Mediaboss Marketing

Ive been so engrossed in the current political landscape that the fact we have 18 days until 2020 has sort of passed me by. The start of another decade usually gives us momentum to press refresh. But given our current circumstances, a moment of retrospection feels wise.

Where were we in 2010? Well, we had a black American president, and his famous poster of Hope that blew up the world was still fresh in our minds. That same year Kathryn Bigelow won the Academy Award for Best Director (a woman hasnt won it since).

Scrolling was not a thing. BuzzFeed and its infectious memes was only four years old, and going viral actually meant something. Instagram hadnt quite caught on we were mostly mucking about on Twitter so screen addiction was not a topic, nor debilitating FOMO. And Fake News was, well, not in the news, although Facebook was a new obsession for millions worldwide.

We had embarked on a Tory-Lib Dem coalition government perhaps the calmest of political marriages we will see for a long time. And a global recession which had hit hard in 2008 hadnt completely destroyed us though it had ruined many lives.

The oldest millennial then was 29; the Kardashians were not a global phenomenon (Kim was 30 and still single). The internet felt hopeful and was giving people all over the planet a true voice for the first time. Recommendation algorithms hadnt started to control how we saw content they were arguably one of the biggest precursors to some of the most damaging aspects of our new technological world order.

We were blissfully ignorant of the political populism that would bring Donald Trump to power, give birth to the alt-Right and set Brexit in motion. Our crippling fear of our planet dying from ever-increasing emissions had receded (even if the danger hadnt), momentarily pushed out of our minds by the global recession. The Paris Accords would not be signed until 2016.

Today, many of us feel incredibly anxious about our future; the environmental statistics can feel justifiably overwhelming. Our news media can too often feel like non-stop hype, and Facebook is amok with peddled political lies.

But we also have Extinction Rebellion, and have witnessed the extraordinary power of Greta Thunberg. We are living in an era of activism never seen before.

And who could have guessed at the power of #MeToo? Or that we would see a film like Black Panther? Or that hashtags could genuinely sway opinion for good and social media campaigns could help set people free? As for me, Im a decade older and probably not much wiser. My children are now in their teens. The fear of advancing years, however, has given me fresh drive.

Far from slowing down, Ive launched a media company, ThisMuchIKnow, whose message is one of action and hope over 24-hour negativity. I feel a restless energy many would describe as a mid-life crisis. I dont. At 46, I see this as a time to start again; to stave off mortality and to assiduously consider how I want to shape my next 10 years.

As for Britain, we are still sitting on the precipice of a momentous decision. The real battle lies not in Brexit, but in whether we and this new government will have the bravery to save our planet. Only revolutionary action will grasp the incredible opportunities ahead rather than clinging dangerously to current comforts. Because by 2030 it will have become much harder to press refresh.

As one mad enough to sit through this election to the bitter end at 6am, nursing a nasty white wine hangover in bed admittedly I passed out for two hours in my sons bed at 3.30am I watched two leaders give very different losing speeches.

Jo Swinson delivered by far the most gracious words of the night.In total contrast was Jeremy Corbyn, who blamed the media and Brexit, said that his policies were the right ones, and said that he was not going quite yet.

As dawn crept further in and we saw a Conservative government with even fewer women in it than before, and no chance of Luciana Berger leading the Liberal Democrats after her defeat in Finchleyand Golders Green , my hope is that the Labour Party mightfinally vote in its first female leader.

Earlier in the evening I had joined others at an electoral debate at new all-female club The Wing, where those from the 50:50 campaign drove home again how far we are from gender parity in government.

And that Labour has never voted in a female leader this can surely not happen again.

Epstein with Maxwell in 2005 (Patrick McMullan via Getty Image)

While Harvey Weinstein is finally going into the dock over two rape charges next month , the horror of Jeffrey Epsteins crimes gets amplified. And all we have is deafening silence from Ghislaine Maxwell,the woman who has reportedly admitted helping to procure him young girls for massages. There are reports she is to do an interview on an unnamed US TV network but nothing is certain, especially her whereabouts. How, in an era where everything and everyone can be tracked, can this woman still be hiding unseen?

New: Daily podcast from the Evening Standard

Subscribe to The Leader on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Acast or your chosen podcast provider. New episodes every weekday from 4pm.

