#which is the case with all corporate social media

[sizzlingsandwichperfection-blog]

They're starting to get more meta. Feel free to send me better memes via asks.

Awesome coffee is so incredibly good. And 100% of the profit goes to charity.

[tangibletechnomancy]

The reason I took interest in AI as an art medium is that I've always been interested in experimenting with novel and unconventional art media - I started incorporating power tools into a lot of my physical processes younger than most people were even allowed to breathe near them, and I took to digital art like a duck to water when it was the big, relatively new, controversial thing too, so really this just seems like the logical next step. More than that, it's exciting - it's not every day that we just invent an entirely new never-before-seen art medium! I have always been one to go fucking wild for that shit.

Which is, ironically, a huge part of why I almost reflexively recoil at how it's used in the corporate world: because the world of business, particularly the entertainment industry, has what often seems like less than zero interest in appreciating it as a novel medium.

And I often wonder how much less that would be the case - and, by extension, how much less vitriolic the discussion around it would be, and how many fewer well-meaning people would be falling for reactionary mythologies about where exactly the problems lie - if it hadn't reached the point of...at least an illusion of commercial viability, at exactly the moment it did.

See, the groundwork was laid in 2020, back during covid lockdowns, when we saw a massive spike in people relying on TV, games, books, movies, etc. to compensate for the lack of outdoor, physical, social entertainment. This was, seemingly, wonderful for the whole industry - but under late-stage capitalism, it was as much of a curse as it was a gift. When industries are run by people whose sole brain process is "line-go-up", tiny factors like "we're not going to be in lockdown forever" don't matter. CEOs got dollar signs in their eyes. Shareholders demanded not only perpetual growth, but perpetual growth at this rate or better. Even though everyone with an ounce of common sense was screaming "this is an aberration, this is not sustainable" - it didn't matter. The business bros refused to believe it. This was their new normal, they were determined to prove -

And they, predictably, failed to prove it.

So now the business bros are in a pickle. They're beholden to the shareholders to do everything within their power to maintain the infinite growth they promised, in a world with finite resources. In fact, by precedent, they're beholden to this by law. Fiduciary duty has been interpreted in court to mean that, given the choice between offering a better product and ensuring maximum returns for shareholders, the latter MUST be a higher priority; reinvesting too much in the business instead of trying to make the share value increase as much as possible, as fast as possible, can result in a lawsuit - that a board member or CEO can lose, and have lost before - because it's not acting in the best interest of shareholders. If that unsustainable explosive growth was promised forever, all the more so.

And now, 2-3-4 years on, that impossibility hangs like a sword of Damocles over the heads of these media company CEOs. The market is fully saturated; the number of new potential customers left to onboard is negligible. Some companies began trying to "solve" this "problem" by violating consumer privacy and charging per household member, which (also predictably) backfired because those of us who live in reality and not statsland were not exactly thrilled about the concept of being told we couldn't watch TV with our own families. Shareholders are getting antsy, because their (however predictably impossible) infinite lockdown-level profits...aren't coming, and someone's gotta make up for that, right? So they had already started enshittifying, making excuses for layoffs, for cutting employee pay, for duty creep, for increasing crunch, for lean-staffing, for tightening turnarounds-

And that was when we got the first iterations of AI image generation that were actually somewhat useful for things like rapid first drafts, moodboards, and conceptualizing.

Lo! A savior! It might as well have been the digital messiah to the business bros, and their eyes turned back into dollar signs. More than that, they were being promised that this...both was, and wasn't art at the same time. It was good enough for their final product, or if not it would be within a year or two, but it required no skill whatsoever to make! Soon, you could fire ALL your creatives and just have Susan from accounting write your scripts and make your concept art with all the effort that it takes to get lunch from a Star Trek replicator!

This is every bit as much bullshit as the promise of infinite lockdown-level growth, of course, but with shareholders clamoring for the money they were recklessly promised, executives are looking for anything, even the slightest glimmer of a new possibility, that just might work as a life raft from this sinking ship.

So where are we now? Well, we're exiting the "fucking around" phase and entering "finding out". According to anecdotes I've read, companies are, allegedly, already hiring prompt engineers (or "prompters" - can't give them a job title that implies there's skill or thought involved, now can we, that just might imply they deserve enough money to survive!)...and most of them not only lack the skill to manually post-process their works, but don't even know how (or perhaps aren't given access) to fully use the software they specialize in, being blissfully unaware of (or perhaps not able/allowed to use) features such as inpainting or img2img. It has been observed many times that LLMs are being used to flood once-reputable information outlets with hallucinated garbage. I can verify - as can nearly everyone who was online in the aftermath of the Glasgow Willy Wonka Dashcon Experience - that the results are often outright comically bad.

To anyone who was paying attention to anything other than please-line-go-up-faster-please-line-go-please (or buying so heavily into reactionary mythologies about why AI can be dangerous in industry that they bought the tech companies' false promises too and just thought it was a bad thing), this was entirely predictable. Unfortunately for everyone in the blast radius, common sense has never been an executive's strong suit when so much money is on the line.

Much like CGI before it, what we have here is a whole new medium that is seldom being treated as a new medium with its own unique strengths, but more often being used as a replacement for more expensive labor, no matter how bad the result may be - nor, for that matter, how unjust it may be that the labor is so much cheaper.

And it's all because of timing. It's all because it came about in the perfect moment to look like a life raft in a moment of late-stage capitalist panic. Any port in a storm, after all - even if that port is a non-Euclidean labyrinth of soggy, rotten botshit garbage.

Any port in a storm, right? ...right?

All images generated using Simple Stable, under the Code of Ethics of Are We Art Yet?

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

The Radio Times magazine from the 29 July-04 August 2023 :)

THE SECOND COMING

How did Terry Pratchett and Neil gaiman overcome the small matter of Pratchett's death to make another series of their acclaimed divine comedy?

For all the dead authors in the world,” legendary comedy producer John Lloyd once said, “Terry Pratchett is the most alive.” And he’s right. Sir Terry is having an extremely busy 2023… for someone who died in 2015.

This week sees the release of Good Omens 2, the second series of Amazon’s fantasy comedy drama based on the cult novel Pratchett co-wrote with Neil Gaiman in the late 1980s. This will be followed in the autumn by a new spin-off book from Pratchett’s Discworld series, Tiffany Aching’s Guide to Being a Witch, co-written by Pratchett’s daughter Rhianna and children’s author Gabrielle Kent. The same month, we’ll also get A Stroke of the Pen, a collection of “lost” short stories written by Sir Terry for local newspapers in the 70s and 80s and recently rediscovered. Clearly, while there are no more books coming from Pratchett – a hard drive containing all drafts and unpublished work was crushed by a vintage steamroller shortly after the author’s death, as per his specific wishes – people still want to visit his vivid and addictive worlds in new ways.

Good Omens 2 will be the first test of how this can work. The original book started life as a 5,000-word short story by Gaiman, titled William the Antichrist and envisioned as a bit of a mashup of Richmal Crompton’s Just William books and the 70s horror classic The Omen. What would happen, Gaiman had mused, if the spawn of Satan had been raised, not by a powerful American diplomat, but by an extremely normal couple in an idyllic English village, far from the influence of hellish forces? He’d sent the first draft to bestselling fantasy author Pratchett, a friend of many years, and then forgotten about it as he busied himself with continuing to write his massively popular comic books, including Violent Cases, Black Orchid and The Sandman, which became a Netflix series last year.

Pratchett loved the idea, offering to either buy the concept from Gaiman or co-write it. It was, as Gaiman later said, “like Michelangelo phoning and asking if you want to paint a ceiling” The pair worked on the book together from that point on, rewriting each other as they went and communicating via long phone calls and mailed floppy discs. “The actual mechanics worked like this: I would do a bit, then Neil would take it away and do a bit more and give it back to me,” Pratchett told Locus magazine in 1991. “We’d mess about with each other’s bits and pieces.”

Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch – to give it its full title –was published in 1990 to huge acclaim. It was one of, astonishingly, five Terry Pratchett novels to be published that year (he averaged two a year, including 41 Discworld novels and many other standalone works and collaborations).

It was also, clearly, extremely filmable, and studios came knocking — though getting it made took a while. rnvo decades on from its writing, four years after Pratchett's death from Alzheimer's disease aged 66, and after several doomed attempts to get a movie version off the ground, Good Omens finally made it to TV screens in 2019, scripted and show-run by Gaiman himself. "Terry was egging me on to make it into television. He knew he was dying, and he knew that I wouldn't start it without him," Gaiman revealed in a 2019 Radio Times interview. Amazon and the BBC co-produced with Pratchett's company Narrativia and Gaiman's Blank Corporation production studios, with Michael Sheen and David Tennant cast in the central roles of Aziraphale the angel and Crowley the demon. The show was a hit, not just with fans of its two creators, but with a whole new young audience, many of whom had no interest in Discworld or Sandman. Social media networks like Tumblr and TikTok were soon awash with cosplay, artwork and fan fiction. The original novel became, for the first time, a New York Times bestseller.

A follow up was, on one level, a no-brainer. The world Pratchett and Gaiman had created was vivid, funny and accessible, and Tennant and Sheen had found an intriguing romantic spark in their chemistry not present in the novel.

There was, however, a huge problem. There wasn't a second Good Omens book to base it on. But there was the ghost of an idea.

In 1989, after the book had been sold but before it had come out, the two authors had laid on fivin beds in a hotel room at a convention in Seattle and, jet-lagged and unable to sleep, plotted out, in some detail, what would happen in a sequel, provisionally titled 668, The II Neighbour of the Beast.

"It was a good one, too" Gaiman wrote in a 2021 blog. "We fully intended to write it, whenever we next had three or four months free. Only I went to live in America and Terry stayed in the UK, and after Good Omens was published, Sandman became SANDMAN and Discworld became DISCWORLD(TM) and there wasn't a good time."

Back in 1991, Pratchett elaborated, "We even know some of the main characters in it. But there's a huge difference between sitting there chatting away, saying, 'Hey, we could do this, we could do that,' and actually physically getting down and doing it all again." In 2019, Gaiman pillaged some of those ideas for Good Omens series one (for example, its final episode wasn't in the book at all), and had left enough threads dangling to give him an opening for a sequel. This is the well he's returned to for Good Omens 2, co-writing with comic John Finnemore - drafted in, presumably, to plug the gap left Pratchett's unparalleled comedic mind. No small task.

Projects like Good Omens 2 are an important proving ground for Pratchett's legacy: can the universes he conjured endure without their creator? And can they stay true to his spirit? Sir Terry was famously protective of his creations, and there have been remarkably few adaptations of his work considering how prolific he was. "What would be in it for me?" he asked in 2003. "Money? I've got money."

He wanted his work treated reverently and not butchered for the screen. It's why Good Omens and projects like Tiffany Aching's Guide to Being a Witch are made with trusted members of the inner circle like Neil Gaiman and Rhianna Pratchett at the helm. It's also why the author's estate, run by Pratchett's former assistant and business manager Rob Wilkins, keeps a tight rein on any licensed Pratchett material — it's a multi-million dollar media empire still run like a cottage industry.

And that's heartening. Anyone who saw BBC America's panned 2021 Pratchett adaptation The Watch will know how badly these things can go when a studio is allowed to run amok with the material without oversight. These stories deserve to be told, and these worlds deserve to be explored — properly. And there are, apparently, many plans afoot for more Pratchett on the screen. You can only hope that, somewhere, he'll be proud of the results.

After all, as he wrote himself, "No one is finally dead until the ripples they cause in the world die away, until the clock wound up winds down, until the wine she made has finished its ferment, until the crop they planted is harvested. The span of someone's life is only the core of their actual existence."

While those ripples continue to spread, Sir Terry Pratchett remains very much alive. MARC BURROWS

DIVINE DUO

An angel and a demon walk into a pub... Michael Sheen and David Tennant on family, friendship and Morecambe & Wise

Outside it's cold winter's day and we're in a Scottish studio, somewhere between Edinburgh and Glasgow. But inside it's lunchtime in The Dirty Donkey pub in the heart of London, with both Michael Sheen and David Tennant surveying the scene appreciatively. "This is a great pub," says Sheen eagerly, while Tennant calls it "the best Soho there can be. A slightly heightened, immaculate, perfect, dreamy Soho."

Here, a painting of the absent landlord — the late Terry Pratchett, co-creator, with Neil Gaiman, of the series' source novel — looms over punters. Around the corner is AZ Fell and Co Antiquarian and Unusual Books. It's the bookshop owned by Sheen's character, the angel Aziraphale, and the place to where Tennant's demon Crowley is inevitably drawn.

It's day 74 of an 80-day shoot for a series that no one, least of all the leading actors, ever thought would happen, due to the fact that Pratchett and Gaiman hadn't ever published any sequel to their 1990 fantasy satire. Tennant explains, "What we didn't know was that Neil and Terry had had plots and plans..."

Still, lots of good things are in Good Omens 2, which expands on the millennia-spanning multiverse of the first series. These include a surprisingly naked side of John Hamm, and roles for both Tennant's father-in-law (Peter Davison) and 21-year-old son Ty. At its heart, though, remains the brilliant banter between the two leading men — as Sheen puts it, "very Eric and Ernie !" — whose chemistry on the first series led to one of the more surprising saviours of lockdown telly.

Good Omens is back — but you've worked together a lot in the meantime. Was there a connective tissue between series one of Good Omens and Staged, your lockdown sitcom?

David: Only in as much as the first series went out, then a few months later, we were all locked in our houses. And because of the work we'd done on Good Omens, it occurred that we might do something else. I mean, Neil Gaiman takes full responsibility for Staged. Which, to some extent, he's probably right to do!

Michael: We've got to know each other through doing this. Our lives have gotten more entwined in all kinds of ways — we have children who've now become friends, and our families know each other.

There have been hints of a romantic storyline between the two characters. How much of an undercurrent is that in this series.

David: Nothing's explicit.

Michael: I felt from the very beginning that part of what would be interesting to explore is that Aziraphale is a character, a being, who just loves. How does that manifest itself in a very specific relationship with another being? Inevitably, as there is with everything in this story, there's a grey area. The fact that people see potentially a "romantic relationship", I thought that was interesting and something to explore.

There was a petition to have the first series banned because of its irreverent take on Christian tropes. Series two digs even more deeply into the Bible with the story of Job. How much of a badge of honour is it that the show riles the people who like to ban things?

