revenu

The Problem With Cringe Culture

From what I’ve seen, the phenomenon dubbed Cringe Culture is a paragon of insecurity, internalized misogyny, and self-loathing.

Let me elaborate a little here:  here on Tumblr (and in life in general, honestly), a lot of folks are very pre-occupied with what is or isn’t Cringey.  It’s a dynamic somewhat reminiscent of an eighth grade schoolyard, but that’s really not the issue here.  

What Tumblr folks dub Cringey are typically things that are enjoyed by young teens (in particular, young girls) exploring fandom and fan creativity for the first time.

Yes, these teens are frequently obnoxious, overzealous, and loud, but it’s an exciting time for kids:  we as adults may have comfortably settled into our interests, but for them it’s an avenue of unsupervised self-expression they may not have experienced before.  Moreover, they have little to no experience in moderating themselves, which is one of the reasons why I believe the act of mocking them to be a somewhat callous one.  

Are they occasionally annoying?  Subjectively, yes.  I frequently find young teens and tweens annoying, particularly when they’re being loud and obnoxious during my allotted writing time.  But I don’t shame them for it, on here or in real life, because I’m an adult and they are literally children .  

And most importantly, so are the people mocking them.

I’ll elaborate once again:  I’m nineteen.  Most of my friends, both on here and on my other blog, are fellow chill late teens and twenty-somethings.  And I’ve never seen any adult who’s secure in their own self-image do anything other than Do Their Own Thing and allow everyone else do the same.

In other words, I’ve been involved in fandom for a few years now, and almost everyone I’ve seen actively participating in cringe culture has turned out to be no older than seventeen or so themselves, and probably (consciously or otherwise) attempting to distance themselves from their “embarrassing” younger alter egos and feel more confident in their purported maturity. 

Because they probably did some Cringey things when they were fourteen, too:  maybe they drew manga OCs on DeviantArt with needlessly elaborate hair, ran a passionate SuperWhoLock blog, read Homestuck, wrote angsty poetry about turning into wolves, et cetera.  

Of course, the whole point here is that there is literally nothing wrong with any of these things:  they’re harmless examples of children exploring revenues of creativity for the first time, that we’ve been conditioned to find embarrassing.  

Now, I’m not going to pretend I didn’t have this phase myself:  I once got into an impassioned argument on Facebook with a bunch of One Direction fans when I was sixteen or so, in which I dismissed their obsession as being Stupid and Juvenile and proclaimed my favored Heavy Metal as being far superior.  

Now, I’m still not into One Direction in the slightest, but if I could go back in time I would probably smack my sixteen-year-old self upside the head and tell her to leave people alone and let them do their own thing.

Of course, a large part of my reasoning was also driven at the time by my unfortunate Not Like Other Girls phase, in which I wanted to distance myself from the silliness of my fellow teen girls as much as possible.  I may or may not have still been in my “I hate pink” phase, which I still shudder to think about to this day.

Which brings me to another one of Cringe Culture’s more problematic aspects:  it’s inherently a little misogynist, in that almost everyone who partakes in it is attempting to distance themselves from the interests of teenage girls.

Shows like Doctor Who, Steven Universe, Voltron, Supernatural, Yuri on Ice, and many others all have passionate and predominantly young female fanbases, and as such, people seem unwittingly inclined to see them as inherently vapid, annoying, or Cringey in a way that equally vocal male-dominated fandoms simply aren’t.  

Even being a Trekkie (Star Trek fan) was considered embarrassing when the fandom was predominantly female populated, although the means by which fanfiction and discourse was exchanged was via fan-run zines rather than Tumblr blogs.  Now that men are in on it, it’s considered one of the best fandoms there is.

More male populated fandoms such as Game of Thrones, the Walking Dead, the DC and Marvel cinematic universes, and Star Wars are just as impassioned, and have had just as many ideological issues in the past.  Yet are these things ever denigrated as being Cringy or annoying?  Not that I can recall.