Here is the original post:
Kardashians, Greta and #MeToo with 18 days left of this decade Im carving out a moment to reflect - Evening Standard

The first article in this series discussed the psychology behind alt-right radicalization onlinewho is most vulnerable to extremist indoctrination, the risk factors correlated with such vulnerability, and the forms that the process of radicalization can take. Now, the next question to be asked concerns the actual implications and dangers of online alt-right extremist movements and their recruitment efforts. We have seen too often that radicalization in the virtual world can lead to real-world violence; we have seen terrible acts of mass violence that have been connected with members of the alt-right online, such as in Christchurch and El Paso. But are these acts of violence the only dangers posed by the activities of the alt-right online? The second part of this series will explore whether, in a hypothetical world devoid of the tragedy of alt-right violence, the virtual activities of the alt-right would still have real-world implications.

There is a tendency in alt-right activity to weave dark humour into online content, meaning that the rest of us often struggle to distinguish between honestly-held, hateful beliefs and ironically-presented hate speech. A leaked style guide from a neo-Nazi site proves that this is actually a tactic of the alt-right in some cases: The unindoctrinated should not be able to tell if we are joking or not.Anonymous imageboards like 4chan are not dedicated to any specific ideology, which makes it especially difficult to determine whether or not users actually believe the appalling things they are writing, or whether it is all part of some sort of ironic, competitive game to see who can say the most abhorrent thing, or share the most despicable, hateful meme.

The first article in this seriesdiscussed the dangers of anonymous-poster imageboards like 4chan. This danger stems from the power such sites have to provide exposure to alt-right content and to engender a link between violence, hate, and commonplace humour in peoples minds. Inherent to the structure of 4chan itself is a tendency to provide gateway content to extremist discoursewith a single click, users can be taken from one thread discussing video games or current events to another thread full of hate-ridden rants against minorities and women. 4chan users near-ubiquitous use of darkly ironic humour with regard to almost any subject means that terroristic violence, hate crimes, and bigotry are talked about in such a way thatmake people laugh and belittle their importance. This creates a link between toxic content and humour: people find themselves amusedby hateful thoughtswhether they accept them or notmaking hate speech appear more readily acceptable and less harmful.

Dr. Ghayda Hassan is the founder and director of the Canada Practitioners Network for the Prevention of Radicalization and Extremist Violence (CPN-PREV) and a UNESCO co-chair on Prevention of Violence Radicalization and Extremist Violence. She gives credence to the idea that, in certain cases, users of sites like 4chan may be participating in a collective exorcism of hate-feelings which they dont actually accept. That is, people may congregate online and express feelings of hatred which they neither accept, nor believe; indeed, they may even appear to advocate hate crimes, without actually subscribing to any part of what they are saying.

We all have hate-feelings, says Hassanhaving hate-feelings is part of being human. Neither acceptingnor acting on these very human feelings, however, isnatural, andboth can lead to discourse and actions which the majority of us would consider utterly inhumane. Normally, says Hassan, we have positive social spaces in which we can experience and express our feelings of hate without it meaning that we actually want to destroy the target of our hate. The danger comes when these constructive spaces are replaced by unmediated online platforms where real-world regulatory processes no longer exist. In the real-world, people around us react to our expressions of hate and help us to understand hate-feelings and how to deal with them in a healthy way. Online, however, anyone can say anything anonymously, and there isnt always a constructive reaction or discussion that follows in order to help somebody work through their hate-feelings in a positive way, explains Hassan.

There is the obvious concern that online alt-right content and recruitment efforts will generate more hate and inspire more radicalization, or at least expose more people to extremist ideologies than would be the case without this virtual outlet. While this may be the case, expressing hate-feelings online, even without mediation to help you interpret and dismiss them, doesnt mean that an individual will act on those feelings in real life, says Hassan.Although the risk is certainly greaterwith the lack of divide that once existed between the virtual world and the real world, activities in the virtual space can bleed into the real world, desensitizing people to violence and prejudice, and normalizing expressions of hate.

Dr. Hassan points out that, while there is certainly no guarantee of social upheaval in the foreseeable future, a look at history shows us that increased polarization of the population and increased hate around otherness can contribute to civil conflict. Thus, radicalism and expressions of hate speech that occur in the unmediated arena of the Internet have the potential to increase hatred towards others. Previous wars have all been accompanied by highly de-humanizing discourse, she continues, and we are definitely preparing the social space for a more tense relationship that, [in the] long-term, may lead to civil unrest or disruption.

Carrie Rentschler, an Associate Professor of Communications Studies at McGill University, focuses on social movements and media activism. She points to online hate-speech and the alt-rights tactics of doxxingas well as rape- and death-threats as culprits in the creation of an intense culture of fear. In such a culture, people, particularly women, are afraid to speak out against hate and condemn the alt-right for fear of retaliation against themselves or those they are close to. Whether or not rape- and death-threats are realized, the fear of that realization is often enough to shut down would-be vocal opponents of the alt-right. The very threats made by radicals online are harmful, says Rentschler; whether it is carried out or not, the threat itself says you are not safe.

