“Anonymous vs. Scientology”:
http://www.cnettv.com/9742-1_53-32298.html?tag=cnetfd.vid

…and a thread at a “Anonymous” rally board:
http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=3770

A political protest or an art exhibition, however “geeky” its origins, is NOT the place to deploy a simple-minded camera whore. Both events are deeply dependent upon getting decent PR. Both want their audience to do more than chuckle and wander on.
As stated above, if Ms. Slutsky had been willing to maintain her composure and simply let the folks involved speak, her coverage might simply have been unenlightened. As it is, her behavior is, to slip into the current parlance, unadulterated FAIL.

Happily, Anonymous is getting coverage from a fair number of more respectable outlets; CNet’s intellectual vacuity doesn’t hurt the movement in the least. And, while Anonymous is quite serious about its social goals, it’s also in the business of having fun. Especially at the expense of the slow-of-wit.

Good luck on your own home front.

-not_quite_Anonymous

Bandwidth talks. If this shit were on bittorrent, there would be 0 seeders.

I see no reason to avoid posting my honest, true opinion on things, even if non-positive, to avoid the terrifying wrath of a handful of disagreeing comments at the end of said posting. Nobody in there is particularly abusive by my standards, nobody goes over the line into actionable statements… all in a day’s weblogging, really.

This is not a fan club, after all. Well, not an expected one, anyway.

But mud-slinging aside, It seems a fundamental misunderstanding on Jason’s part is at heart here. There is, I think, a generational gap, per se, between Jason and the GETV crew in how they approach filmmaking. Jay comes from a background that views video media as something of a serious art form that requires a proper set of discipline to execute and produce a quality respectful piece of video; his works reflect his philosophy and training in the field. Meanwhile, Geek Entertainment, like so many things that has come out of the “Web 2.0″ cultural trend, is an amateur production with a completely different, almost ad-hoc, pure entertainment approach to making videos that are released in short bursts of clips, unfamiliar as to what came before them. Both parties have different approaches to doing interviews, and craft their production to a particular taste. GETV pumps out stuff that appeals to and is aimed towards a certain target audience, while Jason wants to ensure his topics and interviews are given the proper level of respect and intellect they deserve. They’re two completely opposing philosophies on the same medium and subject matter.

Perhaps Jason felt that the GETV guys (and yes, there really are people who are named Slutsky) have desecrated BBSes and other related topics in that video in question, let alone offended by the method by which the interviews were conducted. I personally do not see anything wrong with asking “What’s a BBS?”; I don’t know about you, but I’m sure many people from those days would be happy to explain it to the younger generation whose only familiarity with online communication and socializing is in the form of things like instant messaging and Facebook. Plenty of scientists I’m sure have to put up with similar tactics of not knowing much about the field when interviewed by a reporter about a latest research find or whatnot. Again, target audience: for whom is this stuff is made for?

I’m not here to defend GETV, which doesn’t appeal to me to begin with. We’re all entitled to our own opinions about whatever and to express it, and we all see the same things in different perspectives. But I would advise you, Jason, to next time you come across something like this to step back for a moment and consider that not everything is made in a way that would suit your tastes and methodology on the same subject matter (thus avoiding attracting nonconstructive asshattery such as demonstrated by ‘adam quirk’, ‘FSFunky’ and the fake ‘violet blue’ above in the process.) Let the dumbasses fall for the crap, and let the quality stuff prevail. Stick with what you do best.

On a side note, I personally can’t stand the viral YouTube stuff with its extremely short lifespan and low-culture shallowness, and I think that the meaning of the word ‘geek’ has been so dumbed down that anyone literally can proclaim themselves to be a geek simply by purchasing the latest do-everything cell phone and knowing which button to press to turn on the computer. But maybe that’s just the state of culture today. Sigh.

I will, of course, let your counterpoints stand on their own merits.

Also, do you dislike the use of “l33t” because you are emotionally attached to that verbal abortion, or because you realize it is an abomination?

Also, yes, I realize that blogs are a great way for any self-important asshat to feel superior, and I realize that this isn’t going to change anytime soon. I don’t mind it at all, and find it very entertaining.

BTW (by the way), are you trying to mimic The Rock with your eyebrow raised like that, or did you stroke out?

Seriously, who gives a shit? Your name got out there, if people were truly interested they would get on the internet and find out more and find out the “correct” information.

If someone was barely interested in the subject and was just watching ms. Slutsky’s chest bouncing around, they got their fill.

Don’t like don’t watch it. Want to piss and moan about it on your blog, go right ahead. But stop taking yourself and everything else so goddamn seriously.

I’ll just have to chalk you up in the “hater” category. No worries, diversity is the spice of life. You’re certainly not the first and won’t be the last. Nonetheless, we’ll continue to make media that pisses you off. Why? Because it’s fun, we’re passionate about what we do and we like documenting other people’s passions. Thanks for your sage advice & again, cheers!

It is possible to discuss technical subjects for a general audience while still being 1. Accurate, 2. Clever, 3. Funny, and 4. Listenable. Your contempt for the audience shines through with every frame, with your every “ironic” use of the terms “l33t” and “RTFM”. I despise this and will continue to do so.

Hiding behind your title is poor, and simplistic. I’m sure you can point to “geek” if someone says they didn’t get it and point to “entertainment” if someone like myself contends your show plays like a broken speak-and-spell, but that’s taking the easy way out. Acting like 2k of text in a weblog entry represents an unfathomable amount of discussion of your product is just the kind of light-n-fluffy “ha ha” hipsterism that infects the show itself.

No, I am not in the least bit interested in being interviewed by anyone connected to Geek Entertainment TV.

Also, aim the fucking camera at the interviewee when they respond. Film your eye candy nodding at some other point in the day, after you get the useful footage. If you’re going to be shallow and ape news organizations, use some of the positive aspects.