It’s always fascinating to see how “who whom” trumps absolutely everything else for the SJW. Not even war or criminal accusations are as important as their identity boundaries are to them. A tale of two tweets from the SJW micro-Twitter to which they’ve retreated in the aftermath of the Musk acquisition.
Just deleted a link to an article on the Gaimanbots published on a site that’s comicsgate affiliated. Mea culpa! TL;DR: s’lookin like someone hired a very expensive cyberPR company to flood major social media platforms with cornball “Gaiman! He’s ginchy!” AI-generated bot posts.
I have been puzzled by your silence on the serious allegations leveled against Gaiman. Promoting his work without even a mention is shocking to me, given Bleeding Cool’s gossip column origins. Will you cover this story?
It literally never occurs to them that they are actively assisting the media’s wall of silence regarding the Neil Gaiman sexual assault allegations because they are hiding most of what little coverage exists since they don’t like the only journalists who are willing to breach that wall. In fact, many of them even rejected the initial allegations due to an insane theory that Boris Johnson’s sister had manufactured the allegations in order to destroy Neil Gaiman’s reputation due to Gaiman being a public advocate for transexualism.
Meanwhile, no one besides Fandom Pulsehas covered the story about the bots and the professional social media campaign being waged on behalf of Neil Gaiman, aside from The Bookseller‘s initial reporting of Gaiman’s engagement of the firm.
Neil Gaiman appears to have engaged a damage-control firm and begun an extensive social media campaign TWO MONTHS BEFORE the podcast that broke the news of the alleged sexual assaults, based on what the members of the Neil Gaiman Facebook group have observed.
In the past few weeks, there have been reports that a reputation management firm has been hired by Neil or on his behalf, and their activities may include astroturfing X with positive comments about his work. Messages take the form of paragraph of Chat-GPT-style text praising a Gaiman project, or describing it as if readers will never have heard of it before (which is not appropriate for the intended audience, who have already been discussing it for years). There is then a bunch of replies to the post expressing delight about the work. I assumed that couldn’t happen on Facebook.
A few days ago I was concerned by a post that was shared to this group from the Neil Gaiman group. Now, we’re all positive folks and we’re here because we like Neil’s stuff (or did until recently), so it’s not unusual for the mood to be on the enthusiastic side. It’s possible I’m seeing more than is there. But… You can check how long somebody has been a member of a group, so I had a quick look for each of the posters. Tortoise Media’s podcast was published on 3rd July so there would have been an awareness of their initial investigations in the months running up to then. A remarkable number of commenters only joined the Neil Gaiman group in May, June, and July.
A Reddit commenter points out that Gaiman’s claims to have been diagnosed with autism – at the age of 62 – appear to be rather dubious. He first made the claims on March 8, 2023. That would appear to have been before the podcast production was underway, but well after Gaiman was aware that he was going to be facing public accusations of sexual assault.
If I remember correctly, didn’t he also talk about having autism for the first time a few months before the podcast was released? I think he confirmed it for the first time on Tumblr earlier this year, (and surprise, that was one of the defenses used by a friend of his who talked to Tortoise). Seems like he and his team were already long prepared for the podcast episodes to drop and had a plan in place.
It’s certainly interesting that while Gaiman is more than willing to tell people that he’s autistic – which apparently has not impressed anyone as an even remotely legitimate diagnosis – while continuing to conceal what appears to be his continued involvement with Scientology. Personally, I think he should have gone with sociopathy, although perhaps that would have struck just a little bit too close to home.
Check out this breakdown of joe rogans new special and how over the top and aggressively gay he is. It’s at 1.4 million views in under a week and climbing. I want to see the fear in the eyes of all the frauds who lie and ass kiss rogan and attack anyone who makes fun of him in any way. I want to see that moment when they realize everyone knows now and they can no longer gas light and ad hominem anyone who makes joe feel insecure or sad.
I want to see them slowly start saying more vague things about joes contribution to comedy. Maybe from “saving” all of comedy to “he’s not totally destroying it. I mean he’s a really nice guy when you get to know him.” I knew this day would come. Enjoy every minute of this
Joe routinely talks shit about me on his podcast for saying obviously true and hilarious things. Well. I’ve learned in farming that eventually the chickens all come home to roost. And on a level of feel for the guy. I don’t hate him. I’m not taking pleasure in his humiliation. It’s all the comics who know better and lie. I do take pleasure in watching them squirm knowing that they have to “pivot their position.” I don’t think joe is as aware of the situation as all the leaches and ass kissers around him. Those guys can be the most vicious and the most cowardly.
