Mediaboss Marketing

Social media has become an addictive part of everyday life and we must be wary of all the ways it is exploited.

Social media has reached a saturation point that the likes of Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey could scarcely have imagined in their wildest dreams. Businesses utilise it to sell us product, friends use it to keep us in the loop on their nights out, and politicians not to mention sundry shady organisations and troll farms manipulate it in the hope of winning.

Instagram, Facebook and Twitter have proven to be inescapable and, for many of us, stupidly irresistible.In the political sphere this year, the world watched as Donald Trump continued to unleash bile-filled, lying tweets at his adversaries. The Presidents propaganda machine fired out shots against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, suspected whistleblowers, ambassadors, cabinet members, and whoever else dared criticise the man in the Oval Office.With the impeachment hearings swinging into full gear towards the end of 2019, Twitter remained Trumps platform of choice for hysterical rants.

In our personal lives, many of us refreshed Instagram daily to see our friends living their so called best lives, while we remained stuck in the mundanity of our own. Consequently, many of us have developed a nagging fear of missing out (or FOMO), and cant stand spending time alone.

Gradually, the truth about Surveillance Capitalism emerged. In the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook was called into account on the court floor. Mark Zuckerburg claimed that users have nothing to fear. He was lying. The acclaimed Netflix documentaryThe Great Hackserved as a further wake-up call to users around the world: we are being played for fools. In June, Facebook announced plans to integrate cryptocurrency into the website. You might characterise it as megalomania. And you might be right.

Meanwhile, sinister forces have subborned social media to dangerous political purposes. Trolls in fascist States aim to destroy democracy. Governments here look on like goms. The poisonously cynical alt-right group QAnon spread the hashtag #FakeWhistleBlower. And Deep Fake is on the way.

What effect is social media having on the human condition? Scholars have said it is a minefield for our mental health. It breeds addiction, self-doubt, and passivity. Leisure time once dedicated to reflection, reading, or socialising, has been replaced with hours of refreshing a social media feed that amplifies fear and insecurity. So who is going to fight back? And how? One things for sure: it is time for radical action.

You can read the complete 'Whole Hog On 2019 in one brilliant sweep in the Hot Press Annual in which we distill the highlights and low-points of the year, across 132 vital, beautifully designed pages. Starring heroes of the year Fontaines D.C. on the front we cover Music, Culture, Sport, Film, Politics, the Environment and much, much more. Buy this superb publication direct from Hot Press here.

Here is the original post:
The Whole Hog: We should fear the dangers of social media - hotpress.com

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

First it was the moon landing, vaccines, and New Coke. Now nutty conspiracies are surrounding the life-and-death matter of hurricanes.

With warming waters providing extra fuel, tropical cyclones have become more frequent and more intense in recent years, causing deadly flooding, widespread power outages, and hundreds of billions of dollars in damages. Some people (ahem) see a sinister plot behind it all, an attempt to overhype the threat of disasters so that Big Government can take over (or something). This bonkers hurricane trutherism has spread from right-wing blogs to a much broader audience.

And it might already have real-world, fact-based consequences. A working paper suggests that by downplaying hurricane risk, conservative media hosts like Rush Limbaugh could be discouraging people from getting out of harms way.

Before Hurricane Irma struck Florida in 2017, causing more than 100 deaths and $50 billion in damages, hurricane trutherism got a lot of attention. Limbaugh the most popular talk show host in the country cast doubt on Irmas severity and the motivation behind advisories prodding people to evacuate.

Here comes a hurricane, local media goes on the air, Big hurricane coming, oh, my God! Make sure you got batteries. Make sure you got water. It could be the worst ever. Have you seen the size of this baby? Its already a Cat 5. Limbaugh went on to suggest that the hype about Irma would lead to a bigger audience for TV stations, a boost in local business from worried residents stocking up on supplies, and of course, panic over climate change. Shortly thereafter, Limbaugh evacuated from his South Florida home to escape Irmas wrath.

The right-wing commentator Ann Coulter followed with her own take on Twitter: HURRICANE UPDATE FROM MIAMI: LIGHT RAIN; RESIDENTS AT RISK OF DYING FROM BOREDOM. Limbaugh and Coulters comments were covered by the mainstream media, and Google searches for hurricane conspiracy reached an all-time high.

The damage was done. For their study, the researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles found that only 34 percent of Floridians who likely voted for President Trump in the 2016 election evacuated before Irma hit, compared to 45 percent of Hillary Clinton voters. But ahead of two other hurricanes Matthew in 2016 and Harvey in 2017 when skepticism of hurricane threats was less widespread in the media, the researchers found that Trump and Clinton voters evacuated at similar rates.

The researchers looked at GPS location data from 30 million smartphone users to compare evacuation patterns for hurricanes Matthew, Harvey, and Irma, and juxtaposed that with voting data from the 2016 presidential election. The authors declined Grists request to comment because the paper is in the final stages of peer review.

Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication who was not involved in the study, said the findings appeared to be in line with recent research showing that the media can have a strong effect on decision-making.

