Vox journalists ruin people’s lives then demand higher wages
Earlier this week, Vox‘s Carlos Maza succeeded in getting independent journalists and content creators demonetized across the YouTube platform in what has become known as the Vox Adpocalypse. These users, including Steven Crowder, were ones with whom Maza has had personal Twitter spats.
The day after the demonetizing, Vox writers, including Maza, walked out on their jobs in a protest over wages. After all, killing other people’s income sources ought to command a higher payday. The conflict over wages and working conditions began in 2017, when Vox Media staffers announced their unionization intentions, shortly thereafter joining the Writers Guild of America East. As no agreement has yet been reached, more than 300 writers took their Google docs and went home.
Outlets like Vice, BuzzFeed, and Vox, are either dying or are being put on life support by other corporations who have a vested interest in maintaining the woke, clickbait status quo.
As Newsweek reported, “On Tuesday, the Team YouTube Twitter account wrote that while the company ‘found language that was clearly hurtful, the videos as posted don’t violate our policies.’ The next day, YouTube reversed its stance and announced Crowder’s channel would be demonetized.”
In changing the standards of their platform overnight, and continuously adjusting what constitutes unacceptable speech, dialogue, and T-shirts, YouTube makes it difficult for broadcasters to know whether they will be able to continue earning a living tomorrow.
Writers and media owners are still resistant to the demands of the contemporary newsroom. Funding models are adjusted based on monetizing clicks, ad revenue is courted, and crowdfunding platforms augment writers’ salaries. Owners and writers are perpetually trying to get a handle on how to paint a financially sustainable picture, while delivering content that has meaning. Which is why it’s so disingenuous for writers to seek to defund other journalists and content creators.
Let’s face it. There have been a lot of unpersonings, cancellings and deplatformings over the past five years, but this Vox Adpocalypse is a major first step toward something sinister—it’s affected actual policy. First at YouTube and then at Twitter.
Some well-respected voices have suggested that it’s perfectly fine to eliminate unsavoury content creators in order to enforce “basic decency standards.”
If YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook were strictly private companies as opposed to monopolistic corporations who control the political and cultural town square, then they may have a more compelling point.
In fact, just two days ago we wrote, “Silencing speech that is distasteful now means that it will be that much easier for someone else to silence you.” And just like that, we see that the silencers are being silenced. Much to Carlos Maza’s consternation, progressive journalist Ford Fischer had the same thing happen to him, a guy who was monitoring “hateful content” has now been trampled under the heels of the progressive march of his colleagues. This whole Vox Adpocalypse thing reveals that it’s easy to destroy the ground you’re standing on.
YouTube has run afoul of internet denizens for some time because of the video recommendations algorithm, which throws up recommended videos with seemingly no rhyme or reason, giving viewers a link to a video about incels after they’d watched something on Ikebana. But instead of continuing to work on their product and improve their algorithms, they have decided to become compelled by what Ben Shapiro calls “astroturfing boycotts.”
First, these paranoiac overcorrections take away the livelihood of an edgy comedian, then they take away the livelihood of a progressive comedian, then they start to scrub their platform of world history.
YouTube has now taken to removing educational videos of World War II because there are Nazis in them, and everyone knows that Nazis are offensive. As MIT Technology Review puts it, “this shows just how fraught and complex the balance is, and highlights the risk of unintended consequences when policies and algorithms are tweaked.”
These new YouTube rules and regulations are now affecting the way we understand and process the world. They are removing actual history lessons. This is what Vox has wrought. And now their writers want a raise.
It’s a good thing that everything humans have used to document history hasn’t been digitized and the originals tossed just yet. We don’t have to wait for our libraries to be burned by invading ideological enemies or crusaders, we’ll just do it ourselves. Plus this way, we won’t know when we begin to repeat the genocidal history of our past.
As Churchill once paraphrased, “Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.” The door that is opened by the silencing, deplatforming, and cancelling of ideas and people that are unsavory is one that enters into a confusing world of shifting, subjective standards, where platforms are too afraid to stand up for their users lest they be taken down themselves. What began as an ideological turf war for control of the narrative has morphed into social engineering. We are erasing our own history because we think it’s too offensive.
