#reframe 2019

[prfm-multiverse]

Koe Interlude + VOICE (Perfume×Technology presents Reframe 2019) (NHK BS4K 2019.12.30)

Google Drive

[libraford]

A local organization here has released a list of books that they feel are imperative to have in the time ahead. The list was not easily shareable, so I copy-pasted it here.

There is no need to read all of these, but one thing you can do that takes little effort is call your library and see if they have them in stock.

If you are moneyed, you can buy some copies and put them in little free libraries.

EDUCATING FOR ADVOCACY BOOK LIST

All books are written by authors from that culture

BOOKS FOR ADULTS

(2024) Be a Revolution: How Everyday People are Fighting Oppression and Changing the World - and How You Can, Too by Ijeoma Oluo

Each chapter discusses how someone is advocating for oppressed populations

and has examples of how others can do the same or similar.

(2024) The Message by Ta-Nehisi Coates

The author travels to Senegal, South Carolina and Palestine and grapples with deep questions and emotions.

(2023) Better Living Through Birding: Notes From a Black Man in the Natural World by Christian Cooper

A memoir of a Black man learning to claim space for himself and others like him.

(2022) Myth America: Historians Take On the Biggest Legends and Lies about Our Past Edited by Kevin M. Kruse and Julian E. Zelizer

The title explains it so well.

(2022) South to America: A Journey Below the Mason Dixon to Understand the Soul of a Nation by Imani Perry

History, rituals, and landscapes of the American South and why they must be understand it in order to understand America.

(2022) Memphis by Tara M. Stringfellow

Tells the story of 3 generations of a Southern Black family in Memphis.

(2021) How the Word is Passed: A Reckoning with the History of Slavery Across America by Clint Smith

An exploration of important monuments and landmarks in the USA that show

how slavery has been foundational in the development and history of our country.

(2021) The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together by Heather McGhee

The title explains it.

(2021) The Seed Keeper by Diane Wilson

Historical fiction telling the story of several generations of a Dakota family

(2020) The Good Immigrant: 26 Writers Reflect on America edited by Nikesh Shukla and Chimene Suleyman

26 authors share their stories of living in the USA.

(2020) Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents by Isabel Wilkerson

Examines the unspoken caste system that has shaped America and shows how we continue to be defined in this way..

(2020) This Is What America Looks Like: My Journey from Refugee to Congresswoman

by Ilhan Omar

This title explains it.

(2019) The 1619 Project: A New Origin Story by Nikole Hannah Jones (among others)

Reframes our understanding of American history by placing slavery and its continuing legacy at the center of our national narrative.

(2019) Things are Good Now by Djamila Ibrahim

Stories of how migrants sort out their lives in foreign lands.

(2018) So You Want to Talk About Race by Ijeoma Oluo

An examination of race in America.

(2018) I’m Still Here by Austin Channing Brown

A memoir telling her journey of learning to love her blackness while navigating America's racial divide.

(2018) If They Come for Us by Fatimah Asghar

Poetry that captures the experience of being a Pakistani Muslim woman in contemporary America, while exploring identity, violence, and healing.

(2016) Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of History of Racist Ideas in America by Ibram X. Kendi

Traces the history of Black America.

(2015) Between the World and Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates

A memoir, in the form of a letter to his young son, telling his personal experiences with racism and violence in the United States.

(2015) My Seneca Village by Marilyn Nelson

Poetry and information about Seneca Village – a multi-racial, multi-ethnic neighborhood in the center of Manhattan (Central Park ) that thrived in the mid-19th century.

(2014) An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz

Tells the 400+ years of US history, from the perspective of Indigenous peoples

(2013) Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom Scientific Knowledge, and the Teaching of Plants by Robin Wall Kimmerer

Explores the place of plants and botany in both Indigenous and Western life.

(2010) The Warmth of Other Suns: The Epic Story of America’s Great Migration by Isabel Wilkerson

Follows the stories of three Black Americans’ migration journeys from Mississippi, Florida and Louisiana.

(2010) The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness

By Michelle Alexander

Explains how we haven’t ended, but have redesigned, the caste system in the U.S.

(1972) Lame Deer, Seeker of Visions by John (Fire) Lame Deer and Richard Erdoes

Told by Lame Deer, a Lakota medicine man, this memoir teaches the history of Indigenous people in the USA.

BOOKS FOR GRADES K-12

GRADES 7 - 12

(2021) Firekeeper’s Daughter by Angeline Boulley

The novel's main character is a young woman with a French mother and an Ojibwe father, who often feels torn between cultures.

(2021) The 1619 Project: Born on the Water by Nikole Hannah-Jones and Renée Watson

Illustrated by Nikkolas Smith

Tells the story and consequences of American slavery in verse.

(2020) Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You by Jason Reynolds and Ibram X. Kendi

Shorter and appropriate for middle and high schoolers.

(2020) All Boys Aren’t Blue by George M. Johnson

Series of personal essays about the author’s life growing up as a gay, black man.

(2020) Dictionary for a Better World: Poems, Quotes, and Anecdotes from A to Z by Irene Latham and Charles Waters Illustrated by Mehrdokt Amini

Explained in title.

(2020) Woke: A Young Poet’s Call to Justice by Mahogany L. Browne with Elizabeth Acevedo and Olivia Gatewood Illustrated by Theodore Taylor III

Poetry about fighting for racial justice through joy and passion.

(2020) Be Amazing: A History of Pride by Desmond Is Amazing Illustrated by Dylan Glynn

The history of Pride, with bold illustrations, focusing on the importance of embracing one’s own uniqueness and tuning out the haters.

(2020) Dear Justyce (Dear Martin #2) by Nic Stone

Continues the story of Justyce from Dear Martin in a series of flashbacks and letters.

(2020) Punching the Air by Ibi Zoboi and Yusef Salaam

A novel in verse about a boy who is wrongfully incarcerated.

(2019) Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobab

The author tells the story of life as a nonbinary person in graphic novel form.

(2019) An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States for Young People original book by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz adapted by Debbie Rees and Jean Mendoza

Shorter and appropriate for middle and high schoolers

(2017) Sea Prayer by Khalad Hosseini Illustrated by Dan Williams

Written as a poetic letter, from father to son, this is a story of the journey of refugees.

(2017) Dear Martin (Dear Martin #1) by Nic Stone

A story of the realities of a Black teen living in America.

(2015) All American Boys by Jason Reynolds and Brendan Kiely

From the perspective of two teenage boys, one Black and one White, a story is told with the realization that racism and prejudice are still alive and well.

(2015) Beyond Magenta: Transgender and Nonbinary Teens Speak Out by Susan Kuklin

The author interviewed six transgender for gender-neutral young adults and lets

them tell their story.

(2011) Heart and Soul: The Story of America and African Americans written and illustrated by Kadir Nelson

The title explains it well

GRADES 4 - 6

(2023) An American Story by Kwame Alexander illustrated by Dare Coulter

Tells the story, poetically and honestly, about American slavery

(2023) Step by Step!: How the Lincoln School Marchers Blazed a Trail to Justice

by Debbie Rigaud and Carlotta Penn illustrated by Nysha Pierce

Tells the story of a group of Black mothers and children and their two-year march to integrate an Ohio elementary school.

(2022) Say Their Names by Caroline Brewer illustrated by Adrian Brandon

A young Black girl leads a #BlackLivesMatter protest march.

(2021) Stamped (For Kids): Racism, Antiracism, and You by Jason Reynolds and Ibram X. Kendi.

Shorter, more kid friendly version of Stamped from the Beginning.

(2021) Unspeakable: The Tulsa Race Massacre by Carole Boston Weatherford illustrated by Floyd Cooper

Traces the history of this African-American ‘Wall Street District’ and its destruction by White supremacists.

(2016). I Dissent: Ruth Bader Ginsburg Makes Her Mark by Debbie Levy illustrated by Elizabeth Baddeley

The life and work of RBG told in picture book form.

