Few things are more amusing, than when people who believe that astrology is scientific try to get all logical and analytical. Once again, SJWs are attempting to use “science” to malign #TheFandomMenace.
I originally read this study thinking that there might be some original thought here, and potentially some useful information that I could use to update the Geeker Gates with. But instead what I found was a collection of the very same talking points that everyone has already read in legacy media articles multiple times before. I’ve responded to those points numerous times on this blog.
Nevertheless, we shall press on anyway. Reading the opposition is how conservatives understand liberal positions, better than liberals understand conservative positions. So grab some donuts and coffee, and pull up your hip waders. This one is going to be deep and long.
Before the Age of Enlightenment, those who pursued power such as monarchs and other despots, would oftentimes use religion as a tool to impose their will over others. A monarch would declare that, “God says X, and therefore you must do Y.”
The idea of “separation of church and state” was born out of that problem, by individuals such as Roger Williams, Voltaire, John Locke among others. Those ideas inspired the Founding Fathers to insert the Establishment Clause into the 1st Amendment, which established a separation of church and state into the Bill of Rights. Anti-separatists argue that no such separation exists in the Establishment Clause, but we have enough supporting documents from the Founders to know that it is what they intended. Ultimately it’s a very good idea, as no rational person wants to live under a theocracy.
What the Founders didn’t foresee however, was that science would replace religion as the go-to tool for aspiring despots pursuing power over others. Now the government official says, “Science says X, so you are required to do Y.” They would now have us live under a technocracy. Say hello to the new boss; same as the old boss.
But the fundamental problem that modern despots have, is the inherent difference between rigid religious dogma, and ever changing scientific findings. Genuine science does not cling to rigid unchanging dogma in the same way that religion does, nor should it. The commonly parroted phrase “settled science” is pure flim-flam uttered by the scientifically illiterate. Genuine science is never ever settled. Scientific findings routinely change as new discoveries are made. One year salt is bad for you, the next year it’s a cure-all. Wait long enough, and the findings you wish for will fall in your lap.
Furthermore, religion is based on belief and faith, whereas genuine science is founded on experimentation, factual evidence, and vigorous debate. Without debate, you don’t have a genuine science. So science becomes a poor tool for despots because of its ever changing findings due to new discoveries. So in order to use science as a tool to impose power over others, it has to be distorted through linguistic shell games, and smoke and mirrors. New findings have to be suppressed and other findings have to be manufactured.
Enter the political propagandist, who attempts to pass off well-rehearsed political rhetoric as scientific authority in what amounts to garbage scholarship.
Morten Bay, PhD, presumably from UCLA, has written a formal paper “on the politicization of #StarWars fandom and #TheLastJedi.”
Here’s my paper (final draft) on politicization of #StarWars fandom & #TheLastJedi, accepted for pub. in First Monday. It shows ~50% of criticism directed @rianjohnson was political trolling, some of it likely from Russia. Also shows haters=small minority. https://t.co/fFGSxJToi5 pic.twitter.com/BUCJLpl0FI
— Morten Bay, PhD (@mortenbay) October 1, 2018
Rian Johnson bounced his bobblehead in furious agreement, unlikely having actually read the piece.
A bit of Morten’s research came out awhile ago and made some headlines – here’s his full paper. Looking forward to reading it, but what the top-line describes is consistent with my experience online. https://t.co/MTRgmPxGgZ
— Rian Johnson (@rianjohnson) October 1, 2018
The study comes from today’s academia, so it therefore promises to be monumentally stupid. But no doubt this silly pseudo-scientific research paper will form the basis for multiple articles in the garbage tier media, so let’s take the time to examine this bit of quasi-academic detritus anyway. A PDF of the study can be found at the appropriately named website, ResearchGate.
The research paper is entitled, Weaponizing the haters: The Last Jedi and the strategic politicization of pop culture through social media manipulation. That’s a mouthful. The paper itself is 29 pages long, so let’s proceed.
In fact the efforts of Russian hackers on social media were discovered to have been less about the Presidential election, and more about causing general social “discord and divisiveness amongst the American people, though not necessarily focused on specific politicians or political campaigns.” They attempted to foment racial conflict, much in the same way that the Democratic Party has on a routine basis throughout its entire history.
