Try the custom AI to help you find products that Reddit loves.
If you verbatim read what he wrote, you plagiarized.
This could ruin your Youtube career, and deservedly so. Plagiarism isn't something to be joked about. Best course of action: acknowledge what you've done, write an explanation which demonstrates that you know why what you did was wrong, and apologize. I also advise that no matter how much you try to justify this to yourself, you make no excuses whatsoever for what you did. Doing so will only make this incident worse.
And make a genuine attempt at publicly answering this question: why the hell did you feel the need to plagiarize at all?
FYI, here's a good book for you right now.
Edit: For some reason I wrote "what we wrote" instead of "what he wrote". Fixed.
While I think some things, like racism, should be called out, I also think that we are (myself included) very quick to judge and throw stones.
This topic reminded me of a book I’ve been meaning to check out — So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed . I think if you enjoyed the podcast, you might like the book as well.
It's not exactly the same thing, but I feel like this phenomenon is related to the one discussed in Jon Ronson's book <em>So You've Been Publicly Shamed</em>. I think it's a real problem of our age, and it seems like the amount of damage it is causing -- not just on the personal level for those people who've had the internet hate machine pointed at them, but for its chilling effect on discourse in general -- is underappreciated, or at least under-discussed.
I don't think most people would have chosen to live in a world where a single mistaken comment online or the expression of a "bad" opinion can lead to loss of employment, social ostracism, and death threats. Yet here we are. It feels somewhat like a Malthusian trap of the comments section.
Edit: Disclaimer, that book is a pretty stressful read. At least, it was for me. Don't get me wrong, I think it's important and well executed, but the subject matter is stressful.
Matt doesn't need to read every single comment everywhere for this to be an issue. Say when there's a podcast, there's 100 comments. Matt could only read 20 and still see some about him not being there.
And those comments can range from soft and constructive to somewhat shitty and outright asshole.
And yeah he could have give normal responses. A lot of the time, he has given them. 'I'm at this con.' 'I'm dealing with a business emergency.' 'I'm on a family vaction.' But sometimes people don't see those normal responses or don't care and still throw things his way.
So again. We don't see what Matt's seeing. We may look in a Reddit thread and see A shitty comment and ignore it. But Matt, who has to pay attention to all forms of feedback as part of his job. He'll see that one shitty comment and it's proably the 12th he's seen and say 'there's not that much today.'
EDIT: If you are still not sure what my point is, read this. It's about when people are mad at you on social media. Not a perfect comparison as the examples are extreame, but gives some insight.
On a related not. If this fake story gets a rise out of you; positive, negative, funny, sad. Read this Book, So You've been Publicly Shamed, by Jon Ronson.
It pretty much goes through the mechanisms and aftermath of the whole, 'Tweet that will ruin his life' part. It's not pretty for anyone involved. Also the other Ronson books are real good.
It's on audible, so yous your podcast promo codes and save some trees.
True—for such a soft-spoken First Lady, Melania’s fashion choices speak volumes... from her pussy-bow blouse (worn just days after her husband’s “grab em” comments) to her continued support of problematic designers like Dolce & Gabbana. Like it or not, fashion is political: Madeleine Albright and her pins, Balenciaga and its Bernie-inspired collection, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her gold hoops, the list goes on. For a woman whose closet consists of luxury labels like Chanel and Gucci, wearing a $39 “I really don’t care” Zara jacket is a deliberate choice that sends a very clear message.
Re performative outrage: Jon Ronson wrote a fascinating book called So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed, which explores the online phenomenon of public shaming and evaluates the culture of outrage that society has cultivated. It’s interesting and sad how performative outrage can so easily ruin an individual’s career and social standing but have no lasting impact on a company or brand.
>It's hard to dig up information on people like her (again, because she's a nobody) but from what I could find her career is doing the same as it was before the hate mob.
She was covered and interviewed in Jon Ronson's book on public shaming. At least as of that time, years later, her life definitely had not returned to its previous state or quality.
Yup. I have deleted posts made in public where I was 100% correct/truthful/moral because the pitchforks were coming out and the effects threatened to become overwhelming. Even if 80% of the people agree with you, once a social media mob starts to form if even 0.001% of the remaining 20% decide to try to ruin your life via bedbugging or harassment or whatever, that's enough to have a real potential impact. If you have a family, a career, a life to protect, you will often prioritize being spared the effects of the mob over proclaiming your veracity/correctness/innocence. In my case, I deleted some tweets, turtled my social and took a contentious political argument with @Popehat to a private channel, even though there was no doubt my position was both correct and well-defended. I just couldn't endure the onslaught of idiot strangers coming out of the woodwork.
