Mediaboss Marketing

GroupthinkDostoevsky foresaw how 21st-century liberalism would undermine itself

6 mins07 February 2019

The revolutionary theorist Shigalyov in Fyodor Dostoevksys novelDemonssums up the progress of his thought: Starting with unlimited freedom, I conclude with unlimited despotism.

This celebrated sentence has long been read as Dostoevskys prognosis of the terrorism that plagued Russia in the late 19th century. Aiming to achieve an unprecedented freedom, small groups of revolutionaries denied freedom and life itself to their own members.

The same transformation occurred on a vast scale when terror was practised by a revolutionary state. Understood as a critique of communism, the formula Dostoevsky put into his characters mouth was prophetic. Wherever the communist project has been attempted, the result has been the same: an eclipse of freedom more complete than any that existed in the tyrannies the revolutionaries overthrew.

Yet the ideas that are the true demons in Dostoevskys novel are not only those that fuelled late 19th-century terrorism and 20th-century communism. They are found among liberals today, who are ready to dissolve religion, family, nationality and the practice of tolerance in order to bring into the world a kind of freedom that has never before been known. Some on the Right believe this freedom will come from unfettered market forces, while others on the Left favour using education to deconstruct practices and institutions that have held societies together in the past. Like the Russian revolutionaries, these liberals are possessed by a vision of ever-increasing human freedom that can only end in tyranny. If Dostoevsky was a prophet of 20th-century totalitarianism, he also foresaw how 21st-century liberalism would undermine itself.

It is easy to forget that Dostoevsky began as a liberal himself. When he was arrested in April 1849 as a member of a group of dissident intellectuals he shared the beliefs of the progressive Russian thinkers of his day. Passionately promoting what they perceived as the most advanced European thinking, they rejected religion and any morality that was based on it. Society had to be founded on scientific materialism and governed by an ethic based in science. Several intellectual movements came together in this mishmash of ideas.

Some favoured the roseate visions of French utopian thinkers such as Charles Fourier, who envisioned society reorganised into phalansteries, ideal communities where work would become a type of play and the task of rubbish collection assigned to dirt-loving children. (Another side of Fouriers thought is shown in his proposal that Jews be confined to duties as farm labourers.) Others were more drawn to hard-headed English Utilitarianism or the radical humanism of the German thinker Ludwig Feuerbach, who interpreted the idea of God as an image of the unlimited possibilities of the human species. All believed that human beings must fashion their own values and make a new world.

Suggested reading

By John Gray

By the 1860s, these ideas had come to be called nihilism, a term made popular in Russia by Ivan Turgenevs novel Fathers and Sons (1862). Today, nihilism means the denial that human life or history have any meaning. In its mid-19th century meaning, however, nihilism accurately describes our contemporary liberal consensus. Like the progressive Russian intelligentsia to which Dostoevsky initially belonged, early 21st-century liberals believe the human future will be shaped by science and values that are somehow derived from science. Religion and everything connected with it must be rejected an obstacle to progress. A nave version of this sort of nihilism is presented in the writings of Steven Pinker.

After his arrest and exile, Dostoevsky rejected the liberal ideas of his day forever. Condemned to death a sentence commuted to hard labour in Siberia after a mock execution by firing squad he returned to St Petersburg in 1860 a lifelong enemy of the ideas for which he had been exiled. His own ideas a murky mix of Russian messianism with a rather dubious version of Orthodox Christianity do not amount to anything much. But his subsequent writings, above all Demons, reveal an astonishingly prescient insight into the liberal mind today.

Published in 1872, the book tells how an ideal in which human beings are freed from any authority or constraint morphs into squalid violence and pervasive repression. Based on an actual incident in which a student who had questioned the leadership of the terrorist Sergei Nechaev (1847-1882) who argued that any means were justified if they contributed to a progressive transformation in society was murdered with Nechaevs complicity, the novel provides a pitiless and extremely funny account of the self-immolation of liberalism.

Demonshas often been attacked as being didactic in tone a criticism that misses the dark humour that runs throughout the novel. But it is true that Dostoevsky aimed to teach a lesson. Revolutionary radicalism in politics has its ultimate source in atheism. Dostoevsky conveys this lesson through the character of Kirillov, an engineer and member of the radical group, who contends that if you do not believe in God you must become God yourself:

To recognise that there is no God, and not to recognise thatat thesame time you have become God, is an absurdity I have found it:the attribute of my divinity is Self-will

Kirillov believes that in order to demonstrate his divinity he must kill himself. By doing so, he would prove that human beings are not ruled by mechanical laws but possess a god-like freedom to do as they will. The core of his atheism is the assertion that without God human beings are free do whatever they chose. Exercising his freedom as a god-man, Kirillov shoots himself.

