10 ms·

When will these companies learn that shriekers on twitter don't represent the preferences of their actual customer base? Or maybe it won't matter, because sinc

When will these companies learn that shriekers on twitter don't represent the preferences of their actual customer base? Or maybe it won't matter, because since normal people have other things to worry about it always pays to give in to the loudest, most obnoxious people. In which case, i guess we can look forward to a future where everything is influenced by the most unhinged. "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity."

erulabs 4y ago
Nietzsche called it “the tyrannomania of impotence”. I can’t just imagine being so passionate about — ads?
- SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
  Well, I mean, the passion doesn't come from a vacuum here. The controversy here was started by a group of campaign directors. You can be and I am concerned about the media dynamics here, but it's not a big mystery why campaign committees would care deeply about buying a lot of ads or why Disney might decide it's a good business move to let them.
  - erulabs 4y ago
    Oh absolutely - totally agreed about folks who’s jobs this is or who’s revenue it represents. I am more flabbergasted by the “boycott” from normal customers who are apparently outraged they won’t be seeing ads they already agree with.
    - SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
      As far as I've seen reported, there was no boycott or grassroots outrage here. I think this is just a story of Disney accepting demands from a somewhat controversial industry with strong government connections that they must be allowed to advertise on Hulu.
      - erulabs 4y ago
        Hrm, it's possible it's exaggerated, but that's all I've seen reported. https://www.avclub.com/hulu-boycott-abortion-gun-control-ads-1849335816 https://www.avclub.com/hulu-boycott-abortion-gun-control-ads... https://www.newsweek.com/cancel-hulu-calls-grow-after-disney-stops-democrats-running-political-ads-1727907 https://www.newsweek.com/cancel-hulu-calls-grow-after-disney... https://www.adweek.com/lostremote/boycott-hulu-streamer-rejected-democrat-back-ads-abortion-gun-control/64237 https://www.adweek.com/lostremote/boycott-hulu-streamer-reje...
        SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
        While these articles are certainly framed and headlined to make people think there's a boycott movement, neither the first nor third article actually report on anyone in particular who's called for a boycott. The Newsweek article suggests why, with its most prominent sources for a boycott including some random indie musician and "user smilingoutloud2". I should have caveated that there's always noise on Twitter calling for silly things, but I don't see much reason to believe that there was ever a real boycott movement or that Disney was motivated by fear there could be.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > ...or why Disney might decide it's a good business move to let them. There's also the angle where Disney's decision-makers might be sympathetic to the people in the campaign committees for personal, non-business reasons.
malermeister 4y ago
Who says your quote on the bottom doesn't describe you on the side you didn't intend to be on? Every time there's any political news, all I can see is people complaining about "shriekers". Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?
- dabbledash 4y ago
  I guess it's possible i've been sending outraged missives to Hulu in my sleep, but I don't think so.
  - malermeister 4y ago
    Seems to me you left one right here though. You might not consider it as such, but I'm sure neither did the people you complained about.
    - registeredcorn 4y ago
      So essentially, the problem you're addressing is not whether either side is "shrieking" but rather the inadequacy of conveying tone through text. WE CAN A LITTLE BIT I GUESS!?!!!?!?!! But not by much. Never been a fan of English because of the lack of overt tonal expression; with gusto.
- _ea1k 4y ago
  Its funny that you say that. I initially read his comment as being in favor of the move, despite the "shriekers" on twitter who he perceives to care too much about fairly mundane details of Disney's revenue model. Now I realize that its also possible that the "shriekers" were in favor of political ads and he's against them. Yeah, both sides look shriek-tastic to me.
- BitwiseFool 4y ago
  >"Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?" No. In fact I see this as a very underhanded rhetorical cheap trick - essentially a catch-22. Only on the most basic level is criticism of critical people some kind of hypocritical indictment. 'You say you don't like people taking things too seriously, yet it sounds like YOU are the one taking things too seriously. Curious'.
zmgsabst 4y ago
I think that only works in the short term. When your catering to that fringe becomes a problem or uncomfortable, people will drop you en masse — precisely because they’re too busy to care. Hollywood’s stocks aren’t doing well enough to say their strategy of catering to the fringe is working: they’ve all suffered massive losses as people tune out. But it’s not because people are fundamentally uninterested: Rippaverse raised over $3M, anime and manga are setting records, etc.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > When your catering to that fringe becomes a problem or uncomfortable, people will drop you en masse — precisely because they’re too busy to care. The problem is that people can become inured to it, especially if there aren't better options. That state can exist for a long, long time. Edit: > But it’s not because people are fundamentally uninterested: Rippaverse raised over $3M, anime and manga are setting records, etc. After Googling a bit, that Rippaverse thing seems like it's an opposite-polarity reaction, so it's still part of the problem.
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    Sure — that’s why we’ve spent five years with terrible Star Wars and Marvel movies pandering to a niche audience. But eventually the music stops and everyone leaves… which is what we’re seeing now: Those companies haven’t produced quality within easy memory (5 years) and so people are overcoming their decades of inertia to find new properties. You can look at the different receptions of Reacher and Terminal List versus Wheel of Time and Rings of Power, though, to see that putting The Message over quality doesn’t work. > After Googling a bit, that Rippaverse thing seems like it's an opposite-polarity reaction, so it's still part of the problem. You should listen to Rippa’s own description rather than the press around it: He’s just trying to make a quality comic book, no explicit message. That’s portrayed as “anti-woke” because not putting The Message front and center is a revolutionary act, these days.
    - NoraCodes 4y ago
      > He’s just trying to make a quality comic book, no explicit message. That’s portrayed as “anti-woke” because not putting The Message front and center is a revolutionary act, these days. This is extremely interesting to me for a couple of reasons. The use of "these days" here makes me think that you consider comic books with a political message (or Message, as you spell it) are a new phenomenon. That's deeply ahistorical; the first superheroes - among them Superman, Wonder Woman, and Captain America - were created in the 1930s with pretty clear political agendas. Captain America's would, I hope, be obvious; he was created by American Jews who wanted to portray the fight against fascism, and specifically Nazism, as patriotic and righteous. Superman, too, was created by American Jews, and has periodically been portrayed as anti-Communist and generally anti-authoritarian throughout his entire existence as a character. Wonder Woman was created in the 1940s by a polyamorous triad of outspoken feminists, and her creators explicitly stated at the time: > Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don't want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are. Women's strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman. Superhero comics without significant, explicit political messaging are rare in the history of the medium. Popular ones are even moreso.
beej71 4y ago
Disney is a very successful and long-lived company. If I had to bet money, I'd bet they know their customer base very well and are correctly positioning themselves for maximum profit.
meragrin_ 4y ago
> When will these companies learn that shriekers on twitter don't represent the preferences of their actual customer base? It is all about the money. Hulu's ad revenue was most likely found to be underperforming the rest of Disney and political issue ads is at least one of the differences. They are just using this as a cover.

