#this is not really a post about voting this is a post about online etiquette

[britneyshakespeare]

Had the extremely upsetting experience of a mutual of like 6 years going off on me for occasionally making posts about supporting Harris because apparently that makes me a g n cide denier who refuses to learn and grow, with all of my views just being assumed not even from what I've told them I believe or what I've posted before, but just because I DON'T post particularly the kind of things they THINK I should be. When I pointed out how much they were just completely assuming about stuff I'd never talked to them about, I was told it doesn't matter what I do in real life or "care" about if I simply disagree with their conclusion and vote for her anyway. Like they were absolutely not sorry for the level of maliciousness they not just assumed of my character, but for some reason thought appropriate to bring directly to me before unfollowing me. No apology whatsoever for how discomforting or upsetting that might be and certainly no acknowledgment that I could disagree with them and still be a good person. I just got another even longer rant about how they fundamentally can't fuck with me because of this one thing, no matter WHAT else I do in my real life (which I pointed out that they do not know), and how I'm directly supporting fascism.

Like seriously what is it about Tumblr that makes people think they know someone based off of occasional posts? There were just such DEEP assumptions they were making of me and going off of very little or absolutely nothing. Around the time I first became mutuals with that person I used to express my personality and beliefs and talk about what was going on in my life a lot more openly, but I've significantly scaled back on doing that in many ways for many reasons. One of my major ones is privacy and the way I've had strangers outside my followers and following circles just find random things I say and dogpile me for it. I was fundamentally changed after some T Fs did that to me like 3 years ago. I also just didn't have many conversations w that person anymore (I message people in general on here like 10x less than I did circa 2018-2019, which I'm somewhat sorry about!). My point is to say I think this person felt comfortable assuming that they knew me, especially who I am in 2024 at the age of 25, much better than they actually did.

One of the specific things they accused me of was being afraid of learning and growing (because I don't perform social media activism on here like they think I should). Like AFRAID to take criticism. When again I've never received criticism from them or had to respond to any criticism on here before as pertaining to my views on... well, absolutely any of the issues they accused me of not caring about. They essentially treated it as if the only thing in the world I cared about was the US election and characterized me as the most out-of-touch liberal they could possibly imagine, because I'm not "pushing" Kamala Harris to be better (Oh?? Should I do that on here?? Does she read my blog??).

And most hypocritically what they said was that I only *sometimes* *vaguely* post pro-Harris things (I often post like 5 or fewer things in a day though?). But here's the kicker. "Because I know I'll get shit for it. And rightfully so."

Really????? Not a single person, anon or not, in my messages or in a tagged post or anything, has ever given me shit before for saying who I'm voting for. I'm actually NOT afraid of "getting shit" for that opinion, I just don't start fights with people who are anti-voting. And why should I??? I genuinely don't believe in trying to change the minds of strangers on the internet about that sort of thing. I'm just not confrontational about it; that is so not the same thing as being "afraid of getting shit." I'm not posting ENOUGH about my support for Harris, therefore I'm afraid. But therefore they can also make all these assumptions about me being their strawman for an ignorant Harris supporter.

I'm afraid of getting shit but I still post anyway? But if I weren't afraid of getting shit I'd be posting a lot more?? This is ALL based on their assumptions of what my blog *should* look like, based on what I really and truly believe. My level of posting every now and then is an accurate gauge of my feelings on complex, sensitive, global issues. Because I'm voting for the Democratic presidential candidate and I'm ok sharing pretty much just that little glimpse of myself.

I really don't think that person knows just how inappropriate and insulting that is to just say all of that to me. Like they really know what's going on in my head. Their first message began and ended with like "I'm sorry I love you I just can't take it anymore" but they clearly weren't sorry enough to try and be more respectful to me, and they didn't love me enough not to default to extremely ungenerous assumptions and attacking me based off of those instead of any actual words I've said that they take issue with.

Online radicalization is real and it's not necessarily bad because your political views can start to fall well out of the contemporary Overton window. The way you find it appropriate to treat people whose views, however common, seem to fundamentally misalign with yours... that does matter. You can't just assume the worst of everyone and then act on that in how you approach them as individuals. And then be shocked that you don't stay friends with them. You can't be confrontational with someone about an issue you've never had an honest conversation about, and then expect them to take your bad faith in them as reasonable well-meaning criticism.

