Green Room - Week 38 - Day 1

[clauderainsrm.livejournal.com]

The results last night sent shockwaves through the internet: http://therealljidol.livejournal.com/838692.html

Well, OK, maybe not "shockwaves", but people were sad about it.

The, of course, the new topic came and people were even more sad about that! ;) http://therealljidol.livejournal.com/838956.html

Or at least equally sad.

You also had questions. I have answers! Let's see if we can have them make a belated Valentines Day love connection!!!

- "I want to know which one was me" - Referencing the announcement that I made that I would identify who I was talking about from that infamous post: http://therealljidol.livejournal.com/837598.html

I will let you know *when you are eliminated*. I am giving you the choice if you want to do that in private, where we can talk a little more freely (although I've been having a problem with people forwarding private messages lately, so my policy on what I do and don't talk about may need to change in the near future)

If you *are not* eliminated (aka "you win") that still counts as you no longer being in the competition. :)

- "Who can be a champion?" "Do they need to have a Livejournal?" "What is the best way to post their entry?"

Anyone you know can be your Champion. Just tie your favor on them and send them out to joust!
They don't *have* to have a Livejournal any more than any contestant *has* to have a Livejournal - but as people who have played earlier this season know, it certainly helps.
If they don't already have one, they should still be pretty easy to set up. Heck, they can set one up under their FB, Twitter or Open Access ID!
The best way for them to post their entry is in their space. If you are absolutely desperate, they can sent it to you and you can post it.

But let me answer the next question as well and it may clear up a few more questions. That question being "You said 'ideally' they should be someone who hasn't played this season of Idol - is that a strict rule that they shouldn't have played, or just a suggestion?"

My answer to that is to let you know why I introduced the Champions concept a couple years ago.

I think the LJ Idol needs to be someone who can inspire people and *make them want to get involved*. Not just to be better writers, but to be involved in Idol itself! :)

With the Champions, you are bringing someone new to the table, someone who you think is strong enough to defend your position in the game. But also someone that you think will enjoy their (limited) experience.

Ideally, it's a recruitment tool. :) They post their entries in *their* space and suddenly Idol is introduced to a whole group of people who may not have been aware of what was going on.

So, yes, *ideally* I'd like for it to be someone new - and ideally, I'd like for it to be in their own space. Because that creates a greater chance for people to get intrigued that doesn't exist when folks already know what is going on.

Granted, I know that it isn't always possible - so if you do have to grab someone who played this season, I get it. I'd just prefer if you could grab someone who could be dragged into our world, a new voice to enjoy.

***

Cynthia was mentioning an article last night, but unfortunately she forgot to send it to me. It was about various people who have posted something stupid online and ended up losing their jobs when the comment when viral and everyone started chiming in, without knowing the context. (There are plenty of ass-hats out there who are outright spreading hate - but there are also the ones who seem to be caught on a "slow news day" and end up in the cross-fire... and of course the people working toward social justice who end up in the cross-fires of those who would rather *not* have it.)

It led to an interesting conversation about the importance of people out there working for social justice, but how easily things can get out of control and become a mob in the process. I know I've seen a few, when someone posts something stupid and the world goes after them. There are people on every side of every issues, who seem like the folks who would have gone out to the public executions.

Does the click-bait/retweet culture encourage this sort of thing, or only reflect what was already there?

Comments

[xo-kizzy-xo.livejournal.com]

First?

Clickbait, definitely. It's the reason why headlines are the way they are. I've got one of our local news stations on my feed, and they've devolved into clickbait-grabbing headlines to garner responses. Otherwise people would just yawn and scroll right on by. You can rant about it all you want, but it's so obvious how the internet has changed the way we get and digest information. The Walter Cronkite/Edward R. Murrow method of news wouldn't survive in this.

(god, I almost shed a tear typing that)

And certainly the mob mentality plays into that too. There's always a voice or two of reason, though, but more often than not they're shuttled to the side while everyone reveals their pitchforks. I see fights like this all the time in the snowdog FB communities, of all places. It makes me stop reading after while because 1) I don't have a personal connection to it, and 2) if I'm going to get caught up in something like that, it'd better involve people I know. Beccause people I know = personal investment. It's the reason why gleaning the snark on GOMI (http://www.getoffmyinternets.net) leaves me cold.

I'm just thinking right now, if I were still playing, who would I choose for a champion who isn't involved in any way with Idol? My first choice would be SO. If he turned it down...I honestly don't know. I know very few writerly types IRL.

