#Advertising During the Pandemic

[advertisingduringthepandemic]

Uber's "Thank You for Not Riding" advertisement

The slogan "Thank You For Not Riding" is what the company uses to thank us for remaining home rather than utilizing their services, according to (Uber's Commercial for Covid-19: "Thank You for Not Riding," 2020). And it is that the business has promised to provide 10 million free trips for those crucial employees who must go to their workplaces due to a force major. The final line of the thank-you note reads, "Stay home for all who cannot." The objective of the advertising was to spread the word about social isolation strategies and to persuade viewers to take precautions against the epidemic. It opens with empty roads and streets and the words "Thank you for not riding with Uber." It then shows different critical workers who are still working throughout the epidemic, such as healthcare professionals, food store employees, and delivery drivers. The advertising also highlights some of Uber's safety policies, such as the need that drivers routinely clean their cars and the provision of masks to them. Customers of Uber are urged to use their service just as needed. 

The "Thank You for Not Riding" commercial from Uber is aimed at its clientele who are accustomed to using the company's ride-hailing services. It tries to convey that people may help stop the spread of COVID-19 by refraining from utilizing Uber's services excessively. The advertisement may also be interesting to people who are curious about the safety precautions, Uber has put in place in order to protect both drivers and passengers.

The target audience was not immediately exposed to any of Uber's products or services in the "Thank You for Not Riding" commercial. The objective of the campaign was to encourage appropriate usage of ride-hailing services while also thanking consumers who chose not to utilize Uber's services during the epidemic. The commercial emphasized social responsibility by urging viewers to prioritize their own and other people's safety during the epidemic by restricting their travel to really necessary things. Additionally, it emphasized Uber's dedication to accountability and safety by highlighting the safety precautions the firm has put in place to protect both drivers and customers. As a result, in this specific advertisement, Uber's goods and services were not necessarily promoted as being suitable for the intended demographic.

There’s no media manipulation involved in this Uber's "Thank You for Not Riding" advertisement thanks to users for putting safety first during the epidemic and encouraging appropriate ride-hailing behavior. It is successful in grabbing viewers' attention because it is relevant to the current circumstances and conveys a message of social duty and unity. Viewers who are feeling the effects of the pandemic can relate to the striking and evocative visuals of vacant roads and vital workers on the front lines of the epidemic.

REFERENCES

Uber’s commercial for Covid19: “Thank you for not riding.” (2020, April 14). Eslogan Magazine | Noticias de Marketing Y Publicidad, Branding Y Social Media. https://en.esloganmagazine.com/ubers-commercial-thank-you-for-not-riding/

KFC's "Contactless Delivery" advertisement

In order to promote their new contactless delivery option, which enables customers to receive their meal orders without having to interact with the delivery driver, KFC prepared the "Contactless Delivery" advertising during the COVID-19 epidemic. The opening of the campaign emphasizes how the epidemic has affected ordinary life by presenting videos of deserted streets and shuttered shops. The article continues by highlighting KFC's new contactless delivery option, which enables consumers to get their food orders devoid of direct interaction with the delivery driver. The advertisement conveys KFC's commitment to promoting the health and safety of its customers and employees, while also promoting a quick and secure way to order food. It is meant to reassure customers who may be concerned about the security of receiving food deliveries during the pandemic. According to (KFC and Pizza Hut Have Launched a Contactless Delivery Service in China amid Coronavirus Fears, n.d.) "The health and wellbeing of our employees and customers is our top priority, and the innovative new services will help reduce the risk of person-to-person transmission of the Coronavirus and protect our employees and customers". 

The target audience of KFC's "Contactless Delivery" advertisement is the people who always buy their food and this advertisement have really concerned about their customer’s safety 

According to this (Fadilla Puspita Dewi, 2021) during the pandemic, new products or services like KFC Indonesia's contactless delivery are evaluated for customer satisfaction. A questionnaire to previous customers, in-depth interviews with customers, and an analysis of product-related digital advertising were used as the three points of view for gathering information. The contactless distribution program was highly received by participants, according to the study's findings, and is worthwhile to test in COVID-19 situations since it can both stop the spread of the disease and address fundamental human needs. Furthermore, it also offers convenience for those who may not be able to leave their homes.

This advertisement doesn't include any form of media manipulation. The fact that the advertisement managed to capture viewers' attention is probably because of its timely and pertinent message regarding contactless delivery during the epidemic. The advertising tackles widespread concerns about the spread of the virus and provides a remedy that encourages consumer convenience and safety. Additionally, the advertisement effectively conveys the advantages of the service through the use of images and straightforward text. Overall, the concept and style of the advertisement are plain and educational rather than deceptive, which would have helped it attract people.

REFERENCES

KFC and Pizza Hut have launched a contactless delivery service in China amid coronavirus fears. (n.d.). Business Insider. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://www.businessinsider.in/retail/news/kfc-and-pizza-hut-have-launched-a-contactless-delivery-service-in-china-amid-coronavirus-fears/articleshow/73915775.cms

Fadilla Puspita Dewi, F. (2021, April 16). Customer Satisfaction with the COVID-19 Pandemic Innovation Products on Contactless Delivery KFC Indonesia. Papers.ssrn.com. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3827560

[grinchwrapsupreme]

i'm not saying this to make any sort of point but as someone who works in canadian theatre, the wga strike is going to have an interesting effect on live entertainment too, like i know multiple people who have lost their jobs or will lose their jobs soon because so much american television is produced here and obviously the iatse union is standing with the wga which it should and i also know that when film crew are out of work like this they often turn to theatre because it's a different local of the same union (and a lot of them started in theatre) and they wind up pushing permits out of work because film crew are usually members which means they get first dibs on all calls even if they don't have much live entertainment experience and even though attitudes in theatre and film are VERY different. And i really really hope the wga gets everything they want, they deserve that and more, but i also hope it happens quickly before young iatse permits get priced out of this city and we get into into another situation like the one right after the pandemic

[valentinaonthemoon]

Advocating original stories in cinema on bluesky is my new favourite hobby

I feel very tired. It feels like big companies need to milk everything out of their existing movies just come out with more and more products, and it doesn't even matter if they are good or not, because they know that people will go see them anyway.

What suffers most is the actual art form of cinema. The more "indie" productions with actual original stories are obscured by these sequels or prequels, and get barely any recognition at the box office or on streaming services, because any advert you see is taken by the ones with more money.

Anyway, if you have seen a good original movie recently, please come suggest it.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Rosemary Westwood at NPR:

A group of high-level managers at the Louisiana Department of Health walked into a Nov. 14 meeting in Baton Rouge expecting to talk about outreach and community events. Instead, they were told by an assistant secretary in the department and another official that department leadership had a new policy: Advertising or otherwise promoting the COVID, influenza or mpox vaccines, an established practice there — and at most other public health entities in the U.S. — must stop. NPR has confirmed the policy was discussed at this meeting, and at two other meetings held within the department's Office of Public Health, on Oct. 3 and Nov. 21, through interviews with four employees at the Department of Health, which employs more than 6,500 people and is the state's largest agency.

According to the employees, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they fear losing their jobs or other forms of retaliation, the policy would be implemented quietly and would not be put in writing. Staffers were also told that it applies to every aspect of the health department's work: Employees could not send out press releases, give interviews, hold vaccine events, give presentations or create social media posts encouraging the public to get the vaccines. They also could not put up signs at the department's clinics that COVID, flu or mpox vaccines were available on site. The new policy in Louisiana was implemented as some politicians have promoted false information about vaccines and as President-elect Donald Trump seeks to have anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr lead the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. And some public health experts are concerned that if other states follow Louisiana, the U.S. could face rising levels of disease and further erosion of trust in the nation's public health infrastructure.

[...]

A blow to public health practice

Staff at Louisiana's health department fear the new policy undermines their efforts to protect the public, and violates the fundamental mission of public health: to prevent illness and disease by following the science.

[...]

Experts fear consequences of undermining trust in vaccine

Last year, 652 people in Louisiana died of COVID, including five children. Louisiana currently is tied with DC for the highest rate of flu in the U.S. In 2022 alone, flu killed 586 people in Louisiana. Every health department staff member, former staff member, public health official and vaccine expert contacted by NPR repeated the scientific consensus that vaccines are safe, effective, and essential for preventing illness, hospitalizations, and deaths.

[...]

Policy change follows new governor's election

Until becoming Louisiana governor in early 2024, Republican Jeff Landry served as the state's attorney general for eight years. During the pandemic, he criticized the state's COVID response and filed lawsuits over federal and state vaccine mandates. On Dec. 6, 2021, Attorney General Landry spoke at a state committee hearing against adding COVID to the childhood immunization schedule. At his side was Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who presented false claims about COVID vaccines. This year the Republican-controlled legislature passed five bills — all signed by Gov. Landry — and two resolutions aimed at loosening vaccine requirements, limiting the power of public health authorities and sowing doubt about vaccine safety.

