#Trending Business Personality 2022

[thecurioustale]

My Thoughts on Jenny Nicholson and the Star Wars Hotel

I watched Jenny Nicholson's four-hour "The Spectacular Failure of the Star Wars Hotel" video essay that YouTube showed me recently but which till now I couldn't bring myself to construct a day around. She's in great form here, and I'm pleased to say I go back as a fan of her work all the way to her Friendship Is Witchcraft days. (Blows my mind that she voiced all Mane Six characters, and others, so well.)

Anyway, long story short, Disney built a Star Wars hotel at Disneyworld in 2022 that was themed as a voyage on a spaceship, then proceeded to charge thousands of dollars per person per night, the most expensive publicly-available Disney theme park hotel experience by miles and miles, and then closed the hotel in 2023 after having spent hundreds of millions of dollars. Jenny went into the experience as a member of the core target demographic and spent four hours talking about all the ways it was an underwhelming or outright disappointing experience.

Her video reminded me of Hasbro's own misadventures in corporate greed with Magic: The Gathering, which has suffered in recent years from price increases, disengagement from the fan community, and a huge proliferation of product spam—i.e. more products overall, more ways to buy a given product (e.g., the proliferation of different boxes, which eventually killed the original draft booster box that had powered Magic for 30 years), and more variants of individual cards within and between products.

Hasbro and Disney are very similar in the economic space they operate in, and also utilize similar business strategies. Disney is essentially the S-tier megacorporation to Hasbro's B-tier, and we have seen many of the same corporate trends play out in both companies.

When it comes to Disney theme parks, they have massively increased ticket prices over the years, well beyond the rate of inflation, and have also implemented advance-scheduling systems for faster access to rides that has made the process of exploring a Disney theme park much less spontaneous and a lot more regimented and stressful.

Disney realized, years ago, that their limited number of theme parks—they only really have two, not counting the various sub-parks: Disneyland on the West Coast and Disneyworld on the East Coast—together with Disney's entrenched status as a cultural icon with lots of goodwill and brand recognition among the public, are vastly underserving public demand, allowing them to inflate the price of a single trip almost arbitrarily, well into the four digits—or even the five-digits if you're taking the family and spending several days.

The Star Wars hotel was Disney's "Magic 30": a product so ludicrously expensive as to incur immediate and universal condemnation by their own fans. It's clear to me what Disney was doing: They'd happily turned the conventional price knob up and up and up for years. Now they wanted to experiment with a fundamentally more expensive product class, basically five to ten times more expensive. They wanted to see if the market could support it. Because the growing disparity of wealth in America, together with America's obscene wealth as a nation relative to the rest of the world, means that it's definitely possible: There are definitely millions of people out there who could book a stay at the Star Wars hotel if they wanted to. And Disney was like "Let's see if they will."

And you know what? I think it could have succeeded. Because there really is an obscene excess of wealth in this country, even though most of us don't have any access to it. And we are a culture whose zeitgeist is ever ravenous for the next big, flashy experience.

But instead the venture failed spectacularly. Why? Because such reckless corporate greed is, itself, usually a sign of deep organizational rot and incompetency among the board and executive leadership. In other words, their hotel failed for the same reason they tried building it in the first place: Disney has grown stupid.

The way it failed, going by Jenny's video, is down to two independent reasons:

An outrageous degree of "penny-wise, pound foolish" thinking;

A fundamental failure to anticipate the comfort and pleasure of the guest.

The former is the more obvious of the two, and what really stood out to me as emblematic of it in this whole boondoggle were two simple thing: 1) The hotel rooms didn't have complimentary Disney+; and 2) the free loaner umbrellas for hotel guests visiting the Star Wars Land in Disneyworld were either so worn-out or so shoddy to begin with that, unless it was a big coincidence, both Jenny's and Jenny's sister's umbrella failed while in use. This was in the context of Disneyworld's most expensive customer experience ever, by a lot, and Disney was nickel-and-diming them. Jenny's video goes into a great depth of detail on the dozens if not hundreds of corners they cut; it was basically everything but the food. The result was an antagonistic relationship between Disney and their hotel guests where almost everything interesting cost more money (usually a lot more money) while almost everything included in the main ticket price was of cheap quality or stingy in its allotment. Every aspect of the whole process, from the scammy vibes of booking a room in the first place, to the pathetic after-care for customers who reported a problem after their stay, was likely to leave a sour taste in the customer's mouth.

When you're paying the most expensive prices in the history of a product category, you really just need to be given an up-front price that includes all or nearly all of it. You'll know what you're in for, and you can make an informed decision, and then it's really just down to the host to provide an experience and level of service that matches those high dollar outlays. But instead, as Jenny pointed out, it's like you're dealing with Spirit Airlines, where you're gonna pay a fee for literally everything beyond sitting your body quietly on the airplane.

Mind-boggling hubris. Disney needs to be broken up for the monopoly that it is, and this is just one more example of how convinced of their own inevitability and supremacy Disney has become.

The other main failure on Disney's part is the subtler one.

Jenny focused on how the Star Wars themed choose-your-own-adventure game, which was at the heart of the hotels' central conceit of "live your own personal Star Wars story," was irreparably dysfunctional. Not only was the app, through which most of the "experience" was conveyed, horribly designed; and not only were the tasks delivered through this app mostly busywork to anyone other than young children, consisting of little more than walking around and scanning inanimate objects; but the storyline's entry points and decision points were completely impenetrable through reasonable means, to the point of seeming arbitrary. Jenny proactively tried and failed to get into her preferred storyline; then tried and failed to get into any storyline; then was automatically sorted into one the next morning; and ultimately ended up having only one (dubiously) interactive story experience over the whole weekend.

She talked about how the tightly-regimented and incredibly full schedule was so mentally and physically draining that on the final night she fled her dinner table fearing she would vomit and had to stand in her hotel room staring at herself in the mirror for a while, to understand her illness (which turned out to be stress-induced exhaustion) and center herself.

She talked about how she didn't get to see a much-coveted music show during dinner on her first night because she was seated behind a giant column.

Really, these things are manifestations of the larger and more fundamental failure on Disney's part to anticipate the comfort and pleasure of the guest, as I put it.

As I was watching her video, two thoughts came to me in this vein:

First was that this whole experience really needed to be "playtested," as we might say in Magic. I mean, I'm sure there nominally was, but whatever playtesting they did was completely ineffective. Good playtesting would have brought most of these issues to light.

Second was that the Disney of today has completely lost touch with the namesake of their industry: hospitality. This would never have happened at a new luxury resort by an established world-class hotelier a century ago. Because they understood the basics. Little things, like hot towels.

I could tell just from Jenny's video that this whole hotel was decided from the top-down by soulless, disconnected corporate suits who blatantly disregarded whatever good suggestions I'm sure the Imagineers® came up with. For the failures to be as expansive and ubiquitous as Jenny's video documented, no doubt the institutional rot extends down at least as far as the project manager level, if not down to individual Imagineers® and beyond, but there have to be at least some good ones, and clearly they were overruled early and often. Whenever Disney's leadership was faced with a decision between anticipating the comfort and pleasure of the guest, and saving a couple bucks on a guest who was literally laying out several thousands of dollars to be there, leadership chose the latter.

They were so arrogant that they believed, without noticing or questioning it (unless Disney's leadership is in fact cartoon evil), that they would tell the customer what constitutes a good experience, and the customer would pay top dollar for it. And so you get a guest experience where customers who are actively trying to pick a given storyline can't get any storyline and are later seated for the dinner show behind a giant fucking column.

It's sad, and we should all be glad that their hotel failed. Not that Disney is likely to learn the right lessons from their failure, but the long-term solution here is for leisure dollars to be directed toward other companies. For the several thousand bucks that Jenny paid, she could have had a true luxury vacation in most parts of the world—and for longer than two nights.

One thing that I noticed during the four hours of her video was that Disney, or at least the people in charge of developing this hotel, didn't seem to understand what constitutes an enjoyable story experience. I am forgiving of the low level of complexity in the various puzzles, since the public is famously stupid plus a lot of these guests are going to be children. But there was so little imagination in the actual plot beats: Chewie sneaks in, gets arrested, and busts out. You get to help some Resistance fighters smuggle their luggage. Like, it's insipid. I mean, ultimately, most pop storytelling is insipid, but what I mean is that the dressings were insipid too. Dressing a story up is what makes stories great, at least at the mainstream level. There was no pomp and flourish; no clever interweaving; no electric events that put people on the edge of their seats. Just walking around on your phone for two days scanning crates and occasionally being in the same room while somebody busts Chewie out of the clink—assuming you even make it to the story events in time, since they often fired early.

The whole thing smacks of rule by committee, too many cooks, and suits suits suits all the way down.

I think it's a sign of the times that this is happening. We are once again in Robber-Baron territory in this land. The big corporations and the oligarchs who run them have become so obscenely rich and so utterly disconnected from ordinary life, and their corporate cultures have become so masturbatory and so officious, that they are increasingly creating products for idealized, phantom audiences. They increasingly don't understand real people or real life.

And we can and should bring the weight of the government down on them, more to break up monopolies and allow new and established competitors to seriously challenge them than to actively punish these companies for making money, but even more so we just need to spend our dollars elsewhere. I mean, I'm speaking hypothetically here; I am poor so none of this even applies to me in the first place.

Hence why, even after inflation, this is still just my two cents.

[meddling-in-horror]

Giving Them the Moment: How Our Flag Means Death and it's Portrayal of Black Men is the Most Important Thing on Television Right Now

Note: written April 20, 2022

Media is an incredibly distinct way of communicating. It has a wide reach, and each person has their own interpretation of what they see. That’s the beauty of the medium as a whole. However, there are often downsides, especially when it pertains to the West. In the US in particular, there is a trend within popular media to lean towards propagandization. Whether it’s the idea that communism and socialism are products of the ‘Evil East’ or the lingering effects of the Motion Picture Production Code - also known as the Hays Code, the media monopolies have a firm grasp on what we as a society watch and enjoy. 

When you begin to play close attention to how the media portrays Black men, this becomes abundantly clear.

It is a rare thing when we see Black men whose characters aren’t portrayed as being the object nor the perpetrators of violence. In fact, only one mainstream popular show comes to mind: The Fresh Prince of Bel Air. But even then, the given circumstances of Fresh Prince revolve around Will’s escape from the violence of the ‘urban’ inner city. This vilification of Black men dates back to the 1910s with D. W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation, and continued into the 1930s, where Black people were often personified as the monsters, representing the ‘exciticism’ of the world beyond the West. It is the ‘exoticism’ that has played a huge part in the dehumanization of Black men as a whole. But as a Black Queer person watching Our Flag Means Death, it is breaking that mold in an incredibly important way.

The Black men in the show are allowed to have fun.

This show is breaking barriers left and right. Of the major recurring cast of 15, over half of them are people of color. It’s overt and unflinching portrayal of Queerness when so many of its older viewers - myself included - have lived through the Bury Your Gays and Dead Lesbians tropes time and time again is overwhelmingly refreshing. Nearly all characters are Queer until proven straight and represent all parts under the umbrella, including Leslie Jones’ polyamorous pirate queen and Vico Ortiz - a non-binary actor - playing a non-binary character. 

But in a world where the narratives of Black men are so often framed around violence and brutality, the Black crewmates of the Queen Anne’s Revenge - Frenchie, Oluwande, and Roach - are allowed to be funny and vulnerable. Each one of them is starkly different from the other with identifiable characteristics that allow the audience to humanize them. The trio quickly became my favorites among the crew, with Roach being the stand-out amongst them. Samba Schutte’s often deadpan delivery never fails to draw a laugh from me, in particular the assertion that “meat is meat”. Frenchie, played by Joel Fry, is the quickest on the draw where his intellect is concerned, being posited in the show’s fifth episode as having had a hand in inventing the pyramid scheme while spouting the wildest of conspiracy theories and being afraid of cats (they’re witches, they steal your breath, and have knives in their feet, you know). The softness and constant vulnerability of Samson Kayo’s Oluwande may be one of the most important aspects of the show, as it establishes him as a reliable and trustworthy confidante to not just Jim, but to Rhys Darby’s Stede Bonnet as well.

They exist in their own separate spheres on the ship, going about their own separate business completely unbothered. While it is implied they lead violent lives as pirates, this violence isn’t used to define them as characters. In fact, Oluwande stated that both he and Jim engaged in piracy because they “had no choice”. The brief mention we get of Frenchie’s backstory implies that he lives a life of servitude, though whether that was as an enslaved person or a freed Black domestic worker is not mentioned. While there is little known about Roach so far, it is implied that his culinary skills are far beyond the levels of what is needed aboard a pirate ship.