Examining the practice of doxxing gives us a better understanding of just how scared targeted individuals can be. Doxxing is an attempt to stop the target from participating in a certain kind of discourse, engaging with a particular cause, or challenging a specific group or ideology online. Doxxers destroy an individuals privacy and anonymity online in an attempt tolegitimize their threats and make the target feel exposed, vulnerable, and afraid. Doxxers will reveal the real name, occupation, face, and even address about loved ones of the targeted individual. By frightening and shaming their opponents into silence, doxxers create a culture of fear wherein people are threatened away from voicing their opinions. It is a tactic used by both the alt-right and their opponents, and hasunfortunately become increasingly mainstream.

Rentschler explains that when people are afraid to challenge hateful ideologies for fear of harm being done to them or their families, our society becomes one in which the hate-mongersare empowered because there are fewer and fewer voices to counter hateful, radical ideas. Rational discourse and debate can no longer take place when too many people are frightened into silence, andhate-speech is made dangerously prominent and powerful in such a society.

Online hate speech has the potential to indoctrinate non-radicals into extremist ideologies, normalize certain kinds of violent or discriminatory discourse, desensitize people to the idea of viewing of even committing acts of violence, and create a society in which people are afraid to stand up and speak out against hatred and violence. Knowing all this, one might ask: what steps can we as a society take to combat the powerful effects of online extremism, and to protect ourselves from its influence in the real world?

Rentschler emphasizes the importance of de-platforming, moderation, and holding people to higher standards on internet platforms. There is promising evidence that banning users who share hateful and extremist content on social media platforms is an effective way to reduce the amount of hate speech that is shared. Holding people to particular standards online is essential, says Rentschler, but currently, there is very little in place to stop online hate speech and harassment. Likes, popularity votes, and upvotes are key to the proliferation of extremism online, Rentschler explains; the more popular content is, the more available and accessible it is made. This means that the more likes an alt-right post receives, the more mainstream exposure it might be given.

In terms of developing a solution to mitigate dangerous online activity, while some might think that it would be easier to discuss and challenge toxic ideas through free debate so as to prevent their normalization and acceptance into mainstream society.However, when asked, Rentschler was more skeptical: Im not sure that the fact that its out there means were discussing it and debating it, says Rentschler; unless were actively and constantly challenging such speech, its relative prominence might do far more harm than good.

And what about free speech? Isnt it important that we defend the right of even the most bigoted extremist to freely express themselves, even if what they say is abhorrent? Rentschler points out that at a certain point, the right to free speech of the alt-right infringes on that same right of those who would stand up against them, exemplified in part by the effectiveness of doxxing and similar practices. Theres an important question to be asked, she saysWho cant speak, out of fear of harassment and harm? We might champion free speech as a pillar of what makes ours a free and safe society, but when it comes to online extremism and the very clearconcerns it poses in the real world, the issue is far from black and white.

Featured imageflat screen computer monitors on table photobyKaur KristjanonUnsplash.

See the rest here:
Unmasking the Alt-Right: Real-World Implications of a Virtual Movement - The McGill International Review

Taylor Swift fans are fervent, sure, but nothing truly brings a community together like a man whittling a successful woman down to her reproductive parts.

On Monday night, far-right Canadian Youtuber known for his promotion of scientific racism and eugenics," according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote, I cant believe Taylor Swift is about to turn 30 she still looks so young! Its strange to think that 90% of her eggs are already gone 97% by the time she turns 40 so I hope she thinks about having kids before its too late! Shed be a fun mom. :).

Understandably, the Twitter factions rioted in the comments. And, let me tell you, the burns were sick.

RELATED: Why Taylor Swift Said Demi Moore's Memoir Was One of Her Favorite Books of 2019

Honestly, if you somehow cant come to your own realization that posting about a womans egg count is a bad and very gross idea, maybe consider the fallout?

View post:
The Internet Is Coming to Taylor Swift's Defense After an Alt-Right Troll Tweeted About Her Egg Count - Yahoo Lifestyle

(JTA) Andrew Yang, a former tech executive, has never held public office. But that hasnt stopped him from running the most successful dark horse campaign of the election cycle.

His platform is based around creating a universal basic income giving every American citizen over the age of 18 $1,000 per month, in place of other welfare programs. His Freedom Dividend proposal has ignited debate and made him a favorite among many, especially young people, looking to shape up the economic status quo.