Gov. Landry also appointed Dr. Ralph Abraham, a family medicine doctor, to be the state's surgeon general. That position co-leads the Department of Health, and is tasked with crafting health policy that is then carried out by the departmental co-leader, the secretary. [...] Abraham said masking, lockdowns and vaccination requirements "were practically ineffective," that COVID vaccine adverse effects have been "suppressed," that "we don't know" whether blood from people who've been vaccinated is safe for donation and that "we hope and pray" COVID vaccines don't increase the risk miscarriages.

[...]

A slippery slope to future disease outbreaks

Experts told NPR they feared a policy that undermines COVID, flu and mpox vaccinations could have a spillover effect, reducing public trust in vaccinations overall, including those given to children to prevent a host of dangerous and deadly illnesses. "I believe that we will see measles cases. I believe we will see whooping cough cases. I believe we will likely see meningitis outbreaks," said Hood. In the Nov. 14 meeting, a staff member asked whether the ban on promoting vaccines applied to children's immunizations, but the answer was noncommittal, according to an employee with knowledge of the meeting's details. "My understanding was it's not clear to what extent we might be able to promote childhood vaccinations," the staff member said. (The Louisiana Department of Health's statement to NPR said the changes in policy and messaging do not apply to childhood immunizations.) Nationally, vaccination rates for serious childhood diseases have been falling in recent years, including in Louisiana.

[...]

The rise of public health officials promoting misinformation

Louisiana isn't the only state where public health officials have recently announced controversial decisions and repeated false or discredited health theories. Florida's surgeon general has made false claims about COVID vaccines, undermined school vaccine mandates for the measles and said local officials should stop adding fluoride to water supplies.

The consequences of anti-vaxxer extremism and anti-public health sentiments being normalized by Republicans: Louisiana bans the state's Department of Health from promoting COVID, flu, or mpox vaccines.

[katapotato55]

IMPORTANT PSA TO THOSE NEW TO TUMBLR OR REALLY ANYONE ON THIS SITE IN GENERAL:

IT IS OK TO REBLOG SPAM AND LIKE SOMEONE'S CONTENT ON THEIR BLOG NO ONE HERE IS GOING TO BE WEIRDED OUT, IN FACT IT IS ENCOURAGED THIS IDEA THAT SOCIALIZATION = BAD IS A TOXIC CAPITALISTIC TOOL DESIGNED BY HELLSITES LIKE TWITTER TO LEACH MONEY AND GOODWILL FROM YOUR BODY. I honest to god have no idea why "ratioing" on twitter is bad, like the act of engagement is considered a bad thing as if twitter were trying to encourage your toxic rage. oh wait that is exactly what twitter is doing. Twitter's entire business model is to encourage you to get outraged and to profit off of your rage induced engagement.

TUMBLR. DOES. NOT. HAVE. RATIOS. REBLOGGING IS A GOOD THING HERE. NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, AND HONESTLY MY MEMORY IS SO CRAP I FORGET Y'ALL RESPOND TO MY STUFF ANYWAYS.

All you need to do is change your profile pic and post something, and congratulations you now have a valid Tumblr citizenship. also to you twitter users: you can't cancel people on tumblr. this is a website full of eccentric weirdos. We are so far away from the mainstream that tumblr struggles to find advertisers for this site. At one point tumblr was very toxic, and the toxic tumblr people would eventually move to twitter during the porn ban. Twitter + the pandemic simply gave the toxic weirdos mainstream power to ruin people's lives. politely fuck off with your toxic crap, no one here is afraid to call you out on your obvious bullshit like on twitter. We don't have anything to hide here and even if we did your impact means NOTHING here. If you try to make tumblr toxic again then you will not be welcomed here by the community. Behave.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Precaratize bosses

I'm touring my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me SUNDAY (Apr 21) in TORINO, then Marin County (Apr 27), Winnipeg (May 2), Calgary (May 3), Vancouver (May 4), and beyond!

Combine Angelou's "When someone shows you who they are, believe them" with the truism that in politics, "every accusation is a confession" and you get: "Every time someone accuses you of a vice, they're showing you who they are and you should believe them."

Let's talk about some of those accusations. Remember the moral panic over the CARES Act covid stimulus checks? Hyperventilating mouthpieces for the ruling class were on every cable network, complaining that "no one wants to work anymore." The barely-submerged subtext was their belief that the only reason people show up for work is that they're afraid of losing everything – their homes, their kids, the groceries in their fridge.

This isn't a new development. Back when Clinton destroyed welfare, his justification was that "handouts" make workers lazy. The way to goad workers off their sofas (and the welfare rolls) and into jobs was to instill fear in them:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/03/welfare-childhood/555119/

This is also the firm belief of tech bosses: for them, mass tech layoffs are great news, because they terrorize the workers you don't fire, so that they'll be "extremely hardcore" and put in as many extra hours as the company demands, without even requiring any extra pay in return:

https://fortune.com/2022/10/06/elon-musk-jason-calacanis-return-to-office-gentlemens-layoffs-twitter/

Now, there's an obvious answer to the problem of no one taking a job at the wage being offered: just increase the offer. Capitalists claim to understand this. Uber will tell you that surge pricing "incentivizes drivers" to take to the streets by offering them more money to drive during busy times:

https://www.uber.com/blog/austin/providing-rides-when-they-are-most-needed/

(Note that while Uber once handed the lion's share of surge price premiums to drivers, these days, Uber just keeps the money, because they've entered the enshittification stage where drivers are so scared of being blacklisted that Uber can push them around instead of dangling carrots.)

(Also note that this logic completely fails when it comes to other businesses, like Wendy's, who briefly promised surge-priced hamburgers during busy times, but without even the pretense that the surge premium would be used to pay additional workers to rush to the restaurant and increase the capacity:)

https://www.theguardian.com/food/2024/feb/27/wendys-dynamic-surge-pricing

So bosses knew how to address their worker shortage: higher wages. You know: supply and demand. For bosses, the issue wasn't supply, it was price. A worker who earns $10/hour but makes the company $20 profit every hour is splitting the surplus 50:50 with their employer. The employer has overheads (rent on the shop, inventory, advertising and administration) that they have to pay out of their end of that surplus. But workers also have overheads: commuting costs, child-care, a professional wardrobe, and other expenses the worker incurs just so they can make money for their boss.

There's no iron law of economics that says the worker/boss split should be 50/50. Depending on the bargaining power of workers and their bosses, that split can move around a lot. Think of McDonald's and Walmart workers who work for wildly profitable corporate empires, but are so badly paid that they have to rely on food stamps. The split there is more like 10/90, in the boss's favor.

The pandemic changed the bargaining power. Sure, workers got a small cushion from stimulus checks, but they also benefited from changes in the fundamentals of the labor market. For example, millions of boomers just noped out of their jobs, forever, unwilling to risk catching a fatal illness and furious to realize that their bosses viewed that as an acceptable risk.

Bosses' willingness to risk their workers' lives backfired in another way: killing hundreds of thousands of workers and permanently disabling millions more. Combine the boomer exodus with the workers who sickened or died, and there's just fewer workers to go around, and so now those workers enjoy more bargaining power. They can demand a better split: say, 75/25, in their favor.

Remember the 2015 American Airlines strike, where pilots and flight attendants got a raise? The eminently guillotineable Citibank analyst Kevin Crissey declared: "This is frustrating. Labor is being paid first again. Shareholders get leftovers":

https://www.thestreet.com/investing/american-airlines-flight-attendants-bash-citi-analyst-who-put-shareholders-before-workers-14134309

Now, obviously, the corporation doesn't want to offer a greater share of its surplus to its workforce, but it certainly can do so. The more it pays its workers, the less profitable it will be, but that's capitalism, right? Corporations try to become as profitable as they can be, but they can't just decree that their workers must work for whatever pay they want to offer (that's serfdom).

Companies also don't get to dictate that we must buy their goods at whatever price they set (the would be a planned economy, not a market economy). There's no law that says that when the cost of making something goes up, its price should go up, too. A business that spends $10 to make a widget you pay $15 for has a $5 margin to play with. If the business's costs go up to $11, they can still charge $15 and take $1 less in profits. Or they can raise the price to $15.50 and split the difference.