There’s no question whatsoever that political influence can be found in pop culture. Watch any awards show, and you’ll find that celebrities just can’t shut up about it. But one also has to look to the toxic creators who impose their deeply moronic social justice politics into the products of pop culture. That’s where the “deliberate, organized political influence” truly dwells. That’s what the Geeker Gate is all about.
The alt-right movement is a purely imaginary figment of leftist imagination. So was the Far-Right, and the Extreme-Right, and the Uber-Right, and the Ultra-Right, and the NeoCon before that. And the notion that the Russian Federation would align with any purported Alt-Right is beyond silly. One merely needs to review the animated Soviet propaganda available on YouTube, and one will instantly recognize Soviet propaganda as aligning neatly with modern Democratic Party platforms and rhetoric. Remember, Putin is ex-KGB.
Marten is uses the amusing Ron Howard Fantasy-Fulfillment Technique, whereby any opinion expressed that conflicts with the Collective’s Narrative must be the result of Russian Bots or other pretend boogeymen. In this way he’s able to convince himself that he and his comrades are part of a great majority, while detractors are part of a “tiny vocal minority.” Though it’s unlikely that he’d be willing to entertain minority rights for those detractors.
Actually, eight months after it opened in theaters, Star Wars fans were mainly talking about the shameful misbehavior of Lucasfilm representatives, and the absurd media publications that mindlessly parroted the phrase “toxic fandom” as often as it could. I’ve responded to many of those media pieces on this blog, and they’re always ill informed and poorly researched. The actual film itself, The Last Jedi, hasn’t been the primary focus of discussion for months.
Since when was the creation of websites and social media content that criticizes any film, or that calls for the replacement of poorly performing leaders deemed as “toxic?” Since drones in the Collective disagree with the efforts? So what if they do?
Supporters have indeed called detractors predominately white males with misogynistic views. But that’s because those supporters are either uneducated, or they seek to marginalize the voices of females and people of color who have expressed the exact same critical opinions.
There is evidence that the fan conflict caused by The Last Jedi stems from deliberate and organized social media influence tactics employed by politically motivated operators, foreign and domestic? Well, let’s hope that evidence is far more concrete than the nearly non-existent evidence for the Kelly Marie Tran Instagram Incident.
If the film was original targeted towards cinema-goers who were too young to vote, then why are some SJW activists calling for more sex in Star Wars?
No. George Lucas attempted to convey left-leaning values, but the studio system which he fought to get out from under wisely suppressed his efforts. I go into depth about that here.
The parallels of Palpatine could be just as easily applied to President Obama, who routinely used Executive Orders to circumnavigate and undermine Congress. The on-the-nose references to Bush in Epsiode III were clear, and he was called out on it. Many called critics “paranoid” at the time for interpreting a message about Bush, so I’m glad that Morten is here to clear that up.
Well it was a surprise because as I demonstrate in my blog post about the politics in Star Wars, the franchise didn’t convey left leaning sentiments in great measure previously. This was primarily because those of the Greatest Generation who had real experience in dealing with the fringe left abroad during wartime, and who were in power throughout the studio system at the time, wouldn’t allow dippie domestic hippies to engage in it full on. The argument that Star Wars has always been left leaning is pure poppycock.
Additionally, left leaning in the 1970s meant something different than it does today. Remember, while the modern SJW is the inheritor of the smelly 1960s-era hippie ideology, the two couldn’t be more different. The free-love flower-children of the flatulent 1960s, have fundamentally transformed into puritan neo-Victorian authoritarians in the modern era. How this occurred is the biggest unexplored sociological mystery of the 20th and early 21st Centuries.
What it did do, was portray a shrieking purple haired harridan who made incredibly stupid command decisions, and who barked at the primary male protagonist through half the movie in an effort to convey a ridiculous feminist message about non-existent toxic masculinity. A message which has no application in the real world.
No. Normal people didn’t even see any arguments for equality of gender, race, and class at all. Rather, what they saw instead, was political propagandists using gender, race, and class to shield moronic social justice messaging from criticism. Also, poor storytelling and 1 dimensional characters didn’t help matters either.