Yang has no experience in government, which makes figuring out where he stands on Jewish issues more challenging. However, there is one Jewish issue Andrew Yang has made headlines for:

Andrew Yang is against circumcision.

At one point he said he would incorporate that view into public policy, according to The Daily Beast.

Its sort of pushed on parents in many situations, Yang said, calling circumcision a cultural onus.

From what Ive seen, the evidence on it being a positive health choice for the infant is quite shaky, he added.

This makes Yang an intactivist one of those who advocate for keeping penises intact, as they like to say, or uncircumcised.

Despite this, doctors say that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks.

An anti-circumcision policy would greatly impact the Jewish community: a bris, or brit milah, is the Jewish ritual of circumcision usually performed on the eighth day after a baby boy is born, and a sign of entering into the Jewish covenant.

After a backlash, Yang seemed to walk back his statements, tweeting that he would not pass a universal policy on circumcision.

I support the freedom of parents to adopt circumcision for any religious or cultural ritual as desired. Actually have attended a brit milah myself and felt privileged to be there Always up to parents.

Still, he never said he would end his anti-circumcision advocacy.

Besides the circumcision controversy, has Yang waded into other waters that Jews should be concerned about?

Oddly enough, Yang is a bit of a hit with the alt-right.

For one thing, some of them applauded his comments on circumcision. But as The Verge reported in March, Yang has a following on forums on the site 4chan that are full of anti-Semitic memes.

One meme showed Yang redistributing wealth from a Jewish banker caricature, the kind of noxious anti-semitism thats common on [the 4chan forum] /pol/, Russell Brandom reported.

Yang has strongly denounced this form of support.

I denounce and disavow hatred, bigotry, racism, white nationalism, anti-Semitism and the alt-right in all its many forms. Full stop. For anyone with this agenda, we do not want your support. We do not want your votes. You are not welcome in this campaign, he said in a statement to The Verge.

What else has Yang said about anti-Semitism?

He tweeted support for Jews in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting.

I know its true for everyone but I feel terrible and terrified for my Jewish friends. So many have lost family members to violence and anti-Semitism. It hits home for them like for very few others because of their history of persecution. Imagine having your worst fears realized, Yang tweeted.

But further along in that same Twitter thread, he went on to push for universal basic income, saying that it would decrease economic and social tensions and potentially help to stop violent shootings.

Economic stress adds to social polarization and violence, he said. If youre walking around worried about how to survive month-to-month you are more likely to lash out and respond to hateful messages and ideas.

On Yangs blog, he expanded on his plan to fight anti-Semitism, with the help of UBI.

Would a Universal Basic Income have prevented the violence in Pittsburgh? Perhaps not but I believe it would have a better chance of preventing the next one than just about anything else we could do. And yes, that includes thoughts and prayers.

What does Yang say about the movement to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel commonly referred to as BDS?

Yang has not specifically addressed BDS.

What about relationships with Jewish groups?

Yang hasnt appeared with any, though he did submit a minute-long video message to J Street.

There is also a Jews for Andrew Yang Twitter account. As of this writing, it has just under 3,000 followers.

Does he have a foreign policy with regard to Israel?

Not a very detailed one, but he has come out in favor of a two-state solution.

The only acceptable end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict involves a two-state solution that allows both the Israeli and Palestinian people to have sovereign land and self-determination, Yang told the Council on Foreign Relations.

I dont want to prescribe the specifics of a two-state solution, as the Israeli and Palestinian people both need to be leading any conversation, and I look forward to engaging with all stakeholders to come up with confidence-building measures, such as a ceasefire and an end to the expansion of settlements, as we look towards building a sustainable peace.

Where does he stand on aid to Israel?

In March, Yang acknowledged to voters in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, that he did not know enough about aid generally to pronounce on aid to Israel. Im not going to get into the specifics of foreign aid, he said when asked about the annual defense assistance Israel gets. It could be the $3.8 billion in the context of money we give to other countries is appropriate.

In terms of the money we are giving to an ally like Israel, my first instinct would be like, why would we reduce it, you know? Yang said, speaking off-the-cuff at a meeting in Plymouth, New Hampshire.

In his video to J Streets 2019 conference, Yang said that under his administration, aid to Israel and Gaza would continue, and also, aid to Palestinians under U.S. Aid would be restored.