The friendships and relationships they form within the crew aren’t built on violence either, but on open and honest communication. Most notably, the friendship of Frenchie and Wee John Feeny, played by Kristian Nairn. Fry and Nairn are an impeccable comic duo when their characters become ‘room people’, and the scene where they begin to design their new space is a personal highlight of the episode. Oluwande and Jim’s romance - played to perfection by Kayo and Ortiz - is one that revolves around both characters being almost devastatingly open with each other. Both actors play the emotional vulnerability of the characters well, and it is important to emphasize that it is Kayo’s Oluwande that moves to meet Jim where they are. 

While the show allows all its men to show varying levels of emotional vulnerability - an exception being offered to the emotionally constipated Izzy Hands, played by Con O’Neill - there is something so special about seeing that luxury afforded to Black men. This show has, in just ten episodes, has become a game changer for the television industry. It has proved that a show with explicitly Queer characters can become a massive sleeper hit, and that sometimes the best kind of historical show is one that is historical fiction. But it has also proved that you can create a narrative with Black men that doesn’t include their stories being framed in violence or brutality, that they can be funny, charming, witty, vulnerable, intelligent, complex characters with their own narratives that serve a purpose outside of a device of exoticism. It is this rare thing that makes these characters, and indeed the show as a whole, so important to its viewers. 

We deserve more vulnerability, more humor, and more humanizing content from these three men, and this show is one that is truly deserving of a glorious second season.

Sources:

Donaldson, Leigh. “When the media misrepresents Black men, the effects are felt in the real world.” 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/12/media-misrepresents-black-men-effects-felt-real-world.

Kumah-Abiwu, Felix. “Media Gatekeeping and Portrayal of Black Men in America.” 

Opportunity Agenda. “Media Portrayals and Black Male Outcomes.” 

https://www.opportunityagenda.org/explore/resources-publications/media-representation-impact-black-men/media-portrayals.

Our Flag Means Death, (2022-). HBO Max.

[centrally-unplanned]

I love deconstructing 'lifestyle' articles like these, they are such a gold mine of biases and narrative formation by the chattering classes. Here we have a wonderful premise:

Now, Ms. Margo is living a dream of many American women who are seeking relationships abroad, some of whom cite the toxic dating scene in the United States

Well, no objection from me that the US has toxic dating norms. But, hm, idk, 'many women' - is this a true trend amoung the American Female? Lets see who this article features:

Ms. Margo fell in love with the city (and its men). She found a gig teaching English in Paris and moved there after she graduated from Sarah Lawrence College in May 2019.

Okay, not *that* crazy but I do think I know what kind of Sarah Lawrence grad gap years in Paris before her law degree;

For Cindy Sheahan...At the end of 2017, she quit her job and traveled throughout Southeast Asia for leisure, and she started using Tinder.

That isn't...most people can't list as their full time job "Dating in Thailand";

For Frantzces Lys...she started a podcast called “Chronicles Abroad” with her co-host, who had met Ms. Williams, 40, in Malaysia. In 2018, Ms. Lys interviewed Ms. Williams, the founder of a consultancy, and the two kept in touch. They started dating years later.

Oh yeah the extremely relatable situation of a podcast host and boutique consultancy founder travelling to Mayalsia!!

“When you decide to just live your life for yourself, you actually end up stumbling upon people that match your energy and the same ideals and values,” said Ms. Lys, a 42-year-old founder of a wellness company.

Oh a wellness company, who hasn't founded one of those!!! And a link to their company, wow thanks NYT, that was definitely gonna be my follow-up for Ms. Lys:

Cepee Tabibian, who moved to Madrid at 35 from Austin, Texas, felt similarly.

Okay that could be normal, what do she d-

In 2020, she met her partner, who is Spanish. Now, she is the founder of She Hit Refresh, a community that helps women over the age of 30 move to a different country.

Jesus fucking Christ none of these people are real. They are full-hog in the industry of packaging and selling their Life of Insight & Discovery for $500 an hour over zoom sessions to non profits hosting leadership seminars, their dating isn't dating its brand management. I don't doubt they authentically love their life but this, shockingly, is not a trend, is not a sample, is not ethnographic data, this is an ad buy by a sliver of globe-trotting wealthy woman masquerading as journalism.

Absolutely the only relatable person is:

Alexis Brown, for example, noticed a lack of “effort and intention” from the men she was dating in Atlanta, where she attended Spelman College.

When she traveled across Europe for vacation from October 2022 to January 2023, however, the people she dated made it clear that they wanted to spend time with her.

Who takes way more words than is necessary to tell me she had a polycule stretching from Paris to Prague during her study abroad, which, good for her, that is what study abroad is for. Shockingly, this is not a new development in the collegiate experience!

Buried amoung the branded bullshit is Alexis's real gem and the only true 'thesis' of the article:

“The dating culture in the U.S. is that it’s cool and normalized to be indifferent to someone and not really express how you genuinely feel,” Ms. Brown, 23, said.

Which is essentially that in Europe people will "express emotion" unlike the cold, busy America. I don't doubt this, but I would hope a writer at the NYT's could have slightly more social awareness; the 'reason' Americans do not "express emotion" is that if they did you would dump them right on their ass on the first date.

Someone telling you, to quote Ms Margo:

“This one guy was like, ‘I ran through traffic just to look into your eyes once, and if you don’t want to go on a date with me, I can die happy knowing that I just met you,’” said Ms. Margo, a 28-year-old English teacher from Los Angeles.

As an opening line is cringe and uncomfortable, because they do not know you. They are lying and you know they are lying, it is a horrible foundation for a long term relationship. American dating norms have been hammering this lesson home on every participant (but if we are being honest, its primarily women hammering this home on men) and it is probably right to do. Anyone who does this lacks credibility.

But when you are in ~*Paris*~, you don't care about their credibility, because you lack it yourself. You are on vacation, you have no future, just a sequential present. If the guy who tells you your eyes are his world turns out to be a clingy failson who requires at least a blowjob a day to keep his mood stable, you can just *get up and leave the country*, you cannot be trapped because nothing is keeping you there. By placing an ocean between yourself and your social standing you can radically change your standards.

And you know what, there is something to that! Maybe the 18-point-checklist you mentally process every Tinder swipe through as you plan out your dream wedding on Cape Cod to a status-swollen ghost in a Tom Ford speckle-gray blazer while on lunch break from your quant analysis job at a digital marketing start-up in Chelsea isn't the best baggage to bring into a first date! Through radically shifting your social context it might be possible to jar your brain out of what is holding it back. Its not what you found in Paris, but what you left behind in America, that could actually make a difference... and that reality could give this article some heft.

But then say that instead of trying to sell me on the idea that:

For Ms. Margo, a Black woman who attended predominantly white institutions throughout her school years, she felt ignored in the United States, as if she “was not an option,” she said. In Paris she felt seen.

France is less racist than the campus of Sarah Fucking Lawrence against black people. No wonder the humanities are dying if they are teaching this level of self awareness.

[nerdy-nonbinary]

More than "Sheer Coincidence": The Antisemitism of Disney's Animated Villains

This is a paper I wrote for a Jewish studies class. It was inspired by a tumblr post, so I thought it was fitting to share here. Most will be under a "read more" link, as it is about 25 pages including the bibliography. Please feel free to ask questions, and enjoy.

_______

On June 19, 2022, Tumblr user fantastic-nonsense published a post about Disney’s 2010 animated film Tangled, and the film’s villain, Mother Gothel, which starts, “*sigh* the ‘Mother Gothel is an anti-semitic caricature��� discourse is going around again.” They argue that, because Mother Gothel’s appearance was based on two non-Jewish women, Gothel’s voice actress Donna Murphy and singer Cher, any claim that Mother Gothel’s large nose or dark, curly hair resemble antisemitic caricatures was simply projection. The goal of Gothel’s design was to make her as visually distinct as possible from Rapunzel, not to make her “look Jewish.” They continue with a question: 

“[I]f Gothel was blonde with a ‘normal’ nose…but literally nothing else about her changed, would you be saying that she’s an anti-semitic stereotype?...All I’m saying is that Gothel (and thus Tangled) is unreasonably linked to those tropes…There is a very distinct difference between being actively anti-semitic and Tangled, which has anti-semitism being projected on it because its villain bears passing similarity to anti-semitic caricatures out of sheer coincidence.”

The user has since deleted the original post, but a reblog remains further arguing their point. In an attempt to defend the film from criticisms of antisemitism, fantastic-nonsense stumbles upon a fundamental conundrum of analyzing villainous characters such as Mother Gothel: Is it possible to create a villainous character that avoids all potential antisemitic pitfalls? And, despite fantastic-nonsense insisting it’s a “sheer coincidence,” why do so many Disney villains have stereotypically Jewish traits?

Unmasking Antisemitism: The Origins of Disney’s Jewish Villains

Jewish people have long been viewed as villainous in various gentile European cultures, a view brought to the United States through colonization. Accusations of blood libel go back to the 12th century and have been noted from eastern Europe to England. Famous authors and playwrights such as Charles Dickens and William Shakespeare indicate a centuries-long trend of villainous characters defined by their Jewishness, and infamous business magnate Henry Ford published accusations of predatory banking practices and fervent Christian hatred in his pamphlet series The International Jew in the early 1920s, before Disney was a studio. With centuries of association between Jews and villainy as a backdrop, there is little surprise that Disney turned to antisemitic tropes in the construction of one of its earliest villains.

The 1933 short Three Little Pigs is remembered as one of the most successful shorts from Disney’s Silly Symphonies series. Not only was the film the source of the song “Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?” which became an anthem to “Depression-weary audiences,” but the film was a milestone in character development, versus the characters existing only to serve gags. Walt Disney was so proud of the finished film, he said, “At last we have achieved true personality in a whole picture.” Part of developing the characters’ personalities was creating a menacing villain, an archetype Disney would come to be known for, and the Big Bad Wolf is one of its earliest successes on this front. The film follows the typical narrative of the fairy tale, with a trio of pigs each building their own house, one of straw, one of sticks, and one of brick. We see the Wolf approach them as the first two are frolicking after constructing their flimsy houses, drool pouring from his mouth filled with sharp teeth. While the Wolf is able to simply blow away the straw house, the house of sticks proves to be a bit stronger, and he resorts to trickery, pretending to give up and leave the pigs alone before returning dressed as a sheep and asking for shelter. The pigs sees through this disguise, refuse him entry, and his anger gives him the strength to blow down the house of sticks. When the pigs flee to the house of bricks, the Wolf returns with a new disguise: a Jewish peddler.

Wearing a large brown overcoat, green-tinted glasses and a skullcap, and adorned with a fake beard and long nose, the Wolf knocks on the door of the brick house with a rack of brushes around his neck, proclaiming in a Yiddish accent, “I’m the Fuller Brush man, I’m giving a free sample!” The pig from the brick house, quickly seeing through his tricks, proceeds to hit him with said free sample before pulling a welcome mat from beneath the Wolf’s feet, causing him to land on his face and his false nose to bend 90° towards the sky. The Wolf rips off the disguise in anger, and the short continues.

The association of Jews and the peddling profession arose during the 19th century, as peddling helped facilitate the mass migration of Jews across the globe during that time. Peddling was more accessible to poor immigrant Jews than owning a store, and the freedom of self-employment allowed them to maintain their own schedule and keep Shabbat, unlike factory jobs. As most peddlers did not maintain the job for more than a decade, nor pass it down to their sons, peddlers represented a lack of assimilation, perpetually tying the occupation to otherness, which facilitates the villainization of peddlers through their Jewishness. 

The stock character of the “Jew peddler” quickly entered popular culture, giving all manner of creatives, from commentators to novelists, a new punching bag in their library of cultural symbols. As Hasia Diner describes the figure in her book Roads Taken: The Great Jewish Migrations to the New World and the Peddlers Who Forged the Way, “Sinister and shadowy, exotic or absurd, he made a good subject for mockery, with his odd accent, his clothing, his lack of a fixed abode, and his distinctive bodily features: in this milieu, a prominent hooked nose was a sure sign of Jewishness, a long beard a likely trait as well.” 

Director Burt Gillett created a costume for the Disney short’s villain which ticked off every box in the “Jew peddler” playbook. A symbol of “trickery, otherness, and greed,” and pervasively believed to be dishonest, the peddler costume serves not only as a disguise for the Wolf, but to highlight those traits in his villainous hunt of the pigs. Audiences would have had a pre-existing cultural understanding of the Jewish peddler as a costume. Throughout the 19th and into the early parts of the 20th century in the United States, local newspapers reporting on masquerade parties described “Jew peddler” costumes among princesses and pirates. With his two costumes being a play on the phrase “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” and the known manipulative figure of the Jewish peddler, the characterization of the Wolf is clear: He is so manipulative, even his choice in costumes shows off his deviousness.