When one mentiosn equality, one needs to specify whether they mean equal opportunity, or equality of outcome. But it’s probably best for the left to get their own house in order, before worrying about the equality of everyone else in the neighborhood anyway.
No. It is not possible for academics to identify genuine sexism, racism, and homophobia, because leftists don’t have a fundamental understanding of what those things actually are. They just like parroting the words at anyone they don’t like, or at anyone they disagree with.
I’m a highly critical fan. And I haven’t determined the critical fans to be either a majority or a minority, because I have no data to determine the reality of that either way. Neither does Morten. What I do know, is that The Last Jedi experienced a significant drop off after its opening weekend, more so than Star Wars films before it. the next film to be released, Solo, was a box office disaster. Interpret that as you will.
Political activists have used bots and sock puppet accounts to troll left-wing fans? Did Morten do any research into “Down With Disney” by chance? Or are is he gaslighting us here?
Yes, we’ve all heard about Rian’s Russian Bots. It’s entirely unimpressive given the complete and total lack of evidence.
Yes, pop culture spaces on social media are in fact political battlegrounds. In fact, they probably have been for decades, thanks to SJW activists who insist on inserting their unwelcome politics into entertainment fare. It’s part of a larger effort called “The Long March Through The Culture,” and I highly advise all of my readers to learn more about it.
Normal people don’t endlessly obsess over race and sexuality, so things like racial biases and the nonsense word “heteronormativity” are simply never considered among the normal class.
How does Jonathan Gray determine who is or who is not a fan?
Actually, if Morten had done some genuine research, he would have discovered that the “visceral and vitriolic” reactions against the Special Edition and the Prequel Trilogy was expressed primarily by the legacy media.
The term “toxic fandom” has been created by legacy media writers barely out of college who don’t understand how the real world operates, thanks largely to learning institutions such as UCLA.
Today’s academics are largely uneducated. As a result, the “endemic and omnipresent misogyny in geek culture” they’re perceiving is purely imaginary. Again, leftists routinely struggle with the basic definitions of words.
If good storytelling, 3 dimensional characters, and a natural aversion to reprehensible political indoctrination represent “totemic nostalgia,” then count me guilty as charged.
That’s the problem Morten is having; focusing on the purely imaginary fault lines of race and gender. The very same thing that Morten is accusing Russian Bots of doing.
Did Morten collect his tweets before or after Rian Johnson deleted 20,000 his tweets? I’m genuinely curious.
Public Twitter accounts? But we’re being told that Twitter accounts are private and/or personal.
Did Morten’s sentiment analysis and coding take into account the prolific hate hoaxing that SJWs are prone to? Where SJWs pose as their political adversaries to paint them in a bad light, or to prove a non-existent point? How did Morten determine that the sentiment being expressed was genuine?
How did Morten’s account analysis determine whether or not the “politically-motivated agenda” was spontaneous, or a response to the politically-motivated content in The Last Jedi’s screenplay?
How did Morten determine if the accounts belonged to real human beings? “Most likely” seems like you felt it out, rather than using any kind of methodology or determining technology.
I don’t disclose my identity, yet I rarely use swear words. In fact, I routinely post the following quote in response to those who do:
“Profanity is the effort of a feeble brain to express itself forcibly.”
Anonymous political speech has a long and proud history in the United States, beginning with the earliest pamphleteers of the American Revolution. It allows ideas to be expressed with a reduced worry of consequences. Ideas that might otherwise be suppressed by SJW savages who bark and rant on front lawns at 4 a.m. in the morning.
Certainly there’s not much difference between that, and the masked savages of Antifa. Well, except that I don’t vandalize anything or threaten anyone’s safety.
A troll may be part of a Russian social media influence campaign? Well, then I guess a troll may also not be part of a Russian social media influence campaign. It may be sunny with clear skies. Or it may be raining cats and dogs. How very scientific.
If no absolute attributions are claimed, then how can this serve as evidence of anything at all?
You know who else tweets about identity politics? Jon Kasdan, screenwriter for Solo.
