Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Shitposting/'Parafiction' Watch

Screenshot_20191122-085323_Chrome.jpg


Big Twitter purge of people, presumably in the aftermath of the Squirrel Executioner Jo Swinson thing. Journalists/politics/public figures must have had a loud enough tantrum for action to be taken I reckon.

Oddly enough repeatedly dishonest/incompetent journalists haven't been hit and nor have the Conservatives despite blatantly misleading with their renamed account. Leave it up to you to guess what power dynamics make outright misrepresentation from serious political groups acceptable while a guy with a pretend non league football club and a killer robot beyond the pale. Certainly the trad. media hate having their uselessness exposed by jokes that'd be transparent to a child.
 
I'm actually a bit gutted about the bannings tbh: some of their output is truly joyful, hilarious stuff.

Aye, it was. Plus I think it's a grim sign in general, not that Twitter has ever been anything like a free platform but the basic statement is that they'll crack down on comedy/satire in an instant if people with enough profile don't like it. 'No mockery from the proles' basically.
 
Good to see some of this stuff making it onto here



Twitter saying today that this one is actually a son of a Duke, if true the fact he doesn't know much about what average people earn speaks to him not actually having any experience of such matters.
 
Not sure who or what the swelling tide of Discordian/ Mindfuck / satirical fake news stuff (funny as some of it is) will ultimately benefit, or even if all of it is “independent” of the main players though.
Is it like “outrage tweeting”, that ultimately benefits the perps more than the outraged?
Hmmm
 
Not sure who or what the swelling tide of Discordian/ Mindfuck / satirical fake news stuff (funny as some of it is) will ultimately benefit, or even if all of it is “independent” of the main players though.
Is it like “outrage tweeting”, that ultimately benefits the perps more than the outraged?
Hmmm
Do you think Swinson has benefited from the squirrel episode? She just looks ridiculous responding to it tbh, and all the fake outrage at it over the last few days has purely been an attempt (looking currently quite successful) to shut it down rather than genuine concerns about fake news.
 
Do you think Swinson has benefited from the squirrel episode? She just looks ridiculous responding to it tbh, and all the fake outrage at it over the last few days has purely been an attempt (looking currently quite successful) to shut it down rather than genuine concerns about fake news.
Politicians seem to be almost uniquely ill-equipped to handle satire and ridicule, far less dish it out. All the more reason to expose them to as much of it as possible...
 
Do you think Swinson has benefited from the squirrel episode? She just looks ridiculous responding to it tbh, and all the fake outrage at it over the last few days has purely been an attempt (looking currently quite successful) to shut it down rather than genuine concerns about fake news.

I don't think it helps her at all. They've put her front and centre of their campaign and that's already not working, and now she simultaneously looks like someone who, even though it's clearly a joke, probably would shoot squirrels actually, someone who wants to be controlling and someone with no sense of humour.
 
Last edited:
Do you think Swinson has benefited from the squirrel episode? She just looks ridiculous responding to it tbh, and all the fake outrage at it over the last few days has purely been an attempt (looking currently quite successful) to shut it down rather than genuine concerns about fake news.

No, I don’t think Swinson benefitted from it, and I actively dislike her, but the question remains about this sort of stuff, Cui bono, ultimately?

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy pompous politicians being taken down a peg or two, but it does give pause for thought that the main discernible cyber warfare aim of certain state\criminal networks appears to be generalised confusion, distrust, disaffection and demoralisation amongst *all* their perceived enemies and targets. Surely people whose “radical” or “humourous” online activity could be seen to fit in well with the aims of state/criminal networks might need to give it a bit of thought?

When people become convinced that *nobody* is trustworthy they are paradoxically in the appropriate state for persuasion that any old crap from any old source *could* be true...... see the way things have been going in US and UK
 
Back
Top Bottom