I'm afraid of criticism??? I'm afraid of criticism. No I'm not. This person and I have never had an issue before where they criticized me and I got harshly defensive. It was ALL projection. The entire tone of their messages was as if all their anti-voting posts recently were somehow in communication with the occasional go-vote-for-Harris posts that I make. That's not a conversation. I don't post for your satisfaction. I don't post in "response" to my mutuals I disagree with. I just post what's on my mind, sometimes, about some things. I really again can't stress enough how baffled I am by this

[crossovernonshipstournament]

All right so I'm going to get the groupings done today and hopefully have the matchups posted by today or tomorrow, but before I get started on that I thought I'd take a second to lay out the etiquette I'm expecting (and what behavior I will be banning) from this poll.

So, unlike the Artificial Kids Poll, which leaned into the "we're taking the kids out for ice cream later" vibe, I'm not gonna come down super hard on trash talk in this one. But that doesn't mean that anything goes! Here's some ideas of what will and will not fly.

Things that are fine:

-Comically exaggerated threats. (Ie, "If my fave doesn't win I'm blowing up the moon!" This is absurd. You're being silly. This is Saturday morning cartoon villain levels of overreaction. I'm fine with this.)

-Playground levels of trash talk. (Ie, "I can't believe they crossed over Camp Camp and Bob's Burgers. Look, see? Little King Trash Mouth." Look, you wanna throw shade at the characters, go for it. They can take it. This is okay too.)

-Incentivizing people to vote against an entry. (Ie, "If this entry wins I'll never watch this show you all keep telling me to watch/if they lose I'll definitely watch it." You wanna hold your own interests hostage to your followers do what you want. This is also fine.)

Things that are not fine:

-Insulting the canon properties or the people who enjoy them. (Ie, "Pitting this media property that I really like and find meaning in against this random who cares media property is an insult to my favorite media property." Any media property can have meaning to anyone, and sometimes the submissions came from people who were trying to fix a bad media so aren't even fans anyway and wouldn't appreciate the implication.)

(AND YES I WILL BE HOLDING MYSELF TO THIS AS WELL. There's RWBY characters in this poll and I am going to be sitting on my fucking hands not to insult RWBY's bad writing or take my usual potshots at how bad cRWBY are at their jobs. Like, for example, see that <- That kind of thing won't be tolerated.)

-Comments about the characters' appearance that can potentially reflect on real existing people who share that trait. (Ie, Felix is cartoonishly thin and explicitly drawn to look like a grimy little shit-weasel; remarks like that are fine, but "He's so ugly, look at his stupid white boy haircut and his complete lack of an ass," are traits that potentially someone reading could possibly have. We're only looking to trash the pretend people, we don't want collateral damage over here.)

-Should go without saying but anything that counts as real world hate-speech (racism, transphobia, anti-semitism, misogyny, ableism, etc, etc, etc- if it feels like you're using my silly tumblr poll as an excuse to be a bigoted piece of shit, I'm blocking you.)

-Anything that invalidates a character's likeability as a character. (This one is purely vibes but a good example is the person on Artificial Kids who kept tagging a poll with their fave against Boyd with how much they hated him. This wasn't trash talk; this was genuine insulting the character and by extension his fans just for the crime of being against their fave. If you're getting this het up about a silly tumblr poll, you probably need to take a step back from online activity. Take a walk around your block or bake some bread or take yourself out for lunch. Something to settle your feelings idk. Just step away and calm down it's not that big a deal.)

TL;DR: I am allowing friendly ribbing and trash talk, but keep it in good sportsmanship territory. Your shade should not extend beyond the pretend people you're throwing it at. Are we all clear? This is a silly tumblr poll, it doesn't need to get that serious.

[kookiecrush]

You know I have noticed something in this chapter 2 , I am an army since 2019 ok so I have seen pre pandemic & post pandemic fandom . So being an 2019 army I have noticed that some big ot7 accounts are not inactive anymore in this chapter 2. It's Iike as group activities are on halt so they are also inactive , I thought once members starts to release solo works those accounts or armys will hype us more you know like they will encourage us to stream, vote etc like before, just difference is instead of group It's solo comebacks but the sad thing is that instead of doing this most of them have gone inactive. I am not saying you have to be online whole day , life happens you know but totally ignoring the artist, it's not good because due to this the young / new fans are left with asking weird questions to the members on WV lives. I think new fans needs t know the army etiquette. Honestly I miss the pre pandemic energy & yes I blame some big "ot7" accounts , they should hype even more . I think in this chapter 2 , solo fanbases are doing fantastic job instead of ot7 accounts.