Charges have been laid after a Barrie teen was killed in an automotive collision last month.
Barrie Police say a 17-year-old and 19-year-old man were arrested and charged Saturday in connection with the crash that killed 17-year-old Paige Ferreira
Barrie police communications co-ordinator Peter Leon told the Barrie Today that charges were laid based on shocking video evidence, as well as statements from witnesses obtained by investigators.
“All I can say is there was an interaction that took place between the two vehicles prior to the crash,” Leon said. “There was evidence to support the charges.”
Police say the investigation will remain closed “unless something else materializes,” said Leon.
“As a result of the investigation, it should serve as a message that people need to operate their motor vehicles cautiously and in respect of the law.”
The vehicle reportedly left the road before jumping a snowbank and striking a road sign before rolling over multiple times.
After the crash, Simcoe County Paramedics rushed Ferreira to the hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries. One of the drivers was taken to hospital where he was treated for minor injuries.
The two men are charged with dangerous driving causing death. Police have yet to confirm what the role of the 19-year-old was in the crash.
Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer was not invited to a Liberal-led meeting of opposition parties after comments made earlier Tuesday.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reportedly invited Bloc Quebecois Leader Blanchet, Green Leader Elizabeth May, and New Democrat Leader Jagmeet Singh.
According to Green Leader Elizabeth May, Scheer was excluded from the meeting because of the “speech that Mr. Scheer gave following the prime minister’s statement was viewed as disqualifying him from participation in a discussion on how to find solutions.”
When Trudeau himself was asked about the matter, he confirmed that it was Scheer’s statements earlier that he deemed “unacceptable speech.”
Jagmeet Singh also called Scheer’s speech “reprehensible” and “divisive,” saying that the comments were “designed to pit some groups against another.”
The Conservative Party Leader did, in fact, have some strong words for Trudeau—though whether or not they were what other party leaders are calling them is up for debate.
Scheer had heavily criticized Trudeau’s inaction over the anti-pipeline blockades, calling them “the weakest response to a national crisis in Canadian history.”
“Let me be clear Mr. Speaker, standing between our country and prosperity is a small group of radical activists, many of whom have little to no connection to First Nations communities. A bunch of radical activists who won’t rest until our oil and gas industry is entirely shut down,” said Scheer.
“Now they may have the luxury of not having to go to work every day. They may have the luxury of not facing repercussions for skipping class, but they are blockading our ports, our railways, and our borders and roads and highways. They are appropriating an Indigenous agenda which they are willfully misrepresenting.”
Trudeau responded to the comments in the House of Commons later on Tuesday afternoon, explaining that it was the CPC’s deliberate misunderstanding of reconciliation that was behind the exclusion.
“The Conservative Party of Canada continues to demonstrate that it willfully and deliberately tries to misunderstand the reality of reconciliation in this country, and that is why they were excluded from a constructive conversation on how to move forward as a country on the path of reconciliation,” said Trudeau.
When asked by Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchett about if there was any timeline in place for the removal of protestors, Trudeau stated that the government was willing to meet with Wet’suwet’en to find a solution, again giving no details.
Mohawk Council of Kanesatake Grand Chief Serge Otsi Simon called on anti-pipeline protestors to end the rail blockades as a “show of good faith.”
“Bringing down the blockades doesn’t mean that you surrender. It doesn’t mean we’re going to lay down and let them kick us around. No, it would show compassion,” he said.
“I’m simply pleading with the protesters … Have you made your point yet? Has the government and industry understood? I think they did.”
Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer gave a similar message earlier Tuesday at the House of Commons, when he called Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s response to the protestors “the weakest response to a national crisis in Canadian history.”
Scheer highlighted that the majority of members of the Wet’suwet’en people were in support of the coastal gas link project. “Every single elected band council on the gas link route supports this project. The majority of hereditary chiefs support this project.”
“The prime minister’s elevation of these protestors to the same level of the thousands of men and women in First Nation communities who have in good faith been trying to right the wrongs of Canadian history, does a disservice to the spirit of reconciliation. And the prime minister has emboldened and encouraged them.”