Kirillov is possessed by the idea, which Dostoevsky explored in Crime and Punishment(1866) and Brothers Karamazov (1879), that if there is no God everything is permitted. Generations of secular thinkers have attacked this as nonsense, and it is true that ethical life can be understood in strictly naturalistic terms. Morality is as much a part of what it means to be human as language. But in a naturalistic perspective, a liberal way of life is only one of many the human animal has invented. The belief that only one morality is ordained for all is a relic of monotheism, and Dostoevsky presents a compelling account of how an idea of unlimited freedom derived from Christianity became the inner logic of liberal humanism.

Among Russian nihilists, atheism meant the replacement of God by humanity a universal subject that shapes its own future by deploying the power acquired by growing scientific knowledge. In this version, atheism is a project of collective human self-deification. Though they are careful to avoid such language, todays liberal humanists pursue the same project. Claiming for the human species the freedom that Christianity attributes to God, they believe humankind can fashion a good life for all of its members.

According to Dostoevsky, however, the end-point of this kind of atheism is each human being acting just as they please. Nechaev justified terror on the ground that it is necessary in order to create an earthly paradise. But if human beings can adopt any means to achieve this end, why cant they also chose their own ends? Why should anyone serve humanity an entity as elusive as the Deity or concern themselves with something as nebulous universal freedom? If any means is allowable, so too is any end. The attempt to create a new world collapses into Kirillovs self-will. It is not surprising that Nietzsche recognised in Dostoevsky one of his predecessors.

Suggested reading

By Giles Fraser

Historically, liberal humanism is a footnote to theism. John Locke grounded human rights in duties to God, while Kant argued for the immortality of the soul as a necessary basis for human freedom. Here again, generations of secular thinkers have insisted that liberal values do not depend on religion. Yet liberal humanists continue to rely on the belief that human beings are by nature freedom-loving a view that is certainly not based on empirical observation. Liberals might respond by asserting that human nature is not fixed it can be transformed by political action. But if human beings are free to alter their nature, what is there to say they will remake themselves as free beings? They may prefer the tranquillized peace of a society like that imagined in Huxleys Brave New World. Or decide that the freedoms of the past are relics of oppression, which must be swept away for the sake of social justice.

The liberal mind at present divides into two schools. One is composed of people who call themselves classical liberals, unwitting disciples of the Russian nihilists that believe human progress is ensured by the continuing advance of science. The other comprises postmodern liberals, who view science as little more than congealed ideology. The two are very much at odds, and yet both are possessed by an idea of unfettered freedom.

Suggested reading

By James Bloodworth

If classical liberals believe human beings can use the laws of nature formulated in science to make a new world, postmodern liberals believe scientific laws including those that apply to human nature, a concept they reject are no more than cultural constructs. The upshot is the same. Humankind can shape its own future unconstrained by any external force or authority. But if freedom is unlimited it is also empty. Whatever latter-day nihilists may say, science cannot supply human values. There is nothing in the laws of physics that prohibits the Holocaust. Equally, deconstructing science cannot validate whatever values are currently regarded as progressive. If science is ideology and human nature a fiction, anything goes. The alt-Right is as much a product of postmodernism as the alt-Left. Either way, the practices of tolerance and free expression that used to underpin liberal values are consumed in culture-wars between rival mobs.

Among western traditions, there are some that limit human freedom without invoking theism. Ancient Greek drama and Shakespeare show human beings are trapped by their own deeds and characters whatever they may will. A sceptic like Montaigne used reason to humble the human mind, not exalt it. The implication of Wittgensteins later philosophy is that freedom is situated in particular forms of life. When all the ways of life humans have fashioned for themselves are rejected as exercises in repression, nothing remains but the assertion of will or feeling. That is pretty much where we are now.

If liberalism were a scientific hypothesis, it would have been falsified many times over. But for its disciples, it is far from being a mere hypothesis. As the ex-liberal Dostoevsky understood, liberalism is nothing if not a religion. In the past, this may have been a strength. Today it is a weakness, and possibly fatal. Shigalyov was right. Trashing old freedoms in order to bring about a new state of unbounded freedom can only lead to despotism. Liberals cannot stem the on-going retreat of liberal values because it is they that are driving it.

Suggested reading

By John Gray

Go here to read the rest:
You're reaping what you sowed, liberals - UnHerd

Taco filters, banana solar eclipses, and pussy hats, oh my. Welcome, friends, to Adhere Creatives Top 10 Most Influential Social Media Marketing Campaigns for 2017!