But when businesses don't face competition, they can make you eat their increased costs. Take Verizon. They made $79b in profit last year, and also just imposed a $4/month service charge on their mobile customers due to "rising operational costs":

https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/1c53c4p/79bn_in_profits_last_year_but_you_need_an_extra/

Now, Verizon is very possibly lying about these rising costs. Excuseflation is rampant and rising, as one CEO told his investors, when the news is full of inflation-talk, "it’s an opportunity to increase the prices without getting a whole bunch of complaining from the customers":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/11/price-over-volume/#pepsi-pricing-power

But even stipulating that Verizon is telling the truth about these "rising costs," why should we eat those costs? There's $79b worth of surplus between Verizon's operating costs and its gross revenue. Why not take it out of Verizon's bottom line?

For 40 years, neoliberal economists have emphasized our role as "consumers" (as though consumers weren't also workers!). This let them play us off against one-another: "Sure, you don't want the person who rings up your groceries to get evicted because they can't pay their rent, but do you care about it enough to pay an extra nickel for these eggs?"

But again, there's no obvious reason why you should pay that extra nickel. If you have the buying power to hold prices down, and workers have the labor power to keep wages up, then the business has to absorb that nickel. We can have a world where workers can pay their rent and you can afford your groceries.

So how do we get bosses to agree to take less so we can have more? They've told us how: for bosses, the thing that motivates workers to show up for shitty jobs is fear – fear of losing their homes, fear of going hungry.

When your boss says, "If you don't want to do this job for minimum wage, there's someone else who will," they're telling you that the way to get a raise out of them is to engineer things so that you can say, "If you don't want to pay me a living wage for this job, there's someone else who will."

Their accusation – that you only give someone else a fair shake when you're afraid of losing out – is a confession: to get them to give you a fair shake, we have to make them afraid. They're showing us who they are, and we should believe them.

In her Daily Show appearance, FTC chair Lina Khan quipped that monopolies are too big to care:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaDTiWaYfcM

Philosophers of capitalism are forever praising its ability to transform greed into public benefit. As Adam Smith put it, "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." The desire to make as much money as possible, on its own, doesn't produce our dinner, but when the butcher, the brewer and the baker are afraid that you will take your labor or your wallet elsewhere, they pay more and charge less.

Capitalists don't want market economies, where they have to compete with one another, eroding their margins and profits – they want a planned economy, like Amazon, where Party Secretary Bezos and his commissars tell merchants what they can sell and tell us what we must pay:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/01/managerial-discretion/#junk-fees

Capitalists don't want free labor, where they have to compete with rival capitalists to bid on their workers' labor – they want noncompetes, bondage fees, and "training repayment agreement provisions" (TRAPs) that force their workers to stay in dead-end jobs rather than shopping for a better wage:

\https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/04/its-a-trap/#a-little-on-the-nose

Capitalists hate capitalism, because capitalism only works if the capitalists are in a constant state of terror inspired by the knowledge that tomorrow, someone smarter could come along and open a better business, poaching their customers and workers, and putting the capitalist on the breadline.

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/18/in-extremis-veritas/#the-winnah

Being in a constant precarious state makes people lose their minds, and capitalists know it. That's why they work so hard to precaratize the rest of us, saddling us with health debt, education debt, housing debt, stagnating wages and rising prices. It's not just because that makes them more money in the short term from our interest payments and penalties. It's because it de-risks their lives: monopolies and cartels can pass on any extra costs to consumers, who'll eat shit and take it:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/02/its-the-economy-stupid/#overinflated

A workforce that goes to bed every night worrying about making the rent is a workforce that put in unpaid overtime and thank you for it.

Capitalists hate capitalism. You know who didn't hate capitalism? Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels. The first chapter of The Communist Manifesto is just these two guys totally geeking out about how much cool stuff we get when capitalists are afraid and therefore productive:

https://pluralistic.net/SpectreHaunting

But when capitalists escape their fears, the alchemical reaction that converts greed to prosperity fizzles, leaving nothing behind but greed and its handmaiden, enshittification. Google search is in the toilet, getting worse every year, but rather than taking reduced margins and spending more fighting spam, the company did a $80b stock-buyback and fired 12,000 skilled technologists, rather than using that 80 bil to pay their wages for the next twenty-seven years:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/02/21/im-feeling-unlucky/#not-up-to-the-task

Monopoly apologists like to argue that monopolists can rake in the giant profits necessary to fund big, ambitious projects the produce better products at lower prices and make us all better off. But even if monopolists can spend their monopoly windfalls on big, ambitious projects, they don't. Why would they?

If you're Google, you can either spend tens of billions on R&D to keep up with spam and SEO scumbags, or you can spend less money buying the default search spot on every platform, so no one ever tries another search engine and switches:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/04/teach-me-how-to-shruggie/#kagi

Compared to its monopoly earnings, the tech sector's R&D spending is infinitesimal:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/08/11/nor-glom-of-nit/#capitalists-hate-competition

How do we get capitalists to work harder to make their workers and customers better off? Capitalists tell us how, every day. We need to make them afraid.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/19/make-them-afraid/#fear-is-their-mind-killer

Image: Vlad Lazarenko (modified) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wall_Street_Sign_%281-9%29.jpg CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

[38sr]

I know this is gonna be a strange one, but I do have an industry question;

I've been looking for a job for the last 4 years post-grad, I've tried every bit of advice I've gotten over my 6 years in school and 4 years out. Is it too late for me?? Or more so what advice would you have at this point?? I'm starting to feel really negatively about this venture, and getting a day job has been just as difficult;;

Hello Sky! Hope it's okay to call you that. Ah post-grad job hunting.....I don't miss that period of my life at all. Before I begin, just want to preface that what I say going forward is strictly from my perspective/experience. I am not the absolute of the animation industry so if what I say doesn't align with you, you do not have to follow it haha. Alright, advice for post grad job hunting.... Well, I think I want to start off giving a bit of context for the animation landscape these past 4 years that has been rough for everyone (trust me it'll come back around to your question): 1.) COVID Pandemic

This one might be a confusing for some people because when COVID hit in 2020, the only facet of entertainment that was able to keep going was animation. If you remember, during this time streaming numbers went up because people were stuck at home, every studio was launching their own streaming platform (HBO Max, Disney+, Peacock, etc.) and celebrities were given animated shows because live-action had stopped dead in its tracks. This period allowed artists outside of California state to get hired because what's the point of capping the talent to the local area when we're already working remotely? In short, it was a boom. But an exponential boom rather than a gradual boom. You never wanna grow too fast because you'll crash out quicker (and harder) which leads us to our second factor.... 2.) Netflix's first ever round of layoffs in summer 2022, streaming actually isn't profitable?????

In short, this year is when Netflix's growth finally stopped and was the beginning of The Great Animation Contraction. Other studios who were looking to Netflix as a the new model of distributing/creating entertainment had realized Netflix wasn't invincible. As well as their business model. So naturally, they got scared and and take action (aka layoffs). I was affected by these layoffs while working at Marvel Studios and many artists got laid off at studios to save face from the mistake that was streaming (though at this point studios were still double downing on it). Also, around this time live-action was slowly restarting thanks to vaccines and social distancing protocols. So those celebrity studded animated productions dwindled down (and also they caused so much havoc for us animation workers because most of those celebrities had no animation production experience). Which now leads us to...

3.) Mergers everywhere! Yeah, uh, mergers fucking suck. People kept losing their jobs because companies kept absorbing into each other and multiplying their debts to ungodly dollars amounts! Apparently no one took a math class and understood if you multiply any number by zero you will always get a zero. These merger also caused more shows to get shelved and canned, making the job market even slimmer. And by then we get to 2023 and the....

4.) WGA, SAG and TAG Contract Negotiations By now, studios have realized that streaming is losing them money because it costs a butt load of money to not only create a streaming site, but also maintain it, update it, create new media for it, acquire established franchises for it, and maintain the current library. Streaming shows aren't being advertised like they used to on cable so shows don't last beyond one or two seasons. Worker contracts are becoming shorter and shorter (I had a co-worker who had a 3 month contract! Isn't that insane?). And what happens in the midst of this streaming meltdown?

WGA, SAG and TAG are gearing up for their contract negotiations. And as we know SAG (actors) and WGA (writers) did strike which good for them! But now there are no live-action jobs and once again, animation (TAG) is the only one running because our negotiations don't officially start until 2024. At this point, so many animated productions have been cancelled left and right for the sake of "saving money and cutting costs". And the effects were very much being felt in the animation work force. Some animation workers were starting to leave the state of California to more affordable cities, some getting day jobs as baristas, hell some leaving the industry all together. It didn't help that studios were kind of withholding production greenlights 'cause 1) they're greedy corporations 2) these strikes were putting pressure on them. And when we did enter 2024 for our contract negotiations, that contraction was at the tightest. The job market for animation had become so bone dry that you have director-level talent taking entry level jobs to stay afloat. But because of that new, emerging artists are blocked out from breaking in. Anytime a job listing would go up people would go in a frenzy and try every thing they could to get the job. That's how little shows were in production this year specifically. Of course, by now it is public that TAG has ratified the contract (meaning we will not strike). But up until then, studios were quite literally waiting with baited breath for the duration of negotiations. A ton of stuff was in development but nothing was getting a greenlight in fear of a strike. So many animation workers at this point have been laid off for at least 2 years, got priced out of LA county, or got so burned by the industry that they left for a more sustainable paycheck. At this point of the post you're probably thinking, "Why is she talking about all of this and not answering my question?"

