Mediaboss Marketing

People say left-wingers are touchy. But it only took a 30-second teaser for Netflixs new show Dear White People to get alt-right viewers to cancel their subscriptions.

And judging from some misreadings of the clip, many didnt even give it the full 30 seconds.

Were not just talking about easily-swayed Twitter sheep. The knee-jerking extended to the more cultured spokesmen of the movement with 100k+ followers.

Considering the alt-right are winning the culture wars at the moment their man is in the White House and liberal America is licking its wounds why are they so thin-skinned?

One-time Buzzfeed writer Tim Treadstone, aka @BakedAlaska claimed that the anti-white show promotes white genocide, and created the #NoNetflix boycott hashtag, which has been trending for two days.

But he has since claimed that it is Dear White People director Justin Simien who is shutting down debate:

Really? Theres a difference in loudness between simply not watching a show, even blocking one person on Twitter, and ditching a whole network.

As well as throwing the baby out with the bathwater, this is the definition of shutting down debate.

Which is odd, considering alt-right criticisms of liberals center on their oversensitivity and propensity to take things out of context. Youve got your eager-for-a-fight SJWs; fragile snowflakes who cant stand the heat, people who cant take a joke. More often than not, just sore losers.

But whats worse than a sore loser? A sore winner.

If people on the alt-right had stayed for the full 30 seconds of the Dear White People teaser, they might have seen that it presents a critique.

Going even further back, you might discover that the 2014 movie on which the show is based critiques people of all leanings. It lampoons privileged racism, and those who think it no longer exists but also takes on overzealous activists and people who are lukewarm about standing up for what they believe.

At the very start, one character calls in to the main character Samantha Whites radio show and asks whether it would be okay if he had one called Dear Black People. The question is debated. Everyone gets it from all sides, and this changes their outlook.

It is a film about the act of debate, self-criticism and re-evaluation. But it seems in our era of anti-intellectualism, any attempt to educate oneself or someone else is frowned upon.

The alt-right position themselves as provocateurs, but dont know how to respond to criticism.

Their political representative, President Trump, doesnt believe in climate change and so has cut funding to research into establishing whether it is a thing or not. His press secretary Sean Spicer told a room full of journalists to stop criticising his administration the day after the inauguration.

The truth is, the alt-right attracts the thin-skinned.

I mean, you have to be quick to take offence in order to wilfully misread black lives matter as black lives matter more; to think that voicing how its not okay to shoot a black person on sight is itself a racially motivated attack, or, in the case of Tomi Lahren who hates whiners as bad as systematic lynchings by the KKK.

In the case of Dear White People, the argument is this:that outlining the ways in which people have been racist in the past and in the present is itself racist against racists.

Do you follow? No? Thats because its bollocks.

The alt-right have always been thin-skinned but we just hadnt seen it. Not too long ago they were outliers with nothing to lose. They didnt have to justify themselves because nobody paid them enough heed to challenge them. Now they are a dominant political voice, but havent developed the diplomacy that comes with having to satisfy everyones gripes.

Dear White People director Justin Simien responded to the backlash in a Facebook post (which he later deleted): I feel strangely encouraged. To see the sheer threat that people feel over a date announcement video featuring a woman of color (politely) asking not to be mocked makes it so clear why I made this show.

Now there has been a backlash to the backlash. Some outlets have begun endorsing the show. The heat has lead to people who might not have seen the original film looking it up on Netflix.

It even inspired someone to coin the phrase broflake to needlealt-right guys who are nonetheless hypersensitive. In the end, the jokes on them.

See the article here:
The Alt-Right Are Winning. So Why Are They So Thin-Skinned? - Heat Street

Yesterday, Netflix premiered the trailer for Dear White People, a series based on a film that was released in 2014 and doesnt seem to have made much of an impact on the worlds supply of white people. But since the online communities who like to call people sensitive snowflakes are also big into projection, trollish alt-right types who frequent 4chans /pol/ board and Reddits r/the_donald (where else?) are freaking the fuck out about the trailer, calling for white people to #BoycottNetflix over the companys brazen act of anti-white discrimination and white genocide, i.e., acknowledging the existence of people of color in its customer base.