Its been one wild year in the world of social media marketing campaigns. We saw marketing teams coming up with some of the most creativeand humorouscampaigns yet, some of which rival what we saw in 2013's,2015s and 2016s Top 10 Influential Social Media Marketing Campaign lists. In addition to these advertising feats of strength, youll notice a continued focus to promote social causes on social media platforms. Some of these campaigns were true grass-root movements, while others were driven by companies.

But enough with the introduction. Lets jump straight into our 2017 most influential social media campaigns, starting with number one on our list, GEs Balance the Equation campaign.

Its a bold, ambitious goal. But it wont be easy. According to research out by the annual Women in Tech report, women hold at most 25% of all computing jobs. And GEs own research paints an even harsher picture, with IT and engineering programs worldwide comprised of just 13%-24% women. To ensure they meet their objective, GE is pulling out all the stops with their marketing efforts. And one of their most creative campaigns to date is their Balance the Equation campaign, featuring National Medal of Science in Engineering winner, Millie Dresselhaus.

While there is no data quite yet on how many women GE has hired, the campaign should still be considered a success. Between GEs #BalanceTheEquation hashtag and its GE-girls.com website, the company has secured thousands of retweets and comments, all while making inroads with younger girls who could one day become the STEM experts of tomorrow.

Timing is everything when it comes to influential marketing campaigns. I meanwhen the power went out in the Superdome during Superbowl XLVII, and Oreo brought down the house with its single well-timed dunk-in-the-dark tweet? I cry every time I see it. It was my screen saver for, like, years. This year, it was Chiquita that took advantage of the dark, only this time it was due to the much anticipated solar eclipse which made its way across the U.S. on August 21st of this year.

On the path of totality, you will see two distinct banana suns. The total eclipse occurs in between the two banana suns as a sort of lackluster intermission.

In a moment of marketing brilliance, which was almost too bright to stare at directly, Chiquita took full credit for the 2017 solar eclipse, dubbing the suns crescent shape the Banana Sun. For three weeks, starting on August 7th, the company went straight up bananas, creating gifs, a website, and a massive glowing banana which they unveiled on August 20th near the Flatiron Building in NYC.

Thanks to the Banana Sun, Chiquita managed to garner thousands of new Twitter followers, hundreds of comments on its Banana Sun GIFs, and tens of thousands of retweets. At least two of the companys solar eclipse videos were viewed over a million times.

What can I say? Weve come a long way from corporate dictatorships run by banana companies my friends. This is what I call progress.

Hurricane Harvey was the costliest Atlantic hurricane to ever hit the United States, with damages estimated at almost $200 billion dollars. Many homes were unsalvageable, forcing millions of American families onto the streets. But in the peak of the crisis, some individuals and organizations rallied behind Harveys victims, in what has become one of the strongest showings of charity fundraising in American history. Embed from Getty Images

Enter J.J. Watt, defense star for the Texans. Watt set up his own Houston Flood Relief Fund on his personal website, then took to social media to announce the effort. The results were immediate. His original goal of $200,000 was blown apart as millions of donations poured in thanks to the efforts of social heavy hitters like Jimmy Fallon and Ellen DeGeneres, along with others such as hip-hop star Drake and Tennessee Titans owner, Amy Adams Strunk.

There are not enough words to thank you all for your generosity. If there is one thing I have taken away from these last few weeks, it is the reassurance of how much good is out there in our world. J.J. Watt

In total, some $37 million was donated in just three weeks! It just goes to that social can be a force for good, and not just for selfies, lolcats, and well-timed salt bae memes.

Can the promotion of a new slogan lead a major league baseball team to victory? Even one which has not once clutched a World Series in the 112 years of the leagues existence? As unlikely as that sounds, it may have played a role in the Houston Astros stunning and triumphant 4-3 win over the L.A. Dodgers in 2017s World Series finals.

Earn It first appeared in off-season, before the team had even set foot on a spring training field. It galvanized the teams supporters, who took to social media to promote the pithy and ambitious new mantra. And who can blame them for being excited? If your last slogan was Root! Root! Root!, you can only get better from there.

And get better they did. As the season progressed, the number of Google searches for the Astros continued to skyrocket.

Earn It is one of those divinely inspired slogans that hits you harder than a Chapman fast ball. Not since Just Do It has a mantra worked so effectively to command attentionand maybe win a team a World Series.

I was so depressed over Norm MacDonalds exit as the KFC colonel, I couldnt eat fried chicken for months. Months. But then the company goes and creates one of the best social stunts of 2017?

Lets just say I see a drumstick in my near future.

In September of this yearunbeknownst to fried chicken lovers everywhereKFCs creative shop, Weiden+Kennedy, started following 11 people on Twitter: the five original Spice Girls, and six dudes named Herb. Now, that isnt exactly noteworthy by itself. But when you connect the dots to KFCs secret recipe of 11 herbs and spices, you suddenly see where KFCs marketing team was going with this.