Another one of my greatest issues with Cringe Culture is that it discourages passion:  I have never encountered a fandom, Cringey or otherwise, that hasn’t produced genuinely stunning works of art and fiction.  Moreover, I’ve never encountered a fandom that doesn’t have fans who have cited it as what saved them from depression or even suicide.  

So if someone’s passionate about something, even if it’s something of no value to you, it costs absolutely zero dollars to mind your own goddamn business and not taint their joy with your own insecurity, cynicism, and internalized self-loathing.  

Similarly, I can speak from experience when I say my interests and fandoms got me through the very worst period of my adolescence, and I’d be a significantly less happy person if I didn’t have still have them to fall back on.  Not everyone’s sole source of enjoyment and comfort in life comes from nihilistic memes.

So if you want to take a step towards fostering a more creative generation, take a step away from Cringe Culture.  Respect other people’s interests, and openly and unabashedly enjoy your own.  Question why you think certain interests are Cringey, and try to distance yourself from the mentality that you’re a better or cooler person for being less similar to young women.

And finally, try and forgive your fourteen-year-old self for whatever cringiness they may have been culpable of, and tell them that you love them anyway.

i dont really care what yall think about dream daddy and what you think about some of the game grumps being involved in its development, or whoever streams or buys or consumes the game, or the dadsona stuff, whatever, some of it has valid points for sure

but if you bitch and complain and boycott it, in the end you’re literally just taking revenue and livelihood from the queer creators of the game, who are queer, and making it that little bit more difficult for queer content BY queer creators to be visible and funded and bought.

please stop judging queer creators by some kind of impossible ideal that is very rarely placed on non-queer creators. you know what it does? makes it terrifying for queer creators to CREATE from fear of backlash over anything they produce. it happens non stop here - as soon as something from a queer creator becomes popular, there has to be something wrong with it that leads to it’s boycott. often the ‘something wrong with it’ may be not entirely related to the actual content itself.

if you want queer content, support the people trying their hardest to make it. 

let dan and phil make money without complaining 2k17

youtube

This video posted today on Vlogbrothers explains the Adpocalypse. I appreciate Hank taking on the topic and thought I’d add some data from our channel, Sexplanations to support his case.

Sexplanations’ most viewed video, which has over 3.2 million views, took around 40 hours to make and has earned less than $200 from YouTube ad revenue in the 8 months since it was published. That’s $0.00006 per set of eyeballs and <$5 earned per hour invested. 

While our channel promotes health and inspires curiosity, we are often put in a lower revenue bucket because sex is stigmatized – EVEN THOUGH MOST of the 7 billion+ human beings on this planet are a result of people being sexual. 

!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!



**This is another reason I’m so very grateful to those of you who support us on Patreon, YouTube Red, and by sharing our videos. BIG THANKS!**

Source: http://amzn.to/2oCggMd

“Launch” will build your business—fast. Whether you’ve already got a business or you’re itching to start one, this is a recipe for getting more traction.
Think about it—what if you could launch like Apple or the big Hollywood studios? What if your prospects eagerly counted down the days until they could buy your product? What if you could create such powerful positioning in your market that you all -but- eliminated your competition? And you could do all that no matter how humble your business or budget?

Since 1996 Jeff Walker has been creating hugely successful online launches. After bootstrapping his first Internet business from his basement, he quickly developed an underground process for launching new products and businesses with unprecedented success.

But the success-train was just getting started—once he started teaching his formula to other entrepreneurs, the results were simply breathtaking. Tiny, home-based businesses started doing launches that sold tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and even millions of dollars in sales with their launches.

“Launch” is the treasure map into that world—an almost secret world of digital entrepreneurs who create cash-on-demand paydays with their product launches and business launches.

Whether you have an existing business, or you have a service-based business and want to develop your own products so you can leverage your time and your impact, or you’re still in the planning phase—this is how you start fast. This formula is how you engineer massive success.