(2008) Silent Music: A Story of Baghdad written and illustrated by James Rumford

Ancient and recent history of Baghdad from the perspective of a young boy.

(2005) Show Way by Jacqueline Woodson illustrated by Hudson Talbott

Traces the history of the ‘show way’ quilt from slavery through freedom.

(2005) My Name is Bilal by Asma Mobin-Uddin illustrated by Barbara Kiwak

Muslim-American student experiencing religious prejudice.

(2005). Amelia to Zora: Twenty-Six Women Who Changed the World by Cynthia Chin-Lee Ilustrated by Megan Halsey and Sean Addy

An alphabet book that teaches about the extraordinary lives of 26 women.

(1978). The Other Way to Listen by Byrd Baylor and Peter Parnall

Helps children learn about indigenous cultures.

GRADES PRE-K - 3

(2023) These Olive Trees: A Palestinian Family’s Story written and illustrated by Aya Ghanameh

A story of a young girl and her family in Nablus, Palestine, 1967

(2020). Antiracist Baby by Ibram X. Kendi illustrated by Ashley Lukashvsky

Teaches young children how to be an antiracist.

(2016). When We Were Alone by David A. Robertson and Julie Flett

A young, indigenous girl learns about her grandmother’s experience in a

residential school.

(2013). A is for Activist by Innosanto Nagara (board book)

An ABC book that teaches children about being an activist.

[old-powwow-days]

The first major solo museum presentation of fourth-generation Navajo weaver Melissa Cody (b. 1983, No Water Mesa, Arizona) spans the last decade of her practice, showcasing over 30 weavings and a major new work produced for the exhibition. Using long-established weaving techniques and incorporating new digital technologies, Cody assembles and reimagines popular patterns into sophisticated geometric overlays, incorporating atypical dyes and fibers. Her tapestries carry forward the methods of Navajo Germantown weaving, which developed out of the wool and blankets that were made in Germantown, Pennsylvania and supplied by the US government to the Navajo people during the forced expulsion from their territories in the mid-1800s. During this period, the rationed blankets were taken apart and the yarn was used to make new textiles, a practice of reclamation which became the source of the movement. While acknowledging this history and working on a traditional Navajo loom, Cody’s masterful works exercise experimental palettes and patterns that animate through reinvention, reframing traditions as cycles of evolution. Melissa Cody is a Navajo/Diné textile artist and enrolled member of the Navajo/Diné nation. Cody grew up on a Navajo Reservation in Leupp, Arizona and received a Bachelor’s degree in Studio Arts and Museum Studies from Institute of American Indian Arts, Santa Fe. Her work has been featured in The Barnes Foundation, Philadelphia (2022); Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art, Bentonville, AR (2021); National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa (2019–2020); Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff (2019); SITE Santa Fe (2018–19); Ingham Chapman Gallery, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque (2018); Navajo Nation Museum, Window Rock (2018); and the Museum of Contemporary Native Arts, Institute of American Indian Arts, Santa Fe (2017–18). Cody’s works are in the collections of the Stark Museum of Art, Orange, Texas; the Minneapolis Institute of Arts; and The Autry National Center, Los Angeles. In 2020, she earned the Brandford/Elliott Award for Excellence in Fiber Art.

Melissa Cody: Webbed Skies currently on exhibition at MoMA PS1 through September 9nth, 2024

IDs Under the cut

Top to Bottom, Left to Right: White Out. 2012. 3-ply aniline dyed wool. 17 × 24″ (43.2 × 61 cm)

Deep Brain Stimulation. 2011. Wool warp, weft, selvedge cords, and aniline dyes. 40 x 30 3/4 in. (101.6 x 78.1 cm)

World Traveler. 2014. Wool warp, weft, selvedge cords, and aniline dyes. 90 x 48 7/8 in. (228.6 x 124.1 cm)

Into the Depths, She Rappels. 2023. Wool warp, weft, selvedge cords, and aniline dyes. 87 x 51 9/16 in. (221 x 131 cm)

Lightning Storm. 2012. 3-ply aniline dyed wool. 14 × 20″ (35.6 × 50.8 cm)

Pocketful of Rainbows. 2019. Wool warp, weft, selvedge cords, and aniline dyes. 19 x 10 3/4 in. (48.3 x 27.3 cm)

Path of the Snake. 2013. 3-ply aniline dyed wool. 36 × 24″ (91.4 × 61 cm)

[transmutationisms]

i've been hearing a lot on anti-psychiatry/reframing diagnosis and symptoms/etc (including from your blog) but i feel like im missing a baseline of information to delve in that discussion. do you know some good sources to learn the 101 of what psychiatry is, how diagnoses are "discovered"/labeled, etc...?

before hearing about the subject i assumed mental illnesses/disabilities were the result of a recognizable cause (in the same way covid is caused by contact with the virus, or some form of blindness caused by problems with the optic nerve) but it seems that is not the case.

also, not a native english speaker, don't know if im using the correct vocabulary for this.

before hearing about the subject i assumed mental illnesses/disabilities were the result of a recognizable cause (in the same way covid is caused by contact with the virus, or some form of blindness caused by problems with the optic nerve)

this is a very common misconception, and one that's very useful for the legitimation of the discipline of psychiatry. in truth, genomics and neuroscience have not identified a biological cause of any psychiatric diagnosis (p. 851). psychiatric diagnoses are not made on the basis of neuroimaging or neuroanatomical differences (none have been consistently or strongly observed as defining or causal characteristics of such diagnosed conditions, and neuroimaging datasets, such as by fMRI, are prone to be interpreted in highly varying ways by different researchers), nor with bloodwork or indeed on the basis of any other biomarkers; the 'chemical imbalance' theory of diagnoses like depression has been thoroughly debunked. instead, these diagnoses depend on clinicians' observations of patients' behaviours and affect. this in itself doesn't automatically constitute a damning critique (we rely on subjective judgments of things all the time), but it does mean that attempting to stake the psychiatric discipline's legitimacy on the identification of biological aberrations is at best misleading at and worst fraudulent, not to mention essentialist.

none of this means that psychiatry or psychiatrists are 'making up disorders from nothing', or that people's distress / symptoms are unreal. psychiatry certainly can and does pathologise behaviours that would be more productively understood as responses to traumatic experiences, capitalist political conditions, social oppression, &c; in these processes, it should be understood as a means of producing bourgeois notions of social order & then enforcing them. the fact that psychiatric diagnoses are not made on the basis of, nor do they correspond to, specific biomarkers or biological 'types', doesn't make mental / emotional / affective suffering any less 'real' than any physically observed counterparts.

as for texts that will give you some groundwork on psychiatry, i would recommend Anne Harrington's Mind Fixers: Psychiatry's Troubled Search For the Biology of Mental Illness (2019) and Andrew Scull's Desperate Remedies: Psychiatry's Turbulent Quest to Cure Mental Illness (2022) and Psychiatry and Its Discontents (2019). all three of these are heavily focussed on the usa, which is generally overrepresented in historical and sociological literature on psychiatry; however, i still think these three texts are useful starting points for getting introduced to the history of psychiatry and broad contours of critiques of the discipline. i've also posted a longer anti-psychiatry reading list that has more texts focussed on other national and international contexts.