Sorry to have brought identity/gender politics into… NOPE. Not sorry AT ALL ’cause I think the GALAXY George gave birth to in ’77 is big enough for EVERYONE: straight, gay, black, white, brown, Twi’lek, Sullustan, Wookiee, DROID & anything inbetween. #droidrights #weAREsentient
— Jon Kasdan (@JonKasdan) May 19, 2018
Is Jon some sort of mole-bot?
Doesn’t the finite space of a Twitter post require “simplicity and brevity?” It’s not like a person has the kind of blog space that would allow for eloquence and/or diarrhea of the keyboard. Misspelling Hamill and Luke are indicators? How many people have left off the second L in Hamill, either from poor typing skills or a malfunctioning keyboard? How many people have fat-fingered J instead of K, which are right next to each other on a Qwerty configured keyboard? A lack of personal matter on an account is the signature of a bot? Is everyone supposed to be broadcasting their personal issues all the time? Is the concept of private matters dead? Do I need to start posting details of my colonoscopy to escape designation as a Russian bot?
All of this material focusing on Russian agendas seems to be missing the crucial involvement of the Illuminati and the Reptilians from within the Hollow Earth, who seek to subjugate mankind and sell them as slaves to the victors in a battle being waged between the Pleiadians and the Annunaki. And maybe they were all responsible for abducting potential Solo theater goers as well:
Honestly, this stuff is either paranoid hysteria cubed, or a concerted effort to add weight to the “Russian Bots stole the 2016 election” narrative.
SJW is a term that SJWs themselves came up with in an effort to unduly romanticize their idiot activist antics. It’s taken on a pejorative connotation because of the blatant stupidity and misbehavior of the SJWs themselves. They do not support equality of gender, race, sexuality, or anything else. In fact they’re largely responsible for a New Segregation, where selected genders, races, and sexualities are more equal than others. The left’s deeply sick obsession with race and other artificial divisions has never abated and continues on. The only thing that has changed over time is the particular color of their ignorant bigotry. And of course, social justice itself is pure snake oil, which is why the left uses perceived marginalized classes to shield it from criticism.
SJWs do in fact ruin everything. They have a Reverse Midas Touch, where everything they touch instantly turns into pure crap. It’s a fairly consistent phenomenon.
Here’s the full quote that Morten cites, which I wrote:
I just don’t think that’s the case though. Shoddy film craft is a huge issue in TLJ. But politics is certainly a part of the reason I don’t like TLJ; Rose Tico’s deeply moronic social justice lectures for instance. The SJWs within Lucasfilm have made this a proxy battleground.
— Itchy Bacca (@ItchyBacca) June 7, 2018
Interestingly, the following tweet:
The more I read your posts on twitter the more the terrible direction TLJ went in makes sense to me. You SJWs ruin everything.
— Jared Cabe Hilliard (@Jayhill422) August 5, 2018
…was in response to a retweet from Rian Johnson of a Verge article that defended Sara Jeong for tweeting “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men,” among many other racist comments against whites. Did that context show up anywhere in Morten’s methodology?
The following tweet was also quoted in the study:
— Sith Kryptonian 🎥🖥 (@sithkryptoyt) January 9, 2018
I asked Sith Kryptonian if he was aware that he was being quoted in this study. His response:
lol no i wasnt haha. Interesting he picked this one out out of all my my tweets and not the ones that argued the inconsistency of the characters and the film.
— Sith Kryptonian 🎥🖥 (@sithkryptoyt) October 2, 2018
Interesting indeed. Why did he pick that tweet and not one of the others? Probably for the same interesting reason that he redacted the portion about “shoddy film craft” from my own tweet; it doesn’t fit the Narrative.
Did Kelly Marie Tran call it “online harassment?” Because in the article Morten is citing which I’ve commented on, nowhere in the body of the piece does KMT reference “online harassment.” Her editor mentions it in the editor’s note. And it appears in the headline, which editors oftentimes write. But did KMT herself write that phrase? The jury is out on that.
For leftists to determine whether or not genuine racism or misogyny had been expressed, they would have to first understand the basic definitions of those words. They don’t.
Is Morten honestly attempting to attribute identity-based politics to the imaginary alt-right? What normal person would ever buy that?