There is a more intelligent side to the gag of the Jewish peddler costume; not only would the Wolf seem less threatening dressed as a Jewish peddler, but the pigs would assume he kept kosher and didn’t eat pork, easing their worries. Still, the use of antisemitic stereotypes to emphasize the Wolf’s dangerous and manipulative nature has been recognized as offensive, including by the company itself. A 1948 re-release of the short edited the animation to remove the antisemitic costume. The Wolf still dresses as a peddler, but without any Jewish signifiers, maintaining the overcoat but swapping the skullcap and green-tinted glasses for a bowler hat and clear ones, and forgoing the nose and beard altogether. Initially, the original audio was maintained, as the new animation of the wolf still matches the original dialogue, but a new version of the Wolf’s audio was recorded and replaced the Yiddish accent at a later date. Instead of hawking his wares in a Yiddish accent, the Wolf puts on a low, unintelligent-sounding voice and tells the pigs, “I’m working my way through college!” This is the version of the short that is available on Disney+, where no mention is made of the short’s history or the edits that were made to it. Although the Wolf does not have the same notoriety as many of Disney’s villains from feature-length films, he didn’t fall into complete obscurity, making a cameo in Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) alongside the pigs, and appearing in the 2002 direct-to-video film Mickey’s House of Villains. 90 years after his first appearance, the Wolf’s legacy resonates in the designs and characterization, which Walt so highly praised, of the villains who came after him.

Hooked-Nosed Hags and Mincing Manipulators: Jewish-coding in 20th Century Disney Films

Disney took its first leap into feature-length animation in 1937 with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Released only four years after Three Little Pigs, the film displayed a marked improvement in many areas of animation, particularly character design. While previous Disney shorts had largely starred animals, Snow White featured an entirely human or human-like cast. Unable to differentiate between hero and villain by species, designers needed other visual signifiers to indicate a character’s villainy or heroism to the audience. As former Disney character animator Andreas Deja wrote on his blog, where he frequently catalogs stories from Disney’s older films, “[Walt] Disney insisted on strong contrast between good versus evil, and that needed to be clear in the characters' design as well as their acting.” 

In 1749, German philosopher and playwright Gotthold Ephraim Lessing wrote in his play Die Juden (The Jews), “And is it not true, their countenance has something that prejudices one against them? It seems to me as if one could read in their eyes their maliciousness, unscrupulousness, selfishness of character, their deceit and perjury.” For centuries, antisemites have posited that Jews not only are evil, but look evil based on their natural physical appearances. This idea quickly made its way into Disney’s understanding of character design. Although Three Little Pigs’ Wolf is the only villain who takes on an explicitly Jewish appearance, Disney has designed its villains with stereotypically Jewish traits as a visual indicator since its first feature film. This notion of visual signifiers of internal traits is derived from race science, a concept the American government had latched onto with the Dillingham Commission, a Congressional committee analyzing immigration in the United States at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century. In the Commission’s Statistical Review of Immigration, published in 1911, the “Hebrew” people were the third-lowest ranked group in the “Caucasian race.” As Jews were considered one of the least desirable groups of white people, common traits amongst them were quickly associated with villains, regardless of their background.

Snow White’s Queen Grimhilde does not have many stereotypically Jewish traits upon first glance. This is essential to the story, as the Queen was previously the “fairest one of all” until her title was taken by Snow White, whose beauty outshone hers even while dressed in rags. Because she is also beautiful, she could not be designed with ugly, villainous, “Jewish” traits. However, when she finds out the Huntsman failed to kill Snow White, she adopts a disguise in order to poison her without being recognized, much like the Wolf in The Three Little Pigs. Her disguise transforms her from a beautiful, regal woman into a decrepit witch, with a massive, hooked nose and deep eye bags, both common traits in antisemitic caricatures, marking her new form as Jewish. Her transformation marks her change into a more active villain role, pursuing Snow White herself instead of sending a henchman to find her. By the end of the film, the Queen’s internal ugliness, through her vanity and envy of Snow White, has physically manifested, showing that she was never really as beautiful as the kind-hearted and button-nosed Snow White.

The contrast between the Aryan features of Disney’s leading ladies and the ugly and Jewish-coded traits of their female villains continued for decades. Cinderella’s stepmother, Lady Tremaine, and her daughters are both drawn with large noses compared to Cinderella, who has a button nose similar to Snow White. Lady Tremaine is given a hooked nose and heavy-lidded eyes, just as Queen Grimhilde had in her disguise. Her less exaggerated appearance befits her more realistic villainy, portraying personal greed and child abuse rather than a magically enhanced poisoning plot. The stepsisters, on the other hand, are given bulbous noses, similarly to Snow White’s seven dwarves, largely indicating ugliness rather than Jewishness. In both cases, their designs are “more reminiscent of 101 Dalmatians male villains Horace and Jasper, rather than typical Disney female features.” All three are given features reminiscent of Disney’s male character designs, compared to Cinderella’s “proper” femininity, which, at this point in Disney’s history, was always white. 

Maleficent and Aurora’s designs in Sleeping Beauty function similarly. Maleficent’s pointed nose, prominent horns, which Jews are often accused of having, and green skin make her appear inhuman compared to Aurora’s upturned nose and blonde hair. Maleficent’s appearance is also juxtaposed against the film’s good fairies, Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather, who look entirely human aside from their wings. Sleeping Beauty also furthers the concept of appearance reflecting personality, giving the cruel Maleficent an unnatural skin tone, and displaying her most powerful form, a dragon, at the climax of the film. It is important to note that both Maleficent and Queen Grimhilde use magic and potions in their villainy, while their respective princesses do not use magic on their own. Judaism and witchcraft have long been associated in European Christian concepts of witches, and these films both bring that trope into a new world of storytelling.

While Disney’s early female villains were largely coded as Jewish by their designs and the juxtaposition between them and Disney’s respective female lead’s designs meeting Euro-centric standards of beauty, male villains’ coding comes at the nexus of homosexual and Jewish male stereotypes, alongside their designs. In her description of the coverage of Leopold and Loeb’s 1924 murder trial, Sarah Imhoff wrote that “the press coverage did not often explicitly cite their Jewishness because it did not need to. Journalists and commentators were able to convey Jewishness without stating it directly. Certain characteristics—intellectual, physically weak, not fit for manual labor, perverted, and prone to illness and psychiatric imbalance—painted a gendered portrait of a Jewish man even without reference to race or religion.” Many of Disney’s male villains fit such descriptors, indicating their Jewishness to the audience without the religion ever being mentioned. Additionally, these descriptors–particularly “perverted,” which at the time was a euphemism for both religious and sexual deviance-- are often applied to gay men, while homosexuality was treated as its own psychological issue. Both queer and Jewish men are seen as feminine, not meeting the white Christian ideal of a strong, straight, and stable man. With such overlap, queercoding of male characters often coincides, intentionally or not, with Jewish-coding.

The effeminate, mentally unstable villain can be found as early as the 1950s with Peter Pan’s Captain Hook, a willowy man in a plumed hat prone to comedically anxious outbursts, with black, wavy hair and a large nose. Captain Hook is voiced with a British accent, as many of Disney’s male villains do (including Jafar, Scar, and Governor Ratcliffe, whose fitting British accent stands out against John Smith’s strangely American one), which is not typical of Jewish characters in American media. However, “unlike the good characters of the film, who are endowed with physical features more generally identified with Northern European characters, the Captain Hook character would appear to be more Southern or Eastern European…he is the villain, and the writers and artists chose to give him physical characteristics that somehow reflect his villainy.” The author does not mention Jews in his analysis, but the majority of American Jews are descended from Eastern European Jews, and the comparison is bolstered by the non-visible Jewish stereotypes Hook fits as well. Again, Hook’s features are contrasted against Peter Pan and Wendy’s straight, brown hair and upturned noses, matching his implicitly Jewish characteristics with an implicitly Jewish appearance.

The Disney Renaissance, a period from 1989-1999 which saw massive success for Disney and a notable Broadway influence on the films, also saw a barrage of male villains with notable Jewish-coded traits. While Aladdin’s Princess Jasmine has a slightly larger nose compared to her white princess predecessors, Jafar still has much more prominent and hooked nose and heavy-lidded eyes, traits even more prominent in early iterations of his design. Jafar fits many of the descriptors applied to Leopold and Loeb in lieu of calling them Jewish; he is a manipulative magician with a wiry frame, contrasted by Aladdin’s larger build and ability to run and swing around Agrabah to avoid guards, and becomes mad with power after wishing to become a genie himself. Appearance-wise, in addition to the Jewish-coded traits mentioned above, Jafar’s dress-like robe and elaborate headpiece give him a feminine appearance next to Aladdin’s pants and vest, and bare muscular chest, affirming his masculinity. Imhoff notes that, because of Jews’ intelligence and lack of physical prowess, the prevailing stereotype was that “Jews tended not to commit courageous crimes, but rather chose crimes where they did not have to confront their victims directly.” She extrapolates, “Jewish men’s crimes were crimes of intellect, not passion; manipulation, not aggression; outsmarting, not overpowering.” Jafar displays these methods of criminality multiple times, tricking Aladdin into fetching the genie’s lamp from the Cave of Wonders, lying to Jasmine about Aladdin being sentenced to death, and hypnotizing the Sultan with his staff to steal an heirloom jewel. Although Aladdin uses his wits to defeat Jafar by trapping him in the magic lamp, his physical strength both make him more attractive and capable in Jasmine’s eyes than Jafar, who pursues her for political gain.

The Lion King’s Scar is a more prominent example of the juxtaposition between the strong but simple hero and the weak but wily villain. After feminizing himself, proclaiming “I shall practice my curtsy,” when his brother King Mufasa tells him that Simba, Mufasa’s son, will one day be Scar’s king, Scar says, “Well, as far as brains go, I got the lion’s share. But when it comes to brute strength, I’m afraid I’m at the shallow end of the gene pool.” While the heroic Mufasa, and later Simba, are muscular and broad, Scar is drawn almost emaciated, his hips swinging with each step in an effeminate manner. Like Jafar, Scar rarely involves himself directly in his crimes, sending his hyena henchmen to do his dirty work while he devises a plan. While animated lions lack the physical traits associated with Jews, Scar’s strangely dark mane contrasts with Mufasa and Simba’s reddish fur, and the dark circles of fur around his eyes resemble both heavy eyelids and eyeshadow, serving as both a feminizing and Jewish trait. When Scar and Simba fight at the climax of the film, Scar resorts to gaslighting, trying to convince Simba that he is responsible for his father’s death, and tricks, throwing burning ashes into Simba’s face, rather than beating him with brute strength.

Pocahontas’ Governor Ratcliffe fits oddly into the field of simultaneously feminized and Jewish-coded villains. His purple outfit, braided hair, and posh mannerisms make him by far one of Disney’s most effeminate villains, and he is one of the most explicitly money-hungry villains in Disney’s film library, singing lyrics such as “It's mine, mine, mine/For the taking/It's mine, boys/Mine me that gold!” blatantly assigning Ratcliffe the stereotype of the greedy Jew. Yet the historical setting of the film, 17th century Virginia, makes it highly unlikely that Ratcliffe could possibly be Jewish. Still, his overwhelming greed and feminine mannerisms insert Jewish stereotypes into even the most unlikely settings, highlighting the pervasiveness of the stereotypes beyond direct acknowledgements of Judaism.

Although Hercules’ Hades is less feminized than his 90s predecessors, his coding is bolstered by frequent use of Yiddish words in his dialogue, describing Hercules as “the one schlemiel who can louse” up his plan, calling him “The yutz with the horse!” when directing the titans to attack him, and convincing Hercules to fall for his scheme by telling him, “We dance, we kiss, we schmooze, we carry on, we go home happy.” Portrayed as a fast-talking swindler, calling back to the fear of peddlers Disney utilized in Three Little Pigs, Hades follows the trend of having a hooked nose and deep-set eyes, as well as being significantly weaker than Hercules, who is characterized throughout the film by his immense strength and lack of forethought. While Hades nearly succeeds in getting Hercules to kill himself by diving into the River Styx to save Megara, once Hercules achieves godhood and becomes immortal, all it takes is a single punch to knock Hades himself into the river and defeat him.

Both Hades and Jafar also play upon fears of not just homosexuality but sexually deviant heterosexuality in their respective films. While Jewish men were characterized as feminine due to circumcision in the late 19th century, “Jews were not thought to endanger society by their supposed homosexuality but rather by their evil heterosexual drives. […] But while family life was intact among the Jews themselves, it was, so racists asserted, directed against the family life of others.’” While neither Jafar nor Hades express genuine attraction toward their female leads, each interferes with their predestined heterosexual relationship with the male lead. When Jafar fails to retrieve the lamp from Aladdin before he uses it, foiling his plan to become Sultan, his parrot henchman Iago suggests that Jafar marry Jasmine as a means of becoming Sultan instead. Jafar proceeds to brainwash the Sultan into pronouncing him Jasmine’s fiance while she builds a relationship with Aladdin, and nearly succeeds in forcing her to marry him, before Aladdin interrupts his plan. Hades gained leverage over Megara after she made a deal with him for a man who left her, and has her woo Hercules only to sacrifice her, using Hercules’ emotions to manipulate him into nearly killing himself trying to save Megara. In both cases, genuine heterosexuality triumphs over “evil heterosexual drives.” Even with Aladdin’s Arabian-inspired setting and multiple mentions of Allah by the Sultan, conceptions of pure heterosexual love shaped by Christian values save the heroines from deviant, and implicitly Jewish, heterosexuality.