In response to Chief Simon’s comments, Mohawks in Kanehsatake barricaded the council office Tuesday morning.
“People are suffering across the country because of this blockade–and not just non-Indigenous people. Indigenous people as well. Shortages in propane and probably food supplies are going to start getting critical if this continues,” Chief Simon said of the blockades.
There’s no such thing as a non-binary haircut. But that didn’t stop Gray Crosbie from opining on the trouble of getting a haircut as a self-proclaimed genderless person. Speaking on The Social with BBC Scotland, Crosbie talks about how disconcerting it is to have to choose between the barbershop and the salon, the problem with women being charged more for their haircuts than men, and feeling like society is too normative.
Perhaps the low key worst thing about this video is that it’s called a poem. But aside from that, there’s this assumption that until non-binary people emerged, fully formed, ideated, and sexless from mother’s womb, no one ever felt like they didn’t belong before. There’s this feeling that non-binary people are the first to not fit into the sex binary boxes.
One look at the history of street fashion can tell us this isn’t true. While our memories of the mid 20th century begin and end with pin-up girls, poodle skirts, and bad boys in leather jackets, the reality is far more complex. People’s looks spilled out of the stereotypical sex-based binary all over the place. There are the rock stars, obviously, who strutted in whatever femme or masculine fashion that suited them at the time.
But then there were the teen subcultures that broke binary barriers all over the place. Disco featured drag queens, men in makeup, perms, and heels, women like Liza Minelli dallying with traditional tuxedos, ties, and top hats. This was pretty much normal. Punk rock and new wave advanced the cause of kids not needing to adhere to gender stereotypes. And while these things were not commonly accepted in mainstream cultural discourse, the kids just didn’t care.
Being accepted by mainstream culture was not a big priority for the kids of the 20th century. And why should it be? Half the problem with the gender identity push today is this need for acceptance. The idea is that the entirety of society needs to change so that you can feel okay about your haircut. The truth is, if you don’t feel okay about your haircut regardless of what literally anyone else thinks, maybe that’s not the hair cut for you.
Striving for acceptance is entirely anathema to the concept of exhibiting your true self no matter what. If you have specific haircut demands, keep looking for the right stylist or barber or friend who wants to be daring and cut your bangs for you. My friend Sarah once pierced my ear by first numbing it with a package of frozen chicken and then stabbing a safety pin through the lobe. It hurt, and it was bloody, and I was proud of that pin. I did not demand societal acceptance.
Is this person male or female? Does it matter? Do they care what you think?
When I was a teenage icecream dipper (that’s what it’s called), the gentlemen who came in often misgendered me as male. I had really short hair, I had no figure, and my attitude was entirely unfeminine. When they called me son I batted my eyelashes at them and called them daddy. My boss hated that and told me to cut it out. If only I could have told them I was non-binary.
As a new mom with a 6-month-old son who had to undergo cranial surgery, I wanted to cut off all my hair in solidarity. I wanted to look as unfeminine and uncoiffed as possible, but the hairdresser could not understand and insist on giving me a suburban mom’s haircut. I told her over and over to take it close, use the clippers, but she would not. That hair cut cost over $100, and it was infuriating. I took sheers to it myself when I got home.
Non-binary hair isn’t a thing, and it shouldn’t be. There are just haircuts, and people who cut hair, who have opinions. The reason women’s haircuts tend to cost more is because women tend to have longer hair, and it takes more effort. Having cut my son’s hair multiple times, because he hates going to the hair shop despite not being non-binary, it’s way harder when it’s longer.
The problem isn’t that more hairstylists in Scotland aren’t familiar with non-binary hair, but that people are so concerned with what others think of themselves or their hair. Crosbie notes that they sometimes answer questions in a way that they perceive will make other people more comfortable. But for the love of everything that is holy, why? Crosbie should be themselves, sit in the chair, proclaim what they want, state that since it’s a short haircut they should pay the lower price, and get on with it. The worst-case scenario is a bad haircut, and that’s not a binary-based problem. In fact, we’ve all been there.