2/ I’ve done a lot of this type of work over the years. Thing is, the whole cancelling thing is a straw man argument. Ironically, deplatforming would be a lot rarer if platforms had rules and enforced enforced regularly. That’s how you create a norm.
3/ Spotify/Rogan issue is important. But, I can’t help wonder where the public and music industry has been all the years re right-wing talk radio.
Talk radio is a cesspool of deceit, extremism and bigotry. The audience far eclipses Rogan’s. But little pushback there.
1/ Much to say about Spotify/Rogan -- and I'm in no way diminishing importance of pressure here or destructive effects of Rogan's misinformation. BUT...I feel like media/scientific and medical communities/activitists seem to have totally forgotten about and/or ignore talk radio.
2/ All the pressure on Spotify sure is important and matters a lot. But, shouldn't their be equal if not more pressure on the major radio companies?
Right-wing radio wayyy bigger than Rogan, also worse in lots of ways. And, they use *public* airwaves.
3/ All that's to say, media should be talking about/engaging on/pressuring Spotify here. But let's not give talk radio a pass just because it's been around longer.
1/ No matter the issue -- be it a political campaign, policy fight or culture debate -- the way the media (newspapers, tv, online, radio, etc...) deals with it is going to greatly shape and influence the outcome.
And the right-wing has an incredible advantage.
2/ Between Fox News, talk radio, Facebook ecosystem, etc, the information asymmetry advantaging the right-wing's chicanery, extremism and bullshit is potent and destructive.
And the tempests they create don't just stay in their bubbles, but end up distorting media at large.
3/ Nothing. Not one damn thing will get better unless the right-wing noise machine is dealt with and addressed. In fact, things will only get worse and worse.
Fascism, climate crisis, racism, attacks on trans people, etc...
1/ I want to just put a few things out there about OANN and ATT/DirecTV because in a way, the incredibly good Reuters reporting just begins to scratch the surface on how absurd and odious this deal is....
2/ Every cable company pays channels a fee per subscriber for carrying it.
Let's say cable company has 100 customers. And they want to carry a channel that has a fee of $1. They pay that channel $1 for every customer you have. So, you give them $1,000 every month.
3/ Usually the fee is a nominal fee. ATT has been paying OANN about 12 cents per subscriber. That seems small, but it's actually an incredibly huge number. The amount of revenue they give OANN every month is massive.
1/ Apropos 60 Minutes interview with Facebook whistleblower, there are two thing I want to share. media matters did a much research leading up to and around FB role in attack. But two big one jumps out…
2/ Days before Jan 6 w/in far right FB groups we track (many closed ones), we started seeing a sudden shift. People urging others to bring guns to the rally.
3/ This was notable for a couple reasons. For starters, atypical. Usually people remind others *not* to bring guns because of DC gun laws. Second, it seemed…almost calculated, coordinated or organized.
FB was advised. But nothing. No additional investigation or follow through.
1/ I'm not sure this is a good thing for a few reasons...
a) For starters, FB isn't good at defining political. For example, daily wire has spent over 10M on ads this year alone. But FB political ad library says they have spent 800k on political/social ads since 2018. C'mon!
2/ a continue) My point there is that FB will narrowly define this in ways that are overall not helpful and if past is any indicator in ways that will almost certainly unfairly advantage right-wing content.
3/
b) This will calcify and intensify an existing problem on platform.
Asymmetry on FB is intense. For ex, last weekend right-leaning content had 50.96% of all engagement, left-leaning had 12.4%. News/non-aligned content (which was majority in terms of volume) only had 36.64%.