This was another week where you couldn’t swing a dead cat without hitting a potential Lexicon entry. Although I’m not sure why you would want to swing a dead cat around, but I’m not here to kink shame. Let your freak flag fly, baby!
Out of all the potential subjects, one really stood out for me. In a move that shocked, well, not that many people, Mark Zuckerberg announced Meta and all the social media sites under it would be moving away from its “fact checking” model (which literally fact-checked obvious jokes, thus making the model itself a joke) and moving more towards a Community Notes standard like what is being used on the Social Media Site Formerly Known As Twitter. This got Leftists all atwitter (or would that be aX) at the notion. Journalists (0r whatever the fuck Brian Stelter is) and Leftist hacks were up in arms at Zuck’s decision.
Which obviously means it was the right decision.
And it makes it perfect for a Leftist Lexicon entry.
fact checking
What the Left thinks it means – a vital service that should only be done by professionals
What it really means – finding out the truth and calling out the lies
One of the hardest things about being informed today is knowing who you can trust. Modern journalism is a hodgepodge of shitty sources sucking up to even shittier people so they can get invited to dinner parties with yet even shittier people. The Fourth Estate has become Leftist stenographers more than the bulldogs that will relentlessly seek the truth. Anymore, any journalists are lucky to stumble into the truth, and even then there’s a better than average chance they’ll completely miss it.
On its face, the idea of fact checking is a good thing, especially given the modern journalism as described above. We want to be informed, or at the very least seem informed to impress others. To that end, we look for sources that break things down for us and teach us things we didn’t know. With the sheer deluge of information sources, it’s hard to find a way to control the output of the fire hose.
Enter the fact checkers, doing the research for you so you don’t have to! It’s so easy and cheap to do, it’s a wonder why people don’t do this more often!
And that’s the problem.
When you pawn off anything you should do yourself, you are subject to the outcomes the other party produce. It’s like when you hire a contractor who farms out the work to a subcontractor. The job may get done, but it may not up to the standards the contractor has. Then it becomes a matter of people pointing fingers at one another trying to figure out who’s responsible for the kitchen sink being put in the attic.
When it comes to information, it’s a lot harder to fix the fuckups, mainly because no one wants to take responsibility for your being misinformed. You don’t want to admit you were a dumbass for believing a fact checker. The fact checker doesn’t want to admit fault because a) it looks reaaaallllly bad when a fact checker can’t figure out the truth, and b) it hurts their widdle fee-fees. The entity that hired the fact checkers doesn’t want to take the hit for the reasons mentioned above and because it erodes the trust the entity has, which ultimately costs them money.
In other words, when you rely on fact checkers to do your research for you, more often than not, you’re their bitch.
Then, there’s the lovely little problem of bias. In the early days of Facebook fact checking, the people doing it leaned so far left they were parallel to the ground while standing up. Once that got called out, Zuck tried to balance out the fact checkers and the checking itself, but only made it worse because some of the fact checkers had bias issues. Not a good look, kids!
Regardless of which side of the political/ideological aisle you’re on, bias fucks up your ability to be truly informed because it limits your scope of information sources. Social media has turned us back into a tribalistic society where anyone who deviates from what you consider to be normal, just, and right is an infidel and, thus, not even worthy of even basic human decency. When you face information from one of those “unclean” sources that contradicts your mindset, you have two choices: adapt, or reject.
I bring this up to underscore the problem with biased fact checking. If you have the opinion information from one side or the other is untrue (regardless of whether it’s factual), you are going to more inclined to reject it. And if you have the power to shape what other people see on a social media website like…oh I don’t know…Facebook, you are going to be tempted to hide the “bad” information and go after those who want it to be known.
There’s an old saying that applies here…something about absolute power and corruption…I’m sure it will come to me.
Anyway, the Facebook fact checkers fell into this trap, which caused a lot of accounts to get warnings, suspensions, and even terminations. And in some cases, actual news stories shared online got slapped with misinformation tags (I’m looking at you, Hunter Biden) and were subsequently suppressed. Oh, and I forgot to mention Zuck said he got pressure from the Brick Tamland Administration to suppress the laptop story.
And who got punished for suppressing this legitimate news story? The entities who shared it. I mean, why would people who actively worked towards misinformation by absence see any punishment for making people misinformed? That’s just crazy talk, man!
But it also exposes the danger of trusting fact checkers without verifying whether what they’re saying is factual. Just because you tell me you’re honest doesn’t mean I’m not gonna test you. And you shouldn’t just trust and believe either. News stories that sound too good to be true should be the first ones that should make your Bullshit Meter light up like the…biological discharges…in an hourly rate hotel room when you scan it with a blacklight flashlight.
Not that I know anything about that, mind you…
This is going to be a bit of an ask, but it’s going to make more sense if you do it. Question all of your sources while reaching out for alternative sources from a wider array of ideologies. Then, let common sense be your guide. If something sounds factual and makes sense, be open to accepting it. If something sounds like more full of bullshit than the world’s largest cattle ranch, then don’t trust it. Consider it mental calisthenics that will make you stronger, faster, better. And without the need for bionics!
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out how the typical Leftist sources are so upset Mark Zuckerberg is going in a new direction with fact checking. The way it was set up initially, the Left had the power over what got considered factual. Now, thanks to the advent and popularity of Community Notes, they no longer control the flow of information and can be called out for pushing misinformation while pretending to guard against it. And if you’re a Leftist media shill, the worst thing you can do is strip them of the power and the prestige of being information brokers and letting the hoi polloi point and laugh when you fuck up.