Across decades, genders, and settings, Disney has not only continued to rely on antisemitic stereotypes to communicate villainy through character design, but has developed its villains to incorporate increasingly specific stereotypes that have been applied to Jews for decades, if not centuries.

(Not Her) Mother Knows Best: Mother Gothel and the Blood Libel of Tangled

The 2000s was a time of experimentation for Disney Animation. As the success of the Renaissance began to fade, Disney turned to genres and technologies it hadn’t worked with before. The early 2000s saw an onslaught of films with unprecedented science fiction elements, such as Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Treasure Planet, Lilo and Stitch and Meet the Robinsons. Beginning with Dinosaur in 2000, Disney slowly made its way into the field of CGI animation, developing its technology at a rapid pace across films like Chicken Little, Bolt, and the aforementioned Meet the Robinsons. After this decade of experimentation, Disney released a film which combined the musical and princess elements of the Renaissance with the CGI it had been developing, releasing its first CGI princess film: Tangled. A reimagining of the fairytale of Rapunzel, the film has been a topic of discussion since its release for both its villain, Mother Gothel, who embodies a wide variety of traits, both in her design and characterization, that have been negatively associated with Jews; and its story, which bears striking similarity to a long-standing antisemitic canard: blood libel.

Beginning with accusations of using blood in religious rituals in the 12th century, in the 13th century, an additional accusation further vilify Jews: “Jews killed Christian children to obtain their blood, turning ‘ritual murder’ into ‘blood libel’ or ‘ritual cannibalism.’” Jews were not only accused of killing Christian children, but using their bodies for personal gain. Although Tangled forgoes any child killing, its prologue tells a chillingly familiar tale of the kidnapping and exploitation of a beautiful, blonde infant by a dark and curly-haired, crooked-nosed woman, adapting the blood libel narrative for a new audience, just as blood libel narratives have adapted to fit “changing cultural and political climates.”

In developing a story fit for a feature-length movie, Tangled adds magical elements to its narrative absent from the original fairy tale. In the film, a drop of sunlight fell to earth in the form of a flower with incredible healing capabilities. This flower is discovered by Mother Gothel, whom the audience meets as an old woman, who discovers a song which, when sung to the flower, makes her young. Her young appearance incorporates many of the antisemitic archetypes present in previous villains including long, black, curly hair, dark, hooded eyes, and a pointed nose with a bump. Gothel hides the flower to hoard its powers for herself, immediately establishing her as greedy, another common antisemitic trope. When the pregnant queen falls ill, the search party is sent for the mythical flower, hoping it will heal her. It is found, and after drinking a medicine made from it, the queen recovers and gives birth to a healthy girl, Rapunzel, with hair that is inexplicably bright blonde, as both the queen and king have brown hair. Aging and growing desperate, Gothel sneaks into the castle and cuts a lock of Rapunzel’s hair, only to discover that the hair, which has gained the flower’s magic, loses that magic when cut. She decides to kidnap Rapunzel, hiding her away and raising her as her own to continue utilizing the hair’s magic properties.

Many Disney films have utilized the contrast between villains’ and heroes’ character designs to indicate to the audience which role they play, with villains getting Jewish-coded features and heroes largely getting Western European ones. In nearly every way, Rapunzel and Gothel���s designs are completely opposites. Gothel’s frizzy dark hair could never be related to Rapunzel’s blonde, straight, silky mane. Gothel’s eyes are dark and hooded where Rapunzel’s are green and wide. Gothel’s nose is bumpy and hooked where Rapunzel’s is small and turns up. Gothel is curvaceous where Rapunzel is petite. In every way that Rapunzel fits the Aryan ideal, Gothel sits firmly in the category of other, even if both are white. Gothel’s foreign appearance was very intentional by the film’s director. In an interview, co-director Byron Howard said, “So, Gothel is very tall and curvy, she’s very voluptuous, she’s got this very exotic look to her. Even down to that curly hair, we’re trying to say visually that this is not this girl’s mother.” This goal in character design was repeated by him and co-director Nathan Greno in various interviews. 

More than simply creating visual difference between Rapunzel and Mother Gothel, Gothel’s “voluptuous,” “exotic look” plays into the classic trope of the “Beautiful Jewess,” an orientalized beauty who tricks others with her alluring appearance, “‘her beauty conceal[ing] her powers of destruction.’” Gothel gaslights Rapunzel to keep her in her tower, convincing her that her naivete makes the outside world too dangerous for her to live in, and the contrast between Gothel’s curvy and sexualized body and Rapunzel’s petite frame only serves to bolster her claims. It is notable that early iterations of Gothel’s design show her without many of the visually “Jewish” traits she has in her final designs, with straighter hair tied back in a low bun, rather than the large curly hair seen in the film. Several designs have long, but not hooked, noses, and higher collars, avoiding the “Jewish seductress” aspect of her design. Yet these designs were rejected in favor of one influenced by two famous women: Donna Murphy, who voiced Mother Gothel, and Cher. Cher in particular was looked to for being “very exotic and Gothic looking,” playing into the orientalization of the Beautiful Jewess, where “the physical beauty and sensuality of the Jewish woman, her dark hair…were almost always described using orientalizing tropes and characteristics.” Although neither Cher nor Murphy is Jewish, both have the dark, curly hair and large noses associated with Jews, and the choice to base Gothel’s appearance off of them, particularly Cher’s “exotic” beauty, plays directly into pre-existing antisemitic tropes, whether intentionally or not.

Like Queen Grimhilde and Jafar before her, Gothel utilizes a disguise as part of her villainy. However, Gothel’s disguise, her false youth, is constant throughout the film, rather than temporary for one evil act. The Beautiful Jewesses’ “imaginary proximity to seduction, sexuality, theater, and dance, as well as to masquerade and costumes, certainly had just as much to do with their femininity—situated outside of bourgeois gender roles—as with their Jewishness.” Both Gothel’s Jewish features and her sexualized femininity play a role in the manipulative nature of her youthful disguise.

Not only do the narrative similarities to blood libel and the design of Mother Gothel play into antisemitic tropes, but more so than previous evil mother figures in Disney films, Gothel fits the “stereotype of the overbearing, over-involved, suffocating Jewish mother.” While Queen Grimhilde and Lady Tremaine force Snow White and Cinderella, respectively, into servanthood, Gothel pretends to care for Rapunzel, as exemplified in the song “Mother Knows Best.” In addition to warning Rapunzel of the dangers of the world outside her tower, she guilts her for wanting to leave her, singing “Me, I'm just your mother, what do I know?/I only bathed and changed and nursed you/Go ahead and leave me, I deserve it/Let me die alone here, be my guest.” Her overbearing and manipulative parenting strategies were a key part of her character, and of Rapunzel’s, according to Howard and Greno. In an interview with Den of Geek, Greno said, “If it’s a story about a girl who’s stuck in a tower, and we wanted Rapunzel to be a smart character, she’s being manipulated. So, if Mother Gothel was a mean villainess…you’d be like, Why is Rapunzel staying in the tower? You needed to buy that this girl would be there for 18 years. Mother Gothel can’t be mean. She has to be very passive-aggressive,” and Howard added, “Gothel has to be more subtle…than a one-note, domineering mother.” By playing on the loving but overbearing Jewish mother trope, Tangled establishes Gothel as a convincingly threatening and manipulative villain. The movie’s narrative tropes, character designs, and character personalities that play upon antisemitic tropes, make it difficult to deny the antisemitism present in Tangled. 

The Twist Villain; Or, How Every Villain is a Little Bit Jewish

In the 13 years since Tangled’s release, many of the antisemitic tropes that had become staples of Disney’s villainous characters have been absent from its films. This coincides with a trend often referred to as the “twist villain,” where the film presents a fake villain to the audience, only to reveal that a “good” character was secretly the villain the whole time. Villains like King Candy from Wreck-It Ralph, Hans from Frozen, Robert Callahan from Big Hero 6, and Mayor Bellwether from Zootopia all fall under this trope. Because these characters are not meant to be read by the audience as evil based on their design, they lack the Jewish-coded traits like dark, curly hair, hooked noses, and deep-set eyes that have been used to mark villains as evil in the past. Other films, in lieu of a proper villain, opt for a hero’s internal conflict or a non-malicious antagonistic force to drive the story, such as Moana, Frozen II, and Encanto. These new story structures seem to eliminate the antisemitism present in other Disney films. Yet the trend of villains hiding in plain sight, lulling even the audience into a false sense of security before revealing their true colors, also plays into centuries-old antisemitic tropes.

In 19th century German criminal justice literature, “the ‘Jewish crook’ (jüdischer Gauner), a code term for a type of criminal that could apply to non-Jews as well,” was defined by “dangerous criminality masked by an assumed identity—a falsely benign exterior.” Because Disney has created an association between stereotypically Jewish traits and villainy for decades, priming audiences to read such traits as evil, by creating villains who hide their true character from both audiences and other characters, both through their actions and their non-Jewish-coded appearances, the films which use a “twist villain” both reaffirm the visual villainy of such traits and play upon another antisemitic trope.

In many ways, it seems impossible for Disney to create a villain that avoids some antisemitic trope, if avoiding stereotypically Jewish character designs only leads to affirmation of another trope. Unfortunately, it may very well be impossible. As John Appel notes in Jews in American Caricature: 1820–1914, “Jews, too, have been described as penny-pinching misers, cheats and ostentatious consumers, pushy parvenus and clannish separatists, radical unbelievers and Orthodox fanatics, ‘red’ Communists and arch-capitalists, draft evading slackers and cowardly soldiers and, more recently, bloodthirsty Israeli militarist occupiers of peaceful villages.” Whether a villain is stingy or greedy, cowardly or bloodthirsty, oddly insular or the mastermind controlling everything, they fall into a Jewish stereotype. Especially when the concept of Jews being sneaky or able to trick others comes into play, it is nearly impossible to create a villain who doesn’t hit one stereotype or another. Certainly, designs and narrative beats like the ones in Tangled make the Jewish-coding of villains far more obvious, but history’s view of Jews has permanently branded them as villainous. 

That doesn’t mean that every villain is equal. Hans’ duplicity in Frozen does not raise as many alarms as the multi-layered antisemitism in Tangled. Nor does it mean that every Disney film, let alone every piece of fiction influenced by centuries of antisemitism, should be disregarded. But understanding how antisemitism has influenced Disney’s villains, and, by virtue of its films’ success and cultural dominance, impacted how the American public perceives Jews because of these portrayals, these trends can be acknowledged and criticized, instead of being willfully ignored by insisting that 90 years of cinematic history is simply a “sheer coincidence.”

Bibliography

Aladdin. Walt Disney Pictures, 1992.

“Antisemitic Caricature of a Dreyfus Supporter - Collections Search - United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.” Accessed May 6, 2023. https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn545107.

Appel, John J. “Jews in American Caricature: 1820–1914.” American Jewish History 71, no. 1 (1981): 103–33.

Brew, Simon. “Byron Howard & Nathan Greno Interview: Tangled, Disney, Animation and Directing Disney Royalty.” Den of Geek, January 28, 2011. https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/byron-howard-nathan-greno-interview-tangled-disney-animation-and-directing-disney-royalty/.

Brunotte, Ulrike. “‘All Jews Are Womanly, but No Women Are Jews.’: The Femininity Game of Deception: Femme Fatale Orientale, and Belle Juive.” In The Femininity Puzzle, 1st ed., 21–54. Gender, Orientalism and the »Jewish Other«. transcript Verlag, 2022. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv371bzpp.4.

Carnevale, Rob. “IndieLondon: Tangled – Nathan Greno and Byron Howard Interview - Your London Reviews.” Accessed April 11, 2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20151128043916/http://www.indielondon.co.uk/Film-Review/tangled-nathan-greno-and-byron-howard-interview.

Climenhaga, Lily. “Imagining the Witch: A Comparison between Fifteenth-Century Witches within Medieval Christian Thought and the Persecution of Jews and Heretics in the Middle Ages.” Constellations 3, no. 2 (May 9, 2012). https://doi.org/10.29173/cons17200.

Croxton, Frederick. “Statistical Review of Immigration, 1820-1910.” Immigration to the United States, 1789-1930 - CURIOSity Digital Collections, 1911. https://curiosity.lib.harvard.edu/immigration-to-the-united-states-1789-1930/catalog/39-990067954980203941.

D23. “Three Little Pigs (Film).” Accessed May 1, 2023. https://d23.com/a-to-z/three-little-pigs-film/.

Deja, Andreas. “Deja View: The Evolution of Jafar.” Deja View (blog), November 30, 2012. https://andreasdeja.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-evolution-of-jafar.html.

———. “Deja View: The Huntsman.” Deja View (blog), February 3, 2015. https://andreasdeja.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-huntsman.html.

———. “Deja View: The Stepmother.” Deja View (blog), October 1, 2012. https://andreasdeja.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-stepmother.html.

———. “Deja View: Twenty Years Ago...” Deja View (blog), March 30, 2013. https://andreasdeja.blogspot.com/2013/03/twenty-years-ago.html.

Desowitz, Bill. “Nathan Greno & Byron Howard Talk ‘Tangled.’” Animation World Network. Accessed April 11, 2023. https://www.awn.com/animationworld/nathan-greno-byron-howard-talk-tangled.

Diner, Hasia. Roads Taken: The Great Jewish Migrations to the New World and the Peddlers Who Forged the Way. Yale University Press, 2015. https://web-p-ebscohost-com.remote.slc.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzkzMzA5Ml9fQU41?sid=c8d1f3df-2c0a-4e45-bb29-d0a83e2c8fbb@redis&vid=0&lpid=lp_13&format=EB.

“Disney+ | Video Player.” Accessed February 22, 2023. https://www.disneyplus.com/video/ddc23c92-f7d2-481c-9d71-1332af3a8c4f.

Disney Censorship: Three Little Pigs 1933 Original vs 1948 Reanimated Scene, 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB1mMNvrUrM.

“Disney Does Diversity: The Social Context of Racial-Ethnic Imagery.” In Cultural Diversity and the U.S. Media. Albany : State University of New York Press, 1998. http://archive.org/details/culturaldiversit0000unse_o7p9.

Englund, Steven. “The Blood Libel.” Commonweal 150, no. 2 (February 2023): 34–38.

fantastic-nonsense. “Memories of Another World.” Tumblr. Tumblr (blog). Accessed April 27, 2023. https://fantastic-nonsense.tumblr.com/post/687550407752466432/perfectlynormalhumanbeing-as-a-jew-one-of-the.

Ford, Henry. “The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem,” June 12, 1920. Wikisource.

Goldberg, Ann. Sex, Religion, and the Making of Modern Madness : The Eberbach Asylum and German Society, 1815-1849. 1 online resource (x, 236 pages) : illustrations, map vols. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10084824.

“Grimm 012: Rapunzel.” Accessed February 22, 2023. https://sites.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm012.html.

Hant, Myrna. “A History of Jewish Mothers on Television: Decoding the Tenacious Stereotype” 5 (2011).

Hercules. Walt Disney Pictures, 1997.

Imhoff, Sarah. “Bad Jews: The Leopold and Loeb Hearing.” In Masculinity and the Making of American Judaism, 244–69. Indiana University Press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt2005vkq.16.

Kim, Jin. “Mother Gothel.” The Art of Jin Kim (blog), May 26, 2017. https://theartofjinkim.wordpress.com/2017/05/26/mother-gothel/.

koreatimes. “Dreams Come True, Disney Style,” May 15, 2011. https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/art/2023/04/689_87009.html.

Matteoni, Francesca. “The Jew, the Blood and the Body in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe.” Folklore 119, no. 2 (2008): 182–200.

McCulloh, John M. “Jewish Ritual Murder: William of Norwich, Thomas of Monmouth, and the Early Dissemination of the Myth.” Speculum 72, no. 3 (1997): 698–740. https://doi.org/10.2307/3040759.

Mollet, Tracey Louise. Cartoons in Hard Times: The Animated Shorts of Disney and Warner Brothers in Depression and War 1932-1945. New York, New York, USA: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017.

Pocahontas. Walt Disney Pictures, 1995.

Putnam, Amanda. “Mean Ladies: Transgendered Villains.” In Diversity in Disney Films: Critical Essays on Race, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexuality, and Disability, n.d. 2013.

“Rapunzel by the Grimm Brothers: A Comparison of the Versions of 1812 and 1857.” Accessed February 22, 2023. https://sites.pitt.edu/~dash/grimm012a.html.

Rowe, Nina. The Jew, the Cathedral and the Medieval City: Synagoga and Ecclesia in the Thirteenth Century. Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Schüler-Springorum, Stefanie. “Gender and the Politics of Anti-Semitism.” AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW, 2018.

Schutt, Tatum. “Why Do So Many Disney Villains Look Like Me?” Hey Alma, March 5, 2022. https://www.heyalma.com/why-do-so-many-disney-villains-look-like-me/.

Tangled. Walt Disney Pictures, 2010.

tangledbea. “It’s Bex, Not Bea.” Tumblr. Tumblr (blog). Accessed April 17, 2023. https://tangledbea.tumblr.com/post/687549550733492224/sigh-the-mother-gothel-is-an-anti-semitic.

Teter, Magda. Blood Libel. Harvard University Press, 2020. http://www.jstor.org.remote.slc.edu/stable/j.ctvt1sj9x.

“The Finaly Affair.” TIME Magazine 61, no. 11 (March 16, 1953): 79–80.

The Lion King. Walt Disney Pictures, 1994.

theartofjinkim. “Archaeology (IV): Tangled Early Designs!” The Art of Jin Kim (blog), December 18, 2017. https://theartofjinkim.wordpress.com/2017/12/18/archaeology-iv-tangled-early-designs.

Three Little Pigs. Short. United Artists, 1933.

“Three Little Pigs | Disney+.” Accessed May 1, 2023. https://www.disneyplus.com/movies/tangled/3V3ALy4SHStq.

Wills, John. “Making Disney Magic.” In Disney Culture, 14–51. Rutgers University Press, 2017. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1p0vkn3.4.

[blazehedgehog]

Thoughts on Tim Sweeney's future of video games being all about live service experiences?

Epic has primarily been a multiplayer-only developer for close to (if not more than) 20 years now. And Fortnite in particular has made them billions and billions and billions of dollars.

Like, I believe it came out as part of the Apple trial, Epic made 20 billion dollars in 2022 alone. That's $20,000,000,000. And that's just for that one year. Fortnite has, since then, had multiple times where they've broken all kinds of concurrent player records, and now Fortnite as a business has grown to encompass multiple entire games.

It would be easy to say that, in its entire life time, just Fortnite alone has very likely earned Epic Games close to one hundred billion dollars.

So if you're looking at things from a purely monetary perspective, as a "𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚍𝚞𝚌𝚝" that generates "𝚙𝚛𝚘𝚏𝚒𝚝", then yes. You would naturally say this. You would say, "we made a live service product that has generated more money than anything we've ever made combined, ergo that is the future." You are successful, so you want to repeat that success.

Which is the thing with these kinds of people, right. I know Tim Sweeny comes from the trenches, I know he wasn't always this rich, but he's speaking from the same perspective as, like... let's talk movies for a second.

Let's talk about the term "executive meddling." Film studio executives chase money. They chase trends. They'd like to be trend setters, but the fact of the matter is, a lot of them are too cowardly to do that. They wait until somebody else becomes a trend setter, they set up a mining operation in that trend, and bleed the vein dry until the next trend setter comes along.

You might have a really incredible idea for a movie, you might write a really amazing script, and it could turn out to be a legendary classic, but executives only see the world in dollar signs. If your movie doesn't hit "what's hot" then you are considered a risk and depending on how much of a risk you are, your legitimately great movie might get thrown in the dumpster.

And even if they are the ones to set a trend, that does not necessarily mean they are suddenly open and welcoming to new ideas. Again, it's all about going where the success is and staying there until the success stops happening.

Games are no different, except that it's much easier to have a breakout indie success on a lower budget than it is with a movie. There's a lot about making a movie that requires a crew of people to work, whereas an indie game can be the sole effort of a single person and still tear up the charts.

With the one hundred billion dollars Fortnite has made Tim Sweeny, he could fund hundreds of thousands of independent developers. Possibly even a million-plus. He could give these people careers. Even if they failed, it wouldn't matter, because he has one hundred billion dollars and lost maybe 0.001% of that. He could cultivate an entire cottage industry of his own. Multiple, even.

He doesn't even need to be that picky! He was on staff for Jazz Jackrabbit! It's Sonic with a gun! The next Tim Sweeny could be out there with something just as derivative, and just needs a little extra nudge, you know?

Instead, our current Tim Sweeny wants to make two hundred billion dollars. He wants to put Snoop Dogg in Fortnite, who has a lightsaber battle with the Demogorgon from Stranger Things. They are both killed when horror movie icon Micheal Myers pulls up in Paul Walker's Nissan Skyline from The Fast and the Furious, who blows them both up with a rocket launcher that shoots pumpkins. He is wearing an Among Us back pack.

Certainly, that is a video game. It is also definitely money, both coming in and going out like a firehose. But it will never be the only video game. To claim otherwise is just chest thumping for investors.

You can't take it with you, Tim. And one day, Fortnite will have to shut down. Seven-plus years of weapons, maps and gameplay will all evaporate overnight. Are you so sure you can trap lightning in a bottle again? I haven't forgotten Battle Breakers. The Metaverse only makes sense to those with infinite money, and nobody, not even you, truly have infinite money. Especially not in the ways you're burning it at both ends.

Besides that, Ready Player One was a dystopia! It was a dystopia, Tim! People weren't happy!

[mermaidsirennikita]

I’ve started watching The Artful Dodger and loving it, it’s far better than Bridgerton at actually capturing the essence of a romance novel (my first thought upon seeing Jack and Belle interact was that it could’ve been ripped straight from a romance novel). Do you have any recs for tv shows or movies that have the vibes of a romance novel?

Ooh yes!

Oldie but a goodie and if anyone hasn't seen it they should (and really, the whole trilogy--the second movie gets a bad rap, but I personally so enjoy it, and I love the third movie for a lot of reasons but the "REIGNITE. OUR. LOVE." sequence is absolutely one of them, the "we are gonna FUCK THIS SHIT OUT" vibes are sooo romance novel for me). Bridget Jones's Diary. Mark Darcy is just an amazing hero. Bridget is a legend. Hugh Grant as Daniel Cleaver is PEAK Hugh Grant, and his introduction in that film is one of the greatest character intros I have ever. Seen in cinema. I see some people knock on it because of things that have aged--Bridget worrying over her weight because it's the early 2000s and super skinny was the trend, the workplace harassment. I don't give a fuck. If you haven't seen Bridget Jones's Diary, you are doing yourself a disservice.

(It is based on a book, but that book is not a romance novel. The movies are.)

Ummm speaking of Hugh Grant, Music & Lyrics is an underrated BANGER and absolutely fucking reads as a romance novel. A washed up has-been pop star begins a creative partnership with the messy neurotic woman who waters his plants? He does a flop attempt at defending her honor to do the guy who did her wrong. There's a grand gesture/grovel moment ffs. It's GREAT. The music is AMAZING. POP! Goes My Heart!

This one is borderline because it is more of a girls trip comedy, but the romance is truly centered so well and is a swoony romance and it features peak Richard Madden and it is again, so underrated. Netflix's Ibiza, dude. Buttoned up marketing girl goes on a business trip to Spain, her two best friends (who are both much wilder than her) accompany her and they go to the club one night and see DJ Richard Madden (LEOOOOO WESSSSST) and he and the main girl have this amazing meet cute that involves someone drawing a dick on her face in glow in the dark marker and him coming to the rescue, but then he has to go to a gig in Ibiza and she and her friends decide to track him down because some people are destined to go to the moon, but her destiny is to FUCK. THAT. DJ. But Harper and Leo's connection is more like love at first sight than pure horniness? I just miss movies that like, unabashedly capture zany happiness and the flutters of first love (and the sex scene is so good???). This movie is amazing and I adore it.

Bros. Look dude. I know Billy Eichner fucked up the marketing for this one. I know he's annoying as hell. Bros is objectively a romance novel movie lol. It's not as inclusive as it could/should be, I will agree with that always--but the romance arc is so good, and it is legit funny, and it has a FAILED GROVEL which we all know is one of my favorite things. And I do think it has a deeply true heart and soul and is really amazing.

Brown Sugar. PEAK Taye Diggs and Sanaa Lathan. It's a slow burn friends to lovers movie in which there is sooooo much sexual tension and so much angst and so much follow the fuck through. Also, Taye Diggs has one of the most magnificent line deliveries of all time with "riCHARD LAWson".

Imagine Me and You. The sapphic romcom we deserve. A bride falls in love at first sight with hot florist Lena Headey while walking down the aisle to marry her groom, as you do. What follows is a woman desperately trying not to cheat on her husband while experiencing extreme sexual tension with Lena Headey. Surprisingly soft and super romantic.

Lady Chatterley's Lover (2022). Required viewing for historical romance novel fans. Obviously based on a book, but again, that book is not a romance lol. The movie is. And it's one of the hottest movies in recent memory. Jack and Emma did the WORK. The kiss right before he goes down on her is maybe my favorite movie kiss of all time.

Obviously. Pride and Prejudice (2005). I shouldn't have to include this, but to be fucking clear lol. I will always maintain that while P&P (the novel) is a predecessor and a shaper of romance novels, it is not a romance novel. It is a contemporary novel with a lot of social commentary and a good love story. This movie? Makes it a full, sweeping romance with some of the best tension ever committed to screen.