The critical breakdown of Rogan’s stand-up special is much, much funnier than the special itself.
Unfortunately now it sounds like the crowd’s initial excitement and enthusiasm is running on fumes as we’ve got our first real obvious awkward bomb of the night. The crowd goes completely silent and Joe just stands there like a deer in headlights, now I don’t know if this is from excitement and arousal or from nervousness and fear likely some combination but this is the moment Joe starts profusely sweating through the mustard blouse perhaps its nerves from some subconscious realization that his shadow is about to take the wheel and squirt out a major leak here. Pay attention to this region here and watch how it develops throughout the show and by the way oh oh man look at Chekov’s Stool behind him just teasing us back there. Stop teasing us Joe! He knows how to build suspense that’s for sure.
Seriously though these aren’t really jokes, this is all just his regular podcast banter he’s been doing for the past 5 years, just yelled on a stage in front of an audience, and the bombs are piling up… it’s clear that his heart isn’t in it anymore. This thing was just a Greatest Hits Montage of the worst era of this guy’s podcast condensed into an hour.
This is how it’s done. In fact, if everyone refused to talk to the media, its influence would be significantly degraded, because without the cover of direct quotes from the relevant sources, their little hit pieces always end up looking like the groundless opinion pieces they actually are.
News query from The Associated Press
I’m a reporter covering religion and politics for The Associated Press. I’m working a story about Sen. JD Vance and the role of Catholicism in his life and approach to public policy. He has often been discussed as being in dialogue with Catholic post-liberals or integralists. You’ve been described as one of the leaders of the integralist movement, or as you have described it, political Catholicism. Would you be open to an interview on this topic, on your interactions with Sen. Vance and on your thoughts about the implications of his nomination for the vice presidency?
Peter Smith, Reporter, Global Religion team, The Associated Press
Dear Mr. Smith, Thank you for your message. With whatever respect may be due, I would rather handle a hissing viper than interview with a journalist from the Associated Press. Come to think of it, I have spoken unjustly; vipers are at least sincere in their own way.
Adrian Vermeule, Ralph S. Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School
Personally, I usually don’t even bother responding to the inquiries, because even the most firmly negative response just causes them to run their Reluctant Interview script, in which they first appeal to the opportunity to let you tell your own side of the story, then to the importance of the story, and finally, to veiled threats about some of the negative stuff they could write about, but might not if you talk to them.
Don’t take the bait, in fact, don’t even respond to them in the first place. Don’t get cute, don’t get clever; the more dishonest reporters will even try to utilize any rhetoric on your part and present it as you somehow threatening them. Remember, their whole objective is to make you look bad, and anything you say to them, or write to them, is potential grist for the mill.
But don’t delete their emails, always save them, in case you need them for the police or for a lawsuit. Because it looks really bad for them when they are issuing those veiled threats or claim to be “giving you the chance to respond” to a story that is already written and is scheduled to run the very next day.
Grummz calls out WIRED for lying – again – about #GamerGate:
Wired gets it completely wrong.
Gamergate started because journalists were exposed for trading favorable reviews and coverage in exchange for favors, and for lying about it, as well as the movement.
Ethics in journalism was the banner, and now Wired is perpetuating the lies and smear campaign that started it all.
Just yesterday we had recent example of a game journalist’s corruption, and even just weeks ago with Ubisoft and expensive Disney trips for influences.
The gaslighting that wired is doing here, shows the reasons haven’t changed, and the journalists are still scum.
To this day, the media still knows virtually nothing about #GamerGate. As an OG GamerGater, I do. I was there from the very start ten years ago, before it was even christened #GamerGate. I even know the identity of GamerGater#1, who broke GameJournoPros and exposed the gaming media’s whole ghastly favors-trading game; most people have forgotten that I was once not only a game journalist myself, I was the first professionally syndicated one.
The gaslighting, as Grummz correctly described it, was always an attempt to change the narrative away from the gaming media’s wrongdoings, many of which are things they do openly today that they don’t even bother to hide.
The fall is a bitch when the Black Rider has no further use for you. The YouTube CEO is dead of turbo cancer and I very much doubt that any of the thousands of video creators who were unjustly kicked off of YouTube by her and her minions for nonexistent and unidentified “violations” will shed one single tear for the woman.
Susan Wojcicki, who served as CEO of YouTube for nine years during a period of massive growth for the video platform and was one of Google‘s first hires, died on Friday, Aug. 9. She was 56. Wojcicki’s death after a two-year fight with cancer was announced by her husband, Dennis Troper.
