S02.E18: Online Harassment

[Athena]

Online harassment is a major problem, but it's rarely prosecuted. If only we'd been warned about this in the early days of the internet.

[Victor the Crab]

confederate flag == nazi Germany flag. Allow that to sink into your dense skulls, Lindsey Graham!

 

Oh, do I love Ollie's Carlos Danger. It takes me right back to 2013 (understanding, full well, how silly that sounds).

[biakbiak]

I totally didn't recognize Colin Hanks, I hope the hair is for a role.

[Delwyn]

Besides the reprise of "Danger!" my favourite part of this episode was the Picasso (in French) "Last week tonight" poster in the background of the Internet parody. Amazing reference. Now I am wondering how many of these inside jokes I haven't noticed on the show before.

[attica]

I hope the hair is for a role.

 

I feel certain that was a wig. I'm glad they showed us outtakes, those are always fun.

 

John's finding a way to work in a 'danger' reference was kind of circuitous, but I appreciate the effort.

[liqidclark]

Amazing episode, IMO.

 

The whole deal with changing the faces on US currency was hysterically unreal. The fact that Jackson hated paper money, and yet has his face is on the $20? I have no WTF left to give after that.

 

Then there was the line about Russia continuing to be funny until it SUDDENLY isn't.

 

I'm sorry, but John Oliver would make a decent puffin. What's wrong with puffins?! :P

 

Yes, the internet can be insane. It's probably good to be reminded of that now and again. The TV "news" reactions to revenge porn were intensely cringeworthy, but of course tabloid pushers would want to make light of unwanted public exposure. The last lady in the video package was laughing like a fuckin' hyena.

 

And the internet ad parody is an instant classic, IMO. "EVERYONE." The applause break after the "insane" joke. The poetry of the tag line for "The Internet" at the end. So much genius. Om nom nom nom....

Edited June 22, 2015 by Liqidclark

[Primetimer]

Angry comedy -- one of the best kinds!

Read the story

[Sharpie66]

I saw his name in the end credits, which I watched just so I could find out who was in the "commercial." I was shocked to see Colin Hanks's name, because I only know him from Band of Brothers, so I didn't recognize him at all!

[trow125]

Besides the reprise of "Danger!" my favourite part of this episode was the Picasso (in French) "Last week tonight" poster in the background of the Internet parody. Amazing reference. Now I am wondering how many of these inside jokes I haven't noticed on the show before.

It said "Vallauri" at the top of the poster -- maybe it was a faux Alex Vallauri? In any event, they did an AMAZING job of recreating that commercial. The production design in that bit was incredible.

[ganesh]

How is it determined that the $20 bill is more popular than the 10? I always ask to break 20s when I do have to use cash. Is there a law that designates monetary denominations? Could we have like a $15 bill?

 

I hate the "just don't take pictures of yourself." It strikes me as kind of prudish and uptight. It is almost the same as "you won't get pregnant if you don't have sex." Or, you could have fun with your life and learn about safe practices first. 

[iMonrey]

That commercial from the 90s for AOL was hysterical. It's scary to think how much the internet has grown from the early days of modem dial-up. 

[Delwyn]

It said "Vallauri" at the top of the poster -- maybe it was a faux Alex Vallauri? In any event, they did an AMAZING job of recreating that commercial. The production design in that bit was incredible.

Oh, I miss-read  it as Vallauris, the artist commune in France that Picasso lived in. Guess my brain invented the S. You're probably right.

[Athena]

I found it difficult to laugh about the harassment the women received especially the college professor being the victim of revenge porn.

 

When I went the Youtube page for this clip via the PTV article, it's been extremely negatively received because of the gamers that were profiled. John and his team did not get the full story there, but I hope that controversy doesn't negate the message that these kind of threats are wrong.

 

I remember those original AOL ads and they did a good job recapturing it.

[Kromm]

I found it difficult to laugh about the harassment the women received especially the college professor being the victim of revenge porn.

 

When I went the Youtube page for this clip via the PTV article, it's been extremely negatively received because of the gamers that were profiled. John and his team did not get the full story there, but I hope that controversy doesn't negate the message that these kind of threats are wrong.

 

I remember those original AOL ads and they did a good job recapturing it.

Apparently this Anita Sarkeesian person is someone that generates a lot of controversy, but all we have to do is look at the comments on the YouTube page for Oliver's video to see people making abusive threats against her.  She can be dead wrong, immoral and a manipulative liar (those are the accusations being tossed around), but still be an effective illustration of this phenomenon, because a lot of the knee-jerk reactions to talking ABOUT her leap immediately to things like calling her a "bitch" and people telling her to kill herself (or threatening to kill her in comments).  

Edited June 22, 2015 by Kromm

[peeayebee]

I was following the GamerGate fiasco/harassment story when it was happening, so I was well aware of what Sarkeesian and others went thru. Seems to me that a lot of the controversy that was generated came from those who wanted to discredit them.