And the reason for that is because I what to highlight you didn't miss your chance. You unfortunately graduated at a time where the circumstances were not good for breaking in for the past 4 years.

I'm not saying this to deter you from animation either. I just want to be transparent and honest about the current state of animation because it really has been bleak for the past 4 years. So it's not your fault but rather the industry was just in a seriously bad drought. Both emerging and veteran artists have been struggling to find work and when they do it didn't even last for 6 months. Hopefully, with the renewed contract studios will start greenlighting productions again so everyone isn't fighting for one job opening. But I can't tell 'cause I am not Raven Baxter haha. But what advice can I give during this tough time? Start developing your own projects. Things may be pretty dry right now but now is the time when you can create and develop your own original stuff that can be used in your portfolio. Short or long form, showing progress videos, just create. Because once you start working it's gonna be hard to find that personal project time (trust me I'm going through that right now haha). Also, you'd be surprised how just doing your own thing can garner the attention of someone who does have the power to hire you. How do you think I got to work on the shows I have in the animation industry? Almost all of my jobs happened because I was just creating my own thing and it just happened to match the sensibilities of a show produced by a Hollywood studio. And if I had any additional advice... it would probably be don't think that Hollywood is the only way you can tell your stories.

This one is more of....a recent revelation I've had after going through a pretty bad work experience but Hollywood isn't the only way you can be a storyteller. Whether it's comics, games, streaming, animation, or film....the Hollywood system isn't the end all be all. And by Hollywood system I'm referring to breaking into a big studio like Disney, Nick or something and trying to get your own movie/tv show to win an award or something. That system often works for a certain group of people and fails other groups. That's why I say develop and create your own thing because you might find something that fits your creative voice more than Disney or any other Hollywood studio. Maybe that's inconsiderate of me to say as someone who's been incredibly lucky to work in the animation industry for almost 8 years now....but I still wanna be honest that there are other avenues that isn't the Hollywood way. All in all, please don't give up or beat yourself up. The current state of animation within America was out your control and resulted in many artists struggling to find a job. You aren't too late. In fact, I would say now is your time to do your thing in preparation for when that hiring boom comes again (or you can just take another route to tell your stories). I hope that answered your question!

[covid-safer-hotties]

Reference saved in our archive (Daily updates!)

Far right defenses of 'freeze peach' keeping doctors from facing discipline for spreading medical misinformation.

Key Points Question How frequently do medical boards discipline physicians for spreading medical misinformation relative to discipline for other professional misconduct?

Findings In this cross-sectional study of 3128 medical board disciplinary proceedings involving physicians, spreading misinformation to the community was the least common reason for medical board discipline (<1% of all identified offenses). Patient-directed misinformation and inappropriate advertising or patient solicitation were tied as the third least common reasons (<1%); misinformation conduct was exponentially less common than other reasons for discipline, such as physician negligence (29%).

Meaning Extremely low rates of disciplinary activity for misinformation conduct were observed in this study despite increased salience and medical board warnings since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic about the dangers of physicians spreading falsehoods; these findings suggest a serious disconnect between regulatory guidance and enforcement and call into question the suitability of licensure regulation for combatting physician-spread misinformation.

Abstract Importance False medical information disseminated dangerously during the COVID-19 pandemic, with certain physicians playing a surprisingly prominent role. Medical boards engendered widespread criticism for not imposing forceful sanctions, but considerable uncertainty remains about how the professional licensure system regulates physician-spread misinformation.

Objective To compare the level of professional discipline of physicians for spreading medical misinformation relative to discipline for other offenses.

Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study analyzed and coded publicly reported medical board disciplinary actions in the 5 most populous US states. The analysis included data from January 1, 2020, through May 30, 2023, for California, Florida, New York, and Pennsylvania and from January 1, 2020, through March 30, 2022, for Texas.

Main Outcomes and Measures Medical board disciplinary proceedings that resulted in some form of sanction were analyzed. Codes were assigned for the different types of offenses relied on by medical boards for imposing physician discipline.

Results Among 3128 medical board disciplinary proceedings in the 5 most populous states, spreading misinformation to the community was the least common reason for medical board discipline of physicians (6 [0.1%] of all identified offenses). Two reasons tied for third least common: patient-directed misinformation (21 [0.3%]) and inappropriate advertising or patient solicitation (21 [0.3%]). The frequency of misinformation conduct was exponentially lower than more common reasons for discipline, such as physician negligence (1911 [28.7%]), problematic record-keeping (990 [14.9%]), and inappropriate prescribing (901 [13.5%]). Patient-directed misinformation provided a basis for discipline 3 times as often as spreading misinformation to the community. The frequency of disciplinary actions for any reasons related to COVID-19 care, even if not about misinformation, was also quite low (10 [0.2%]). Sanctions in misinformation actions tended to be relatively light.

Conclusions and Relevance The frequency of discipline for physician-spread misinformation observed in this cross-sectional study was quite low despite increased salience and medical board warnings since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic about the dangers of physicians spreading falsehoods. These findings suggest that there is a serious disconnect between regulatory guidance and enforcement and that medical boards relied on spreading misinformation to patients as a reason for discipline 3 times more frequently than disseminating falsehoods to the public. These results shed light on important policy concerns about professional licensure, including why, under current patient-centered frameworks, this form of regulation may be particularly ill-suited to address medical misinformation.

[maigeiko]

The look of… IX: Hakone-Yumoto Onsen

History Although it‘s likely that Geisha worked in Hakone since the late 19th century, not much can be found about their history. The current Kenban was built in 1950 [1]. In the early/mid 80's (before the bubble economy), 400-450 Geisha lived in Hakone [2]. The Otosan of Ikedaya Okiya reformed the traditional employment system and introduced benefits like pension plans and financial compensations for cancelled jobs [3].

In 2000 latest, the Hakone Yumoto Kenban launched its own website [4], creating a space for Okiya to advertise and look for new members [5]. In 2001, the Okasan of Wakita became the current head of the Geigi Union. In order to ensure the survival of local Hanamachi culture, the Kenban became open to public in 2008, and the Geisha band Basara (婆娑羅) was founded in 2009. [2]

In the late 2010's, around 150 Geisha from age 18 to 80 lived in 32 Okiya. Lack of work during the Corona pandemic reduced their numbers to 109 in 2021. The amount of Geisha working in Hakone has increased meanwhile, with 140 of them active in January 2024, but still hasn‘t reached its pre-pandemic levels. [2]

The look of Hakone Maiko

Local term: Kirariko きらり妓

※ Hairstyle: own hair, Shimada mage and Hanaogi mage ※ Kanzashi: Kushi, maezashi, non-seasonal hana kanzashi ※ Make up: western make up or light oshiroi, both lips painted from the start ※ Kimono: Furisode mostly without tucks (rarely with sleeve tucks) ※ Eri: white, white with embroidery (red, red/pink) ※ Obi: Koken musubi ※ Obiage: tied and tucked in, red ※ Obijime: red with simple, rectangular Obidome ※ Footwear: white or black Zori

The look of Hakone Geiko

Local term: Geisha

※ Hairstyle: Taka shimada or Tsubushi shimada Katsura ※ Kanzashi: Taka shimada: Kushi, Tama in the back, Kogai in the back, and sometimes in the front too. Tsubushi shimada: Kushi, Tama ※ Make up: Oshiroi ※ Kimono: Mostly Homongi/Tsukesage, sometimes Hikizuri. Kuromontsuki for Tachikata is always a Hikizuri ※ Eri: white, rarely with white or pink embriodery ※ Obi: Yanagi musubi with Kuromontsuki (white/blue Hakata ori), otherwise Otaiko musubi ※ Obiage: always red with Kuromontsuki, otherwise white, pink or light blue. Usually not patterned. ※ Obijime: light-coloured. No Obijime with Yanagi musubi ※ Footwear: Zori, Geta with white or blue Hanao

Casual/Jikata style

※ Hairstyle: Yohatsu ※ Kanzashi: usually none, maki (蒔絵) kanzashi at best ※ Make up: western make up ※ Kimono: Kurotomesode, otherwise Homongi ※ Eri: white ※ Obi: Otaiko musubi ※ Obiage: mostly warm pastel colours, but basically anything goes. Not patterned. ※ Obijime: Sometimes with Obidome ※ Footwear: Zôri