Now the question is this—are you going to start slow, and fade away from there? Or are you ready for a launch that will change the future of your business and your life?

Read more: http://amzn.to/2oCggMd

anonymous asked:

Hi, thankyou for all your 1d music posts. Its interesting how you could explain their take on the writing and performing in an academic understanding. I always thought writing music consists of a lot of freestyling, so to have it explained like a math formula was really cool (omg I dont know how to explain this, I'm sorry if its rude). I have questions, do the order of the writer's name indicate the level of contribution made to the song? Thankyou.. Sorry its rly long :)

Unlike in academics, where the authors are listed in descending contribution to the work (lead authors do the most work), in celebrity culture, I’m sure there is some element of throwing celebrity names up for songs to be considered. I don’t know the convention for the order of listing, whether lyricist first or music first.

Here’s what I learned about how songwriting revenue is split.

Usually the revenue is split between lyric writers and music writers. The lyrics might include the melody; the whole thing bundled together is called “the top line.” This is worth 50% of the songwriting revenue.

The harmony and the rest of the music is worth the other 50%.

So, for example, if Harry and Louis and Julian wrote a song together, and Harry and Louis wrote the lyrics, Julian the music, H/L each get 25%, and Julian gets 50%. If Julian wrote some of the lyrics, he would cut into H/L’s share.

None of this depends on who performs the music.

As for how much money songwriters make, the answer is, not that much.

Here’s a quote:

“Mechanical Royalty — Writers receive 9.1 cents for a song that sells on an artist’s CD. However, this is usually split with the publisher, leaving the songwriter only 4.55 cents. If the song is co-written, then they receive only 2.275 cents! So, if a writer has a song on a million-selling album, they earn around $22,750.
Performance Royalty — A songwriter is paid when his or her song is performed live or on radio, television, or cable. The average performance royalty is under $5,000 per year for those who are lucky enough to receive performance income”. — How Songwriters Are Paid (https://americansongwriter.com/2013/06/songwriter-u-getting-paid-as-a-songwriter/)

Now, if a newbie lyricist came along and worked with an established music composer/ producer, would she or he be willing to take a much smaller cut? If it meant an opportunity to be allowed into the trusted writing circle, definitely.

The whole Swedish group of writers/ producers, including Max Martin, Jorgen Elofsson, Johan Carlsson, Denniz Pop all began with collaborations.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/behind-the-music-why-a-few-guys-from-sweden-own-your-playlist/

Thanks for the ask!

Sea

Addendum: just thought of something else. A while ago we got news that Harry had signed on as a songwriter with Warner Music for excess of $5 million. As we can calculate from above, this is an exorbitant amount, unless there was guarantee that he would perform these songs, too – that is, if there was guarantee of multiple (10+) songs guaranteed to sell/stream 1+ million copies each. Wow. That’s a lot of hits.

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/music-publishers-chase-celebrities-with-huge-upfront-fees.585002/

youtube

THE ART OF THE (TRUMP AND PUTIN) DEAL

Say you’re Vladimir Putin, and you did a deal with Trump last year. Whether there was such a deal is being investigated. But if you are Putin and you did do a deal, what might Trump have agreed to do for you? 

1. Repudiate NATO. NATO is the biggest thorn in your side – the alliance that both humiliates you and stymies your ambitions. Trump seemed intent to deliver on this during his recent European trip by bullying members about payments and seemingly not reaffirming Article 5 of the pact, which states that any attack on one NATO ally is an attack on all. (He’s backtracked on this since then, under pressure from Congress.)

2. Antagonize Europe, especially Angela Merkel. She’s the strongest leader in the West other than Trump, and you’d love to drive a wedge between the United States and Germany. Your larger goal is for Europe to no longer depend on the United States, so you can increase your influence in Europe. Trump has almost delivered on this, too. Merkel is already saying Europe can no longer depend on America.