 

 

The original AOL commercial was great in its awfulness, and the parody was outstanding. I recognized the guy who walks in, but not until the closeup of Hanks did I recognize him. They did it all so perfectly. The way that Hanks was typing cracked me up, but everything was great. Loved the outtakes, too.

[Eegah]

One particularly great video is from Jim Sterling (his Youtube show is called Jimquisition), where he calls out all the people launching those horrible attacks on Sakeesian by saying it's their own fault that now no one can give her any kind of criticism, no matter how legitimate (and there's plenty of that to be made), without being labeled a misogynist.

[ZoqFotPik]

 

How is it determined that the $20 bill is more popular than the 10?

I'm guessing ATMs dispensing 20s has a lot to do with it. According the Federal Reserve, there are over 4 times the number of 20s than 10s in circulation, and the 20 is the third most common bill after 100 and 1.

Edited June 23, 2015 by ZoqFotPik

[Merneith]

Apparently this Anita Sarkeesian person is someone that generates a lot of controversy, but all we have to do is look at the comments on the YouTube page for Oliver's video to see people making abusive threats against her.  She can be dead wrong, immoral and a manipulative liar (those are the accusations being tossed around), but still be an effective illustration of this phenomenon, because a lot of the knee-jerk reactions to talking ABOUT her leap immediately to things like calling her a "bitch" and people telling her to kill herself (or threatening to kill her in comments).  

 

Sarkeesian is doing a series of web videos that critique video games from a feminist point of view. It's called "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games." This has prompted the more reactionary element to threaten her with everything from death on down. The whole thing has been one long shit show of harassment in attempt to prevent her from speaking out.

 

A few months ago, Sarkeesian actually had to cancel a speaking engagement at the University of Utah because someone wrote to the school, claiming that feminists had destroyed his life and threatening to stage the biggest school shooting since the massacre at a Canadian school, Ecole Polytechnique,  some years earlier. Law enforcement thought it was serious so on their advice, Sarkeesian had to cancel her speech.

 

There are reasonable things to critique about Sarkeesian's videos and essays, but the harassment has tipped straight into domestic terrorism. It's pretty much impossible to have a nuanced discussion of her views because, inevitably, her haters show up, shouting, "Burn the witch". Gamergate is part of that legion of harassment.

 

Good for John for tackling it. It's no different than the racism that led to the shooting in Charleston (or the religious bigotry that led to the shooting at Charlie Hebdo.) If no one's been shot yet because of Gamergate, it's only because of the negative attention focused on it by the likes of Oliver and Colbert.

[Mindymoo]

Right there with ya, Chattygal. I have heard (well, read) some vile, nasty language hurled at me for being a woman and for being a lesbian. It is hard not to engage with these trolls, but this stuff is scary and awful. In relating why I am standing behind the women who accuse Cosby to my own sexual assault experiences, not only was I called a liar, but I was told I would be shown what rape really is. And then there are the women getting doxxed left and right. It's all so horrible and depressing.

[Kromm]

Sarkeesian is doing a series of web videos that critique video games from a feminist point of view. It's called "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games." This has prompted the more reactionary element to threaten her with everything from death on down. The whole thing has been one long shit show of harassment in attempt to prevent her from speaking out.

 

A few months ago, Sarkeesian actually had to cancel a speaking engagement at the University of Utah because someone wrote to the school, claiming that feminists had destroyed his life and threatening to stage the biggest school shooting since the massacre at a Canadian school, Ecole Polytechnique,  some years earlier. Law enforcement thought it was serious so on their advice, Sarkeesian had to cancel her speech.

 

There are reasonable things to critique about Sarkeesian's videos and essays, but the harassment has tipped straight into domestic terrorism. It's pretty much impossible to have a nuanced discussion of her views because, inevitably, her haters show up, shouting, "Burn the witch". Gamergate is part of that legion of harassment.

 

Good for John for tackling it. It's no different than the racism that led to the shooting in Charleston (or the religious bigotry that led to the shooting at Charlie Hebdo.) If no one's been shot yet because of Gamergate, it's only because of the negative attention focused on it by the likes of Oliver and Colbert.

But that's the interesting (and ultimately saddest) part of this.  Sarkeesian could be guilty of every single bit of truthbending or exaggeration being tossed at her (I'm not saying she is, keep reading...) and it wouldn't matter in the least.  Because the parts that ARE undeniably on display to everyone... the comments on news articles, on YouTube videos, on Twitter and blogs... those show the truth of the overall assertion that misogynistic comments and violent threats follow women around on the Internet. People aren't happy simply to say she's wrong (if that's what they think) or that she's a liar (if that's what they think), it's just inevitable it seems that the "bitch", "whore", c***" stuff, and asking her to kill herself (or for someone to murder her) follow.

