Cashing in on the Innocent - Self-serving agendas & revisionist history

 Transcript below...'nuf said

I hate to date a video by bringing up a current event but the coming YouTube Adpocalypse in 2019 is being driven by yet another self-serving "activist."  One whose own past is questionable in the context of his "activism" becoming  a prime example of what's wrong with social media.

I don't usually get involved in new media controversies.  I see them as hollow, pointless and self-serving to the so-called "activists."

Nobody questions the source if there's an opportunity to milk a story for all its worth.   For example,  I watched a couple of  videos on the" Pedo Ring" controversy on YouTube which is causing major advertisers to pull out of the platform.   While I don't always agree with the viewpoints of  channels like the TheQuartering or Optimus ,  I have to agree with the premise that the media's new "YouTube warrior" is less about his cause and more about his popularity.

I won't bother to name his channel as I have no desire to encourage the behavior. 

That this guy went from virtually nothing to monetized overnight with YouTube's blessing is ironic considering he's attacking the very platform he's deriving revenue from and being given a voice to speak by it. 

That he blames the platform for the problem is either misplaced aggression or outright sensationalism.   I lean toward the latter.  There were ways to achieve his goals without causing harm to legitimate creators or the platform.   

In essence it's like suing an automaker for a fatal accident because the car went too fast. 

You can make a safer car and Youtube is hypersensitive about being a safe platform.  That someone finds a way to misuse it for their twisted compulsions is not reason to attack and damage it.  Where is the personal responsibility here?   

I'm sick and tired of so-called "activists" blaming everything but the perpetrator of the misdeed for whatever "cause célèbre" is popular today.  Half-truths, half-reasoned, complete insanity.

Let me be clear.  YouTube is no great ally of mine and has done my own channels great harm with their overheated fear of losing safe harbor and broken search algorithm but if I do something wrong it's my fault not theirs.

No, YouTube isn't pure and unsullied.  In fact you can find literally hundreds of channels blessed by YouTube whose only purpose is to instruct new "creators" how to essentially STEAL content from other videos on the platform, abuse the search algorithm and make money for doing nothing but a cut and paste of other peoples work.  The result is 1000's of "Top Ten" compilation videos with millions of views and thousands in revenue for these new "creators."  The original creators see none of it and worse the search algorithm gets pre-loaded with garbage ultimately crowding out legitimate content.

This is the same kind of sensationalist and seedy mechanism the so-called "activist" uses to  enrich himself at the expense of others. 

It's the same issue I have with the so-called "woke" movement that treats everything not 100% in line with their views as "misogynistic."

It's not misogynistic to be against a revisionist history agenda even when it's in the form of popular media.

The new "Captain Marvel" movie is a prime example by making it less about entertainment and more about an agenda.

Where have we heard that before...

Games like Battlefield 5, TV shows like Doctor Who and the militant effort to reshape a world view into something  worse than the wrongs they're trying to correct.

It's a stupid game, a dumb comic book, a nerdy TV show.   

Yes, it's all of those things but all of them have their own history, their own take on the world of their time.  A view that should not be lost and a story that must be built upon not denied. 

I'd rather that Doctor Who wasn't the new vehicle for a blatant political agenda.  I'd rather that we didn't need to focus on gender in a video game or a comic book character for the same reason.  All of these mediums can help change a world view but not by alienating half of it.  This is the problem.

The pendulum will swing, that's true, but every pendulum has a fulcrum.  Without it there is no pendulum only anarchy.  Denying history, denying other views denies the fulcurm.  Good or Bad our history is our foundation.  We try to take that which is good and learn from that which is wrong and  unjust. 

For example, with all the evils of the Roman Empire to say that it's gifts to modern civilization are irrelevant is simply ignorant.  Succeeding generations after the fall have tried to learn from the past and hopefully not repeat its worst aspects. 

Not always with success but to whitewash the failures or deny the history is to perpetuate the greater sin.  To align with the cult of personality and the cause célèbre while blatantly denying anything that conflicts with your own world view or your own contribution to the problem only moves civilization that much more quickly to collapse. 

This sounds more like I agree with the rampant SJW causes of the day but in fact I accuse them of the very sin they claim to be vanquishing.

We come back to ideology again.  The truth lies not in any full swing of the pendulum but rather where it rests at the center.

Now that We've seen the 13th Doctor ( Jodie Whittaker)...

 

I'll say this up front...I'm no fan of Social Justice agendas.

Not because I don't believe in universal equality and fairness but rather because the so-called social justice "cause" is frequently more important than the people it's supposed to be serving.

Now I'm fairly certain I'm not a sexist.  Considering my upbringing that would be pretty much impossible but there is still some discomfort when I see blatant attacks on my gender.

I suppose that much like the LGBT community (forgive me if I missed a letter, I don't keep up with such things) it's necessary to be outrageous if you want somebody to pay attention.

So it is with the 13th Doctor.  In the 8 episodes I've watched of the new series I can say this...

It's not complete crap but it's definitely got an agenda.  Not in a subtle Star Trek kind of way but in a more overt in your face kind of way.