Jewish fun fact

In Yangs corner or part of the Yang Gang, we should say is Sam Altman, a Silicon Valley investor who last month threw a fundraiser for him. Altman has experimented with supporting universal basic income. In a 2016 New Yorker profile, Altman joked about how his younger brothers urged him to run for president. Lets send the Jewish gay guy! Altman said. Thatll work!

Click here for all of the other 2020 candidates positions on anti-Semitism, Israel and other issues that matter to American Jewish voters.

See the article here:
Where does Andrew Yang stand on anti-Semitism, Israel and other issues that matter to Jewish voters in 2020? - JTA News

Michelle Malkin appeared on the YouTube channel of prominent white nationalist content creator Vincent James on Tuesday, where she applauded young alt-right supporters for having come to the epiphanies that for me took a long time in the making.

It appears that Malkin, after becoming a pariah among mainstream conservatives, has decided to lean into her support among the far-right.

Writers and members of the mainstream GOP began distancing themselves from Malkin after she explicitly endorsed anti-Semitic and white nationalist YouTube political personality Nicholas Fuentes in a speech at UCLA in November. Subsequently, Young Americas Foundation cut ties with Malkin. Washington Examiners Tiana Lowe chided Malkin for affiliating with racists because [Malkin] sees them as the most potent allies available to back a militantly xenophobic agenda. Jonathan S. Tobin wrote in the New York Post that Malkin thinks these haters are allies in a crusade to halt all non-European immigration (ironic, since Malkins parents were Filipino immigrants).

Malkin said she met Vincent James, who also goes by the pseudonyms of Vincent Foxx and Vincent James OConnor, at the UCLA event, adding that it was excellent to make that connection. James is a far-right YouTube political entertainer who often pushes white nationalist and conspiratorial content and was spotted perusing the perimeter of the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference with Fuentes.

During her 42-minute interview with James, Malkin said her recent embrace of the self-described groyper alt-right made sense to her because it was in line with the type of politics she had been trying to engage in for the last 25 years.

I feel like theres a good synergy and partnership here because thats the work that Ive been trying to do for 25 plus years. Its been frustrating because so many people dont care. And so, when I see a glimpse, a glimmer of a spark of energy and hope and optimism, yeah, hell yeah, Im going to run to that, Malkin said. Thats what I did.

Earlier in the interview, James had vouched for Malkin to the groyper crowd, which recently co-opted Trumps America First slogan to brand its latest efforts.

I cant stress this enough. Michelle Malkin supports America First. Michelle Malkin tells the truth. Michelle Malkin is standing up against the conservative establishment, James said.

In one portion of the duos conversation, James asked Malkin to stop him when one of the following policy proposals sounded white nationalist: an immigration moratorium for at least 10 years, prosecuting employers who hire undocumented immigrants, banning welfare for undocumented immigrants, and requiring high school students visit a third-world country so that they see how great they have it here.

Malkin did not stop him.

Malkin alleged that conservatives know and believe that demographic changes in the United States could negatively affect them, but says they dont talk about it publicly for monetary reasons. (Malkin does not seem to consider the possibility that conservatives could try appealing to immigrants instead.) Malkin also praised America First activists who hung a banner over a bridge in Virginia that featured a design scheme remarkably similar to the one used by American Identity Movement, the rebranded white nationalist group Identity Evropa.

During his interview with Malkin, James scrolled through her Twitter profile and revealed that he is the operator of The Red Elephants Fan Account on Twitter. James has been banned from Twitter before, and banned users often pose as fan accounts to gain access back onto the platform.

James has appeared on a neo-Nazi podcast and was filmed in 2017 asking members of Rise Above Movement, a violent white supremacist group, to recite the white supremacist slogan 14 Words on camera. Members of that white supremacist group have since faced federal charges for engaging in violence at the 2017 Unite the Right white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. The same year, James blamed Jews for social media bans, saying that the people responsible for fact-checking articles on Facebook were very similar in DNA to [Facebook COO] Sheryl Sandberg, who is Jewish. James once kept a Holocaust denier on his payroll who later ran the failed Senate campaign of neo-Nazi Patrick Little.

As Right Wing Watch reported in 2018, James uses his platform tohostprominentwhite nationalistspeakers and sympathizers,bolstersuch white nationalist organizations as Identity Evropa,stokeracist fears about immigrants,advancerace war narratives, andspeakto aggrieved white people at-large. Last year, James dedicated one video to arguing that the Trump administration should not hire black people and especially not black women.

James denies having ever advocated for anti-immigrant, white nationalist, or anti-Semitic ideas, claiming such accusations are a tactic of communists.

Read the rest here:
Michelle Malkin Appears on White Nationalist YouTube Show - Right Wing Watch