It took about a month, but one Twitter sleuth finally figured it out:

Mike Edgette, a social media manager for TallGrass Public Relations, had without knowing it struck twitter gold. His single comment generated hundreds of thousands of likes and retweets, creating an explosion of activity for KFCs twitter feed. KFC, capitalizing even more on the publicity, painted Edgette a portrait of him riding on Colonel Sanders back with a chicken drumstick in his hand. Which he again shared for tens of thousands more views and retweets!

This is where some patience, and maybe a little luck, can go a long way toward creating a viral social movement. We planted this on Twitter over a month ago, said Freddie Powell, creative director at Wieden+Kennedy. Frankly, we werent sure if anybody was going to find it. Sometimes you just have to put stuff out into the universe and cross your fingers that the internet will work its magic.

Its that time of the year again. Everybody is dusting off their gym memberships and smoking their last pack of cigarettes before the New Year. And much like last year and the year before, companies will create marketing campaigns around this New Years theme.

But very few of them will come close to making those resolutions as enjoyable as Spotify.

For a few years running, the company has departed from its digital roots to take to the streets with a creative end-of-year OOH marketing campaign. The campaign shares some of the companys most humorous user data, which it then turns into next years resolutions. And this years Its Been Weird theme will be larger than ever, encompassing 14 markets around the world, and requiring the assistance of 70+ artists to create over 100 billboards assets. According to Spotify CMO Seth Farbman, the company is better served with an end-of-year campaign featuring billboards than, say, banner ads. We are using out-of-home in a way that is less traditional, he said. Out-of-home gives that hyperlocality that gives those aha moments to people. And it allows a digital community to feel connected in a physical way. This is happening here. Were all seeing this and remembering this moment together.

This years campaign will feature artists like Sam Smith, Ed Sheeran, Bruno Mars, Niall Horan, and Big Shaq, and will run both here in the States and across the pond in the UK.

Hope youve all got your pussy hats on hand. Because #7 on our list of top 10 influential social media events for 2017 is the womens march, a protest movement that exploded onto the scene thanks to viral social media hype.

In early 2017, a number of Facebook pages protesting the inauguration of President Donald Trump began to receive wide attention. As the pages increased from a few hundred to tens of thousands of followers, it became apparent to many that consolidation, and then mobilization, was an absolute must.

Leaders of the movement focused their attention on a march on Washington D.C., and used the twitter hash #womensmarch to spread the word. Within days, the grass-roots movement had exploded to hundreds of thousands of followers. Not only did it lead to a march of nearly half a million people in D.C., it created dozens of sister protests around the country.

The cult hit Stranger Things released a brand new second season just a few months back, and it has everything an obsessed fan could want. The whole gang back together? Check. Synthesizers? Check. Samwise Gamgee? Check. Eggos? Check.Eggos?

Ah yes, Elevens favorite snack makes more appearances than ever in Season 2. And the marketing team over at Kelloggsto their credittook advantage of the free plug, by creating a fresh, buttery new campaign called Eggos to capitalize on all the delicious publicity.

Kelloggs began talks with Netflix before the airing of the second season. The result of the partnership was a small series of advertisements which appeared during the premier of Stranger Things 2. Best of all, Kelloggs social team was ready to capitalize on the hype. Armed with humorous GIFs, the #StrangerThings hashtag, and more images of Eleven scarfing down the iconic 80s waffle than they knew what to do with, the social team managed to come up with some weapons grade tweeting that earned them thousands of new online followers.

Unconventional, I know. Number 9 on our list kinda reminds me of how back in 2006 Time Magazine made You their Person of The Year. A little vague, sure. I still tell people I was on the cover of Time magazine. Nobody ever believes me.

This year, local businesses have taken on social media like never before, many times outshining even the cleverest 5th Avenue ad agencies with some of the stuff they come up with. Goliath companies which can spend large sums on massive ad buys and sleek commercials do not have the same leverage when it comes to social media, which is more about authenticity and consistent messaging.

Even more important, social media is about getting a message out quickly to customers interested in your business. Smaller companies are often significantly more agile than their larger counterparts, which gives them the advantage when it comes to fighting off negative reviews or, delivering incredibly good news, like how you were on the cover of Time magazine.

Why have so many local businesses turned to Facebook and the like for their local advertising? Because of the cost, the simplicity, and the incredible targeting capabilities of course! We are seeing many of our local business clients find double, triple, the ROI from Facebook advertising in 2017. Now go get some of that!