I don’t know that I’m attempting to weaponize anything. But I’m certainly using Disney Star Wars as a vehicle to demonstrate the abject stupidity of SJW ideology to younger people who aren’t presented with ideas and perspectives outside of the Collective’s Narrative in school. I’m attempting to demonstrate to them here that SJW morons can in fact be effectively argued against and put in their proper intellectual place, and how to do it. If that’s weaponizing, so be it.
If this study can’t extend to the entire Star Wars fandom as a whole, then it doesn’t really have much value.
What about the organized attempt within Lucasfilm to push ignorant political propaganda in their content? Has Morten studied that at all? Or is this all just a grandiose exercise in confirmation bias?
Would cognitive dissonance encompass the desire to have Rachel Butera, fired while simultaneously demanding that James Gunn be rehired? Is it anything like accusing the “toxic fandom” of being racist, while simultaneously supporting the defense of Sarah Jeong? Is it anything like that?
No one is expecting their political outlook to be respected, represented, or amplified. Representation is a bizarre need for emotionally stunted SJWs. Rather, what they hope for instead, is the absence of moronic social justice politics. Nothing needs to replace it.
In fact no one ever viewed Star Wars as devoid of politics entirely. To think that they do or ever did represents a gross misunderstanding. Rather, how they viewed it instead was as politically agnostic, not atheist. For instance, George Lucas revised history, by later claiming that the Empire Vs. Ewok conflict was always an allegory of the United States Vs. Viet Cong conflict. However studio heads overseeing Lucas at the time made sure that the Empire Vs. Ewok conflict could just as easily represent the British Lobster Backs Vs. the American Colonials during the American Revolutionary War. It could represent the highly coordinated and organized legacy media and academia vs. genuine Star Wars fans as well. It could just as easily represent any number of similar conflicts, because George wasn’t allowed to make it specific only to the dippie hippy misunderstanding of the Viet Nam War. That’s the distinction that SJWs are are continuing to struggle with. Understanding this doesn’t require the changing of beliefs, only the understanding of easily researched facts. Being alive at the time that Star Wars was released in 1977 helps a bit too. Instead, Morten merely parrots the rhetoric that he’s read others write elsewhere, stupidly assuming it to be established fact. In this area, he’s simply flat out wrong.
The problem that Morten is having with his conjecture regarding Russian influence, is that normal people simply aren’t as naive and gullible as SJWs, who rarely mature mentally beyond the age of 17. Normal people are far less likely to be influenced by Russian bots and/or trolls, than SJWs are to be influenced by today’s worthless college curricula and/or romantic graphic art depicting Che Guevara.
Russian actors aren’t responsible for the Star Wars backlash. Rather, the content in The Last Jedi screenplay is, which I’ve analyzed here on this blog.
The notion that those “claims have been thoroughly debunked” is of course entirely incorrect. First it’s important to understand that I have never claimed that the fans who hate The Last Jedi are either a majority or a minority. There simply isn’t any evidence to support either claim as of this writing, completely taking into account Morten’s study.
But I routinely link directly to sources in the purportedly credible legacy media, in my blog posts from which many of my facts come. For instance, the massive drop off after the highly successful opening weekend for The Last Jedi was in fact very real, and was reported on by multiple “credible” sources. The poor performance of The Last Jedi in comparison to The Force Awakens Blu-Rays is also supported by industry published numbers. It’s simply just a fact. The user generated score on Rotten Tomatoes, may actually be worse than people realize. And then of course there’s the poor merchandise sales:
I never contended that Solo flopped specifically or only because of a fan boycott. Rather, my contention is and has always been that apathy toward the franchise has now crept into the general audience as a result of The Last Jedi’s shoddy film craft, and deeply moronic social justice propaganda. This apathy is mostly responsible for Solo’s box office disaster, with the boycott merely being the cherry on top of the sundae. Because of this, I suspect that Episode IX has a slim chance to do worse at the box office than Solo did, if apathy in the general audience continues on this curve.
Morten can claim these facts to be thoroughly debunked if he likes, but then he’ll have to argue against his often cited Scott Mendelson, whom I also have cited multiple times. Remember, leftist fantasy and factual reality are mutually exclusive, and always two entirely different and separate things.
