There’s a phenomenon where someone writes an essay about this or that but someone else wants to discuss something that has not yet made it to the front page.
This is unfair to everybody involved. It’s unfair to the guy who wrote the original essay because, presumably, he wants to talk about his original essay. It’s unfair to the guy who wants to talk about his link because it looks like he’s trying to change the subject. It’s unfair to the people who go to the comments to read up on the thoughts of the commentariat for the original essay and now we’re talking about some other guy’s links.
So!
The intention is to have a new one of these every week. If you want to talk about a link, post it here! Or, heck, use it as an open thread.
And, if it rolls off, we’ll make a new one. With a preamble just like this one.
Elden Ring DLC drops on Thursday!
At first, I thought that this was yet another GenXer complaining about corporate censorship of art that didn’t comprehend the art that it was censoring. “Join the club, pal”, I thought.
Then I looked at who posted it.Report
https://decider.com/2024/06/18/amazon-censors-full-metal-jacket-artwork-remove-born-to-kill-slogan/
However, others noted that the words were likely left out of the listing as a design requirement — since, as we mentioned, the original slogan is still available on the thumbnail.
“Once again, this isn’t censorship. Many platforms have rules against written text on the main background graphic,” one offered. “It’s there to prevent studios from filling the graphic with critic quotes, mostly.”
Glancing at a few other films, this does seem to be a pattern.Report
You’d think that Modine would care less about them removing the artwork if it was done for reasons like keeping studios from changing the artwork.Report
It’s okay to admit that you were wrong because you didn’t actually understand what happened.Report
I’m delighted to have @mikefkndj point out:
“Matthew, someone posted the other day it’s got to do with not allowing text on the main page photo, because if they allow it the promoters will slap all sorts of critic reviews and stars all over it. The thumbnail still includes the wording, just not the banner on the listing.”
His attribution of this position to “someone” is compelling and I can easily see how you’re swayed by it.Report
Um, what? I quoted the article which makes specific reference to other Tweeters responding with that information… which is what I quoted. The article’s authors reached out to Amazon for comment but didn’t hear back.
I checked several other movies and saw the same: thumbnails with text that was removed from the larger image.
Is your point that I shouldn’t listen to people on Twitter? Boy, that’s a whopper coming from you!
Again. You’re wrong. And now you’re doubling down with borderline ad hominems. An impressive display of assholery!Report
Kazzy, I quoted, in its entirety, the tweet the story linked to.
Here, let me copy the story you linked to:
The first link in those two paragraphs doesn’t like to the right tweet. It, instead, links to Modine’s tweet. The second links to @mikefkndj’s tweet.
I wouldn’t argue that you shouldn’t listen to people on Twitter.
But neither would I argue that you should listen to them.
Their arguments are the things that are worth listening to.
The argument that someone pointed out that someone pointed out that if it were allowed then promoters would slap words and graphics on the graphic is one that I don’t find particularly compelling.
Do you find it compelling?Report
What I find compelling is an observable trend wherein one sort of image (often with text) is used in thumbnails and another sort of image (without text) is used on the main page. I observed this myself. This was not specific to this particular movie and almost certainly has nothing to do with the message of that movie or that text. Modine doesn’t appear to know that so his objection was reasonable in that context. But you have additional context… what I’ve offered you here and what folks on Twitter seemed to present with a certain degree of confidence and knowledge.
But if you want to cling to the idea that Amazon specifically targeted this movie, this image, and the idea behind it.. by all means, you have the right to be wrong.Report
Some examples:
The Godfather
Toy Story
Clockwork Orange
Sound of Music
Passion of the ChristReport
I looked at those movies on Prime Streaming one by one:
The Godfather showed a still from the movie where someone is whispering in Brando’s ear, not the poster.
Toy Story shows a still from the movie where Buzz Lightyear is standing in Andy’s room.
Clockwork Orange shows a still from the movie where the lads are in the milk bar.