[lrig-rorrim.livejournal.com]

My problem is that I know a lot of writerly types IRL... none of whom could do a deadline of this Thursday. It's not a lot of time to find someone, and have them write a thing. I've asked someone, but I know they're busy (and it's someone I don't know well) so now I wait. And panic. Heh.

I agree that the Internet has drastically changed the way we interact with and get our news. The news outlets are desperately trying to make money and get eyes, and with the saturation of information, they have to resort to the click-bait style stuff and sensationalist headlines in order to make that happen. It kind of sucks, because everything gets shaped around this quick interest-grabbing kind of framing that really doesn't add anything to the content, and definitely makes people more inclined to be reactionary (I think anyway. It's not like I've done a study. Heh).

[xo-kizzy-xo.livejournal.com]

It kind of sucks, because everything gets shaped around this quick interest-grabbing kind of framing that really doesn't add anything to the content, and definitely makes people more inclined to be reactionary...

Exactly :nodding: The more eyes on a piece, the more ad revenue. The more ad revenue, the more $. It's a vicious cycle. And yeah, encouraging reactionary commentary plays directly into that. If people weren't being reactionary, what's the point of reading it?

At least you KNOW writerly types IRL. I rarely speak about writing IRL because it's seen as pretentious in the "who the F do you think you are?" kind of way. I miss the days where I got NO repercissions in any way, shape, or form from something I truly enjoyed doing.

[lrig-rorrim.livejournal.com]

One of the things I find interesting is just how effective click-bait headlines are. I mean, I hate the things, and get grumpy about them, but when I'm scrolling past something that's all "you wouldn't believe what happened next..." or "this simple trick will blow your mind" or whatever, I actually have to fight with myself sometimes to keeeeeep on scrolling. The people who crafted these systems are really good at manipulating human psychology. It reminds me some of those old timey ads for snake-oil drugs, with all the testimonials about the Wonder Product and how life changing it is.

I'm really sorry that writing isn't a thing you can talk about IRL - that really sucks! Have you considered joining up with a local writer's group or anything, to find other folks in a similar situation? There are a couple of those run out of the library here, and I've seen ads on craigslist for them, and some posters in local bookstores, too. The NaNo forums are often a good way to keep in touch with local writers even when it's not November, too.

[jexia]

My little fight back, if I'm grabbed by one of those articles, is then go to the original youtube video (or whatever) and share that, instead.

[dmousey.livejournal.com]

Instant access makes it very hard to put a spin on what is really happening too. Things aren't as easily hidden. George Orwell was a genius. I don't think he ever truly thought it would get this far.

Younger adults aren't getting their info from traditional online news outlets either. This is the reason for 'click-bait' and does enable our growing ADD-like lifestyle.

[dmousey.livejournal.com]

No, people are quick and reactionary, and it usually degrades into a name-calling session when there isn't thought behind the reply. That's where people get into trouble. Once it's on the net, always on the net.

I do a lot of environmental advocacy and of course follow politics closely, you learn to debate using links (non-partisan,non-profit) and credible references, you dig for yourself.

News has always had an "If it bleeds- it leads" mentality.

[lrig-rorrim.livejournal.com]

I think this is probably the article you guys were talking about: how one stupid tweet ruined Justine Sacco's life (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/magazine/how-one-stupid-tweet-ruined-justine-saccos-life.html?_r=0). Soon after I read that, I read this - racists getting fired: the sins of whiteness on social media (http://tressiemc.com/2014/12/02/racists-getting-fired-the-sins-of-whiteness-on-social-media/), and I think it provides an interesting perspective on the whole thing.

I have more thoughts, but need to go find a champion, and also write a thing. Heh. Back later when I'm not frantically scrambling.

[clauderainsrm.livejournal.com]

Justine Sacco! Yes, that was one of the names she mentioned.

I'll have to read the second article, and send it to her for a later decision!

I *knew* someone would have a link!

[fodschwazzle.livejournal.com]

Both articles are good, but the second is especially elegant. I think there are a couple of different types of problems at work. One is public shaming (looking at Zoe Quinn) which occasionally has something to do with ethnicity but can happen regardless. Another is calling out figures of authority and/or for their abuses of social power. The second of these should always be possible. The first should have limitations. Making a white person live as a representation of their race is a good lesson handled badly if it gets to the point that they receive death threats--that's putting a group's freedom of speech above an individuals freedom from harm. Worse, such actions often, as the NY Times article demonstrates, can result in leaders of shaming movements finding themselves in similar pickles. This is why I am starting to believe that the freedom of speech will need provisions added soon.

