11 ms·
For those who think this isn’t political, check out what they posted on the POTUS Twitter the day before https://twitter.com/potus/status/1451544259992203266 h
by lettergram 5y ago
For those who think this isn’t political, check out what they posted on the POTUS Twitter the day before
https://twitter.com/potus/status/1451544259992203266 https://twitter.com/potus/status/1451544259992203266
The goal of this is to reclaim “let’s go Brandon” and it’s obvious.
EDIT: for those who don’t know what “Let’s go Brandon” means, a child comment linked to a 40 second video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ8asiDn2_A&feature=youtu.be https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ8asiDn2_A&feature=youtu.be
For those who don’t watch or attend sport events — this happens at many of the events lately.
- tragictrash 5y agoThe video has the lines "pandemic ain't real, they planned it". That's called disinformation, and it was removed as such.
- retrac 5y agoI am reminded of a quote I just ran into from the Canadian Supreme Court on free speech in R v. Zundel. Setting aside any legal questions, I found it interesting for its emphasis on the potential expressive value to disinformation. > The first difficulty results from the premise that deliberate lies can never have value. Exaggeration -- even clear falsification -- may arguably serve useful social purposes linked to the values underlying freedom of expression. A person fighting cruelty against animals may knowingly cite false statistics in pursuit of his or her beliefs and with the purpose of communicating a more fundamental message, e.g., `cruelty to animals is increasing and must be stopped'. A doctor, in order to persuade people to be inoculated against a burgeoning epidemic, may exaggerate the number or geographical location of persons potentially infected with the virus. An artist, for artistic purposes, may make a statement that a particular society considers both an assertion of fact and a manifestly deliberate lie; consider the case of Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, viewed by many Muslim societies as perpetrating deliberate lies against the Prophet.
- tragictrash 5y agoAnd I'd like to point out that a majority of comments to this post are about how 'they' are censoring 'us'. It is censorship but not for the reasons most commenters want. Its medical disinfo about covid being removed. They are not being opressed, as much as the commenters want it to be that. You want exaggerated expression? I got one for you: Freedumb.
- jeegsy 5y agoThe speed at which we have embraced censorship with the attendant rationalizations has been amazing.
- tragictrash 5y agoWho is doing the censoring here? It's YouTube. They have a right to remove content from their platform as they see fit, in accordance with their TOS. There is no right to post YouTube videos in the constitution. Your not being oppressed. Get over it.
- retrac 5y agoI refer you back to my original comment. I quoted the Canadian Supreme Court in part to separate the legal question from the deeper one. As a non-American, the legal question is honestly pretty boring. The deeper issue of what constitutes a healthy society with free debate and expression, however, is interesting to me. Because free speech is a societal and cultural value, as much as a legal one. A commune of religious weirdos with no laws at all could be highly tolerant or intolerant of dissent. It could embrace or reject free speech, just socially based on whether they ostracize the dissenters. Similarly, a nation of publishers where every publisher refuses to publish anything controversial, dissident or offensive may have no First Amendment issues, but it's not one that takes the principles and values of free speech very seriously.
- tragictrash 5y ago
- newbie2020 5y agoHalf the songs out there contain disinformation. Is YouTube going to get rid of them all?
- sellyme 5y agoMedical disinformation? Because the typical music industry schtick of lying about how much money you have or how often you get laid probably isn't quite as bad as that one.
- tragictrash 5y agoYeah not even close. This has real repercussions, especially to the people that need herd immunity to reenter society, like the immune comprised.
- tekknik 5y agoSo now everybody has to change speech for a very very small minority?
- Phileosopher 5y agoYes, if you lean politically hard left in the USA. This has already become a political talking point for transgender people, and all censorship is good censorship under those claims. No, if you're simply liberal or conservative in the USA. They generally think that speech should be uncensored until it's directly causing legitimate violence (e.g., yelling "fire" in a crowded theater or threatening death).
- tragictrash 5y agoSpeech? No, that's free. We're talking about hurting people by not getting vaccinated. YouTube is a private company. Them censoring someone is not an infringement on free speech.
- tekknik 5y ago
- jquery 5y agoReclaim “let’s go Brandon” from what, exactly? Never heard the phrase until now. I googled it and all I got was a shoddily written Fox News article that didn’t link to the alleged source interview, claiming it was a huge internet meme now.
- lovich 5y agoIts a conservative meme stemming from a nascar race where the crowd was chanting "Fuck Joe Biden" and a reporter stated the crowd was chanting "Let's go Brandon". It's now conservative slang for "Fuck Joe Biden"
- sillysaurusx 5y agoThank you for the straightforward explanation.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- flutas 5y agoI hadn't actually heard of it either, from one of the first results: > This whole thing got started earlier this month, at the Talladega Superspeedway. Brandon Brown had just won a NASCAR race. And sportscaster Kelli Stavast at one point commented during an interview with Brown afterward how the crowd seemed to be chanting in his honor: ‘Let’s go, Brandon!” >Unfortunately, that’s not actually what they were chanting. Not even close. The crowd was very clearly addressing President Biden, not Brandon. Only, with an f-bomb in front of his name instead of “Let’s go!” Video: https://youtu.be/kQ8asiDn2_A https://youtu.be/kQ8asiDn2_A Source: https://bgr.com/politics/lets-go-brandon-the-backstory-of-this-joe-biden-meme-thats-all-over-the-internet/ https://bgr.com/politics/lets-go-brandon-the-backstory-of-th...