If I may offer a suggestion, media folks, maybe stop parroting Leftist squawking points and start doing your fucking jobs. There’s a reason used car salesmen are considered more trustworthy than the media and their fact checkers these days, and I can draw a pretty clear conclusion as to why. But I’m sure if you really put your hivemind to it, you’ll figure it out by the end of January.
Of the year 3843.
Tag: twitter
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Hollywood loves reboots like they love hookers and blow, and they really love hookers and blow. Sometimes these reboots work out (like the updated version of the Planet of the Apes movies, minus the Tim Buron-directed abomination). Sometimes they don’t (like the flaming shit-show that is the unreleased “Snow White”).
When Elon Musk bought Twitter and turned it into the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter, Leftists started looking for alternatives because they would no longer be able to count on high-ranking Leftists to censor those icky conservatives opinions that didn’t violate the Terms of Service, but did violate their fee-fees.
Now, they’ve found one, a little thing the kids like to call Bluesky. It’s relatively new, but it’s already boasting over 20 million users with a lot of them being former X users (so ex-X users. Thank you! Tip your waitstaff!) departing the social media site after Donald Trump won the Presidency for a second time with help from Elon Musk.
So, shall we take a trip into the Blue-niverse? (Thank you! Please hold your applause!) Even if you don’t want to, we’re going!
Bluesky
What the Left thinks it means – a social media site where like-minded people can share their opinions without fear of being censored by right wingers
What it really means – the digital version of Air America
After decades of having control over most of the popular media of the time, Leftists have had to adapt to a new environment where their control was no longer as secure as it once was. Talk radio, lead by the late Rush Limbaugh, started becoming the alternative to the squawking heads people once looked to for news. And, yes, there are plenty of examples of talk radio hosts getting shit wrong, but it didn’t matter. The Left no longer controlled the flow of information.
As a result, Leftists tried to ride the wave of talk radio success by creating Air America. Basically, what the brain trust behind it thought was all they had to do was replace Rush Limbaugh with Al Franken and watch the money roll in. Only, it didn’t. Talk radio wasn’t plug-and-play. You actually had to have personalities people want to listen to, and Air America really didn’t. Oh, they had an audience, but it was far smaller than the normal talk radio audience. Say what you will about Limbaugh, he knew how to entertain (which is ironic because Al Franken was on “Saturday Night Live” when it was actually funny).
And then Air America came in with a whimper and went out with a popcorn fart. You’re lucky to find anyone around my age to even remember Air America was something other than a Mel Gibson movie these days, and the only reason I remember it is because I’m just that lame. Nevertheless, the point is Leftists really don’t know how to catch up when someone outside of their ideological bubble races ahead of them.
Which brings us to Bluesky.
What Musk has done for X is so logical, it’s no surprise Leftists hate it. Instead of letting one side of the political aisle run roughshod over anyone who disagreed with their enlightened (and utterly dumb) opinions, Musk brought at least some semblance of neutrality to the platform. Which pissed off Leftists to no end. After all, if there’s one thing Leftists hate more than Donald Trump and Elon Musk, it’s having their positions challenged in any way. So, after spending all this time talking smack about the platform (while still on said platform), they took their balls and went home…to Bluesky.
Now, I’m not going to say it’s a flaming Port-A-Potty over there because, well, that would be unfair to flaming Port-A-Potties. Oh, sure, you’ll still find decent posts about nature and science, but most of the stuff being posted on there is straight-up Beyond Thunderdome shit. Aside from being accused of censoring conservative viewpoints as well as pro-Palestinian posts, they’re driving other Leftists away for…dare I say it…not being Leftist enough.
Great way to build up the world’s most tolerant echo chamber!
In the post-election environment we find ourselves in, this isn’t all that unusual. Leftists always look for people to blame for their election failures because it’s a hell of a lot easier than saying, “Ya know, we really fucked up here.” With Bluesky, the only difference is the venue.
Oh, and the level of batshit insanity.
Fortunately, you don’t have to go on Bluesky to see it. Some brave soul is going into Bluesky and picking out the best of the worst and putting it on X. Whomever you are, my few remaining brain cells and I thank you.
If you don’t want to get an X account (like your humble correspondent), there is still humor to be found out of the batshit insanity when you consider the possibility the Bluesky Leftists are screaming into the void (albeit an intellectual one) of their own creation. Then, it becomes a contest to try to “prove” how Leftist you are, which will lead to more fighting with the freak show.
Cue Thunderdome! Two Leftists enter, one Leftist leaves!
And we’ll have to deal with a potential shortage of popcorn…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
As a semi-popular blogger, pundit, and all around neat guy, I have a deep respect for freedom of speech. After all, without it, I’d just be some lunatic behind bars talking about how bad government sucks. As it stands, I’m just in a rubber room, so yay, I guess?
I wouldn’t bring this up unless it was relevant, and thanks to Queen Kamala the Appointed and the Left, it’s become very relevant, but not in a good way. Whether it’s The Social Media Site Formerly Known as Twitter getting banned in Brazil for alleged misinformation to Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz and Presidential candidate Kamala Harris both in favor of some form of government intervention/regulation of social media, the topic is as relevant today as it was when the Bill of Rights was passed.
free speech
What the Left thinks it means – the right to express yourself without government interference, except when it crosses certain lines
What it really means – the right to express yourself without government interference, regardless of who you are and what you say
As with guns, cars, and movies like “The Room,” freedom of speech can be used for different ends. That’s why it’s important to consider the implications of their use prior to firing a gun, driving a car, or paying for a ticket to see “The Room.” Oh, and speaking out.
