Chapo Trap House and the rise of the dirtbag left

fwiw the guy who shot at the congressmen doesn't seem that much different, even if his own politics seem more cogent and his violence more focused. it's not like these people see specific problems and are shooting people because they believe it'll help a specific cause, they just need a convenient target

i read Frederik's posts in the voice of Mark McKinney's Dar-RYL character from TKITH

omg lol

Also Maddow reporting on Russia is very far from conspiratorial shit posting if you see any of it

Honestly I watched it the time she got some of his tax return and it struck me as being pretty damn conspiratorial (mostly because there was a ton of conjecture involved)

I feel like Maddow's shtick was done a great disservice by having the tax return thing be INSANELY HYPED that day, leading people who had seen some clips of her show and kind of nodded along to her reasonable takes to watch that evening's show only for it to be a drawn-out monologue followed by the least amount of actual substantive information possible.

the hype didn't help but the segment was awfully insubstantive in any context

I think it's similar to the dilemma of people who have to write regular newspaper columns. She might have the material or novel take on something to come up with a superb article a handful of times, but her show airs Monday through Friday and oh god how do you fill up all that time

I'd listen to CT if they just muted Stav's mic when he wasn't actually speaking. The West Coast eps with Nick and other friends went down far better. Too many of the regular eps remind me of the one time I tried listening to Ari Shaffir's show years ago and that dude had just some straight horrible personal opinions expressed on the worst way possible.

she should quit that shit and go patreon

morbz just slayed me w/the dar-RYL reference

it's a problem CNN, MSNBC, probably Fox News have, where there is only so much news and most people don't want to watch an hour of in-depth analysis, and even if they do, they don't want it every day

news channels wanting people to keep tuned in is the stupidest shit, the best part of them is being able to turn it on, hear the general facts of what's going on in the world, and barring some huge development being confident that you're up to date. the amount of bullshit they've concocted to keep people tuned in detracts from the actual news

I'm still wincing at the day I spent in airports following the nightclub shooting in Orlando. I started in Canada, and Canadian news just listed the same facts and minor developments, then moved on. When I was stuck in an american airport for hours, CNN had hosts musing over "what could it mean" interspersed with guests, including someone called "security mom", a blogger of note (?!?)

Agreed about that tax segment, both hype and actual substance of that, though I think it was probably way too dry to be characterized as in the universe of Beck, Infowars etc. I was really grateful when she did a fairly lengthy segment on Rep. Barbara Lee's amendment last week and not solely because the story itself was one of the few positive things of late.

I felt like a less-sensationalist version of the attention-seeking Twitter creeps/weirdos like Eric Garland

i'm a reg CT listener and it can definitely be hilarious but man some of the "ironic" gay stuff is just so "layered"? (gtfo of here) that i don't even get it any more. like at some point i'm p sure you just like to call things and people "gay" & "faggy". the ironic race & jewish stuff can veer that way, too, but maybe slightly less so?

excuse me there's ironic what

forgive me for not engaging with cum town and therefore criticizing it without having any contextual basis but iirc "ironic" use of "gay" and "faggy" is also known as homophobia

I don't think anyone (beyond the most tiresome of edgelords) would blame you or anyone else for finding that beyond the pale

More coverage:

http://www.macleans.ca/society/the-rise-of-the-internets-dirtbag-left/

ha, v unsurprising byline

I'd listen to CT if they just muted Stav's mic when he wasn't actually speaking. The West Coast eps with Nick and other friends went down far better. Too many of the regular eps remind me of the one time I tried listening to Ari Shaffir's show years ago and that dude had just some straight horrible personal opinions expressed on the worst way possible.

Lol a Stav-less CT is a bold, almost challopsy take but appreciated nonetheless. imo his cackle is essential to the show, but I understand

Nobody's cackle is essential to anything that's the podcast fallacy

http://www.flickfeast.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/p01hg78p.jpg

There are honourable exceptions

ha, v unsurprising byline

I am ignorant of his other works

the podcast fallacy

addamsfamilytheme.wav

Nobody's cackle is essential to anything that's the podcast fallacy

https://s3.amazonaws.com/pq-imgs/images/quizzes/Different-Strokes.-4714.jpg

Don't really know what point Frederick is trying to make itt but fwiw I also disagree that if someone *were* to shoot Chait and say "Chapo made me do it" that this would change anything about the situation, people do this kinda shit and claim all sorts of motivations. Gun accessibility + poor mental health system, as mentioned upthread, is p much all there is to it.

