made her a fashion icon. Collaborations with major fashion brands and appearances on prestigious red carpets have further solidified her place in the fashion world.

Cardi B isn't afraid to use her platform for good either. She's a vocal advocate for political issues and has actively supported various charitable causes. From donating to hurricane relief efforts to speaking out about social justice, Cardi B demonstrates a social consciousness that resonates with her fans.

However, Cardi B's outspoken nature has also landed her in the spotlight for feuds with other celebrities. One such instance is her ongoing tiff with rapper BIA. In 2023, BIA released a diss track aimed at Cardi B, accusing her of infidelity and copying her style. Cardi B responded swiftly, calling the track "fueled by hate and lies" and showcasing her characteristic unapologetic approach to conflict.

Cardi B's Legacy: A Continuing Evolution

Cardi B's story is one of constant evolution. From viral social media star to Grammy-winning rapper, she has broken barriers and redefined what it means to be a successful female artist. Her music, a potent blend of raw lyricism and infectious beats, continues to resonate with millions

[savefilescomng12]

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter and reddit

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter and reddit 

The landscape of social media is ever-evolving, with TikTok leading the charge as a platform that continually shapes trends and propels ordinary users into the spotlight. One recent sensation is Mami Kim, whose video titled "Sdiscoteca" has gone viral, amassing an astonishing 14.7 million posts and spawning a myriad of related content. This article delves into the factors that contributed to the virality of Mami Kim's video, the subsequent ripple effects on TikTok, and the broader implications of viral content on social media.Mami Kim's rise to fame on TikTok can be traced back to her distinctive video "Sdiscoteca," which quickly captured the attention of the platform's vast user base. The video's appeal lies in its unique blend of music, dance, and visual storytelling, which resonates with a diverse audience. The catchy nature of the content, combined with Mami Kim's engaging personality, has made it a perfect candidate for viral success.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter 

The "Sdiscoteca" video is characterized by its vibrant visuals and infectious energy. Mami Kim showcases a high-energy dance routine set to an upbeat soundtrack, filmed in a lively nightclub setting. The video’s production quality, combined with Mami Kim's charisma, makes it stand out amidst the sea of content on TikTok. The video's appeal is further enhanced by its universal themes of fun and celebration, making it relatable to a wide audience.TikTok's sophisticated algorithm plays a crucial role in the virality of videos. By promoting content that garners quick and substantial engagement, the algorithm ensures that popular videos reach an even larger audience. Mami Kim's "Sdiscoteca" video likely benefited from this mechanism, gaining significant traction on the "For You" page, where users discover new and trending content.The success of Mami Kim's video has sparked a wave of related content and trends on TikTok. Users from around the world have created their own versions of the "Sdiscoteca" dance, adding personal twists and interpretations. This phenomenon not only amplifies the reach of the original video but also fosters a sense of community among users.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter and reddit 

Thousands of TikTok users have participated in the "Sdiscoteca" trend by posting their renditions of the dance. This user-generated content includes variations in choreography, creative costumes, and unique settings, each adding a new dimension to the trend. The collaborative nature of this content creation fosters a sense of inclusivity and participation, encouraging more users to join the trend.Influencers and celebrities have also jumped on the "Sdiscoteca" bandwagon, further boosting the video’s visibility. High-profile TikTok personalities and even mainstream celebrities have posted their versions of the dance, bringing their substantial followings into the fold. This cross-promotion highlights the interconnected nature of social media platforms and the role of influencers in driving trends.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on reddit 

The viral success of Mami Kim's "Sdiscoteca" video exemplifies the broader dynamics of content virality on social media platforms. It underscores several critical themes relevant to understanding the impact of viral phenomena in the digital age.Viral content like Mami Kim's video can have significant economic implications. For creators, viral videos often lead to monetization opportunities through brand partnerships, sponsored content, and increased follower engagement. Mami Kim, for instance, might leverage her newfound fame to secure deals with brands looking to tap into her wide-reaching influence.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter and reddit 

The psychological impact of viral fame is a crucial consideration for content creators. The sudden influx of attention can be both exhilarating and overwhelming, bringing with it the pressures of maintaining relevance and managing public scrutiny. For Mami Kim, the viral success of her video likely brought a mix of validation and stress, highlighting the need for mental health support in the digital influencer space.One of the positive aspects of viral content is its ability to foster community and connection among users. The "Sdiscoteca" trend has brought together a diverse group of individuals who share a common interest, creating a sense of belonging and camaraderie. This communal aspect is a powerful force in the social media landscape, driving engagement and participation.