Yes, there are some limitations to free speech, and they’re established as a means of protecting people from physical or reputational damage. Some speech like “fighting words” aren’t considered free speech because a) they are designed to promote a violent response, and b) the person engaging in it is kinda asking for an ass-whuppin’. For those of you younger folks reading this, fighting words are what we old folks used to do in lieu of internet trolling because the Internet hadn’t been invented yet. (Thanks, Al Gore.)
Anyway, the Left has tried to apply the same approach used with fighting words with other forms of speech. Each one could be a Lexicon entry in and of itself, but here is a list of these speech forms the Left doesn’t like.
hate speech – Basically, any speech that makes Leftists look like assholes
misinformation – Basically, any speech that proves Leftists are assholes
election interference – Basically, any speech that shows Leftists losing
election misinformation – Basically, any speech that proves Leftist politicians are full of shit
I’m not sure, but I’m sensing a pattern here…
Although a case can be made for regulations on these, the case is pretty fucking bad. You can pass as many laws banning them, but they run smack in the face of the very thing Leftists claim to be all about: free speech. Yes, some speech is abhorrent and would make Gandhi want to grab a shotgun and start kicking ass, but the answer to it isn’t cracking down on the bad speech; it’s countering it with good speech. Dennis Miller put it best (and I’m paraphrasing it from here, so please don’t sue me, Mr. Miller): No free speech gives you Hitler. Healthy free speech gives you David Duke. There’s a big, big difference.
The problem is the Left doesn’t understand that difference. Either that, or they don’t get the reference, which isn’t all that uncommon with Miller’s work. Regardless, Leftists treat any speech that isn’t from their echo chamber as dangerous. And it’s not because it’s particularly threatening, dangerous to society as a whole, or offensive to society as a whole. It’s because it’s not something they can control with any degree of success.
Having said that, they aren’t going to stop trying. During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, information countering the official narrative got censored and social media accounts that spread that information got removed. Even as Mark “No, I’m Not Data” Zuckerberg had to admit the Brick Tamland Administration pressured Meta to crack down on certain content. And I’m guessing you know what content got the ban hammer.
But you know who didn’t get nailed for COVID misinformation? All the figureheads and media outlets who peddled the Administration’s bullshit. Seems “Trust the Science” didn’t include actual science. Then again, the “Trust the Science” people also believe men can be women just because they feel that way, so…
It’s bullshit like this (the censorship, not the men claiming to be women) that made Elon Musk take on the mantle of leadership when it comes to free speech online. He has rightly made it his cause, and given the lack of accountability for those who on the Left who violate the Left’s own rules (I’m looking at you, Rachel Maddow!), it’s clear we need someone who not only understands free speech, but also allows it.
Musk may not be the best person to do it, but at least he’s doing it. Since taking over the Social Media Site Formerly Known As Twitter, he has reversed many of the previous decisions made and reinstated accounts that he felt were terminated unjustly. Granted, that gave us back noted white nationalist and all around weirdo Nick Fuentes, but the upside is we can now keep better track of him and what he says. That’s something you don’t get with free speech crackdowns. Forcing people like Fuentes to go off the free speech grid makes it harder to track him down and combat whatever speech he’s spouting. With a healthy respect for free speech, he makes himself known, so we can do a little rhetorical White Supremacist Whack-A-Mole.
And if you know any of the scuttlebutt about him, the mole part might not be complete hyperbole.
Freedom of speech is one of the bedrock principles we should all strive to want. Without it, how would we redress grievances with the government (of which your humble correspondent has plenty), spread the message to others to gather peaceably, or print out flyers? And for those of you eagle-eyed readers out there, you might recognize the examples I just gave as rights covered under the First Amendment. If you didn’t, that’s okay. You’re still brighter than 100% of the dipshits who think free speech should be limited because fee-fees get hurt.
I don’t think free speech is going anywhere if Queen Kamala the Appointed and Vice Queen TIMMAH get into office because neither one has the brains necessary to make the case in favor of getting rid of it, but that doesn’t mean we can ease up protecting it. As Ronald Reagan put it:
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.
And if you can’t trust a man who acted with a chimp, who can you trust?
Paywall X
X, formerly known as Twitter, is looking into the possibility of charging users a small monthly fee to use the service. If this happens it will be the final death blow to the Social Media platform.
Twitter was my favorite Social Media outlet, back when it was young. It had no ads, it no gimmicks, just simple text and some attached images. Plain, simple, useful.
I have written before that I prefer the older forms of Social Media, before it even had a name. Email Groups, Blogs, and Internet Forums.
With these there is control of who sees your posts. Who comments on your posts. And even who is a member of the circle getting the posts. Now, of course, they can be sent on to other places as well.
All of the current Social Media outlets can be replaced. But not with the batch of clones that are out now that are mimicking the current popular platforms. Even now we have multiple Twitter clones out there and all fall short of the original.
Will X survive by charging all members a fee? I don’t think so. Most sites, even news sites, that have paywalls I personally browse away from the moment I hit that wall.
Are Paywalls good to have? It depends. Yes in some cases it is a good measure. In other cases, it is not. And for Social Media. It is a bad idea.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
This week, we delve into the world of comedy, for which some readers are saying “Finally!” Fortunately for you, it’s not my jokes this time.
Instead, we can look to Twitter and Leftists for the humor. Seems our favorite Socialist Socialite got her collectivist panties in a wad over a Twitter account parodying her. And as one might expect of someone dumber than a bag of hammers, the Socialist Socialite tweeted out a warning advising fans of the account. Because as we all know the best way to make a problem go away is to draw as much attention to it as humanly possible.