Tachiyaku style

※ Hairstyle: Maeware Katsura ※ Kanzashi: Tama pin in the back ※ Make up: Oshiroi ※ Kimono: Hômongi ※ Eri: white ※ Obi: Koken musubi with mint/light green Kakae Obi (抱え帯) ※ Obiage: red, white, pink or light blue. Obidome not uncommon ※ Obijime: light-coloured

Notes

Arts: The schools taught in Hakone are Nishikawa 西川 (dance), Honjo 本條 (Kouta, Hauta and Min‘yo), Kineya 杵屋 (Nagauta) and Tosha 藤舎 (Hayashi). [6]

Kirariko is a newly coined term in use since 2003 to call junior Geisha in the age group from 18-30. [7] Upon turning 30, Kirariko have to take either a „dancer grade B“ or „dancer grade A“ test. To pass the B test, she has to perform two dances. For the grade A test, she has to perform three female style and three male style dances. [8]

Companions: Okiya recruit and employ companions as well as Geisha. Companions receive a fixed wage, which is usually lower than that of the Geisha, but the customer pays the same price. Companions can be requested to wear either western clothing or Kimono. Western clothing is a business suit provided for free by the Okiya, Kimono can be rented for a set fee by the Okiya as well. [9] Companions receive professional names like Geisha. They don‘t study performing arts and can work part-time. Their job is to serve drinks and food and engage in „pleasant conversation“ with customers at banquets. [10] In my opinion, a good entry-level job in the Karyukai – some companions became Geisha later in their carreer. [11]

Becoming independent: after being Geisha for seven years, you have the opportunity of opening a branch of your debut Okiya. In all cases I know, the new Okiya takes one or two characters from the original Okiya. For example Ikedaya 池田家 → Wakita 和喜田 and Yukieda 雪江田 (田 Kanji is part of the new name). Wakita 和喜田 → Suzuwa すず和 and Yukiwa ゆき和 (和). Kitami 㐂田見 → Kisaya 㐂茶家 (㐂).

Changing Okiya registration: only possible when becoming independent, or when your (biological) mother, sister, or daughter opens a new Okiya.

Sources

[1] https://note.com/meetgeisha/n/n1cc907ffd4c9. [2] https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/301712, [3] https://conex-eco.co.jp/hakonesaisai/71824/ [4] https://web.archive.org/web/20000919171055/http://www.geisha.co.jp:80/ [5] https://web.archive.org/web/20001017234326/http://www.geisha.co.jp/okiya-name.htm,[6] https://geisha.co.jp/kenban/, [7] https://web.archive.org/web/20040408030159/http://www11.plala.or.jp/fukunoya/what_is_kirariko.html,[8] https://konohanasakuya.blogspot.com/2012/03/dance-performance.html,[9] https://yukieda.com/kyuujin_answer/, [10] https://yukieda.com/recruit/companion/,[11] https://web.archive.org/web/20080220191156/http://www.00wakita.com/hyousyou.html

Picture sources: Group picture 2024, Hakone Odori, three Kirariko 2023, Kirariko back view 2023, Geisha dancing, Geisha preparing Tosenkyo set 2019, Sumomo with a dancer 2009, Anzu and Yuho 2023, really nice picture of Yumiko with Kokyu 2022, Chacha dancing 2022, Atsumi and unknown Tachikata 2019, Natsumi 2022, Matsuyoshi new year's picture 2023

[didhewinkback]

Call me deranged but Florence post-filming is right there with me in the deranged box. She and only she alone was acting a fool after the movie wrapped. My coins will never go to any of her projects. I have no time for her. Sweet, sweet Andrew out there busily promoting a film that he knows so many professionals contributed to by overcompensating for her tarnished reputation with saccharine praise.

i really should not bother responding to this because you are never going to agree with me but this topic does get me heated so here i go

"she and she alone was acting a fool after the movie wrapped" - was she at the wedding in the middle of the pandemic when people were told to stay home and the entire crew of that movie was ordered to not fuck up the movie by going out by the director who then went to said wedding with her costar? 1 example of 1800 i could give.

if during a movie you are making the director and your costar have an affair and you are directed in sex scenes with her 26 year old boyfriend without an intimacy coordinator for the movie that was supposed to be this feminist battle cry and got advertised by the director as a celebration of the female orgasm when it was in fact a story about a woman held against her will and repeatedly raped by her incel boyfriend - i think you should be allowed to publicly bash the movie all you want and instead she just kept quiet and did her work and showed up when she had to. the response she got from the rest of the cast on that red carpet does really say it all. the way people like to bend themselves into pretzels trying to act like what harry and olivia did was not insanely unprofessional and inappropriate and also legitimiately put the health of their cast and crew at risk in that one example and that florence was behaving a certain way out of nowhere when in fact its occam's razor and the most obvious answer is the real one just always blows my mind

also why are u acting like florence is not also currently promoting this movie w andrew theyre literally holding hands talking about how much working together changed them for the better but go off i guess

[evidence-based-activism]

Is it true more trans teens attempted suicide after ‘anti trans’ laws passed?

Hello! I am guessing this is in reference to this recent study [1], which made this exact claim. In short, this study has substantial issues that weaken its conclusion severely. These flaws, paired with stronger contradictory evidence, suggests that no, these laws are not connected to increased suicide among transgender teens.

First, the contradicting evidence:

While not in reference to these specific laws, other studies have attempted to determine if there is an increase in suicide following laws aimed at restricting transgender healthcare.

This independent report for the UK NHS [2] found "the data do not support the claim that there has been a large rise in suicide in young gender dysphoria patients" and "the claims that have been placed in the public domain do not meet basic standards for statistical evidence". (They – correctly – also criticize the way "this issue has been discussed on social media", which we will get into later.)

The Cass review [2] was an extensive literature review that found evidence did not support the belief that "hormone treatment reduces the elevated risk of death by suicide in [the transgender youth] population".

This Finnish study on adolescents and young adults [4] took a slightly different approach, attempting to determine if access to "gender reassignment" reduced suicide rates. First, they found "clinical gender dysphoria does not appear to be predictive of all-cause nor suicide mortality when psychiatric treatment history is accounted for." They also found "medical gender reassignment does not have an impact on suicide risk".

This similar Swedish study on adults [5] found that "sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism" as higher "mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity" persists after "sex reassignment".

This Dutch study on adults [6] also found that "the suicide risk in transgender people ... seems to occur during every stage of transitioning".

Importantly, these studies are all reasonably strong and well-designed. The centralized nature of these country's health data allowed for large-scale, representative studies to be performed. The English study [2] reviewed data directly from the NHS, the Cass review [3] was an extensive and through literature review (common myths about the report are debunked here [7]), and the final three studies [4-6] were all long-term (multiple decade), nation-wide cohort studies.

This evidence provides a strong indication that medical gender transition treatment do not reduce suicide risk in transgender populations.

---

So, what are the issues with the US study?

First, this study [1] was not representative. The participants were recruited from "non-probability cross-sectional online survey" via "targeted advertisements on social media" between "2018 and 2022".

Already there are substantial issues:

This study is explicitly noted to be non-representative, drawing conclusions about transgender youth based solely on this study is irresponsible.

The participants were recruited via social media, which past research [8] has shown to be correlated with suicide attempts. Notably, the causality of this relationship is irrelevant in this case, because it is still evidence of a significant confounding variable. (Confounding variables are the primary reason why you cannot determine causality from correlational relationships like the one presented in [1].)

This study overlaps with the COVID-19 pandemic. They claim to have "considered the potential impact of the ... pandemic" and found "minimal evidence" of any impact. This conclusion contradicts substantial amounts of past research including a systematic review and meta-analysis of youth suicide during the pandemic [9], a systematic review and meta-analysis of youth depression and anxiety [10], and an analysis of national suicide data for US youth [11].

Their analysis of the impact of the pandemic used "population-adjusted ... death counts by year as a proxy for the overall impact ... in a given state for a given time period". It's likely this was on of the only data sources they had to evaluate the impact of the pandemic, but that doesn't change the fact that this proxy neglects to consider the isolation, financial stress, and social media use among youth and their families that likely drove their decline in mental health. (See studies [12-15] for some introductory evidence of this.)

Other issues:

They considered only self-report of suicide attempts and serious suicidal thoughts, not actual measurements of suicides or suicide attempts. This adds an additional possibility of response bias. (Notably, this was not a concern for the studies I discussed above, which show no relationship between similar laws and suicide, as they evaluate actual medical report data.)

