#do you all know that many times the people decrying the hate the loudest were actually the anons or sockpuppets spreading the hate too

[waybeforeyourtime]

I posted 210 times in 2022

That's 60 more posts than 2021!

91 posts created (43%)

119 posts reblogged (57%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@books-books-smolderinglooks

@royaledvin

@youngroyalsascats

@daylightsimon

@littlebabywille

I tagged 174 of my posts in 2022

Only 17% of my posts had no tags

#young royals - 136 posts

#young royals fandom - 60 posts

#wilmon - 52 posts

#young royals wilhelm - 38 posts

#young royals simon - 34 posts

#edvin ryding - 24 posts

#omar rudberg - 21 posts

#young royals s2 - 16 posts

#prince wilhelm - 14 posts

#young royals fanfic - 13 posts

Longest Tag: 134 characters

#do you all know that many times the people decrying the hate the loudest were actually the anons or sockpuppets spreading the hate too

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

There are 2 types of people right now in YR fandom.

Those who saw August in the opening and thought, "Aw, poor guy. Yes, what he did was wrong, but he really is sorry. Look at him! No one deserves to suffer like that."

And those who thought, "Good, you bigoted, misogynistic, self-centered piece of shit. You're only sorry because you lost your privilege of being close to the Royal family. If you still had your money and your power, you would step all over people like Simon. Eat your fucking broccoli alone, you loser!"

Me - that 2nd group is me.

Neither are right. Neither are wrong. It’s just different perspectives of a well-written character.

111 notes - Posted September 30, 2022

#4

I saw the first post pitting Heartstopper against Young Royals and immediately blocked.

That sort of attitude is ugly and unproductive. It feels that it comes from jealousy and the drive to win. That sort of influence can ruin fandom for people. Everything doesn't have to be BETTER THAN something else to be good. You can like something without hating something else.

And when you come out with "a is better than b" you come across as attempting to put yourself higher than b's fans, especially when you put it in the tags. But, you're not, so don't do it.

120 notes - Posted April 29, 2022

#3

I don't get everyone who thinks Simon was reduced to a love interest, then complain Micke's storyline wasn't there. So you wanted him to be reduced to being the kid with a shitty father? Oh wait you say but that's part of Simon's troubles, he needs to grow and learn from his issues with his dad. Well, that's what he did - grow and learn to weed out what everyone else wants or what they tell him to do - but with Wille's relationship instead.

I do not get how anyone watched S2 and didn't feel Simon's inner turmoil and struggles! I laughed out loud recently when I saw someone say it was out of character for him. Some of you all need to look at Simon in fandom vs Simon in canon. In S1, most of Simon's decisions came from him trying to please other people. That was a huge part of the story. At the end of the S1, Simon made a decision to walk away from Wille. Then in S2, he realizes that's not so easy - that he can't turn off his feelings and the situation is much more complicated. But he still let other people lead him around, he still let other people tell him what's best for him. And he overcame that. He learned to ignore the noise and look out for his best interests.

And why don't you all think that Wille was reduced to only a love interest for Simon? I mean every single conflict he had this season was because of his relationship with Simon. He literally called the Queen to freak out that Simon was on a date.

This is a love story - that's been established quite clearly. So yes the leads - both of them - are going to be "love interests" and their story surrounding that.

159 notes - Posted November 18, 2022

#2

169 notes - Posted October 14, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

Simon: I really don't think I'm ready for a relationship. I'm very obviously not over my ex yet.

Marcus 🚩: cool cool. we'll be chill about this. no pressure. I'll just keep texting you constantly to hang out until you feel bad for me and say 'yes''.

Simon: okay but really I'm not ready for this. You're nice and I think we should -

Marcus 🚩: hey, no I totally get that. I'm so chill here. But let me bring up all your traumas to show you how broken you are: the video (which I didn’t watch 😉😉😉👀), your addict toxic father, how hurt your mother was. I hope that helps you see that you're the problem here, not me. I'm perfect and I love you, and we have the most beautiful relationship ever. Trust me and do what I say. I know what you need better than you do. Because remember I reminded you that you’re broken.

Simon: Okay, dude, like seriously, I'm done. I tried, and you're nice and all, but I don't want to be in a relationship with you.

Marcus 🚩: WHERE DID THIS COME FROM?! HOW DARE YOU NOT BE OVER HAVING YOUR MOST INTIMATE MOMENT SHARED WITH THE WHOLE WORLD. IT'S YOU, NOT ME. I'M THE PERFECT ONE HERE AND YOU WILL REGRET THIS.

223 notes - Posted November 6, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

[booksinpublic]

Why we’re covering Russia

Please prepare to encounter an earth-shattering paradox that might just rip apart the fabric of space, time and modern American politics. Ready? Deep breath. Here we go.

I’m a journalist and I’m not bitter about the election.

Personally and professionally, I’m not attempting to change the results of the US Presidential election, sneak Hillary Clinton into office or otherwise disrupt Donald Trump’s road to the White House. I respect the decision that emerged after a year of hateful campaigning and fearful voting, and honestly, I’m not even that surprised by the outcome.

