PIRATE BAY- THE SEQUEL NFT’s on The Bay

Image: Vice News

PIRATE BAY- THE SEQUEL NFT’s on The Bay

It’s like 2003 all over again. For those of you, born after the 2000s. You might not be aware of what Pirate Bay is.

Well, it’s a secret, not so secret place where angsty teenagers used to download and pirate music and movies.  And you would tie up the phone line for hours. And you mom would yell about not being able to gossip with the Aunt Sheila.

Now that’s out the way.

NFT’s are all the rage now. And if you don’t know what an NFT or non-fungible tokens is, it’s basically a picture that you own the rights to and no one else can distribute or use it without your express written consent.

And this new reimagine Pirate Bay is trying to demolish that by basically making it so you can reproduce and reuse the once original and NFT. And that would in turn dismantle the system that is NFT.

See the problem?

Making something that is supposed to be exclusive available to everyone eliminates the novelty.

Folks on the twitterverse are weighing in on the morality of this which is hilarious in itself.

For more info check out Vice News

https://www.vice.com/en/article/xgdxvw/someone-made-a-pirate-bay-for-nfts

Taylor Swift Facing Trial in “Shake It Off” Copyright Lawsuit

Evan Agostini/Invision/AP/Shutterstock

The first single ” Shake It Off ” released from Taylor Swift’s fifth studio album, 1989 is now in a lawsuit for alleged copyright issues. The lawsuit was first filed back in 2017 claiming that Swift copied the lines “players gonna play” and “haters gonna hate” from a 3LW song.

The lawsuit was dismissed back in 2018 when the judge claimed the lyrics were too generic to be copyrighted. Sean Hall and Nathan Butler, writers of the 3LW song then appealed the ruling once again, and in 2019 the court reversed the lawsuit.

The judge from 2017, Michael Fitzgerald who had originally dismissed the case denied Taylor’s prompt to do so again. Fitzgerald is now claiming there’s still the plausible cause of un-originality.

The case is set to go to a jury trial but no date has been set currently.

I chose this article because, I am a Swiftie myself and I feel as this lawsuit does not have enough concrete evidence to be taken to trial. I think it is suspicious that the lawsuit was dismissed at first but now it is being taken to trail again.

iHeart Pledges to Only Play “Taylors Version”

Photo by Taylor Swift on Twitter

With Taylor Swift in the process of slowly re-recording her old work, with the newest release of her album Red radio stations were still playing the old versions, now owned by Scooter Braun. iHeart, the world’s largest radio chain made a public pledge recently to only play “Taylors Version” of her songs.

Tom Poleman, chief programming officer for iHeart Media states that “whenever Taylor re-records a new track, we immediately replace the old versions.” He also states that the company is fully committed to delivering and playing what the fans want to hear. It has been abundantly clear that fans want to hear the newly re-recorded versions.

Variety Magazine made a comment that most radio stations never switched out the “gold tracks” from the old version to the new track. Although Taylor never came forth with the wishes of playing strictly “Taylors Version”, Swifties have made it clear that they want to hear the re-recorded version.

As of now iHearts the executive decision only applies to the re-recorded version of Fearless, which was released this past June and obviously Red. As Taylor keeps releasing her own versions of her old albums, iHeart will only play those versions.

New Twitter CEO Bans Account Tracking the Ghislaine Maxwell Trial

@TrackerTrial, a prominant account that was giving reports on the Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking scandal preliminary was deleted by new Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal. The account, which was controlled by The Free Press Report, had amassed 525,000 followers in only fourteen days.

In a post on Substack, The Free Press Report shared a picture of the message they got, which blamed them for utilizing Twitter in a “manner intended to artificially amplify or suppress information or engage in behavior that manipulates or disrupts people’s experience on Twitter.”

This is extremely concerning, as it seems that the consequence of censorship is being handed out for little to nothing. Everyone can agree morally that groups such as Qanon or ISIS probably shouldn’t have a platform online, however the norm of social media CEO’s being able to take down any account they want creates a slippery slope. Any account that makes edgy content or is simply reporting on controversial issues run the risk of facing demonetization and or full out suspension.