The ethics of content creation and sharing are paramount in the realm of social media. Issues such as consent, privacy, and responsible content creation are ever-present. For viral videos like "Sdiscoteca," it is essential for creators to consider the implications of their content and the responsibilities they hold towards their audience and themselves.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter 

Looking ahead, Mami Kim's future on TikTok appears promising. The key to her sustained success will lie in her ability to adapt and evolve her content strategy while maintaining the elements that made her initial video a hit.To maintain her relevance, Mami Kim will need to continue innovating her content. This might involve experimenting with new formats, collaborating with other creators, and exploring different themes. By staying attuned to the interests and feedback of her audience, she can ensure that her content remains fresh and engaging.There is also potential for Mami Kim to expand her digital presence beyond TikTok. By leveraging her popularity, she could explore opportunities on other platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, or even launching her own merchandise line. Diversifying her presence would not only mitigate the risks associated with relying on a single platform but also allow her to reach new audiences.In the context of TikTok trends, it is useful to compare the "Sdiscoteca" phenomenon with other viral trends such as the "How Many Months Is Hailey Bieber" trend. This trend involves users creating videos speculating about the possible pregnancy of Hailey Bieber, often using humorous or speculative content.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on  reddit 

Similar to "Sdiscoteca," the "How Many Months Is Hailey Bieber" trend showcases the rapid spread of content through TikTok’s algorithm. Both trends highlight the platform’s ability to turn user-generated content into widespread phenomena, driven by engagement and relatability.

User engagement is a critical factor in both trends. The speculative nature of the Hailey Bieber trend encourages users to participate by sharing their theories, creating a dynamic and interactive experience. In contrast, the "Sdiscoteca" trend is more performance-oriented, with users showcasing their dance skills and creativity.For individuals involved in these trends, the impact can be substantial. While Mami Kim's dance video has likely brought positive attention and opportunities, the speculative nature of the Hailey Bieber trend raises questions about privacy and the ethical boundaries of content creation.

Watch Mami Kim viral video on Twitter and reddit 

The viral success of Mami Kim's "Sdiscoteca" video on TikTok is a testament to the platform's power to amplify voices and create global trends. The subsequent wave of related content and the broad engagement it has generated highlight the intricate dynamics of viral phenomena in the digital age. As Mami Kim navigates her newfound fame, her journey offers valuable insights into the opportunities and challenges of being a social media influencer.The broader implications of viral content, including economic benefits, psychological impacts, community building, and ethical considerations, are critical for understanding the role of social media in contemporary culture. By examining trends like "Sdiscoteca" and comparing them to other viral phenomena, we gain a deeper understanding of the forces that shape our digital narratives and the future of content creation on platforms like TikTok.As TikTok continues to evolve, the stories of creators like Mami Kim will undoubtedly provide ongoing lessons and reflections on the nature of fame, privacy, and community in the 21st century. Whether through dance, speculation, or other forms of creative expression, the platform will remain a powerful space for individuals to connect, engage, and share their stories with the world. Source link Read the full article

[yeohchernyeong]

Week 4 Reality TV Case Study

The rise of social media has dramatically changed the reality television landscape. In the early 2000s, forums and blogs were the main platforms for discussion of reality TV shows, with mainstream sites like The Guardian and Vulture joining fan blogs and audience-facing sites like TWOP in sharing humorous takes on the show. However, by the mid-to-late 2000s, social media platforms such as MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter became competitors for audience attention. These platforms provide space for the formation of online communities, allowing viewers to not only interact with friends and family but also share content related to their interests, including reality shows (Deller, 2019).

In recent years, reality television has played a significant role in shaping the visibility of queer identities and cultural ideas. These programs provide a platform for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and other queer groups in British and American popular culture to express themselves and share their stories. The rise of social media has further reinforced this trend. Through broader norms and ideals of personhood, behavior, and acceptability associated with reality television and social media, these shows make queer identities more accessible and reflect society's diversity and inclusion. Through these media, queer communities can display their lives and stories to a wide audience, promote social understanding and recognition of queer identities, and promote social diversity and inclusion (Michael, 2019).

Live tweets from reality TV shows form identifiable communities on Twitter, and live tweets based on the show give viewers a deeper understanding of a country's cultural identity. Taking The X Factor NZ as an example, live discussions among viewers on Twitter often involve New Zealand, New Zealand culture or New Zealand's place in the world, reflecting the characteristics of New Zealanders and "New Zealanders". This use of social media not only enhances the interaction and participation among viewers, but also provides wider dissemination and influence for reality shows. By sharing their opinions, viewers not only watch the show, but participate in a larger community. This real-time interaction not only connects the audience more closely, but also provides opportunities for immediate feedback and interaction between program producers and participants, deepening the audience's understanding of the program and the cultural and identity issues involved (Stewart, 2019 ).

Social media has become the primary place for viewers to engage in discussions about reality shows, replacing traditional forums and blogs. Twitter, in particular, has become a key platform for real-time interaction during television broadcasts, allowing viewers to tweet as programs unfold, enhancing the public viewing experience. The rise of social media has extended the reach and lifespan of reality shows, providing participants with the opportunity to extend their fame and generate revenue through endorsements and advertising by sharing memes, GIFs and other content. In addition, social media strengthens the credibility of reality shows by giving reality show participants the ability to express their opinions and correct misrepresentations that may appear on the show. Overall, the rise of social media has changed the way audiences participate in and discuss reality shows, providing new possibilities for the spread and influence of programs (Deller, 2019).