They found a statistically significant effect for suicide attempts but not for "seriously considering suicide". This is a strange finding, as, if we assume the results are accurate, it suggests that suicide attempts increased following the laws without any corresponding increase in suicidal thoughts. (This will be relevant later, so keep it in mind.)

The don't appear to report an actual incidence rate, which is a significant oversight considering the topic.

The substantial reduction in effect size when considering the total number of reported suicide attempts versus the number of people who reported at least one suicide attempt suggests that the attempts are clustered within a small group of participants.

They found no evidence of the introduction or enactment of additional "anti-transgender laws" had any impact of transgender youth suicide. Again, this is inconsistent with their overall conclusions; if it is the legal restrictions that cause an increase in suicide attempts then you would expect an increase in restrictions to also increase attempts. (Although not necessarily in a linear fashion.)

All in all, this study makes claims that are much stronger than the evidence they provide to support them. Other, stronger studies, contradict the assertion that these sorts of laws increase suicide among transgender youth. (Which is, I should stress, a good thing for the transgender community.)

(And I should also note here that my personal opinion on the morality of these laws is specific to each law/law category. I'm purely presenting the empirical research concerning the relationship between these laws and suicide in this post.)

---

The major confounding factor: social contagion of suicide.

It is, at this point, all but settled evidence that "suicidal behavior is 'contagious' in that it can be transmitted, directly or indirectly, from one person to another" [16]. This is extraordinarily important because it impacts the way we (i.e., society) should talk about and depict suicide. For an unrelated example, this review [17] concludes "portrayals of suicide in entertainment media may increase suicides and attempted suicide in the population". A specific example of this was the increase in suicide rates and admissions among youth, following the release of the "13 Reasons Why" television show [18-19].

And this is well-known by LGBT organizations. In 2017, the Movement Advancement Project (a pro-LGBT think tank), the Johnson Family Foundation (a pro-LGBT organization), and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention co-authored the second edition of the report "Talking About Suicide & LGBT Populations" [20], which was also endorsed by GLSEN, GLAAD, The Trevor Project, the Transgender Law Center, and the Human Rights Campaign (among others).

Recommendations in this report include [emphasis mine]:

DO encourage discussion about suicide prevention strategies.

DO emphasize the vital importance of resilience

DON’T attribute a suicide death to a single factor (such as bullying or discrimination) or say that a specific anti-LGBT law or policy will “cause” suicide.

DON’T risk spreading false information by repeating unsubstantiated rumors or speculation about suicide deaths or why they occurred.

DON’T talk about suicide “epidemics” or suicide rates for LGBT people. (Remember that sexual orientation and gender identity are not recorded at the time of death, so we do not have data on suicide rates or deaths among LGBT people. In addition, presenting suicide as a trend or a widespread occurrence (for example, tallying suicide deaths that occur in proximity to an external event) can encourage vulnerable individuals to see themselves as part of a larger story, which may elevate their suicide risk.)

DON’T use social media or e-blasts to announce news of suicide deaths, speculate about reasons fora suicide death, focus on personal details about the person who died, or describe the means of death.

DON’T idealize those who have died by suicide or create an aura of celebrity around them.

(They also note that suicide rates cannot be determined by looking at suicide attempts, which is relevant to the above study.)

Please take a moment to consider the extent to which public officials, organizations, and figures are completely disregarding these recommendations in reference to the transgender community. Beyond the anecdotal evidence people involved with or aware of the community are exposed to, this English study [21], this Indian study [22], and this American study [23] all find "poor adherence to responsible reporting guidelines" for the transgender (or "LGBTQ+") community.

Further, as I indicated earlier, the English study [2] directly addresses this sort of irresponsible rhetoric. Failure to comply with responsible reporting guidelines is causing direct harm to the transgender community.

And how does this apply to the first study [1]? It adds in an additional confounding factor: the rhetoric surrounding these laws and their impact on suicide in the transgender community. It suggests that at least some of the observed suicide attempts were precipitated by the social contagion of suicide.

This theory would also explain some of the inconsistencies in the study. That is, it is possible that there was already a subsection of suicidal transgender youth, who, once exposed to increasingly this irresponsible social-contagion-inducing rhetoric, reported (more frequent) suicide attempts. This would account for:

The lack of increase in suicidal thoughts (i.e., those effected were already suicidal).

Why the effect size for the "at least one attempt" is so much lower than the "total attempts" effect size (i.e., the reported increase is concentrated within a small group of people)

Why there is no dose-response relationship between the number of laws and suicide attempts (i.e., it is not the laws so much as the rhetoric surrounding them that is having such a negative impact)

---

Conclusion

Ultimately, there is strong evidence from other countries indicating that similar "anti-trans" laws are not associated with suicide rates. The new American study suggesting otherwise is remarkably weak, and may actually be providing evidence for the social contagion theory of suicide.

Most importantly, the current rhetoric surrounding suicide in the trans community is incredibly dangerous and does a great disservice to all transgender people.

(And again, my personal opinion on the morality of these laws is specific to each law/law category. I'm purely presenting the empirical research concerning the relationship between these laws and suicide in this post.)

I hope this helps, Anon!

References under the cut:

Lee, W. Y., Hobbs, J. N., Hobaica, S., DeChants, J. P., Price, M. N., & Nath, R. (2024). State-level anti-transgender laws increase past-year suicide attempts among transgender and non-binary young people in the USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 1-11.

Appleby, Louis. “Review of Suicides and Gender Dysphoria at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust: Independent Report.” Department of Health & Social Care, 19 July 2024, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-suicides-and-gender-dysphoria-at-the-tavistock-and-portman-nhs-foundation-trust/review-of-suicides-and-gender-dysphoria-at-the-tavistock-and-portman-nhs-foundation-trust-independent-report.

Cass, H. (2024). Independent review of gender identity services for children and young people.

Ruuska, S. M., Tuisku, K., Holttinen, T., & Kaltiala, R. (2024). All-cause and suicide mortalities among adolescents and young adults who contacted specialised gender identity services in Finland in 1996–2019: a register study. BMJ Ment Health, 27(1).

Dhejne, C., Lichtenstein, P., Boman, M., Johansson, A. L., Långström, N., & Landén, M. (2011). Long-term follow-up of transsexual persons undergoing sex reassignment surgery: cohort study in Sweden. PloS one, 6(2), e16885.

Wiepjes, C. M., den Heijer, M., Bremmer, M. A., Nota, N. M., de Blok, C. J., Coumou, B. J., & Steensma, T. D. (2020). Trends in suicide death risk in transgender people: results from the Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria study (1972–2017). Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 141(6), 486-491.

Final report – FAQs. (n.d.). The Cass Review. https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/final-report-faqs/

Sedgwick, R., Epstein, S., Dutta, R., & Ougrin, D. (2019). Social media, internet use and suicide attempts in adolescents. Current opinion in psychiatry, 32(6), 534-541.

Madigan, S., Korczak, D. J., Vaillancourt, T., Racine, N., Hopkins, W. G., Pador, P., ... & Neville, R. D. (2023). Comparison of paediatric emergency department visits for attempted suicide, self-harm, and suicidal ideation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 10(5), 342-351.

Madigan, S., Racine, N., Vaillancourt, T., Korczak, D. J., Hewitt, J. M., Pador, P., ... & Neville, R. D. (2023). Changes in depression and anxiety among children and adolescents from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA pediatrics.

Bridge, J. A., Ruch, D. A., Sheftall, A. H., Hahm, H. C., O’Keefe, V. M., Fontanella, C. A., ... & Horowitz, L. M. (2023). Youth suicide during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Pediatrics, 151(3).

Felfe, C., Saurer, J., Schneider, P., Vornberger, J., Erhart, M., Kaman, A., & Ravens-Sieberer, U. (2023). The youth mental health crisis: Quasi-experimental evidence on the role of school closures. Science Advances, 9(33), eadh4030.

Jones SE, Ethier KA, Hertz M, et al. Mental Health, Suicidality, and Connectedness Among High School Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic — Adolescent Behaviors and Experiences Survey, United States, January–June 2021. MMWR Suppl 2022;71(Suppl-3):16–21. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.su7103a3.

Kalenkoski, C. M., & Pabilonia, S. W. (2024). Teen social interactions and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Review of Economics of the Household, 1-48.

Adegboye, D., Williams, F., Collishaw, S., Shelton, K., Langley, K., Hobson, C., ... & van Goozen, S. (2021). Understanding why the COVID‐19 pandemic‐related lockdown increases mental health difficulties in vulnerable young children. JCPP advances, 1(1), e12005.