Analyzing the Aesthetics of Right-Wing Extremist Media

Haley Mlotek, a writer for the Columbia Journalism Review, wrote an article recently discussing the appeal and the appearance of right-wing media to those who consume it. She suggests there are two main “aesthetic modes” of said media. First, is an exaggerated sense of seriousness, whether that be to do with the message itself, or simply the set design having contrasting colors and headlines that take up half the screen.

According to Irwin Chen, the lead designer at the New School’s Journalism and Design program, “Once you start saying This is the color we’re using, this is the typeface we’re using, it doesn’t matter if there is a lack of a style or a lack of design discipline,” Chen said. “It’s just that you’re being consistent.”

This consistency proves to be effective not only in extremist media, but in most forms of marketing. It’s easy for consumers to associate something arbitrary with the product you’re selling.

Mlotek’s second aesthetic mode is invisibility. She argues that places on the internet that allows people to be anonymous platforms like Facebook. These sites often are overly mundane, and have the potential to display misinformation right next to images of people’s vacations and pets, which suggest to consumers that the misinformation they are seeing is normal and justified.

Twitch Bans Soulja Boy Twice in One Day

Famous rapper Soulja Boy has managed to get himself banned, unbanned, and re-banned within 24 hours. The reasons for his banishment are unclear, however, after recently joining the streaming world, Soulja Boy has already made an impression. In the past, he’s claimed he’s the reason for Twitch’s success and often criticized those who left the platform for YouTube.

One theory for Soulja Boy’s first short-lived five-minute ban is an accidental copyright strike. One fan reported Soulja Boy playing sound samples minutes before the ban. This ban could have been automatic on Twitch’s end which is why it was so short. The second ban is still unclear.

The whole situation has amused Soulja Boy’s fans. Some fans even claim that Twitch has been trolling the rapper. This isn’t the first time Soulja Boy has caused drama on social media and it certainly won’t be the last.

I chose this article because I know little about Twitch. I think it’s interesting that Twitch hasn’t made an official statement for why the rapper was banned. Although the responses to the situations have been light-hearted a lack of response from Twitch could change that.

Sources:

https://gamerant.com/twitch-bans-souljaboy-twice-same-day/

Health Experts Say Gargling Mouthwash Does Not Kill Coronavirus

America is living in an age of misinformation. During a Town Hall meeting on Wednesday, Senator Ron Johnson a Wisconsin Representative made a casual remark that gargling mouthwash has proved to kill the coronavirus. Senator Johnson has been at the forefront of spreading covid-19 conspiracy theories and had even had his Youtube channel removed for violating their misinformation policy.

The Senator has been open about his skepticism towards the vaccine mandates and has even been an active promoter of drugs such as Ivermectin that have been proven to be ineffective in treating the coronavirus. His latest mouthwash cure is yet another example of his lack of knowledge.

According to health experts mouthwash can partially kill off the coronavirus in one’s mouth however most coronavirus infections are present in the nose. The Senator wasn’t completely off base with his latest theory however infectious-disease expert, Kim Woo-Joo tells the Washington Post,  “Even if gargling kills some of the virus, it won’t be able to clean the nasal area, nor the viruses that’s already penetrated deeper into the body,”.

Experts are currently exploring mouthwash and its effect on the virus.

Unfortunately for the Senator, there isn’t enough current evidence that’s strong enough to back his claim. Listerine has even debunked his theory on their website.

This article frustrated me. I struggle to understand how people in positions of power with access to correct information choose to believe myths over facts. People in power have a responsibility to provide accurate information to the public even if it differs from their personal beliefs. In the case of the covid-19 pandemic, misinformation could result in lives lost.

I think Americans should hold our leaders to a higher standard. I respect Youtube for taking Senator Johnson’s Youtube page down. This statement was a reminder to his colleagues and others that share similar views, that their actions do have consequences.