3. Take the United States out of the Paris accord on the environment. This will anger America’s other allies around the world and produce a wave of anti-Americanism – all to your advantage. You’d also love for the whole Paris accord to unravel because you want the world to remain dependent on fossil fuels. Russia is the world’s second-largest exporter of oil after Saudi Arabia, and biggest exporter of natural gas. And the oil and gas industry contributes about half the revenues to your domestic budget. And, hey, there’s also all those Arctic ports that are opening up now that the earth is warming. Trump has delivered on this. 

4. Embark on a new era of protectionism. Or at least anti-trade rhetoric. This will threaten the West’s economic interdependence and loosen America’s economic grip on the rest of the world. Trump is on the way to delivering on this one.

5. End the economic sanctions on Russia, imposed by the United States in 2014. Oil production on land is falling so you want to tap the vast petroleum and gas reserves offshore in the Arctic. In 2011, you and ExxonMobil’s Rex Tillerson, signed a $500 billion deal to do this. But the sanctions stopped it cold. Trump has promised to lift them, but he hasn’t delivered on this yet, because he has got to cope with all the suspicions in America about his deal with you. Once it dies down, he’ll end the sanctions. In the meantime, he’ll give you back the two compounds that were seized by the Obama administration when the U.S. intelligence discovered you’d interfered in the election.

And what might you have agreed to do for Trump in return? 

Two things: First, you’d help him win the presidency, by hacking into Democratic Party servers, leaking the results, sending millions of fake news stories about Hillary to targeted voters, and tapping into voter lists. 

Second, after he was elected, you’d shut up about your help so Trump wouldn’t be impeached and convicted of treason.

In other words, if you did a deal, you both still have every incentive to fulfill your side of it. That’s the art of the deal.

Le bon sens : il y a besoin de faire des économies, peut-être que l'on pourrait prélever un peu sur les gros salaires ou s'occuper du problème de l'évasion fiscale ?

Le gouvernement : mmmh non on va plutôt baisser l'aide aux logements des étudiants qui n'ont aucun revenu

Connverse HC #373

When Connie turns 16 her parents want her to get a summer job so her and Steven set up a business selling watermelon stevens (that DONT come to life) on the boardwalk. They have lion with them and they advertise it as “family business” type thing and they get tons of business because all the tourists think they’re such a cute couple. (credit to @zendro-mida)

anonymous asked:

Do you think HSHQ messed up by making SC a buzz single instead of an actual single released to radio? I feel like that is the most liked/streamed song amongst a majority of people (both fans, general public, and even his mom and BFF Grimmy) that it sucks to be missing out on the music video and radio treatment. What are your thoughts?

Interesting question! 

There are two ways to think about the answer.

First, I think the success of Sweet Creature might be due to the fact that it was released early, as the second song from the album, so that there was increased interest in the song. Ever Since New York was technically the second song we heard from the album (on SNL), but not released, per se, in HQ. The fact that it is the second-most watched YouTube video in the album tells me that while it is popular, it may already have peaked. That is, everyone’s heard it. They are less likely to purchase and watch it more. 

You can see that Two Ghosts, is the fourth-most watched video (after SOTT, SC, and Kiwi). There is definitely interest in the song, and it does not have the exposure (or over-exposure) that SC has.

Second, what is the purpose of a single, exactly? A single from an unreleased album is a way to generate excitement for the album/ tour, but in the case of Two Ghosts, the album has been released, the tours have been sold (and mostly to capacity). Fans are unlikely to buy the single, although we may stream it. I don’t think they are expecting this song to hit top 5 or to generate significant revenue. So what’s the point? 

Answer: to promote Harry Styles. His team choosing Two Ghosts means that they want the song to showcase a different aspect of Harry, perhaps to drive traffic to his website, and to increase his visibility. 

What they want to show may be inferred from its synchronicity with Dunkirk. The singer of Sign of the Times is a magnetic classic rocker who revels in symbology and dramatic metaphor. The singer of Two Ghosts is a romantic poet. Juxtapose these personae against the sensitive, intuitive actor who plays a role seemingly opposite of his personality: Alex is supposed to be a hardened, difficult soldier insistent on his own ways. They are showcasing Harry’s protean abilities and natural talents. 