Where is penpusher when you need him?

[dmousey.livejournal.com]

I was just thinking the same thing about Penpusher! LOL Freedom of Speech will be one very tough steak to chew. This is an excerpt from a blog on Constitutional Law

Nahmod Law

Freedom of Speech

“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

I want to emphasize three important take-away points at the outset. One is that the First Amendment protects us from the government; it does not apply to relations between private persons. Second, the First Amendment, like all individual rights in the Constitution, is not absolute. And last, freedom of speech has costs."



Now, tell me, who should regulate those costs? Should Government enforce punishments for Hate Speech? Or should the populace use its moral judgement as to appropriate amends for damages?

[fodschwazzle.livejournal.com]

If it falls to the populace to decide, then it is clear that there will be a breaking-in period. I know this from my high school girls and boys who are now having to hear and read what others think and feel about them, no matter how impulsive those thoughts might be. I know that I am not happy with the status quo--if individuals are going to do something about it, it will likely have to go beyond advocacy.

[kathrynrose.livejournal.com]

Limiting free speech is a slippery slope. The problem isn't in the freedom itself. The problem is that people focus too much on their "Freedom" and forget their Responsibility and Consequences of their actions, or the Respect/Empathy/Consideration for other people.

Our culture has become too "me" centered. Too much about what "I" can own/accumulate/control. We're too litigious, self-centered and thoughtless. Most people determine an absolute opinion on any given subject, regardless of its scope or complexity, based on who has supported it in 140 characters or less.

But we've stopped teaching people to think. We teach young people to memorize. There is more enmity in our politics than we have ever experienced. We have more people in prison, more children in poverty, more greed and less hope than we have had in our own life memory.

Our problem isn't about speech.

[fodschwazzle.livejournal.com]

I like what you are saying even if I am uncertain of how to actuate it. I try to teach people the value of things rather than the utilization--facebook loses value when you have to endure the unformed opinions of others, even though it looks productive or communicative. Twitter's value tips on whether people are giving to the world what they would hope to receive from it. Poetry gains value when you look at it for what it can do for you rather than what it should do by-the-book.

But it definitely feels like a zero-sum game at the end of the day. It becomes easy to believe that someone with more authority should force this to work in a way more conducive to good humanity. And then we resign our agency away.

[dmousey.livejournal.com]

Again... Freedom of Speech has consequences and responsibilities. Americans abuse their right invoke it, just as we usually abuse and challenge any of our Constitutional rights. (Look what we've done with the Right to Bear Arms)

That in turn causes Amendments, but how far are we willing, if we are willing, to let the Government dictate what we can and can not say/tweet/photograph/publish.

[kickthehobbit.livejournal.com]

...heh.

"Freedom of speech, freedom of speech, freedom of speech..."

[waits for talonkarrde88 to appear ;) ]

[talon.livejournal.com]

Dipping into legalities for a bit here: first, as dmousey points out, this isn't really about the first amendment, which only applies to government action. We live in an era where the speech that we are talking about exists purely on a private platform — Facebook/Twitter/Google are under no obligations whatsoever to guarantee your speech, and can make decisions on what to take down or allow purely at their will, and I don't think there will be any restrictions on them anytime soon, if ever, at least in the US.

Public shaming is definitely something that's magnified by technology, but I don't think it's really a solvable issue at this point; I think future generations will simply have to adapt, much as they will have to adapt to the fact that the internet never forgets anything. There are rearguard actions (like the European Right to Be Forgotten attempt), but I find those unlikely to succeed in the long term, simply because the internet has made access to the information too ubiquitous to be easily censored or removed.

Sociologically, I think the answer is that we will adapt to these new changes in time. People are still coming to grips with the fact that what they put out there will be enshrined and referenced forever, but eventually, a generation will grow up never knowing anything else, and they will modify their conduct to respond to that — or they won't have to, because everyone will have something stupid that they did that will be Googleable and people will stop caring about it as much as they do now. With regards to harassment and death threats, I think that's also an element of the internet that law enforcement will respond to better in the future — real and credible threats are always punishable by law, and as threats move from realspace into cyberspace, prosecution of those threats will move too.