Faraway. Omg, an amazing slept-on movie that is a rare romcom featuring a middle-aged woman! Basically, right when her mom dies she finds out her husband is having at min an emotional affair with his younger employee, and she also discovers her mom had a secret property on a Croatian island. She goes there, and is immediately courted by this younger real estate developer guy, but why is she constantly butting heads with the gruff guy who's been living in her mom's house????

Far and Away. Hate to recommend a Tom Cruise film, BUT it is is very romance novel, and it does star Nicole Kidman as well, and I hate to say it but those two did have bomb chemistry when they were married. The Irish accents are rough, but the plot is delightful because he's a poor guy who ends up getting roped into her scheme to leave for America (after his harebrained revenge scheme against her dad fails lol) and they live in a boarding house together pretending to be brother and sister... But like, everyone can tell they aren't because of their extremely obvious sexual tension lol.

When Harry Met Sally. Cliche, but it is a classic every romance lover should see. I'm not a big Billy Crystal fan, but his chemistry with Meg Ryan is MAGIC in this, and you really do get the sense of two people slooowly falling in love without even realizing it until suddenly they do all at once.

[meret118]

is quite a bit of evidence supporting the premise that, below the surface, the biggest drivers of new employment — online job listings — have become elaborate façades destined to cause more problems than they solve for those seeking work. 

. . .

While this practice had been expanding for years, its true severity was not well understood until Clarify Capital released a September 2022 survey of 1,045 hiring managers that was the first to focus specifically on the topic of ghost jobs.

. . .

Then there are the scammers. With so much automation available, it’s become easier than ever for identity thieves to flood the employment market with their own versions of ghost jobs — not to make a real company seem like it’s growing or to make real employees feel like they’re under constant threat of being replaced, but to get practically all the personal information a victim could ever provide.

. . .

According to the FTC, there were more than five times as many fake job and “business opportunity” scams in 2023 as there were in 2018, costing victims nearly half a billion dollars in total. Technology is expanding the variety of possible con jobs with every passing year; today, with the rapid advancement and proliferation of AI-fueled deepfakes, not even video calls can provide reliable confirmation of who exactly is on the other end.

. . .

Finding work is becoming much more difficult, a trend that started at least as early as 2023, when the average “time-to-hire” across all sectors reached a record high of 44 days. LinkedIn reported in March that hiring on its platform was down almost 10% over the previous year.

. . .

The quaint rudimentary uses of ChatGPT and competing programs in the early days of public AI quickly gave way to software that was more and more specialized to the task of finding and applying for jobs. Sonara, Jobscan, LazyApply, SimplifyJobs, Massive and so many other types of job-hunting AIs now exist that it’s impossible to keep track of all of them.

. . .

Rather than solving the problems raised by employers’ methods, however, the use of automated job-hunting only served to set off an AI arms race that has no obvious conclusion. ZipRecruiter’s quarterly New Hires Survey reported that in Q1 of this year, more than half of all applicants admitted using AI to assist their efforts. Hiring managers, flooded with more applications than ever before, took the next logical step of seeking out AI that can detect submissions forged by AI. Naturally, prospective employees responded by turning to AI that could defeat AI detectors. Employers moved on to AI that can conduct entire interviews. The applicants can cruise past this hurdle by using specialized AI assistants that provide souped-up answers to an interviewer’s questions in real time. Around and around we go, with no end in sight.

[eaglesnick]

“No government that is for the profiteers can also be for the people, and I am for the people, while the government is for the profiteers.”— Rose Pastor Stokes

There is a cost of living crisis and it is not about to end anytime soon.

Food and non-alcoholic drink inflation reached a peak of 19.2% in October 2022. Although food and drink inflation is now much lower, it is never the less still rising, being 1.8% higher than a year ago. Today, the Uk  has the highest core inflation rate among the G7 countries as well as the highest level of food price inflation. A study by BravoVoucher predicts the cost of everyday food items will increase rapidly by 2030.

“This research provides a scary look into the future of food prices if current inflation trends continue. The dramatic increase we’ve seen in prices for everyday essentials like olive oil and baked beans is particularly concerning. It highlights the urgent need for effective economic policies to stabilize inflation and protect consumers.” (Social Equality: 22/07/24)

While food inflation is set to rage, super markets continue to make record profits. 

Asda reported  £1.1bn in profit for year ending 31st December 2023, a 24% increase on the previous year. Tesco reported raking in a massive £2.83bn in profit, a 12.7% increase on the year before. Simsbury’s is predicting profits of £1bn in 2024, and Waitrose has reported a 17% increase  in profits.

The lower end supermarkets are making even bigger profits. Lidl reported a quadrupling of profits for the year ending February 2022, and Aldi tripled their profits over the same period.

The point I am making is that while the cost of living crisis continues unabated the major supermarkets are busy increasing profits for their shareholders. There are many reasons the cost of food has increased, from global supply chain disruption, a rise in energy costs, to increased food production costs, but one that is never mentioned is the massive spike in supermarket profits.

Yesterday I talked about dynamic pricing – the practice of changing prices to match demand and supply – the most ridiculous example of this new form of greed being walking into a Stonegate pub at 8pm and being charged 20p more for a pint than if you had ordered the exact same drink a few hours earlier.

Tesco already use dynamic pricing for their online shopping platform, to allow:

“the company to optimise its pricing for maximum profitability” (The Strategy: Tesco Marketing Mix)

OK, so dynamic pricing is employed for Internet food sales. Most of us still prefer to go to the supermarket in person and “feel the goods” as it were. So we are safe from dynamic pricing. NOT SO!

More and more of British supermarkets are introducing dynamic pricing to the “in-store” experience in the form of electronic shelf-edge labels. (ESL’s)  Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons, Asda and M&S are all reported to be experimenting with ESL’s using Artificial Intelligence to generate algorithms to determine price minute by minute. Electronically displayed prices on the edge of shelving means prices can be changed minute by minute depending upon demand and supply.

Gone is the notion of value for money. The only thing that will matter  will be how much the customer is willing to pay for any particular item at any given particular moment in time, regardless of what it cost to produce.

If price is going to be determined by how much people are willing to pay, how long before we have the scenario of the  sole remaining can of baked beans on a Tesco shelf being sold not at its current price of  £1.40 per can but at £2.50 simply because one shopper has more money than another?

Profiteering has been described as:

“The practice of making or seeking to make excessive or unfair profit, especially illegally or in a black market”

Profiteering now has another definition: dynamic pricing.

[sngii1726]

What does it mean if the 7th house lord is debilitated or in a weak position?

When the lord of the 7th house is debilitated or in a weak position in a birth chart in Vedic astrology, it can have significant implications for relationships, partnerships, and marriage. Here are some points to consider regarding this scenario:

Challenges in Relationships: A debilitated or weak 7th house lord may indicate challenges, delays, or obstacles in forming and maintaining relationships. The individual may struggle to find harmonious and fulfilling partnerships, and there may be issues with compatibility or communication in romantic relationships.

Unstable Marital Life: The 7th house is primarily associated with marriage and committed partnerships. When its lord is debilitated or weak, there may be instability or difficulties in the individual's marital life. This could manifest as conflicts, separations, or even divorce in extreme cases.

Lack of Relationship Commitment: Individuals with a weak 7th house lord may find it challenging to commit to long-term relationships or may have a fear of commitment. They may prefer to keep their options open or may struggle with fidelity and loyalty in relationships.

Impact on Business Partnerships: The 7th house also governs business partnerships and collaborations. When its lord is debilitated, there may be challenges in forming successful business alliances, and the individual may encounter conflicts or disagreements with business partners.

Remedial Measures: Depending on the specific planetary influences and other factors in the birth chart, there may be remedies that can mitigate the negative effects of a debilitated 7th house lord. These remedies may include wearing gemstones, performing specific rituals or prayers, and making lifestyle adjustments.

Focus on Self-Development: Despite the challenges indicated by a weak 7th house lord, it's essential for individuals to focus on self-development and personal growth. By cultivating self-awareness, emotional maturity, and healthy communication skills, they can navigate relationship challenges more effectively and build stronger connections with others.

It is important to remember that astrology provides insight into possible trends and influences but does not determine a person's destiny. Individuals have the power to make choices and take actions that can positively impact their relationships and overall well-being. For more information you can use Kundli Chakra 2022 Professional Software. Which can give you more information based on your horoscope.

[pink-ttes]

ℐׅ 핑크 ─ THE PINKETTES : LET’S TALK POPULARITY

a semi-brief overview of the popularity ranking within pinkalicious and the solo activities that each member has. (ib. @/moirtre)

001. ∬ ˚ ⋆ ࣪  CHARMEINE YU

Coming in at the most popular member, Charmeine was favored before even debuting. She is one of the wealthy heiress’ of the well-established LEE FAIMLY. She’s also the cousin of already debuted Lee girl, BRIAR LEE, who got her musical start in 2016 under TROUVAILLE. Due to her already having a following before THE PINK TAPE aired, her name being mentioned skyrocketed viewer ratings and anticipation for the show. That popularity only took off even more after seeing her on the show, getting a taste of her many talents. She regularly trended during the survival shows airtime for her dancing skills, vocals, and stage presence—not to mention her variety skills. It was no surprise that she made it into the lineup, winning the entire show and being crowned QUEEN PINK. Following her debut, Charmeine’s popularity failed to fade, only growing.

Over her career, Charmeine has had a plethora of solo endeavors, to the extent that some people may even recognize her as Charmeine Yu rather than Charmeine from The PINKETTES. Being the third member to debut as a solo artist and easily the most successful, she came out with her first solo album in 2022 which was a hit instantly. Her promotions for the solo were incredibly iconic, pushing her further in popularity by miles. She became a global ambassador for CHANEL in 2019. She also went on a number of variety shows solo, her most memorable appearances being: THE MANAGER, AMAZING SATURDAY, and her labelmates podcast/talk show, CHATTY WITH ADDY.

She also went onto model for other brands such as ALEXANDER MCQUEEN, MARC JACOBS DAISY, and UNDER ARMOUR. Aside from brand deals, she’s also earned quite a few musical features from artists like Ravana’s KYRIE. It’s safe to say that Charmeine is booked and busy.

002. ∬ ˚ ⋆ ࣪  TANA KANAROT

Majority would thank TANA’S heritage for her popularity, ranking at the second most popular member. Her mother, being a famous model and her father being a well-respected industrial designer with lots of money, her name was already in talks. She is constantly battling with CHARMEINE for most popular but it’s more common for Charmeine to win. A part of her lesser popularity with fans and the general public can be accounted to her likability. She’s had a history with Netizen’s criticizing her attitude, often accusing her of having “Celebrity Sickness.” That isn’t to say that Tana hasn’t had a successful solo career, becoming one of VERSACE’S global ambassador in 2020 and the second member to debut as a soloist in 2021. Her solo was a commercial success, surpassing LONDON’S solo. However, her fans were upset when Charmeine’s solo outperformed hers statistically—charts, streams, and sales.

Taking after her mother, most of Tana’s solo activities, if not all, consist of modeling gigs. She’s posed for brands like NIKE, ARMANI, and HERMÈS BIRKIN.

003. ∬ ˚ ⋆ ࣪  BAE YOONA : LONDON

Most known for her likable personality and Girl-Next-Door image, LONDON ranks in at third most popular member. She was quite popular during THE PINK TAPE, even beating TANA in popularity. The general public favored her being “down to earth” and sweet. They also praised her visuals, likening her to an Angel and even giving her the endearing nickname NATIONS ANGEL. However, this popularity seemed to turn against her with a large few of Netizens slandering her for her relationships with male idols. Though she’s never had a public relationship with any, she’s friends with a lot of male idols and they’ve never shied away from showing their appreciation and admiration for her publicly.

Majority of her solo promotions come from her reputation as a TV personality, becoming a beloved MUSIC BANK MC, making appearances on THE RETURN OF SUPERMAN, HOME ALONE, and RUNNING MAN. However, she has dabbled into the pool of sponsorships, officially becoming a global ambassador for CARTIER in 2020 and is frequently receiving gifts from them all the time. London also accumulated deals with the likes of DIOR BEAUTY and INNISFREE.

The first to do so, London debuted as a soloist in 2020 which received high-praise from the general public.

Although not really publicized, a large majority of Pinkalicious’ discography is credited to London. She has a considerable amount of writing and producing credits under her belt, working with a plethora idols that the public wouldn’t even think. She also plans on publishing a book some time in the future. She has her hands in a few things.

004. ∬ ˚ ⋆ ࣪  KANG MIKYUNG

Due to a cesspool of attitude scandals, MIKYUNG only sits at the fourth most popular member of the group. From the moment she was revealed on THE PINK TAPE, Netizens bashed the girl for her “narcissism” and labeled her as a diva. What Mikyung viewed as self-confidence, others looked at as unattractive arrogance. The general public went on a witch hunt with her, which continued even after her debut—which only fueled their hatred for her, seeing as she still made the lineup in spite of her personality.