Needless to say, this didn’t work well. Which prompted fans of the Socialist Socialite to call for Twitter to ban the parody account, AOCpress. This gives us the perfect opening to discuss the wonders of parody.
parody
What the Left thinks it means – a potentially dangerous threat to valid communication between politicians and their constituents
What it really means – a way to mock the Left protected by the First Amendment
Our good friends at Dictionary.com provide a great definition of “parody” that will serve us nicely:
1. a humorous or satirical imitation of a serious piece of literature or writing: his hilarious parody of Hamlet’s soliloquy.
2. the genre of literary composition represented by such imitations.
3. a burlesque imitation of a musical composition.
4. any humorous, satirical, or burlesque imitation, as of a person, event, etc.
If you’re an observant reader, and I know you are, you’ll notice a pattern. If you’re not or a Leftist (which means you’re not observant by definition), the pattern is humor. Leftists love to tell us they’re funnier than conservatives, but yet they’re redefining humor to take the funny out of comedy and turn it into more of a monologue where the pseudo-comedian throws out Leftist talking points in lieu of jokes. But don’t worry. There are plenty of set-ups, chief of which being the audience being set up that they’ll be entertained, but there are a decided lack of straight men. Or women.
And as a side note, Dave Chappelle was right about Hannah Gadsby.
Anyway, the Left doesn’t have a mirth monopoly by any stretch. Granted, much of the humor they provide is unintentional (i.e. Puddin’ Head Joe and Kamala Harris going off script), but it’s humor nonetheless. Where the Right has the edge in humor is online, especially in the area of satire. With The Onion being as funny as its namesake these days, sites like The Babylon Bee and any number of Twitter handles have picked up the slack by…actually being funny. What a concept!
And a good amount of the time, it’s the Left getting skewered with the Right’s humor. Guess how that goes over with the Left.
As with other things that bug them and that they can’t control, Leftists moan more than a porn actress being paid by the orgasm. And where do they moan the most? On Twitter! After all, if you complain on Twitter about something and tag Elon Musk it actually does something important!
Guess how that turned out. And I’m guessing you’re seeing a pattern here.
See, Leftists hate being mocked, especially when it’s in the form of parody because it’s not just mocking them, but it’s mocking them directly.
Remember the young girl who did a parody of the Socialist Socialite? Well, she got death threats from Leftists. You know, the tolerate, loving, and totes free speech defending Left? (Yeah, I laughed hard when I typed that, too.)
That should tell you two things. First, Leftists take themselves way too seriously. And second, the jokes about their lack of a sense of humor are based in fact. Oh, and Leftists are shitty people when they get butthurt at being the butt of jokes. (See what I did there?)
But here’s the thing. Parody is protected under the First Amendment as free speech. And what’s even more delicious? It’s because of Larry Flynt, a loud and proud Leftist. (On a side note, how do Leftist feminists reconcile Flynt’s treatment and attitudes towards women with feminist ideology? Oh, right, they fucking ignore it.)
Of course, that doesn’t stop Leftists from making the case the AOCpress account should be removed because they claim it’s imitating the Socialist Socialist. Hoo boy. So much to unpack here, but let’s start with the easy one.
Twitter rules are quite clear on parody accounts being allowed so long as they clearly proclaim they are parody accounts. And Leftists should remember this, especially after many of them did Elon Musk parodies on their Twitter accounts.
In other words, it’s perfectly fine when they do it, but no one else can do it, especially to them.
Now, there’s the whole imitation angle. What AOCpress posts may look and sound like what the Socialist Socialite says, but at no time does the account owner say he/she is AOC. Just because it’s indistinguishable from what the Socialist Socialite really says doesn’t mean it’s someone trying to impersonate her. Although, it might be evidence the Twitter account wants to date her…
Now, for the best part of all of this. There are people getting fooled by the AOCpress account, even with the parody tag on it. How fucking stupid do you have to be to get fooled by a parody account that labels itself as parody? I know social media is a “Tweet first, ask questions later” environment, but fuck! You have to be a special kind of window licker to get fooled.
Which says a lot about the people who stan for the Socialist Socialist, doesn’t it?
The proper response to parody isn’t to try to get it removed from the marketplace of ideas, but rather to take it for what it is: an attempt at humor. You don’t have to get it for it to be a joke, and you don’t have to laugh for it to be protected. That’s why Dane Cook has never been arrested for doing his stand-up (although an argument could be made for him being arrested for impersonating a stand-up comedian, but that’s a blog post for another time). That means Leftists are going to have to put up with a lot more mocking from people, myself included.
And that’s going to piss off Leftists.
The AOCpress account exposes how thin-skinned Leftists can be, while at the same time showing how gullible and stupid they can be when they put their minds to it. Like it or not, though, parody is as valid a Socialist Socialite speech, only parody is intentionally funny.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Leftists tend to freak out about things they don’t like because, well, they’re Leftists. This week’s freakout is courtesy of their favorites and ours, former President Donald Trump. See, Trump is running for President in 2024 and CNN…gave him airtime for a town hall meeting.
I know! I was shocked that a cable news network would spend time talking to a famous political figure in an attempt to get ratings!
Although Leftist freakouts are as common as bad pop music songs right now, Leftists are just as predictable with their responses: hashtag activism. For a short time, Leftists on Twitter got #BoycottCNN trending which is…something, I guess? What is a bit more certain is I’m going to mock the hell out of it!