erulabs 4y ago

Nietzsche called it “the tyrannomania of impotence”. I can’t just imagine being so passionate about — ads?

SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
Well, I mean, the passion doesn't come from a vacuum here. The controversy here was started by a group of campaign directors. You can be and I am concerned about the media dynamics here, but it's not a big mystery why campaign committees would care deeply about buying a lot of ads or why Disney might decide it's a good business move to let them.
- erulabs 4y ago
  Oh absolutely - totally agreed about folks who’s jobs this is or who’s revenue it represents. I am more flabbergasted by the “boycott” from normal customers who are apparently outraged they won’t be seeing ads they already agree with.
  - SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
    As far as I've seen reported, there was no boycott or grassroots outrage here. I think this is just a story of Disney accepting demands from a somewhat controversial industry with strong government connections that they must be allowed to advertise on Hulu.
    - erulabs 4y ago
      Hrm, it's possible it's exaggerated, but that's all I've seen reported. https://www.avclub.com/hulu-boycott-abortion-gun-control-ads-1849335816 https://www.avclub.com/hulu-boycott-abortion-gun-control-ads... https://www.newsweek.com/cancel-hulu-calls-grow-after-disney-stops-democrats-running-political-ads-1727907 https://www.newsweek.com/cancel-hulu-calls-grow-after-disney... https://www.adweek.com/lostremote/boycott-hulu-streamer-rejected-democrat-back-ads-abortion-gun-control/64237 https://www.adweek.com/lostremote/boycott-hulu-streamer-reje...
      - SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
        While these articles are certainly framed and headlined to make people think there's a boycott movement, neither the first nor third article actually report on anyone in particular who's called for a boycott. The Newsweek article suggests why, with its most prominent sources for a boycott including some random indie musician and "user smilingoutloud2". I should have caveated that there's always noise on Twitter calling for silly things, but I don't see much reason to believe that there was ever a real boycott movement or that Disney was motivated by fear there could be.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > ...or why Disney might decide it's a good business move to let them. There's also the angle where Disney's decision-makers might be sympathetic to the people in the campaign committees for personal, non-business reasons.