Twitter and fans in general have a ball demonizing her. She still managed to garner fans, mostly praised for her dancing talents, unique visual, and stage presence. Aside from this, she doesn’t have as many solo promotions compared to the members ranked above her, although she still was chosen as an ambassador by MIU MIU in 2020. She has been a loyal ambassador for the brand ever since, regularly sporting Miu Miu purses and attending fashion shows covered from head to toe in Miu Miu. She’s also posed for them countless times, often being named the FACE OF MIU MIU. Additionally, Minkyung teamed up with BLUMARINE, MICHAEL KORS, and JACQUEMUS.

Almost all of her variety show appearances are with a group or another member. The most variety time she has is if she posts a vlog in the groups official YouTube channel, which is usually either about dancing or her trips overseas. Occasionally, she’ll go live either by herself or with a member and stream mediocre but funny gameplay and interact with fans.

005. ∬ ˚ ⋆ ࣪  CAI ARNELA : NELLY

Easily the most blatantly disliked member, NELLY is ranked last in popularity. She was never really noticed or given any real attention during THE PINK TAPE from viewers. There were the occasional comments about her being pretty or “they hope she still debuts,” because they just knew she wasn’t making it in the lineup. When she did, however, all hell broke loose. Initially, there was only supposed to be the top four making it into the group. But Nelly, ranking at five to everyone’s surprise, was added to the lineup at the last minute. Everyone already had looked at the top four as THE CORE FOUR, and essentially the best lineup to come out of Pinkalicious. So Nelly’s addition was riddled with comments such as “rigged,” “unnecessary,” and “filler member.”

Safe to say, it’s hard coming across a BFF that doesn’t at least have a little animosity toward Nelly. Especially considering songs were swiped from their debut rollout, allegations about Nelly not being able to keep up with the others labeled as the reason why.

Putting aside all of the controversies, Nelly was still able to bag her title as a global ambassador for CALVIN KLEIN in 2022, becoming the last member to become an ambassador for a brand. She doesn’t attend variety shows without the members and she rarely gets solo CF’s, however, in 2022 she filmed a CF for MCDONALD’S and appeared in a TOYOTA advertisement.

[thechanelmuse]

My Book Review

Morgan Jerkins was trending during the release of Kendrick Lamar's Drake hit diss record, "Not Like Us," after culture vulture DJ Vlad attempted to get her fired from her teaching position at Princeton University for telling him to mind his mf business. Black folks digitally hemmed him up for his spiteful retaliation, and he began backpedaling only after he discovered Morgan is the niece of legendary producer Rodney "Darkchild" Jerkins.

Seeing her name trend quickly made me recall her memoir, Wandering in Strange Lands: A Daughter of the Great Migration Reclaims Her Roots. It was one of my favorite reads of 2022. I headed to this site to reblog my review. Lo and behold I never posted one on here 🙃. So here we are.

From the moment I read the title, I knew this book would feel familiar, taking me back to the my early days of deep curiosity, personal discovery, and documented confirmation while uncovering the long paper trail of my ancestry and land. (For info on lineage tracing, refer to my post here.) 

Morgan Jerkins' familial journey through Georgia, Lowcountry South Carolina, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and California made me think of my own as a granddaughter of grandparents who headed to New York during the Great Migration by way of Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina extending to Louisa County, Virginia and Boley, Oklahoma. Morgan's memoir, which is divided into four sections, is engrossing, detailed, and reels you into a seat next to her on her journey.

Here's the book's blurb:

Between 1916 and 1970, six million Black Americans left their rural homes in the South for jobs in cities in the North, West, and Midwest in a movement known as The Great Migration. But while this event transformed the complexion of America and provided black people with new economic opportunities, it also disconnected them from their roots, their land, and their sense of identity, argues Morgan Jerkins. In this fascinating and deeply personal exploration, she recreates her ancestors’ journeys across America, following the migratory routes they took. Following in their footsteps, Jerkins seeks to understand not only her own past, but the lineage of an entire group of people who have been displaced, disenfranchised, and disrespected throughout our history. Through interviews, photos, and hundreds of pages of transcription, Jerkins braids the loose threads of her family’s oral histories, which she was able to trace back 300 years, with the insights and recollections of Black people she met along the way—the tissue of Black myths, customs, and blood that connect the bones of American history.

Genealogy is a never-ending process of search and discovery for Black Americans that's met with hidden documents and some areas paper genocide, due to destroyed documents, misclassification, and several stages of racial/ethnic reclassification for our ethnic group implemented by the US government since the 1790 census. I'm pretty sure even after concluding this book Morgan continued her search, working back through her long lines. It's layered like an onion. I've been working on mine for almost two decades reaching the 1600s for a few. It gives you a sense of awakening that's an everyday feeling. It'll never dissipate, especially being able to pull black the veil and unearth the identity of ancestors whose names haven't been said for hundreds of years.

[aleyalea]

Blogging vs. TikTok: Is Long-Form Content Still A King?

MDA20009 DIGITAL COMMUNITIES

Well let’s be freaking real, everyone and their grandma is on TikTok and Instagram these days. You can’t scroll for five seconds without getting hit with a trend dance or even a cute cat video or maybe some Influencer telling you about “why you should buy this product!”. Well, the app itself is very quick, it’s flashy, and of course it’s very addicting too. So, where does that leave good ol’ blogging? Well, you know, the thing people used to do before short-form video took over our lives?

Here comes the real question, is long-form content still A KING? In this era do people still blog? Is blogging still relevant? The answer, YES and maybe no. Well, according to Mr Google, blogging is still relevant till these days but it’s not the top dog anymore.

WTH is Blogging?

So what is a blog? According to (Weiner, 2022) Blogs are a type of regularly updated websites that provide insight into a certain topic. The word blog is a combined version of the words “web” and “log” (Weiner, 2022). It’s basically like having a journal but in a digital format. Short form “virtually”. 

Like I mentioned before, blogging is not the top dog anymore and it’s also not the same as it used to be. In fact, it has evolved in exciting ways. If you’re thinking, “Okay, so what does that even mean?”, don’t worry, I’m about to break it down for you why it still a valuable today.

Firstly, people still want in-depth information. I believe there are still 5 out 10 people not prefers or wants their content delivered in very small-sized like what do you mean 15-second? 30-second video?Sometimes there are people who like to seek or need a real explanation. You can’t learn how to build a website, start a business or bake a ten-layer cake from a quick TikTok (well, maybe the cake, but you get my point). So basically, blogs allow long-form, detailed content. To put it simply, they’re where people go when they’re looking for answers, rather than just casual entertainment.

Secondly, there are some people who find joy in blogging. Sitting down with their laptops and a cup of coffee to spend time expressing themselves through writing. Unlike TikTok and Instagram, where everything is short and meant for instant hits, but with blogs it lets you dig deeper into ideas and share personal stories. It’s a place where your creativity can shine and your art work is appreciated by the communities.

Additionally, I think one of the most empowering aspects of blogging is you own the damn thing. You control what’s published, how it looks, and how people interact with it. Plus, you can monetize however you want. Whether it’s ads, affiliate links, or sponsorships, everything you’re in control of. Having a blog is like owning a house, of course you make the rules. You decide the decor and the layout. You can freely create a community and connect with readers the way you want. 

But in the end, TikTok and Instagram have truly taken over, leaving blogs behind. Today, TikTok and Instagram dominate as the go-to sources for quick, visual entertainment. With shorter attention spans, people tend to favor videos over long written content. Platforms like TikTok and Instagram quickly capture attention with their dynamic visuals and sound, making them more engaging users and of course without any shame I'm definitely one of them.

To be very honest, a lot of people have switched from blogging to making videos because it’s easier to grab and hold people’s attention. Especially for those who don’t enjoy reading.

Vlogs are an engaging visual medium that many viewers prefer. It can be easier to build an audience and follow with video (Hazel, 2024). It’s easier to pull someone into a 15-second video than to get them to read a 1500 word article. Well that’s a fact.

People have shorter attention spans these days (big thanks to the internet), and scrolling through TikTok and Instagram gives them instant satisfaction. You can laugh, learn, and move on in just a few swipes. Blogging? meh… It takes more time to create, more time to consume, and the immediate payoff just isn’t the same.  It’s easier to throw together a 15-second clip than to write 1,000 words on "The Art of Slow-Cooking Ribs: A BBQ Lover's Guide". If you want quick content with little effort, TikTok and Instagram are where it’s at. Blogging requires dedication and patience, both of which are in short supply in a world where everything needs to happen now. People want fast, easy-to-consume content, and that’s where blogs sometimes lose out. 

So, Is Long-Form Content Still A King? I'll leave you with that to ponder.

References

Weiner, A. (2022, December 6). What is a blog? Definition, types, benefits and why you need one. Wix Blog. https://www.wix.com/blog/what-is-a-blog

[rainbowsky]

There should be a turtle category for turtles that believe they were together but have separated. Tortoise maybe?There's a few of us who think they were a couple but they broke up sometime (my guess is early-mid 2022). Now you may say I'm not a turtle but I follow their works, I enjoy watching clips of them, I believe they were together and I hope they will be together again if they want to.I hope that turtles can accept us as a related, friendly genus and not gatekeep us out of turtledom :D

With all due respect, Anon, this is 🙄🙄🙄🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️.

Fake, fan fiction, CPN.

First of all, there are no 'categories' - a turtle is a turtle. As I have said a thousand times, there is no obligation to believe they're a real couple. A huge percentage of turtles don't really believe they're a couple. Many have never believed they were a couple at any point. Creating or focusing on divisions is destructive to the sense of community in turtledom. Just be a turtle.

It's a bit of a conceit to believe that just because you no longer believe SZD, that suddenly you're set apart from others. You're not. You're just an ordinary turtle.

Also, before I get a bunch of asks about this 'breakup' theory, let me say that it's absolutely nothing new. There have been tons of theories of their breaking up over the years. One prior to the Japan trip, one in 2020, and every year since. Just as there are people who become SZD turtles, there are people who fall out of belief. It happens all the time. Some come to believe they never were a couple, some come to believe they broke up - it's nothing new.

Often people who rely heavily on candy for their continued belief will wax and wane in their belief as the supply of candy waxes and wanes. This is very common*.

*Just a reminder that GG and DD are ordinary people who have busy lives and don't owe us proof of their relationship.

I personally don't see any evidence that they broke up, and in fact there's plenty of evidence to the contrary - including the recent Weibo hot search after DD removed CQL from his bio. A hot search about them breaking up started trending and was immediately shut down, meanwhile several other BJYX hotsearches were left to dominate the list for a while.

But everyone is free to make up their own minds about it. I'll say this until I'm blue in the face - no one is obligated to believe SZD.

So rather than forming your little breakup clique, Anon, how about just enjoying GG and DD and continue your career as a turtle?

Also - NOT AN ASK. My inbox is for questions, not for free rental as other people's anonymous soapbox.

PS] I'm not going to debate any theories, so before anyone decides to write me with 'their side of the issue' let me just remind you that everyone has their own blog to post their own ideas, theories and position papers on. My inbox is for questions.

[beardedmrbean]

Democratic St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones’ support of gun control is coming into question after an open records request released thousands of her personal texts, including one that argued gun crackdowns are ineffective.

"Chicago has strict gun laws as well but that doesn't deter gun violence," Jones texted in a group chat to her dad, Virvus Jones and advisor Richard Callow on March 21, KSDK reported. "It's about investing in the people."

Thousands of Jones’ texts from her personal cellphone were publicly released last week after KSDK and the St. Louis Business Journal filed separate Sunshine Act requests for her communications regarding the political appointment process for a Circuit Attorney.

Her private message appears to contradict public comments she has made in the past, including after a mass shooting in the city last month that killed one and left 11 others injured.

ST. LOUIS CHECKS IN AS AMERICA'S MOST DANGEROUS CITY WHILE BALTIMORE SUBURB RANKS AS THE SAFEST: STUDY

"Our state's lax gun laws make our challenge even more difficult," Jones said in June following the shooting. "The legislature's lack of action on gun safety laws encourages the proliferation of guns on our streets and puts our responding officers directly in harm's way."

Jones also joined other cities across the country in declaring June 3 as "Gun Violence Awareness Day," where the mayor argued the Senate "must protect our families" by "expanding background checks to all gun sales, regulating assault weapons, and passing a federal red flag law." 

VIOLENT CRIMES ON THE RISE IN 2022, FOLLOWING PREVIOUS UNPRECEDENTED SPIKE IN MURDERS

In another text to her father and Callow, Jones recounted how Newark, New Jersey, has similar demographics to St. Louis, but far fewer murders, citing Newark’s investment in violence prevention programs. "Newark, NJ has the same size population, same size police force, and similar racial demographics, yet had 50 murders in 2022," she wrote, KSDK reported. "I visited these programs first hand and I know that they work. We just need the will…."

