A response to my article Where’s The Video Of Trump Admitting Defeat To Biden?
I wrote about how we need to get video evidence of Trump, under oath, admitting his defeat to Biden. Then we rub it in the faces of his supporters.
Here’s a link to my comment but I’m reproducing this here because comments sections sometimes go away.
Playteau May 7
Fantasyland hippie sh*t. Delete this dumbass article. I mean really, who the f*ck you kidding? Who snorted some Adderall and cooked this absolutely ridiculous article up?Please stop treating this sh*tbag traitor like anything less than a Russian asset. That status didn’t magically go away on January 20th.
My god. Smoke meth before you write stupid sh*t like this so you have an excuse, you’re just embarrassing yourself. “Proof” is not something the knuckledraggers are concerned with, or have you not been paying attention for decades?
So, it’s the morning and I’ve read all the comments. I’ve seen a number of people who think i’m naive. I’ve addressed that by pointing out that my piece is a starting place. I did acknowledge how the base would respond, and if they had read the piece they would have seen why I suggested that the video come from a court case prosecution of Trump.
But I now see I need to be clearer. Based on the comments from folks like @Cthulhu, @Karl III, @New_Damage & @Mike Wilkerson the time table needs to be accelerated because of the damage an unprosecuted Trump is causing.
There also needs to be multiple prosecutions in different specific areas.
One of the reasons I wrote this was to point out that the Dem’s political establishment & the media’s standard way of dealing with losing politicians and political criminals doesn’t work with Trump.
They need to anticipate how he will respond. They need to anticipate how his base will respond and how his political supporters will respond. They need to anticipate how the RW media will respond as well as MSM & MSNBC.
So that’s why I suggest that when they put out a video with Trump saying something to hold back details. Then, following the round on Fox news when they deny it ever happened, the prosecution can drop more details, witnesses and hard evidence. It’s not enough to just embarrass them, it’s also important to get them to stop spreading their BS. I suggest that they look at the case of the Dominion voting, when if they spread false information they can be sued.
(Look at what WORKS against RW media, not just what you HOPE will work.)
You may not know of me or my history. If you care to learn more, I’ve done a few podcasts recently where I talked about how i developed the strategy to defund the right wing media.
I realized that I could not stop the hosts from spreading their violent rhetoric or change the minds of their target audience, but the people who I could convince that this was dangerous were the sponsors. So I brought the proof to the sponsors. Those people DID want proof and when they got it they either told the hosts to stop it or just stopped paying the hosts. The audience might have kept listening to the hosts, but for the station management, an audience that doesn’t generate revenue for a station is not desirable.
My method was very successful and cost the right wing media $100’s of millions in lost advertising revenue.
In some cases the radio and TV host were fired. Not because of what they said, but because they stopped bringing in revenue.
Losing the support of their bosses because they were no longer an asset, but a liability, is a powerful thing. This is an important distinction because it was no longer about “free speech” or the first Amendment, but about generating revenue.
I went this route because I anticipated many liberals response to my objection to their violent rhetoric. “the response to speech you don’t like is more speech!” and ‘I don’t like what they say about I’ll defend to the death their right to say it!” Or “just ignore them, don’t give them the attention they want!”
I also knew that if they were fired because of something they said, they would be the victim of “cancel culture.” (Which didn’t exist back in 2006 when I was doing this!) I simply went to the advertisers and suggested that they stop tainting their brand with what the hosts were saying. It was the “power of the marketplace” that led to non-renewal of the hosts’ contracts.
I also anticipated how they would respond to me. They sued me, had my blog shut down, attacked me on air, online and threatened me. I used those attacks on me and flipped them around ON TO THEM which lead to more negative attention to what they said.
More detail in the New York Times or SF Chronicle articles about me & my work here. Spocko’s Brain, About.
I made it into a national and international story, where the radio hosts were the villains and I was the victim. When the rest of the media covered it they could note that it was MY speech that was silenced, not theirs.
The hosts could keep saying what they were saying, but they wouldn’t make as much money saying it as before.
Here is the video of the podcast where I explained my method.
People said that there was nothing we could do about right wing AM radio. But my “fantasyland hippie sh*t” method hurt the rightwing media industry severely. (I’ve a very proud member of a group of Dirty F****ng Hippie. I even have the T-shirt!)
Three radio & TV hosts (including Glenn Beck) didn’t get their contracts renewed because of my work, but more importantly I helped show corporations that this kind of speech is bad for their brands, so they pulled their financial support.
They pulled their support not because a few people were boycotting them (which we weren’t), but because the people in the corporations looked at their own stated mission and values statements and said, “This is not who we are and we have decided we do not want to support this kind of talk.”
In America the power of money is huge. The power of the corporate brand is also huge. I understood what the corporations cared about and how they would act and react. I used what they cared about to achieve what I wanted.
As more proof that this method WAS and IS SUCCESSFUL, here is the call I had with Rupert Murdoch during News Corp’s Q2 Financial con call in 2011. I pointed out that Glenn Beck’s show wasn’t generating any revenue. In that call I used the desire of the institutional investors for quarterly profits against Murdoch, who was subsidizing a money losing host.
This led to Beck being fired. I had anticipated what the investors wanted in the short term and used that power to block Murdoch’s goal in the long term.
Here is the link to that story.
Rupert and Me: I question the NewsCorp CEO about Subsidizing Glenn Beck
You suggested that the person who wrote this “absolutely ridiculous article” was on drugs. You are correct. I do take some prescription drugs to treat my depression. I think that without them I would have a hard time continuing to fight the “sh*tbags” who are doing damage to our country.
I’ve been doing this work since 2004, so I have been paying attention for almost 2 decades. My work HAS made an impact and I have the evidence to prove it for the people who care about evidence. I used the metric that MY OPPONENTS use to show failure or success. I used the leverage that powerful people use against other powerful people by convincing them the damage that this kind of speech was having to them and their braind.
My goal with this piece was to figure out what tools, audiences and methods would be useful to slow down Trump and reduce his power post-election.
I learned from the comments, even ones like yours, to horn my approach, clarify my thinking and anticipate the obstacles to success.
Thank you for your comment, it was very helpful. Have a pleasant day,
LLAP
Spocko
