Using XTwitter is part of your job? I don't think so CJ, your 'job' is demystify, to demolish, to deconstruct. XTwitter's job is maintain the corporate order, to monopolise the medium, to exclude, to marginalise, to demote, to isolate. To make money for that fucking freak Musk and his megalomania. The reason you use it is, in part, your …
Using XTwitter is part of your job? I don't think so CJ, your 'job' is demystify, to demolish, to deconstruct. XTwitter's job is maintain the corporate order, to monopolise the medium, to exclude, to marginalise, to demote, to isolate. To make money for that fucking freak Musk and his megalomania. The reason you use it is, in part, your ego, it's why so many use it, so you're not alone. It's effectively an addiction. The medium is addictive, it's why I write here isn't it, it's so fucking easy but the words swirl down the drain, an infinite torrent, it's the nature of the medium. Jean Baudrillard called it 'Xerox to Infinity' (well it was an earlier age).
I'm curious. How, exactly, do you imagine I would I be able to "demystify, to demolish, to deconstruct" anything it if I ran away and hid from it? I'm happy for anyone who is able to do that, as I'm sure it's a huge quality-of-life improvement, but, as I said, it's a part of my job.
Surely CJ it's implicit in your criticism? Your words, if deemed 'dangerous' will not be read, that's the poison, you're there but not there. As to how, well what does your writing do? I find it paradoxical that you defend the medium that seeks to make you invisible. So they don't have tto lock you up, there are no jackboots.
So if political satire is a person's job at all, how do you propose that a satirist publicise their material? Do you want everyone who bothers to publish anti-establishment stuff on the internet to stop, because they are being, to some degree, shadow banned? We will continue to do what we always do, and that is to try our best to stay one step ahead of the censors - or at least not too far behind. We are currently doing that with Substack and spraying out to the other social media platforms in the hope of landing on a few walls. But at this stage, Substack is the core of the operation. However, we KNOW, without a doubt, that at some stage, Substack WILL go the way of the rest of them. So what are we doing to ensure we have a future proof publishing platform where we do not lose all our readers when the requirement to censor catches up with the next "freedom loving" publishing platform?
...and you completely missed my point. We publish on Substack and we DISTRIBUTE anywhere and everywhere else we can find AS WELL AS via Substack. Even when shadow banned, the posts on FB and Twitter have some reach, although nowhere near the reach they should have. So you keep going with each and every platform to help with distribution, even those that are treating you badly.
Christine, you're still missing my point! Simply put; Boycott Twitter, Facebook et al. By using them, you're supporting their monopoly (never mind the cash they make which they use to maintain their monopoly). Break the habit! Drive readers to Substack, personal websites etc.
Good question and I'm not sure I have an answer for you. In some sense, the 'answer' lies elsewhere, 'out there' in the real world. It's about encouraging critical thinking, building collective networks, again in the real world that drives people to eg, Substack, to independent sites. The problem is complex so for example, with major search engines all owned or controlled by giant corps, search engines can no longer be relied upon to direct readers to independent sites, which is why the solution lies outside. If all our activity is online, then it's self-limiting, it becomes a closed loop, with those 'in the know' inside the loop but the outside world excluded. I know from my own websites that starting with the Ukraine war, people searching for my site, visitors sourced from search engines dropped by over 90%! From a couple of 1000 a day to a 100 or so a day. Ultimately, there's no replacement for real actions and organising in the real world. It's a kinda chicken and egg problem.
Hmmm... you think so? A Google search for 'CJ Hopkins' supplied me with 3 links, plus a sidebar to his published work, Substack was notable by its absence.
I used to edit some politically neutral articles on Wikipedia, and although there is editorial disagreement, the end product is factual. The issue arises with interpretation of facts.
Using XTwitter is part of your job? I don't think so CJ, your 'job' is demystify, to demolish, to deconstruct. XTwitter's job is maintain the corporate order, to monopolise the medium, to exclude, to marginalise, to demote, to isolate. To make money for that fucking freak Musk and his megalomania. The reason you use it is, in part, your ego, it's why so many use it, so you're not alone. It's effectively an addiction. The medium is addictive, it's why I write here isn't it, it's so fucking easy but the words swirl down the drain, an infinite torrent, it's the nature of the medium. Jean Baudrillard called it 'Xerox to Infinity' (well it was an earlier age).
