Tuesday, July 16, 2019

TFW you accidentally refer to Hitler as a "hero"

We've all been there:

H/T:  The /r/DaveRubin subreddit:  https://www.reddit.com/r/daverubin/comments/cdi0gx/video_of_tim_pool_calling_adolf_hitler_a_ww2_hero/

Admittedly, I did not watch Tim's video before the edit.  But, judging by the YouTube comments, there were a whole lot of people who caught the remark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9g-M2adW74

Sunday, July 14, 2019

USA Today is banned in /r/News

I tried submitting a link from USAToday.com to /r/News yesterday, but it didn't appear in the new queue:

I didn't think there were any keywords in the title that would trigger the automoderator, so I checked if there had been ANY recent links to USAToday.com in /r/News.  It turns out the most-recent visible post was submitted on February 21st:

Five months without a single submission to USA Today?  No way that would happen by chance.  The domain is banned.  I checked RedditSearch.io to see how many times during this past week people tried submitting a link to USAToday.com in /r/News, and got over 40 results.  (All of which have been removed, of course.)

I wonder why the moderators don't like USA Today?  It's hard to think of a more middle-of-the-road publication.  Nobody gets offended by USA Today!   

Saturday, July 13, 2019

Some guy on Medium

Deadline inserted an editor's note in an article that mentioned Tim Pool:  

Here's how the article currently looks:
While the White House has not released a list of the summit invitees, some of the reported or self-identified guests are Qanon conspiracy theorist Bill Mitchell; Ali Alexander, who recently questioned Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris’ ethnicity, reportedly has been invited; Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk; James O’Keefe; right-wing meme creator “Carpe Donktum”; and Tim Pool. 
(Editors note: An earlier version of this article said Pool claimed that Seth Rich leaked hacked emails to WikiLeaks; other publications, including Daily Beast, The New Republic and Medium, have also linked Pool to Rich conspiracy claims. But in in an email to Deadline, Pool denied making the WikiLeaks claim. In tweets today, he wrote that “Media now falsely claiming that by saying I didn’t *completely* believe Seth Rich leaked emails to Wikileaks I “helped push” the conspiracy theory.”)
It's funny how they refer to Medium as a "publication."  If you click the link, it leads here:


It's a Medium post by a writer named Abe Gaustad.  It's not a bad article, but it's literally just some random guy.  He has 103 followers on Twitter.  It's a personal post.  It was published on Medium, but it wasn't published by Medium.  Medium wasn't acting like a publication here.  Rather than saying "Medium," Deadline should've just said "some guy on Medium."  Anyway, I liked the article, so I started following Abe Gaustad on Twitter.  Now he's up to 104 followers.

Friday, July 12, 2019

That time Twitter tossed "Talia"

Here was another example of Twitter suspending an account that used a misleading profile photo:

The twitter account, @2020Fight, helped make a video of the Covington Catholic kids go viral.  2020Fight claimed to be a California schoolteacher named Talia, yet she used a profile picture of a Brazilian blogger named Nah Cardoso.

So why did Twitter suspend the account?
A spokesperson for Twitter told CNN Business, "Deliberate attempts to manipulate the public conversation on Twitter by using misleading account information is a violation of the Twitter Rules." 
The source familiar with Twitter's investigation told CNN Business the company's initial findings suggested the account was run from the US, but said it can be difficult to determine an account owner's actual location.
Some people thought the account was based in Brazil, even though there's no logical reason to think that.  What exactly was the misleading account information?  Was it just the profile photo?  Was it the profile photo + the name Talia?  Was it something else entirely?  Because my gut says she really was a teacher in California.   

Let's see what the official Twitter rules say:  https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules
Impersonation: You may not impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations in a manner that is intended to or does mislead, confuse, or deceive others. 

Talia?  Nah...

Thursday, July 11, 2019

Not a Master of the Tomatometer

During his new stand-up special, Aziz Ansari asked an audience member what she thought of the movie Crazy Rich Asians:

Aziz:  "Any white people here see Crazy Rich Asians?  Raise you hands, anybody?  Yeah?  Yeah.  You ma'am, in the front, you saw it?  Yeah, It had like a 97% on Rotten Tomatoes.  You think it was that good?  97%?  Ehh, maybe a little less?  What number would you give it?"