Like most right-wing boycotts, the only ones who are being punished here are the boycotters themselves, who now will never know how The Santa Clarita Diet ends. And Netflix makes a point of not releasing ratings for its shows, so even if the boycott does make an impact (it wontthe company added 1.45 million subscribers in the U.S. during the fourth quarter of 2016, and has more than 93 million subscribers worldwide, so it couldnt give less of a fuck about a handful of easily offended white people), Netflixs stock wouldnt be affected either way.

If youve been keeping track, this now means that white supremacists can no longer drink Coke, Pepsi, or Budweiser (or Budwiser, as they spell it), eat Oreos, go to Starbucks, watch Star Wars movies, or binge on Netflix. Oh well, more bandwidth and corn syrup for the rest of us.

[via Gizmodo]

Submit your Newswire tips here.

Previous Newswire The Batman gets a rewrite to go with its new director

Next Newswire Channel Zero gets two more seasons at Syfy

The rest is here:
Alt-Right trolls boycott Netflix because they're scared of Dear White People - A.V. Club

BTW

AmidDonald Trumps mercurial ascent into presidency, internet fans have created a puzzling musical movement, "Trumpwave."

According to knowyourmeme, the originating movement is called fashwave. It takes elements of glitchy, internet-spawned electronic musicvaporwave and synthwave, mostlyand adds references to Trump via '80s yuppy-inspired artwork.

BuzzFeed's Reggie Ugwu wrote about fashwave as:

Now, Trump branding is leading the musical releases.

Andrew Anglin, from white supremacist website Daily Stormer, called itthe official soundtrack of the alt-right. (The alt-right is a loosely organized white supremacist online movement.)

The forms of music associated with previous White Nationalist movements, various forms of rock music, are pretty dated, explains Anglin. In the end, the solution to this problem had been staring me in the face all along. The Whitest music ever: Synthwave.

Its become a serious issue among vaporwave artists, to the point that an emergency summit was called last year to mitigate the scenes creeping fascism.

The banality of the comments in these videos alone is mortifying. But luckily the music sucks.

H/T Thump

View original post here:
'Trumpwave' emerges as the alt-right's meme-heavy soundtrack - The Daily Dot

Katie Hopkins entering the Celebrity Big Brother house in 2015. Photograph: Ian West/PA

Barely four minutes after the conclusion of the most recent Celebrity Big Brother, I am intrigued to see a rash of headlines speculating as to who will be in the summer line-up. Previously a once-a-year-event, Celebrity Big Brother now appears to be a rolling facility a sort of career spa to which celebrities can repair to take the waters when recovering from the other formats. Just as the jet set use the seasons as a verb to describe the migration from Gstaad to the Amalfi coast, there are now people who winter in the jungle and summer in Elstree.

And yet, is it not time to give these shows a thermonuclear modern boost? In short: when is reality television going to accept its new repertory company, and formally embrace the alt-right? Admittedly it has dipped in the toe of its hazmat suit Katie Hopkins has done a grand tour of the formats. But in an age where the most prominent political satire on TV is a panel show onits 52nd series, I should like to see a dedicated far-right edition of Celebrity Big Brother. Or Im a Celebrity. Or Celebrity Survivor. Or any of them, really, except Love Island.

There are easily enough characters available now, and Im sure the last thing they would be is too chicken to bring their ideas to an even wider audience. Hopkins could be persuaded back, obviously. Then theres Milo Yiannopoulos, and that Paul Joseph Watson who broadcasts to Infowars from Battersea, of all hilarious locations. Another tweedily bespectacled one popped up on Channel 4 news this week with comments so silly that I yearned to see him forced to repeat them at Tribal Council and not get picked off. And Im sure you could get a couple of the American ones over.

When a reality star was elected US president, there was a sense that the genre had no mountains left to climb. Yet given how well suited the relentless attention-seeking of the far right is to reality TV, perhaps that is not the case. People say that sunlight is the best disinfectant, but the actual best disinfectant is being cloistered in a McMansion or on an island, and forced to fight and scheme your way to dominance while everyone at home shrieks at how unbelievably ghastly you are. Please just picture Milo having to cooperate with Katie in a raft-building challenge, and tell me there wouldnt be tears before bedtime. And tears of laughter for us, of course. If only British TV commissioning editors werent so serially frightened. At some point they should at least consider confronting the age, before aneven worse one comes along.