#BoycottCNN
What the Left thinks it means – a response to CNN allowing Donald Trump airtime to spread his hateful message
What it really means – a lame response to CNN allowing Donald Trump airtime to promote his Presidential campaign
First, a bit of background. A long time ago, CNN was the place to go on cable to get news, mainly because it was the only place to go on cable to get news. For the most part, they played it straight down the line, but over time CNN became the source for many a Leftist squawking point, thanks to the Commander in Briefs, Bill Clinton. Seems more than a few of the staff were more in the tank for him than Michael Dukakis. (And if you got that reference, I’m eternally grateful.)
From there, CNN’s descent into Leftist madness (but I repeat myself) got more pronounced. And once other cable news networks like Fox News and MSNBC got involved, it was only a matter of time before the only name in the cable news game became an afterthought, as the ratings showed. It got so bad at one point that reruns of Yogi Bear beat CNN in the ratings.
A change was needed, so CNN tried to go hard against Trump in an attempt to suck off some of MSNBC’s viewership. One tiny problem: Leftists really don’t like CNN because they’re not Leftist enough. After all, they…allowed conservatives an opportunity to speak! Oh, the horror! And with MSNBC being batshit crazy enough for Leftists, CNN didn’t stand a chance.
Enter Chris Licht, who became the new boss at CNN in 2022. He decided to take a different approach, one that was unheard of a few years prior: reporting actual news. This got him branded as someone who wanted to make CNN more centrist (i.e. to the right of Stalin), which Leftists simply can’t abide because…reasons! Leftists even went so far as to call CNN “Fox News Lite” because of the move.
Let’s just say the ratings haven’t been going in the right direction yet. The reason is simple: CNN pissed off too many people. The Right won’t tune in because of the decades of carrying water for the Left, and the Left won’t tune in because they have MSNBC to parrot their squawking points without even the slightest deviation. No matter what Licht does, it’s never going to be enough.
But that’s not the issue at hand.
The Leftist response to CNN doing what it’s done for other Presidential candidates (albeit with less than stellar results) is par for the course at worst. But the Twitter temper tantrum behind #BoycottCNN is a new level of Leftist impotence and idiocy. First off, didn’t Leftists on social media try to #BoycottTwitter? Yes, yes, they did. And it worked as well as you might expect: not at all. So, they go on Twitter to pass around the hashtag!
That’s what the kids like to call a self own.
Then, there’s the “me too” aspect of this hashtag. (Not to be confused with #MeToo, which is a completely different Leftist shitshow.) As many Twitter Leftists were so quick to point out, they were already boycotting CNN, as though it were a badge of honor. At this point, boycotting CNN is like boycotting “The Golden Girls” (although I am still involved in a letter-writing campaign about Estelle Getty): it’s pretty much a moot point. They’re already swirling the drain, so losing tens of tens of viewers isn’t going to change that. Piling on, even virtually, is pointless.
But then again, pointless actions are what the Left specialize in. See also: #MeToo.
The part that really tickles me is how the Left reacted to the shift in CNN’s approach to news. When you really think about it (and I do because I need something to do while I browse Twitter), the Left is upset a news organization is moving away from propaganda and more towards actual reporting of facts…but the Left says their favorite cable news shows are already doing actual reporting…so…
Yeah. I got nothing.
I take that back. I actually got something here, and it’s all about controlling the narrative. The Left cannot abide not being in control of the flow of information, and with both Twitter and CNN moving more towards the right as a means to even the playing field, the Left fear they’re losing control of the ability to shape what people think. Which they are, mainly because they don’t understand people in general. And business. And success. And long term thinking. And…well, you get the idea.
But as with so many hashtags, the #BoycottCNN shelf-life will be thankfully short, and the damage will be minimal. Yet, the Left overplayed its hand with the boycott because it gives us an insight into how the operate and why they reacted the way they did. That gives us ammunition to use in the future while also putting their objections into context.
In the end, though, CNN is going to become a casualty in the cable news wars by its own hand. They believed in their own invincibility and didn’t plan for a future where a test pattern could draw better numbers than their prime time shows. CNN burned up a lot of its early credibility worse than Mrs. O’Leary’s cow, but if they’re truly serious about getting back to hard news without as much spin, I wish them all the best. It’s the harder and longer road, but it will bring the best outcome possible.
Plus, it’ll piss off Leftists, which is always entertaining.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
For all the shit I give Twitter on here, I do have to admit it does have some good points. Like, the fact the level of entertainment I get laughing at the sheer batshittery without having to pay a dime for it. But it’s also good for seeing the lifespan of Leftist outrage over a relatively minor thing.
Like a blue checkmark.
Since Elon Musk took over Twitter, he’s pissed off Leftists by…treating people equally. And the Left just can’t handle that because prior to Musk, Twitter was their playground. So, instead of adopting to the new environment, they went to Twitter to bitch about it. And now, they’re taking additional steps: they’re blocking anyone with a blue checkmark, a Twitter hashtag called #blocktheblue.
And, yes, it’s just as dumb as you thing.
#blocktheblue
What the Left thinks it means – a way to separate the paid Twitter shills from the real users
What it means – an insight into Leftist self-importance and hypocrisy
One aspect of Leftist identity is the belief they are the elite, the creme de la creme of society. As a result, they do everything they can to hobnob with other Leftists (except for anyone who isn’t white, rich, and unapologetically narcissistic because you just can’t let everyone into these circles). This included Twitter.