Audience member:  "85."

Aziz:  "85.  Wow.  12% less.  Anything in particular you didn't like that made you dock it 12 points?"

It's so weird how people don't seem to understand how Rotten Tomatoes works.  The % score isn't meant to be a grade. It's just a reflection of what percentage of the critics gave the movie a positive (or fresh) review.  If every critic in the world kinda like a particular movie, that movie would have a 100% Tomatometer rating. 

If Crazy Rich Asians had a 97% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, that just means that 97% of critics liked the movie.  So what the woman in the audience is saying is that she feels that only 85% of critics should've liked the movie.  Well....that's what she's accidentally saying.  I'm guessing what she thought she was saying is that the movie was more of a "B" than it was an "A+." 

I wonder if Aziz Ansari understands how the Tomatometer works?  I'd like to think he does, and that he was fucking with the audience member in two ways:  First by making her nervous in admitting she wasn't a huge fan of Crazy Rich Asians, and second by exposing the fact that she doesn't understand how the Tomatometer works!

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

RIP "Rebeccs"

Remember this tweet?

The tweeter, a girl named Rebeccs, was threatening to throw her DVD copy of The Little Mermaid into the trash.  But eagle-eyed Brandon Wall noticed that the girl's profile picture was taken from elsewhere on the internet.  In other words: The girl was using a FAKE picture of herself.

My theory is that this was parody outrage.  The girl was just trolling, and she didn't seriously hate the casting decision.  But she knew the lemmings on Twitter would go CRAZY the moment they noticed someone dissing the choice of Halle Bailey for Ariel--especially if the person doing the dissing gave off a racist vibe.

Brandon Wall, however, zeroed in on the fact that the girl was using a fake profile photo.  And so, of course, you have a lot of people talking about how "Rebeccs" was a front.

Here's the thing, though:  I don't think people understood the nature of her deception.  Rebeccs was playing into the stereotype of a racist white girl, and she was doing it for laughs.  She wasn't, like, a Russian troll or anything.  (At least, I don't think so.)

The problem is that Twitter suspended Rebecc's account, so now there's no way to review her tweet history.  I did glance through her history briefly, and my impression was that she was American AF.  That was just my impression, though.  I wish I knew WHY Twitter suspended the account--that would be enlightening.

Saturday, July 6, 2019

For Life

Luke O'Brien says:

He links to an article on Forward.com. titled: "Neo-Nazi Andrew Anglin Is Still On Twitter Despite Ban — And Now We Know Where."


But, wait....if Andrew Anglin was banned, then doesn't that mean Twitter did take steps to ban hate and extremism?  I don't get the framing here.  If Anglin was banned from Twitter, and he's defying that ban, then the issue is that Twitter has problems enforcing its bans.  Is it right to assume these bans are permanent...that once you get banned, you're banned for life?

If so, then the new account should be banned.  Banned for the crime of ban-evasion.  

Anyway, I'll watch what happens.  Anglin's current handle is @Rumples42296282.  His Twitter ID# is 1071550279529705472.

Friday, July 5, 2019

Complex's legacy

Alex Galbraith, what are you doing?


You wrote a whole article about Twitter troll @woo_ahhh, who dissed the casting of Halle Bailey as Ariel.  And in that article you said:
The Chloe X Halle star's casting in the upcoming live-action remake of The Little Mermaid caused at least one troll to go viral with a video of herself chucking a copy of the original film in the trash. The user got dunked into oblivion, with Twitter users tearing into her until the app itself swooped in to suspend her account. 
 I'm preeetty sure there wasn't a video of the troll tossing the film into the trash.  It was just a still from another person's video.  And the still came from an unboxing video:

Listen, Alex Galbraith, if I was your editor (and I'm not) I would ask you to fact-check this article.  You think this is just a fluffy article?  No.  This is Complex's legacy!