I’d been giving HBO’s QAnon documentary the benefit of the doubt, despite some valid criticism of the trailer. Having spent my weekend watching it, I am now just baffled anyone would greenlight it as a six-hour series. theverge.com/22330129/hbo-q…
There’s plenty for disinfo researchers to criticize here, but my main issue is that I think this series actually physically sapped my life force. Like I’m not trying to dunk on this thing to be clever, I am legitimately mad I had to sit through it.
Into the Storm is two hours longer than the Snyder Cut and it’s largely YouTubers and 8channers complaining about each other and their media coverage while cooking dinner and showing off $5,000 watches.
The main draw is that the series gets a *ton* of access to the operators of 8chan, who are almost by definition very close to Q. But it comes off as taking everything they say at weirdly literal face value, when it’s very obvious these people like messing with journalists?
Obviously I can’t know what kind of research and verification went on behind the scenes, but it places a huge amount of weight on, say, the fact that people contradict themselves about how political they are.
If you want a documentary about the intersection of the internet and far-right politics, Arthur Jones’ Feels Good, Man is emotionally compelling, incisive, good-looking, and respectful of your limited time on this Earth. theverge.com/2020/2/5/21113…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The *other* reason that “otherwise objectionable” matters is that Republican lawmakers/Trump regulators have been trying to export the (c)(2)(A) preconditions into (c)(1), so any changes they make there are sort of a trojan horse for the entire law.
To be clear, most of the stuff the Trump administration wants to do is very legally questionable, so we’re sort of speaking in hypotheticals.
Are you in the right headspace to receive information that could possibly hurt you? Then check out the Senate livestream for our latest Section 230 nightmare hearing! commerce.senate.gov/2020/10/does-s…
The big prospect from this hearing, as explained by @mmasnick: Facebook throwing its weight behind one of the proposals to change Section 230. techdirt.com/articles/20201…
Roger Wicker nods to the (largely illusory) bipartisan anti-230 consensus. “There is strong agreement from both sides of the aisle that hearing from these witnesses is important.” The witnesses are Google’s Sundar Pichai, Twitter’s Jack Dorsey, and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg.
Love Jack Dorsey tastefully reminding Congress that Twitter is like nine times smaller than the “Big Tech” companies he’s constantly getting dragged into hearings with.
Congress: We must rein in the digital ad behemoths! And the companies that control our phones! And a massive retailer with a drone division!
Oh and also that website where everybody posts their hot takes and apology screenshots, get that one in there too.
Twitter punches way above its weight in media influence — it’s a de facto wire service for lots of journalists and public figures. But as an actual digital platform, it’s *way* smaller than Facebook/Google, without any of those companies’ non-social-media divisions.
If you’re a fan of tech-related Senate hearings, man this is your week. We’re about to start a hearing on the EARN IT Act, aka the “no really, we promise this isn’t about banning encryption” bill! judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/the-e…
Welcome to the EARN IT Act hearing, featuring: charts.
Lindsey Graham kicks off the hearing with a warning about how Facebook finds a lot of child abuse material but will “go dark” because of encryption.
“This bill is not about the encryption debate, but the best business practices, I’m dying to find out what they should be.”
Mike Lee is kicking off with an unusual damper on techlash stuff, saying we "cannot fall prey to the mentality that treats big as categorically bad.” Lee takes a moment to say that US law isn’t like Europe, and that we need to focus strictly on the consumer standard.
Lee says it’s ridiculous that the FTC and DOJ are both carrying out investigations. “I’ve expressed to both my profound frustration that these agencies are conducting monopolization investigations of the very same tech companies at the very same time.”