Reference

Deller, R. A. (2019). Reality television in an age of social media. Reality Television: The Television Phenomenon That Changed the World, 141–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83909-021-920191007

Stewart, M. (2020). Live tweeting, reality TV and the nation. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(3), 352–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877919887757

Lovelock, M. (2019). Queerness as authenticity in reality TV. Reality TV and Queer Identities, 63–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14215-5_3

[jainanibjiya]

The Economics of Filmmaking in the Bollywood Industry

The Bollywood film industry, based out of Mumbai, India, is one of the largest centers of film production in the world. Renowned for its vibrant storytelling, colorful cinematography, and dynamic musical sequences, Bollywood is a powerhouse of creative output that influences global cinema. Understanding the economics of filmmaking in Bollywood offers a window into the complexities of making cinema in an industry characterized by its high-volume production and vast audience diversity.

The Scale and Scope of Bollywood

Bollywood produces around 1,500-2,000 films every year, significantly more than Hollywood. This high output is partly driven by the massive demand among the Indian populace, who are avid cinema-goers. Bollywood films are also distributed to various parts of the world, catering to the Indian diaspora and increasingly capturing the interest of non-Indian audiences.

Funding and Investment

Traditional Financing

Historically, Bollywood films were funded through private investors, often including producers who were wealthy individuals outside the film industry. This model has evolved with the entry of corporate houses and studios which now finance films, bringing more professionalism and a systematic approach to funding.

Corporate Studios and Production Houses

The last couple of decades have seen the rise of corporate studios like Yash Raj Films, Dharma Productions, and T-Series, which have stable financing routes and can invest in bigger projects. These studios not only produce but also distribute and market their films, controlling a larger part of the film's lifecycle.

Government Support and Incentives

The Indian government offers various incentives for filmmaking intended to promote regional cinema and international co-productions. These incentives include tax rebates, funds for technological upgrades, and subsidies for films shot in specific locations.

Production Costs

The cost of producing a Bollywood film can vary widely. A typical mainstream Bollywood movie might cost anywhere from $1.5 million to $10 million, while big-budget films featuring major stars can cost upwards of $25 million. Production costs include:

Star Salaries: The biggest portion often goes to high-profile actors whose presence can significantly influence a film’s box office performance.

Production Design and Costumes: Given the elaborate nature of Bollywood films, a substantial budget is allocated to sets and costumes.

Location and Logistics: Costs incurred from shooting at multiple locations, both domestic and international.

Post-Production: Includes special effects, editing, sound design, and music production, which are crucial, given the musical format of most Bollywood films.

Distribution and Marketing

Marketing can often comprise around 20-30% of the total budget. Films are promoted extensively via trailers, posters, press interviews, and music videos released before the movie launch. Digital marketing has also become a significant component, with promotions on social media platforms and YouTube being crucial for reaching target audiences.

Distribution Channels

Films are distributed across India and globally in theaters, and increasingly, through digital streaming platforms. The theatrical release is crucial for revenue generation, with box office sales making up the largest share of income for most films.

Revenue Streams

Domestic Box Office

Ticket sales within India constitute the primary source of revenue. The performance of a film in its first few weeks is critical as a substantial drop in viewership is typical after this period.

International Box Office

Overseas markets are increasingly important, with large South Asian communities in the Middle East, North America, and Europe. Revenue from these markets can sometimes match or exceed domestic earnings, especially for films featuring popular stars.

Satellite and Digital Rights

The sale of satellite and digital streaming rights has become a significant revenue stream. Streaming platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney+ Hotstar compete to secure exclusive rights for new releases, which can be a substantial source of income.

Ancillary Revenues

These include rights for music, merchandising, and in some cases, adaptations for books or plays. Music rights, in particular, are lucrative in Bollywood due to the integral role of music in Indian films.

Challenges and Opportunities

Piracy

Piracy remains a significant challenge, with illegal downloads and streams causing substantial revenue losses annually.

Changing Audience Preferences

The audience's preference is shifting towards content-driven films rather than typical star-led blockbusters. This shift demands that producers invest in strong scripts and talented new actors.

Technological Advancements

The industry is also embracing new technologies such as virtual reality and artificial intelligence to create richer cinematic experiences and streamline production processes.

Conclusion

The economics of Bollywood is complex and multifaceted, influenced by traditional practices and adapting to new market realities. As Bollywood continues to evolve, its economic strategies will also need to adapt, balancing between its rich, traditional roots and the demands of a rapidly changing global entertainment landscape. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for anyone looking to engage with or study the global film industry, offering insights into not just economics but also the cultural nuances of filmmaking.