Forum on Global Violence Prevention; Board on Global Health; Institute of Medicine; National Research Council. Contagion of Violence: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2013 Feb 6. II.4, THE CONTAGION OF SUICIDAL BEHAVIOR. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207262/

Niederkrotenthaler, T., Kirchner, S., Till, B., Sinyor, M., Tran, U. S., Pirkis, J., & Spittal, M. J. (2021). Systematic review and meta-analyses of suicidal outcomes following fictional portrayals of suicide and suicide attempt in entertainment media. EClinicalMedicine, 36.

Cooper Jr, M. T., Bard, D., Wallace, R., Gillaspy, S., & Deleon, S. (2018). Suicide attempt admissions from a single children's hospital before and after the introduction of Netflix series 13 Reasons Why. Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(6), 688-693.

Bridge, J. A., Greenhouse, J. B., Ruch, D., Stevens, J., Ackerman, J., Sheftall, A. H., ... & Campo, J. V. (2020). Association between the release of Netflix’s 13 Reasons Why and suicide rates in the United States: An interrupted time series analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 59(2), 236-243.

Movement Advancement Project, Johnson Family Foundation, and American Foundation for Suicide Prevention. August 2017. "Talking About Suicide & LGBT Populations." 2nd edition. MAP's Talking About LGBT Issues Series. https://www.lgbtmap.org/talking-about-suicide-and-lgbt-populations

Bolzern, J. E., Mnyama, N. L., & McMillan, D. (2019). Responsible journalism, imitative suicide, and transgender populations: A systematic review of UK newspapers. Journal of gay & lesbian mental health, 23(3), 276-288.

Kar, S. K., Menon, V., Mukherjee, S., Bascarane, S., Sharma, G., Pattnaik, J. I., ... & Agarwal, V. (2023). Suicide reporting of LGBTQI+ population in India: An analysis of online media reports of the past decade. Journal of Public Health, 45(1), e95-e103.

Kirchner, S., Till, B., Laido, Z., & Niederkrotenthaler, T. (2024). Suicide-related media reporting with a focus on sexual and gender minority identities: A content analysis of the quality of reporting. Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention, 45(5), 339–347. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000956

[beardedmrbean]

A House committee revealed Friday that the Pentagon, other US agencies and the European Union — in addition to the State Department — have funded a for-profit “fact-checking” firm that blacklisted The Post.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) wrote a letter to the firm, NewsGuard, demanding more details about the public-private collaboration that led last year to the State Department being sued by conservative outlets that were labeled more “risky” than their liberal counterparts.

NewsGuard has briefed committee staff on contracts it had with the Defense Department in 2021, including the Cyber National Mission Force within US Cyber Command; the State Department and its Global Engagement Center; and the EU’s Joint Research Centre.

“The Committee writes today to seek additional documents and communications from NewsGuard related to all past and present contracts with or grants administered by federal government agencies or any other government entity, including foreign governments,” Comer informed NewsGuard CEOs Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz.

“The protection of First Amendment rights of American citizens is paramount and attempts by government actors to infringe on those rights is dangerous and misguided,” the chairman warned.

The Oversight panel in June opened its investigation into NewsGuard’s apparent participation in a government-funded “censorship campaign” to allegedly discredit and even demonetize news outlets by sharing its ratings of their reliability with advertisers.

Comer also expressed concern about NewsGuard employees sharing social media posts exhibiting left-wing bias, in violation of the company’s policies, and the firm throttling disfavored outlets’ “misinformation” — which in at least one case included a published academic study on the failure of lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“These wide-ranging connections with various government agencies are taking place as the government is rapidly expanding into the censorship sphere,” the chairman wrote. “For example, one search of government grants and contracts from 2016 through 2023 revealed that there were 538 separate grants and 36 different government contracts specifically to address ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation.’”

The right-leaning websites the Daily Wire and the Federalist filed a civil complaint against the State Department in December 2023 for allegedly using taxpayer dollars to fund firms like NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), which smeared the outlets as “purveyors of ‘disinformation.’”

Both firms have relationships with social media platforms such as Facebook, YouTube and TikTok, as well as advertisers like Dell Technologies, ExxonMobil and Nike, prompting concerns about how their “disinformation” ratings would affect business.

In 2022, GDI distributed a “Disinformation Risk Assessment” that rated the “riskiest” sites for factual news as the Federalist, the Daily Wire, Newsmax, the American Conservative, Reason Magazine and the New York Post, among others.

The New York Times and the Washington Post were ranked as among the “least risky.”

In a statement Friday, Crovitz said: “When the Trump administration first asked us for our data and insights about disinformation campaigns from hostile foreign governments in 2020, we contracted with them on the condition that such work be strictly limited to disinformation from hostile governments, not US publishers. We’re proud that NewsGuard’s data and analysis has helped defend Western democracies against Russian, Chinese and Iranian disinformation. NewsGuard was created as a transparent alternative to censorship by governments or big tech companies, and we do not censor any content.”

The 2020 and 2024 elections have brought so-called “anti-misinformation” and “anti-disinformation” efforts to the fore — with The Post’s bombshell scoop on Hunter Biden’s laptop being falsely labeled a Russian plant by then-candidate Joe Biden.

Some Democrats have since been suggesting that the only way to defeat pushback to their policies is by crushing the First Amendment.

President Biden’s ex-climate envoy John Kerry even called the constitutional freedom ��a major block” to keeping people from believing the “wrong” kinds of things.

“You know, there’s a lot of discussion now about how you curb those entities in order to guarantee that you’re going to have some accountability on facts,” Kerry told an audience at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

“But look, if people only go to one source, and the source they go to is sick, and, you know, has an agenda, and they’re putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence,” he said.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate, Tim Walz, also downplayed free speech protections during a 2022 appearance on MSNBC’s “The Reid Out.”

“I think we need to push back on this. There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy,” the Minnesota governor inaccurately stated.

Comer has asked for NewsGuard to provide by Nov. 8 all records of its contracts, grants or other work with the Pentagon, the State Department and any other federal agencies or departments.

[maxwellatoms]

as a person on the inside of the animation industry, are there signs that we might be heading to another dark age of animation like the 1980s (e.g. animation is regulated to just glorified toy commercials or dark fantasy movies)?

"Kid Vid" regulations mean you can't advertise for stuff kids might buy from within a show anymore. Generally, you can't even have (say) Yogi Bear wearing a shirt with his best friend BooBoo's face on it as a gag, because "what if someone made that shirt one day?" Then it would be a retroactive ad, I guess? I'm not schooled in reverse-time law like studio lawyers, so I can't really say. Still, it's almost impossible to get even a fictional product into a kid's show these days, so I think the 1980s will probably stay in their timeline. At least in that way.

I do think a bit of a "Dark Age" is upon us, though. Maybe just a small one. Just a wee little snip of a Dark Age is all.

As far as I can glean, there are going to be precious few animated shows coming out over the next couple of years because not much was picked up during the pandemic. There are only a few things being developed here and there, and I'd wager that those properties "win" simply by existing in a competition-free environment. It takes a long time to produce animation, so almost anything greenlit right now is looking at a full year for turnaround. If you talk to people in the industry right now about jobs, they use words like "wastelend" and "ramen noodles".

Then you've got A.I., of course. The other night I was having dinner with a friend and I found myself in the A.I. conversation I always imagined myself having one day-- the one where we're talking with some immediacy about what the rest of our futures look like as artists, because we know they're not going to look the same ever again. It was pretty cool in a William Gibson sort of way, but I honestly didn't expect to be having that conversation for another decade. Turns out A.I. is becoming a problem right now.

I've already talked about the "art theft" angle, and that's not the problem I'm speaking about here. The problem I'm talking about is the "what do I do when what I do becomes trivial?" problem. If anyone can make a TV show or movie in a week or a day using AI assistance, who determines what gets seen? Networks, I'd imagine, would become redundant. You don't need to fork over $15 a month for Netflix if you can make Netflix-quality content yourself. And if you can't make anything decent even with A.I. assistance, surely someone on the internet can. There would be an incredible glut of content to choose from, so again... who decides what gets seen? An algorithm, probably. Who owns the algorithm?

Peak Dark Age will be the time period when the networks realize that they're going to die, and sink all of their resources into forcing their own survival on the rest of us. I imagine massive layoffs (you don't need multiple writers or artists or support staff when you've got the right tools.) Studios will want to own the tools (of course) and/or suppress the use of those tools by anyone who might want to cut into their profits. Expect to see "A.I. is just too dangerous for the public to utilize, so it needs to be left in the capable hands of corporations". Expect to see customizable Batmans, the ability to put your mom in any Star Wars, and the serialized fever-dreams of billionaires.