It is weird that ot7 accounts are inactive during this period because members are still active. Maybe they feel weird about supporting the members individually? Which doesn't really make sense to me, but idk. It could also just be that life got in the way and they're too busy, or maybe they've moved on from bts. There are still plenty of active ot7 accounts anyway, but I have noticed that some of the solo ones are really putting the effort in and supporting like crazy. It makes sense that solo fanbases are thriving during solo era, it's just a shame there's so much fighting and negativity with a lot of them. I don't see what fans leaving weird comments during lives has to do with ot7 accounts, though? It's not their job or responsibility to educate other fans on how to behave.

[breeeliss]

Quick Guide to Fanfiction Etiquette

i.e. what are acceptable ways of interacting with fics? 

So in light of many recent fic theft related events and with Miraculous Blackout ( @miraculousblackout ) still in full swing, I noticed there are many primers on art theft and etiquette around interacting with art and not much about interacting with fanfiction. So for any readers out there who are interested in knowing appropriate ways of interacting with our fics, here’s a quick cheat sheet. 

When you find fanfiction online that you enjoy or that you want to share, there are easy and respectful ways to go about this. Simply put, it involves interacting with the original source of the fic. On Tumblr, that’s reblogs and likes. On AO3, that’s comments, kudos, and bookmarks. On FFN that’s favorites and reviews. On Wattpad that’s views and votes. Wanna show us how much you love the story? Tell us what you think and help bump our stats. 

If you really love this fic and you want to share this fic with other people, the best way to do that is by sharing links back to the original stories. Creating rec lists comprised of links to your favorite fanfictions are great ways of sharing stories, plus writers love being included on them. Although links are preferred, even just leaving the title of the fic, the name of the author, and the site you read the fic on works. This spreads our stories and lets people know who wrote them. 

What about creating work based off of our writing?

Yes! We love that! Creating remixes, creating podfics, using lines as captions for art/cosplay, creating fanart, creating fancomics, and translating fics are all great provided we’re notified and credited where appropriate. 

When it comes to creating work based off of our fics that in no way involves manipulating our words (i.e. fanart, fancomics, podfics/dubs, etc.) all we ask is that you credit us. Tag our blogs (if applicable), indicate that you are creating work based off of a fanfiction you read, and leave links back to our stories. Writers love getting art inspired by our fics, but please credit us when you do. 

When it comes to creating work that involves manipulating our words (i.e. translations and remixes/rewrites of our fics), it’s always best to ask for permission first. These are things that writers are not always okay with. If they say no, it’s your job to respect that. For remixes/rewrites, please credit us and link back to our original work. Let people know that this is a remix/rewrite of another fic. If you’re translating a fic, it’s important to be very transparent with the writer and tell them where you are going to post this translation and how you are going to credit them (again guys, links links links). It’s also common courtesy to send a link to the writers to the translated work when you’re done. 

This also applies to using lines/sections for our fics as captions for your art/cosplay, as captions for your aesthetic posts, etc. We love it when our stories inspire you, but if you’re copying lines from our fics you need to ask us first and you need to credit us properly. 

A bonus tip for those of you who enjoy AO3 is that the site actually makes it very easy for you to credit the original writers in cases where you’re posting podfics, remixes, or translations of an existing work. When you select “New Work” and begin to post your creation, there’s a section where you can check off and indicate whether this piece is inspired off another existing work. 

If you check the box next to “This work is a remix, a translation, a podfic, or was inspired by another work,” you get an entire form that allows you to include the URL, title, author, and language of the original work. AO3 very nicely credits the original author for you when you fill this out. As a personal suggestion, gifting the work to the original author by typing in their AO3 username is a good way to cover all your bases. 

One last thing: please do not monetize creations that are inspired by our writing unless we give you very clear permission to do so.

Making fanart for our stories is great. Selling prints of fanart inspired by our fics without getting our permission first is less great. This also goes for anyone who dubs over fanfiction on YouTube and monetizes on the videos they post. Writers are artists as well, and our ideas are just as valuable as our written words. To monetize work that is inspired by our words and our ideas is unfair to us. General rule of thumb: don’t do it unless you have permission from us. 

To Review:

Give fics comments, likes, reblogs, views, kudos, bookmarks, votes, and favorites. This is the best way to show us you appreciate our work. Please do it!

If ever you want to share fics with others, always share links leading to the original story. Links Links Links!!!

If you want to create something inspired by our work, please credit us by tagging our blogs and leaving links to our stories. 

If you want to manipulate our work either through a translation or by creating a rewrite/remix of the work, ask for permission first. 

If you don’t have permission, it ends there. Some writers are uncomfortable with their writing being manipulated/altered and you should respect that. 

If you do have permission, please credit us by tagging our blogs and leaving links to our stories.