St. Louis recorded 200 homicides in 2022, 201 in 2021, and 263 in 2020, according to data published by the St. Louis Police Department. The city often has one of the highest murder rates in the nation, alongside cities such as Chicago and Baltimore.

The mayor’s office has since gone into "damage control mode," according to KSDK, with Jones’ spokesman releasing a statement last week clarifying the mayor’s stance on gun control.

"Gun laws are just one part of the solution," Jones spokesman Nick Desideri said. "There’s a difference between deterring behavior and making it harder to get firearms and weaponry; for example, there’s no doubt that gun laws in the blue region around Newark help reduce violence as opposed to here."

SOROS-BACKED PROSECUTOR IN ST. LOUIS ABRUPTLY RESIGNS AFTER SCANDAL-RIDDEN TENURE

In other texts, Jones appeared to agree with her public statements in support of gun control.

"We have way too many guns on our streets and no way to take them away," she said in a text message on May 10, according to KSDK.

They mayor also took issue with an op-ed written by Republican state Sen. Cindy O'Laughlin, which argued for city leaders to emphasize education, employment training and economic development to reverse crime trends in St. Louis. 

"St. Louis needs to clean up its act in many ways. It starts with reducing crime. We are also working to improve our schools statewide and there’s no better place to start than in St. Louis. The costs of crime and an unskilled workforce is costing the entire state in many ways," O'Laughlin wrote in The Missouri Times. 

ST. LOUIS FATAL SHOOTING CLAIMS LIVES OF WOMAN AND 2 CHILDREN IN COUNTY HOME

Jones mocked the op-ed on text, summing it up as "basically" saying, "'Thanks for staying in STL even tho we’re responsible for the horrific amount of guns on your streets.'" 

Desideri took to Twitter last week to share a message from Jones, which stated the texts were released due to an "honest mistake."

"I’ve never been one to hide my feelings," the message relayed by the spokesman stated. "Through an honest mistake, text messages between my family and close friends were released to the public. Sometimes my words can be terse, and my text messages speak for themselves. I understand the impact of some of my comments, and will contact the relevant parties to ensure productive dialogue moving forward." 

MISSOURI ATTORNEY GENERAL BLAMES ST. LOUIS PROGRESSIVE DA FOR CITY REACHING 'CRISIS POINT'

The texts between Jones, her father and Callow were gathered following the open records requests in connection to Kim Gardner stepping down in May as St. Louis circuit attorney. Typically, such materials are reviewed and portions redacted before they are released to the public, but the texts were published wholesale in a 135-page PDF document, according to KSDK.

The PDF was removed just a couple days after it was published and replaced with a shorter and redacted version.

The mayor’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for additional comment on the matter.

[yeohchernyeong]

Week 6 Slow fashion

What is slow fashion?

Slow fashion is a reflection and response to the fast fashion model. It emphasizes not chasing short-term trends, but focusing on the quality and design of clothing. Slow fashion advocates call on people to re-examine their consumption habits, choose environmentally friendly and socially responsible brands, and support sustainable development.

More and more businesses are adopting green initiatives as part of their business philosophy. This shows that companies are beginning to realize the importance of sustainability to their long-term development. Slow fashion, as a new approach, focuses on more durable products, traditional production techniques, and sustainability to achieve sustainable development (Domingos et al., 2022).

In addition, female consumers show a more positive attitude towards slow fashion clothing, while consumers with higher income levels are more likely to purchase slow fashion clothing. Gender and income level are important factors affecting consumer purchasing behavior in the field of slow fashion. And established a model to explain consumers' purchase intention of slow fashion clothing. The model showed good explanatory power in explaining the purchase intention of American consumers' slow fashion clothing, explaining 55.6% of the change in purchase intention (Chi et al., 2021 ). This shows that the model can well explain the driving factors behind slow fashion purchasing behavior, providing valuable insights for future research and practice.

The concept of slow fashion is the opposite of fast fashion, emphasizing quality rather than quantity, and focusing on transparency and responsibility in the design and production of clothing. Consumers are increasingly demanding sustainability and corporate ethics. As consumers increasingly align their values with purchasing decisions, support for slow fashion is gradually increasing (Domingos et al., 2022). This shows that slow fashion is not only a fashion choice, but also an expression of lifestyle and values.

In addition, a positive relationship between compassion and sustainable purchasing standards was found, while compassion plays an important role in sustainable fashion consumption. Compassion is considered a moral emotion that can motivate people to take actions to support social and environmental sustainability (Geiger & Keller, 2017). Particularly as social sustainability issues become increasingly prominent, compassion can be a powerful motivator for sustainable consumption behaviour. This emotional factor interacts with individuals' values and jointly affects their consumption decisions.

The complex interplay between emotions, values and behaviors in the context of sustainable consumption has important implications. People's consumption behavior is not only affected by personal values. In particular, women are more emotional and are easily influenced by emotional factors. These factors jointly shape people's attitudes and behaviors towards sustainable fashion.

Domingos, M., Vale, V. T., & Faria, S. (2022). Slow fashion consumer behavior: A literature review. Sustainability, 14(5), 2860. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052860 

Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., & Wang, Y. (2021). A study of U.S. consumers’ intention to purchase slow fashion apparel: Understanding the key determinants. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 14(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/17543266.2021.1872714 

Geiger, S. M., & Keller, J. (2017). Shopping for clothes and sensitivity to the suffering of others: The role of compassion and values in sustainable fashion consumption. Environment and Behavior, 50(10), 1119–1144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517732109

[joshuajamesposts]

How AI is Revolutionizing Digital Marketing Tools in 2024

wanna know How AI is Revolutionizing Digital Marketing Tools in 2024 look no futher . in this blog i have outlined the perfect way to help you know the insights of ai revolutionizing digital marketing tools in 2024

introduction

The digital marketing landscape is evolving at a breakneck pace, and artificial intelligence (AI) is at the forefront of this transformation. As we step into 2024, AI-powered tools are revolutionizing how businesses approach digital marketing, offering unprecedented levels of efficiency, personalization, and insight. In this article, we'll explore how AI is reshaping digital marketing tools and why incorporating these advanced technologies is essential for staying competitive.

The Rise of AI in Digital Marketing tools in 2024

AI has become an integral part of digital marketing strategies, with 80% of industry experts incorporating some form of AI technology in their marketing activities by the end of 2023. This trend is only expected to grow as AI tools become more sophisticated and accessible.

here's the top must have digital marketing tools in 2024 

Stats & Facts:

Adoption Rate: By 2023, 80% of industry experts were using AI technology in their marketing activities (Source: Forbes).

Market Growth: The global AI in the marketing market is expected to grow from $12 billion in 2022 to $35 billion by 2025 (Source: MarketsandMarkets).

Enhancing Personalization

One of the most significant impacts of AI on digital marketing is its ability to deliver highly personalized experiences. AI algorithms analyze vast amounts of data to understand consumer behavior, preferences, and trends. This allows marketers to create tailored content, recommendations, and offers for individual users.

Example: E-commerce giants like Amazon and Netflix leverage AI to provide personalized product recommendations and content suggestions, resulting in higher engagement and conversion rates. According to a study by McKinsey, companies that excel in personalization generate 40% more revenue from those activities than average players.

Stats & Facts:

Revenue Increase: Companies that excel in personalization generate 40% more revenue than those that don't (Source: McKinsey).

Consumer Preference: 80% of consumers are more likely to make a purchase when brands offer personalized experiences (Source: Epsilon).

Improving Customer Insights

AI-powered analytics tools are transforming how businesses gather and interpret customer data. These tools can process and analyze large datasets in real-time, providing deep insights into customer behavior, sentiment, and preferences.

Example: Tools like Google Analytics 4 use AI to offer predictive metrics, such as potential revenue and churn probability. This helps businesses make informed decisions and refine their marketing strategies.

Stats & Facts:

Predictive Analytics: Companies that use predictive analytics are 2.9 times more likely to report revenue growth rates higher than the industry average

Data Processing: AI can analyze data up to 60 times faster than humans

Automating Routine Tasks

Automation is another area where AI is making a significant impact. AI-driven automation tools handle repetitive tasks, freeing up marketers to focus on more strategic activities.

Example: Email marketing platforms like Mailchimp use AI to automate email campaign scheduling, segmentation, and even content creation. This results in more efficient campaigns and improved ROI. In fact, automated email marketing can generate up to 320% more revenue than non-automated campaigns.

Stats & Facts:

Revenue Boost: Automated email marketing can generate up to 320% more revenue than non-automated campaigns

Time Savings: AI can reduce the time spent on routine tasks by up to 50%

Enhancing Customer Service with Chatbots

AI-powered chatbots are revolutionizing customer service by providing instant, 24/7 support. These chatbots can handle a wide range of queries, from product information to troubleshooting, without human intervention.

Example: Companies like Sephora use AI chatbots to assist customers with product recommendations and booking appointments. According to a report by Gartner, by 2024, AI-driven chatbots will handle 85% of customer interactions without human agents.

Stats & Facts:

Interaction Handling: By 2024, AI-driven chatbots will handle 85% of customer interactions without human agents

Cost Savings: Businesses can save up to 30% in customer support costs by using chatbots

Boosting Content Creation and Optimization

AI is also transforming content creation and optimization. AI tools can generate high-quality content, suggest improvements, and even predict how content will perform.

“Aspiring to create top-notch content become a leader in the industry?

well here's the price drop alert for high quality content masterly course from digital scholar to enhance your branding viral on the social media, google better rankings

Example: Tools like Copy.ai and Writesonic use AI to create blog posts, social media content, and ad copy. Additionally, platforms like MarketMuse analyze content and provide optimization recommendations to improve search engine rankings. According to HubSpot, businesses that use AI for content marketing see a 50% increase in engagement.

Stats & Facts:

Engagement Increase: Businesses using AI for content marketing see a 50% increase in engagement

Content Generation: AI can generate content up to 10 times faster than humans

Enhancing Ad Targeting and Performance

AI-driven advertising platforms are changing the way businesses target and engage with their audiences. These tools use machine learning algorithms to analyze user data and optimize ad placements, ensuring that ads reach the right people at the right time.

Example: Facebook's AI-powered ad platform uses advanced algorithms to target users based on their behavior, interests, and demographics. This results in higher click-through rates (CTR) and lower cost-per-click (CPC). A study by WordStream found that AI-optimized ads can achieve up to 50% higher CTRs compared to non-optimized ads.

Stats & Facts:

CTR Increase: AI-optimized ads can achieve up to 50% higher click-through rates

Cost Efficiency: AI-driven ad platforms can reduce cost-per-click by up to 30%

Predictive Analytics for Better Decision-Making

Predictive analytics powered by AI enables marketers to forecast trends, customer behavior, and campaign outcomes. This allows for proactive decision-making and more effective strategy development.

Example: Platforms like IBM Watson Marketing use AI to predict customer behavior and provide actionable insights. This helps businesses tailor their marketing efforts to meet future demands. According to a report by Forrester, companies that use predictive analytics are 2.9 times more likely to report revenue growth rates higher than the industry average.

Stats & Facts:

Revenue Growth: Companies using predictive analytics are 2.9 times more likely to report higher revenue growth rates

Accuracy Improvement: AI can improve the accuracy of marketing forecasts by up to 70%

Enhancing Social Media Management

AI tools are revolutionizing social media management by automating content scheduling, analyzing engagement metrics, and even generating content ideas.

Example: Tools like Hootsuite and Sprout Social use AI to analyze social media trends and suggest optimal posting times. They also provide sentiment analysis to help businesses understand how their audience feels about their brand. According to Social Media Today, AI-powered social media tools can increase engagement by up to 20%.

Stats & Facts:

Engagement Boost: AI-powered social media tools can increase engagement by up to 20%

Efficiency Gains: AI can reduce the time spent on social media management by up to 30%

The Future of AI in Digital Marketing tools

here's the top must have digital marketing tools in 2024 

As we look ahead, the role of AI in digital marketing will only continue to expand. Emerging technologies like natural language processing (NLP), computer vision, and advanced machine learning models will further enhance AI's capabilities.

Example: AI-powered voice search optimization tools will become increasingly important as more consumers use voice assistants like Siri and Alexa for online searches. By 2024, voice searches are expected to account for 50% of all online searches.

Stats & Facts:

Voice Search Growth: By 2024, voice searches are expected to account for 50% of all online searches

NLP Advancements: The global NLP market is projected to reach $43 billion by 2025

Conclusion

AI is revolutionizing digital marketing tools in 2024, offering businesses new ways to enhance personalization, improve customer insights, automate routine tasks, and optimize their marketing efforts. By leveraging AI-powered tools, businesses can stay competitive, drive higher engagement, and achieve better ROI. As AI technology continues to evolve, its impact on digital marketing will only grow, making it an essential component of any successful marketing strategy. Embrace the power of AI and transform your digital marketing efforts to stay ahead in the ever-changing digital landscape.