The Sound of Music shows Julie Andrews in, like, the 80’s or the 90’s or something, dressed like she’s being interviewed by someone.
Passion of the Christ shows a still from the movie of Jesus post-crown of thorns, pre-crucifixion.Report
“Eh, they censored the art but not because they were being censorious, they were doing what they always do” is a good defense about censoriousness, I guess.
But I’ll quote Modine again: “Not only did they alter a piece of iconic art by Philip Castle, but they completely misunderstood the point of it being there.”
I’d cheerfully amend this statement on his behalf:
“Not only did they alter a piece of iconic art by Philip Castle, but the point of it being there was secondary to their corporate concerns.”
I think we can all agree with that sentence as written.Report
So, you’re acknowledging you were wrong? COOL! Only took [scrolls] 9 more exchanges after the initial one that made this very point. Progress!Report
To be perfectly honest, I think that they’d be better off if they had included a still from the movie.
I checked and here’s a partial list of the movies that did that instead of editing iconic art:
The Godfather
Toy Story
Clockwork Orange
Sound of Music
Passion of the ChristReport
Which they just did!
https://www.amazon.com/Full-Metal-Jacket-Matthew-Modine/dp/B0091X2K0A/ref=sr_1_4?crid=2CQ4XWEOQ4E97&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.0_CCDS98XaqbL_797fMXeqipuiww780EqMozKUibWC2z6B5iUDaWuK8wcG5or4HHLkbKD6DvgYDRqBtky199JlJGMqsum_nmYPdjCAWywtz4IiLeQA0xZ2xAUQh5HZQEBEgDATxikZUEtwPxLzoKt2F2N7Fhm0_ncLmEpHt5Kp5tD50lcvDXKl4NOroaYhmCqT1dLkLP6oD_pR1eqDO-Hiqe3QY-yvoB-B83uqEFaZw.GGTce2m9GZukX1ku42trWBFgXX1YBCdQqzN87khv94k&dib_tag=se&keywords=full+metal+jacket&qid=1718966814&sprefix=full+metal+jacket%2Caps%2C122&sr=8-4Report
Huh.
Nice.Report
“It’s okay to admit that you were wrong because you didn’t actually understand what happened.”
…it isn’t Jaybird you need to be yelling at here, it’s the guy who was the actor in the movie and was wondering why such a significant aspect of it was apparently being censored.
like
do we need to ask you how you’d feel if you hadn’t had breakfast yesterday, hereReport
“Many platforms have rules against written text on the main background graphic”
okay so if someone used a photo of the Stonewall Inn as the graphic for a documentary and airbrushed out the word “STONEWALL”, you’d accept “it’s the platform rules” as the explanation and would not even a little bit find it suspicious?Report
Responding to both your comments…
1.) Yes, Matthew Modine was wrong in his initial Tweet. It appears several people tried to set him straight. I have no idea how he responded. I’m not on X/Twitter so I can’t see the entirety of the exchanges. If he indeed doubled down on his initial comments despite being given additional information to the contrary, I would also point out the silliness. I’m pointing out Jaybird’s here because, well, Jaybird is here and this follow a longstanding pattern of him refusing to listen/learn when provided new information and constantly manipulating conversations to pretend he didn’t say what he said or that evidence that counters his claim really actually totally supports his claims and blahblahblah. He is a disingenuous interlocutor and I like pointing out when that is the case.
2.) I think Modine’s, Jaybird’s, and I’m sure lots of other folks’ initial skepticism was warranted. I think given that Amazon does this in some form or fashion on apparently every single movie and the associated imagery on their streaming platform shows that the skepticism that individual movies and/or their viewpoints are being targeted isn’t ultimately justified. This doesn’t mean the platform’s rules policy are good or are beyond criticism… just that the idea a particular viewpoint is being singled out doesn’t survive scrutiny.