 

I won't pretend to have kept up with the specifics of who (if anyone) specific this lady has tossed accusations at in her speeches or writing.  There's no saying she's a saint or even right about all of that.  But does she have to be?  You can criticize someone without going to certain places... but when it's a woman speaking about gender issues, apparently the gloves come off.

[attica]

I've watched most of Sarkeesian's videos. They're basically academic lectures, detailing the themes and tropes of a whole slew of games. There's not a bomb thrown in any of them. She's just pointing out: hey, a lot of games use Damsels in Distress! Hey, many games don't have a female avatar to play as! Nothing controversial at all, unless you think her talking about game's content in a measured and, frankly, pretty dry tone is The End Of Boys' Fun Forever.

 

(The whole mess started when she put up a Kickstarter to fund her research and video-making. The outrage from male gamers garnered so much publicity that she ended up funding enough for many more videos than she'd planned. So instead of shutting her up, they gave her a career. But they still want her dead. Because men are hysterical.)  

[Kromm]

I've watched most of Sarkeesian's videos. They're basically academic lectures, detailing the themes and tropes of a whole slew of games. There's not a bomb thrown in any of them. She's just pointing out: hey, a lot of games use Damsels in Distress! Hey, many games don't have a female avatar to play as! Nothing controversial at all, unless you think her talking about game's content in a measured and, frankly, pretty dry tone is The End Of Boys' Fun Forever.

 

(The whole mess started when she put up a Kickstarter to fund her research and video-making. The outrage from male gamers garnered so much publicity that she ended up funding enough for many more videos than she'd planned. So instead of shutting her up, they gave her a career. But they still want her dead. Because men are hysterical.)  

Err.  You have me until that last sentence. 

[Unusual Suspect]

Honestly, the worst thing about the whole thing with Sarkeesian is how mild her criticism is compared to how vitriolic the attacks on her have been. This is making Everest out of molehills.

 

Another great piece from Oliver.

[Irlandesa]

A few months ago, Sarkeesian actually had to cancel a speaking engagement at the University of Utah because someone wrote to the school, claiming that feminists had destroyed his life and threatening to stage the biggest school shooting since the massacre at a Canadian school, Ecole Polytechnique,  some years earlier. Law enforcement thought it was serious so on their advice, Sarkeesian had to cancel her speech.

This actually ties back into the gun issue Oliver mentioned at the top of the program.  Sarkeesian was actually going to go forward with the speech, even with the threats, but she wanted people to go through security and not have guns.  She was told that, according to state law, if a person had proper permits, they had to be allowed in the building with their weapons. 

 

So she couldn't ask for a basic safety accommodation because...guns trump threats.

 

It doesn't even have to be a headline-worthy story to know what John is talking about; raise your hand if you are a woman who has ever made a comment on a forum and gotten a violent threat in response from someone who divined (or assumed) your gender.

The one good thing about Gamergate (not that there's anything good about it) is that it shows that this kind of thing is more widespread than people think as people speak up.  I remember listening to a podcast where a comedian was a guest.  And this comedian (I want to say Patton Oswalt or Jim Norton) said that rape threats were bad but he didn't think women got them unless they were discussing sexual assault or something related to rape online.  And I think people actually think that...that women don't get threats unless they're talking about something like a rape scandal.  Yeah but not...it's in any realm.  And those kinds of vitriolic comments are especially common when a woman discusses a matter that had been previously been assumed to be dominated by male fans regardless of what the actual percentages are.  Games are one of those areas.  Professional sports, especially male sports, are another. 

Edited June 24, 2015 by Irlandesa

[morgankobi]

]The one good thing about Gamergate (not that there's anything good about it) is that it shows that this kind of thing is more widespread than people think as people speak up.  I remember listening to a podcast where a comedian was a guest.  And this comedian (I want to say Patton Oswalt or Jim Norton) said that rape threats were bad but he didn't think women got them unless they were discussing sexual assault or something related to rape online.  And I think people actually think that...that women don't get threats unless they're talking about something like a rape scandal.  Yeah but not...it's in any realm.  And those kinds of vitriolic comments are especially common when a woman discusses a matter that had been previously been assumed to be dominated by male fans regardless of what the actual percentages are.  Games are one of those areas.  Professional sports, especially male sports, are another. 

(Bolding mine.) I really hope it wasn't Patton. 

[90PercentGravity]

I totally didn't recognize Colin Hanks, I hope the hair is for a role.

Ah! I kept thinking it was Benicio Del Toro, but knew he was too young and skinny to actually be him.

[fastiller]

I totally didn't recognize Colin Hanks...

 

Ah! I kept thinking it was Benicio Del Toro...

 

I think this is the only time I've ever seen Colin Hanks & Benicio Del Toro confused with one another.  I think it's likely to be the only time, come to think of it.