Sources:

https://www.listerineprofessional.com/covid-19-update

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/09/10/ivermectin-covid-humans/

Federal Court overturns Texas Law banning social media ‘viewpoint discrimination

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images via https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/1/22809654/texas-law-blocked-netchoice-ccia-injunction-viewpoint-discrimination

Recently, a federal judge voted to block a pending Texas law that was set to limit social platforms’ ability to monitor content on the basis of violating the First Amendment. The Texas Social Media Law looks to “web services with more than 50 million monthly active users from removing or otherwise limiting content based on the user’s “viewpoint,” along with other posts requiring a quicker takedown period of illegal posts and lower moderation of “controversial” posts.

The order to block this pending law came from Judge Pitman and the court in Austin, Texas. They found that the alleged “viewpoint discrimination” in the law can be understood as editorial discretion. Judge Pitman also notes other clauses in the law were “inordinately burdensome given the unfathomably large numbers of posts on these sites and apps,”. The order also notes noted that this law was intended to fight “liberal-leaning” moderation on sites such as Twitter and Facebook. It is obvious as the threshold of active monthly users is very high, at 50 million, and if it were lower it would have also covered conservative-friendly sides like Parlor and Gab.

“Private companies that use editorial judgment to choose whether to publish content — and, if they do publish content, use editorial judgment to choose what they want to publish — cannot be compelled by the government to publish other content.”

Federal Court Order against Texas Social Media Law

New and pending laws on social media usage are what are going to affect our futures as media professionals directly. Having an understanding of laws and what is or isn’t covered by the First Amendment is key to staying on top of our own possible media businesses.

Robertson, A. & Brandom, R. “Federal court blocks Texas law banning ‘viewpoint discrimination on social media” The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/1/22809654/texas-law-blocked-netchoice-ccia-injunction-viewpoint-discrimination

Facebook, to be Submitted to Federal Investigation

It goes without saying that many social media platforms today, despite various efforts are incapable of self-regulation. Facebook has once again made the daily headlines for misleading claims made toward advertisers and investors about public safety advertisement reach. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Maria Cantwell are urging federal regulations to look into Facebook or its executives to determine whether they have violated security laws. Particularly, Warren is calling on the Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission. Cantwell, on the other hand published a letter in which she encouraged the Federal Trade Commission to hold Facebook accountable for its deceptive business practices. Evidence of the claims made by the Senators came directly from a testimony made by one of Instagram’s directors, Adam Mosseri, before a commerce subcommittee in regards to the protection of minors on the platform. Apparently, disclosures made by whistleblowing ex-employee- Frances Haugen- of security violation, laid the foundation for the building of tangible argument with an actual case. Warren uses Haugen’s statements to justify her initial request of putting Facebook in the spotlight. This post is important because privacy and social media are two elements that have long gone head to head in disagreement. Facebook policies have made headlines time and time again, and has yet to cease being reprimanded for policy regulation.

Original Source: CNBC News. Pictured: Sen. Elizabeth Warren in an Oct. 26 hearing.

Source: CNBC News

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/09/sens-cantwell-warren-urge-federal-investigations-into-facebook.html

Debt Collectors can Now Become Your Virtual Friends

Your debt collectors can now message you on social media…Yes! It is happening. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has put out new rules regarding debt collectors getting in touch with their debtors. They can now text, email or private message people on social media. Although it has been made clear and an important rule that these debt collectors must announce their identity and their purpose of contact, as they are prohibited from simply befriending their debtors on Social Media.

Michael Lawton, a representative with Wisconsin’s Department of Financial Institutions explained to TMJ news yesterday, that the traditional methods of communication are simply no longer utilized by folks. This includes phone calls and emails- this phenomenon has made it harder for debt collectors to get in touch with their clients in a timely manner. He also explained that this is the first change to ever have been made to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act since 1977. Though it may seem far fetched at first, the process of getting in touch is lawfully required to be very private, and as previously mentioned, debt collectors are required to identify themselves, and finally, recipients are granted an opt-out option at any time after receiving the messages. It is important to note that even with these changes, consumers still have rights to cease further contact, should the exchange of messages become excessive. This article is very important because it is a clear representation of our current definition of privacy, and superbly exemplifies the rising importance of social media in our lives.

Source: https://www.tmj4.com/news/i-team/debt-collectors-can-now-private-message-you-on-social-media-learn-about-new-rules-and-your-rights