BUT HEY!!! GOOD NEWS!!! Amazon has adjusted their approach and now indeed includes a movie still that features the helmet in question. More info here: https://bleedingfool.com/blogs/amazon-caves-after-matthew-modine-calls-out-full-metal-jacket-censorship/#google_vignette
I can also verify that searching for this still shows the one movie poster in the thumbnail and the screenshot in the full details page (I won’t share links since I think that will get the comment sent to mod but you can easily search yourself).
Ultimately, I don’t really care what Amazon’s rules are in situations like this and I don’t particularly care that Modine was bothered by what he observed and took to Twitter; he has a deep and personal connection to the movie, that character, and that imagery. It makes sense he’d be upset, even if it was just because of Amazon’s policies.
I just thought it was fun to point out how silly Jaybird was being as he doubled, tripled, and quadrupled down on whatever his initial point was despite direct evidence to the contrary being offered to him. Also that he claimed I shouldn’t consider what folks are saying on Twitter as some sort of worthwhile source when all he does is tell us what people on Twitter are saying… EVEN HERE! Bwahahaha…Report
“I just thought it was fun to point out how silly Jaybird was being as he doubled, tripled, and quadrupled down on whatever his initial point was despite being given additional information to the contrary…”
well one of the tweets in the story is deleted, the other is a restatement of someone else’s summary of someone else’s statement. but if you want to believe whatever shows up on Twitter I guess there’s nothing I can say!
it should have been pretty easy for you to find an actual source describing this policy but apparently that was too much like work.
“I don’t really care what Amazon’s rules are in situations like this” you typed quite a lot of words for something you don’t care about
“Amazon has adjusted their approach and now indeed includes a movie still that features the helmet in question.”
an intriguing response to a situation where, you claim, Jaybird was totally wrong and this was just Amazon following policy and anyone who said differently was lying scumReport
Amazon has updated its art to include the text again, for what it’s worth.
So, technically, *EVERYBODY* was lying.Report
I notice a lot of overlap in social media between people who post about drinking leaded gasoline while growing up in the ’70s and turning out just fine and people who have forgotten that inflation in the ’70s was FAR worse than it has been during the post-pandemic economic disruption.
“Toughen up and get on with it” tends to be easier advice to give than to take.Report
Those people had good albums coming out every week, though.Report
Yes. Yes, they did. 1970 to 1973…what a time for great albums.Report
Tell them to Google the lead-crime hypothesisReport
People post about drinking leaded gasoline in the ’70s? I was driving in the ’70s and never heard of such a thing. Probably somebody in some ER somewhere had drunk some kind of gasoline, leaded or otherwise, but it can’t have been common.Report
“Drinking leaded gasoline” is an exaggeration of what they DO post. With all the one-upmanship in those kinds of posts, though, someone might claim it eventually!Report
Willie Mays, one of the last legends of old-time baseball has died.Report
How not to help your cause, a continuing series: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cw44mdee0zzoReport
Good news for Lawyers: The lawyer who was temporarily disbarred for throwing a poop-filled Pringles ™ can from his car on at least 10 different occasions has had his license reinstated.
Note to self: If you’re going to throw Pringles cans filled with poop at a rival, throw them at complete strangers for a while first.Report
It’s creative I’ll give him that. Still doesn’t top several of the cases we reviewed in the professional responsibility class I took in law school.Report
This is something that I am seriously going to try to keep track of:
This is one of the most interesting things I’ve seen for a long time. Housing for the homeless in a high-rise. Maybe it’ll work. Maybe it’ll be Cabrini-Green all over again.
If it works, we should do it all over the country.Report
The failure of most proposals for solving homelessness starts with thinking of it as a problem to be solved instead of a situation to be managed.
Meaning even after the tenants move in there will be a continuing need for intensive counseling, security, and maintenance which will be very expensive and by necessity borne by the taxpayers.Report
I think that an additional problem is this:
“Would you be willing to pay $X to solve homelessness?”