The networking and technology conglomerate Cisco Systems makes it onto our list this year, and for good reason. The companys use of influencer marketing to drive sales is paying off in a big way in 2017. And at the forefront of this effort is their Cisco Champions Program, a marketing campaign which offers incentives for its community of IT advocates and experts.

By giving back to the people who run its technology and networking platforms on a daily basis, Cisco can use the experience and advocacy of these individuals to harness powerful promotional content for its brand. The company provides free education, access to new products, recognition to engineers and more. All they ask in return is for these Cisco Champions to share their stories and experiences with Cisco Systems over social media.

The results have been incredible. To date, Cisco Champions has generated tens of thousands of new tweets and thousands of social media mentions across platforms such as Facebook and elsewhere.

And thats a wrap for 2017s Top 10 Influential Social Media Marketing Campaigns. If one of these campaigns stuck out to you, dont hesitate to let us know! And keep an eye out for next years Top 10 Most Influential list, which is sure to be as colorfulor even more sothan this years!

The rest is here:
Top 10 Influential Social Media Marketing Campaigns of 2017

Citing a "high-level source," Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul charged in a bombshell Twitter post late Wednesday that anti-Trump ex-CIA Director John Brennan "insisted that the unverified and fake Steele dossier" be included in a classifiedintelligence community report on Russian interference in the 2016 elections -- a decision that ultimately lent credibility to the dossier and may have played a key role in fomenting unfounded fears of Russia collusion for two years.

Paul called on Brennanto testify under oath immediately, as Republicans continue to aggressively seek outthe origins of the collusion narrative.Fox News had not independently verified Paul's source, and Brennan has not replied to Fox News' requests for comment.

Fox News is told Paul's tweet specifically accused Brennan of pushing to incorporate the dossier into theJanuary 2017 official intelligence community assessment (ICA)from the FBI, CIA, and NSA that Russia worked to interfere in the 2016 election.

However, the dossier is notreferenced in the unclassified summary of the ICA report that has been publicly released. Former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper previously testified that the dossier was not ultimately used in the ICA at all.

CNN reported on Jan.12, 2017, based on anonymous sources, that intelligence officialsbriefed Trump on Jan. 6, 2017 with a "synopsis" ofthe contents of thedossier, which was written by ex-British spy Christopher Steele. Among the claims in the discredited dossier were that the Russian government hadhumiliating and compromising information concerning Trump.

Sen. Rand Paul called Monday for President Trump to revoke former CIA director John Brennan's security clearance. (Reuters)

Although the decision to brief Trump on the dossier and the intelligence community's reliance on it, then-FBI Direct James Comey would later testify, wasostensibly intendedto make Trumpaware of potential blackmail risks, the unexplained and nearly immediate leak of the meetinglegitimized the dossier's significance and prompted a cascade of unfounded media-driven theories about what purportedly compromising information the Russian government may have on the president.

FOX NEWS EXCLUSIVE: INTERNAL TEXTS SHOW DOJ CONCERNS OVER 'BIAS' OF DOSSIER AUTHOR BEFORE CRUCIAL WARRANT APPLICATION

For example, Vanity Fair article alleged:"The fact that the nations top intelligence officials chose to present a summary version of the dossier to both President Obama and President-elect Trump, asCNN reportsthey did last week, indicates that they may have had a relatively high degree of confidence that at least some of the claims therein were credible, or at least worth investigating further."

Shortly afterward the CNN report, BuzzFeed News published the dossier. Steele, whose anti-Trump views are now well-known, was working for Fusion GPS -- a firm hired by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee.

"BREAKING: A high-level source tells me it was Brennan who insisted that the unverified and fake Steele dossier be included in the Intelligence Report," Paul wrote on Twitter on Wednesday."Brennan should be asked to testify under oath in Congress ASAP."

Information from the author of thediscredited dossier was also used in October 2016 to support a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to surveil then-Trump aide Carter Page.

Just nine days before the FBI applied for the warrant to monitor Page, bureau officials were battling with a senior Justice Department official who had "continued concerns" about the "possible bias" of a source pivotal to the application, according to internal text messages obtained last week by Fox News. (Sources tell Fox News theDOJ stonewalled congressional investigators by not releasing those text messages last year.)

Fox News is told the texts were connected to the ultimately successful Page application, which relied in part on information from Steele. In its warrant application, the FBI incorrectly assured the FISA court on numerous occasionsthat other sources independently corroborated Steele's claimsbut did not clearly state that Steele worked for a firm hired by Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Other newly obtainedtext messagesbetween former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and bureau lawyer Lisa Page revealed a high-level meeting among senior intelligence officials was held weeks before President Trumps inauguration during a critical period for theRussia probe.