David: It's not an irreligious show at all. It's actually very respectful of the structure of that sort of religious belief. The idea that it promotes Satanism [is nonsense]. None of the characters from hell are to be aspired to at all! They're a dreadful bunch of non-entities. People are very keen to be offended, aren't they? They're often looking for something to glom on to without possibly really examining what they think they're complaining about.

Michael, you're known as an activist, and you're in the middle of Making BBC drama The Way, which "taps into the social and political chaos of today's world". Is it important for you to use your plaform to discuss causes you believe in?

Michael: The Way is not a political tract, it's just set in the area that I come from. But it has to matter to you, doesn't it? More and more as I get older, [I find] it can be a real slog doing this stuff. You've got to enjoy it. And if it doesn't matter to you, then it's just going to be depressing.

David, Michael has declared himself a "not-for-profit" actor. Has he tried to persuade you to give up all your money too?

David: What an extraordinary question! One is always aware that one has a certain responsibility if one is fortunate and gets to do a job that often doesn't feel like a job. You want to do your bit whenever you can. But at the same time, I'm an actor. I'm not about to give that up to go into politics or anything. But I'll do what I can from where I live.

Well, your son and your father-in-law are also starring in this series. How about that, jobs for the boys!

David: I know! It was a delight to get to be on set with them. And certainly an unexpected one for me. Neil, on two occasions, got to bowl up to me and say, "Guess who we've cast?!"

How do you feel about your US peers going on strike?

David: It's happening because there are issues that need to be addressed. Nobody's doing this lightly. These are important issues, and they've got to be sorted out for the future of our industry. There's this idea that writers and actors are all living high on the hog. For huge swathes of our industry, that's just not the case. These people have got to be protected.

Michael: We have to be really careful that things don't slide back to the way they were pre the 1950s, when the stories that we told were all coming from one point of view and the stories of certain people, or communities within our society, weren't represented. There's a sense that now that's changed for ever and it'll never go back. But you worry when people can't afford to have the opportunities that other people have. We don't want the story that we tell about ourselves to be myopic. You want it to be as inclusive as possible

Staged series 3 recently broadcast. It felt like the show's last hurrah — or is there more mileage? Sheen and Tennant go on holiday?

David: That's the Christmas special! One Foot in the Algarve! On the Buses Go to Spain!

Michael: I don't think we were thinking beyond three, were we?

So is it time for a conscious uncoupling for you two — Eric and Ernie say goodbye?

David: Oh, never say never, will we?

Michael: And it's more Hinge and Bracket.

David: Maybe that's what we do next — The Hinge and Bracket Story. CRAIG McLEAN

[autolenaphilia]

Why enshittification happens and how to stop it.

The enshittification of the internet and increasingly the software we use to access it is driven by profit. It happens because corporations are machines for making profits from end users, the users and customers are only seen as sources of profits. Their interests are only considered if it can help the bottom line. It's capitalism.

For social media it's users are mainly seen by the companies that run the sites as a way for getting advertisers to pay money that can profit the shareholders. And social media is in a bit of death spiral right now, since they have seldom or never been profitable and investor money is drying up as they realize this.

So the social media companies. are getting more and more desperate for money. That's why they are getting more aggressive with getting you to watch ads or pay for the privilege of not watching ads. It won't work and tumblr and all the other sites will die eventually.

But it's not just social media companies, it's everything tech-related. It gets worse the more monopolistic a tech giant is. Google is abusing its chrome-based near monopoly over the web, nerfing adblockers, trying to drm the web, you name it. And Microsoft is famously a terrible company, spying on Windows users and selling their data. Again, there is so much money being poured into advertising, at least 493 billion globally, the tech giants want a slice of that massive pie. It's all about making profits for shareholders, people be damned.

And the only insurance against this death spiral is not being run by a corporation. If the software is being developed by a non-profit entity, and it's open source, there is no incentive for the developers to fuck over the users for the sake of profits for shareholders, because there aren't any profits, and no shareholders.

Free and Open source software is an important part of why such software development can stay non-corporate. It allows for volunteers to contribute to the code and makes it harder for users to be secretly be fucked over by hidden code.

Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird are good examples of this. There is a Mozilla corporation, but it exists only for legal reasons and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the non-profit Mozilla foundation. There are no shareholders. That means the Mozilla corporation is not really a corporation in the sense that Google is, and as an organization has entirely different incentives. If someone tells you that Mozilla is just another corporation, (which people have said in the notes of posts about firefox on this very site) they are spreading misinformation.

That's why Firefox has resisted the enshittification of the internet so well, it's not profit driven. And people who develop useful plugins that deshitify the web like Ublock origin and Xkit are as a rule not profit-driven corporations.

And you can go on with other examples of non-profit software like Libreoffice and VLC media player, both of which you should use.

And you can go further, use Linux as your computer's operating system.. It's the only way to resist the enshitification that the corporate duopoly of Microsoft and Apple has brought to their operating system. The plethora of community-run non-profit Linux distributions like Debian, Mint and Arch are the way to counteract that, and they will stay resistant to the same forces (creating profit for shareholders) that drove Microsoft to create Windows 11.

Of course not all Linux distributions are non-profits. There are corporate created distros like Red Hat's various distros, Canonical's Ubuntu and Suse's Opensuse, and they prove the point I'm making. There has some degree of enshittification going on with those, red hat going closed source and Canonical with the snap store for example. Mint is by now a succesful community-driven response to deshitify Ubuntu by removing snaps for example, and even they have a back-up plan to use Debian as a base in case Canonical makes Ubuntu unuseable.

As for social media, which I started with, I'm going to stay on tumblr for now, but it will definitely die. The closest thing to a community run non-profit replacement I can see is Mastodon, which I'm on as @autolenaphilia@chaosfem.tw.

You don't have to keep using corporate software, and have it inevitably decline because the corporations that develop it cares more about its profits than you as an end user.

The process of enshittification proves that corporations being profit-driven don't mean they will create a better product, and in fact may cause them to do the opposite. And the existence of great free and open source software, created entirely without the motivation of corporate profits, proves that people don't need to profit in order to help their fellow human beings. It kinda makes you question capitalism.

[lady-raziel]

ALSO although i'm sure people are so fucking sick of hearing my thoughts by this point, I'd like to shut down the idea that because this essentially happened over the weekend that should excuse the lack of response (since watcher doesn't work weekends or so i've heard). look, i'm a person who totally supports a work-life balance and leaving work at the office. nobody deserves to be on call 24/7. that's not healthy and it doesn't make anyone more effective at their job.

however. there is a difference between logging out from a normal workday and logging out after you've just dropped a huge announcement that you've been hyping up, and doing so on a Friday afternoon before a tour. if a brand crisis occurs outside of work hours on a perfectly normal day, there's a little more leeway in not jumping on it right away as opposed to a time when you absolutely should be monitoring digital response, if only to pick out your favorite memes and posts to share on your socials (in the alternate universe where this subscription service move went really well and everyone loved it). not knowing what's going on at a time when you shouldn't be expected to know what's going on is pretty different than doing nothing when you absolutely should be watching for company news outside of normal hours.