“Yes.”
“Would you be willing to pay $Y to manage homelessness indefinitely?”
“What? No!”
(Assume that Y is larger than X.)
I’m not sure that that problem can be overcome in a democracy.Report
Not in a democracy it can’t but in a republic it canReport
I recommend looking at San Antonio, and specifically at what they’ve done, how much it’s cost, what it’s meant for policing homelessness, and perhaps most importantly, who’s paying for it (or rather, who’s not). It is in many ways a great success; in some ways, less of one, but it’s a strong model to start with.Report
A campus? Seems like the goal is to “graduate” people away from homelessness rather than manage it indefinitely.
And it seems to require a billionaire instead of a committee.
But… it seems like a good model, at least for the… what? A quarter of the people who go there who actually graduate (with another half actually looking to be on a graduation track of some kind)? That’s an amazing success rate.
We can compare the Skid Row tower to San Antonio, I guess.Report
It has layers:
Layer 1: a campsite on the edge of the “campus,” with security, access to laundry, showers, bathrooms, lockers, veterinary care, and perhaps some stuff I’m forgetting, along with some services.
Layer 2: admission to the campus. This requires a commitment to “wrap-around” services, including mental health services, addiction services, financial services, help with finding jobs, and ultimately help with more permanent housing.
Layer 3: “Alumni.” People who’ve “graduated” from Layer 2, who still have access to services, and who are also part of the counseling process for the people in Layer 2. Basically, one of the best things for people experiencing homelessness to get out of homelessness long-term is for them to be exposed to people who have already done that.
So it’s not just dumping them out. They do have access to services even after leaving the campus.Report
I wonder if flat and wide is part of its success.
If so, Skid Row is missing something.Report
This is correct. People want to solve a lot of problems but you really can’t solve many problems. Just manage them. The taxpayers don’t want to pay for very expensive services and you have to many activists with an utter fear of some coercion and compulsion in getting the homeless to take the services that exist for them. They won’t it to be completely voluntary. It can’t and won’t be.Report
I’d take it a step further – people only want problems managed that impact them.Report
Leave it to the state I grew up in to believe that this text:
Means you get to do this:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/19/politics/louisiana-classrooms-ten-commandments/index.htmlReport
Obviously, the First Amendment refers to *CONGRESS* and not the states.
(See? This is what y’all sound like.)
Anyway, it’s not like the kids can read so I’m sure that the damage is already mitigated somewhat.
(Yes, this is unconstitutional. Yes, the First Amendment has been Incorporated. Welcome to the resistance. I hope you’re able to defeat this obviously silly and meaningless gesture.)Report
Just so we are all clear:
Article 1, Section 8 of the Louisiana Constitution:
https://law.justia.com/constitution/louisiana/Article1.html#:~:text=No%20law%20shall%20be%20enacted,prohibiting%20the%20free%20exercise%20thereof.&text=Section%209.,for%20a%20redress%20of%20grievances.Report
Yeah, I don’t read past the first line of a comment either. Waste of time, really.Report
I understand where you are – but you and I aren’t the only ones reading or digesting this. I usually assume more data is better in these discussions.Report
Incorporation is weird. I’m not sure it’s wrong, but it doesn’t make sense the way it’s been done.Report
I understand what it’s going for. “Hey, if Congress can’t make a law abridging your right to speak without getting fired, then States can’t make those laws either”.
I dig it.
It’s just that the way it works in practice is that you have to prove that this or that enumerated Constitutional right should also be Incorporated and that’s an uphill climb, for some reason.
Heck, I even know the theory behind that one… “you have to respect different states having different constituencies and what might be okay in Montana just won’t work in California”.