WHY BRENNAN, CLAPPER'S HIGH-LEVEL MEETING -- REVEALED BY TEXTS OBTAINED BY FOX NEWS -- WAS SO UNUSUAL

In a Dec. 12, 2016, text reviewed by Fox News, Page wrote to McCabe: "Btw, [Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper told Pete that he was meeting with [CIA Director John] Brennan and Cohen for dinner tonight. Just FYSA [for your situational awareness]."

Brennan was one of the loudest and most virulent voices to trumpet the Russian collusion theory over the past two years, asserting falselyjust weeks ago that Special Counsel Robert Mueller was likely planning to indict members of the Trump administration's family in a scene reminiscent of the"ides of March and the assassination of Julius Caesar.

Paul had supported the White House's decision to revokeBrennan's security clearance last year. Trump administration officials said Brennan was implying improperly that he had insider information to bolster his outlandish accusations. In the same interview in which he told MSNBC that an "ides of March" redux may soon materialize, MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell even remarked at one point, "You have the inside knowledge." Brennan attempted to dismiss that suggestion.

After the news that Mueller found no evidence of Trump-Russia collusionafter an exhaustive probe lasting nearly two years, Brennan offered a meek mea culpa.

I don't know if I received bad information, but I think I suspected there was more than there actually was, Brennan told MSNBCs Morning Joe.

CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

He added: I am relieved that its been determined there was not a criminal conspiracy with the Russian government over our election."

Brennan said he was not all that surprised that the high bar of criminal conspiracy was not met" -- although, according to Attorney General William Barr, Mueller in fact found no evidence of such a conspiracywhatsoever.

Fox News' Catherine Herridge contributed to this report.

View post:
Rand Paul: 'Source' says John Brennan pushed discredited ...

Film censorship in the United States was a frequent feature of the industry since almost the beginning of the motion picture industry until the end of strong self-regulation in 1966. Court rulings in the 1950s and 1960s severely constrained government censorship, though statewide regulation lasted until at least the 1980s.

The censorship dates to an 1897 statute of Maine that prohibited the exhibition of prizefight films.[2] Maine enacted the statute to prevent the exhibition of the 1897 heavyweight championship between James J. Corbett and Bob Fitzsimmons. Some other states followed the example of Maine.

Chicago enacted the first censorship ordinance in the United States in 1907, authorizing its police chief to screen all films to determine whether they should be permitted on screens. Detroit followed the same year. When upheld in a court challenge in 1909, other cities followed and Pennsylvania became the first to enact state-wide censorship of movies in 1911 (though it did not fund the effort until 1914). It was soon followed by Ohio (1914), Kansas (1915), Maryland (1916), New York (1921) and, finally, Virginia (1922). Eventually, at least one hundred cities across the nation empowered local censorship boards.[3]

In 1915, the US Supreme Court decided the case Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio in which the court determined that motion pictures were purely commerce and not an art and so not covered by the First Amendment. This decision was not overturned until the Supreme Court case, Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson in 1952. Popularly referred to as the "Miracle Decision", the ruling involved the short film "The Miracle", part of Roberto Rossellini's anthology film L'Amore (1948).

Between the Mutual Film and the Joseph Burstyn decisions, local, state, and city censorship boards had the power to edit or ban films. City and state censorship ordinances are nearly as old as the movies themselves, and such ordinances banning the public exhibition of "immoral" films proliferated.

Seven states[4] formed film censorship boards, which both pre-dated and outlasted the Hays Code:

Public outcry over perceived immorality in Hollywood and the movies, as well as the growing number of city and state censorship boards, led the movie studios to fear that federal regulations were not far off; so they created, in 1922, the Motion Pictures Producers and Distributors Association (which became the Motion Picture Association of America in 1945), an industry trade and lobby organization. The association was headed by Will H. Hays, a well-connected Republican lawyer who had previously been United States Postmaster General; and he derailed attempts to institute federal censorship over the movies.

In 1927, Hays compiled a list of subjects, culled from his experience with the various US censorship boards, which he felt Hollywood studios would be wise to avoid. He called this list "the formula" but it was popularly known as the "don'ts and be carefuls" list. In 1930, Hays created the Studio Relations Committee (SRC) to implement his censorship code, but the SRC lacked any real enforcement capability.

The advent of talking pictures in 1927 led to a perceived need for further enforcement. Martin Quigley, the publisher of a Chicago-based motion picture trade newspaper, began lobbying for a more extensive code that not only listed material that was inappropriate for the movies, but also contained a moral system that the movies could help to promote - specifically a system based on Catholic theology. He recruited Father Daniel Lord, a Jesuit priest and instructor at the Catholic St. Louis University, to write such a code and on March 31, 1930 the board of directors of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association adopted it formally. This original version especially was once popularly known as the Hays Code, but it and its later revisions are now commonly called the Production Code.