In the Trump-voting districts in this study, theres a natural skepticism of the government, and I think that skepticism is being exploited to the great detriment of peoples health and safety, she said. We tend not to think of evacuating a hurricane as having anything to do with partisan politics, but were starting to see that it is becoming part of the political debate.

Limbaugh isnt the only one undermining public trust in hurricane forecasting. Earlier this year, Trump doubled down on a lie that forecasts had projected that Hurricane Dorian was headed to Alabama, going so far as to present a doctored NOAA map extending the hurricanes range of possible paths with a Sharpie.

To be sure, the media does get excited about hurricanes theres a lot at stake and viewership ratings do tend to spike during big storms. But doubting that hurricanes are dangerous can put lives at risk.

A recent study from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication found that as hurricanes become stronger, it hasnt led more people to evacuate. A survey of coastal residents in Connecticut found that people who had evacuated in the past and later thought it had been unnecessary were less likely to plan to leave town in the event of a future hurricane.

Hurricane trutherism is just one of many conspiracy theories tied to climate change out there. Youtube is full of misinformation about geoengineering and chemtrails, the white clouds that airplanes leave in their wake. Though its good sport to mock these ideas, they stem from real fear and can pose real dangers to those who believe them.

Although often parodied as inconsequential fantasies entertained by disenfranchised people on the fringes of society, the authors of one 2015 study wrote, conspiracy theories can influence what ordinary people intend to do in important domains, like voting or vaccinating their children.

As a nonprofit news outlet, we rely on reader support to help fund our award-winning environmental journalism. Were one of the few news outlets dedicated exclusively to people-focused environmental coverage, and we believe our content should remain free and accessible to all our readers. If you dig our work and agree news should never sit behind a paywall only available to a select few, donate today to help sustain our climate coverage. Donate now, and all gifts will be matched dollar-for-dollar through December 31! Double your impact today.

DONATE NOW!

Read more here:
'Hurricane truthers': Bonkers conspiracies are putting lives in danger - Grist

BERKELEY, Calif. (JTA) There are the makings of a rebellion brewing in the mainstream American Jewish community.

Its not a Jexodus, the rights quixotic dream that Jews will migrate en masse to the Republican Party.

It is a potential rebellion of the median Jew: pro-Israel, pro-two states and perfectly comfortable sitting among the 71 percent of Jews who voted for Hillary Clinton. The sort of Jew who isconcerned aboutleft-wing anti-Semitism on college campuses,but knows well enough to be more concerned aboutdeadly right-wing anti-Semitism.

The issue is simple: The Republican Party, from Donald Trump on down, has a huge anti-Semitism problem. Yet too many American Jewish organizations, which purport to represent the Jewish mainstream, are tiptoeing around it.

When pressed absolutely up against the wall, they might issue a timid plea to speak more carefully a mild rebuke that still usually comes wrapped in an insulating layer of gratitude for pro-Israel gestures.

Most Jews are not fools. We know there is a connection between the scare-mongering aboutSoros globalistsand cultural Marxists andcosmopolitan elites rhetoric that has become the conservative movements primary tool of political mobilization and the surge in anti-Semitic harassment, marginalization and violence that has plagued Jews in recent years.

Were tired of our own establishment organizations talking a big game about fighting anti-Semitism wherever it lies, only to supplicate themselves to a man and a party who has regularly and consistently trafficked in anti-Semitic tropes in pursuit of a political vision radically antagonistic to the values of American Jews.

The latest group to abdicate its duty? The American Jewish Committee.

Eyes fell on the AJC again this week afterPresident Trump, in remarks to the Israeli American Council, suggested that Jews arent nice people, would vote for him primarily to protect our own wealth and are disloyal to Israel. He even threw in an anti-Native American racial slur for good measure.

The AJC, which justinaugurated a social media campaign to Translate Hate,should have been especially attuned to what was happening here.

Trump has repeatedly hit on all of these anti-Semitic themes before. Hes complained thatJews wont back him because he doesnt want your money. Hes told American Jews that Israel is your country.

In many ways, Trumps IAC speech perfectly encapsulated the emerging conservative consensus about American Jews: Were disloyal to America in favor of our actual country, Israel, to which were also disloyal. Ann Coulter, at least, heard the message loud and clear:

Yet instead of a robust condemnation of yet another anti-Semitic indulgence from the president of the United States, the AJCs reply stood out from the rest of the Jewish community for adopting a tone that can only be described as groveling:

Well gosh, Id hate if Donald Trump hit a mine on the road to appealing to Jewish voters. He might get hurt!

Somehow a statement that purports to condemn Trumps anti-Semitism seemed to express more concern about Trumps well-being than that of the Jews. More than a few observers contrasted the wishy-washy response given to Trump with the AJCs considerably more robust reply to Rep. Ilhan Omars Benjamins remark:

The AJCs approach to Omar was not prefaced with sincere appreciation for her political accomplishments, nor couched in language that suggested they were primarily concerned with her well-being. She gets unadulterated scorn, and the AJC will never, ever let her forget it.

Apologists contend that kid gloves are warranted for the president because he and his party are pro-Israel unwavering, as the AJC gratuitously put it at the opening of its gentle admonishment.