Deleting and turtling and being more private is evidence of nothing more than good sense and yields no clue as to who might be correct, incorrect, guilty, or innocent. It's just evidence that we live in a troubling and sometimes terrifying era of a kind of mass social censorship where no matter what you say, if the wrong people find it and decide to attack you, virtually everyone is vulnerable to mass public shaming on a previously unimaginable scale.
Everyone in social conflicts that happen in full public view should probably keep this dynamic in mind.
Nothing to do with PJ, but if you are interested in the topic there's a great book called So You've Been Publicly Shamed by Jon Ronson, another podcaster and This American Life alum.
I think if you're looking into shame you'll get a heck of a lot out out of reading this brilliant book. If you don't know Jon Ronson he's an investigative journalist, author and film maker and he has a fabulous writing style as well as a way of getting people to really open up.
Whilst I agree with what your saying, I think it’s been amplified up to a very noticeable degree. People now a days will doxx and try to ruin a persons life. Look no further than the pr girl that made the hiv joke right before she got on a flight. By the time she landed, she was fired and basically had her life ruined by Twitter.
Jon Robson wrote an interesting book about the phenomenon.
Some numerous viewers blasted "Majority Rule" as an alleged "ripoff" of the Black Mirror episode "Nosedive"; but IIRC (in a tweet that has since been deleted) MacFarlane averred that he'd written "Majority Rule" "a year and a half" before it aired (thus he wrote it before "Nosedive" aired). He noted that he had taken inspiration from a book). — The social-rating aspects of these episodes have also been compared to a 2014 episode of Community titled "App Development and Condiments"; but I'm not going to sympathize with accusers who fall back on that after being wrong about the alleged Nosedive "ripoff".
So I'm going to leave this thread because although discussion with you have been great, others have not been so civil and I don't enjoy being called a dickhead all day.
I see your point, however, and I agree that many celebrities who have been attacked still kept their jobs. I will say, however, that you should take the majority's view seriously, even if you think it's not based on evidence. Because a society where normal people are afraid to voice their beliefs is a society where extremists dominate, who will browbeat the moderates into silence.
Another good book you might want to read is So You've Been Publicly Shamed. These people never recovered from the online mobs that descended on them. And many more live in fear that the same will happen to them.
And that's ultimately what I'm worried about - the slow but increasing destruction of a culture that is open to differing beliefs. Once that's gone, it's very hard to get it back again.
So you've been pubicly shamed is relevant here. Haven't been to other tennis forums, but judging from other comments in this thread, I ain't planning to in the near future.
ETA: Off to buy this book.
Stopscopiesme > TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK.
/r/BlackPeopleTwitter debates wheth... - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
when she landed - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
"So You've Been Publicly Shamed" - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
Sam Biddle who got "cancelled" hims... - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
IAC welcomed her back - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
vid and timestamp - 4:46 - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
BPT talks about brigading and non-v... - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
Should we excuse people making raci... - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
Match.com is also racist - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
Africa needs a Mugabe/ Idi Amin. Hi... - archive.org, <u>archive.today*</u>
I am just a simple bot, **not* a moderator of this subreddit* | [bot subreddit](/r/SnapshillBot) | [contact the maintainers](/message/compose?to=\/r\/SnapshillBot)
She’s a big part of his book too. So You've Been Publicly Shamed https://www.amazon.com/dp/1594634017/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_XZwpFbJ7H45R5
read this book
In the days after "Majority Rule" aired, some people tweeted accusations of a "ripoff" from Black Mirror's "Nosedive" episode — but MacFarlane had noted that he'd written it (with inspiration from a book) "a year and a half" before it aired. That's several months before Nosedive aired.
[re: "Meow Meow Beans"] — Majority Rule and Nosedive have been compared to a 2014 Community episode, "App Development and Condiments". (Wikipedia mentions both Majority Rule and Nosedive in the "See also" section of its article about that Community episode.)
From The Orville Fandom Wiki:
> ... [Seth wrote the script] in mid-2016 ... [after reading a book titled] <em>So You've Been Publicly Shamed</em>, by author Jon Ronson....