However, Depression economics and changing social mores resulted in the studios producing racier fare that the Code, lacking an aggressive enforcement body, was unable to redress. This era is known as Pre-Code Hollywood.

An amendment to the Code, adopted on June 13, 1934, established the Production Code Administration (PCA), and required all films released on or after July 1, 1934 to obtain a certificate of approval before being released. For more than thirty years following, virtually all motion pictures produced in the United States and released by major studios adhered to the code. The Production Code was not created or enforced by federal, state, or city government. In fact, the Hollywood studios adopted the code in large part in the hopes of avoiding government censorship, preferring self-regulation to government regulation.

The enforcement of the Production Code led to the dissolution of many local censorship boards. Meanwhile, the US Customs Department prohibited the importation of the Czech film Ecstasy (1933), starring an actress soon to be known as Hedy Lamarr, an action which was upheld on appeal.

In 1934, Joseph I. Breen (18881965) was appointed head of the new Production Code Administration (PCA). Under Breen's leadership of the PCA, which lasted until his retirement in 1954, enforcement of the Production Code became rigid and notorious. Breen's power to change scripts and scenes angered many writers, directors, and Hollywood moguls. The PCA had two offices, one in Hollywood, and the other in New York City. Films approved by the New York PCA office were issued certificate numbers that began with a zero.

The first major instance of censorship under the Production Code involved the 1934 film Tarzan and His Mate, in which brief nude scenes involving a body double for actress Maureen O'Sullivan were edited out of the master negative of the film. Another famous case of enforcement involved the 1943 western The Outlaw, produced by Howard Hughes. The Outlaw was denied a certificate of approval and kept out of theaters for years because the film's advertising focused particular attention on Jane Russell's breasts. Hughes eventually persuaded Breen that the breasts did not violate the code and the film could be shown.

Some films produced outside the mainstream studio system during this time did flout the conventions of the code, such as Child Bride (1938), which featured a nude scene involving 12-year-old actress Shirley Mills. Even cartoon sex symbol Betty Boop had to change from being a flapper, and began to wear an old-fashioned housewife skirt.

In 1936, Arthur Mayer and Joseph Burstyn attempted to distribute Whirlpool of Desire, a French film originally titled Remous and directed by Edmond T. Greville. The legal battle lasted until November 1939, when the film was released in the U.S.

In 1952, in the case of Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overruled its 1915 decision and held that motion pictures were entitled to First Amendment protection, so that the New York State Board of Regents could not ban "The Miracle", a short film that was one half of L'Amore (1948), an anthology film directed by Roberto Rossellini. Film distributor Joseph Burstyn released the film in the U.S. in 1950, and the case became known as the "Miracle Decision" due to its connection to Rossellini's film. That in turn reduced the threat of government regulation that justified the Production Code, and the PCA's powers over the Hollywood industry were greatly reduced.[9]

At the forefront of challenges to the code was director Otto Preminger, whose films violated the code repeatedly in the 1950s. His 1953 film The Moon is Blue, about a young woman who tries to play two suitors off against each other by claiming that she plans to keep her virginity until marriage, was the first film since the pre-code Hollywood days to use the words "virgin", "seduce" and "mistress", and it was released without a certificate of approval. He later made The Man with the Golden Arm (1955), which portrayed the prohibited subject of drug abuse, and Anatomy of a Murder (1959) which dealt with rape. Preminger's films were direct assaults on the authority of the Production Code and, since they were successful, hastened its abandonment.

In 1954, Joseph Breen retired and Geoffrey Shurlock was appointed as his successor. Variety noted "a decided tendency towards a broader, more casual approach" in the enforcement of the code.

Billy Wilder's Some Like It Hot (1959) and Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho (1960) were also released without a certificate of approval due to their themes and became box office hits, and as a result further weakened the authority of the code.

In the early 1960s, British films such as Victim (1961), A Taste of Honey (1961), and The Leather Boys (1963) offered a daring social commentary about gender roles and homophobia that violated the Hollywood Production Code, yet the films were still released in America. The American women's rights, gay rights, civil rights, and youth movements prompted a reevaluation of the depiction of themes of race, class, gender, and sexuality that had been restricted by the Code. In addition, the growing popularity of international films with more explicit content helped to discredit the Code.

