October 10th, 2020

(no subject)

So, several days ago, some notes of an ex-CIA director got declassified, and, unless it's a massive hoax (doesn't look like it), the tiny unredacted legible part of it reads: Cite alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 28 July of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to villify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service.



This is some heady stuff. More potent than Dulles Plan or fake Thatcher's quote.

(no subject)



This video is a prime example of the cultural dynamic that I struggle to quite put my finger on, but deeply resent. It combines:
- appeal to celebrities for authority (*)
- appeal to base instincts to grab attention ("we have an important message, so we got naked", gosh!)
- while carefully balancing to maintain family friendliness
- call to action, urgent and imitative, monkey see monkey do, appealing to emotions rather than to intellect
- shooting for virality (oh, SMM people, you are my... nemeses? nemesides?)


*) Sometimes, it can be done beautifully. I really love these safety instructions videos made by British Airways. Not sure I quite understand why I find them absolutely brilliant while the one above, repugnant:



(no subject)

Someone's tweet:



Here's a larger screenshot of the page:



Question: is any of the Trump headlines complimentary to him?
Question: are they likely to sway any of the NYT audience's opinions in his favor?
Question: if the answers to both of the above questions are negative, then why does he think it is a problem, exactly?