[livefromcastledracula]

Book Carmilla vs Adaptations (SPOILERS)

Here are a few 'interesting' adaptations. I like some of them for their own merits, but mostly dislike them as Carmilla adaptations for the below reasons, with some notable exceptions: Vampyr: The Dream of Allan Gray (1932 film): The first Carmilla inspired movie, although it keeps almost NOTHING from the novella except 'female vampire'. In this case, a creepy old lady rather than a charming young lesbian. This is a really moody, slow, acid trip of a film though, a treat for fans of vintage vampire film. (3/10) Hammer Karnstein Trilogy: The Vampire Lovers is the gayest and most book-accurate. Carmilla still kisses/seduces men before killing them, boo. The second one her identically-named reincarnation is blonde and has sex with / falls in love with a man booooooo. She's not in the third one at all. It's all very 70's and nowhere near queer enough, but at least we got the incomparable Ingrid Pitt in the first movie. 5/10. Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust: 'Carmilla' shows up as a surprise third act villain. She's an elegant and imposing vampire queen with a castle called "Cjethe" and the Vampire King offed her previously for being A Bit Too Extra. She's... Bathory. She's Elizabeth Bathory, right down to the name of her historical castle, the elaborate gowns and the blood-bathing. Bathory in Castlevania Nocturne even looks a lot like this one. Cool scary vampire lady, but Carmilla In Name Only. 4/10 Castlevania (Games): She's fine here, but mostly just kind of a big Dracula groupie like most of the other non-Dracula vampires. Often depicting as a flying skull or mask crying bloody tears, with optional succubus-like figure reclining on top of it. Cool. Rondo of Blood has her appear together with a ninja vampire Laura with bunny ears because why the hell not. 6/10 Castlevania (Netflix show): Baddass, angry Karen. She's amazing in the first season when she's scheming against Dracula, but after that she just sort of sits on her butt sipping wine and griping about men for a whole season until Isaac storms her castle. A cool character but not a great Carmilla, because Carmilla for me is defined by how much she loves women, not how much she hates men. Still amazing voice work by Jaime Murray though and her last stand was insanely baddass. 7/10

Carmilla Web Series / Movie: My favorite adaptation. It's obviously playing waaaay fast and loose with the canon and reframing her as a charming antihero in a zany urban fantasy, but there's deep current of love for the source material, especially in the movie. Natasha Negovanlis has charisma off the charts and the Hollstein romance is adorable. This Carmilla might be a black-leather-wearing snarky millenial goth with a Canadian accent, but as the show goes on it peels back layer after layer of the romantic, poetic, wistful, world-weary immortal hinted at by the novella. This show redeems LeFanu's lovelorn villain in all the best ways. 10/10. 2019 movie / Styria movie: I still haven't seen these, have heard good things about the gothic cinematography on the most recent one but not good things about the rest of it. The trailer looked moody and pretty though, I may watch it at some point.

[olderthannetfic]

I’ve been casually looking in on the pro censorship vs pro fiction choice debates online for the past few years in fandom spaces and the disparaging of the pro fiction people used to be, ‘you’re an adult’ full stop but as the anti fiction choice people have gone from minors to early twenty somethings it has become ‘you’re in your LATE twenties/30s’ and it is genuinely so funny to me this really proves there was a weird cult movement around 2019 or 2020 and the kids who were indoctrinated but didn’t age out of it have doubled down in the funniest way because ofc it applies to them too so they have to move goalposts and reframe their talking points

--

I feel very sorry for them. Even as in-denial as they are, the big three-oh is going to hit hard.

[yournewlodger]

I think the self-built criminal empire "drag yourself up by the bootstraps" ification of Oswald Cobblepot is indicative of a larger problem with Batman that refuses to address that hey, maybe billionaire politicians who hoard all the wealth with a refusal to relate to or in any way help the less fortunate, are bad maybe. Like of course the Penguin is a self-made criminal immigrant mob boss, because these days you can only be a Batman villain if you are 1.) Mentally Ill or 2.) An Immigrant. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with characters being immigrants. Before you say "how dare you piss on the poor" please understand I'm talking about intent when you see these characters always presented as villains.

And I'm all for reimagining characters for the modern lens, and I fully understand the inherent problematic nature of a character like The Penguin, and maybe I will be Bobo the Fool when The Penguin (the show) comes out, but I think reframing the Penguin as something out of The Godfather severely misses the point. Not only because never more have I wanted superhero media to critique billionaire criminal politicians running for public office (historically, the Penguin's whole bit), but because we don't need the Penguin to be something out of The Godfather. We have someone for that already. And clearly they know that. Because his name is Carmine Falcone.

I think that this notion that the only crime in Gotham City has to be drugs, prostitution, human trafficking, and domestic terrorism severely misunderstands the inherent whimsical nature of superheroes, and historically the Penguin. I mean we are circlejerking into infinity a self-hatred in superhero media. His name isn't even Oswald Cobblepot anymore. When's the last time the Penguin had an umbrella?

And here's the thing. I like Gotham (2014 - 2019). I do. But that universe at least understood that the Penguin is aesthetically ridiculous. Try as they may to present him as a threat, but he will always be a guy who calls himself Penguin.

I do think this problem started with Batman Returns. I'm not here explicitly to critique that version of the Penguin, but I do think it's where we began to lose the plot. Because once again the Penguin is presented as an underdog, a minority, an outcast. And again I ask you to think about intent when the Penguin is a villain and Batman is not. But that movie had Max Shreck to balance it out. What do we have now?

They are so, so allergic to presenting the rich as villains, because they'd be calling themselves out. Because calling the Penguin what he is, a cartoonish portrayal of a wealthy Gilded Age capitalist who preys on the less fortunate to further and further elevate his own wealth, doesn't align with their messaging, which is "billionaires are so awesome, and more importantly, infallible." The Penguin is meant to be an antithesis to Bruce Wayne, who is also generationally wealthy, but most importantly a philanthropist. Bruce Wayne is supposed to be someone who dedicates all he has to making Gotham City a better place, which also includes helping reform Gotham’s villains. But these days we see a man who more and more seems less like a hero, and more like a Penguin. Because if Bruce Wayne cared about Gotham City, really cared, beating every one of his villains to a pulp, just shy of his "no kill" quota, would be less of his focus. I mean how does a man with near unlimited resources allow institutions like Arkham Asylum to exist, let alone send his bad guys there?

And yeah, I know. The answer is the Batman mythos has turned it into The Good Place. His world is too complicated to do any real good. And yes, I know, it mirrors our world too. But why is it that the people who are pointing out that corruption, these We Live In A Society types, the villains? Why are they always the one presented as "insane" for pointing out what's right in front of them? And when's the last time Bruce Wayne did charity work, anyway? Tell me, who are we supposed to be rooting for in the end?

Anyway, the summary is this: The Penguin isn't a Capitalist anymore. The Penguin isn't even a Cobblepot anymore. Who is he? Because he isn't the Fine Feathered Fink I know. And we all know why. And personally, I'm sick of it.

[mariacallous]

The need for good intelligence has never been more visible. The failure of the Israeli security services to anticipate the brutal surprise attack carried out by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023 reveals what happens when intelligence goes wrong.

In contrast, in late February 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s planned three-day “special military operation” to invade Ukraine and topple the government was pushed onto the back foot by the U.S. and U.K. intelligence communities. While Putin’s rapid seizure of Crimea by a flood of “little green men”  in 2014 was a fait accompli, by the time of the 2022 invasion, anticipatory moves including the public declassification of sensitive intelligence ensured that both the intelligence community and Ukraine remained a step ahead of Putin’s plans.

Yet, despite the clear and enduring need for good intelligence to support effective statecraft, national security, and military operations, U.S. intelligence agencies and practitioners are undermined by a crisis of legitimacy. Recent research investigating public attitudes toward the U.S. intelligence community offers some sobering trends.

A May 2023 poll conducted by the Harvard University Center for American Political Studies and Harris Poll found that an eye-watering 70 percent of Americans surveyed were either “very” or “somewhat” concerned about “interference by the FBI and intelligence agencies in a future presidential election.”

A separate study, conducted in 2021 and 2022 by the Intelligence Studies Project at the University of Texas at Austin and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, found that only 56 percent of Americans thought that the intelligence community “plays a vital role in warning against foreign threats and contributes to our national security.” That number is down 10 points from a previous high—if it can even be called that—of 66 percent in 2019, and the downward trend does not give us cause for optimism. Reframed, that statistic means that in 2022, an alarming (in our view) 44 percent of Americans did not believe that the intelligence community keeps them safe from foreign threats or contributes to U.S. national security.