all that being said, even in the first case where something bad happens that you need to take action on outside of work hours, waiting until Monday morning to do anything while the problem gets worse, particularly in a case like this with so much on the line, would get pretty much every comms or PR person I know severely reprimanded or fired. yes, you have a set work schedule each week. but in the end your job is to protect the brand, and you don't get to decide when threats come at you. your job is to formulate a response as soon as you know there's a problem. if you don't do that? you don't have a job anymore.

i say this with the full knowledge that watcher likely doesn't have a full "director of communications" role that entails reputation management on staff. They have a social media manager, yes, but full on corporate communications and all this other stuff really isn't (and shouldn't be!) that person's job description. (as a person who's worked as a social media manager i have a lot of thoughts about how other roles get smushed into that one and how that's not good for anyone, but that's another post.)

is it possible that watcher has contracted an outside firm to do PR/communications? sure. but in that case, a professional firm would ABSOLUTELY be on call over the weekend to help a client. that would literally be part of the fee paid to them. if they are paying a firm, and that firm hasn't helped them formulate a response and gotten it out by now, then they need to fire that group immediately. and also factor this into the conversation about money management if they've been paying a firm (none of which are cheap!) and getting such a horrible return on investment.

long story short, if your office building caught fire over the weekend, would you wait until Monday morning to do something? even if you don't own a fire extinguisher? even if you don't have a local fire department you can call? even if you were the one who set the building on fire? no-- because by then you might not even have an office anymore. emergencies aren't 9-to-5 problems.

[bikiniarmorbattledamage]

Granblue Fantasy, "Woke" International Standards and pandering to toxic trash gamers

So, I'm not going to name him because I don't particularly want his fans finding it via searches and sending me weird nonsense to my inbox, and honestly I don't want people who don't know him receiving psychic damage due to exposure to his opinions - but a certain streaming personality whose primary contribution is toxicity is getting angry that various mega-corporations that happen to originate in East Asia are continuing to focus on marketing broadly to get the most sales, rather than just pandering to miserable straight white men who are scared of anyone different to them.

Basically the same people who used to scream "Sex sells! Deal with it! Facts don't care about your feelings!" are now having breakdowns when it turns out massive mega-corporations don't want to be their friend/nanny/punching-bag, they want to make as much money as possible and the obvious way to achieve that is to broaden their audience, to make more people interested in buying their game.

Because the $100 from a personal with a marginalized identity who joins the series midway, spends exactly as well as the $100 for the cishet white guy who then goes on to start a harassment campaign against a developer via his social media clout, and uses the proceeds to buy Hot Pockets and bootleg NSFW merchandise (I assume).

Granblue Fantasy is a game series which has... largely resisted this trend. It's been releasing games, etc for ten years so, so many depictions of the player characters could be used as an illustration of our double standards tag.

(Also the male protagonist, Gran, is the one the series is named for when translated into English... there is no Djeetablue Fantasy - despite the many attempts by the fanbase to use memes to manifest it. However her name is incorporated into the native Japanese title... nobody tell him in case he decides that's "woke".)

So this guy who screams about studios who go woke, and was 100% going to play the latest entry in it... he'd support it right?

Nah, he complained he didn't like the story, he didn't get it and posted videos of him doing his signature "this is so bad" face. Man who lives off Hot Pockets and has unreasonable expectations of everyone else, failed to have his expectations met.

It's probably good he bailed out there before he found out that Granblue Fantasy, and a lot of game series like it - often have a lot of female fans who are in it for the story, the characters, the cute boys and the generally fun of the world.... all the stuff he hates.

If you doubt this, there's a foolproof way to check....

Oh wow I wonder why more and more studios are deciding it's a bad idea to court the attention of guys like him.

-wincenworks

[pillowfort-social]

We've had a couple folks check in with us to see how we're doing with how crazy this week has been on the internet. And we're touched, really. Thank you for thinking of us!

All things considered, we're doing as okay as we can be. Our Developer Team is working on a our next site update and squashing bugs. From a social media standpoint we're encouraging people to follow us over on Bluesky.

As we stated in our previous funding update your support has helped us remain online until August. In case you are curious, here are our current statistics:

March Funding Update - 55%

We've had a couple questions regarding what funding means after 2023 End of Year Fundraiser and yes, each month we are able to hit at least 100% of our funding goal extends our site's life by a month. The End of Year Fundraiser gave us enough funding to remain online until at least July 2024 if we did not meet any funding goals. Your support has already extended our life until August 2024 which is incredible given how dire things were at the end of last year.

For example, if we are able to at least meet 100% of our $5,000 goal in March we would have enough funding until September.

We hope this answers any lingering questions on that.

For those of you new here: Hi! We're not a large corporation nor are we backed by any investors. We're a small team of part-time contractors passionate about everything fandom and what Pillowfort is all about. Our funding is still entirely user-funded thanks to the support of donations and subscribing to Pillowfort Premium (which gives pretty neat benefits such higher image uploads, multiple avatars, and premium avatar frames).

Active Users: 174,424

Communities: 10,062

Total Pillowfort Premium Subscriptions: 630

Anyways, thanks for reading. We hope you're staying safe and healthy. And in case no one has told you today: the world is better because you're in it.

[ingravinoveritas]

Following up on this excellent post from @nightgoodomens, it really is astonishing to see so many people in the GO fandom misunderstanding the characters/personalities of Aziraphale and Crowley. While I by no means am against people having head canons or differing interpretations, it has become frustrating to see people pushing their ideas about Aziraphale and Crowley onto others and declaring them to be official canon, leaving no room for any kind of discussion.

One of the things spoken about in the above linked post is the denigrating of Crowley, which seems to be a near constant in the fandom at this point, particularly in relation to the "apology dance" scene. (Which, to be fair, is chock full of soft!Dom Aziraphale vibes--thank you, Michael Sheen.) What seems to keep getting missed is that the entire apology dance routine is something that Aziraphale and Crowley do to each other. There is just as much of a possibility that Crowley sat there with a similarly smug look on his face and let out a guttural, snakey "Very nice" when Aziraphale did the dance in the years he listed off, because they play this game together.

Aziraphale and Crowley's relationship is one of equals, and I think this is also something people seem to not understand well. It seems as though a lot of fans who project themselves onto Crowley want to be taken care of, and so they want to believe the same of Crowley, and that the reason he wants to be taken care of is because he is broken. But someone doesn't have to be broken to want someone to take care of them. Sometimes the people who are a shambles on the outside can be dominant, just as sometimes the most buttoned up, put together people can also be submissive. And sometimes the people who look in control on the outside can feel not at all that way on the inside.

But this nuanced thinking seems to increasingly be difficult for many GO fans, particularly those who spend a great deal of time on social media, a place where people are either blindly praised or denigrated and torn down, and where such behavior greatly reinforces that binary, black-and-white mindset. We so badly want the world to be clear-cut--good vs. evil, heroes vs. bad guys--but very often that just isn't how things work. And it is exactly what Terry and Neil were trying to speak against in the GO book (and subsequently, the TV show).

The other thing that I think influences a lot of fans' perceptions about Aziraphale and Crowley is their chosen corporations (i.e., Crowley being thin and Aziraphale being plump). There is an automatic assumption that thin somehow equals more vulnerable, and for all of the emphasis that is placed on Aziraphale and Crowley being genderfluid/nonbinary/not subscribing to traditional gender roles, it's Crowley who seems to be viewed as more androgynous/femme, and is therefore looked at as inherently vulnerable. Meanwhile Aziraphale is thicker and viewed as more masculine, and therefore he is somehow inherently not vulnerable. Yet if the body types were reversed, it seems highly likely that fans' attitudes toward them would be much different.