More:
The next Celebrity Big Brother? It'll be alt-right on the night | Life and ... - The Guardian

ROMEWhen covering PopeFrancis, the story is often reduced to liberals versus traditionalists. Yet spending 15 minutes at a bar in Rome, or pretty much anywhere else in the world with a semi-strong Catholic culture, would prove that not everything is so black and white.

In reality, the vast majority of Catholics sit in the middle, not to mention those interested in the Church even though they might profess another faith, consider themselves religiously unaffiliated or deny the existence of God.

Often, I find myself working from a Roman bar or coffee shop. Sometime thats because Im in-between meetings, or working on a deadline, or simply trying to avoid the temptation (I wish!) of doing laundry and cleaning. In any event, Ive continued this tradition I picked up from my mom back in Argentina.

In an attempt to improve my Italian skills, when I can afford the time, I try to engage whoever is around me in conversation, and after two or three sentences, the cat comes out of the bag: Im a reporter covering the Vatican.

This usually leads to a monologue from the other person.

Some people throw out theusual concatenation of misinformed and misguided facts, ranging from the pope has one lung to how can the Church speak about x, y or z when every priest is a pedophile?

But more often than not, I run into one of the many Catholics in the middle, who listens to and respect the popes because the office comes before the person. These are generally people who see in Francis a man whos done many good things, but also some they find questionable.

A minority of the men and women I speak with have actually read Franciss document on the family Amoris Laetitia, and they often ask me what all the buzz is about: Most never read footnotes, including the famous footnote 351 on the divorced and civilly remarried. Then there are those who have read it all, and who usually say they wish the pope had been more black or white, or had made it part of the text, or had not included it at all.

But beyond this document, virtually everyone I engage with has a list of both praise and criticism, which doesnt make them either Francis-haters or Francis-lovers.

The pope himself has said on several occasionsthat he appreciates criticism.

Yet, more and more, the voices of those capable of both praise and reproachare missing from the conversations being held in the media: they dont hold press conferences, nor do they send out snarky tweets. Finding them requires looking beyond the contacts tab in smart phones and emails.

It implies getting out of the comfort zone, to engage those who might not agree with ones view. It also implies leaving aside the preconceptions on all sides.

I meet people who reduce those who want to raise any criticism regarding the pope to a small set of extremist cardinals who nobody likes anyway, wearing all this medieval plumage cheered by groups of ultra-traditionalists who believe the earth is flat and it doesnt revolve around the sun.

Then there are those who reduce Franciss supporters to kumbaya-dancing, tree-hugging, papal Kool-Aid drinkers who are incapable of perceiving the Argentine pontiff as anything other than Gods greatest gift to humanity.

Though both of those extreme categories do exist, the majority of those who dare say something outside the pope good-pope bad narrative are not deeply weird lunatics.

They might often come offas if they are, however, because for a liberal [or, for that matter, conservative] media to include the voice of a smart, articulate alternativevoice that doesnt fit the frame is apostasy.

And yes, there are articulate voices on both sides of the trenches. Ive met them, run into them at random places in Rome.

Most of those folks, however, are found far away from the magic realm of Twitter, because strong and nuanced arguments can rarely be made in 140 characters.

For journalists to reduce thecoverage of the Catholic Church to supporters v. enemies of the pope is too easy an exercise.

Sure, five minutes on Twitter will confirm that there are people blindly supportive of and blindly hostile toFrancis, of his predecessorsor the Church in general, just like there are people out there extremely in favor of or against Tom Brady and those wholove to hate Roger Federer, or hate those who dont love him.

But this reductionist take doesnt do justice to how most people actually think. It does nothing to address the real conversations being had at coffee shops or among friends all over the world.

Even worse, it deepens this seemingly unstoppable trend towardsgated societies, where we only interact with people who think like us, dress like us and binge-watch the same TV shows that we do.

Thus, the challenge for journalists those covering the Church, and beyond becomes being able to reach out to every side, listen to what they have to say and give them a fair shot at expressing their points of view.

Perhaps that would lead to authentic conversations, and not only with random strangers in coffee shops and bars.

Continued here:
Media frame of 'Francis-lovers v. alt-right wackos' doesn't cut it - Crux: Covering all things Catholic