- Commodore63 5y agoAt 0:13 on your video, the crowd is clearly saying "fuck Joe Biden". So this video is explicitly political, given that its name is a dogwhistle for "fuck Joe Biden".
- elicash 5y agoHis name was actually Brandon. That's not the WH reclaiming anything, that's just his name. (And yes, I'm aware of the Brandon meme.)
- downandout 5y agoIt's pretty obvious that they went out and found someone named Brandon to have a photo op with. This was an SEO play.
- iab 5y agoWhat are the chances of finding someone with the name Brandon though??
- downandout 5y agoIf you're looking for one? 100%.
- iab 5y agoJust such a unique, rare name though.
- sethammons 5y agoDepending on your definition of unique. Roughly one out of 700 people are named Brandon according to wolfram alpha
- therealdrag0 5y agoAre you joking?
- elicash 5y agoYou're stating you think it's obvious. But I would argue it's highly unlikely, and frankly a bit silly.
- 5y ago
- downandout 5y agoThis is a fascinating tweet on many levels. 1) I think it's safe to assume that Joe Biden has no SEO expertise, which means that someone with the power to send the President of the United States out for a photo op does. They went out and found someone named Brandon for Biden to pose for a photo op with. 2) To me it's terrifying that Presidential actions are now being dictated by SEO concerns, but it is interesting. 3) I would have expected this kind of thing from Trump, since he was obsessed with his public image. But apparently Biden, or at least someone close to him, is similarly obsessed. 4) Reading between the lines, the fact they responded in this way makes it appear that the administration is becoming concerned with the the growing anti-Biden sentiment that has arisen in the wake of the Afghanistan debacle and issues with cognitive decline that are becoming increasingly harder to hide. That town hall was a disaster [1]. [1] https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-town-hall-strange-moments-cnn-anderson-cooper-1641533 https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-town-hall-strange-moments...
- nomilk 5y agoThe 'reclaim' phenomenon is fascinating. I presume all politicians do this, well, all who have staff sophisticated enough to grok SEO and respond within a few days to unfavourable trending topics. Would be interested to know other examples of prominent politicians doing this. I'm pretty sure I recall a British politician doing this a year or two ago. I can't remember exactly who it was or what it was about, but I recall it seemed very obvious what was going on - moreso than this Biden/Brandon instance.
- the_jeremy 5y agoBoris Johnson: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-model-google-news https://www.wired.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-model-google-n...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Zuider 5y agoThe 'reclaim' phenomenon is quite old, and it has happened quite often in politics that a party or politician has defused a pejorative or satirical label by embracing it. The elephant and donkey mascots of the two main parties in the USA were originally used to lampoon them.
- hogFeast 5y agoBoris Johnson actually did something similar. Iirc, he gave an interview where he bizarrely and repeatedly mentioned the fact that he likes to paint wine boxes like buses...over and over. And it was thought (and, most likely, leaked) that he was doing this so that when people Googled "Boris bus" it would come up with this story, and not the story about the infamous "Brexit bus" (it also leaked that it was Lynton Crosby, a well-known political campaign manager, that suggested this...which does support the claim that it isn't total bs).
- quakeguy 5y agoOr Rees-Mogg „lying“ in parliament.
- mistermann 5y agoWhat's this refer to?
- throwawaysea 5y agoWhen Google/YouTube/Twitter/Reddit and the rest undertake censorship that is clearly political, it should be treated as an in-kind political contribution. I don’t see why these actions are exempt from laws around campaign financing and election controls. Leaving that aside this is yet another clear example of the power big tech wields over society and how they will abuse it due to their internal biases. We need renewed antitrust legislation (+ enforcement) to break up these companies, regulation to treat social media/Internet infrastructure as common carriers/public utilities, and the inclusion of political identity as a protected class under anti-discrimination laws. We also shouldn’t exempt private organizations from upholding core American values like free speech. The largest platforms are as powerful as the government, and given they are under threat of legislative action on various issues and the current administration admitted to being in contact with tech companies regarding “problematic” content, it is also clear that an abusive party or administration can essentially outsource government-driven censorship to overly powerful private entities.
- formerly_proven 5y ago> This video contains content from NASCAR Media Group, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
- ecocentrik 5y agoWhat does the president speaking to a boy named Brandon have to do with some lowbrow political chant? You're claiming all boys named Brandon are off limits now? I'm very aware this was the same argument used to normalize white supremacist hand signals.