(It also saddens me that this seems to mirror the fans' treatment of Michael and David, where Michael serves as a target for the fans' venom and is seen as less desirable/more threatening because he presents more traditionally masculine, while David is not targeted or attacked and is seen as more desirable/less threatening because he presents much more androgynously. Consequently, many fans find it easy not to sympathize with Michael, and when you can readily disregard someone's feelings, it becomes easier to see them as "less." In the case of Aziraphale and Michael, it leaves no room for either one to be vulnerable and is unfair to both of them.)

What I have always taken away from Good Omens--and from Michael and David's portrayal of Aziraphale and Crowley and how deeply they both understand these characters--is that Crowley doesn't need to be a perfect angel for Aziraphale to like him. He just needs to be a little bit of a good person. And Aziraphale doesn't need to be a perfect demon for Crowley to like him--he just needs to be enough of a bastard to be worth knowing. Neither one has to fully subscribe to the other's outlook or point of view to listen to what they have to say.

Aziraphale and Crowley meet in the middle. In the place that becomes their side, and where they take care of each other, fight with each other, and love each other. And that's more than most of us could ever ask or hope for...

[blumineck]

How long do videos usually take, when it comes to filming and editing? Say, if you put out a 1 min tutorial on something, what would be the (gods I hate to use corporate language) turnaround time for it?

Also, what sort of hardware do you use for filming, and software for editing? I'm always curious about the backstage stuff of content creators.

Always love to watch your videos, you're definitely a bard :3

This is a great question! It varies a lot depending on the video, but in general for one of my 'fantasy tropes' videos, the breakdown is something like this:

- filming: ~2 hours (including setup, warmup, multiple takes, fluffing lines, waiting for the neighbour's dog to stop barking, etc.)

- editing: ~1-2 hours (at the end of filming I usually have around 25-30min footage. The first run of editing cuts the outtakes and fluff and takes it to around 5 minutes. Then there's another run or two to cut that down to around 2 minutes.)

I usually make 3 edits:

one clean without captions that I upload to tiktok so that I can use in-app captions, but I also keep a copy of this in case I need it later

one with built-in captions and text that I upload to instagram and here, so you get the captions without a tiktok watermark (unless I want to use sound from tiktok)

One for youtube because their shorts are max 1 minute so I have to cut a load of content and re-edit the captions. (I could post long form but their long stuff is landscape so I'd have to film everything twice!)

- Finally posting: ~30 minutes (titles, formatting, tags, thumbnails, keeping the app open until the upload finishes before starting the next one, etc.)

So in general it's about 4-5 hours for a final video that's around 2 minutes long. Sillier/ meme-ier stuff is more like 2 hours

- but the biggest variable is research/ training. For some videos I already have the information and skill and I just need to check some things, but for some I need to spend time looking up facts, and digging into history, and for others I then need to go away and practice a new skill, which is all hobby stuff that I love doing, but it's still time spent out of a limited budget!

(Which is why I'm starting to look at some more commercial options, patreon, agencies, etc. Because I'm trying to fit this on top of a day job, part time pole teaching, and family commitments, and some weeks it's... not easy)

I do almost all my filming on my phone (iphone... 11? Pro?- quite recent, bought sdcond hand), with one of those grippy arm tripod things, and a bluetooth microphone. Editing is done in an app called capcut, and finished off in various in-app editors for the social media apps.

Anyway, hope that's useful! Glad you like all this stuff! 😁

[probablyasocialecologist]

People of conscience around the world are rightfully shattered, enraged, and sometimes feeling powerless. Many feel compelled to boycott any and all products and services of companies tied in any way to Israel. The proliferation of extensive “boycott lists” on social media is an example of this. The question is how to make boycotts effective and actually have an impact in holding corporations accountable for their complicity in the suffering of Palestinians? The BDS movement uses the historically successful method of targeted boycotts inspired by the South African anti-apartheid movement, the US Civil Rights movement, the Indian anti-colonial struggle, among others worldwide. We must strategically focus on a relatively smaller number of carefully selected companies and products for maximum impact. Companies that play a clear and direct role in Israel’s crimes and where there is real potential for winning, as was the case with, among others, G4S, Veolia, Orange, Ben & Jerry’s and Pillsbury. Compelling such huge, complicit companies, through strategic and context-sensitive boycott and divestment campaigns, to end their complicity in Israeli apartheid and war crimes against Palestinians sends a very powerful message to hundreds of other complicit companies that “your time will come, so get out before it’s too late!” Many of the prohibitively long lists going viral on social media do the exact opposite of this strategic and impactful approach. They include hundreds of companies, many without credible evidence of their connection to Israel’s regime of oppression against Palestinians, making them ineffective. That being said, all peaceful popular efforts, including boycott and divestment, to hold all genuinely complicit corporations (and institutions) accountable for supporting Israel’s grave violations of Palestinian rights are justified and called for. It is perfectly legitimate, for instance, to boycott companies whose Israeli branch or franchise has supported Israel’s unfolding genocide in Gaza, some of which we mention below in the grassroots organic boycott targets section. Also, a company or product may make perfect sense as a boycott target in one context or city but not another. This context-sensitivity is a key principle of our movement. Regardless, we all have limited human capacity, so we’d better use it in the most effective way to achieve meaningful, sustainable results that can truly contribute to Palestinian liberation. We therefore call on our supporters to strengthen our targeted campaigns and boycott the complicit companies named on our website to maximize our collective impact. The following are the current top priority boycott targets of the global BDS movement.

[paraphwrites]

four days ago i made a post and @listrinha commented "The burry your gays became cancel your gays" and i have SO MANY THOUGHTS that i am making it into a post.

look it's 2024 we know about the 'burry the gays' trope and most of us are over it. we're over the queer characters being reduced to stereotypes and/or getting killed off. and we're over a lack of representation. so, what do streaming services do?

they create beautiful, incredibly well thought out and well made shows with queer characters. and then they cancel it after one season.

if you need to have multiple queer characters in a show, but corporations don't want to make "gay shows", what is the solution? make one season then cancel it off. then you have a whole host of lgbtq+ shows to cite, to say you're not homophobic, but you also don't have to make a bunch of multi seasoned queer shows.

now, i am not saying @netflix is homophobic. i've seen a lot of discourse about that lately and i truly don't think they are. netflix isn't homophobic because netflix is a COMPANY and companies don't have feelings or opinions. companies care about profit and profit alone. and queer shows inherently have a smaller target demographic, ergo a smaller audience, ergo less profit. ergo, it may be the case that making queer shows is less profitable than shows with a mostly straight cast. after all, companies want to appeal to the largest possible audience.

however! however. as i have talked about before, this is still inadvertently homophobic because it treats marginalized groups as equal to majorities. it says, because the majority is better for us, we will not create media for the minorities, and that lack of representation others minorities and it's a whole bloody cycle. basically, netflix isn't homophobic, but they may contribute to homophobia. and there is a distinction.

as times progress, tropes change and shift based on what is and isn't deemed ok by the society. so when we said 'burry the gays' is no longer ok? companies decided to cancel the gays, instead.

i would also like to take a brief aside about at the history of 'bury the gays.' originally, it was a trope that queer authors utilized to include homosexual relations in their media without facing legal or social backlash because "no they were never gay & they are dead!! it's ok!!" and this plays an important role in queer history! i've said it before and i've said it again: a lot of literary devices which we now think of as homophobic originated as a way for queer authors to express themselves in a time when they otherwise could not.

but do you wanna know WHY it's considered homophobic nowadays to use them? because companies who don't care about gay people utilize them as a way to make their piece more palatable despite the fact that, in western society, there is no legal backlash for including queer relationships. ergo, instead of being used by an individual to create a loving work of art, it is being used by a company to get as much profit as possible.

companies do not care about you. they do not care about queer people. they do not care about straight people. they only care for your money. so they will do whatever they can and disregard any and all history until people call them out on it. and then they will pivot. times change. tropes change. companies don't.