In 1964 The Pawnbroker, directed by Sidney Lumet and starring Rod Steiger, was initially rejected because of two scenes in which the actresses Linda Geiser and Thelma Oliver fully expose their breasts; and a sex scene between Oliver and Jaime Snchez, which it described as "unacceptably sex suggestive and lustful." Despite the rejection, the film's producers arranged for Allied Artists to release the film without the Production Code seal and the New York censors licensed The Pawnbroker without the cuts demanded by Code administrators. The producers also appealed the rejection to the Motion Picture Association of America.[10]

On a 6-3 vote, the MPAA granted the film an "exception" conditional on "reduction in the length of the scenes which the Production Code Administration found unapprovable." The exception to the Code was granted as a "special and unique case," and was described by The New York Times as "an unprecedented move that will not, however, set a precedent."[11]The requested reductions of nudity were minimal, and the outcome was viewed in the media as a victory for the film's producers.[10] The Pawnbroker was the first film since pre-code era featuring bare breasts to receive Production Code approval. In his 2008 study of films during that era, Pictures at a Revolution, author Mark Harris wrote that the MPAA's action was "the first of a series of injuries to the Production Code that would prove fatal within three years."[11]

When Jack Valenti became President of the MPAA in 1966, he was immediately faced with a problem regarding language in the film version of Edward Albee's play Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966). Valenti negotiated a compromise: The word "screw" was removed, but other language, including the phrase "hump the hostess," remained. The film received Production Code approval despite having language that was clearly prohibited. The British-produced, but American financed film Blowup (1966) presented a different problem. After the film was denied Production Code approval, MGM released it anyway, the first instance of an MPAA member company distributing a film that did not have an approval certificate. The MPAA could do little about it.

Enforcement had become impossible, and the Production Code was abandoned.

Go here to read the rest:
Film censorship in the United States - Wikipedia

A vigil to honor the slain rapper turned violent on Monday leaving one person stabbed and many injured. Harrison Hill, USA TODAY

Eric Holder, the suspect arrested by Los Angeles Police Tuesday in the homicide of rapper Nipsey Hussle is being held in solitary confinement on over $7 million bond, the Los Angeles Police Department says.

After his initial arrest Tuesday by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, Holder was transferred to the custody of the LAPD's South Bureau Homicide unit and is currently housed in the LAPD's 77th Streetjail, according to booking records.

If and when charges are filed, he will likely make his first court appearance within a few days.

Within hours of Holder's arrest, Hussle's longtime girlfriend, actress Lauren London broke her silence, writing on Instagram that she has felt "completely lost" since the rapper was gunned downoutside his South Central Los Angeles boutique, the same place where the couple first met in person.

Nipsey Hussle murder investigation: Here is everything we know so far

"Ive lost my best friend.My sanctuary.My protector.My soul....Im lost without you," she wrote alongside a series of pictures of the rapper. "We are lost without you babe.I have no words."

Nipsey Hussle and Lauren London arrive at the Warner Music Group Pre-Grammy Celebration on February 7, 2019 in Los Angeles.(Photo: Gregg DeGuire, Getty Images)

The couple started dating in 2013 and have one son togetherKross Asghedom, 2.London is also mother to 9-year-old son, Cameron Carter,with rapper Lil Wayne, while Hussle had a daughter,EmaniAsghedom,from a previous relationship.

Londonshared a picture of their blended family dressed all in white.

Earlier Tuesday, the LAPDidentifiedHolder, 29,as the suspect who fatally shot Hussle Sunday outside of his store, The Marathon Clothing,before fleeing through analley to a waiting car driven by an unidentified woman.

L.A. Sheriff's Department spokeswoman Nicole Nishida told the Associated Press that a man matching Holder's description was detained Tuesday afternoon in Bellflower, a city about 20 miles southeast of where Hussle was slain.

Nipsey Hussle performs onstage at Live! Red! Ready! Pre-Show, sponsored by Nissan, at the 2018 BET Awards at Microsoft Theater on June 24, 2018 in Los Angeles, Calif. Hussle was killed in a shooting outside a clothing store he owned on Sunday, March 31, 2019. (Photo: Neilson Barnard, Getty Images for BET)

During a Tuesday morning press conference, Police Chief Michel Moore saidthe fatal shooting of Hussle wasthe result ofa personal dispute, not gang violence, althoughauthoritiesbelieveHolder has gang affiliations.

Two other men were shot during the attack.

"Mr. Holder walked up on multiple occasions, engaged in (conversation)with Nipsey, left and came back. He subsequently came back armed with a handgun, striking and killing Nipsey Hussle," Moore said.

Anautopsy completed Mondayrevealed that the 33-year-old Hussle, whose real name wasErmias Asghedom, died of gunshots to the head and torso. His death was then certified as a homicide.

Related:LAPD: Nipsey Hussle shooting was result of personal dispute, not gang violence

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Contributing: The Associated Press

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2019/04/02/nipsey-hussle-death-eric-holder-police-investigation-detained/3345579002/

Read the original here:
Nipsey Hussle: Eric Holder in solitary; Lauren London mourns ...