> Specifically, MacFarlane has cited the case of Justine Sacco in reference to writing the episode, a South African woman whose tweets intending to parody a racist American were taken as serious by Gawker and other media sources. A public online shaming campaign ignored her explanation and resulted in enormous worldwide backlash, and she lost her job. A Gawker blogger later apologized, admitting he stoked public ire to generate ad revenue.
> At the 2018 San Diego Comic-Con, MacFarlane reflected:
>> "We wrote that episode the summer of – I don't know, was it two years ago? – and we thought we were all innovative, and five months later the Black Mirror episode ['Nosedive'] comes out, and we're like, 'Shit, everyone's going to think we're–'" [laughter]. "But it's clearly a common concern given the fact that two shows touched on this independently.
>> "Look, it's incredibly creepy. I think there are good things about social media and Twitter. We've seen a speediness of acceptance for certain marginalized groups that I think without the unification of social media would have taken a lot longer. That's the positive side of social media. The downside is that it can become a mob very quickly.
>> "I think it's very creepy. We're not evolved enough as a species not to succumb to the rush of joining a group that is ganging up on another group or individual. There's a weird rush that gives a lot of people when they become part of a mob. It's too soon to independently govern ourselves in the way that social media attempts to do so."
I can't make you read it but this book covers the current mob mentality of cancel culture https://www.amazon.com/So-Youve-Been-Publicly-Shamed/dp/1594634017
In the days after "Majority Rule" aired, some people tweeted accusations of a "ripoff" from Black Mirror's "Nosedive" episode — but, on Majority Rule's airdate, MacFarlane had noted that he'd written it (with inspiration from a book) "a year and a half" before it aired. That's several months before Nosedive aired.
Majority Rule and Nosedive have indeed been compared to a 2014 Community episode, "App Development and Condiments". (Wikipedia mentions both Majority Rule and Nosedive in the "See also" section of its article about that Community episode.)
After Majority Rule aired, numerous tweeters called it a "ripoff" of Black Mirror's "Nosedive". However, on Majority Rule's airdate, MacFarlane had tweeted that he wrote the script "a year and half" before. That would mean he wrote it several months before Nosedive aired. – The aforementioned 2014 Community episode obviously predates both (and as that commenter said, "it's an often repeated concept"). – But the source of inspiration that MacFarlane cited was Jon Ronson's 2016 book So You've Been Publicly Shamed.
> up vote down vote planet
Majority Rule and Nosedive have also been compared to a 2014 Community episode, "App Development and Condiments". (Wikipedia mentions both Majority Rule and Nosedive in the "See also" section of its article about that Community episode.)
In the days after "Majority Rule" aired, some people tweeted accusations of a "ripoff" from Black Mirror's "Nosedive" — but, on Majority Rule's airdate, MacFarlane had noted that he'd written it (with inspiration from a book) "a year and a half" before it aired. – That's several months before Nosedive aired.
>> "We wrote that episode the summer of - I don't know, was it two years ago? - and we thought we were all innovative, and five months later the Black Mirror episode ['Nosedive'] comes out, and we're like, 'Shit, everyone's going to think we're–'" [laughter]. "But it's clearly a common concern given the fact that two shows touched on this independently.
>> "We wrote that episode the summer of - I don't know, was it two years ago? - and we thought we were all innovative, and five months later the Black Mirror episode ["Nosedive"] comes out, and we're like, 'Shit, everyone's going to think we're-'" [laughter]. "But it's clearly a common concern given the fact that two shows touched on this independently.
From the Fandom Wiki:
> ... The script was written entirely by creator Seth MacFarlane in mid-2016 ... [after reading a book titled] <em>So You've Been Publicly Shamed</em>, by author Jon Ronson....
> At the 2018 San Diego Comic-Con, MacFarlane reflected:
>> "We wrote that episode the summer of - I don't know, was it two years ago? - and we thought we were all innovative, and five months later the Black Mirror episode ["Nosedive"] comes out, and we're like, 'Shit, everyone's going to think we're-' [laughter]. But it's clearly a common concern given the fact that two shows touched on this independently.
>> *"I think it's very creepy. We're not evolved enough as a species not to succumb to the rush of joining a group that is ganging up on another group or individual. There's a weird rush that gives a lot of people when they become part of a mob. It's too soon to independently govern ourselves in the way that social media attempts to do so."