[qqueenofhades]

JSYK the OP of the Crab Day post is a self-identified conservative Christian. Can't speak to anything she may have done or said, but I do know that Crab Day wouldn't actually fix Tumblr - the site is running a 30mil *deficit,* which is different from debt. All Crab Day would do would be telling staff that their current policies get users to send them more money, which doesn't actually change anything. Corporations change only when their business strategy is losing the shareholders money.

Gotta be honest, my friend, I'm... not sure what you're trying to do here? Warn me that the original post was made by a Problematic Person (tm) and therefore that must mean it's all wrong, or.... what?

We know that Tumblr badly needs money, because they have told us that and openly admitted that the unpopular new changes were spurred by a need for increasing revenue. I logged on just now on desktop and got a suggestion that I could purchase an ad-free browsing subscription to help support the hellsite (which is the word they used, because they have very much embraced the joke). I have in fact already bought an ad-free subscription, both because I like the product Tumblr provides and want to keep using it in its current form, and because it makes my mobile experience immeasurably nicer. I am well aware that especially in this era of social media sites dropping like flies, the continued existence of a platform that is 30-million-dollars underwater (however you want to split hairs about exactly how) is not a guarantee. And we all complain about Tumblr, but we have all been here a long time (me, uh, over 10 years), we have a solid community, there's no other alternative that's really ever come up or gotten the same kind of uptake, and if it went under, we would be uh, screwed.

Tumblr is kind of a mess, it's the antithesis of every social media site, and it doesn't (for now) have the crap that makes The Artist Formerly Known As Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram so utterly unusable, or if it does, you can (mostly) turn it off. That's why we all like it and why, even if we are resolutely anti-capitalist gremlins who resist being marketed to with every fiber of our being, it doesn't change the fact that servers, staff, and all the rest cost real human-people money which the site, by their own frank admission, is struggling to raise. Even if staff does often make crappy updates, they generally at least TRY to listen to us and include a feature to make it optional or roll it back, unlike certain unnamed idiot billionaires. Their mockery of other social media sites can sometimes be a little much, but for now, Tumblr is pretty much the last place on the internet that does what it does, and I like it that way. If it went under and took my blog of 10+ years and all my friends with it, I would be incredibly sad.

That being the case, and basic financial realities being what they are, encouraging people to toss a few bucks at a TOTALLY OPTIONAL and fun gimmick that increases functionality for a product we like is actually not a bad thing. TumblrMart has crabs, checkmarks, Ea-Nasir merchandise (seriously), ad-free browsing, etc., and if our choice is voluntarily supporting the site through fun (and again, OPTIONAL) purchases versus having us all be involuntarily subject to some horrible data-scraping mechanism or forced off altogether because they couldn't keep the lights on, that is fine with me. Nobody is making anybody do or buy anything. But if you like the product Tumblr provides and want a fun material way to show your appreciation, then I don't think it's some Great Transgression to participate in that.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Mary L. Trump at The Good in Us Substack:

Normally, my issue with the corporate media is their failure to shine a light on stories that matter. But in this case, it seems some segments of the corporate media, primarily Fox, is hellbent on helping Donald interfere with his trial through jury intimidation. It’s a disturbing reality that we must confront. Last night, Donald Trump posted the following on social media: “They are catching undercover liberal activists lying to the judge,” Jesse Watters.

Lawyers and legal analysts like Ryan Goodman and Andrew Weissman made it clear that this was a serious breach, the most serious to date, of Judge Merchan’s gag order – one that should be dressed immediately.  The fact that Donald was quoting somebody else is irrelevant. This seemed to be a blatant case of jury tampering, especially since, at the time of this was posted, five jurors and all six alternates remained to be chosen. I fully expected today’s proceedings to begin with the judge announcing that the so-called Sandoval hearing, which he originally scheduled, would be held today before any other court business. This seemed to be a reasonable assumption considering the purpose of that hearing was so the judge can rule on the prosecution’s contention that Donald should be held in contempt and sanctioned accordingly.

Juror Number 2 dismissed

It’s not uncommon for a juror to be chosen and subsequently let go during the selection process. That was the case with Juror Four after the prosecution discovered the man may have been untruthful in some of his answers. Juror Two’s circumstances were different. She was excused after telling the court that she’d become concerned that her identity might be discovered after her family and  friends questioned her about her possible involvement in the trial following media coverage. The fact that the judge felt the need to keep the identities of jurors anonymous is a damning indictment of the criminal defendant. And clearly the jurors understand the inherent danger of being seated on this jury. 

To put this in perspective, my friend and former U.S. Attorney, Joyce White Vance explained, “Typically, you would only see that happen in a case involving violent organized crime.” Following the juror’s feedback, Judge Merchan reprimanded the press for reporting far too much information about the jurors. [Out of an abundance of caution, I deleted the section about the jurors from last night’s post.]

[...] In a disturbing display of media influence, Fox host Jesse Watters went through the list of jurors, with identifying characteristics like employment, gender, place of residence, and commented on each one. 

Watters then singled out any jurors who didn’t align with his idea of what a juror should be (pro-Donald) and cast doubt on their ability to be fair and impartial. This is not just unethical, it’s dangerous. Fox, on Donald’s behalf, is actively helping Donald create an atmosphere of fear among the jurors. In a just world, Watters would be fired for his irresponsible behavior, but Fox has no interest in justice. Consider what Josh Kovensky of Talking Points Memo, pointed out: “Instead of operating within the process of jury selection, which assumes that people are capable of setting aside whatever political beliefs or biases they may have in order to render a good faith judgment on the evidence, it casts the assumptions underlying that process as Trump’s enemy to be defeated, implying that the jurors themselves are incapable of both being impartial in their judgment of him and participating in a political system in which he is a main actor.”

[...]

Donald amplifies Fox, scares a juror, and breaks his gag order

So far, here’s the pattern: A Fox personality attacks the judge or jury, and then Donald shares it on Truth Social as a way to give himself plausible deniability: He can distance himself from the quote by saying it doesn’t represent what he actually believes. This is exactly what he did last night when he quoted Jesse Watters. Regardless of Donald’s attempts to pretend otherwise, this is a clear violation of his gag order and shows a blatant disregard for the legal process. He needs to be punished or this will spiral out of control quickly. We’re already seeing that his disrespectful behavior in the courtroom and flouting of norms — like refusing to stand when the prospective jurors enter the room or using his phone when nobody else is —has already gone too far. The gag order was imposed to prevent Donald from publicly speaking about witnesses, jurors, court staff and their families outside of the courtroom. Donald has run out of chances and his downfall will be of his own making.