That’s where the blue checkmarks come into play. In the pre-Musk Twitter days, a blue checkmark became a symbol of superiority, mainly because of Leftists making it one. Of course, Twitter denied this colorful combination of pixels meant anything of the sort (because they were in on it the whole time), but just seeing what the internal drones were doing (thanks #TwitterFiles), we know it was bullshit.
Then, some high-profile Twitter users (think valedictorian of clown college) decided to push back against Musk by pushing followers to block anybody with a Twitter Blue account. This movement kicked into high gear recently after Musk removed legacy blue checkmarks to those who didn’t pay the oppressive $8 to get a blue checkmark.
It’s at this point I should point out you don’t need to pay $8 to use Twitter, just to get the verified blue checkmark.
See? I told you it was as stupid as you think. But wait, it gets better!
Since anyone can pay $8 for a verified blue checkmark, Leftists are doing the completely rational thing and assuming everyone with a blue checkmark is a bot or a fraud of some sort. And, as we know, Leftists hate competition. It got to the point people with blue checkmarks felt the need to tell their fans that they didn’t pay $8 for the checkmark, as though they would get kicked out of Leftist social circles if they didn’t.
Now, I’m sure the Leftist elites who are bitching the loudest over this could afford the $8, so it’s not a monetary issue. And it’s not an integrity issue, either, because none of these assholes would know integrity if it came up with them with a name tag, introduced itself, kept referring to its name throughout the conversation, left them a business card, and called them once a week to catch up.
What it comes down to is a loss of exclusivity for Leftists. And they’re handling it badly, or in other words like they handle just about everything. Because they no longer feel special, they throw an online temper tantrum…on the platform they despise.
To any Leftists who are reading this and see themselves in my description, that’s called getting owned.
Sure, the Left has social media alternatives, but they’re not taking them because there’s a reason they’re alternatives: because Twitter is basically the lead dog. That creates the Kobayashi Maru of social media. Either they stay on Twitter where they can be visible and hypocritical, or they can go to another social media site where they are principled, but yelling into the void where only 3 people might engage if only to nod in partisan agreement.
Of course, Musk might just pay the $8 for some of these Leftists, like he did for Stephen King, just so they can enjoy Twitter Blue. Or to troll them as only he can. You know, whichever. Which will cause them to lose their collectivist minds and have to issue more and more apologies to their Leftist allies and explain they didn’t actually pay for Twitter Blue, which will make some of their allies doubt their Leftist bonafides and…well, let’s just say you can spend your $8 on a lot of popcorn because this cycle of dumbfuckery is perpetual. And entertaining!
Granted, this isn’t a major issues on the scale of the Russia/Ukraine War, the border issue, or why anyone decided to green-light a second season of “Velma,” but sometimes these seemingly insignificant issues give the clearest view of the Leftist mindset. And #BlocktheBlue is the kind of issue that puts the Left’s mindset on full blast.
Of course, the Left is overlooking the most obvious solution to the current environment they see on Twitter: log off. It’s fucking Twitter! You have a life away from social media, so go do something! It’s not like you’re being productive members of society by being melded to your phones posting hashtags standing up against racism, sexism, or the ism-of-the-day. Trust me, you’re not missing anything by not being on Twitter 25/8. And if your entire existence is tied to social media, it’s as vapid and empty as, well, most Twitter posts.
To paraphrase a famous saying from the 60s, log off, put down, and go out.
The Unimproved Twitter
Twitter. Even when the Left owned it, it was my favorite Social Media platform. I think because it wasn’t full of ads (originally), games, and other nonsense that is found is most other Social Media platforms.
Twitter was, and still is, a micro-blogging site. And I like blogs. They are plain and simple and good to use to express your views and opinions. You are reading one of my blogs right now.
Since Elon Musk has become the owner of Twitter. I’ve come back to it more. Only to find some rather annoying changes and a few pleasant surprises as well.
I wanted to add a Twitter feed to a website. The usual procedure is to create an app or possibly just give an app permission to access the specific Twitter feed. And the app I was using believed the same thing. This ended up being a terrible dark rabbit hole.
You needed to get a Dev account now just to create a simple Twitter bot to read a feed and post it to another website. And the approval isn’t automatic. Were in the past you could easily just be auto approved to create any bot on the platform. It was very frustrating to say the least.
And of course it turned out to not be necessary. A pleasant surprise after the fact and some digging around. The process is fairly simple now to have a Twitter feed post someplace else. But apparently no one has been informed of this change.
I do have multiple Twitter accounts. I think I may have one even for this blog. I liked using TweetDeck. Because I could see multiple accounts at once and post to all or any specific combination when making new posts to Twitter. But it’s been changed.
The old TweetDeck is now “classic” TweetDeck. And although it is currently accessible still. It may not stay that way. I just don’t like the new version of the application. It’s not very friendly. I’ve never understood why people like to fix things that aren’t broken.
The management and censorship of Twitter was broken. The platform itself was not. Leave it alone Elon and just fix what was broken.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Yes, it’s another post about Twitter. In my defense, though, the current Twitter drama is like being in the Mob or on Brokeback Mountain: every time I think I’m out, they pull me back in and then fuck me. Or something like that
The New York Times and other leftist media sources recently reported an increase in the number of hate speech incidents on Twitter since Elon Musk took over. Their source was a study conducted by several groups, including the Anti-Defamation League, academia, and the Center for Countering Digital Hate, all pointing to what they’re trying to push as an epidemic of hate. Their solution? Get another COVID booster.
Actually, the Left has a few different options on the table from having the government oversee Twitter to investigating Musk’s purchase to leaving the platform altogether to staying and fighting as Alyssa “I’m Definitely Not the Boss” Milano suggested. In other words, they don’t have a clear strategy, but they have a clear idea of what hate speech is.