Please do not monetize work you’ve created that is inspired by our words and our ideas unless you have our permission.

If you’re ever unsure, always ask the writer first

[rosezarucky]

Every Little Bit Counts...

The use of media is becoming increasingly prominent in the political culture, it is almost necessary to be noticed. Politicians use social media and online presence not only to get noticed, but to connect to the digital world and users.  This not only increases their exposure, but gives people the ability to respond and feel like they are contributing and liaising with politicians. Jodi Dean suggests that by having this ease of contact, the action of democracy and debate becomes less powerful (Dean 2013). The more people that have access, regardless of class, status, race etc. is appealing to audiences, however it gives a false sense of responsibility and action. People use hashtags and share posts to give support, then their part is done. Instead of actually contributing to a cause, they are using the fastest option to satisfy their political opportunities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5ABPuNQ6IU There is also the issue of what is actually provided on the internet. What is called journalism these days can often be fake, or just click bait. Unfortunately, many people will take them for what they are without checking a source or sometimes, relying on just the headline. If they see a headline about a corrupt politician, this will influence their vote. This is more likely in people who are not interested in politics, as they are less likely to do any further research. In a survey conducted over 2007-2008, it was found that 55% of internet users did not use news sites for election news (Young 2010).  Whatever political news that occurs in their media will not be sought after, it will just appear. It is then more likely for them to take whatever they see as the truth.

In terms of politicians who might need to keep off social media, look no further than the president of the United States. Donald Trump is a notorious Twitter user, his claims to ‘fake news’ becoming a sort of catchphrase. This essentially means that he addresses ‘rumours’ about himself in order to give his side of the story. To non-Trump supporters, his twitter feed is a sense of entertainment. There has not really been a politician that has taken such a prominent position on social media before, so the proper etiquette may not be established yet. In any case, Trump’s attempt to connect with his followers by posting and reacting to every rumour makes him look silly, desperate and most of all, unprofessional. The purpose of politics is to be professional, but sometimes this needs to be more relaxed to connect with people. Going too far the other way however, can make you the world’s source of entertainment. Is social media really the best place for Trump?

References: DCU School of Communication 2013, IAMCR 2013 Plenary No. 3 - Jodi Dean, 3 July, viewed 26 September 2018, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5ABPuNQ6IU>.

Young, S 2010, 'News, political reporting and the internet', in How Australia Decides, Cambridge University Press, Victoria, Australia.

[newyorktheater]

Broadway from A to Z, 26 profiles that I completed over the (first) six months that Broadway has been shut. https://newyorktheater.me/category/broadway/alphabet-series/

To mark the six months of Broadway’s shutdown this past weekend, we could look back, as I did — The Best Theater in Six Months of No Theater — or we could compile suggestions for a changed theater of the future, as the New York Times did (see below.) But we couldn’t answer the question everybody has had from the start of this unprecedented moment: When will Broadway reopen?

This past week, Dr. Anthony Fauci weighed in, in an interview with the actress Jennifer Garner. The first article I read about his remarks quoted him as saying it won’t be safe to return to theaters until “almost a year” after an effective vaccine was widely distributed. But later in the day, the publication “updated” (i.e. corrected) the article: The government’s infectious disease expert had said not safe without a mask. That reassured some people for some reason.

Andrew Lloyd Webber reportedly wants the British government to “give us a date” when theaters will reopen, telling a committee of Parliament “We simply have to get our arts sector back open and running … We are at the point of no return, really,” But of course the coronavirus doesn’t care about human deadlines and timelines.

Still, we look to the future with hope. At Miscast20, the twentieth anniversary of MCC Theater’s popular annual gala, which for the first time was presented online, the last two singers Joshua Henry and Heather Headley, sang about the sun coming up,  “Tomorrow” (Henry from “Annie”) after an “Endless Night” (Headley from “The Lion King.”)

For some, the sun is already out, as Hannah Grannemann chronicles, from museum-goers in New York to theatergoers in Tokyo.

  Week in Reviews and Previews

  Incidental Moments of the Day, the final Apple Family on Zoom play. (Watch the video and read my review)

Eisa Davis in Lynn Nottage’s play for the virtual Theatre for One, “What Are The Things I Need to Remembe?”

Lynn Nottage on Theatre for One, and theater for many, and keeping busy during COVID

Update: Due to popular demand, extra late-night performance times have been added through September 24 and performances have extended through October! 