[...]

Judge Merchan must lay the smackdown on Donald

Prosecutors have accused Donald of violating the court-imposed gag order SEVEN times since the commencement of the trial. And they will have a chance to make the case for Donald to be held accountable during a hearing next week. They have pointed to public statements and social media posts made by Donald over the past few days as evidence of these violations. They have described the situation as “ridiculous” and have called for it to stop, expressing frustration over Donald’s repeated breaches of the order. Former federal prosecutor Shannon Wu has now called on Merchan to strengthen the gag order to any communication about the trial beyond Donald saying he’s innocent and plans to defend himself. At the very least, Judge Merchan needs to be unequivocal in telling Donald and defense counsel that enough is enough. The repeated violations of the gag order and Donald’s attempts to interfere with the trial warrant serious repercussions. He cannot keep getting away with it.

Mary L. Trump writes in her Substack on how right-wing media outlets (esp. Fox's Jesse Watters) and Donald Trump are conducting witness tampering on the jury for the Trump falsification of business records trial. Trump Trial

[deltadarlingf1]

On the Reality of Dating a Famous/Wealthy Man:

I was going to post this on Twitter but decided I wanted to a do a long form post. So an explanation of this tweet, which was inspired by the screenshot just below it:

First a disclaimer: I am not at ALL saying Mick is anything like the men I'm about to talk about (I genuinely doubt it). I'm using this response to him hard-launching his relationship as an example of the mindset I see in a LOT of the young female F1 fans. If you read the gossip blogs, you've seen posts like this and worse, particularly on Charles, Pierre, Danny, and Carlos's gfs.

As I said in my tweet, if these young girls knew what it can be like behind closed doors for the WAGs of the rich and the famous, they probably wouldn't make statements like this.

I see a lot of younger fans here on social media posting their imagines and fan fics, and as someone a bit older than them, it does worry me. I know for most people it's simple fantasy and fun, but when I see things like the above I know there are some younger girls that really just don't get it.

My aim in posting this is that maybe it'll be a bit of a reality check for some of those girls. And I don't mean that in a bullying way, I mean that in a "please don't look at these smiling pretty girls with the closet full of designer, perfect body, and seemingly perfect life and feel bad about yourself" way.

Lastly, how do I know any of what I'm about to talk about? I wish I was just chatting shit, but I have lived through all of what I'm posting below as the daughter of a "man" of wealth. His money came from corporate life, not fame, but when you have as much as my "father" did/does, you rub elbows with the famous. Everything I detail below happened to me, my mother, and the wives of my "father"'s coworkers. I'm now watching history repeat itself as I've moved up the corporate ladder and find myself around millionaires and billionaires on a regular basis.

1. The "Starter Wife" Phenomenon

In wealthy circles there's the concept of a "Starter Wife". This is the woman wealthy/famous men marry because they were high school sweethearts, worked together early on, or they dated before the man had his "come up". Sometimes men marry these women and have kids for the SOLE purpose of having the "Family Man" persona. For famous men, this can be good PR. For wealthy men, this can boost their career.

A lot of these men fucking HATE their wives. By the time they have money, they want the freedom of single life back. They can now afford their "dream woman" and loathe being "stuck" with their current wife because of it. Leading to:

2. Serial Cheating

These men have all the money and resources they need to live a double life. Not to mention built-in time and an alibi: They're on the road all the time for their job, work trips, events, etc. No time unaccounted for because they're always working.

Some of those work trips to wine-and-dine clients include runs to the local strip club, escorts, and in some cases some of those escorts are of INCREDIBLY questionable age (in reality, they are victims of trafficking). Again, I wish I was talking out of my ass, I have seen this shit with my own eyes and wish to the Gods I hadn't. Then there's also:

3. Domestic Violence

This is bad enough when it's a wealthy man whose built that "Family Man" persona to protect himself, but it's even worse when they're famous. No one believes the victims, in some cases the woman is financially stuck and can't just take the kids and run when it happens.

And for some women it hard to leave the man they thought their partner was and, yes, to let the lifestyle go. Speaking of the lifestyle there's:

4. The Loneliness

This is a big one for the F1 girlies I see posting their imagines and fanfics and what not. The fairytale of "he'll make time for me because he loves me and I'd be special. I'd be different."

These men are busy as shit. That Cartier Bracelet you envy on these girls is often a "sorry I missed your birthday". The big bouquet of roses is a "sorry I had to leave our trip early." Yes, we know the joke "well at least I can cry in a Ferrari", but that shit will wear on you more than you can believe. I can't tell you growing up how hurt I was when my performances were missed, major dates were forgotten, or my proud life updates were met with "yeah, uh-huh, hold on I have to take this call."

Of course there are good times, of course there's memories you'll cling to, but when you're out, you often realize how alone you felt in the relationship. Lastly, and most poignant with this F1 WAG nonsense:

5. Keeping Up Appearances

You're no longer your own person in a relationship with these men, you are an extension of them. With famous men, you're a part of their "branding".

You have to look a certain way, act a certain way, talk to the right people, have the right friends. In the corporate-wealth world, that means making your partner look good, playing the part of the trophy wife and perfect mother. Smile in front of those coworkers that you know just spent the last business trip drinking, gambling, and cheating on their wives. Wear the right dress to the corporate dinner to make his coworkers envy him, but don't dress too sexy or he'll grow angry and think you're trying to cheat.

If you're dating someone famous, by the GODS, you better look immaculate in every post. You better be there to support him at his events, but if you're there too often you're "attention-seeking". You better have model good-looks, but if you ARE a model, you're "a jobless loser trying to profit on him". Don't post him on your IG, but if you happen to post that you're in the same city as him, you're "dropping hints". If he posts you, it's only because you "probably begged him to".

It's a maddening dance where you cannot win for losing. And once you break up, enjoy letting the world decide if he should have stayed with you, or if they're relieved that he finally got away from "that selfish bitch".

Do what you will with the above. I just wanted to get it off my chest. But I do hope that maybe, MAYBE, it'll give someone that needs it some perspective.

[workingclasshistory]

On this day, 3 July 1988, the United States Navy shot down Iran Air flight 655, a civilian passenger plane with 290 people on board, all of whom were killed. The victims included 66 children, and an entire family of 16 who were on their way to a wedding in Dubai. The incident took place during the war between Iran and Iraq, which was led by Saddam Hussein and backed by the US. It followed a catalogue of errors, including the naval officer in charge of firing the missile aboard the USS Vincennes hitting the wrong key no fewer than 23 times before it was eventually fired. The US military then claimed that the Vincennes was rushing to defend a merchant vessel under attack from Iran when an aircraft outside the commercial air corridor was descending in "attack mode" towards the ship – which was false on all three counts. They also tried to claim the ship was in international waters, and naval officials even deleted an Iranian island from the map they showed to Congress. In fact it was in Iranian waters, in clear violation of international law. Meanwhile, the US media backed up the official line, with the New York Times apportioning blame to the pilot, Mohsen Rezaian, and Iran. In the aftermath, officers and crew of the Vincennes were welcomed home and decorated as heroes, receiving combat action ribbons and in one case a Commendation Medal for "heroic achievement" for "quickly and precisely complet[ing] the firing procedure." The Captain was later awarded the Legion of Merit for "exceptionally meritorious conduct as a commanding officer." Donations from the public to construct a monument honouring the USS Vincennes in Indiana also shot up following the incident, and the monument was constructed and dedicated the following year. If you value our social media posts, connect with us directly, independent of social media corporations, by joining our occasional email list: https://shop.workingclasshistory.com/pages/sign-up https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=655304546642764&set=a.602588028581083&type=3

[roo-bastmoon]

The Long Game

First, let's acknowledge some major mismanagement by BigHit. Then, let's talk about what I think *might possibly* be their long game.