> "Majority Rule"
In the days after "Majority Rule" aired, numerous people tweeted accusations of a "ripoff" from Black Mirror's "Nosedive" — but, on Majority Rule's airdate, MacFarlane had noted that he'd written it (with inspiration from a book) "a year and a half" before it aired. – That's several months before Nosedive aired.
Because both Majority Rule and Nosedive have also been compared to a 2014 Community episode, "App Development and Condiments", Wikipedia mentions both Majority Rule and Nosedive in the "See also" section of its article about that Community episode.
books like this
>Remember when Lindsay Ellis literally got cancelled because she said that Raya is like Avatar?
That wasn't why she was cancelled. She was cancelled because the bottomless beast must have sacrifices. No one is immune, everyone is vulnerable, it might be the Red Scare or literal witch trials but someone must be offered to quell the need for symbolic violence.
For more reading see Cabin by The Woods, So You've Been Publicly Shamed and I See Satan Fall Like Lightning.
You should read "So You've Been Publicly Shamed." Here's the author's TED talk which outlines the gist.
Cancel culture is difficult to talk about because everyone thinks of it as a particular thing, and only ever that thing, and assumes everyone else does too. This fiction of "Twitter mobs are just the free market!" is daft. Some people see cancel culture as people going after celebrities. Other people see it as people going after small-time bloggers who made a tasteless joke and trying to completely ruin their whole fucking lives. It's both of those things and more.
^Item&nbsp;Info | Bot&nbsp;Info | Trigger
Jon Ronson's So You've Been Publicly Shamed covers this case (and others) in great detail.
A MacFarlane tweet, dated IIRC on the airdate of "Majority Rule", said he wrote the episode "a year and a half" before it aired (so, about six months before Black Mirror "Nosedive" aired).
(In the tweet he also noted that he had been "inspired" by a Jon Ronson book, "So You've Been Publicly Shamed".)
In past discussions I've given a link to that tweet for reference; but apparently Seth may have recently mass-deleted many of his old tweets, so that tweet is now gone.
Even before "Majority Rule" and "Nosedive", a comparable theme was previously presented in a Community episode, "App Development and Condiments", that aired in March 2014.
Because cancel culture has literally ruined lives of people. There are entire books written about it.
Everyone is so quick these days to want to be that person who has the "fire tweet" that blows the lid off of celebrity x y z and gets them social media fame. They're vultures who want to "expose" people for the sole purpose of vaulting themselves upward and making them feel good about themselves.
It's not just "internet journalists" who do this either. The big problem is regular people. We all know about Reddit misidentifying the Boston Bomber. It happens all the time on Twitter with self-proclaimed people who fight for social justice reforms. It happened again recently. It's terrifying, because the guy was just some normal guy who literally didn't do anything and yet because of people craving internet justice he went through intense trauma. Where's the justice there?
>As for the woman who shared his home address: She deleted it and posted an apology, writing that in all of her eagerness to see justice served, she was swept up in the mob that so gleefully shared misinformation, depriving someone of their own right to justice. Her correction was shared by fewer than a dozen people.
The shit's fucked, man. And these are people who identify as progressives, who are looking out for human rights and social justice, and they're literally ruining people's lives.
A lot of people are talking about the Natalie Wynn video, which I think was generally great, if a little long.
The absolute best part of it is when she outlines the 7 tropes of cancel culture, which does a great job of articulating exactly what is going on here.
Fortunately, someone on the contrapoints subreddit typed 'em all up for us so you can just review it at your leisure and let me know if you think that's a reasonable definition of a phenomenon that is most definitely happening on the web.
This phenomenon has existed in one way or another for a while now--Jon Ronson wrote a book about it four years ago or so. I agree with you that, prior to the internet, this phenomenon would have been called a media circus, or something like that. What's new is the speed and intensity with which it can happen--and I think there's an element to which "the left" (whatever that is) is hyper-vigilant about issues of racism, sexism, and so on as a direct reaction to the disgustingness that was elected to the presidency four years ago.
Thinking this is a partisan issue is a mistake. It's an information age issue, and it's pervasive:
A full year after Nosedive, The Orville aired an episode that raised accusations of a "ripoff" — although the Orville showrunner has claimed that he wrote the Orville episode earlier in 2016 (i.e., before Nosedive aired), having been inspired by a book that he'd read.
Gonna put this here.
Disassociate from this ad much as possible, refuse to discuss the matter (except with people you know you can trust).
This is called a "smear campaign", research it, learn it, know it.