Paul Rudnick

Paul Rudnick On Coastal Elites, Trash-Tweeting Ivanka, and How Bette Midler and Theater Give Him Hope

  Week in Theater News

Ben Brantley will no longer be a theater critic for the New York Times, starting on October 15. “This pandemic pause in the great, energizing party that is the theater seemed to me like a good moment to slip out the door,” He’s been a critic there since 1993. we plan to take our time during this pause selecting Ben’s full-time successor.

The Pulitzer Board had changed its eligibility requirements for its Drama award. Eligible plays for Pulitzer Prizes will include those “that were scheduled to be produced in theatres in calendar 2020 but postponed or cancelled due to the pandemic, as well as plays produced and performed in places other than theater” (ie online or outdoors)

Theater artists and activists will gather September 21 for Lights Up on Voter Mobilization, a virtual town hall, will be presented by the Broadway Green Alliance September 21 at 8 p.m., to share  “actionable steps to mobilize and register voters, break down candidates’ positions on climate issues, and explore the intersection of environmental and racial justice issues.”

“Bulrusher” announces its swoon-worthy cast, the next livestream of Paula Vogel’s Bard at the Gate, starting September 17.

32nd Annual Festival of New Musicals from the National Alliance for Musical Theatre will occur online November 19 and 20th, with video excerpts of eight new musicals

20 Theater Figures on How to ‘Revolutionize’ Their World

Director Lavina Jadhwania loves watching plays with captions, hopes such access continues post-pandemic

Director Jay Stull suggests universal basic income/medical insurance from a pool created by artists who make it

Also: A new Federal Theater Project – director Lear deBesonnet Works that span traditional theater venues, digital media and the streets – artistic director Niegel Smith

Eliminate unpaid internships – dramaturg Lauren Halvorsen

institutionalize media production departments- #Psalmayene24

Five New York Times critics on what must change Open up the canon – Maya Phillips Embrace streaming – Jesse Green Make affordable tickets available for essential workers – Laura Collins-Hughes (how about for everybody?) Pool resources among for-profit and non-profit theaters (the way sports leagues do) – Elizabeth Vincentelli Relax theater etiquette – Alexis Soloski

June 14 Lloyd Suh King Henry V

Congratulations to Lloyd Suh for winning the Horton Foote Prize + $50,000 for his play at MaYi Theater, “The Chinese Lady,” based on the true story of the first female Chinese immigrant to the U.S.

Isabelle McCalla and Caitlin Kinnunen as high school girlfriends in The Prom

The filmed version of the Broadway musical The Prom will make its Netflix debut December 11

Ayad Akhtar novelist and Pulitzer-winning playwright (Disgraced, The Invisible Hand, Junk) will be the new president (starting Dec 2) of Pen America,, the literary and human rights organization. In interview: “I’m not convinced that literature is the best way to form political opinions. It’s the great form of nuanced intellectual discourse. We can have profound conversations about literature, but I’m not sure that political opinions — like who to vote for — are the purview of literature. But increasingly everything has become politicized, and I think an organization like PEN has to acknowledge that.”

Tonya Pinkins among an all-woman cast for Moliere in the Park’s School for Wives, which will be live streamed at 2pm and 7pm on October 24th

X is for Xavier Rubiano, a Broadway casting director who likes Miscast

Xavier Rubiano is the last in the Broadway Alphabet series — not as well known as most of the previous 25. But he represents the many behind-the-scenes folk who have always made Broadway possible.

Rest in Peace

Diana Rigg portrayed Eliza in a 1974 production of Pygmalion in the UK. Forty-four years later, she portrayed Mrs. Higgins in the current Broadway production of My Fair Lady

Medea

Lauren Ambrose as Eliza and Diana Rigg as Mrs. Higgins

 Diana Rigg, 82, memorable for her performances on Broadway (Medea, My Fair Lady), TV (The Avengers, Game of Thrones) and for her witty book of bad reviews through the ages, “No Turn Unstoned”

After Six Months, What? #Stageworthy News of the Week To mark the six months of Broadway’s shutdown this past weekend, we could look back, as I did -- …

[laurenelizabethmclaughlin-blog]

Hi, My Name is Liberal.

Look through your Facebook feed for about 30 seconds and it’s almost impossible to not see someone share an online article regarding politics, or a politically charged status turned rant. Today, it seems like everyone’s is talking politics. However, talking is the operative word, everyone is posting politics I should say. It’s 2018 and literally anyone can have a platform. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, after all, our Constitution safeguards our 1st amendment right to free speech, but literally ANYONE can have a platform and have their positions and stances posted for the masses. People are quick to share their opinions on Facebook, and Twitter, but how about in person? Is an unfriend on Facebook an unfriend in life, and is the identity that we share on Facebook truly our real identity? Is it civil to unfriend someone because of something they’ve posted on Facebook? Personally, I feel that it plays in to the idea of polarized factions, and an in group/ out group mentality. However, more and more people have been identifying themselves by their social media profiles and also by the political party that they feel they align with. So how exactly do these two relate? 

I’ve been an active Facebook user since 2009. Yes, at 12 years old I opened up my first Facebook account. In the past 9 years, I have amassed 2,776 friends. I promise you I don’t have that many friends in real life, but in the past I would normally except anyone if we had a large number of mutual friends, regardless of whether or not I knew them personally. I’m mentioning this because my Facebook news feed has become a melting pot of people from my extra curriculars growing up, elementary school, middle school, high school, now college, and definitely a few randoms in between, and I have seen opinions from all across the aisle. A big thing that I’ve seen since the 2016 election is posts from both liberals and conservatives alike making statuses asking people to defriend them if they don’t agree with their opinions or announcing that they will be defriending people because they don’t agree with their own opinions. This begs the question over whether or not it’s ok to shut yourself out to other people and their political leanings. You may not like what other people are saying, but by removing them from your feed and your friends list, you’re ending any portion of the conversation that could possibly still be. It’s important to question if there is etiquette and if so, what is it? I found an anonymous article from The Guardian that discusses unfriending people on social media and whether or not this is part of a bigger problem of incivility and a regress of political discourse. The article read, “Given the number of people who get their news mostly from Facebook (nearly 50% of adult Americans, according to the most recent research), this is how large swathes of the population come to live in total blackout from each other” (The Guardian, 2017). This resembles the large amount of individuals who are further polarizing themselves by taking part in the removal of friends based on political ideologies. It begs the question though, is who we identify as on Facebook who we are in life, and going off that, does who we voted for in the last election define ourselves? You have to think about if you would drop friends in real life based off of their political stances, which I feel is going a little too far. 

If you’re questioning what I mean by people identifying themselves by their political parties, I’m talking about how people have lost sight of important issues, and only see Republican or Democrat, not the greater good of everyone. It used to be very common to vote for a candidate based on what they represented, and what stances they had on hot button issues. Many times, regardless if you felt you were a conservative, liberal, or somewhere in between, you would pick the candidate that felt similarly to your own ideas and views. However, in American politics currently this is no longer the case. People now vote Republican if they feel they are conservative, and Democrat if they feel they are more liberal, despite knowing all of the facts. Many citizens no longer care about the issues at hand and the different stances that are taken. It is common belief generally that to be a Republican is to love Donald Trump and watch only Fox News and be against abortion. If you’re a Democrat you must hate conservatives, be a “snowflake” tree hugger and a Hillary lover. But this is not how it should be, you should pick your party based on your own values and morals, not have your party make your decisions and predict your ideals. Someone recently showed me an old Jimmy Kimmel skit in which people on the street are asked if they like Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act better, most of them not realizing that they are the same. Most of the respondents just say they don’t like Obamacare, simply because it was proposed by Obama, even when the host tells them the provisions of the program and they agree with them. It sadly shows that many Americans don’t know what exactly they are voting for or preaching about on social media. 

I will touch more on demagoguery in my next post, but it is important to remember the dangers of continuing to polarize yourself because it is easy to become a demagogue by closing yourself off to someone else’s opinion and ultimately ending the conversation. I understand that the conversation is short now, but should we try to salvage the last pieces of discourse that still exist regarding politics? This is a key example of the ingroup/ outgroup idea that is so flagrant right now. The us vs. them mentality is the last thing the U.S. needs considering our current extreme polarization, and the unfriending or unfollowing someone on social media only exacerbates the problem. The age old saying warns people to never discuss religion, politics, or money in a social setting, and these days that has now gone out the window, but it’s both a good and bad thing. On one side, by discussing politics and hard ball issues, you’re keeping the discussion somewhat alive. But on the other hand, odds are pretty strong that this isn’t exactly a conversation, but more of pissing fight over who can talk louder than the other. It is easy to click a button on Facebook and no longer being “friends” with them. But would you really drop a friend in real life based on who they voted for in the last election? 