malermeister 4y ago

Who says your quote on the bottom doesn't describe you on the side you didn't intend to be on? Every time there's any political news, all I can see is people complaining about "shriekers". Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?

dabbledash 4y ago
I guess it's possible i've been sending outraged missives to Hulu in my sleep, but I don't think so.
- malermeister 4y ago
  Seems to me you left one right here though. You might not consider it as such, but I'm sure neither did the people you complained about.
  - registeredcorn 4y ago
    So essentially, the problem you're addressing is not whether either side is "shrieking" but rather the inadequacy of conveying tone through text. WE CAN A LITTLE BIT I GUESS!?!!!?!?!! But not by much. Never been a fan of English because of the lack of overt tonal expression; with gusto.
_ea1k 4y ago
Its funny that you say that. I initially read his comment as being in favor of the move, despite the "shriekers" on twitter who he perceives to care too much about fairly mundane details of Disney's revenue model. Now I realize that its also possible that the "shriekers" were in favor of political ads and he's against them. Yeah, both sides look shriek-tastic to me.
BitwiseFool 4y ago
>"Have you considered that complaint in itself might be considered the "shrieking" you so despise?" No. In fact I see this as a very underhanded rhetorical cheap trick - essentially a catch-22. Only on the most basic level is criticism of critical people some kind of hypocritical indictment. 'You say you don't like people taking things too seriously, yet it sounds like YOU are the one taking things too seriously. Curious'.

zmgsabst 4y ago

I think that only works in the short term. When your catering to that fringe becomes a problem or uncomfortable, people will drop you en masse — precisely because they’re too busy to care. Hollywood’s stocks aren’t doing well enough to say their strategy of catering to the fringe is working: they’ve all suffered massive losses as people tune out. But it’s not because people are fundamentally uninterested: Rippaverse raised over $3M, anime and manga are setting records, etc.

tablespoon 4y ago
> When your catering to that fringe becomes a problem or uncomfortable, people will drop you en masse — precisely because they’re too busy to care. The problem is that people can become inured to it, especially if there aren't better options. That state can exist for a long, long time. Edit: > But it’s not because people are fundamentally uninterested: Rippaverse raised over $3M, anime and manga are setting records, etc. After Googling a bit, that Rippaverse thing seems like it's an opposite-polarity reaction, so it's still part of the problem.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  Sure — that’s why we’ve spent five years with terrible Star Wars and Marvel movies pandering to a niche audience. But eventually the music stops and everyone leaves… which is what we’re seeing now: Those companies haven’t produced quality within easy memory (5 years) and so people are overcoming their decades of inertia to find new properties. You can look at the different receptions of Reacher and Terminal List versus Wheel of Time and Rings of Power, though, to see that putting The Message over quality doesn’t work. > After Googling a bit, that Rippaverse thing seems like it's an opposite-polarity reaction, so it's still part of the problem. You should listen to Rippa’s own description rather than the press around it: He’s just trying to make a quality comic book, no explicit message. That’s portrayed as “anti-woke” because not putting The Message front and center is a revolutionary act, these days.
  - NoraCodes 4y ago
    > He’s just trying to make a quality comic book, no explicit message. That’s portrayed as “anti-woke” because not putting The Message front and center is a revolutionary act, these days. This is extremely interesting to me for a couple of reasons. The use of "these days" here makes me think that you consider comic books with a political message (or Message, as you spell it) are a new phenomenon. That's deeply ahistorical; the first superheroes - among them Superman, Wonder Woman, and Captain America - were created in the 1930s with pretty clear political agendas. Captain America's would, I hope, be obvious; he was created by American Jews who wanted to portray the fight against fascism, and specifically Nazism, as patriotic and righteous. Superman, too, was created by American Jews, and has periodically been portrayed as anti-Communist and generally anti-authoritarian throughout his entire existence as a character. Wonder Woman was created in the 1940s by a polyamorous triad of outspoken feminists, and her creators explicitly stated at the time: > Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don't want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are. Women's strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman. Superhero comics without significant, explicit political messaging are rare in the history of the medium. Popular ones are even moreso.

beej71 4y ago

Disney is a very successful and long-lived company. If I had to bet money, I'd bet they know their customer base very well and are correctly positioning themselves for maximum profit.

meragrin_ 4y ago

> When will these companies learn that shriekers on twitter don't represent the preferences of their actual customer base? It is all about the money. Hulu's ad revenue was most likely found to be underperforming the rest of Disney and political issue ads is at least one of the differences. They are just using this as a cover.