I'm curious. How, exactly, do you imagine I would I be able to "demystify, to demolish, to deconstruct" anything it if I ran away and hid from it? I'm happy for anyone who is able to do that, as I'm sure it's a huge quality-of-life improvement, but, as I said, it's a part of my job.
Surely CJ it's implicit in your criticism? Your words, if deemed 'dangerous' will not be read, that's the poison, you're there but not there. As to how, well what does your writing do? I find it paradoxical that you defend the medium that seeks to make you invisible. So they don't have tto lock you up, there are no jackboots.
So if political satire is a person's job at all, how do you propose that a satirist publicise their material? Do you want everyone who bothers to publish anti-establishment stuff on the internet to stop, because they are being, to some degree, shadow banned? We will continue to do what we always do, and that is to try our best to stay one step ahead of the censors - or at least not too far behind. We are currently doing that with Substack and spraying out to the other social media platforms in the hope of landing on a few walls. But at this stage, Substack is the core of the operation. However, we KNOW, without a doubt, that at some stage, Substack WILL go the way of the rest of them. So what are we doing to ensure we have a future proof publishing platform where we do not lose all our readers when the requirement to censor catches up with the next "freedom loving" publishing platform?
I think you completely missed my point; I'm not referring to Substack but to Twitter.
...and you completely missed my point. We publish on Substack and we DISTRIBUTE anywhere and everywhere else we can find AS WELL AS via Substack. Even when shadow banned, the posts on FB and Twitter have some reach, although nowhere near the reach they should have. So you keep going with each and every platform to help with distribution, even those that are treating you badly.
Christine, you're still missing my point! Simply put; Boycott Twitter, Facebook et al. By using them, you're supporting their monopoly (never mind the cash they make which they use to maintain their monopoly). Break the habit! Drive readers to Substack, personal websites etc.
What a great idea. But please tell little old dumb dumb here, what tools do we use to drive readers to Substack?
Good question and I'm not sure I have an answer for you. In some sense, the 'answer' lies elsewhere, 'out there' in the real world. It's about encouraging critical thinking, building collective networks, again in the real world that drives people to eg, Substack, to independent sites. The problem is complex so for example, with major search engines all owned or controlled by giant corps, search engines can no longer be relied upon to direct readers to independent sites, which is why the solution lies outside. If all our activity is online, then it's self-limiting, it becomes a closed loop, with those 'in the know' inside the loop but the outside world excluded. I know from my own websites that starting with the Ukraine war, people searching for my site, visitors sourced from search engines dropped by over 90%! From a couple of 1000 a day to a 100 or so a day. Ultimately, there's no replacement for real actions and organising in the real world. It's a kinda chicken and egg problem.
Two Xs in XeroX.
Google does a better job of giving CJ more "reach" than Twitter ever did.
Hmmm... you think so? A Google search for 'CJ Hopkins' supplied me with 3 links, plus a sidebar to his published work, Substack was notable by its absence.
Does it show his 2022 book, Rise of the New Normal Reich?
His Wikipedia page doesn't read like a hit piece... although it stops at 2009.
The Consent Factory's Wikipedia Liason was banned from Wikipedia in 2019. You can read about it here if you're into that kind of thing ... https://consentfactory.org/2019/11/05/the-ministry-of-wiki-truth/
Holy shit at that wiki talk page.
I follow you on here, and I bought and read your novel.
Keep linking to the Consent Factory stuff. I don't think most people use individual websites in the Phone Age.
If someone were to update that page to include your recent work, that may ignite something.
Please feel free to have at it. It could use an update, and you would probably trigger the paranoid Wiki editors into conniption fits.
I wouldn't trust a single word of anything you read on Wikipedia, it's run by the CIA/FBI (and no doubt MI6).
Anything that has political implications is to be taken with a heavy dose of skepticism. Glenn Greenwald's Wiki entry is said to be a classic example.
I think the mutable nature of everything on the Web is surely obvious to everyone by now, 'reading between the lines' is now an archaic observation.
I used to edit some politically neutral articles on Wikipedia, and although there is editorial disagreement, the end product is factual. The issue arises with interpretation of facts.
I don't remember the titles but I think 4 or 5 of his books were shown in the sidebar
That's what I get. If you're living in Germany, maybe the 2022 book is omitted.