I brought up a podcast that I listen to daily in my last post, and how a recent episode focused on social media and politics. is post-truth, and also related to people’s political identities, and how they use their Facebook accounts. Mr. Pebble brings up the point that Facebook showed the way people are and revealed to their “friends” their true colors. The anger over politics has been boiling up for years, but in order to remain civil human beings, many swept it under the rug or left it for private conversations. This is no longer the case however, as social media, mainly Twitter and Facebook, have given people a platform to speak their minds, no matter what’s on them. However, even though you found out that you and your high school best friend don’t see eye to eye on politics, doesn’t mean you can just throw them an “unfriend.” It could be an ideal opportunity to explain to them your feelings, and ask about their own. As much as a post supporting Trump from your great Aunt Miriam may seem annoying, next time try to stop and listen to what she has to say. Discussion and hearing where other people are coming from and why they vote the way they do are crucial to a democracy. It is also important to remember that freedom of expression and speech, and the ability to support the party of your choice are principles that the United States was founded on.

[jenmedsbookreviews]

Well this has been a week and a half. Well, technically it is a week and a day, but it one I would and wouldn’t like to repeat. It was with a very heavy heart that I had to say goodbye to poor old Mars on Tuesday. I discussed his condition with the vet and sadly she could tell the mass in his abdomen had grown dramatically in just a week. He wasn’t gaining weight even with the steroids and he was more and more tired so it was the kindest thing to do. I will miss him terribly, as does Luna who has had to say goodbye to both of her friends and really doesn’t know what to do with herself right now. I know the feeling.It didn’t make it easier that on the day in question, for the first time ever, WordPress through a wobbler and managed to delete the content of my post, a blog tour review for Louise Voss’s The Old You. A massive thanks to Jo Robertson for letting me know but I was awful rushing to prep the post while bawling my eyes out and trying to get to work. Apologies to Louise if my review wasn’t up to normal standards. I really did love the book. I was only working half a day too as on Tuesday afternoon I headed to London with Mandie for Johanna Gustawsson and Steph Broadribb’s joint book launch in Covent Garden. One moment of sun in a dark day. Well, that and the Chocolate bun from Ole and Steen. Well I was in mourning.

So, after that ordeal, I only had one more day to work last week as I was off to CrimeFest!!! Did I mention that? I think I may have … I’m not going to bore youa ll to death about it in this post, I’ll do a round up later in the week hopefully, but I will share a few book pics as I may have bought one or two whilst away.

Please note – Chris Whitaker loves me. Understandable as I am fab, but there you go. books I purchase this weekend are Big Sister by Gunnar Staalesen; Hell Bay by Kate Rhodes; Tall Oaks by Chris Whitaker; Hydra by Matt Wesolowski; Head Case by Ross Armstrong; Dark Pines by Will Dean; The Reckoning by Yrsa Sigurdardottir; and The Ice Swimmer by Kjell Ola Dahl. I also received copies of Ten Year Stretch, Hidden Killers andHer Name Was Rose and a signed copy of A Fractured Winter from the lovely Alison Baillie.

I’ll update you all on the CrimeFest shenanigans soon (ish) but I have to say one of the highlights for me was finally getting to meet Rachel Amphlett. I absolutely love her work and she so lovely. And tall. Thanks to Rachel and Nick for the photo – not embarrassing at all 🙂

When we meet again, I shall wear stilts …

In addition to the above books, I may have purchased a few and also received one direct. Books I bought are: The Taking of Annie Thorne by CJ Tudor; Cross Her Heart by Sarah Pinborough; My Husband’s Lies by Caroline England; Motherlandby GD Abson; The Watcher and Head Case by Ross Armstrong; Songs of Innocence by Anne Coates; The Echo Killing by Christi Daugherty and Murder Map by Richard Parker. I also received an advance copy of Seven Bridges from LJ Ross and Peter Ritchie’sShores of Death where I am also quoted inside.

Today I braved Ikea and went shopping for a new desk and chair. I am working from them now and am slowing building up a writing space. This is what I have so far…

I can tell you’re impressed. When I got home, I found that my certificates from my recent online courses had been delivered so I’m like a proper expert now. Or something. No – hold your applause now. This wasn’t neuro-science.

And apparently over the weekend I became the second funniest blogger in the Bloggers Bash Awards. Can’t help feeling the badge needs the world “place” in is as the wording makes it seem like a gentle put down lol. Thank you to everyone who voted for me but it is a weird category for me to be in really. I may be a funny/sarcastic Facebooker/Tweeter but my blog is actually full of really long and really boring posts. Not funny at all. Unless you’re laughing at my typos. Some of them are hilarious.

Now because of the cat and Crimefest, my reading has been pants this week. I finished Ten Year Stretch, plus I managed to read a couple of others, Murder at the Grand Raj Palace by Vaseem Khan and Seven Bridges by LJ Ross. You can read about them below.

Books I have read.