Worse, despite abundant examples of authoritarian aggression and worldwide terror attacks, nearly 1 in 5 Americans seem to be confused about where the real threats to their liberty are actually emanating from. According to the UT Austin study, a growing number of Americans thought that the intelligence community represented a threat to civil liberties: 17 percent in 2022, up from 12 percent in 2021. A nontrivial percentage of Americans feel that the intelligence community is an insidious threat instead of a valuable protector in a dangerous world—a perspective that jeopardizes the security and prosperity of the United States and its allies.

The most obvious recent example of the repercussions of the corrosion of trust in the intelligence community is the recent drama over reauthorizing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). First introduced in the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, Section 702 is an important legal authority for the U.S. intelligence community to conduct targeted surveillance of foreign persons located outside the United States, with the compelled assistance of electronic communication service providers. According to a report published by Office of the U.S. Director of National Intelligence (DNI), 702 is “extremely valuable” and “provides intelligence on activities of terrorist organizations, weapons proliferators, spies, malicious cyber actors, and other foreign adversaries.”

Section 702 was scheduled to “sunset” at the end of 2023 if not reauthorized. Yet Congress failed to reauthorize 702 by the end of 2023, electing to punt the decision—as is so often the case—to this spring, when it was finally reauthorized (with some important reforms) in late April 2024, but it was only extended for two years instead of the customary five. An unusual alliance of the far right and the far left squeezed centrists and the Biden administration, which was strongly pushing for a renewal that would protect the civil liberties of U.S. citizens and not needlessly hobble the intelligence community in protecting the United States itself.

But the frantic down-to-the-wire negotiations about reauthorizing some recognizable form of 702 obscured a deeper problem at the heart of the contemporary Americans’ relationship with intelligence that has been brewing over the last decade: The fundamental legitimacy of a strong intelligence community—and the integrity of its practitioners—has been questioned by U.S. lawmakers on the far left and the far right, perhaps reflecting a misguided but increasing consensus of tens of millions of Americans.

This trend is now a crisis.

Section 702’s troubled journey faced queries from the privacy-oriented left, where those with overblown concerns about potential abuse by the intelligence community viewed reauthorizing 702 is tantamount to “turning cable installers into spies,” in the words of one opinion contributor published in The Hill. The intelligence community’s revised authorities (some adjustments were required given the 15 years of communications technology development since the amendment was first passed) were called “terrifying” and predictably—the most hackneyed description for intelligence tools—“Orwellian.” On the power-skeptical right, Section 702 is perceived as but another powerful surveillance tool of the so-called deep state.

In response to legitimate concerns about past mistakes, the intelligence community has adopted procedural reforms and enhanced training that it says would account for the overwhelming majority of the (self-reported) mistakes in querying 702 collection. According to a report from the Justice Department’s National Security Division, the FBI achieved a 98 percent compliance rate in 2023 after receiving better training. Further, the Justice Department and the DNI have gone to unprecedented lengths to publicly show—through declassified success stories—the real dangers that allowing 702 to lapse would bring to the United States and its allies.

Never before has an intelligence community begged, cajoled, and pleaded with lawmakers to enable it to do its job. After all, a hobbled intelligence community would still be held responsible should a war warning be missed, or should a terrorist attack occur.

For instance, Gen. Eric Vidaud, the French military intelligence chief, was promptly fired over intelligence failings related to Putin’s (re)invasion of Ukraine despite the Elysée’s criticisms of the warnings made by the United States and United Kingdom as “alarmist.” And Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva, director of Israeli military intelligence, recently resigned over the Oct. 7 attacks despite the fault probably lying across Israel’s political landscape as well. Intelligence professionals pay more than their share of the bill when their crystal ball stays cloudy.

The hullabaloo over 702 is not the only recent instance painting the actions of the U.S. national security apparatus as questionable state activity conducted by dishonest bureaucrats, and some recent history helps put the recent events into a broader downward trend in trust.

In 2013, National Security Agency (NSA) mass-leaker Edward Snowden, a junior network IT specialist with a Walter Mitty complex, sparked a needed but distorted global conversation about the legitimacy of intelligence collection when he stole more than 1.5 million NSA documents and fled to China and ultimately Russia. The mischaracterization of NSA programs conveyed by Snowden and his allies (painting them as more intrusive and less subject to legal scrutiny than they were) led to popular misunderstandings about the intelligence community’s methods and oversight.

It was not only junior leakers whose unfounded criticism helped to corrode public faith in intelligence; it has also been a bipartisan political effort. In 2009, then-U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that the CIA had lied to her after she wished to distance herself from the agency’s “enhanced interrogation techniques”—which critics call torture. But Pelosi’s comments earned a “false” rating from Politifact’s “truth-o-meter.” Then-CIA Director Leon Panetta countered that “CIA officers briefed truthfully.”

Some suspicion of a powerful intelligence community stems from genuine failings of the past, especially the CIA’s activities in the early and middle stages of the Cold War, which included some distasteful assassination plots, the illegal collection of intelligence domestically (such as surveillance of Americans on political grounds, including illegally opening their mail), and the LSD experimentation on unwitting Americans as part of its infamous MKULTRA program.

Most of these excesses—characterized as the CIA’s “Family Jewels”—were reported to Congress, which held explosive hearings in 1975 to publicize these activities, bringing the intelligence agencies into the public realm like never before. Images of Sen. Frank Church holding aloft a poison dart gun, designed by the CIA to incapacitate and induce a heart attack in foreign leaders, became front page news. These serious failings in accountability were the dawn of rigorous intelligence oversight.

Public trust in government was already sinking when, in 1971, the Pentagon Papers revealed that politicians had lied about US activities in the deeply unpopular Vietnam war. The Watergate scandal the following year added fuel to fire. Although the CIA was not directly involved in Watergate, the involvement of former agency employees led to a wider belief that the agency was tainted. And in the late 1970s, CIA morale sank to an all-time low when then-President Jimmy Carter began the process of sharply reducing its staff, attributing the decision to its “shocking” activities.

In response to congressional findings and mountains of bad press, subsequent directors of the CIA considered the criticisms and made numerous changes to how the intelligence community operates. While the intelligence community (and its leaders) made good-faith efforts to operate strictly within its legal boundaries, be more responsive to congressional oversight, and embrace some level of transparency, the public image of the CIA and the broader intelligence community didn’t change. After the Cold War ended, the preeminent vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, called twice for the disbanding of the CIA. Such political pummeling of the role of intelligence and the integrity of its practitioners was bound to leave a mark.

The politics of distrust are back to the bad old days. By 2016, distrust of the intelligence community had returned with a vengeance: then-presidential candidate Donald Trump claimed that NSA was circumventing domestic legal constructs to spy on his campaign through its close partnership with the Government Communications headquarters (GCHQ), the British signals intelligence agency. (The NSA said those claims were false and GCHQ called them “utterly ridiculous”.) As president-elect, Trump also compared U.S. intelligence to “living in Nazi Germany.” Once Trump entered the Oval Office, the FBI was a frequent target for his invective thanks to the investigation into possible Russian interference in the 2016 election.

While the intelligence community is a long way away from the excesses of the 1970s, it is not perfect. Intelligence is an art, not a science. It is not prediction so much as narrowing the cone of uncertainty for decision-makers to act in a complex world. Even when acting strictly within the law and under the scrutiny of Congress and multiple inspectors general, the intelligence community has been wrong on several important occasions. It failed to stop the 9/11 attacks, got the assessment that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction spectacularly wrong, and was made to look impotent by Osama bin Laden for nearly a decade before the U.S. Navy SEALs caught up with him on a CIA mission in Pakistan in May 2011.

Errors still happen because intelligence is hard, and the occasional failure to warn, to stop every attack, or to prevent every incorrect search query is inevitable. Today, mistakes are self-reported to Congress; they are no longer hidden away as they sometimes were in the past. Yet the intelligence community has done a poor job telling its own story and self-censors due to widespread over-classification—a problem that the DNI has acknowledged, if not yet remedied. It has only belatedly begun to embrace the transparency required for a modern intelligence apparatus in a democratic state, and there is much work yet to be done.