The problem Morten is having with his description of troll-like behavior is that SJWs categorize the expression of any idea or thought that they disagree with or don’t like as trolling, and it isn’t any more nuanced than that. It’s the same transparent political tactic they use to excuse censorship of all kinds, by labeling any speech they don’t like as hate speech, as though hate speech itself wouldn’t be protected speech.
These people want you to accept whatever propaganda they decide to push in pop culture and elsewhere, without protest or criticism. When and if you do respond critically, they’ll work overtime to demonize you for pushing back against their idiotic political agenda, and their insatiable lust for power over you. They don’t even want you to have the ability to express your critical thoughts at all. So you can imagine what would happen should these people ever gain real power in government. Remember that when you’re at the voting booth.
Is Morten analyzing the “emotional state and physical environment” in the same way that he analyzed tweets? If so, there’s something creepy about that, in a Big Brother kind of way. Or Big Mother if you’re smashing the patriarchy.
So people respond to comments in the same manner that they’re spoken to. It took a scientific study to figure this out? I guess the old adage is true, “It takes a liberal years or even decades to figure out what a conservative recognizes instantly.”
In fact there is no evidence whatsoever that dissatisfied fans constitute either a majority or a minority. Twitter can hardly be said to be representative of fandom as a whole. Most dissatisfied fans will simply walk away from the franchise without bothering to express a single word anywhere. Most probably aren’t even on Twitter at all. They just shrug their shoulders and move on. Furthermore the contextual nature of the tweets don’t seem to be taken into account as mentioned above. Solid scholarship is still done in an analog fashion, rather than relying on flawed or activist programmed algorithms to do your scholarship for you.
For those with living historical memories, the notion that this is somehow a brand new manifestation born of the Trump era is demonstrably false. To believe this, one must discount similar negative reactions to the on-the-nose allegory to Bush in Episode III. The Geeker Gate has been happening repeatedly for decades, and plays a small role in the much larger “Long March Through The Culture.”
We may as well point out the misinformation being propagated about organic food, climate change, and The Great Southern Strategy Switcheroo Myth. But that’s beyond the scope of this blog post.
If the study cannot be replicated, then you Morten, do not have a scientific study. Rather, you have a political propaganda piece instead.
The indications are that pop culture debates on social media are the result of idiot SJWs imposing their moronic politics into the pop culture content being produced. Normal people are merely responding to that transparent imposition.
So now we come to the real point of this pointless exercise. Regulation of social media. That’s what this study is screaming for. Leftists are fully aware that they always have inferior arguments which are incapable of withstanding debate in an arena of free speech. This of course is why they always seek to regulate speech, to handicap the political opposition in an effort to ensure they can win debates and push through their disastrous policies. It’s the only way they can, and they know it.
I have to wonder, how the Greatest Generation would have reacted, had Ma Bell decided to regulate the speech of its customers. If the phone company had banned customers from phone lines for things that they had said.
The remaining pages of Morten’s study show citations.
Ultimately this sort of quasi-academic tripe makes me very, very angry. Rather than focus time, effort, and resources on valuable things like discovering a cure for cancer or aids, transforming deserts into farmland, colonizing the Moon and terraforming Mars, discovering new exoplanets, conquering the effects of aging in the genetic code, discovering new particles to understand the material fabric of reality, excavating remnants of humanity’s distant past, piercing the veil into higher dimensional spaces, solving the Unified Field Theory, etc. Instead of doing any of that, these academic imbeciles waste their lives endlessly bickering over small-minded race and sexuality nonsense, like high school adolescents stupidly preoccupied with the conflict between jocks and burn-outs. It’s all very, very dumb indeed. What a waste. Morten ought to read this study.
C Net debunks this ridiculous study further here.
Throughout social media you’ll find uneducated drones in the Collective lecturing normal people that they shouldn’t argue with the results of a study just because they don’t like it. Unfortunately for them, this is not the rigid unchanging dogma of religion. If this study wants to pass itself off as genuine science, then rigorous debate is an absolute requirement.
Below you’ll find a variety of perspectives that dispute the abject silliness of this study: