#tiktok has damaged society's view of DID

[the80srewinders]

We heard that a ban on TikTok might happen. Thats good news for plurals, especially those with DID. Why? TikTok has users who spread misinformation and add stereotypes to DID. They also put more attention on DID than they do OSDD, when OSDD is diagnosed just as often if not more. But because society always had a fascination with the dramatic amnesic switching that only occurs in DID, long before internet or social media existed and long before TV really, the media has always chose to focus on DID instead. This includes people on TikTok. We usually don't advocate for fakeclaiming and thats not what we're doing- we're just saying to take them with a grain of salt. Most people who post about DID on TikTok post themselves acting out dramatic switches to anime characters, dsmp characters, or different creatures. Sure, those types of alters exist in DID, but usually the host is too scared to share them with other people. And thats all these people post themselves switching to. Then, the switches are so acted out "Where am I? Oh, there's a camera? Hey yall I guess I switched!" When we switched on camera, it was before we even knew about DID and before I the host was aware of the alters fully. I tend to have slient staring episodes when I talk irl, and when I switched on camera I thought I just had those staring episodes. Then I'd try to piece together where I left off and some of the details would be missing. Now, if we switch on camera we'd brush it off the same and not let anyone know a switch happened. And these people who act out DID on TikTok- they also dramatically act out pre-switch. They act like theyre falling asleep then suddenly they dramatically act out waking up. Opening and rubbing their eyes, looking around confused. I've seen videos with multicolored motion blur filters during their acted out switches. But people acting out DID on TikTok dont just glorify switching. They also post about their protectors or persecutors being assholes in general in a quirky way. "My protector alter is so mean to some people! Lets make a comedy sketch of that for TikTok!" If protectors are mean to other people, its because they remind the protector of trauma or past danger so the protector is trying to ward them off. "My persecutor is a bully to other people, if you got a rude message thats my persecutor sorry about that." That's now how persecutors work. Persecutors attack the system, usually the host. Persecutors usually bully the host in an effort to instill the "lessons" learned from abuse because its what the persecutor sees necessary. Theyre misguided protectors. And sometimes, you'll find a person acting out DID on TikTok who glorifies dissociation. Not the memory gaps for trauma or certain months or years, but depersonalization and derealization. They use all these hazy, blurry filters and talk about "being in headspace." Or make derealization seem quirky. While being in headspace is a real part of DID/OSDD, its overly glorified and overly expected. People act like having a headspace is another normal part of DID like alters are. Not every person with DID or OSDD has a headspace. These people on TikTok spread more misinformation and spread the same stereotypes. They've also made more stereotypes in the process. Now, because of these misinformed people on TikTok, a whole subbreddit uses the DID side of TikTok to prove why most people who claim to be a system are "faking." TikTok has largely contributed to syscourse all across social media and in real life. Its made other systems unsure if other systems around them are faking. Its made systems think theyre faking it themselves in a disorder that already comes with denial. So if TikTok is banned, it would be a good thing for all systems. Its always been a mental illness and neurodivergence glorifying site anyway.

[princeoftherunaways]

2023 book recs! (to read and to skip)

inspired by @deanmarywinchester's incredible rec list and general reading reviews!

RECOMMEND:

The Murderbot Diaries by Martha Wells: I love you autistic androids. forever and ever. I'm pretending the adaptation is not happening bc I don’t think the screen can do it justice so I’m simply enjoying every single page of these books before there’s inevitable show Discourse. I love the plots and the dialogue and just like murderbot I too wish I could be left alone to watch my shows.

Something That May Shock and Discredit You by Daniel Lavery: this book has a couple excerpts on here that make the rounds and piqued my interest and holy shit. if you are trans and queer and probably autistic. read this book as fast as you can. I felt seen in every word and also. Absolutely read to filth.

The Traitor Baru Cormorant (the masquerade series) by Seth Dickinson: I think I finally started this series because of my bestie @ofbowsandbooks (as is the case with so many things) but who's to say. either way I read this towards the beginning of the year and have not stopped thinking about it since. if you read it. please listen to so much (for) stardust by fob. I cannot recommend the specific kind of damage it does to you while rotating baru and tain hu in your mind. just. tailored to me in so many ways (fantasy story about imperialism and masks and lying and the terrible power of math) so I do admit bias there.

Settlers by J Sakai: If you can only read a book or two about understanding why colonialism/capitalism is at the root of all evil...read this book. It's at the top of my general list of political nonfic recs (next to capitalism & disability by marta russell and border & rule by Harsha Walia). I like to describe it as a leftist pov of us history that pulls apart some of the liberal/white "optimism" of People's History of the US.

They Can’t Kill Us Until They Kill Us by Hanif Abdurraqib: I think this was also based on an excerpt I saw on here. I finally started getting into memoirs/essay collections this year and WOW. I mean, even if that genre isn't your thing, you should still read this book. It's just so so good, and utilizes unique topics (particularly music, I love his FOB essay) to explore both small personal moments and larger existential issues.

The Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon: This is considered a staple of anticolonial movements & education for a reason. Definitely helpful for understanding the global decolonial revolutions of the 1960s.

Decarcerating Disability by Liat Ben-Moshe: An incredible study of abolition from a disability lens. Clear (if a bit repetitive at times) but overall an engaging read that definitely brings a much needed addition to larger abolition texts.

Chain-Gang All Stars by Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah: I read this one after seeing @deanmarywinchester's posts about it. I read it in two days and it knocked me so hard on my ass. Especially as someone who was obsessed with the hunger games in middle/high school. Just. Wow. holy shit. we knew this already but abolish prisons police etc etc and also we have GOT to be done with tiktok. and alexas. and just being okay with casually reposting/consuming videos and images of violence against people of color and and and -

Exile & Pride by Eli Clare: transmasc disabled PNW crew rise up!!!! the trauma of growing up as all these things in a small rural town!!! I have very rarely felt so deeply seen and understood as when I was reading this book. It's heavy emotionally & topically, so warnings there. I did struggle a bit with it but only because of how deeply some of his story reflects my own.

Innocence & Corruption by Aiyana Goodfellow: This book and its author demand a fundamental shift from how we as a society view and treat children. If you are planning on having kids, have kids in your life, are a teacher, etc etc, cannot emphasize enough how important this book is to remind us that kids are people now, and they deserve autonomy, respect, and support.

Honorable Mentions:

he who drowned the world by shelley parker-chan : this was moved down a category only because the book before this one (she who became the sun) is literally just setup for this sneaky gut punch. So as a duology, could be stronger. this book as a standalone? Wow. There's some banger lines and concepts and characters in there. (Wang baoxiang. Just. Oh boy). Definitely fascinating in convo with baru cormorant, and I think a reason it's lower for me as well is because the lens of hwdtw is much more of an internal power turmoil than a study of imperalism, which I'm biased towards interest-wise. I read this purely because of @ash-and-starlight's incredible art, so please go check that out if you read the book - It is absolutely worth the read for their art.

the Black Jacobins by C L R James: I'm a french revolution bitch. it was a special interest of mine as a kid and got me invested in history. that said, we gotta talk about france's fuckery. which is to say, slavery/genocide/colonialism etc etc. This book is somewhat tricky to read at points, especially in keeping track of who's who, but a really incredible explanation of the beginning of Haiti's fight for independence. If you enjoy French or Caribbean history, anticolonial revolutions, and some of the nitty-gritty details of history textbooks, this is for you.

life under the jolly roger by Gabriel Kuhn: who here has seen black sails. (thee gay pirate show. Original edition.) strikes a good balance between an understanding of what pirates have/can/could represent, and absolutely clarity about their actual violence, legacy, and politics. Informative without being drawn in by the romanticism or dismissing its power completely.

the essential June Jordan: Politically relevant and also just lyrically beautiful poetry.

hell followed with us by Andrew Joseph White: trans horror fans w/ Christianity beef, this is for you. I am NOT a horror fan, but it was so well done and resonant with me that I stomached the gore for it and do absolutely recommend. if that’s your thing

DO NOT RECOMMEND:

the invisible life of addie larue by ve schwab: I love VE and am a bit of an apologist for her prose over plot bc her worldbuilding is always so cinematic to me, but this was such a frustrating waste of a brilliant concept. It was just...boring? Neither Addie nor Henry are particularly interesting (Henry's relatable, but again, not engaging as a character) and for someone who's been alive for a long time, I expected more unique flashbacks and worldbuilding. I expected the ten thousand doors of january, but this was not that, although I think at its soul it wanted to be.

the lies of locke lamora by scott lynch - Been meaning to read this forever since it was recommended a lot on here if you liked six of crows. I would say a similar setup (dickension fantasy) but that's about it. Characters aren't that likeable or clever, the action is slow, and I take issue with the ending.

unwieldy creatures by addie tsai - I so badly wanted this book to be good. It was not.

a day of fallen night by samantha shannon - It was fine, it's just such a long book I think time is better spent elsewhere, ya know?

provenance - second ann leckie book that i've finished unimpressed. despite murderbot being top of my list, this similar vibe of sci-fi did not strike me as one with such a unique clear voice. It just felt like a more inclusive version of many average space books.

[billconrad]

We Live Like Kings and That’s Hard to Write About

    One hundred years ago, the year was 1923; the Roaring Twenties. People were optimistic about the future, making lots of money and having a blast. Yet, not really. Life was hard, medical care was basic, information was scarce, the stock market was about to crash, and people were not aware of the harm they were causing.

    Since 1923, we developed technology that improved our lives, grew as a society and understood our prior mistakes. Now, we have more respect for the people around us, know about the problems in society, and are actively working on improvement. Here are some improvement examples:

    I can go to my local supermarket and purchase inexpensive pasta from Italy, tangerines from Mexico, maple syrup from Canada, and water chestnuts from China. If I was in the Eiffel Tower in Paris, I could video chat with my somebody in the Eiffel Tower replica in Vegas. I can use the Wikipedia application on my phone to look up what year Nelson Mandela was born, what movie received the tenth Academy Award, where prairie dogs live, and all about the small English town Kingsbridge. If I get cancer, a broken bone, or an infection, doctors can usually help. An event can happen in front of me, and I can record it with my smartphone. After I post it (with one click), in under an hour, over a billion people can view that video. Our phones even warn us about earthquakes, fires, power outages, and traffic. And the most mind-shattering aspect of these developments is that not one person found this paragraph impressive.

    That is a significant problem for writers. Where is the conflict, the struggle, or the dilemma? “Steve was in trouble. He knew nothing about Kingsbridge.” Umm… Steve can easily learn about that topic on his smartphone. Well, Steve could lose it. Umm… He could ask a nearby person; everybody has a smartphone.

    Now, hold on. There are still gigantic problems like homelessness. Umm… Everybody knows about it, and many people are working on solutions. In time, this problem will come under control. Want some proof that we can solve an epic problem? The air quality in Los Angeles used to be out of control. Since the ‘30s, people have understood the issue and began solving it. I recall going there in the ‘70s, and my eyes watered. Now, I can spend the day in Los Angeles without issue.

    It is a struggle for an author to invent a legitimate conflict. “Sally was watching television, and a robber broke down her door.” Umm… Did she call the police? Did Sally’s wireless security cameras capture the incident? Did her insurance company pay for the damages? Did Sally take a picture of the robber, post it, and have thousands of people look at the image?

    Now, conflict requires precise circumstances to get around society’s advances. Readers know about present technology, what they can buy, what is possible, facts, statistics, geography, history, news, biology, physics, literature, fiction, and current events. Readers do not accept oversights, mistakes, racism, sexism, bad morals, copying existing work (intentional or not), lazy writing, or uncompelling concepts.

    Plus, we have imagined so many things. How about a Star Trek teleporter? “Scotty pressed the button and beamed Kirk from the planet to his starship.” That sentence is easy to understand, and the impossible science does not mystify anybody.

    Besides the advances, people get exposed to so much. I remember in the ‘70s seeing a man wearing pink fingernail polish. That was so outrageous! But now? 3.7 MILLION videos get uploaded to YouTube and 34 MILLION to TikTok daily. As a result, every possible aspect, view, alteration, outfit, personality, sexuality, death, life, setting, and location of the human body has been thoroughly explored, exploited, created, and destroyed. This wealth of explored situations makes creating something that surprises anybody extremely difficult. He wore fingernail polish AND earrings? Yeah, no.

    These advances have introduced an endless number of pitfalls. “Stan got lost.” Today, nobody can get lost. The author must explain that Stan forgot his smartphone, there were no road signs, nobody was around, and there were no recognizable landmarks. “Tara arrived in Germany and could not ask for help.” Wrong! Many people in Germany speak English, and a basic internet search would educate the author. Plus, nearly all phones now come with a language transaction application.

    This society of kings has an additional problem for writers. Amazon releases over 1.4 MILLION self-published books through its Kindle Direct Publishing every year. While good for readers, I must compete with this vast sea of books.

    Yet, living like a king is not all bad. Our advances make it easier to publish, get the word out, and connect with people. In fact, I’m doing that right now.

    You’re the best -Bill

    November 29, 2023

    Hey book lovers, I published four. Please check them out:

    Interviewing Immortality. A dramatic first-person psychological thriller that weaves a tale of intrigue, suspense, and self-confrontation.

    Pushed to the Edge of Survival. A drama, romance, and science fiction story about two unlikely people surviving a shipwreck and living with the consequences.

    Cable Ties. A slow-burn political thriller that reflects the realities of modern intelligence, law enforcement, department cooperation, and international politics.

    Saving Immortality. Continuing in the first-person psychological thriller genre, James Kimble searches for his former captor to answer his life’s questions.

    These books are available in soft-cover on Amazon and eBook format everywhere.

[project-digital-communities]

Week 10: social media filters

Augmented reality (AR) filters are this group of technologies' most recent and ground-breaking contribution. These filters are regularly applied to users' faces and provide a range of modifications, such as the addition of fashionable attire, the enhancement of facial features, the transformation into fantastical beings, or the addition of amusing objects like a Taco hat. According to Bhatt's (2020) research, about 600 million people use AR filters on Facebook or Instagram on a monthly basis, while a whopping 76% of Snapchat users use them every day(Javornik, A, Marder, B, Barhorst, J, B,McLean, G,Rogers, Y,l Marshall, P,  Warlop, L 2022. P. 2).

The popularity of AR face filters demonstrates how well this type of augmented reality satisfies the unique needs and incentives of its users. No study has yet identified the precise satisfactions provided by AR face filters, despite earlier research indicating the gratifications consumers wanted in their social media interactions(Javornik, A, Marder, B, Barhorst, J, B,McLean, G,Rogers, Y,l Marshall, P,  Warlop, L 2022. P. 2).

There is now a brand-new way that self-esteem and body image are affected. We are constantly exposed to painstakingly manufactured images of other people's life on social media sites like Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, fueling our yearning for both their experiences and appearances. Young people are exposed to unreachable beauty ideals through the usage of social media filters that change and enhance characteristics, negatively affecting their view of themselves (RUSSELL  2022).

According to a recent ParentsTogether poll of 200 kids between the ages of 13 and 21, youth who use beauty filters on a regular basis have a greater desire for cosmetic surgery and skin-color alteration. Notably, the survey also found a link between teenagers' stated dissatisfaction with their appearance and the amount of time they spend on social media (RUSSELL  2022).

Self-presentation is altering one's behavior while interacting with others in order to make a particular impression on the audience. In order to create a good first impression, people who use social media feel pressured to offer the most appealing versions of themselves to others. But it's crucial to understand that these images frequently don't adequately depict someone's actual physical attributes. Patients are increasingly asking for cosmetic procedures to make them look more like their edited or filtered pictures, a trend known as "Snapchat dysmorphia." It's probable that "Snapchat dysmorphia" may keep growing, fueling a rise in the popularity of plastic surgery (Habib A, Ali T, Nazir Z, Mahfooz A 2022. P. 81).

Body positivity is a relatively new idea that many millennials and members of Generation X did not grow up with. The ideal of being slender, attractive, and blonde is one that many people strive to but rarely achieve, but despite the rise of this image, social media platforms and their algorithms regularly continue to do so. The usage of social media relates to people having body image difficulties and psychological suffering, according to a study that was published in the Children and Youth Services Review Journal in 2020 (RUSSELL  2022).

In summary, social media filters and augmented reality (AR) have had a significant influence on society. With the help of these technological advancements, we may improve our appearances and alter our reality, which has become essential to our online encounters. Although filters present potential for creativity and self-expression, they also give rise to questions regarding self-perception and authenticity. Filter-based picture proliferation can lead to the spread of idealized ideals of beauty and damage people's self-esteem. Society must encourage digital literacy and a positive tension between self-presentation and self-acceptance. We can manage their impact and ensure a more genuine and thoughtful usage of augmented reality in the digital sphere by critically engaging with filters.

References:

Habib A, Ali T, Nazir Z, Mahfooz A 2022,’Snapchat filters changing young women’s attitudes’,Annals of Medicine & Surgery 82():, October 2022. | DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104668

RUSSELL, T 2022, Social Media Filters Are Changing How Young People See Themselves, Teen Vogue, viewed 11 June 2023,

<https://www.teenvogue.com/story/social-media-filters-how-young-people-see-themselves>

Javornik, A, Marder, B, Barhorst, J, B,McLean, G,Rogers, Y,l Marshall, P,  Warlop, L 2022,’‘What lies behind the filter?’ Uncovering the motivations for using augmented reality (AR) face filters on social media and their effect on well-being’, Computers in Human Behavior

Volume 128, March 2022, 107126

[loriwigsten]

Social Media and Ethic Responsibility 

 Looking at the current state of social media today, one can see at this point in its history social media platforms take a limited role in policing what occurs on their platforms. Perhaps it is because they do not want to limit the number of followers they gain. Most platforms have been developed in order to increase the audience with the goal of increasing revenue, through ads, without taking ethical considerations in mind.  This may have occurred because years ago no one ever thought that social media would have the influence on society that it has today. 

     Some platforms believe free speech is the most important thing to protect, even though some of this free speech is hate speech or speech which results in the harassment of others. These platforms seem to have not taken into consideration the nature of allowing a free for all online of unlimited and unhindered so-called free speech and the damage it could do. With the rapid growth of social media, many platforms developed beyond their capacity to control what happened on their platform, because they did not consider the ethical implications of having so few rules in place, 

     However, in the last several years, consumers of social media see how important it is that ethical rules need to be in place in order to limit the damage done to society. As a result, some basic new rules had been enacted on platforms in order to limit future damage.  Two examples of such rules are a policy like flagging information that is misleading or false, as well as a policy of removing a user who consistently breaks the rules of the online community.

     There are also other ethical considerations such as the privacy of a user's data. Many social media platforms sell the personal data  of individuals to third parties who use it to target users on the platform or even just as a way of targeting content specifically to a user in order to keep them engaged on their site. However many times they do this against the wishes of users and in some cases in a way that is against privacy laws.  Facebook, for example, had to pay  $5 billion in fines to the  United States Federal Trade Commission in 2019 for  privacy data violations, and just recently in 2023 Meta- the parent company of Facebook was fined $400 million dollars  by Irish privacy regulators for breaking the EU’s privacy laws. 

     However, Facebook is not the only social media platform that concerns the United States. TikTok under both President Trump and President Biden has come under scrutiny for both privacy and  national security threats. US officials fear the Chinese government could demand user data from TikTok or its parent company ByteDance, in order to use this information to benefit Chinese intelligence in China. Just this week TikTok CEO Shou Chew testified before the  US House and Energy Commerce Committee.  One possible reason for this concern by the US government was because in Oct 2022 it came to light that journalists' whereabouts were being secretly tracked under the direction of  Chris Lepitak, its chief internal auditor in an effort to find persons who leaked information from within the ByteDance company. 

     These are not the only issues of concern. Both Facebook and TiKTok also use algorithms on their platforms that filter out opposing views in users' feeds, making users only see what they want to see and block out opposing viewpoints. One troubling issue with Facebook is that even when users do see shared information from family and friends, their platforms feed encourages such engagement even if it is harmful or harassing. 

     As someone who is seeking to be a social media professional, I wish to hold myself to a higher standard and work for a company that does the same. According to  www.BigVillage.com, LinkedIn is viewed as one of the most ethical social media companies by consumers. Their basic guiding code of conduct reflect this. 

LinkedIn Code of Conduct

Put Members First- understand member's needs, conduct yourself with integrity, and support members' success

Trust and Care about Each Other -build relationships based upon these values respect, honesty, compassion, integrity, and trust.

Be open Honest and Constructive- Address issues in a transparent way and welcome constructive feedback in order to grow

Dream Big, Get Things Done, and Have Fun-lead by being a positive example, seek to solve big challenges, use sound judgment and set actionable goals, and working together on things that matter.

Act as One LinkedIn- take responsibility for what you do while realizing how it will affect others

Embody Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging-Create economic opportunities for everyone.

      Anyone who works in social media should have policies that reflect a similar code of ethics to LinkIn’s which simply respects the dignity of people and it's members. It is my personal feeling that this is something every online professional has a moral responsibility to do.  I also agree that being open and honest and able to accept constructive feedback is another important aspect of being a professional. In these ways, LinkedIn got this Code of Conduct right. 

Ethics in social media is extremely important in current times, since what you do and say on social media can have a greater impact than anticipated according to the following article Social Media Ethics and Etiquette. Therefore it is more important than ever for you to have your own set of standards. For me, these additional core concepts are some of the most important things to remember when online. 

Core Values Online 

  Make sure what you post is credible information

Be honest and transparent when you make a mistake and take responsibility for it.

Have an open mind when sharing information, there will be others who do not necessarily agree with your viewpoints. Be open and respectful of others' opinions. You can disagree but do so in a respectful manner.

Try to show your content through a  positive lens, realizing that there are always two ways to see an issue.  Talk about what issues you support rather than what you do not support. 

Always be authentic-  when you do this you gain the trust of your audience

     By following this code of conduct, I hope to live up to my goal of becoming a responsible social media professional and creating a more positive environment online for the online community I will serve. 

[tarobytez]

disability in the Six Of Crows Duology; an analysis of Kaz Brekker, Wylan Van Eck, and the fandom’s treatment of them.

****Note: I originally wrote this for a tiktok series, which im still going to do, but i wanted to post here as well bc tumblr is major contributor to what im going to talk about

CW: ableism, filicide, abuse

In the Six of Crows duology, Leigh Bardugo delicately subverts and melds harmful disability tropes into her narrative, unpacking them in a way that I, as a disabled person, found immensely refreshing and…. just brilliant. 

But what did you all do with that? Well, you fucked it up. Instead of critically looking at the characters, y’all just chose to be ableist. 

For the next few videos paragraphs im going to unpack disability theory (largely the stuff surrounding media, for obvious reasons) and how it relates to Six Of Crows and the characterization of Kaz Brekker and Wylan Van Eck, then how, despite their brilliant writing, y’all completely overlooked the actual text and continuously revert them to ableist cariactures.

Disclaimer: 1. Shocker - i am disabled. I have also extensively researched disability theory and am very active in the disabled community. Basically, I know my shit. 2. im going to be mad in these videos this analysis. Because the way y’all have been acting has been going on for a long ass time and im fuckin sick of it. I don’t give a shit about non-disabled feelings, die mad

Firstly, I’m going to discuss Kaz, his play on the stereotypical “mean cripple” trope and how Bardugo subverts it, his cane, and disabled rage. Then, I am going to discuss Wylan, the “inspiration porn” stereotype, caregivers / parents, and the social model of disability. Finally, I will then explain the problems in the fandom from my perspective as a disabled person, largely when it comes to wylan, bc yall cant leave that boy tf alone.

Kaz Brekker

Think of a character who uses a cane (obviously not Kaz). Now, are they evil, dubiously moral, or just an asshole in general? Because nearly example I can think of is: whether it be Lots’O from Toy Story, Lucius Malfoy, or even Scrooge and Mr.Gold from Once Upon A Time all have canes (the last two even having their canes appear less and less as they become better people)

The mean/evil cripple trope is far more common than you would think. Villains with different bodies are confined to the role of “evil”. To quote TV Tropes, who I think did a brilliant job on explaining it “The first is rooted in eugenics-based ideas linking disability or other physical deformities with a "natural" predisposition towards madness, criminality, vice, etc. The Rule of Symbolism is often at work here, since a "crippled" body can be used to represent a "crippled" soul — and indeed, a disabled villain is usually put in contrast to a morally upright and physically "perfect" hero. Whether consciously on the part of the writer or not, this can reinforce cultural ideas of disability making a person inherently inferior or negative, much in the same way the Sissy Villain or Depraved Homosexual trope associate sexual and gender nonconformity with evil. ”

Our introduction to Kaz affirms this notion of him being bad or morally bankrupt, with “Kaz Brekker didn’t need a reason”, etc. This mythologized version of himself, the “bastard of the barrel” actively fed into this misconception. But, as we the audience are privy to his inner thoughts, know that he is just a teenager like every other Crow. He is complex, his disability isn’t this tragic backstory, he just fell off a roof. It’s not his main motivation, nor does he curse revenge for making him a cripple - it is just another part of who he is. 

His cane (though the shows version fills me with rage but-) is an extension of Kaz - he fights with it, but it has a purpose. Another common thing in media is for canes to be simply accessories, but while Kaz’ cane is fashionable, it has purpose.

The quote “There was no part of him that was not broken, that had not healed wrong and there was no part of him that was not stronger for having been broken.” is so fucking powerful. Kaz does not want nor need a cure - its said in Crooked Kingdom that his leg could most likely be healed, but he chooses not to. Abled-bodied people tend to dismiss this thought as Kaz being stubborn but it shows a reality of acceptance of his disability that is just, so refreshing.

In chapter 22 of SOC, we see disabled rage done right - when he is called a cripple by the Fjerdan inmate, Kaz is pissed - the important detail being that he is pissed at the Fjerdan, at society for ableism, not blaming it on being disabled or wishing he could be normal. He takes action, dislocating the asshole’s shoulder and proving to him, and to a lesser extent, himself, that he is just as capable as anyone else, not in spite of, but because he is disabled. And that is the point of Kaz, harking back to the line that “there was no part of him that was not stronger for having been broken”. 

I cried on numerous occasions while reading the SOC duology, but the parts I highlighted in this section especially so. I, as many other disabled people do, have had a long and tumultuous relationship with our disability/es, and for many still struggle. But Kaz Brekker gave me an empowered disabled character who accepts themselves, and that means the world to me. 

Keeping that in mind, I hope you can understand why it hurts so much to disabled people when you either erase Kaz’s disability (whether through cosplay or fanfiction), or portray him as a “broken boy uwu”, especially implying that he would want a cure. That flies in the face of canon and is inherently fucking ableist. (if u think im mad wait until the next section)

Next, we have Wylan.  

Oh fucking boy. 

I love Wylan so fucking much, and y’all just do not seem to understand his character? Like at all? Since this is disability-centric, I’m not going to discuss how the intersection of his queerness also contributes to these issues, but trust me when I say it’s a contributing factor to what i'm going to say.

Wylan, motherfucking Van Eck. If you ableist pricks don’t take ur fucking hands off him right now im going to fight you. I see Wylan as a subversion another, and in my opinion more insidious stereotype pf disabled people - inspiration porn.

Cara Liebowitz in a 2015 article on the blog The Body Is Not An Apology explains in greater detail how inspiration porn is impactful in real life, but media is a major contributing factor to this reality. The technical definition is “the portrayal of people with disabilities as inspirational solely or in part on the basis of their disability” - but that does not cover it fully. 

Inspiration porn does lasting damage on the disabled community as it implies that disability is a negative that you need to “overcome” or “triumph” instead of something one can feel proud of. It exploits disabled people for the development of non-disabled people, and in media often the white male protagonist. Framing disability as inherently negative perpetuates ideals of eugenics and cures - see Autism $peaks’ “I Am Autism” ad. Inspiration porn is also incredibly patronizing as it implies that we cannot take care of ourselves, or do things like non-disabled people do. Because i stg some of you tend to think that we just sit around all day wishing we weren’t disabled. 

Another important theory ideal that is necessary when thinking about Wylan is the experience of feeling like a burden simply for needing help or accommodations. This is especially true when it comes to familial relationships, and internalized ableism.

The rhetoric that Wylan’s father drilled into his head, that he is “defective”, “a mistake”, and “needs to be corrected”, that he (Jan) was “cursed with a moron for a child” is a long held belief that disabled people hear relentlessly. And while many see Van Eck’s attempted murder of Wylan as “preposturous” and overall something that you would never think happens today - filicide (a parent murdering their child) is more common than you would like to believe. Without even mentioning the countless and often unreported deaths of disabled people due to lack of / insufficient / neglectful medical care, in a study on children who died from the result of household abuse, 40 of 42 of them (95%) were diagnosed with disabilities. Van Eck is not some caricature of ableist ideals - he is a real reflection on how many people and family members view disability. 

Circling back to how Wylan unpacks the inspiration porn trope - he is 3 dimensional, he is not only used to develop the other characters, he is just *chefs kiss* Leigh, imo, put so much love and care into the creation of Wylan and his story and character growth that is representative of a larger feeling in the disabled community. 

That being said, what you non-disabled motherfuckers have done to him.

The “haha Wylan can’t read” jokes aren’t and were not funny. Y’all literally boiled down everything Wylan is to him being dyslexic. And it’s like,,,, the only thing you can say about him. You ignore every other part of him other than his disability, and then mock him for it. There’s so much you can say about Wylan - simping for Jesper, being band kid and playing the fuckin flute, literally anything else. But no, you just chose to mock his disability, excellent fucking job!

Next up on “ableds stfu” - infantilization! y’all are so fucking condescending to Wylan, and treat him like a fucking toddler. And while partly it is due to his sexuality i think a larger portion is him being disabled. Its in the same vein of people who think that Wylan and Jesper are romantically one sided, and that Jesper only kind of liked Wylan, despite the canon evidence of him loving Wylan just as much. You all view him as a “smol bean”, who needs protecting, and care, when Wylan is the opposite of that. He is a fucking demolitions expert who suggested waking up sleeping men to kill them - what about that says “uwu”. You are treating Wylan as a burden to Jesper and the other Crows when he is an immensely valuable, fully autonomous disabled person - you all just view him as damaged. 

And before I get a comment saying that “uhhh Wylan isn’t real why do you care” while Wylan may not be real, how you all view him and treat him has real fucking impacts and informs how you treat people like me. If someone called me an “uwu baby boy” they’d get a fist square in the fucking jaw. Fiction informs how we perceive the world and y’all are making it super fucking clear how you see disabled people. 

Finally, I wanted to talk about how the social model of disability is portrayed through Wylan. For those who are unaware, the social model of disability contrasts the medical model, that views the disability itself as the problem, that needs to be cured, whereas the social model essentially boils down to creating an accommodating society, where disability acceptance and pride is the goal. And we see this with Wylan - he is able to manage his father’s estate, with Jesper’s assistance to help him read documents. And this is not out of pity or charity, but an act of love. It is not portrayed as this almighty act for Jesper to play saviour, just a given, which is incredibly important to show, especially for someone who has been abused by family for his disability like Wylan, that he is accepted. 

Yet, I still see people hold up Jesper on a pedestal for “putting up with” Wylan, as if loving a disabled person deserves a fucking pat on the back. It’s genuinely exhausting trying to engage with a work I love so much with a fandom that thinks so little of me and my community. It fucking shows. 

Overall, Leigh Bardugo as a disabled person wrote two incredibly meticulous and empowered disabled characters, and due to either lack of reading comprehension, ableism, or a quirky mix of both, the fandom has ignored canon and the experiences of disabled people for…. shits and giggles i guess. And yes, there are issues with the Grishaverse and disability representation - while I haven’t finished them yet so I do not have an opinion on it, people have been discussing issues in the KOS duology with ableist ideals. This mini series was no way indicative of the entire disabled experience, nor does it represent my entire view on the representation as a whole. These things need to be met critically in our community, and talked about with disabled voices at the forefront. For example, the limited perspective we get of Wylan and Kaz being both white men, does not account for a large portion of the disabled community and the intersection of multiple identities.

All-in-all, Critique media, but do not forget to also critique fandom spaces. Alternatively, just shut the fuck up :)

happy fucking disability pride month, ig

[weirdmageddon]

i’m thinking again about this article, read it if you havent

it concisely puts into words what ive been lowkey aggravated about online as a psych major and as someone diagnosed with ASD (and subsumed ADHD)

Social media incentivises reductive or sweeping statements, meaning that these kinds of distinctions often get flattened by the way we talk about mental health and neurodivergence online. Given that its platforms are mostly limited to 60 second videos, 10-slide infographics, or 280 character microblogs, it rarely provides the space necessary to tackle these topics with detail or nuance.

this is so important to recognize. i hate that i have to ask myself “does this person really neurochemically have adhd like me or did they self-dx because they relate to some generalized symptoms they saw on a ‘you may have adhd if x’ post”? if someone told they they had adhd 5 years ago online i would have believed them but now i can’t be sure if they actually have adhd like neurochemically or if they saw something online they related to. and i understand why people self-diagnose, our healthcare system is fucked and systemic racism and sexism still exist, but me and my mom (who works as a nurse in a psychiatric clinic and sees the entire DSM in her workplace every day) believe it’s gotten way out of hand to the point of being detrimental to everyone involved.

for me my disorder is a structural and connectivity difference during gestation which begets divergent thinking and neurochemical imbalances. (ADHD is almost always comorbid with ASD. in fact when i was diagnosed with ASD it was during the DSM-IV where it was dictated that a diagnosis of ADHD not be given along with a diagnosis of ASD because it’s subsumed into it, but DSM-V allows dual diagnosis now.) for me it’s purely nature but i think for a lot of others it’s a question of nurture.

“I think it's great to be able to relate to people and find a community based on your traumas and how fucked up and maldapted you feel to society,” says P.E. The issue is, however, that these overly-pathologised views of mental health and neurodivergence usually invite us to situate the root of the problem firmly within ourselves, and as fixed parts of our identity. “If more and more of us all feel so maladaptive to the point that we require medication, then perhaps we can all collectively realise that something larger is going on that does not have to do with the chemical composition of our brains. I think we need to realise that it's something larger than that.”

we shouldnt be so quick to turn everything into a diagnosis. if you dont actually have the neurochemical imbalances of ADHD, stimulants can fuck you up while they help me to do just basic tasks and leap over executive hurdles that other people have no problem doing without them because my brain is wired differently from the start.

i posted this thread on twitter and someone replied, “i managed to skim it, i wish i had the attention span to read it in full. Very frustrating to see tik toks that have almost a million likes tell people that their behavior is a result of trauma while knowing that its impossible to undo the damage the tik tok has done”

and let me tell you i literally fucking hate tiktok. i’ll read this headline “people with OCD are finding community and support on tiktok” and be oh good for them but the thing with tiktok is like

it’s all about image. it’s focused on image. so what you’re going to get is people all dolled up in clothing and fashion and whatever with some bland ass music playing to some text on the screen and some kid sitting there silently running their fingers through their hair and pointing to the text with an air of sanctimoniousness about it. the use pathology as a topic for visual clout.. it’s not taken as seriously or as in as much nuance as it should. the focus isn’t fully there. it feels almost disrespectful to me.

im not kidding when i say tiktok has regressed our society and not to sound like a boomer but it literally was not like this before tiktok. tumblr had issues with romanticizing depression which was bad but it smoothed itself out because it was in writing and people weren’t pulled away by how someone looked so they could successfuly counter it. but now? i’ve never seen the talk about diagnoses so grossly oversimplified as they are right now especially on twitter too and it makes me feel like my real issues and the issues of other people with ASD and ADHD will become disgustingly trivialized like a game of telephone if this keeps up because of the association with these stupid fucking kids who think having diagnoses makes you “cool”. autism is cool in some aspects—i wouldn’t be me without it—but horrible in others (cant focus on what people are saying because all i can focus on is my ability to maintain eye contact, thinking im crazy for most things because no one else seems to notice or struggle with it, oversensitivity to sensory stimuli, being a picky eater because i have such an aversion to many textures and flavors and being made fun of for it and i feel horrible and disrespectful like i might come across as xenophobic for it if its with foods im not used to from other cultures, i can’t become friends with anyone if they dont share my interests, i don’t know i’m feeling emotion unless there’s a physiological reaction i can perceive. all of these things i hate about myself and are just generally unnecessary obstacles), there is nothing cool about living with ADHD (and im not saying this as to how i can benefit others. i mean i literally cant do the things i want to because of executive dysfunction, i dont process shit that was just said to me which is frustrating and embarassing for me, my mom gets fed up with having to tell me the same thing over and over or she thinks i’m lying that i didnt hear what she said to avoid doing something when i genuinely didn’t even process she said it), there is nothing cool about living with anxiety. but none of them, NONE of them should EVER be used as an excuse to not take responsibility for one’s actions or be used to appear more meek. this extends beyond ASD, ADHD, and anxiety btw im also talking about bipolar, cluster Bs, dissociative disorders, etc. these may serve as explanations for why behavior is the way it is but never an excuse. i can’t tell you how fucking tired i am of people using their hyperfixations as an excuse as to why they cant stop watching racist youtubers. literally as someone with autism and adhd and hyperfixations of my own if you have basic human morality you’ll feel guilt every time you interact with it so it will be aversive conditioning until you stop altogether or if you prevent yourself from watching it the hyperfixation will fade fast. it’s gotten out of control.

the worst offenders are for the most part teens who are Going Thru It and want to find an identity and answers. the teenage stage of life is the perfect recipe for all of this to coalesce and it’s no wonder we’re seeing all these serious mental health disorders on 13-16 year old’s carrds like bpd when you typically can’t even get diagnosed with personality disorders until you’re 18 because teenager’s personalities are still developing and clinicians are hesitant to give a diagnosis until then. knowing you have complex ptsd of some kind is one thing but treating it as a badge of honor to tote around to appear special because all the cool kids have it isn’t it and it further adds to the stigma of bpd as just being annoying attention seeking teenagers which bars the people who need help from getting it. pretty much every teenager has mood swings and emotional issues and image issues but those alone don’t create the diagnosis of a personality disorder which is why clinicians typically like to wait until the patient is an adult to diagnose them. the same thing with self dx’d psychotic and dissociative disorders too, this thread really tells it how it is.

so many teens. aren’t. doing. necessary. research. i’m talking like scientific articles on journal databases type of research. research that takes genuine self-reflection as to how your experiences align with formal diagnostic criteria for a year or two at least. and teens are being indirectly influenced by social and peer pressures to diagnose themself with something. don’t use social media like tiktok or twitter or tumblr as a means to diagnose yourself. it’s okay not to have something, in fact it’s a privilege. not everything needs a diagnosis.

it also makes me feel like there’s less of a community to turn to i can trust to know what i’m going through and what i experience in the same way as me and i know i’m not the only one feeling this. it’s not “everyone has a little ADHD”, it probably means there’s a societal problem and we’re being pushed beyond the limits of what human brains are able to effectively handle. and we also need to stop treating mental disorders as a way to appear unique and cool and immune to criticism and/or as a crutch to fall back on when we fuck up.

[96thdayofrage]

THE DARK UNDERSIDE OF REPRESENTATIONS OF SLAVERY

Will the Black body ever have the opportunity to rest in peace?

The photographs are about the size of a small hand. They’re wrapped in a leatherette case and framed in gold. From the background of one, the image of a Black woman’s body emerges. Her hair is plaited close to her head, and she is naked from the waist up. Her stare seems to penetrate the glass of the frame, peering into the eyes of the viewer. The paper label that accompanies her likeness reads: delia, country born of african parents, daughter of renty, congo. In another frame, her father stands before the camera, his collarbone prominent, and his temples peppered with gray and white hair. The label on his photo says: renty, congo, on plantation of b.f. taylor, columbia, s.c.

In 1850, when these images were captured, the subjects in the daguerreotypes were considered property. The bodies in the photographs had been shaped by hard labor on the grub plantation, where they’d spent their lives stooped over sandy soil, working approximately 1,200 acres of cotton and 200 of corn. Brought from the fields to a photography studio in Columbia, South Carolina, each person was photographed from different angles, in the hopes of finding photographic evidence of physical differences between the Black enslaved and the white masters who owned them. A daguerreotype took somewhere between three and 15 minutes of exposure time, and the end result was a detailed image imprinted on a small copper-plated sheet, covered with a thin coat of silver.

Louis Agassiz, a professor at Harvard, commissioned the portraits of Delia and Renty, along with those of other enslaved people, from the photographer Joseph T. Zealy. The daguerreotypes remained, all but forgotten, in the school’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology attic until an archivist found them in a storage drawer in 1976. Since then, these photos of Renty and his daughter Delia have been featured on conference programs, in presentations, and reproduced in books.

As photography has moved from the scientific novelty of Agassiz’s time to ubiquitous contemporary entertainment over the years, the art form has reflected society’s inequity. The rediscovery of the daguerreotypes and their use in revenue-generating materials in the present day have helped surface an ethical issue that has long accompanied images of Black people’s bodies: Their presentation and exploitation still, in many cases, outweigh individual ownership and autonomy.

While the provenance of the photos traces a line from a drawer at Harvard to a photographer in South Carolina, their story today also has roots in Norwich, Connecticut, home to Tamara Lanier, who claims to be the great-great-great-granddaughter of Renty. As a girl, Lanier’s mother told her about an ancestor named “Papa Renty.” She learned that he was a master of the Bible and that, as an act of defiance, he taught other enslaved people to read. According to the history passed down through her family, Renty got his hands on Noah Webster’s The Original Blue Back Speller, and after tending to crops in the fields, he would study the book at night.

Gillian B. White: Introducing the third chapter of “Inheritance”

Lanier would not start searching for the truth behind those stories until 2010, the year her mother died. She began a genealogical search for her ancestors. She also told an acquaintance, Richard Morrison, of her mother’s death and her own attempt at tracing her bloodline. Morrison, an amateur genealogist, took what Lanier told him and did some digging. He came up with a name: Renty Taylor. Morrison’s Ancestry.com search pulled up a photograph of Renty from 1850—one of Agassiz’s daguerreotypes. Further searches provided Lanier with information about Agassiz and Zealy and mentioned where she could find the original pictures: Harvard University. When she traveled to the school and viewed the images, Lanier was disappointed by their size, which resembled a deck of cards. There he was, the man who seemed larger than life in many of her mother’s stories, looking small and sad.

Seeing her ancestors in the archives at the university, Lanier felt the portraits were out of place. She believed that the images of Renty and Delia belonged to her. So on March 20, 2019, she filed a lawsuit against Harvard. In her lawsuit she alleges that the images of Renty and Delia are still working for the university, based on the licensing fees their images command. (In 2019, Harvard acknowledged that the images are not protected by copyright and that it charges only a $15 fee for a high-resolution scan.) Lanier requested that the university grant ownership of the daguerreotypes to her, pay her punitive damages, and turn over any profits associated with the portraits. “From slavery to where we are today, Black people’s property has been taken from them,” Lanier told me. “We are a disinherited people.”

Earlier this year, a court dismissed Lanier’s lawsuit, saying that “the law … does not confer a property interest to the subject of a photograph,” no matter the circumstances of its composition. Neither Harvard nor the judge presiding over the case disputed Lanier’s evidence that she was a direct descendant of Renty. Still, the court declared that Havard had the right to keep ownership of the photographs. Lanier has appealed the decision, and now the Massachusetts Supreme Court will weigh in. Oral arguments are scheduled for November 1.

Lanier’s case is about more than her personal interest in the photographs; rather, it has greater implications in a long-running reckoning. Agassiz used these photos of enslaved Africans, along with measurements of their cranium, as evidence of a theory known as polygenism, which was used by American proponents to justify slavery. He and other scientists believed Black people were created separately from white people, and their pseudoscientific inquiry was embedded into racist stereotypes in the bedrock of this country. To some historians, in keeping and curating images like these, Harvard is still celebrating the work of these practitioners and their discredited racial theories. (Harvard did not respond to requests for comment. In a previous statement, the university claimed the daguerreotypes were “powerful visual indictments of the horrific institution of slavery” and hoped the court ruling would make them “more accessible to a broader segment of the public.”)

The outcome of Lanier’s court case against Harvard will be legal commentary on whether the Black body ever has the opportunity to rest in peace, or whether present-day academic and entertainment priorities outweigh the rights of the Black deceased.

Whether she gets there or not depends on her long shot of an appeal. But her fight is an important front in a war over the ownership of images of Black bodies, one that is being waged on TikTok as well as in dusty archival drawers.

This technology spawns a series of questions: At a time when Black bodies are treated as teaching moments for the larger culture, are those whose bodies were broken—by the whip of an overseer or the bullet of a police officer—ever afforded the opportunity to rest in peace? This inquiry is the latest curious development in the ethically fraught conversation about Black bodies, ancestry, and ownership. There is a direct line between historical exploitation and the ongoing commercialization of and profiting from images of dead Black people, over which their descendants often have little control, few claims, and few rights.

America is still grappling with the limitations of freedom, and whether Renty and Delia will be released from the grips of the archives remains to be seen.

[incorrectzutaraquotes]

i’m sure you’re tired of me posting non incorrect quote or non zutara things, but there are things i want to talk about. it started, i guess, as a trend on tiktok where people would share their stories and experiences with racism as people of color in the united states(or anywhere really, but everyone i’ve seen has been from the us). as a woman of color, i felt compelled to participate, but wasn’t sure how to. i didnt want my face showing up globally because i knew that with posting that, not only could people i know in real life find it, but so could the wrong side of tiktok, thus leading some nice so not comments being left under the post. with tumblr i like the anonymity. i can talk about this in as much detail as i want without anyone being able to put a face to my name. despite being here for almost 19 years, i’m still not completely comfortable talking about these experiences when people know what i look like.

i’m going to put this under a cut so it doesn’t take up too much room, and so you can skip if you want.

for starters, my name’s holly. i’m asian american. i was born in china, but shortly after i was born i was stuck in an overcrowded orphanage. this resulted in being adopted by white parents when i was about one and a half to two years old. i lost fluency with my native language and that eventually lead to losing the language completely, and i lost touch with my culture.

i was in second grade, that’s how far back i can remember my first real encounter with racism. i was seven in a classroom full of white kids. there was this boy with blonde hair and blue eyes who sat next to me for a good portion of the year. i remember walking into class everyday, and every day he would ask me the same questions. “why is your nose so flat?” and “why do you eyes look like that”. i was seven. and whether or not he intended to hurt my feelings, it stuck with me for a long time. at first i was confused, because i didn’t think i looked different. i didn’t view myself as looking different until then. until i was constantly reminded everyday that my facial features were “weird” and “odd”. that my face was undesirable. it lead to years and years of insecurity and self hatred.

i wanted so bad to look like the other white girls in my school. i wanted a cute upturned nose with a perfect bridge shape. i wanted blue eyes. i wanted eyelids that didn’t connect in the corners and eyelashes that were naturally curled and turned up unlike mine, that just rested straight forward. i wished that i had lighter skin and blonde hair. i didn’t want to be different and undesirable. i thought i was ugly, and i would look at myself in the mirror for long periods of time, picking out everything that set me apart from the other white kids at my school.

that same year i found out that i needed glasses, and i’m pretty sure i cried. i didn’t want another reason for myself to stand out. i refused to wear them for an entire year and a half, before i realized that i had to wear them if i wanted to see. i was seven, eight. i wasn’t even in the double digits yet but i had this idea in my head that i was ugly because i wasn’t white. whether that kid had meant to hurt me like that didn’t matter, because the damage had already been done. and the worst part was that i had no one i could tell, but none of my friends and none of my family would understand what i was going through. so i suffered in silence and dealt with it the best a child could.

when i was in middle school, i can vividly remember kids mocking asians for laughs. they thought it was funny. funny to be racist. i remember this one time i was out walking the track with a group of kids during gym class. i was walking just behind them and i overheard their conversation. they were making fun of asian’s eye shape, and pulling their eyes back to make them smaller. and it hurt. and they knew i was walking behind them. they knew i was there and that i could hear their whole conversation, but they didn’t care. and i was too scared to speak up for myself, so i had to sit back, listening to and watching them mock people who looked like me because they thought it was funny. i was in seventh grade.

that next year, i was in eighth grade. i had a class with a boy. (i was convinced i liked him, but i’ve come to realize that was not the case at all. i was just forced into thinking he liked me, and i felt obligated to like him back. i realize now that that is just how society (and a get normative society) has conditioned women to feel, but that these feelings were nothing more than platonic. this will make more sense as i continue to tell the story.)

as i was saying, i had a class with a boy, and we began talking and becoming friends. or, i thought we were friends. i realize now those feelings were one sided, and that he only used me to pick on me. he and his friends would take my things and hide them. they sat behind me and would move my desk during class while i was trying to work. they’d throw things at me, whatever they had available. sometimes it was paper, sometimes it was coins, i remember a few times it was a stick they’d found on the track. and now, it doesn’t seem like a racially motivated thing, and maybe it wasn’t and i’m just overreacting. but i saw how he treated other girls. i saw how he treated his girl friends. i saw how he treated my friends. i was with them all the time, and yet i was the only one who was ever on the receiving end of this treatment. and that, that sucked. but i didn’t tell anyone again, because i knew they would just tell me “that means he likes you”. but his actions went further then a playful slap in the arm, and became almost dangerous. i was only fourteen.

in high school i tried my best to stay away from those toxic people. instead, i could remember the racism i faced in those four years coming from my own family, rather than my peers at school. i cant possibly name every time my family has been racist, but i can specifically remember times when i was constantly told by them that my eyes “didn’t look asian”. that my sister looked “more asian” than i did simply because her eyes were smaller than mine. as if i didn’t already have an identity crisis because i wasn’t white enough to fit in with my predominantly white neighborhood, but i wasn’t asian enough to fit in with the few asian kids at my school. it was my dad who continually pushed me to be an engineer(which im not doing, to clarify). don’t get me wrong, he wanted all of us to be in a field where job demand was high, and he did want my sister to be an engineer, but he didn’t bring it up at the rate that he did with me. he still does it. and this plays into the stereotype that all asians are smart and that because we’re smart i have to go into a field that requires high intellect. he didn’t put that immense amount of pressure on any of my other white siblings. just me.

there’s a chinese restaurant down the street from us. we order from there a lot, and usually they’re really good with getting our orders right. in fact, this was the only time i can remember them getting our order wrong. and immediately they began to make fun of their understanding of english and their broken english. immediately they jumped on that opportunity to mock their language, using words like “ching chong” to describe their words. and the saddest part is, i wasn’t even surprised. and yet i couldn’t say anything because i didn’t want to start a fight, and i knew if i did i would be told that “it was just a joke” or that “you’re being too sensitive”. i often wonder if they’d mock me if i didn’t have perfect english. if i spoke with a “chinese accent”. it makes me wonder if i’m only really accepted because i’ve been so assimilated into whiteness that you can’t even tell i’m asian unless you look at my face. this happened mere weeks ago.

last week i went to get my hair done. because of covid everyone is required to wear masks, but there were at least 10 people in there. i was sat down in front of the mirror while my hairdresser cut my hair. in the reflection of the mirror i could see this older white women getting her hair one behind me. she wasn’t wearing her mask properly. it resting under her nose, eventually her chin, and at one point it came off completely and her hairdresser had to tell her to put it back on. the entire time i was sat in that chair, where i could only look straight ahead in that mirror, she was watching me like a hawk. giving me side eye glances and even turning her head completely towards me at times. let me remind you that there were other customers in there. it wasn’t just me and her. i could feel myself starting to get anxious, my heart starting to speed up and my fingers under the apron they put around you, tapping the side of my phone in my hands nervously. i was genuinely afraid that she would start throwing racist slurs and start blaming me for the coronavirus the entire time. i was scared. and it was literally just last week. im tired.

[romymdxcontexualstudiesfirstyear]

The censorship of women on social media.

Deep rooted in our society is the attempt to control women, it goes back centuries. Women being told to act proper, lady like and quiet themselves, in fear of being unfairly labelled a shameful name. For decades this attitude towards women continued until more recent times, women have found new ways to challenge this outdated idea of womanhood. In today’s society women can proudly express their trues selves online, whether its speaking out about an issue they normally wouldn’t feel able to do or simply posting a picture of themselves. Although women nowadays have much more freedom then before, do they really have complete freedom? On social media women can post and write whatever they please, as long as it complies with the ‘community guidelines’, this is where the issues start to crop up. An alarming amount of women’s posts that get removed are to do with their appearance, if it doesn’t fit into the ‘healthy lifestyle’ or the objectified version of women. The culprit of this is usually Instagram and TikTok, along with most social media platforms having their own ridiculous guidelines.

Rupi Kaur the visual poet, had a menstruation-themed photo series which she posted to Instagram, to challenge the taboos of periods. One photo in particular gained some attention which resulted in it being removed twice, the image under fire (See Figure 1) was of the artist herself, fully clothed lying down in bed, with 2 small spots of bloods visible both on her trousers and the bed sheets. The post was then removed twice for violating community guidelines, Kaur challenged these removals and eventually the post was restored where you can still find it today. On the restored post Kaur writes how she “thanks Instagram for providing the exact response her work was created for, deleting a photo of a women who is fully clothed and menstruating, claiming that it goes agonist guidelines when the guidelines state that its nothing but acceptable.” (Kaur, 2015)

Although the post is back up and has been ever since, the fact that it was removed twice despite that there was nothing within the image that violated guidelines, proved how women are controlled to fit the common place ideals that have been ingrained into society. It’s surprising to see the amount of people who think this type of image shouldn’t be on social media, as if a women menstruating isn’t natural, it’s made to seem dirty which it just isn’t.

Figure 1. Rupi Jaur photographed by her sister Prabh Jaur, exposing a small part spot of blood, a part of the period series to break the taboos of menstruation. March 25th 2015.

Out of social media women are censored for simple things we might take for granted now, such as reading a book or educating yourself. Once women were ‘allowed’ to read and write books men started trolling and claimed that women’s novels were dangerously distracting, unrealistic and even damaging to their mental health; Men would often deem female writers insane or secretly male. Joan Acocella an American journalist comments on the book ‘The Women Reader’ by Belinda Jack (see figure 2) “Women seemed stupid therefore, they were considered unfit for education; therefore, they weren’t given an education; therefore, they seemed stupid” (Aocoella, 2012) this statement holds a lot of truth, women were never even given the chance to educate themselves and when they did they were called insane and made fun of.

Male writers retaliated by publishing ‘helpful advice’ for women, targeted to keep women in their place; but women fought back. Publishers in the 16th century would offer cheaper and smaller books that could easily be hidden from husbands, book clubs started to form among women, discussing what made men fear women reading do much? The biggest reason being that women would then start to gain their own opinion, unguided or unbiased and they would think independently, another form of women being censored to fit this ideal that had been created just to put them down. The fear of women gaining education is still feared in more modern societies today, for example Iran’s ban of women studying certain topics like English literature, a way of controlling women to do and act how predominantly men want them to act and being punished if they disobey these rules, similar to the community guidelines on social media but in a more serious way.

Figure 2. Front cover of “The Women Reader” by Belinda Jack, the book introduced frustrated female readers over many eras, exploring the differences between men and women’s reading tastes.

The social media platform TikTok is particularly a culprit of censoring and discriminating women, policing their bodies and removing videos with women with “abnormal body shapes”. Raeann Langas, a body-positive influencer with a substantial following on TikTok aims to show people that all bodies are beautiful, regardless of shape or size. Langas posted a video of her and a friend dancing on the beach in matching bikinis, (see figure 3.) a few days after she posted the video she realised that the video had been taken down for violating community guidelines, assuming the app didn’t allow those types of videos she didn’t feel the need to challenge it. But after some digging she found countless videos of women in bikinis using the same #bikini nut the only different was they were all straight-sized women. She says “It was alarming to me that they were clearly removing certain types of people and body types, not the mention a majority of these videos kept up were highly sexualised and would be considered inappropriate for certain viewers.” (Langas, 2020

Langas brings up a great point here, for a post to be “accepted” on social media it is overly sexualised and pretty much objectifies women. You see it on most social media platforms, for example if a slender, “in shape” women posted a bikini picture on Instagram it would get high praise from both women and men, but if a women with a bigger body and stereotypically “unfit” shape were to post the exact some picture, the response would be name calling and making her feel like she is less than, and in some cases the post gets taken down for “violating guidelines”, censoring women who express their true self because society has deemed their body type unappealing and not fir for social media.

Figure 3. Picture of Raeann Langas with her friend at the beach, spreading body positivity. Malibu California, 2020.

Despite this unjust censorship women have experienced for far too long, there is also a positive side to it. International Women’s Day always brings to light the achievements of women and gives them to opportunity to continue to challenge the status quo by changing the shape of society. Alyssa Milano the American actress, singer, author, producer and activist is known for many of her achievements but especially her #MeToo movement that sparked up in 2017, Milano asked women on Twitter to write ‘#MeToo’ if they had ever been sexually harassed or assaulted. In just a few short days tens of thousands of women had responded, one small outcry became an army or supporting women. (Protesting women after Harvey Weinstein arrest pictured below. (See figure 4)

The MeToo movement is just a small part of the victory for women, women having the right to be free, uncensored is shifting the social norms, especially on social media. From my own personal experience getting the upmost amount of support from women on social media is so uplifting, it makes you feel seen and listened to, not just other women preaching about her rights. The more women taken control and break down barriers on social media the more freedom we will get, no longer being put in our place for expressing ourselves, we will no longer conform to the misogynistic views and objectify ourselves for anyone.

Figure 4. Picture above is participants in the march against sexual assault and harassment apart of the MeToo movement in LA Hollywood, November 12th 2017.

The cases I have brought up all support the same opinion that I have about women and social media which is that, misogynistic, sexist and old-fashioned views that have for years censored women are now the very thing that are now giving us the power to take a stand and challenge the status quo. Recent events of women being attacked and sexually harassed are terrible and should never have happened, I feel as if people have already started to stop talking about it and only support it while its “trending” and once it’s done being in the spotlight we get censored again because people don’t really want to talk about the real issues, only talk about them when its gaining them clout, which I feel is the real problem with the social norms we have created. Although it may seem like every step we take we get knocked back three, but every small victory makes up a brighter and better future for women, we need to continue to challenge the status quo, breaking down the barriers and make people uncomfortable until we are heard. Censoring of women may never stop, but we can learn how to make the censorship our own and command what we can and can’t post, no more of being put in our place, more of claiming our rightful place.

[mom-tings]

Can we talk about family vlogging?

Buckle up friends, this is gonna be a long one. 

Whether you have children of your own, frequently babysit, or have young siblings, I’m sure you’ve recorded a child before for one reason or another. (I am aware that statement sounds creepy, but I assure you it is not meant to be.) For example, have you seen those TikToks of people putting cheese on kid’s heads?! Personally, I have a toddler cousin who is known for doing silly things, like calling her uncle “Grandpa” just because he has grey hair, and I have tonnes of videos of her in my camera roll. But, how did the phenomenon of recording in the household begin, and can it do more harm than good? 

Today’s article, then, is called “Recording Intimacy, Reviewing Spectacle: The Emergence of Video in the American Home” by Hannah Spaulding. In this article, Spaulding discusses the discourses around home video-recording technology, and suggests there are two seemingly opposed sides when it comes to the medium: one that saw the tech as a portent of spectacle, and one that embraced it as an apparatus for intimacy. Specifically, she mentions the show America's Funniest Home Videos, where people submitted funny videos they took of their family members. The family with the video that’s rated the most funny receives a cash prize. The show has been around since 1989, and as we know, technology has changed quite a bit since then.  I'm going to be talking about this a little bit later, but first I wanted to share a quote that stood out for me in the article. The quote is as follows: “Amateur video’s proponents claimed it as a tool of intimacy that would allow viewers to transform their televisions into personalized sites of private communication and facilitate new connections, bridging space, time, and emotional distance. And its opponents denounced videomaking as a dangerous extension of televisual spectacle, something which promised to destroy authentic experience, colonize memory, damage domestic life, and lead America further into the “society of the spectacle (Spaulding, 2018, pg. 258).” I think this  quote is an accurate summary of the article, as it discusses both sides of how people  perceive video recording technology in the household. 

While reading this article one thing I kept thinking about was family vlogging. If you don't know what family vlogs are, I might go so far as to say that you are lucky. Essentially, family vlogs are when parents record what their life is like with their child or children and upload them on video streaming platforms, primarily YouTube. These channels have increased in number in recent years, primarily because everybody has smartphones with which to make recordings. In these videos, the caregivers show pretty much everything the child does in their day: every meltdown, every meal, every bath, literally everything. The first time I saw a family vlog on YouTube was by a channel that had around 2 million subscribers, and I thought to myself, “Imagine how much money my mom could have made if family vlogging was a thing 20 years ago,” as we have hours and hours of footage of my sister and I playing around the house, going shopping at Toys R Us, etc... 

But, this brings about an important concern regarding family vlogs. Such YouTube channels have become increasingly popular over the last 5 years, and many families who partake in vlogging rely on their channels as a primary source of income (this includes: sponsorships, product placement, and other forms of advertisement). Thus, it can make you wonder what families are in it for the ‘right reasons.’ As Spaulding mentions, video-recording in the home can be viewed as either something intimate, or something to make a spectacle out of the family. The same debate then, applies to family vlogging. Personally, I am against family vlogging, and one reason why would be because of what transpired recently with the Stauffer family. 

To put it short, the Stauffer’s are a family vlog channel, who adopted a fourth child from China in 2017. The little boy had many issues, including possible brain damage, and though the family initially stated they were not looking to adopt a child with “challenges,” they changed their mind and adopted him anyways (McNeal, 2020). Myka, the mother of the family, uploaded content about him for years, highlighting what it’s like to raise a child who is significantly different from her other three children. In the videos, Myka shared intimate details about the child and his upbringing, and even before they brought him home from China, she had made 27 videos about the adoption process (McNeal, 2020). Undoubtedly, these videos brought the family a significant source of income, as they each have hundreds of thousands of views. In May of 2020, after raising the child for three years, and using him for content, the Stauffer’s announced that they had permanently placed him with another family after unspecified behavioral issues (McNeal, 2020). 

Many people on social media were outraged, and saw this as an exaggerated version of what family channels have been doing for ages. There is a running joke about family channels, which is that when their views are down and therefore they aren’t making as much money, they introduce a new child into the family. Of course, this is harmful for a number of reasons.

I like to think of it this way:

Family vlogs need children, children age and become ‘boring,’ so family vloggers get more children. 

Many family channels have been criticised not only for that, but also due to the protection of minors. Many such channels focus on babies and toddlers, who are unable to consent. What happens when the child grows up and is able to see videos of them online that have been viewed by millions of people? A more intense critique, then, would be that family vloggers feed into all the (let’s keep it PG) *creeps* that exist on the internet. 

That being said, not every family vlog channel is like the Stauffer’s. Some genuinely seem to be families happily posting videos of their everyday lives, supporting Spaulding’s argument that some see recording in the household as intimate. I guess the perspective here would be along the lines of, “I love my kids, if I record and upload this, they will be able to watch it when they grow older. Plus, others can also watch.” Now, that supports another one of Spaulding’s claims, which is that the two sides “opposed” to home videos are actually not opposed at all. That is, a mother for example can want to upload a video of her children both because she loves them and because she wants others to see. 

So, if it wasn’t clear enough, I am against family vlogs. I don’t think children should be used as props for monetary gain. That being said, if really you want to record your family and have the videos for memories, you can still “make” family vlogs, but perhaps keep them private. Afterall, I think we can all agree there are some things YouTube just doesn’t need more of. 

References

Spaulding, H. (2018). Recording intimacy, reviewing spectacle: The emergence of video in the American home. Television & New Media, 19, 3, 257-273 Retrieved from

https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.library.carleton.ca/doi/10.1177/1527476417710727

McNeal, S. (2020, May 29). A YouTuber Placed Her Adopted Autistic Son From China With A New Family - After Making Content With Him For Years. Retrieved from 

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemcneal/myka-stauffer-huxley-announcement

[theonslowbeat]

Sunday evening a Black Mountain man setout on a mission to find his vehicle. The Onslow Beat received a call from Charles Nicholas “Nick” Tarlton requesting urgent help sharing photos of his 2017 Honda Civic Touring and the police report information.

After searching Facebook for any clues about the juvenile who had stolen his vehicle early Sunday morning from his mountain home while he slept, Tarlton was shocked with what he found. He discovered in his search on Facebook the recent prior posts and articles in regards to recent disappearances with the 17-year-old juvenile, Austin Tyndall. Upon discovering these, it was then he reached out pleading for assistance in sharing information on his vehicle that was stolen from his Black Mountain, NC home.

Tarlton, a Professional Photographer and General Manager of a hotel who became acquainted with 17-year-old Tyndall online via a popular mobile app, “TikTok” that is designed for short-form mobile video clips with dance, singing, comedy, vlogging, food, sports, DIY, animals and everything in between.

Tarlton said that he provided help to Tyndall on several occasions when he was in New York and alleged he was stranded, hungry and needs neglected. Digital Reporter, Melissa Oakley asked Mr. Tarlton, “What made you feel so drawn to help him? Did you not see any signs of a possibly dangerous situation?” Mr. Tarlton responded, “I have helped raise teenagers with a former partner and I guess my fatherly instincts just kicked in, he reminded me of the kids I helped raise and I wanted to help.” Tarlton continued, “It’s just sad that in today’s world you want to have a good heart and help people and you can’t.”

Nick Tartlon went in depth with The Onslow Beat in showing his selfless acts of humanity towards Austin Tyndall. “I bought him food for a good week while he was in NY, I just can’t stand to see anyone going hungry, especially a kid like that.”, Tarlton said. He further explained that he offered to buy Austin a bus ticket but he didn’t have an ID to board a bus so he took vacation time, used his own money and set off to NYC to help a stranger in need get home, who he had no idea would soon make him the next victim.

Nick Tarlton said he drove to NYC to pick up Austin Tyndall and drove him back to the Beulaville, NC area by Mike’s Farm where Austin said he was, “kind of just staying between friends.”  Austin contacted Nick the following week to bring him some money, a repayment of sorts for all he had done for him while he was in NYC. Austin Tyndall came by travel in a pick up truck that he shortly after arrival to the mountain area said had mechanic issues and needed repair, which turned into a suggestion to scrap the truck. You can see in these messages that at this point Nick Tarlton became very frustrated with the idea that Austin had travelled all the way to the mountains to give him what was at that time $20 (view images) and then lead to more issues that would potentially require him to assist physically and financially. It has been further discovered that Austin Tyndall travelled to the home of Nick Tarlton in the pickup truck and it was allegedly stolen as well.  The Onslow Beat reached out to Asheville PD which is the agency in that matter and was unable to receive a response by deadline.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Below is a screenshot from Austin Tyndall expressing gratitude over social media on Facebook for the help and generosity Nick Tarlton had shown before the very ironic event occurred.

While in today’s climate of youth being taken advantage of, human trafficking and sex trafficking, it seems to be that is nowhere near the case here. Speculations quickly rose with Nick Tarlton being a 40-year-old, gay, white male and Austin Tyndall being a 17-year-old in what appeared to be circumstances of desperation and despair. In this case, it’s merely a one in a million, a true good Samaritan.  Below you can see pieces of conversations by electronic means between Tarlton and the juvenile where food was ordered for him while in NY after the last disappearance.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

BACK STORY

On April 23, 2019, Goldsboro Police posted a missing persons report for Tyndall via Facebook. During this incident, Tyndall had taken his mother’s vehicle he was not authorized,  nor licensed to operate along with two teenage girls who were also included in the missing alerts additionally. The three juveniles were located in Iowa several days later.

May 10, 2019 Onslow County Sheriff’s Office issued a Missing Persons report for the girlfriend of Austin Tyndall, Madison Bratcher. Austin and Madison had yet again left the state in a vehicle he was unauthorized to operate. The two juveniles were located in Connecticut on May 15, 2019. From Connecticut, Austin Tyndall somehow made way to New York.

THIS WEEK

Early Monday morning at 12:43am a Craven County deputy responded to a request from the Black Mountain Police Department to locate a stolen 2017 Honda Civic Touring operated by juvenile, Austin Tyndall age 17 at an address in Newport, NC. The vehicle was located and the suspect fled in the vehicle. The chase ended in New Bern, NC in Craven County. Craven County Sheriff’s Office and the NC State Highway Patrol were able to stop the vehicle and take him into custody. Carteret County Sheriff’s office said Monday, Austin Tyndall was in custody under a $10K secured bond.” Tyndall was charged with one count of (F) fleeing to elude law enforcement and (F) larceny of a motor vehicle per the Black Mountain Police Department Monday morning with probation violations pending.

The owner of the vehicle, Nick Tarlton told Digital Reporter, Melissa Oakley after he became aware of his vehicle being gone that he realized that Austin Tyndall had used his computer when he was there. He checked the browser to see if Tyndall had failed to log out on any online accounts and if the location settings were on.

“I realized he had used my laptop, so I decided to see if he was still logged into any of his accounts on Facebook, Instagram, Google, anything to see if his location was on and I could tell the police where he was at with my car.”, Tarlton said. “Sure enough, he had not logged out of his Facebook account nor his Google account…”, he continued. “From there, I called Black Mountain [police] and told them where he was located.”, explained Tarlton

Austin Tyndall is currently showing to have one upcoming court date per the NC Courts website. He is calendared to be in Wayne Co. (Goldsboro) on June 24, 2019 for an arrest from May 7, 2019 for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, misdemeanor probation violation, and he is currently on probation for Larceny of a Motor Vehicle in 2018 in Lenoir Co.

Nick Tarlton, the most recent victim of car theft was able to get his car back Wednesday in Morehead City, NC and head back to his mountain home with minimal damages.

Photo Courtesy: Nick Tarlton

Photo Courtesy: Nick Tarlton

Photo Courtesy: Nick Tarlton

Images of visible damage to the 2017 Honda Civic Touring, owned by Nick Tarlton of Black Mountain, NC. (Photo Courtesy: Nick Tarlton) 

The Onslow Beat received many tips and screenshots of messages from sources who wish to remain anonymous where Tyndall admitted to stealing the vehicle belonging to Nick Tarlton, how he did it and how fast he was driving the vehicle at high rates of speed (160MPH) all while bragging gleefully to friends online as he headed back to the coast of NC. Tyndall showed no remorse in the messages not shown for privacy and ethical standards (heavy language) cannot be shared publicly, referring to the stolen vehicle as his own, bragging to friends to come out and see “his” car at local businesses.

Screenshot image of Tyndall showing image of speed to another person by digital communication in what appears to be a video chat.

In asking Nick Tarlton, “If you could say one thing or ask anything to Austin Tyndall, what would you say or ask after all of this?” “Tarlton answered, “I would ask why and how could you do this to someone who was so generous and genuinely kind to you? ”

“How are you now that this is over for the most part?” Tarlton replied, “It feels like I’m getting back to normal. My car is in the shop and getting the necessary repairs. I did have some unnerved feelings for several days…” He continued with response of how it has changed him, “In the long term, someone will come along and really need help and I’ll say no.”

The great state of N.C. tries most cases with 16-17 year-old juveniles as adults in cases as this. We can only hope for fair justice and Austin Tyndall to change his behavior and become a productive adult citizen in society.

      Donate to support the continual growth

Unlike MSM outlet's independent sites don't have the luxury of hopping on websites that are already fully equipped and funded by a corporation. There's no company credit card that someone else pays the bill for. If you appreciate the articles produced and want to support the growth and development of The Onslow Beat, whether it is donating for breakfast, lunch or towards additional development of this brand, it is appreciated! There's also no charge to you or forced subscription in order to read the information that ends up costing readers money.

$1.00

Juvenile arrested and charged following high speed chase in a stolen vehicle. Sunday evening a Black Mountain man setout on a mission to find his vehicle. The Onslow Beat received a call from Charles Nicholas "Nick" Tarlton requesting urgent help sharing photos of his 2017 Honda Civic Touring and the police report information.

[neptunecreek]

A Plan to Pay Artists, Encourage Competition, and Promote Free Expression

As Congress gets ready for yet another hearing on copyright and music, we’d like to suggest that rather than more “fact-finding,” where the facts are inevitably skewed toward the views of the finder, our legislators start focusing on a concrete solution that builds on and learns from decades of copyright policy: blanket licensing. It will need an update to make it work for the Internet age, but as complicated as that will be, it has the profound benefit of adhering to copyright’s real purpose: spurring creativity and innovation. And it's far better than the status quo, where audiences and musicians alike are collateral damage in an endless war between giant tech companies and giant entertainment companies.

We all have lots of experience with blanket licensing, though we may not realize it. Nightclubs, restaurants, cafes, and radio stations all have their own soundtracks: the music that helps define the experience of any venue or business. Whether they favor jazz, rock, classical, or heavy metal, venues choose music that reflects what they want to convey to people about the character of the business. And they can make those choices because no music publisher can dictate what they play—Jazz Club B can play the same tracks as Jazz Club A. A publisher can't do a deal with a chain of restaurants or radio stations giving them the sole right to play their top hits.

This has been vital to the progress of music. It prevents the dominant music venues from becoming gatekeepers by insisting on exclusive access in exchange for playing publishers' leading tracks. If that happened, competitors without exclusive deals wither away, or would never launch.

But when the Internet came along, and Congress gave record labels a right to collect performance royalties, we lost sight of that principle of universal access.  The only statutory licenses for recordings that cover Internet services are narrow, and full of limitations. The result is a toxic dynamic in which a handful of companies dominate online music services. A few online giants—like Spotify—are standalone music companies, but most of the major music channels, like YouTube, iTunes, and Amazon Prime, are divisions of large, monopolistic conglomerates with very deep pockets. Apple, Google, and Amazon have leveraged their dominant positions in search and e-commerce to become even more dominant. If you only sell to high bidders, then eventually all the low bidders will disappear and the high bidders have all the sellers over a barrel.

The online giants desperately need competition to discipline them. That's the usual pattern: successful businesses breed competitors who try to offer something that's better (for customers, or suppliers, or workers, or all three). Getting audience-facing music service competitors into the mix will liberate musicians and music companies from operating at the sufferance and mercy of Big Tech.

And we know how to do it: create a system of universal licenses for recorded music that make playing music over the Internet more like playing music over the radio or in a club. Let companies pay a per-user license fee that gives them access to the same catalog that Amazon, Apple, and Google claim, without having to cut deals with every label and musician.

The Music Modernization Act, passed in 2018, was a step in the right direction. It created a new blanket license for musical compositions, covering downloads and interactive streaming. Let’s build on that momentum and create a complimentary license for sound recordings.

A Blanket License for the Internet

In broad strokes, here's how a robust Internet license for sound recordings would work. If you want to offer music to the public—if you want to start a streaming site, or let users exchange music, or share videos with music clips in them like TikTok users do—all you need to do is set up an account with a rights clearinghouse, called a "collecting society."

You pay the collecting society a monthly license fee that goes up with the number of users you have. If you have one user and Facebook has 2.5 billion users, then your license fee is 1/2,500,000,000 of Facebook's fee.

You also allow the collecting society to audit the use of music on your platform. They'll use statistically rigorous sampling methods to assemble an accurate picture of which music is in use on your platform, and how popular each track is.

The collecting society will then pay rightsholders for your use of the music. That's it, more or less. It's not complicated, but it will be a challenge. There are a lot of details we have to get right. Let's get into some of them.

Collecting Societies

Collecting societies get a bad rap, and not without reason. Independent labels and musicians have long accused the societies of undercounting their music and handing money that is rightfully theirs to big music corporations and the musicians who've signed up with them. Collecting society executives have been mired in corruption and embezzlement scandals, and other misdeeds that have put the whole sector in bad odor. At the same time, public interest groups have locked horns with collecting societies for years over proposals to make it easier to censor the Internet, and the societies have never stopped trying to expand the scope of who needs a music license—from nightclubs to restaurants to cafes to market stalls to school plays to classrooms.

But a better collecting society is possible. Indeed, the problems with societies over the years have demonstrated the pitfalls that a new collecting society must avoid.

Some requirements for a new collecting society:

It must be transparent. From the methodology for sampling online music usage, to the raw data it analyzes, to the conclusions it reaches, to the payments it makes, the entire business should be open and subject to public scrutiny.

It must be fair. Statistical analysis is an incredibly powerful tool, but it's also  to do well. The statistical method used to sample and extrapolate online music usage must be visible to all.

It must be limited. From executive salaries to the scope of its activities, the collecting society must be limited to act as a utility player in the online music ecosystem, whose sole purpose is fairly apportioning music from online services to music creators.

Fairness

Under the current system, the recorded music industry is concentrated in the hands of three major labels, each of which has a long history of artist-unfriendly business practices that saw successful musicians who made millions for corporations go broke and die in poverty.

The power imbalance between the concentrated industry and the vast number of musicians who'd like to enter the industry favors one-sided, unfair contracts. That’s one reason copyright systems around the world include some form of reversion right through which creators can unilaterally cancel their contracts with their publishers, labels, or studios, and get the rights back.

Reversion points to another way to make online music usage fairer for artists. Blanket licenses for online music could and should also establish a minimum fraction of blanket licenses that go directly to artists, irrespective of their contracts with their labels. The current statutory license for “non-interactive” Internet streaming gives 50% of royalties to artists. We think that’s fair.

Artists have long railed against online music distributors like Spotify and Pandora, saying that they receive inadequate compensation for the use of their work. The streaming companies counter by opening their books and showing that they've paid billions in license fees. Can both sides be right?

Indeed, they can. If almost all of the streaming money is hoarded by the labels who get to arm-twist musicians into one-sided contracts, it's entirely possible for Spotify and Pandora to spend billions to license music while the musicians get next to nothing.

The online music industry is currently generating more revenues than the music industry did at the height of the CD bubble, and yet, musicians are going hungry. The labels’ market concentration has made the deals on offer to musicians progressively worse, as the probability that musicians can take their music to a rival label dwindles every time the big music companies merge with one another.

Statutorily guaranteeing that, at minimum, half of all license payments go directly to artists, irrespective of their label contracts, is a way to ensure that online music listeners and online music makers are on the same side and the more people love a musician's art, the more money the musician makes.

Competition

Artists and users are the biggest losers in the current ecosystem, thanks to the lack of competition.  If you want to listen to a favorite song, there's an (approximately) one in three chance that you're going to get it from one of the Big Three labels. When it comes to home Internet service, most people in the U.S. have only one or two equally expensive carriers. You'll search with Google, socialize with Facebook, and distribute your videos on YouTube.

Blanket licenses pay artists while promoting competition. If you want to start a TikTok, Facebook, YouTube, Apple Music, or Amazon Prime competitor, you’ll be free to make the very best service you can, and you will have access to the exact same catalog that the established services offer.

As you add users, your license payments go up as a function of your popularity. If you're an overnight sensation, great, your windfall needs to be divvied up with the creators whose music helped you succeed. If you're a slow burner and take years to ignite, then you pay very little to cover the usage of your small but loyal user base. If you want to start a specialty service to fill a specific niche, you don't have to hire a business-development team and an army of lawyers to do deals with the labels.

For artists, this is almost a license to print money. Every time a new service pops up online with a great idea for music, it represents a way for you to get paid. If a service interests new fans in your music, or gets existing fans to congregate around it, you get paid right away—their success is based on their ability to excite your listeners, not their ability to convince your label's corporate lawyers to do a deal with them.

Free Expression

Best of all, blanket licenses enable the kind of creativity that we've all come to know and love in the digital era.

Rather than putting musicians on the wrong side of the speech debate, insisting that others' creations be censored off the Internet, blanket licensing aligns the interests of musicians with the interests of audiences, and puts them on the side of free expression. Every artist should be on the side of free expression, always.

This is how things worked in the pre-Internet world. The blanket licenses that clubs and radio stations rely on—and the mechanical licenses that let anyone record their own cover of an existing song—meant that artists had the right to get paid for the use of their music, but not the right to tell a DJ they didn't like that she couldn't spin their album, nor the right to force another musician to destroy their cover of a song they wrote.

Details: Who, What, How

This plan has some pretty gnarly details that need to be worked out through collaboration with all the important stakeholders, especially creators. But we want to make sure we signpost those so you know what they are and can get to thinking about them:

The license should cover both digital performance and distribution rights in sound recordings, so that all kinds of music services can participate.

The license should cover "synch" rights for making things like YouTube and TikTok videos, but it should not cover movie studios or advertisers that want to include musicians' work in their products—a blanket license should add to musicians' income streams, not destroy them;

The collecting society needs a rigorous statistical sampling and analysis system;

We need a way to divide up money among musicians who collaborate on a song;

We need a way to divide up money among musicians who mash up, sample, or remix someone else's song under this license;

We need a way to verify the claims of musicians who represent themselves as rightsholders over a given recording or composition.

These are hard problems and they'll take real work. But solving these problems is much easier than making things fair for creators and audiences while continuing on our current, monopolistic path, with Big Tech and Big Content fighting one another for the right to profit from the rest of us.

from Deeplinks https://ift.tt/2ztjWr0