It is the job of the intelligence agencies to keep a calm and measured eye on dark developments. In a world in which the panoply of threats is increasing, the role of the intelligence community and its responsibilities within democratic states has never been greater. If the community cannot be trusted by its political masters in the White House and Congress, much less the American people, then it will not be given the ability to “play to the edge,” and the risk is that the United States and its allies will be blind to the threats facing them. Given the adversaries, the consequences could be severe.

U.S. intelligence has had a rebirth of confidence since 9/11 and the incorrect judgments of the Iraqi weapons program. It was intelligence and special operations that hunted and killed bin Laden, U.S. law enforcement that has kept the U.S. homeland safe from another massive terror attack, and the intelligence community correctly predicted the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That increased sense of purpose and morale is moot if the U.S. people, Congress, or the president (sitting or future) do not trust them. This crisis of legitimacy is a trend that may soon hamper the intelligence community, and the results could be unthinkable. Getting the balance between civil liberties and security right isn’t an easy task, but the intelligence community must have the tools, trust, and oversight required to simultaneously keep faith with the American people while serving as their first line of defense.

[wildlife4life]

Seven (+) Sentence Sunday

Tagged by @giddyupbuck, @exhuastedpigeon, @wikiangela, and @theotherbuckley Thank you all so much and I am so excited for all your upcoming fics.

NFL Buck, what else. Here is the lead into Buck's leg injury.

Buck clicks his tongue, “You’re an asshole. I’m telling Linda to take the rest of week off, let you fend for yourself with meals.” He threatens emptily, trying and failing not to smile. Eddie places a hand over his heart, overdramatizing his mock dread to the threat, “Would you really deprive the man you proclaim to love more than football itself, the great wonders of Linda’s cooking?” His boyfriend snorts loud and the screen shakes with his laughter, “Yes, but given your last cooking attempt, I’ll reframe from doing so.  I like our new kitchen too much for you to potentially burn it down.” Eddie was not going to argue with him. His piss poor cooking skills were a fault he embraced. He almost burned down their first home in Houston, trying to make a celebratory dinner for Buck after he signed his million-dollar contract with the Texans. “How’s camp going? Taking your own advice and making some new friends?” Eddie asks. Evan frowns a bit, “Still getting a hang of McVay’s system. I got to know the receivers when I had those private work outs with them and at OTA’s. Wolford and Perkins are good guys, I’m around them a lot. I get along great with the O-line, especially Whitworth, which is good. Don’t need another unguarded linebacker snapping my leg.” He wrinkles his nose at the memory and Eddie notices the slight movement of the arm not holding his phone, probably rubbing scars along his left leg.  Eddie grimaces, remembering that game, Buck’s recovery, and the potential loss of his starting job to Watson. The 2018/2019 season really was the worst for Evan.

I ignore canon and embrace the quirk that is Eddie's very bad cooking skills. Hope you all enjoyed! If you want to see more NFL Buck just go here.

Tagging (no pressure): @hippolotamus @disasterbuckdiaz @spotsandsocks @jeeyuns @fortheloveofbuddie @forthewolves @ladydorian05 @devirnis @eddiebabygirldiaz @thewolvesof1998 @loserdiaz @thekristen999 @lizzybizzyzzz @try-set-me-on-fire @jesuisici33 @spaceprincessem @shortsighted-owl @homerforsure @sibylsleaves @monsterrae1 @lover-of-mine @watchyourbuck @rogerzsteven @eowon @911onabc @911-on-abc @cowboydiazes @cowboy-buddie @cowboy-buck @brokenribsdiaz @buck-coded @bvckandeddie @housewifebuck @honestlydarkprincess @transbuck @elvensorceress @glorious-spoon @bigfootsmom @eddiediaztho @buddierights @athenagranted @rainbow-nerdss @rainbow-nerdss @gayhoediaz @gayedmundodiaz

[odinsblog]

Billionaire fossil fuel mogul David Koch died August 23, 2019. Though he will rightfully be remembered for his role in the destruction of the earth, David Koch’s influence went far beyond climate denial. Ronald Reagan may have uttered the famous words, “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem” back in 1981—but it was David Koch, along with his elder brother Charles and a cabal of other ultrarich individuals, who truly reframed the popular view of government. Once a democratic tool used to shape the country’s future, government became seen as something intrusive and inefficient—indeed, something to be feared.

“While Charles was the mastermind of the social reengineering of the America he envisioned,” said Lisa Graves, co-director of the corporate watchdog group Documented, “David was an enthusiastic lieutenant.”

David Koch was particularly instrumental in legitimizing anti-government ideology—one the GOP now holds as gospel. In 1980, the younger Koch ran as the vice-presidential nominee for the nascent Libertarian Party. And a newly unearthed document shows Koch personally donated more than $2 million to the party—an astounding amount for the time—to promote the Ed Clark–David Koch ticket.

“Few people realize that the anti-American government antecedent to the Tea Party was fomented in the late ’70s with money from Charles and David Koch,” Graves continued. “The Libertarian Party, fueled in part with David’s wealth, pushed hard on the idea that government was the problem and the free market was the solution to everything.”

In fact, according to Graves, “The Koch-funded Libertarian Party helped spur on Ronald Reagan’s anti-government, free-market-solves-all agenda as president.”

Even by contemporary standards, the 1980 Libertarian Party platform was extreme. It called for the abolition of a wide swath of federal agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Bureau of Land Management, the Federal Election Commission, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, the Federal Trade Commission, and “all government agencies concerned with transportation.” It railed against campaign finance and consumer protection laws, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, any regulations of the firearm industry (including tear gas), and government intervention in labor negotiations. And the platform demanded the repeal of all taxation, and sought amnesty for those convicted of tax “resistance.”

Koch and his libertarian allies moreover advocated for the repeal of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other social programs. They wanted to abolish federally mandated speed limits. They opposed occupational licensure, antitrust laws, labor laws protecting women and children, and “all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates.” And in true libertarian fashion, the platform urged the privatization of all schools (with an end to compulsory education laws), the railroad system, public roads and the national highway system, inland waterways, water distribution systems, public lands, and dam sites.

The Libertarian Party never made much of a splash in the election—though it did garner almost 12 percent of the vote in Alaska—but doing so was never the point. Rather, the Kochs were engaged in a long-term effort to normalize the aforementioned ideas and mainstream them into American politics.

(continue reading)

[fedorah-the-explorah]

I saw a take that said the family dynamics between team red (especially shadowsan + carm) are somewhat exaggerated by fandom and there's not actually a lot in canon that supports a lot of popular head canons or attributed roles. And it's like, first of all, please keep your hurtful truths to yourself. Second of all, I'm probably going to need a read more.

Despite myself, I really cannot disagree with the points made by this particular poster. It's a sound argument. Carmen Sandiego (2019) is an adventure series. It's fast paced, action packed, and focused a decent amount on edutainment. This is understandable, this is after all, the point of the franchise as a whole. The characters have enough sustenance that they are likeable, though they are most noticeably flat.

I'd argue that Shadowsan and Devineaux are the most dynamic characters, but even then the handling of their respective character arcs leaves something to be desired. Much like the rest of the series, their storylines feel rushed and added in as a second thought. I get the impression that the show was envisioned simply as an adventure of the week type of thing. They had a premise and a gimmick and they wanted to run with it. This is fine. But then came the overarching story lines and... Well. There were no master pieces.

We'll take season one as an example. The first two episodes were pretty solid. They had a coherent and well executed story line supported by characters with personality and potential for growth and depth. The pilot episode of a series serves to set up character arcs and overarching themes without having to go too into depth because of the fact that it's simply the beginning. The first two episodes of this series fulfilled their purpose, and they were executed well. I will even be generous to the rest of the season's story line and say that there did seem to be at least the minimal amount of foreshadowing and groundwork laid for the twist at the end of the season.

The problem then comes into play with the remaining episodes. From episodes three to eight, the story line is episodic and self-contained. There's a formula and it works well without there necessarily being a greater need for depth. I was perfectly invested simply with the caper by caper formula. It was never thought-provoking for me nor did it need to be. It was just a bit of fun. And then came the final episode and it was... interesting! I was pleasantly surprised by the sudden inclusion of an overarching story line, if not scratching my head a little.