I know everyone is worried that Two Ghosts will use Taylor for promo, but I think it is really meant to illustrate how versatile, talented, and romantic Harry can be. Sweet Creature could have done that too, but Two Ghosts has had less exposure, and has been universally well-received on his television broadcast. 

FWIW Taylor Swift is on Big Machine Label Group, of which her father owns a sizable stake. 

Sea

anonymous asked:

so, as far as we know, the ackermans are "a subproduct of the titan science", right? So, what would happen (please dear god Isayama, jesus christ, allah, budha and all the saints never let this happen) If a titan eat an ackerman? Would it mean that they would be human again with the powers of their clan? Or will they remain titans and wouldn't be affected? I mean, they say it, they're a SUBPRODUCT of the titanic science. They're special, they're not like the rest of humans. What do you think?

Hello anon!

I think…no chances. I’ve read Crynchyroll’s translation. So the Ackerman Clan’s official title is “byproducts of titan science.” That means they are byproducts of Ymir Fritz’ “heritage” but at the same time the Ackerman Clan hasn’t 9th titan power directly.

Let’s see..

IEA defines “by-product” in the context of life-cycle assessment: “… main products, co-products (which involve similar revenues to the main product), by-products (which result in smaller revenues), and waste products (which provide little or no revenue).“ 

Well I note that Isayama sometimes draws “childbirth” pattern and use the attachment theory in parent-child relationships.

Roughly speaking, the newborn can be byproduct under some conditions. Just a theory but I think the first powerful Ackerman was born by the woman who was injected with the serum and became the titan shifter. Yeah she was pregnant.

In addition, it’s logical for me why Ackermans’ genes dictated them to fight for living and why they have the strong attachment to the person who gave them “the second birth.” It’s a meaningful allegory.


Thank you for the ask! Have a nice day!

8

              The Grand Jewel Of All The Palaces- Dolmabahçe Palace

                                            (Rooms Of Power)


“Dolmabahçe Palace was ordered by the Empire’s 31st Sultan, Abdülmecid I, and built between the years 1843 and 1856. Previously, the Sultan and his family had lived at the Topkapı Palace, but as the medieval Topkapı was lacking in contemporary style, luxury, and comfort, as compared to the palaces of the European monarchs, Abdülmecid decided to build a new modern palace near the site of the former Beşiktaş Palace, which was demolished. Hacı Said Ağa was responsible for the construction works, while the project was realized by architects Garabet Balyan, his son Nigoğayos Balyan and Evanis Kalfa (members of the Armenian Balyan family of Ottoman court architects).

The construction cost five million Ottoman gold lira, or 35 tonnes of gold, the equivalent of ca. $1.5 billion in today’s (2013) values.[3][4] This sum corresponded to approximately a quarter of the yearly tax revenue. Actually, the construction was financed through debasement, by massive issue of paper money, as well as by foreign loans. The huge expenses placed an enormous burden on the state purse and contributed to the deteriorating financial situation of the Ottoman Empire, which eventually defaulted on its public debt in October 1875, with the subsequent establishment in 1881 of financial control over the “sick man of Europe” by the European powers.

The palace was home to six Sultans from 1856, when it was first inhabited, up until the abolition of the Caliphate in 1924: The last royal to live here was Caliph Abdülmecid Efendi. A law that went into effect on March 3, 1924 transferred the ownership of the palace to the national heritage of the new Turkish Republic. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder and first President of the Republic of Turkey, used the palace as a presidential residence during the summers and enacted some of his most important works here. Atatürk spent the last days of his medical treatment in this palace, where he died on November 10, 1938.

Today, the palace is managed by Milli Saraylar Daire Başkanlığı (Directorate of National Palaces) responsible to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. The only way to see the interior of Dolmabahçe is with a guided tour.”