George Floyd

[padraig (u.s.)]

curtis is classic "insight porn"

accurate

 

[Mr. Tea]

accurate

Continuing the analogy, I'm pretty sure either you or vim just blew a load, but I can't work out which.

 

[vimothy]

be a good lad and clean it up though

 

[DannyL]

That's interesting, thank you.
I read a fair amount of stuff about the dissemination of propaganda and fake news, I've read a fair bit about how news is treated inside Russia as well. I still think the "MSM" are pretty far away from the distortions of reality you get in totalitarian states. I guess he's drawing a much more subtle picture than that though.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

the Curtis version of hypernormalization - like any sweeping Curtis thing - falls apart if you expose it to any level of detailed scrutiny

but it's useful as a shorthand for the manufacturing of reality in general

and the idea that artificial realities seeming both literally and figuratively more real than "reality" itself

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

like a less stupid than the literalization of The Matrix but still pretty stupid version of Baudrillard

 

[DannyL]

Peter Pomerantsev paints pretty amazing desription of this world in his first book, Nothing is True, Everything is Possible. It's very much an entertaining read rather than an academic tome but it's still brilliant. He knows this world intimately as he used to work for Russian TV. Some of the most interesting parts are where he links it into deeper Russian orthodox Church eschatological traditions.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

I guess he's drawing a much more subtle picture than that though

I don't know if subtle is the word for it

but he's describing it in the context non-totalitarian, nominally free places

 

[line b]

I didnt find Hyper normalization all that baudrillardian, i.e. concerned with images, meta narratives and etc. Its a fly by night retelling of geo politics since the 70's, finding each point where world leaders needed to deal with a complex problem but instead crafted for the public a much simpler problem, solved this made up problem, and events spiraled out from there. Obviously you can easily branch of into simulacra and what not from from there but I didn't find it dwelled too much on that, rather was just alot of historical exposition. I liked it a bit.

 

[DannyL]

I think with me and a lot of this stuff, like my politics in general, the rhetorical excesses (of the critics of "mainstream media" in this case) pushes me into more conservative position and I end up defending the fucking Sunday Times or whatever. I don't feel as conflicted about defence of the BBC 'cos it's whole model is rooted in that Reithian legacy of a shared public good.

Amazing how popular these shared goods are - the BBC and NHS I'm mostly thinking about - things still are, as part of the shared language and self-understanding of Britishness. The Been much less so of the two, these days but it's funding model is still something outside of the market in part.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Peter Pomerantsev paints pretty amazing desription of this world in his first book, Nothing is True, Everything is Possible.

sounds right on the money. the title is, anyway.

the original hypernormalization book is Everything Was Forever Until It Was No More. it's pretty nuts.

it's about a collective response to specific historical circumstances, tho

whereas Curtis hypernormalization is an open-ended, ongoing thing

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

I didnt find Hyper normalization all that baudrillardian, i.e. concerned with images, meta narratives and etc

it's applied Baudrillard

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

whether that's literally true or not

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

instead of saying, "the Gulf War did not take place"

the Curtis version would "[x powers that be] decided to create [x simplified narrative] of the Gulf War for [x nefarious purposes]"

(cue ominous Clint Mansell music, grainy black and white footage of the king of Iraq ca. 1920s, etc)

either way, the created reality supercedes the actual reality of what happened

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

it's applied Baudrillard

Curtis being, as I mentioned, a popularizer rather than an originator

 

[Leo]

and *interesting* perspective:

An RNC Speaker Said Cops Would Be 'Smart' to Racially Profile Her Own Son

One of the Republican National Convention’s top speakers said in a recent video that it would be “smart” for a police officer to racially profile her biracial son, because “statistically, my brown son is more likely to commit a violent offense over my white sons.”

 

[sus]

Baudrillard is a crazy person with a couple decent ideas, so I can't mind a popularization personally

 

[luka]

I don't think anyone should allow themselves to be pushed into more conservative positions, least of all as a response to rhetorical excesses. We all know the left are annoying people. You don't have to invite them round for dinner. You just have to share a basic orientation towards society.

 

[vimothy]

there's kind of a mutation taking place isnt there, in terms of what "left" and "right" actually mean - no one's sure any more, everything solid etc

 

[luka]

Yeah. But that's another issue.