Most obviously and for no apparent reason other than they could,  the doctor is a woman now.  OK, we've known that for a year but the real question is:  Can the performance transcend the agenda.   Can we learn something without being hit over the head with it.

Apparently Chris Chibnall and the BBC don't think so.  While Chibnall is the show runner he's also taken on writing duties for many of the new episodes.

As such his "essence" is all over the show.

If a TV show has a script then I'm going to be paying close attention to the writing.  Plot, story flow and character development are all things I'm watching for.  Formulas become blatantly apparent and with Doctor Who it's obvious that the story must fit the agenda instead of the other way around which includes the choice of companions.

Speaking of which...

The Doctor's new companions are of course ethnically and culturally diverse thus satisfying the agenda.  A fact were repeatedly made aware of and supported by weak male characters who present as flawed and largely uninteresting.  The first in the guise of an elderly "Graham" still grieving over the loss of his wife in the first episode and Ryan a directionless young man with a condition that hinders his coordination.  Much time was spent in the first episode highlighting the fact that he couldn't ride a bicycle because of it regardless of the cheering section comprised of his Grandmother and Graham.  

Lest we forget the third companion, Yaz, a young and impatient female traffic enforcement officer for whom the world isn't moving fast enough.  Other than the Doctor, her character is the only one that seems to show any ambition or depth.  Depth for a social justice warrior that is...

Here's what I've seen so far:

In the episode entitled "Rosa" A pivotal event in American Civil Rights History attempted to be shoehorned into Doctor Who Canon.   It came close to being relevant up until I realized that instead of a thoughtful historical treatment we bore witness to a parade of stereotypes and agendas.  The message was pretty much, "White people bad."  

Almost every character in the episode that didn't identify as a minority of some type was treated as an antagonist.  From the brutish dullard who slaps Ryan for "touching his wife" to the waitress that refuses to serve "their kind."

It's ironic that the treatment of racism in the episode is so heavily dependent on a plot device that is itself a racist stereotype.  The historical event was less important than the agenda being pushed.  In the entire episode the only white character that didn't seem to have it in for the Doctor was Rosa Park's Husband, Raymond who might as well have been part of the furniture.  Virtually no effort was made to explore anything outside of the desired agenda.  

In the "The Tsuranga Conundrum" we're presented with a dilemma onboard a medical transport ship populated by largely clueless characters whose only purpose is to again push the agenda.  From a female General with "pilots heart" trying to save face by relying on meds to mask the condition to her obedient male android servicing her every need to her less obedient engineer brother who finds himself dismissed at every opportunity.

The threat in this episode is a small ship eating alien that was far more comical than threatening.  Overshadowed by an overtly feminist agenda that included a pregnant male patient giving birth and Graham and Ryan serving as hapless midwives.  Assuming this was a human (and nothing contradicted that assertion) the biological absurdity alone should have been enough to dismiss the premise but of course no explanation was offered.  I suppose this is the ultimate expression of "Gender neutrality."

So we've looked at just about everything but the new doctor as portrayed by Jodie Whittaker.  Bottom line, the writing isn't doing the character justice.

I've got no problem with a female time lord.  None whatsoever.  In fact when the "Master" regenerated into "Missy" for Peter Capaldi's 12th Doctor it was a brilliant turn.  We saw an evolution of the Doctor/Master relationship beyond simple adversary.  There was always a hint that there was a closer relationship between the 2 characters.  A relationship that went beyond the simple good versus evil dynamic.  Relationships are never that black and white.  With "Missy" that relationship could be fleshed out.  The gender change served a purpose.

With the 13th Doctor it's just gratuitous...

I'm not sure who coached Jodie Whittaker on her new role but it seems the instruction probably went something like, " Act like David Tennant with boobs and bad fashion sense."

That's pretty much it.  There's no depth here, nothing endearing, nothing interesting aside from gender and that gets old pretty quick.  The most interesting aspect of the character is its use as a vehicle for revisionist history of the franchise.  It's subtle but it's there.

When we're finally treated to the requisite "wardrobe change" scene found in every new Doctor at least as far back as Jon Pertwee, we find Whittaker's character in a clothing store changing room with varied articles of women's clothing flying through the air.  She utters the line, " It's been a long time since I've worn women's clothes."  

I'm sorry, I'm pretty familiar with Doctor Who Canon and never did I see William Hartnell in a dress.  Jon Pertwee wore ruffled sleeves but that was the extent of it.  So where is this OTHER female incarnation?  Apparently there will have to be one now to fit the agenda.

Jodie Whittaker's Doctor seems destined for a fate shared with Colin Baker's 6th Doctor.  That being poor writing and weak fan support.   Even a SJW agenda can't provide enough material to save this incarnation if things don't change fast.

I'm hopeful that things get better but for that to happen the agenda has to get out of the way.  It's stifling the writing and character development.  After 8 episodes I'm not feeling any better about the current run of the series.  

By comparison, by the time Id' gotten over Matt Smith spitting on the Tardis console somewhere around "Victory of the Daleks" I was pretty much onboard.  Considering he took over from my favorite ( current generation ) doctor ( 10th ) David Tennant, that means something.

As Sean Connery said in the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"