Shadowsan's reveal made a decent amount of sense in hindsight, but didn't come across as particularly expertly crafted. It was a sudden shift to the status quo with little build up, and it felt vaguely out of place. It's an episode that could have been executed better if the narrative had started to shift earlier in the season or if there were more episodes between "The Chasing Paper Caper" and "The French Connection Caper." Instead it's everything all at once and I found myself thinking, "Oh! Okay! So we're doing this now."

Upon rewatching, there is some build up that can be noticed and recontextualizes, but it's not much. Even knowing how the season concludes, episodes 3-8 still feel episodic and disconnected from any greater story line. You've got some angst about Carmen's origin, and Shadowsan's insistence about sending Tigress for a second time reframes itself as a calculated decision rather than misjudgment but that's about it. They have the bare essentials of story telling, but they're not skillfully crafted. And that's... fine! This is children's TV. I don't actually hold it to the same standard as adult television, and I do think it's a pretty decent show for what it is.

My point then that I want to address is this idea of bare essential story telling. Carmen Sandiego doesn't lack the elements needed to tell a good story. They're there, just not expertly executed. The post that inspired this spiel mentioned that Team Red reads more as friendly coworkers. I don't fully agree with this, but I see their point. I will also say that I don't think this was what the writers had in mind. I do believe they were meant to be read as Found Family, in fact, it is more or less explicitly stated in "The African Ice Caper." It's just that, like every other aspect of the show, it's handled in a way that gives hints of further depth while not fully conceptualizing the theme.

This is not a smear campaign against the series. No, this is very much a product of passion. It's an entertaining show with beautiful animation and captivating fight sequences. I was hooked from the first episode and I continued to be so through the end of the series. I'd say one of the greatest draws of this show lies in its weakness. We're only given impressions of characters' further depth and personality. With the obvious exception of Carmen, we're only given glimpses of characters'back stories. In regards to over arching story lines, we're only given bare bone elements. This isn't great from a critical standpoint, but it does open the door to a large array of fan interpretation and transformative fanworks.

Because of the flaws in canon, fans are not bound by strict limitations. They are free to come up with their own unique interpretations of characters, they can flesh out back stories however they see fit, and otherwise flimsy storylines lend themselves to deeper fan-driven exploration.

Frequently on Tumblr, you'll see posts that disparage fanon for the way that it tends to flanderize and flatten characters. And yeah! This is bad! Unsurprisingly, flattening complex stories into easily recognizable tropes and clichés is actually the devil! A lot of times in fandom, you see this sort of corporate brain rot that simplifies stories into familiar and easily consumable pieces of "media" ("Consuming media," my beloathed)

Fanon gets a bad rep. Is it deserved? Mm. A good majority of the time, maybe. But where is the discussion for fanon in the other direction? What about when fanon expands a work of fiction? When it assigns more complexity than canonically given? There's something innately human about connecting with a piece of fiction and wanting to do more. We don't so easily let go of things, you know? When you love a piece of art that's otherwise disappointing, you have this desire to see it do better. To meet its potential. I think that's where fanon in the opposite direction stems from.

I think the fandom surrounding Carmen Sandiego (2019) is a decent example of this. The characterization is admittedly lacking, but that's done nothing to stop fanartists from coming up with their own rich interpretations of characters and their relations to others.

Carmen and Julia are two characters that share a decent amount of screen time, but their relationship otherwise suffers from the amount of time stretching between interactions. This has done nothing to deter fans. It seems I can't throw a stone in this fandom without hitting beautiful pieces of fanart depicting the two, or multi-chapter fics exploring the two's dynamics, or impassioned ramblings about them.

The same thing can be said about Graham and Carmen. They share a decent amount of screen time and their interactions are compelling, but they're too far and in between. What's there is not fully developed. Again, bringing it back to the idea of bare essential story telling. They have what they need to hint at the intrigue of both these dynamics, but they're not satisfactorily executed and both relationships suffer as a result. Their relationships, and indeed, the show as a whole, kind of feels like a completed puzzle with various missing pieces.

I chose Julethief and Redcrackle to use as examples, but similar things can be said of every other relationship in this show. Player and Carmen have moments that hint at a dynamic friendship built on unwavering trust and care, but it's only in a few select scenes, (though, the scenes that do do this are phenomenal and make me want to cry-- and I'm so sorry shippers-- but Player and Carmen have a monopoly on the hard hitting emotionally impactful moments in this show. I don't make the rules, I'm sorry.) and the majority of their interactions are reserved for getting down to business.

However, because of the glimpses we do see, you see countless fics detailing their friendship and building on to what we see in canon by going behind the scenes. I myself have extensive head canons about these two and honestly, what I've written and published is only the tip of the iceberg. Player is a bit of a tricky character to get a grasp on because of his limited role in canon, but what we do see opens up all sort of interpretation. I have such a fun time writing him because I can use what I see in canon to shape my own ideas about how he would act in various scenarios. My version of Player is far more dynamic than what we see in canon, but it's only like that because I love the canon character so much. I want him to do more, I want him to be more. My creativity is piqued with this character.

Moving on, let's focus on Shdowsan and Carmen, my other beloved dynamic. I have so many ideas about these two's relationship, and I especially enjoy delving into the dynamic between him and Black Sheep. They suffer the same problems as prior discussed. The scenes building on their relationship are sparse, but they are there. Take for several examples:

Shadowsan interacting with little Black Sheep in the "Daisho Caper," Shadowsan's stated remorse at not being able to tell Carmen about her own family, Shadowsan nursing her back to health after "The Stockholm Syndrome Caper," his stated motive for hiding the truth of her lineage from her, Shadowsan telling her he'd be with her till the end of the line, Shadowsan reminiscing about little Black Sheep when he visits the destroyed VILE Island, Shadowsan's dedication to finding Carmen's mother for her, Shadowsan telling her she can finally rest, and, and, and, and.

There is certainly a reason that fans have interpreted he and Carmen as being father and daughter, and I am in no way surprised by the beautiful and extensive explorations that certain fans have taken into these two's shared history (@frozenwolftemplar my beloved)

After all, you really do have to wonder about the hardened assassin who couldn't bring himself to harm a child or her father. Could there have been more done on the show writers part to really cement their relationship as adoptive father and daughter? Yes, absolutely. Does the development of their relationship leave something to be desired? Yes, absolutely. Do the existing interactions inspire me to delve further and call up melancholy memories of me and my own father, thus making me want to extensively detail their shared history before expanding on their present relationship so that I can process my own feelings about my own father? Yes, absolutely. Is this type of connection a deeply valuable faucet of story telling and kind of the whole point of creating art to begin with? I think so!

Carmen Sandiego doesn't necessarily set things up just to drop them so much as it strives to create compelling story lines and interesting characters before ultimately failing to delve deep enough or dedicate enough time for these things to fully come into their own. They're there and they exist, but it's like... Drinking water with oranges in it. I can taste the oranges, but damnit, now I want orange juice.

It utilizes story telling techniques, but not enough so that the show fully benefits from them. There's an impression of character dynamics, back stories, and personality but they're not fully recognized.

However, it is because of these flaws that fans can take the source material and go absolutely bonkers with it. By engaging with the story and characters, you really get the chance to flex your creative muscle. It's like a sandbox. The sand is there, the box is there, and the tools are there, but what you make is up to you. I've seen some deeply moving pieces of writing come out of this fandom, and it's insane to me how some authors can do so much with so little. In engaging with fanworks for this show, I've drawn connections to my own life and my own relationships. There are lines of writing that have been engraved into my brain. I've met wonderfully creative people and I'm glad to be an active member of the community.

No, the show itself is no amazing piece of story telling. It's fun and it's entertaining, but it doesn't fully realize everything that it set out to do. It does, however, open the door to community as well as inspiring creativity and transformity, and that means the world to me.