Personally, I am affronted and ashamed to have Donald Trump represent my country, and I’m afraid of what strange new havok his idiocy and ego might inflict upon the world. But, to be fair, I am afraid of every president.

As with every new person we proudly march into the Oval Office, I wonder how many people this president will kill. I wonder how, why and when his decisions will result in death, how large the scope will be, and I hope he ruminates seriously on his role in the entire affair. Because sending people to die and orchestrating the untimely murder of citizens across the world is one of the infallible, unavoidable aspects of being President of the United States, especially in an era of drone warfare, connected missiles and rapidly advancing weapons technology. People are going to die because of Donald Trump’s decisions, just as people died under Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and nearly every other president in history. Just as they would have died under Hillary Clinton.

I wonder how killing people will make Donald Trump feel. I wonder if it will change him.

But I digress.

Donald Trump is the President of the United States. This is a fact. As a citizen and especially as a journalist, I honor this fact and I’m not in the business of trying to change it single-handedly.

Which brings us to Russia.

B A C K  I N  T H E  U S S R

I would not be doing my job if I did not write about Russia’s well-documented cyber attacks on the US election process in 2016. Engadget would not be doing its job if we ignored the conclusions and evidence of multiple trusted intelligence agencies that Russia attacked the very foundation of US democracy right under our noses, while the world was watching.

Engadget is dedicated to discussing all of the ways technology influences our lives -- this includes its influence on the US political system. This includes hacking, especially on an international scale; especially from a country as power-hungry and dangerous as Russia.

Let’s be clear here: Russia is dangerous. Russia is the reason the war in Syria is so catastrophic that it has been called the worst humanitarian crisis since the Holocaust. Right now, Russia is helping bomb hospitals, civilians, children and entire cities in a nation already devastated by civil war. Russian president Vladimir Putin has shown willful disregard for international laws, not only by authorizing cyber attacks on the US, but also by invading his country’s neighbor, Crimea, and taking control of it by force. Putin’s actions have earned him a dedicated sub-heading on Wikipedia’s “List of journalists killed in Russia” page. Putin is dangerous. Russia is dangerous.

This isn’t a revelation. Frankly, the response to Russia’s intrusion into the US political system has been completely backward. Conservatives have decried Russia’s policies and actions for generations; Republicans rallied against the USSR so fiercely in the mid-1900s that they birthed McCarthyism and decades of anti-Communism crusades.

But somehow, today, the loudest defenders of Russia’s cyber attacks on the US election process are people who voted for Donald Trump, the Republican candidate. It’s baffling.

J O U R N A L I S M  T O D A Y

I only know the political leanings of these commenters because a pattern has emerged on my published articles about Russia, cyber warfare and fake news: It seems that every time I mention these topics, I’m accused of being a liberal cuck who’s attempting to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s victory. Even though these are straight news articles; even though they are clearly sourced, concisely written and contain no personal commentary.

Even then, in the comments I am suddenly transformed into the wider “mainstream media,” which I imagine as a beastly, bulbous worm oozing with kale-scented puss and covered in the plasma of a million aborted fetuses, quietly undulating in front of a computer playing Hillary Clinton’s campaign speeches on an endless loop. I am suddenly part of a larger effort to remove Donald Trump from office and implement endless term limits for Barack (or Michelle) Obama; I am a snowflake who can’t get over the election; I am the absolute worst.

And it’s not just me. Anyone who writes about Russia on Engadget -- and across the web -- gets similar treatment. So, let’s take a moment to clear the air: There is no left-leaning, media-wide conspiracy to brainwash the American public.

Journalism is just like any other industry -- it’s composed of individuals, some of whom are liberal, some of whom are conservative and some of whom don’t give a damn. Plenty of reporters voted for Donald Trump (and no, we’re not talking about the bloggers at Breitbart who were contractually obligated to vote for him, donate to his campaign and kiss his gold-flecked slippers once a week), and plenty voted for Hillary Clinton. Across the broad field of journalism (again, this does not include tabloid sites like Breitbart or InfoWars), there is no conspiracy to skew facts in any particular direction.

Of course, I can not and do not speak for every journalist. I take my job seriously; I have a degree in journalism and I delight in thinking critically about its role in society. Freedom of the press is protected by the First Amendment for a reason -- it is a vital aspect of our country’s checks and balances. It ensures people in power can’t act without consequence. It is necessary and I am proud to be a part of this particular machine.

Furthermore, I’m proud to report for an outlet with a laser-focus on technology and all of the ways it impacts our lives. As Moore’s Law plays out before our eyes, technology is becoming increasingly relevant to every person on the planet. I delight in introducing new audiences to the fascinating worlds of AI, gadgetry, cyber security, video games and, yes, state-sponsored hacking.

F A K E  N E W S

I can hear the comments now: “No voting machines were hacked, no other systems involved in the elections were hacked. This is fake news at it's [sic] best.”