These are just guesses I have right now--I'm not stating facts and my opinions are subject to change as new info becomes available. But come with me for a few minutes...

In early 2022, Jimin's mail was "omitted" four times by BigHit employees, which lead to late insurance premium payments, which led to an on-paper "seizure" of his apartment. The press sat on that news for three months until the day his With You OST dropped and the scandal overshadowed his release. Jimin went to ground, avoided all social media for months. At this time, Jimin's personal information was leaked on the internet, and that was the last time we saw Jikook hang out alone that we know of.

Now in 2023, since Jimin's album FACE dropped, we already know about the sabotaged sales and streams by Hanteo, Billboard, YouTube, and Spotify. There was the issue with his in-ears not working properly during an encore. On top of all that drama, BigHit didn't get all the physicals shipped in time, they didn't playlist his songs for several days, they never sent his songs to radio (that we can see), they made one tweet to acknowledge Jimin's #1 on Hot100 but nothing else--not even a cake like the other solo albums got, they didn't let him film more than two music videos when they did that for their new groups, the press releases about their stocks going up after Hot100 also credited their new groups, and Jimin only had 9 days of uninterrupted promo between other members' works.

Now I am not a conspiracy theorist. I well understand that the military enlistment compressed schedules, and that each member had say in their creative works and promotions. I'm not a manti. But none of the above is a good look. Add up all those fumbles together, and you could make a solid case for mismanagement.

And now today, we see PD Bang on the cover of Billboard (which, OF COURSE, mentioned Blackpink in the same breath).

JUST LOOK AT THE WAY THE STORY IS BEING SHAPED FOR AMERICAN READERS. You see what's happening here? You think SM is gonna get a cover story for their side of the corporate shakedown?

And then there's this little gem:

"If your question is about the possibility of creating an artist like BTS again, the answer is no. However, if you were to ask whether there would be a K-pop artist from HYBE that tops the Billboard Hot 100 chart, my answer would be yes. [Jimin became the first BTS member to achieve this as a solo act on April 3 when his single “Like Crazy” debuted at No. 1.] The experience of managing BTS and operating different labels gave us access to powerful networks, infrastructures and experiences. With these, HYBE can repeat its remarkable results with the help of talented artists.

Okay so before everyone starts rioting online, take a moment, pause, reflect, think about what all might be going on here, behind the scenes, in this very political world of the music business.

Do I think Bang PD screwed Jimin over to score points with Billboard? No, I do not. But neither do I think Jimin's solo effort is anyone's priority but Jimin's.

"HYBE is primarily focusing on leveraging its accumulated expertise in managing and producing acts that consist of multiple members, rather than solo artists or mixed-gender groups in K-pop."

I think no one ever expected Jimin to make it to #1 on Hot100 and industry insiders felt pretty sure the West wouldn't let him stay in the top 10 the next week. Why? Well, partially racism. But mostly it's bad for their bottom line.

If your entire business model is that people pay for radio play and that gets them on your private chart and the private chart leads to more advertisers and awards... and then someone comes along and DOESN'T pay to play and gets to the top of your chart? Nobody needs you. So you HAVE to sabotage them. You absolutely have to change your rules. (I'm just sitting here waiting for Jimin to release his other songs so that Billboard can change their rules to say you can't be on Hot100 if your name starts with J- and ends with -imin.)

Now, it might have been satisfying for us as fans to see BigHit come out swinging and put Billboard on blast for his sake and ours. But they have ZERO. LEGAL. RECOURSE.

Billboard is privately owned and they can make whatever rules they want. They are part of a larger media company that has connections to every media outlet; no one is gonna publish an exposé any time soon, I promise you. We got exactly ONE English-speaking website to write about it and that was it. Everyone in the industry knows what is going on, and no one has the power to do anything much about it.

So what does that mean for the future?

Well... Bang PD just recently paid a HUGE mark up of $26 million to buy Trevor Noah's home out in LA.

And now he's on the cover of Billboard. WHY? Neither of these things will result in any immediate payout for him.

It's a long game.

And frankly, a very old and honored way of doing business. It's how they went up against the big three and it's how they are gonna go up against the West, I feel it in my gut.

Bang PD is getting a home on US soil. He will be paying US taxes. He's making in-roads by being nice with Billboard folks. He's making contacts; he's already had phone calls with Pharrell and Bieber and Grande and Laroi. Some of those are already shaping into collabs. We already know Hybe has set up shop in the US with Scooter at the helm.

Meanwhile, BigHit is adjusting in real time to the new rules around the charts (culling is happening to Yoongi too, so they changed up the check-out process of the BTS US Store). Suddenly there's plenty of focus on promoting via TikTok and other viral social media. They are dipping their toe into AI. They are discussing their own in-house ticketing option. This company is looking toward the future and hedging its bets.

Do I know with any certainty what's up their sleeve?

Absolutely not.

Do I trust any corporation very much?

Nope.

Do I have faith in BTS?

Probably more than anything else in my life, at this point.

So while I have no insider info, I just feel like the company is making very intentional and methodic footholds into the West. They are not complaining or screaming or suing or threatening anyone. They are not badmouthing competitors or whining about unfair deals. They are laying ground on complicated, political in-roads, one step at a time.

The Expo is in 2030. I'd wager by that time, BTS will have conquered the West and have some radio play.

And I think the company believes that in order to do that, they have to make their new groups profitable while BTS serves. They have to survive for the next two years.

When BTS is back, and their dues have been paid, I think they will be unstoppable. I hope they get to work on solo projects AND group projects. I think they will take over every corner of the world, if managed properly.

They just need to do it in a way that also assuages the Western music industry. The American Powers That Be have a chokehold on music and they will demand their pound of flesh somehow.

I strongly suspect BTS will never pay to play. But they will build relationships and find a way to become so interwoven in the cultural fabric that to deny them a place in Western spaces is to be left behind. And they will do it politely, and gently, and come out smelling like a rose.

So before you go off on social media and scream the walls down about neglect (and there WAS some, in my opinion) and abuse (we don't really know that), just take a moment to consider--if they had no legal recourse against Billboard, how can they beat them at their own game?

The best way to defeat an enemy is to make them a friend.

I'm just guessing here, but I think if fans stay loyal, BTS just might have the last laugh, here. I think they got radio scared as hell.

It sucks that Jimin didn't get fair treatment at this time. He is my bias and I feel it like a knife to my own heart. But he DID make history with his #1 and they can never take it away.

So I say give it time. All the people sniggering at him and BTS right now are going to sing a different tune in the future.

My best guess is that this is a long game, and it will require sacrifices that are totally unfair, but in the end... well, as long as BTS has ARMY, they cannot be denied.

Apobangpo.