I'd apply that reasoning to most right wing shock jocks as well, except when we get into the territory of someone like Alex Jones, whose entire shtick is feeding paranoia, warning of a coming conflict and never breaks kayfabe (unless he's in court)...that's a bit murkier. But I don't think either Russia conspiracy shit or Chapo flippancy is really comparable to that.

CTH/dirtbags mentioned in this rather flimsy MYT Mag piece as well

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/magazine/hated-by-the-right-mocked-by-the-left-who-wants-to-be-liberal-anymore.html?partner=socialflow&smid=tw-nytmag&smtyp=cur

Here is an ideology that has many accused sympathizers, but no champions, no defenders.

gee I wonder why that is

maybe they should read the "hipster as pejorative" thread

Amber's my favorite Chapo so the latest episode is a nice change of pace but once again why do they bother even bringing a guest on?

I assume the guests don't mind and were mostly going to hang with them anyway but it's weird to have someone interject every ten minutes on a podcast where they're the featured guest.

It's a weird dynamic, obviously I think the guests are thrilled bc it's great exposure, but the talking over guests thing is a huge blind spot probably caused by their inexperience in broadcasting before CTH. Then again, they've been doing it for almost a year and a half now - they need to figure that out.

do they pay guests?

I doubt it seriously. Podcasts as an industry do not pay guests yet, do they

they make so much money though

i suppose like most radio shows don't, although this is a fairly fledgling medium

I liked the guest because I thought she worked well in the first half. Yet, she didn't get a chance to contribute much in the second half, sorta what happened when her brother Leyawn was on

well the episode was clearly demarcated into two halves. they even asked her if she wanted to stick around for the ask Amber portion iirc.
that said, there have been eps where the guest gets rolled over by the rapid fire snarking.

What talk shows pay guests? Most of their guests are either freelance columnists or people promoting their books - a Chapo appearance by someone writing for the Baffler or the Outline or wherever is huge. I know I've bought lots of books by people they've had on.

Late night tv chat paid appearance fees to guests

will does the right thing and prompts their guest specifically a few times. not much else you can do imho

Don't really know what point Frederick is trying to make itt but fwiw I also disagree that if someone *were* to shoot Chait and say "Chapo made me do it" that this would change anything about the situation, people do this kinda shit and claim all sorts of motivations. Gun accessibility + poor mental health system, as mentioned upthread, is p much all there is to it.

I'd apply that reasoning to most right wing shock jocks as well, except when we get into the territory of someone like Alex Jones, whose entire shtick is feeding paranoia, warning of a coming conflict and never breaks kayfabe (unless he's in court)...that's a bit murkier. But I don't think either Russia conspiracy shit or Chapo flippancy is really comparable to that.

― Daniel_Rf, Wednesday, July 5, 2017 4:36 PM (six days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

a lot of ppl were saying this back when ppl shot those congressmen & it struck me as a very partisan argument. either these ideas deserve some credit for the actions of their followers or they dont, but liberals being inconsistent on this is lazy

deej, I understand that it seems convenient to have my side be blameless and the other side to blame but I do think you need to have some nuance: people whose public persona is obviously kidding and people whose public persona is dead serious cannot be put on the same level.

fwiw I think there are plenty of conservative pundits whose shtick is snarky hyperbole directed at the left too, and they shouldn't be blamed for their followers either.

but Alex Jones strikes me as different because, even though he may claim it's performance art and plenty of ppl obviously tune in for the lolz, within the world the show establishes there is no ambiguity whatsoever that his followers are under attack from very sinister forces and that violent, armed resistance is a legitimate way to fight that. That provides a stronger moral responsibility than if it was just zings, and if we had a high profile leftist radio DJ stridently calling for armed insurrection against the US govt (and yes I know these ppl exist but not w/ Jones' standing), I'd say the same for them.

obviously as a leftist I'm more likely to take right-wing snark seriously than left wing snark, being the target of it and all, but I don't think there's much room for interpretation with someone like Alex Jones

iow: the ideas totally deserve credit for the actions of their followers but you can't divorce that from tone and context

Women /minorities: "LOL cool story. You will bow down to our proclivities, or your lily white cult can gtfo of our party. Have a good day!" pic.twitter.com/jWQatShCU8

— Dude Kembro 🌈 (@HillaryWasRight) July 13, 2017

do we really need to pile on some random guy

they're all at it

Imagine being a wealthy white guy and telling this to poor minorities who vote for Democrats pic.twitter.com/QFy141R94p

— Marcus H. Johnson (@marcushjohnson) July 13, 2017

Eh, clean shot. The "persecution" cries over this very much amount to "we want to have it both ways".

"all"

are chapo people crying 'persecuction'?? not sure i follow