[variousqueerthings]

im finally watching the original "tales of the city" (yes... paul gross is in it, but to be fair i wanted to watch it anyway) -- but it's interesting because i did watch the 2019 series when it came out because jen richards was playing a young olympia dukakis and i think essentially reframing her character (iconic) as a trans woman 26 years after the original series and [checks online] 41 years after the first book was published. unless of course she was a trans woman from the beginning, we shall see!

but it does mean that i read anna madrigal (olympia dukakis) in a specific way from the beginning - a part of her Luster and Mystery when she's first introduced is that she's a trans woman who doesn't talk about it, like many trans women wouldn't have done at the time

i say "i think" because there was a big narrative about her deciding to tell characters about being trans in the 2019 story, and it felt like the first time it was brought up in the story

anyway. we shall see! it's fun to get into some iconic queer media! and somewhere in there is also a paul gross 👀

mainly though, laura linney!!! between this and angels in america she really is a foundation of Big Queer American Stories

[prfm-multiverse]

Do you have a video of Perfume performing Rebuild from the Reframe or Future Pop tour?

2019.12.30 Rebuild (Perfume×Technology presents Reframe 2019 (NHK BS4K) + 2022.01.17 Rebuild (Perfume Reframe Tour 2021) (WPTA Liveship.tokyo)

Google Drive

[binhwantstoeatoreo]

Week 4: Digital Community and Fandom: Reality TV Case Study

The Simple Life: How Social Media Revived Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie's Reality TV Legacy

Digital Communities, Fandom, and the Power of Nostalgia

In our always-online era, nostalgia isn’t just a feeling—it’s a whole digital ecosystem, and reality TV is thriving because of it. Enter The Simple Life (2003–2007), the OG chaotic blond-bestie duo, Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie. What was once a hilariously absurd fish-out-of-water show is now a full-blown cultural relic, resurrected through memes, TikTok edits, and Gen Z’s insatiable love for camp. Social media has basically given this show a second life, proving that iconic moments never truly fade—they just get repackaged with a trendy soundbite and a side of irony. It’s like self-branding, but for TV history—who knew The Simple Life would be living rent-free in our feeds two decades later?

The increased accessibility of past reality TV through streaming platforms and online fan communities ensures that audiences can constantly rediscover and reinterpret these shows (Kavka, 2019, p. 7). What was once considered “trash TV” has now been reframed as a cultural commentary, with Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie becoming icons of an era where self-branding and celebrity were beginning to merge with reality entertainment.

Paris and Nicole: Reality TV Personas as Self-Brands

Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie were not just reality TV stars; they were early adopters of self-branding, embodying a highly curated yet seemingly authentic version of themselves. Their on-screen personas—Hilton as the naive, pampered heiress and Richie as the witty, rebellious sidekick—aligned perfectly with what scholars call “the self as a project,” where reality TV participants cultivate and monetize their public image (Kavka, 2019, p. 8).

Their exaggerated antics, catchphrases like Hilton’s iconic “That’s hot,” and Richie’s sarcastic quips became instantly recognizable cultural touchstones. These personas weren’t just accidental; they were carefully crafted extensions of their real lives, designed to generate engagement. In many ways, Hilton and Richie pioneered “performative authenticity” (Deller, 2019, p. 167), a concept that modern influencers continue to exploit on social media. The balance between authenticity and curation—where a celebrity appears genuine while maintaining a highly constructed public image—is a hallmark of influencer culture today.

Reality TV, as a genre, has always been shaped by the tension between authenticity and performance, and The Simple Life capitalized on this ambiguity. Kavka (2019, p. 12) notes that reality TV creates a unique space where participants perform their own identities within a structured, semi-scripted environment. Hilton and Richie’s “characters” blurred the lines between real and exaggerated, laying the groundwork for today’s influencer economy, where social media personalities navigate a similar balance between reality and fabrication.

In a recent interview, Hilton and Richie reflected on their experiences and acknowledged how The Simple Life helped shape their public personas, despite their parents initially discouraging them from participating in the show (Moore, 2024). This retrospective self-awareness aligns with the broader trend of reality TV stars reclaiming their narratives in the digital age.

Social Media and Reality TV’s Nostalgic Resurgence

The resurgence of The Simple Life can be largely credited to social media’s ability to turn past reality TV content into meme culture. Deller (2019, p. 158) points out that reality TV moments frequently become GIFs, reaction images, and viral tweets, extending their cultural shelf life well beyond their original air dates. Hilton and Richie’s escapades are now widely shared in TikTok edits, Instagram reels, and Twitter threads, proving that their comedic chemistry remains timeless.

Beyond humor, the show’s themes of satire and social critique resonate differently with contemporary audiences. In the early 2000s, The Simple Life was often dismissed as trivial entertainment (Pelletier & Seenarine, 2022). However, looking back, it can be viewed as an early critique of class privilege and consumer culture (Noonan, 2024). Fans now reinterpret it through a more analytical lens, similar to how other nostalgic media from the 2000s has been re-examined in the digital era (Deller, 2019, p. 157).

Kavka (2019, p. 5) further explores how reality TV formats have shifted from mere entertainment to interactive experiences, where audiences participate in the narrative through online engagement. This participatory culture allows fans to remix and reinterpret past reality TV moments, ensuring their continued relevance in digital spaces. An article from The Cut highlights The Simple Life’s enduring cultural impact, noting that 20 years after its premiere, the show continues to shape pop culture discourse. Social media discussions and the availability of the series on streaming platforms have introduced it to younger viewers, cementing its legacy (Jacobs, 2023).

From Considered "Trashy" Reality TV to Social Media Icons

Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie’s influence did not end when The Simple Life went off the air. Instead, they successfully transitioned from reality TV stars to digital-era celebrities, proving their adaptability in the evolving landscape of fame. Hilton, in particular, has mastered the art of social media reinvention. She continues to embrace her “dumb blonde” persona while simultaneously positioning herself as a business mogul. Her 2020 documentary This Is Paris revealed a more introspective side of her, demonstrating how social media allows reality TV alumni to reclaim their narratives (Hilton, 2020).

Nicole Richie, though less overtly public, has also found a niche in the digital age, using her signature humor to engage with audiences while distancing herself from her tabloid-fueled past. Both women showcase how reality TV alumni can maintain relevance by embracing social media and adapting their personas to fit new digital landscapes.

A discussion in ASAP Journal explores how reality TV has evolved in response to social media’s interactive nature, emphasizing how audience engagement fuels the longevity of shows like The Simple Life. Reality TV no longer ends when the cameras stop rolling; instead, it lives on in social media discourse, reaction videos, and fan communities (Luca & Sharma, 2024).

Final thoughts: The Blurring Lines Between Reality TV and Social Media Fame

The case of The Simple Life illustrates how reality television and social media exist in a symbiotic relationship. As Deller (2019, p. 159) explains, reality TV set the foundation for today’s influencer culture, where visibility and audience engagement dictate a celebrity’s longevity. Hilton and Richie were ahead of their time in understanding that personal branding could extend beyond traditional television, shaping how celebrities navigate digital fame today.

Moreover, the shift from passive reality TV consumption to active audience participation highlights the genre’s adaptability. Kavka (2019, p. 9) notes that contemporary reality TV relies on the audience’s involvement, making it an evolving, interactive format rather than a static media product. This is evident in how shows like The Simple Life continue to generate online discourse, ensuring their continued relevance.

Social media hasn’t just revived The Simple Life; it has fundamentally changed how we engage with reality TV nostalgia. Through memes, archival clips, and ongoing fan discussions, Hilton and Richie continue to be cultural fixtures, proving that in the digital age, pop culture never truly disappears—it simply reinvents itself through new platforms and fresh perspectives.