And, as we’re about to see, they’re completely wrong. Again.
hate speech
What the Left thinks it means – hateful speech that is not protected by the First Amendment and should be illegal
What it really means – hateful speech that is protected by the First Amendment, but not necessarily by Twitter
I’m going to be honest with you at the start. Neither side has this issue completely right as it pertains to Twitter. As a private company, Twitter can set the rules as to what it allows on the platform, and the First Amendment need not apply. After all, the first five words of it are “Congress shall make no law” and last time I checked Twitter isn’t Congress. Although I’ve found an increasing number of twits on both…
At the core of the issue is how hate is defined. Since hate speech first came into the public lexicon, hate has evolved from racist, sexist, and generally unacceptable commentary to anything that hurts a Leftist’s fee-fees. Prior to Musk buying Twitter, the Left had a field day getting accounts nuked for Terms of Service violations more spurious than the credibility of Media Matters.
That’s because the Left has friends in high places, namely the moderation staff. When you get to define what constitutes hate speech, you can justify any moderation invoked under it. With the moderation staff at Twitter leaning so far left the only parts of their body that got sunburned were on the right, let’s just say they were fairly liberal with their definition, and definitely illiberal with their enforcement.
But, remember, it’s Elon Musk creating more hate speech on Twitter.
Actually, the hate speech has been there; it just hasn’t been called such. Like the “Summer of Love” in 2020, the Left crafted a tidy, yet wholly unbelievable narrative. And when confronted with the flood of conservative Twitter accounts going down, their response was the same: they shouldn’t have broken the rules Twitter, a private company, created.
All while telling a Colorado baker to bake the cake, I might add.
Fast forward to, oh, now. The Left no longer defends the private company because the rules are starting to apply to the people who used to be the ones who made up the rules as they went along. Although there are some inconsistencies with how the rules got applied, the fact the Left got a small taste of what conservatives endured for years isn’t entirely unwelcome, at least to me. Still, Musk should work on ensuring the rules are fair across the board, and that starts with the moderation team.
Meanwhile, back in the “hate speech is on the rise on Twitter” camp, they’ve run into a bit of a problem: the numbers don’t seem to match what is going on, or at the very least what the Left says is going on. But why let a little thing like reality get in the way of a good two minutes hate, right?
Which brings us back to what constitutes hate speech because, well…the people making the claims of a rise of hate speech on Twitter aren’t exactly forthcoming with their methodology. Although they cite the number of “slurs” being posted, they never provide context. Granted, there are few instances where calling someone a racial, sexual, or other type of slur would be fine, the fact there are some and the lack of transparency of the internal mechanics of the study being promoted as gospel should be enough to make even the most rabid Leftist pause.
Should be, but doesn’t apparently.
This is the time to push back against the Left’s narrative by asking hard questions. How is “hate speech” being defined? What was considered “slurs”? How were these slurs counted? Was context considered in the determination? Do we really need any more Tyler Perry movies?
Although these questions (especially that last one) will remain unanswered most likely, there is one thing that isn’t in dispute: the First Amendment protects hate speech. No matter how many Twitter Leftists repeat the idea it’s not, the US Supreme Court has already ruled it is. And before the Leftists decry this as a racist decision by a right-wing court, Justices Kennedy, Sotomayor, Kagan, and…the Notorious RBG concurred.
Oops.
Even if you disagree with the ruling, and with basic Constitutional principles for that matter, the concept of hate speech online and in general just doesn’t work without understanding intent. In most cases, it’s clear, but if you’re just looking for words and not context, there will be a lot of hits that should have been misses. Or Ms. if you’d prefer.
Without that added context, you’re more likely to find a cost-effective government agency than you are to find a consistent and logical conclusion. You might as well use a blindfold, a dartboard, and several adult beverages to confirm whether something is hate speech. In other words, a more sensible method than we’re using now.
What the Left fails to understand, either purposely or…oh, who are we kidding, is how to combat hate speech. What they want to do is remove it from the public square so no one can see or hear it. All that does is make it more attractive for those looking to push the envelope more than a postal employee working straight commission. It’s the forbidden aspect that makes it so attractive, as Tipper Gore and the Parents Music Resource Center found out way back in the 1980s. Nice to know Leftist still can’t learn from history, though.
The other and ultimately preferable way to fight hate speech is with…brace yourselves…more speech. By letting assholes spout off, they get their feelings off their chests and we can respond by not being assholes. That, and we can find out where the assholes are and know who not to send Christmas cards to, so…win-win! For the most part, I think Musk falls into this camp, which is a good thing for online speech all the way around.
Not that it will convince the Left to stop being hall monitors. Just look at how they treat each other on Mastodon! They need to feel they’re in control, which is why they’re trying to paint Twitter as a cesspool where only racists, sexists, homophobes, transphobes, and other shitty people congregate. That’s why they have to invent a scandal, especially considering their predictions about Twitter going the way of Kanye West’s future endeavors have yet to occur. (Amazing how the same folks who say the Earth is going to end in 10 years as they did in the 80s can’t get predictions right, isn’t it?)
So, I would take the studies showing an increase in hate speech on Twitter with a grain of salt…the size of Mount Everest.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week – Black Friday Edition!
To get us all in the holiday shopping move, I decided to whip up a special Lexicon edition! And, no, I don’t have the receipt, so you can’t return it.
With Elon Musk making massive changes at Twitter, Leftists have been of two minds: one, Twitter is dead, and two, there has to be an alternative to Twitter that will be better. Of course, this makes as much sense as a death ray invented for peaceful purposes, but this is the Left we’re dealing with here.