But I’m coming at it from more of a “The Constitution Is A Suicide Pact” position than one that requires that I appreciate how reasonable that reasonable positions can be.Report
I think the answer just is slavery and then Jim Crow. Absent that then the south losing the war it is hard to imagine there ever being a 14th Amendment. Then if Jim Crow hadn’t existed afterwards it’s hard to imagine the legal doctrines taking shape and ultimately prevailing.Report
MAGAs don’t really care about the Ten Commandments any more than they care about “tradition” in any form. But they are riven with rage and spite at those they consider inferior so these sorts of measures are only meant to be vice signaling.Report
Chip, the rate of Religious Displays Per Capita has been steadily going down since its peak in the 1980’s.Report
Which explains the rise of Christian Nationalism. They need to enforce through coercion what they can’t get through persuasion.
This is why I keep saying we can never accept their arguments at face value.
Religion, tradition, liberty…these words are now vice signals intended to inflict punishment on their hated Outgroups.Report
Saw a funny tweet that suggested: “There should be a new tort called “wrongful legislation” so that citizens/voters can sue elected officials directly without QI when they pass legislation which is clearly and unmistakably unconstitutional.”
The guy who pointed it out was salivating at the thought of establishing such a law.
I suppose that I’d be okay with such a law as well, when I think about it for a few minutes.Report
It should be impeachable. (A lot of things should.)Report
It seems all is not well in Bibi Land:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/06/20/idf-hamas-netanyahu-gaza-israel/Report
In more how not to help your cause, Pro-Palestinian activists have a Kid’s Intifada Corner at the University of Waterloo in Toronto:
https://x.com/NegarMojtahedi/status/1796587686423322826?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1796587686423322826%7Ctwgr%5E2159aa25bcd2b9ddb51dee79970401d901cbaadd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdisqus.com%2Fembed%2Fcomments%2F%3Fbase%3Ddefaultf%3Dlawyersgunsmoneyblog-comt_i%3D14242720https3A2F2Fwww.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com2F3Fp3D142427t_u%3Dhttps3A2F2Fwww.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com2F20242F062Fhappy-solstice-day-to-those-who-celebratet_e%3DHappy20Solstice20Day20to20those20who20celebratet_d%3DHappy20Solstice20Day20to20those20who20celebratet_t%3DHappy20Solstice20Day20to20those20who20celebrates_o%3Ddescversion%3D4951f4dfeb7eac8107266cce8c39144d
They wonder why most Diaspora Jews don’t trust them one bit.Report
I’m sure they lose sleep over the opinions of Jews.Report
Apparently, the FBI raided the mayor of Oakland’s house today.
And republicans think that the DOJ is biased!Report
It appears to be connected to city contracts for services.Report
Garbage services to be exact. This sort of corruption exists everywhere but usually not under a veneer of social justice rhetoric.Report
Sanitation Justice is Climate Justice.Report
French Jews find themselves stuck between a rock and hard place during the upcoming French elections, see anti-Semitism coming from the Right and the Left. They don’t trust anybody.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/20/world/europe/french-election-antisemitism-jews.htmlReport
Politico has an article about Colorado Springs! And they didn’t obviously lie too much!
(Note: The most dangerous place in Colorado Springs is to stand between Richard Skorman and a reporter.)Report
You’re not going to believe this, but Amazon Prime has readded the writing to the helmet.
Check it out here.Report
Okay. I read this tweet and I immediately thought “that seems implausible”:
I looked into Elliot Malin’s twitter and it’s not like he’s a new guy, he’s been on since 2012.
I thought about the numbers and wondered how I could check to see if it were not true.
First thought was to check the OpenSecrets website and look at the donors.
Here’s the numbers for 2020.
And here’s the numbers for 2024.
First glance stuff:
2020: Top five donors had 3 red, 2 blue.
2024: Top five has 5 red.
2020: Top ten donors had 6 red, 4 blue.
2024: Top ten donors have 7 red, 2 blue, 1 both
2020 Top 25 donors had 14 red, 11 blue
2024: Top 25 donors has 15 red, 7 blue, 3 both
Hrm.
Maybe.Report