Threatening and banning critical pieces isn’t what good people do; it’s what groups like the Church of Scientology do. The goal isn’t to censor criticism, but to create a positive counter-narrative. Or more realistically, a populist narrative with “Big Tech” as the antagonist.
I think the tone of my piece may have portrayed a stronger sentiment than I intended—I’ll consider editing to improve that, but in no way am I saying we should ban the films outright (although stalling long enough to find out what the representation will be could be valuable).
Given we don’t know the full intent of the films, the portrayal could be not just critical but malicious (even if merely farcical) - and I’m simply pointing that out now, well before the release date. So that we, across the movement, can be prepared for that negative perception hit and as you say begin working on “creating a positive counter-narrative” …whatever that may be.
I agree outright shutting down critiques is problematic ‘cult-like’ behavior—but EA was already doing that for years prior to FTX which contributed to people’s views that this movement was a cult. The problem I see, having done that prematurely (because of defensiveness, contrarianism, edge-lording), is that there is now a legitimate reason to deflect a potential new wave of negative press and the leaders have ‘evolved’ to saying “optics don’t matter!” The evolution of thinking amongst higher brass is out of sync with the reality of our situation.
I’m not saying stalling the films is something the movement should do at all, merely an option albeit risky… I was sharing that as an option for people who may be featured (and may not be aware they have life rights). The film will get attention no matter what. The flipside is, the film comes out and what, EA says or does nothing? If that’s what everyone thinks is best so be it, I really wasn’t trying to prescribe a course of action, merely suggesting some options (because don’t you hate it when people point out a (potential) problem and not provide some ideas for a solution?)
Threatening and banning critical pieces isn’t what good people do; it’s what groups like the Church of Scientology do. The goal isn’t to censor criticism, but to create a positive counter-narrative. Or more realistically, a populist narrative with “Big Tech” as the antagonist.
I think the tone of my piece may have portrayed a stronger sentiment than I intended—I’ll consider editing to improve that, but in no way am I saying we should ban the films outright (although stalling long enough to find out what the representation will be could be valuable).
Given we don’t know the full intent of the films, the portrayal could be not just critical but malicious (even if merely farcical) - and I’m simply pointing that out now, well before the release date. So that we, across the movement, can be prepared for that negative perception hit and as you say begin working on “creating a positive counter-narrative” …whatever that may be.
I agree outright shutting down critiques is problematic ‘cult-like’ behavior—but EA was already doing that for years prior to FTX which contributed to people’s views that this movement was a cult. The problem I see, having done that prematurely (because of defensiveness, contrarianism, edge-lording), is that there is now a legitimate reason to deflect a potential new wave of negative press and the leaders have ‘evolved’ to saying “optics don’t matter!” The evolution of thinking amongst higher brass is out of sync with the reality of our situation.
What would “stalling the film” look like? And how would you avoid drawing more attention to the film by doing so?
I’m not saying stalling the films is something the movement should do at all, merely an option albeit risky… I was sharing that as an option for people who may be featured (and may not be aware they have life rights). The film will get attention no matter what. The flipside is, the film comes out and what, EA says or does nothing? If that’s what everyone thinks is best so be it, I really wasn’t trying to prescribe a course of action, merely suggesting some options (because don’t you hate it when people point out a (potential) problem and not provide some ideas for a solution?)