Will the witch hunts continue? Almost certainly — these online platforms will always be one where you can easily point out how right you are by pointing out how egregiously wrong someone else is, without any harm to yourself. I don't think that'll change, unless the companies start instituting requirements for real names, for example (but there's a large benefit to anonymous speech, too). But in some ways, these public shamings do put others on notice that societally, some behavior won't be tolerated. They don't always get the right people or are based on the right reasons, but the message itself is one of reinforcing a norm that I think most would agree with.

[ryl.livejournal.com]

Sociologically, I think the answer is that we will adapt to these new changes in time. People are still coming to grips with the fact that what they put out there will be enshrined and referenced forever, but eventually, a generation will grow up never knowing anything else, and they will modify their conduct to respond to that — or they won't have to, because everyone will have something stupid that they did that will be Googleable and people will stop caring about it as much as they do now

One of Arthur C. Clarke's last books, The Light of Other Days (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Light_of_Other_Days), covers a societal change similar to what you're talking about. Someone develops a stable wormhole which allows people to look into the past and present and eventually destroys the whole concept of personal privacy. The people who grew up before this discovery get all up in arms about that, but the younger generations are completely okay with it and eventually society adapts to it. We can see this in action now. These are interesting times.

[bleodswean.livejournal.com]

I do love the possibilities of recruitment! It is a bit of a time crunch, though. I'm intrigued by the idea....

Mob mentality is one of the most frightening aspects of human psychology, imo. There is no question that the internet has shrunk the world down to a global village and viruses can become epidemic. Perspective is important. And this feeds into the pondering on intersubjectivity.

:)

[xo-kizzy-xo.livejournal.com]

Ooh, that's a good one :)

[crisp-sobriety.livejournal.com]

Ah, this clears up a lot. Thank you. :)

In the spirit of this 'champion' concept, I have recruited someone who has had nothing to do with Idol, or even LJ. But they're a great writer, I think. I'm looking forward to you guys getting to read them.

[roina-arwen.livejournal.com]

So what happens if a contestant can't find a Champion or whose Champion isn't able to / forgets to fulfil their duties? Is the contestant automatically out??

[clauderainsrm.livejournal.com]

You mean what happens if someone misses the deadline and doesn't submit what they were supposed to submit?

We know the answer to that.

If someone is having a difficult time finding a Champion, hopefully they will get the word out. I'm sure there are people are here who, while not "ideal" because they already know about Idol, would be willing to help out in a pinch.

[roina-arwen.livejournal.com]

That's what I thought, I just wanted to double check.

[clauderainsrm.livejournal.com]

Also -

No. I can't be someone's Champion.

Yes, someone jokingly asked that - and yes, that was the very first time I've ever received that question, which is awesome! :)

[lawchicky.livejournal.com]

I love this!

I would have just assumed that you'd never Champion one contestant, but cheers to whomever asked :)

[hosticle-fifer.livejournal.com]

What if he was champion to ALL contestants? Make it fair and all that. ;)

[clauderainsrm.livejournal.com]

What if every week was a Champions week, and he was everyone's champion???

This is a great idea... oh wait... nevermind...

[watching-ships.livejournal.com]

Actually had a friend who was not familiar with idol before approach me about being my champion. She's a fabulous writer, so I'm really excited to see what she comes up with! And she even said she wants to join in the next time this happens, so...yay! I've recruited someone :)

[jexia]

*thumbs up*

[dmousey.livejournal.com]

Whoot! Very cool! And me thinks Ssir is using this recruitment to subtly collect more sacrifices for a season ten! :)

[anyonesghost.livejournal.com]

"A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila." (Mitch Ratcliff)

The combination of 24/7 news media, #social wildfire, and the "it's funny when it's not me" mentality of mobs ... well, there's a reason I'm judicious about sharing personal information. This would be a big part of it.

[bleodswean.livejournal.com]

THAT is a fucken amazing quote!!! Thank you for sharing it!

[dmousey.livejournal.com]

Agreed, I've already filed it away for future reference.

[pixiebelle.livejournal.com]

Gary, you're cruel. Making them find a champion and both people writing an entry by Thursday?!? That's pretty intense. Was it always this quick of a turn around for champion weeks?

By the way, I've always loved this concept. It brings a great dynamic to the community. I say that as a former champion and someone who had to choose a champion as well. And as a reader, I love reading what everyone brings to the table.