I think that's the next 5-10 years. And while that's happening, the tools will keep getting better and better until literally anyone can sit down, ask for an Oscar-worthy part-rom-com/part action movie starring a twenty-five year old Steve McQueen and and eighty year old Daniel Radcliffe rescuing Air Bud from the Death Star, and then watch the resulting film with some degree of satisfaction. There'll come a point when content of any visual, auditory, and written complexity can be generated on-the-fly, and the traditional limits of budgets and schedules will just be gone.

It's easy to spin off into fantasy and try to guess exactly what's coming. I could probably spin on that all day. But what I know is that the future of the animation industry won't look anything like what I've become accustomed to. And maybe that's okay because what I've become accustomed to looks nothing like the industry I started in. Things change, and you roll with the punches. Thanks to the self-fulfilling dystopian prophecy we find ourselves in, just about everyone on the planet is finding themselves rolling with the punches coming from the Powerful Greedy. That's less a "me problem" and more a planet-wide problem we should probably all sit down and hash out, like, yesterday.

My immediate problem as an artist (and yours if you're an artist too) is figuring out how to get your ideas seen in a world where the amount of entertainment content is exploding exponentially. Especially if you're the sort of artist who needs to eat and live somewhere.

So yeah, I think there's going to be just a little peppering of Dark Age coming up. But in every time of change, there are opportunities. Hey, I'm down for an animated Dark Fantasy movie. Let's do this!

[literaryxbones]

Link to Original Video: The Fashion Goths Are Taking It Too Far - YouTube Link to Channel: 90s Goth | What it was like (youtube.com)

Yesterday night I watched this video by goth creator Angela Benedict. It was very well put together and spoke openly about some issues I've come across in the subculture for a long time.

For reference, I joined the goth scene during 2020. I had listened to post-punk music before then and really enjoyed it, I just didn't know there was a name or community for the genre I loved so much. As a baby bat during the pandemic, I felt pressured to buy expensive clothes. I wanted to look like the content creators I admired. I didn't want to be seen as "not goth enough" for not being able to afford the high prices set by online retailers. It was later that I learned that many alternative influencers wore garments donated by sponsors. They didn't have to pay large sums of money for what they wore. Rather, they were being paid to advertise the brands. I'm not against sponsorships in any form, and I'm glad these creators are making a living inside the scene, doing what they love. Others online were either old enough to purchase these fancy clothes, and there were some that upcycled thrifted fabrics to create custom, detailed pieces all their own. When I was 14, I didn't have the skill or knowledge to DIY. I've rambled on for a long while, but Angela has re-sparked my interest in upcycling, embroidery, and DIY. I'll definitely be posting my ideas, inspiration, and crafts on here soon! I'm still a beginner when it comes to making your own clothes and accessories though. My stitches are totally uneven still

[orange-plum]

So there’s this older couple who have been getting my groceries whenever I ordered on the app during the pandemic. They told me I was their fav customer before and bought me a Christmas present last year, and the guy even offered me an advertising gig at one point before

Anyway, they know I have bad tendons cuz I had to order groceries last January for 3 months cuz I was on crutches. Well, I ordered some groceries tonight and rolled up to the door with my knee scooter. And the guy sees me peek out and laughs and goes "oh no!" and then he yells back at his wife in the car and pulls my door open all the way and points at me and yells "Hey look, she hurt herself again!" 

💀💀💀 my reputation precedes me

[gacha-incels]

[Exclusive] "Namu Wiki, a Haven for Sexual Exploitation Content, Grows in Size… Remains in a Regulatory Blind Spot"

published Oct 16 2024

Kim Jang-gyeom, People Power Party Lawmaker, at National Assembly Audit Namu Wiki Headquarters in Paraguay, Generating Revenue in South Korea

this article is originally in Korean and has been mtl and edited into English here. it’s not going to be 1:1 but the basic info should be there, if you see any discrepancies though lmk and I’ll edit it asap. thanks everyone for your continued help and understanding.

During the pandemic, exposure and advertising revenue surged Affiliated 'Arca.Live' Faces Issues with Illegal Pornographic Content Distribution Selective Compliance with Korea Communications Standards Commission's Regulations

The participatory knowledge-sharing site "Namu Wiki" is expanding its reach through illegal content, yet remains in a regulatory blind spot, according to reports. Although its headquarters are located in Paraguay, Namu Wiki generates substantial revenue in South Korea while selectively responding to requests for cooperation from the Korea Communications Standards Commission (KCSC).

According to data obtained by Kim Jang-gyeom, a People Power Party lawmaker and member of the National Assembly's Science, Technology, Broadcasting, and Communications Committee, Namu Wiki's combined PC and mobile advertising banner revenue approximately doubled during the pandemic. This increase was attributed to a significant rise in both exposure and click rates, which nearly doubled.

From April 2019 to October 2021, over a span of 2 years and 7 months, the estimated revenue generated by a single advertising banner on Namu Wiki amounted to 479.85 million KRW (approximately 359,000 USD). During this period, the total number of ad impressions reached 19.15 billion, while the total number of clicks was around 2.09 million.

The affiliated platform "Arca.Live" has also come under scrutiny due to issues with the distribution of illegal pornographic content. Despite these concerns, Namu Wiki’s response to regulatory oversight has been selective, responding to requests from the KCSC on a case-by-case basis.

This situation has raised concerns that the platform, while continuing to grow its user base and revenue, is not sufficiently addressing the illegal content problem. Calls are mounting for stronger regulatory measures to prevent illegal and harmful content from spreading on online platforms such as Namu Wiki and Arca.Live.

During this period, Namu Wiki's advertising revenue steadily increased each year: 112.05 million KRW (approximately 83,900 USD) in 2019, 177.1 million KRW (approximately 132,600 USD) in 2020, and 190.7 million KRW (approximately 142,700 USD) in 2021. Monthly revenue ranged from 7 million to 15 million KRW (approximately 5,200 to 11,200 USD) in 2019 but rose to around 20 million KRW (approximately 14,900 USD) per month by 2021. Considering that the last two months of 2021 were not included in these figures, the total advertising revenue for that year is estimated to have surpassed 200 million KRW (approximately 149,000 USD).

These figures represent the revenue generated from a single advertising banner on the Namu Wiki website. The platform's total advertising income is likely several times higher, possibly even reaching multiples of ten.

The number of ad impressions also saw significant annual growth: 3.7 billion in 2019, 7.6 billion in 2020, and another 7.6 billion in 2021. Monthly ad impressions were in the range of 400 to 500 million, but doubled to around 700 to 800 million in 2021. If the trend continued at a similar rate towards the end of the year, the total number of impressions in 2021 is expected to have exceeded 9 billion.

The number of ad clicks, which directly impacts revenue, also showed changes: 510,000 clicks in 2019, 850,000 in 2020, and 720,000 in 2021. In 2019, monthly clicks fluctuated significantly between 15,000 and 75,000. From 2020 onward, however, the numbers stabilized at a relatively higher level, ranging between 65,000 and 80,000 per month. Assuming a similar trend continued towards the end of 2021, the overall annual clicks are expected to be comparable to the previous year.

Since Namu Wiki’s headquarters are based in Paraguay, its exact revenue structure remains unclear. Nonetheless, the platform is known to generate income through advertising on its site as well as through its affiliated websites such as Arca.Live and Namu News.

The Korea Communications Standards Commission (KCSC), Namu Wiki's regulatory authority, has previously granted the platform a high degree of autonomy. Even when reports were made regarding inappropriate content or potential defamation on Namu Wiki, most cases resulted in "no action" decisions.

Meanwhile, issues have arisen with Arca.Live, a community site under Namu Wiki, which has been involved in the distribution of illegal pornographic content, including material featuring children and adolescents. Recently, it was confirmed that "deepfake" sexual exploitation content was being disseminated through Arca.Live. Although the site is fully serviced in Korean, harmful content remains accessible without age restrictions, facilitated by the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) and unrestricted sign-ups.

Following criticisms, Namu Wiki removed some pornographic content from Arca.Live in August at the request of the KCSC. However, the platform has maintained a lukewarm stance, declining to participate in regulatory meetings with the commission. It is reported that communication between Namu Wiki, which is based overseas, and the KCSC primarily occurs via email.

This has led some to call for the KCSC to move beyond self-regulation and take a more active role in content review and regulation. There have been repeated concerns about the platform's lack of transparency regarding information sources and the absence of any measures against discriminatory or hateful content.

Lawmaker Kim Jang-gyeom criticized Namu Wiki, stating, "Namu Wiki has become a primary conduit for the spread of illegal content, including deepfake pornography and fake news. While it presents itself as a self-edited encyclopedia based on collective intelligence, it allows for malicious edits and stigmatization."

He further stressed the need for the government to implement strong countermeasures against the illegal and dangerous aspects associated with Namu Wiki.