Ten Year Stretch – Crime Fest Short Story Anthology

Twenty superb new crime stories have been commissioned specially to celebrate the tenth anniversary of Crimefest, described by The Guardian as ‘one of the fifty best festivals in the world’.

A star-studded international group of authors has come together in crime writing harmony to provide a killer cocktail for noir fans; salutary tales of gangster etiquette and pitfalls, clever takes on the locked-room genre, chilling wrong-footers from the deceptively peaceful suburbs, intriguing accounts of tables being turned on hapless private eyes, delicious slices of jet black nordic noir, culminating in a stunning example of bleak amorality from crime writing doyenne Maj Sjowall.

The foreword is by international bestselling thriller writer Peter James. The editors are Martin Edwards, responsible for many award-winning anthologies, and Adrian Muller, CrimeFest co-founder.

All Royalties are donated to the RNIB Talking Books Library.

The contributors to Ten Year Stretch are: Bill Beverly, Simon Brett, Lee Child, Ann Cleeves, Jeffery Deaver, Martin Edwards, Kate Ellis, Peter Guttridge, Sophie Hannah, John Harvey, Mick Herron, Donna Moore, Caro Ramsay, Ian Rankin, James Sallis, Zoe Sharp, Yrsa Siguroardottir, Maj Sjowall, Michael Stanley and Andrew Taylor.

A cracking anthology which I have reviewed in full. You can find the links for the final few at the bottom of this post and can order your own copy here.

…

Murder at the Grand Raj Palace – Vaseem Khan

In the enchanting new Baby Ganesh Agency novel, Inspector Chopra and his elephant sidekick investigate a murder at Mumbai’s grandest hotel.

For a century the iconic Grand Raj Palace Hotel has welcomed the world’s elite. From film stars to foreign dignitaries, anyone who is anyone stays at the Grand Raj.

The last thing the venerable old hotel needs is a murder…

When American billionaire Hollis Burbank is found dead – the day after buying India’s most expensive painting – the authorities are keen to label it a suicide. But the man in charge of the investigation is not so sure. Chopra is called in – and discovers a hotel full of people with a reason to want Burbank dead.

Accompanied by his sidekick, baby elephant Ganesha, Chopra navigates his way through the palatial building, a journey that leads him steadily to a killer, and into the heart of darkness . . .

Started on audio, finished in book format, I do love an Inspector Chopra book. Murder, mayhem and missing princesses make for another cracking read. You can find your own copy here and my review will be published soon,

…

Seven Bridges – LJ Ross

Ryan’s most explosive case yet…

It’s been five months since a killer walked free and DCI Ryan is preparing to leave Newcastle to hunt him down – this time, for good. 

But Ryan’s plans are scuppered when events take a dramatic turn and he is forced to stay and face his past one last time, or watch a friend suffer the consequences. 

Amid the chaos, another killer is preparing to strike. When the Tyne Bridge explodes, Ryan’s team are faced with a frantic race to uncover a deadly foe who won’t stop until every bridge is burned, along with everybody on it…

Murder and mystery are peppered with romance and humour in this fast-paced crime whodunit set amidst the spectacular Northumbrian landscape. 

Love this series and this is another belter but writing the review will be tough as there is too much chance of a spoiler. So I will just say – read it. It’s fabulous. And if you do then no it’s not but yes it is me. You can buy your own copy here and my review will hopefully be up on publication day.

…

And that was it. You can catch up with my daily blog posts at the links below:

Ten Year Stretch Part 4: Ten Years of CrimeFest

The Old You by Louise Voss

Ten Year Stretch Part 5: Ten Years of CrimeFest

Ten Year Stretch Part 6: Ten Years of CrimeFest

Guest Review: Broken Bones by Angela Marsons

Dying Truth by Angela Marsons

Fault Lines by Doug Johnstone

Blog Tour: The Cathy Connolly Series by Sam Blake

Freefall by Adam Hamdy

This coming week I have a few tours to take part in and possibly some reviews if I get time. Tours are for As Good As Gold by Patricia Furstenberg; It Was Her by Mark Hill; The Chosen Ones by Carol Wyer; and Songs of Innocence by Anne Coates.

So that is it for now. I am hoping for a far less problematic week this week. Thankfully only four days at work for the next three weeks and then I am on on my hols. Cannot wait. Unbelievably I also celebrate my second blog birthday on Thursday. I am beside myself with excitement. Actually, I am quite impressed. Never been able to concentrate on anything for two years before. Go me,

Have a fab week all.

Jen

Rewind, recap: Weekly update w/e 20/05/18 Well this has been a week and a half. Well, technically it is a week and a day, but it one I would and wouldn't like to repeat.