References:

@mrrsrc. (2024, October 15). Well, that was unexpected || @ParisHilton #thesimplelife #meme #nicolerichie #parishilton #flirting #fyp #2000s #y2k. Tiktok.com. https://www.tiktok.com/@mrrsrc/video/7425689519065795873?lang=en

Deller, R. A. (2019). “Chapter Six: Reality Television in an Age of Social Media.” Reality Television: The Television Phenomenon That Changed the World, 167. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781839090219

Hilton, P. (2020, September 14). The Real Story of Paris Hilton | This Is Paris Official Documentary | Paris Hilton - YouTube. YouTube.com. https://youtu.be/wOg0TY1jG3w?si=7lracHDOMXCh0IVH

Jacobs, M. (2023, November 24). Oral History: “The Simple Life” Turns 20. The Cut. https://www.thecut.com/2023/11/the-simple-life-20th-anniversary-interviews.html

Kavka, M. (2018). Reality TV: its contents and discontents. Critical Quarterly, 60(4), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/criq.12442

Luca, C., & Sharma, A. (2024, August 27). Reality TV in the Social Media Economy / A Conversation About Reality TV in the Social Media Economy. ASAP/Review. https://asapjournal.com/node/reality-tv-in-the-social-media-economy-a-conversation-about-reality-tv-in-the-social-media-economy/

Moore, J. (2024, December 5). Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie’s Parents “Told Us Not to” Make “The Simple Life” Originally. People.com. https://people.com/paris-hilton-and-nicole-richie-parents-told-us-not-to-make-the-simple-life-originally-8756878

Noonan, S. (2024, December). The Reality TV Shows That Raised A Generation. Substack.com; THINGS THAT KEEP ME UP AT NIGHT. https://tidbitsetc.substack.com/p/the-tv-that-raised-me?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Offensive Tea. (2024). the SKINNIEST show that’s EVER been made part 1: fastfood queens. Youtube.com. https://youtu.be/kH8nc_z9_70?si=l4q0p8llwIKa4Gmw

Pelletier, A., & Seenarine, N. (2022, February 2). Cooking competitions satisfy reality TV cravings - The Quinnipiac Chronicle. The Quinnipiac Chronicle. https://quchronicle.com/75711/arts-and-life/cooking-competitions-satisfy-reality-tv-cravings/

Sufficient_Motor_458. (2024). just me and “simple life” paris hilton trying to make it through another monday. Reddit.com. https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/comments/1bhskp2/just_me_and_simple_life_paris_hilton_trying_to/

[ivogfan]

New interview with Ivo talking about his upcoming tour stop for Carousel in Bristol!

(I’ve copy-pasted the article below too!)

STANDUP IVO GRAHAM ON THE INSPIRATION BEHIND HIS ACCLAIMED DEBUT THEATRE SHOW: ‘I THINK ABOUT THE PAST CONSTANTLY’

Known for a self-deprecation that belies his enviable intellect, wit and lyricism, “apologetically posh” standup Ivo Graham has been performing comedy since his late teenage years – despite what he calls “extensive grooming for more serious careers at Eton and Oxford”.

Now in his early 30s, he has written eight sell-out solo standup hours, made numerous radio and TV appearances, supported Josh Widdicombe on tour and written a book, Yardsticks for Failure, set for release in Spring 2025.

Along with his best friend and fellow standup Alex Kealy, Graham also originated the Gig Pigs podcast, chronicling the pair’s enduring love of live music, one gig – and many digressions – at a time.

In 2019, Graham became father to a daughter; an experience that altogether changed him, and became one of the inspirations for his first foray into theatre.

A meditative, candid and temporally rich exploration of his own life, the construction of Carousel has offered Graham the chance to weave an emotionally charged tapestry without the safety net that a standup stage can provide. As a result, it has resonated very strikingly with audiences.

The show is currently touring, and comes to Bristol Old Vic’s Weston Studio for three nights, beginning on February 4.

Ahead of the run, Graham shared some insights as to what the theatrical experience has unlocked for him.

At what point did you realise that the subjects explored in Carousel were best expressed in a play, rather than in standup form?

“I think the best standup works at that perfect nexus between reality and escapism; comedy and tragedy. I should try and do more standup at that midpoint rather than pissing about with games and gifts indefinitely. But I also wanted to do a show about thoughts in my head that you really couldn’t put in a standup show for more than maybe five sneaky minutes at the three-quarter mark. I am greedy. I wanted a bigger platform for my pretension.”

In what ways has working in an adjacent artform surprised or freed you?

“Amid a chaotic life that has become especially stressful of late (see: the show), and with very few other good habits in place barring the odd marathon (clang!), I did not realise how phenomenally and almost meditatively satisfying it would be to hone one script and then learn it and say it over and over again every day with as little deviation as possible.

“Not all of the show is fun to do but the whole show was almost always the calmest and proudest hour of my day at the Fringe. If I could do three of these shows a day and there was the demand for them and I could guarantee that my voice would hold up, I would have done three a day. Is there no ceiling to this man’s self-absorption?!”

How has becoming a parent changed your relationship with your own parents?

“It has done so in a whole host of almost entirely positive but adjacently complicated ways that I cannot even begin to pick apart here. But needless to say, seeing my dad bouncing on their trampoline with my daughter, or my mum driving her on the back of her scooter: it’s just about as good as my life gets. (Bar Glastonbury perhaps).”

Could you describe ways in which you have confronted or reframed your own childhood, while witnessing life through your daughter’s eyes?

“I think about the past constantly, to an extent that I don’t think it would be overdramatic to call emotional self-harm, but I don’t think about my own childhood too much, safe in the knowledge that at this age (five) I was by all accounts broadly loving life, and being very well raised by my parents before they sent me off to boarding school two years later, which I accept is a more controversial approach (though I broadly enjoyed it).

“I want to be as much like my memories of my young parents as I can be. The main difference is there’s only a tiny amount of footage of me from 1995 (grainy and gorgeous as it is) whereas I have recorded hundreds of hours of my daughter’s life with a mania for chronicling which has arguably become its own problem. ‘But you got to see some of this footage man!’ I am the Paul Thomas Anderson of the soft play.”

Do you think your emotional life has deepened in recent years, and with what impact?

“By a factor of five, or 10, or 20, or whatever number sounds huge without being overdramatic. A fuck of a lot has happened and it’s included all the highest highs and all the lowest lows so far. I hate to keep coming back to this, but a lot of it really is in the show.”

How have audience responses to Carousel affected you?

“If my sole job was to sit in a warm and well-lit room replying to DMs about the show, and bouncing parasocially back and forth into every interaction, I think it would be a very nice job. However, I think it might be quite the solipsistic quicksand to try and ever get out of, so it’s important that I set limits on my social media usage, lock my phone in a box for hours at a time, and either dance to music in my flat, or, heaven forbid, go outside.”

Ivo Graham: Carousel is at The Weston Studio, Bristol Old Vic on February 4-6 at 8pm. Limited tickets are available at www.bristololdvic.org.uk.

Graham’s book Yardsticks for Failure: A Journey Down the Sinkhole of Not Getting Stuff Done (Headline) is set for release in May 2025, and available for pre-order now.

[haveyoureadthispoll]

Acclaimed literary essayist T Kira Madden's raw and redemptive debut memoir is about coming of age and reckoning with desire as a queer, biracial teenager amidst the fierce contradictions of Boca Raton, Florida, a place where she found cult-like privilege, shocking racial disparities, rampant white-collar crime, and powerfully destructive standards of beauty hiding in plain sight. As a child, Madden lived a life of extravagance, from her exclusive private school to her equestrian trophies and designer shoe-brand name. But under the surface was a wild instability. The only child of parents continually battling drug and alcohol addictions, Madden confronted her environment alone. Facing a culture of assault and objectification, she found lifelines in the desperately loving friendships of fatherless girls. With unflinching honesty and lyrical prose, spanning from 1960s Hawai'i to the present-day struggle of a young woman mourning the loss of a father while unearthing truths that reframe her reality, Long Live the Tribe of Fatherless Girls is equal parts eulogy and love letter. It's a story about trauma and forgiveness, about families of blood and affinity, both lost and found, unmade and rebuilt, crooked and beautiful.