I've been through this as well. Try to weather the storm.
And don't worry, I believe you. I'm sure others here do as well.
Honestly, read about different techniques abusers use, not only will it help you be more aware of your own behavior, but it will also give you more insight into others actions towards you.
Aspies, especially those that haven't had much experience in relationships or haven't done much work on, focused on, their own behavior, can fall into abusive patterns.
This is easily recognized through idealization/devaluation/discarding. This sounds like what might have happened in your first relationship.
However, what separates most aspies from PD disordered is that once made aware of how some behaviors can come off, they will usually try to be more aware in the future. I know I studied what dysfunctional relationships looked like extensively, so I'm more aware of how my own behavior could be perceived. Then it's all down to effective communication, which for me means asking direct questions and asking for direct feedback, as well as effective boundary setting.
More likely than not, aspies (and autists in general) are the victims, rather than the perpetrators of abuse. Such as in your second relationship.
Narcissists commonly target aspies because they tend to be naive, "easy prey", if you will.
Check out Jon Ronson’s book about this
> Black Mirror did it first,
Community also did something comparable in 2014
(episode "App Development and Condiments").
FWIW, Seth claims that he wrote this Orville episode
"a year and a half ago"
(before the Black Mirror episode aired),
MacFarlane wrote this episode after reading Jon Ronson's book
<em>So You've Been Publicly Shamed</em>.
So You've Been Publicly Shamed
It's not just evil people reaping the whirlwind as the exclusive victims of cancel culture or public shaming. Jon Ronson's book on this subject suggests "cancel culture" is actually a return to a meaner and Purtanical tradition of public shaming popular in the 1800s
One of the more harmless examples of cancel culture taking out tech geeks for a dongle joke is mentioned in the book. I'd say Jordan Peterson's dominance hierarchy theory explains why some people on the bottom get screwed by public shaming / cancel culture. Also social credit score plays a role, Dave Chapelle got away with the joke discrediting Michael Jackson's accusers because of his being black (social credit bonus) and at the top of the dominance hierarchy.
All you empathy-less mofos should read Jon Ronson's book.
I don't care for Bryan at all as a GM, but it really must suck on a personal level.
By all means, dig up their tweet history and post it here.
Then try reading So You've Been Publicly Shamed by Jon Ronson, and have a think about why that's something you'd want to do.
Transgressive humour is transgressive.
Some people here need to pick up a book.
>It’s bad to drop bombs on civilian residential houses, it’s fine to drop bombs on terrorist military facilities. It’s bad to lock up innocent people, it’s good to lock up people who have committed rape.
The problem is with your analogy you're saying, "it's bad to do X action against 100% known good people, it's good to do it against 100% known bad people," which is rather convenient because it puts you, again, on the moral high ground.
I'd propose a different analogy: Torture is BAD when our enemies do it to our troops. Torture is GOOD when we do it to our detainees to gain important intel. How do you feel about that? Can we waterboard someone to save American troops?
>It’s much more defensible when it’s done to remove the anonymity of bad acts done online and hold people responsible for what they have done and said.
The problem with this is that there are so many shades of grey in what is good and bad with stuff online and more often than not, the punishment doesn't fit the crime.
How many times have you heard of someone saying something, maybe it's just one single tweet, off-color or poorly timed, something that's taken as possibly sexist or racist, and because of that an internet lynch mob is formed? The person gets doxxed, their employer gets contacted, they get harassed, sent death threats, and they end up fired from their job. And the internet lynch mob moves on and forgets about them the next week, not realizing the trail of destruction they've left. Ever read this book?
The problem is that person gets put in the same group as an Alt-Right nazi guy at Charlottesville. To the internet lynch mob, there's no difference. Once you're "The Enemy," all bets are off, and there are no bad tactics.
What about that Evergreen College professor who questioned the proposed "Day of Absence," where all White people were supposed to not show up to school? He received nonstop death threats, was called a racist, a bigot, every name in the book, had to have armed security for his classes, and eventually was forced to resign. I know that isn't doxxing, but I'm stating that as an example of the same Social Justice overreaction where the punishment doesn't fit the crime. What was his crime? Questioning whether something was right or not? Did he deserve that reaction? The problem, again, was that once he was "The Enemy," and on the wrong side of the movement, he was considered just as bad as everyone else. To the Social Justice movement, he was no better than a David Duke or a Christopher Cantwell.