Well, the Left has been promoting Mastodon as just such an alternative. Now, if you’ve never heard of it, don’t be surprised. It’s only been around since 2016, but now Leftists are starting to get the ban hammer for shit they’ve been getting away with for years, they’re looking for any USB port in a storm. Will they find safe harbor there? Will it become as big or bigger than Twitter? Will the Detroit Lions ever win another Thanksgiving Day football game? We’ll find these answers and more!
Mastodon
What the Left thinks it means – a better version of Twitter, post-Musk
What it really means – social media for Leftists who prefer pre-Musk Twitter where they do whatever they want
Whenever there’s a new cultural phenomenon, Leftists tend to do one of two things: co-opt it so it can be turned into a propaganda arm, or try to copy what the Right is doing. As the Left has discovered, it’s easier to do the former than the latter because all the heavy lifting of actually producing something has already been done. All they have to do is show up and find their ways into key positions to drive the propaganda. This has been pretty successful, considering when they’ve tried to imitate the Right (i.e. Err…I mean Air America) they’ve managed to fuck it all up.
This is how the Left got to hold so much power at Twitter and other social media sites like Facebook and YouTube. With the combination of tech-savvy true believers and sympathetic (or just pathetic) corporate leadership, Leftist enjoyed free reign without fear of consequences. After all, as long as they were on the right side of issues (i.e. so far Left it makes Karl Marx look like Milton Friedman), they weren’t doing anything wrong.
I mean, aside from targeted harassment, doxxing people, death threats, and censoring of stories that broke the Leftist narrative, of course.
Once Musk started asking questions, Leftists started circling the wagons to deny what had been a given on both sides of the aisle, and it wasn’t even a secret it was going on. Don’t believe what has been documented numerous times! Believe the narrative (which has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese factory in the middle of gangland shootout)!
Yeah. I’m not even on Twitter and I know the official stance pre-Musk was bullshit. It’s not even a mystery why Leftists and their media pals (redundant, I know) started saying Twitter was turning into a cesspool after Musk took over. It even inspired the idea Twitter would be dead within a week, as predicted by a (now possibly former) employee.
Yeah, that didn’t happen.
So, what does any of this have to do with Mastodon? Aside from the Left’s snowflake (emphasis on flake) attitudes about having to share their sandbox with those icky right wingers, it shows they’re willing to try to ruin another social media platform so they don’t have to share. Just with Musk’s takeover of Twitter, Mastodon saw a boom in users, and judging from the positive press gushing over it, they were mostly Leftists.
Yet, with growing popularity comes increased scrutiny of the tech security and ideological varieties. I won’t go into the tech side of it because a) that’s more Chris’ wheelhouse, and b) I can’t say as I understand the ins and outs well enough to discuss it. From my interpretation of the articles I read, Mastodon’s security may be as effective as Kanye West’s advisor on Jewish affairs.
But on the ideological side? I am so there.
It seems the ban-hammer harpies that used to infest Twitter have already infested Mastodon. In the short time since Leftists fled there, there has been a Ban-A-Palooza against…Leftists! Yep! They’ve started eating their own over there, including noted Leftist Wil Wheaton, apparently for not being woke enough. The irony? Wil loved to block people on Twitter for saying “Shut up, Wesley” on his account. Now, Mastodon has literally shut him up.
Another user was allegedly banned from the site for, get this, being a capitalist. I would be hesitant to run with this story because I haven’t been able to verify it independently. I add it here as a possible example of just how far Mastodon has gone in just a short time.
In thinking about how the Mastodon influx has unfolded (mainly since I can’t watch my Baltimore Ravens on Sundays with any degree of certainty or without having to fork over my immortal soul), I came across an interesting hypothesis, and with everything I’ve found and relayed to you, I have a hard time ignoring it.
Mastodon is a long-term troll against the Left.
Granted, some of these ideas are out there like the Hubble, but let me lay out the case for you.
First, think about how you say the word “Mastodon.” Most people would pronounce the first “o” with an “a” sound, so “Mastadon” instead of “Mastodon.” Now, put a little vocal comma between the second syllable “sto” and the third syllable “don.” Put it all together and you have “Masta Don.” As in “Master Donald Trump.”
Holy Own Goal, Batman!
Then, there’s the bans I mentioned earlier. Not only are they on-brand for Leftists, but they are so on-brand as to throw up red flags that it might be a long game for someone who wants to fuck with the Left, a la Titania McGrath. I’ve always felt one of the best ways to mock Leftists is to hold a mirror up to how they act and crank up the absurdity to 11 (because it’s one higher). If I’m right about Mastodon, they have mastered this so sublimely as to be virtually indistinguishable from the authentic Leftist.
However, I could be wrong and Mastodon is really trying to be a successful competitor to Twitter. If so, I have no qualms about it. Competition tends to make a product or service better, so even if Mastodon is as competitive with Twitter as the Detroit Lions is to, well, just about any other NFL team, there might be enough incentive for Elon Musk to make changes to improve the overall quality of the app. Then again, the Leftist exodus from Twitter has already done that, so well done, sir!
If Mastodon wants to be around longer than a TikTok video, I have a suggestion. Start up other social media alternatives and name them after other prehistoric animals. You know, like…oh, let me spitball here, Pterodactyl, Triceratops, Saber Tooth Tiger, and Tyrannosaurus. Then, merge them all into a single company called Megazord Inc. Maybe include room for a Dragonzord in there, too.
You’re welcome.