The message? Being pro-Israel (or at least pro-Likud) isa get-out-of-anti-Semitism-free card. Groups like the AJC are sending the message that the correct positions on Israel will suffice to forgive any amount of anti-Semitism in America.

And Republicans have felt entitled to play that card, again and again, to wash away increasingly more brazen anti-Semitic indulgences.

Invite a Holocaust denier to the State of the Union, as Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., did?

Dont worry, hes a champion of Israel!

Say the Republican Party is controlled by the Jewish lobby, as former Minnesota congressman (and Trump-endorsed GOP Senate candidate) Jason Lewis did?

Its fine these are not my views about American support for Israel, period.

Even where other Jewish organizations have clearly and robustly condemned Republican anti-Semitism,the media (both Jewish and non-Jewish) routinely fails to follow up. There are no dogged demands for comment, no monthlong storylines about the GOPs anti-Semitism crisis.

Repeated instances of conservative anti-Semitic rhetoric are routinely glossed over and effectively forgiven even asRepublicans defiantly refuse to apologize for them. They spit in the face of the American Jewish majority, then have the chutzpah to call themselves defenders of the Jews and theyre allowed to get away with it largely without question.

Bari Weiss famously justified putting more intense focus onleft-wing anti-Semitismbecause it is supposedly more insidious than the right-wing variety: harder to spot, more easily integrated into reputable political, academic or media circles.

Yet we do not lack for organizing or editorials against left-wing anti-Semitism. If there is a form of anti-Semitism that has truly resisted consistent registration on the public radar, it is mainstream right-wing anti-Semitism.

On the mainstream right, we see conspiracy theories aboutJews buying Congressor trafficking migrants or orchestrating impeachment allowed to run rampant in the highest levels of government and in the most influential sectors of the media. And when they do predictably explode intovandalism, harassment or violence, few dare hold accountable the mainstream actors from political officials to Fox News mouthpieces who so eagerly served up the toxic stew.

Whats bizarre is thatthe AJCs own polling decisively demonstrates how far it has deviated from American Jewish priorities. This year, 78 percent of American Jews told the AJC that anti-Semitism on the extreme right represents a very or moderately serious threat, compared to 36 percent for the extreme left.

When it comes to attributing blame to political parties, the numbers are just as stark. Asked to assign responsibility for current levels of anti-Semitism on a 1-10 scale, Jews gave Republicans a median score of 7 compared to a 3 for Democrats.

When the political apparatuses of the American right from the president to Congress to Fox News repeatedly and regularly transmit anti-Semitic conspiracies of the worst sort, injecting them into American political discourse and normalizing them as a feature of American public life, it is not innocent. It needs a clarion response. We are screaming for the communal institutions that represent us to reflect this reality to reflect our reality when representing us on a political stage.

In fact, just this summer, the AJC expressed outrage at President Trumps comments today criticizing American Jews who support and vote for Democratic candidates, calling it shockingly divisive and unbecoming of the occupant of the highest elected office, and the comments inappropriate, unwelcome, and downright dangerous. What has changed since then? How is it that Trump can double-down on his anti-Semitism and get an effective green light on it?

The AJC needs to think very carefully about its future if it continues along this path. What is the use ofan organization that describes itself as the Jewish State Department if it stops reflecting the interests and preferences of most Jews? Increasingly Jews mainstream Jews are asking ourselves that very question.

In the meantime, American Jews will continue to fight anti-Semitism vigorously and unsparingly wherever it manifests. No distractions. No free passes. No timidity.

If the American Jewish Committee is interested in actually representing the American Jewish community, it should stand by us.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent company, 70 Faces Media.

See the original post:
American Jews know anti-Semitism is a problem on the right. Why are Jewish organizations increasingly letting it slide? - JTA News

Tucker Carlson, who is beloved by white supremacists, hosted a political candidate on his show this week who also appears to be a white supremacist. Pete DAbrosca is running for a seat in Congress and has been widely praised by the most extreme right-wing figures and organizations, including InfoWars and VDARE.

Fox News Tucker Carlson recently hosted Pete DAbrosca, a congressional candidate who has ties to white nationalism and has supported the bigoted, anti-immigrant campaign of a group known as groypers, who are trolling conservative public events with anti-Semitic dog whistles and other hateful rhetoric.

Since DAbrosca announced his congressional bid and anti-immigrant platform over the summer, hes been lauded by far-right personalities and publications including Ann Coulter and the white nationalist publication VDare and appeared on the conspiracy theory outlet Infowars (which he had also appeared on before). In that most recent appearance, he agreed with the host that Democrats get elected through illegal voting and defended the leader of the groypers, a far-right media figure, Holocaust denier, and pro-segregation activist named Nick Fuentes who hosts America First on YouTube

Lets be blunt and call a spade a spade: Tucker Carlson is a white supremacist. He tries to cover it with veneer of mainstream conservatism, but it comes shining through far too often to be deniable.

Read the rest here:
Tucker Carlson Hosts White Supremacist on Show - Patheos