The thing is, comments like this (completely real) one have little basis in reality. I have never written an article claiming Russia hacked US voting machines, nor has any other journalist worth his or her salt. The easiest way to fact-check this claim is to read our stories.

I have also never written “fake news” (though I did get to the second round of interviews at The Onion like eight years ago). Fake news is not simply an article that you find upsetting or a report that makes someone you like -- or voted for -- look bad. There is a global fake-news industry churning away right now that is dedicated to writing incorrect and misleading stories about the US political system -- and we should be concerned about it.

When citizens can’t distinguish truth from a lie, we lose our power. It is impossible to make informed decisions in the voting booth, at town halls or on the streets without a consensus on the facts; we can’t change the system if we don’t first understand how it works. When fiction is treated as truth, there is no foundation for productive conversation and we lose the ability to reach a compromise. Democracy’s floor falls away beneath us.

It takes some work to write fake news, but it takes vastly more effort and expertise to spot trends, investigate, interview, verify and craft a true, in-depth report that stands up to public scrutiny. The process can take days, weeks, months or years. The process involves traveling to Baghdad, Manila, Delhi, Nice, Seoul and every other city across the globe; the process involves weeks away from family; the process gets people killed. And no, that’s not just in Russia.

This is what journalists do, every day, in pursuit of the truth. Journalists at CNN, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Mother Jones, NPR and Engadget follow complex processes and a strict code of ethics -- all of which are currently under a microscope as the Trump campaign wages a war of words against the press and its freedoms.

I do contend that 24-hour news networks in particular provided a disservice to the American public this election cycle. While plenty of hard-hitting, verified reporting about the candidates came out in 2016, they couldn’t hold the country’s attention while BREAKING stories about Trump’s sexual proclivities dominated the television screen. Plus, Donald Trump’s election was a shock to plenty of seasoned journalists who put too much stock in pollsters and prediction models in an unprecedented campaign season.

This scrutiny means journalists are working harder today than before Election Day. And just like 2017 promises to be a great year for punk rock, it’s also looking like fertile ground for robust, system-shaking journalism.

Which, again, is not fake news. A recent episode of Planet Money offers brilliant insight into the machinery behind fake news, and I encourage anyone who’s ever lodged that term at a journalist to listen in.

At its heart, fake news is the complete opposite of journalism; it is the antithesis of the work I do every day. It makes my job harder.

It’s a good thing I’ve always loved a challenge.

P R O M I S E S

So, here we are.

I will continue to write about Russian cyber attacks on the US political system. Engadget will continue to cover every instance of hacking, nuclear armament, technological advancement and military upgrades to come out of Russia, the US or any other country with global influence. Covering technology as it infiltrates systems across the world is not only fascinating and important work; it’s our only job.

As a human, I will make mistakes. As a journalist, I will rectify and clarify those mistakes as quickly as possible, with complete transparency and in the interest of cultivating an informed audience. This is what separates my work from the world of fake news -- my goal is to inform; the goal of fake news is to generate quick outrage and clicks.

I will continue to act professionally and write the truth as far as we can know it for the benefit of every single person who reads my articles.

Even the ones calling me a liberal cuck.

Especially those ones.

[waybeforeyourtime]

so you think people should just ignore the hate that Omar gets???

When it's sitting in your inbox, and no one else has seen it - yes. Because then it dies right there and then. You sharing it is giving a platform to hate. That's 100% on you for sharing it.

If it's someone tweeting shit? Well, I say to ignore that too. Because this is how it goes...

... 1 troll shares something hateful

.... 10,000 people all start talking about it

Then people who love drama see this attention, and then more people start sharing hateful thoughts just to keep it going.

Then everyone starts talking about the hate. Then hate talk, whether it's stating it or decrying it, takes over the fandom. And then fandom is a sucky place to be. People who don't want to be in an unhappy place take their happy thoughts and leave. Then fandom is just a bunch of trolls and drama-lovers.

Listen, I get the desire to white knight your fav. But it doesn't stop the haters. Not ever. Not once. No - this time will not be different.

The only way to destroy a troll is to ignore them. Block them. Trolls feed off seeing people angry and upset. The more you talk about it, the more energized they get. Not once has a troll ever said, "Oh, all of you people who've dogpiled me are right. I'm sorry. I have changed my ways and will now become a productive member of fandom." No, they see the reactions and then they just share more and more hate.

AND before you think that the talent appreciates your white knighting, have you asked them? Maybe they aren't even seeing it. Maybe it gives them anxiety to have the conversation keep going. Maybe it distresses them to see their fans distressed on their behalf. IDK how they feel about it and neither do you until they tell us.

And I'm going to listen to my own advice, and this is my last post on the subject. If you want to talk about it, don't ask me anon, msg me, and I'll be glad to have a private conversation with you.

ETA: I also want to add that I think many of the defensive reactions aren't so much to "protect" the person (in this recent case Omar) but rather because people feel like they are personally being attacked when someone doesn't like their fav. That's why I think these things escalate - ship and stan wars are always personal.