[attica]

Err.  You have me until that last sentence.

 

Oh. Right, sorry. #Notallmen. I forgot. :)

[Hanahope]

Sarkeesian could be guilty of every single bit of truthbending or exaggeration being tossed at her

 

I don't care if nothing true comes out of her mouth, that is still no excuse, ever, to threaten someone with rape, murder, or any type of bodily harm against them or their family.  I completely dislike Rush Limbaugh and know he lies about all sorts of things.  I still wouldn't threaten him with bodily harm.

Edited June 24, 2015 by Hanahope

[90PercentGravity]

A guy in New York threatened Nancy Grace while she was reporting in Arizona and he was extradited to Arizona and charged. He eventually plead to computer tampering and was placed on probation. Not much, but more than a lot of these guys are getting. I'd be curious to see what would happen if Sarkeesian, Wu or the other one (totally blanking on her name) came here for a while. Would Arpaio take the same action? Or would he ignore it since they aren't Nancy Grace or in his demo?

Edited June 24, 2015 by 90PercentGravity

[possibilities]

I also wonder: Has Nancy Grace taken up the cause and been advocating for these cases affecting other women to be taken more seriously? I don't follow her ravings, so maybe she has. But if not, well... she oughta.

[Kromm]

A guy in New York threatened Nancy Grace while she was reporting in Arizona and he was extradited to Arizona and charged. He eventually plead to computer tampering and was placed on probation. Not much, but more than a lot of these guys are getting. I'd be curious to see what would happen if Sarkeesian, Wu or the other one (totally blanking on her name) came here for a while. Would Arpaio take the same action? Or would he ignore it since they aren't Nancy Grace or in his demo?

 

I also wonder: Has Nancy Grace taken up the cause and been advocating for these cases affecting other women to be taken more seriously? I don't follow her ravings, so maybe she has. But if not, well... she oughta.

I don't know, but I imagine that Nancy Grace linked being threatened to her being a Conservative rather than to her being a woman.  Because that's how Nancy Grace rolls (they all do--if they can't bring it back to forwarding the Conservative cause they won't mention it at all).

[possibilities]

I didn't even think of the possibility that she'd be in solidarity on the basis of gender; I just hoped for a fleeting moment that she would think no one should be threatened, and since she'd experienced it she might want to speak up on behalf of catching and stopping the people who do it, like how the person who threatened her was dealt with. I forgot entirely that conservatism was the only basis on which it's wrong to threaten someone-- clearly I am out of touch with the depths of the full self-pitying agenda.

[Kromm]

I didn't even think of the possibility that she'd be in solidarity on the basis of gender; I just hoped for a fleeting moment that she would think no one should be threatened, and since she'd experienced it she might want to speak up on behalf of catching and stopping the people who do it, like how the person who threatened her was dealt with. I forgot entirely that conservatism was the only basis on which it's wrong to threaten someone-- clearly I am out of touch with the depths of the full self-pitying agenda.

Who do you suppose Nancy Grace would want to stop online harassment? A government she thinks should do even less than they already are?

 

If she could contrive of a way for God to do it, she'd be happy.  But other human beings?  Won't happen in Graceland.

[90PercentGravity]

Nancy Grace wasn't targeted because of her political views. It was actually both her and Jane Valez-Mitchell that were targeted and it was because the person didn't like what they were saying about Jodi Arias. It wasn't necessarily because they were women, but the threats were that the guy wanted slit their throats and hang them naked from a tree, which is similar to the threats the gamer women are getting. Now... while the threats were not politically motivated, one has to wonder if Joe Arpaio would have taken up the gauntlet if a similar threat had been made toward, say... Whoopie Goldberg. That's why I wonder what would happen if the gamer women were to come here? Because they absolutely would be getting similar threats while they were here. So would Joe Arpaio get involved then?

 

Arpaio has also been known to extradite people who make threats against him online, including anonymous threats, so MCSO has the resources and knowledge to figure out who makes the threats in at least some cases.

Edited June 24, 2015 by 90PercentGravity

[possibilities]

I don't think anyone here was suggesting that some women deserve it. I think it's been suggested that some conservatives (like Arpaio or Grace) may think some women deserve it, and that they may also behave as though conservatives are the only ones who deserve protection.

 

It might not be so, but that is the question I think is being asked: would they protect someone who didn't agree with them, or do they only take action on a crime perpetrated against "their side"? Some of us are cynical based on past observations, but I don't think anyone has said they agree with selective enforcement, we are only speculating on whether it would turn out that way. Maybe we shouldn't, but I think that's what we've been doing.

[AnaRow]

I didn't realize that there were people who actually thought bad of Jon Stewart speech. I mean aside from the folks at Fox News. I was grateful that there was at least one person in the media who actually gets it and used his public platform to say it, even if it wasn't funny.