You can take the ticket when it’s offered. But all those millions and all that manufactured success won’t avail you much once you cease to be useful and you’re thrown from the high horse. And there is no question that the late YouTube CEO merited her fate, given that she actively pushed the shot that very likely killed her. If she had paid attention to what she called “misinformation about COVID-19” instead of banning it, she would probably still be alive and well.
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki on Tuesday said the platform has removed more than half a million videos that contain misinformation about COVID-19 since February.
I don’t know why, but the wicked are always foolish enough to believe that their even more wicked masters won’t lie to them.
Wow, I was so mad at her when she deleted my YouTube account and my income for “hate” that turned out to be “true.” But seeing her deplatformed from life itself is humbling. At least I still get to be on rumble. She’s now not even allowed on bitchute. But seriously tho does this mean I can go back on YouTube?
Former BBC presenter Huw Edwards has been charged with child pornography offences after 37 indecent images were allegedly shared on a WhatsApp chat.
Scotland Yard confirmed the 62-year-old broadcaster was facing three charges of making indecent images of children between December 2020 and April 2022.
Police said Edwards was arrested on November 8 last year and charged just over a month ago on June 26 following authorisation from the Crown Prosecution Service.
Edwards – who helmed royal and political events at the BBC before resigning in April – has been bailed and will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court this Wednesday.
According to the charge sheet, Edwards is accused of having six category A images, 12 category B pictures and 19 category C photographs on WhatsApp.
And yes, it’s pretty much all of them. The evil guys don’t want to talk about the wicked guys, they prefer to systematically target the kind of people who will call them out for what they are.
And they tell you what they are. You just have to believe what you read. Consider the following, written by the accused himself, Mr. Tubcuddle:
Today I had my photo taken, for an American Library Association Series of author photo posters. (The poster won’t be out for months. You’ll need to get something else in the meantime, like their Sherman Alexie poster. Or their Orlando Bloom READ poster. Or their P. Craig Russell Sandman poster.) The photographer explained that she was going to do a straightforward photo (which she took), and that later she wants take some more imaginative ones — me looming from the darkness, me with paint or ink dripping from my hand, that kind of thing. And then she mentioned that she wanted to also take a photo of me as the mythological or literary character of my choice, and wondered who I’d like to be.
“Red Riding Hood’s Wolf,” I said, because I went perfectly blank, and that was the first thing that popped into my completely blank head. So I’m going to be Red Riding Hood’s Wolf in a photo, although this may not be obvious to anyone except the photographer and me.
Afterwards, she asked why…
I honestly didn’t know, so I started writing, to try and figure it out.
I think part of the idea of Red Riding Hood’s Wolf (why her wolf? Possibly because I was given a Ladybird book containing the story of Little Red Riding Hood, when I was an infant, and that was the first time I’d encountered the image of a wolf standing on his hind legs. He wore a jacket, at least in memory he did, in the paintings, and was talking comfortably to Red Riding Hood, who was chubby and pretty, and much older than I was, and I could absolutely understand what he saw in her, and for me Sondheim’s song “Hello Little Girl” was already beginning to come into existence, as text not subtext: obviously, this meeting was to be the start of a beautiful friendship, one that would last — girl and wolf — forever). The wolf in the story represents an awful lot of stuff — the danger and truth of stories, for a start, and the way they change; he symbolises — not predation, for some reason — but transformation: the meeting in the wild wood that changes everything forever. Angela Carter’s statement that “some men are hairy on the inside” comes to mind: as an image, in my head, it’s the wolf’s shadow that has ears and a tail, while the man in wolf form stands in his forest (and cities are forests too) and waits for the girl in the red cloak , picking flowers, to come along, or, hungrily, watches her leave…
There’s a woodcutter, and an axe, but at the start of the story, the wolf is waiting again, and he’s just fine.
When I was a boy, when I grew up I wanted to be a wolf. I never wanted to be a wolfman. I didn’t really want to be a werewolf, except for a few years in my early teens. I wanted to be a wolf, in a forest or in the world.
Later, as an adult, I remember encountering the story of Red Riding Hood in its original form, a French version that predated the cleaned-up ways of telling the tale I’d already encountered, and the bleak sexuality of the story came through: when she encounters the wolf in her grandmother’s bed, he eats and drinks her grandmother with her, then tells her to take off all her clothes and throw them on the fire — she wouldn’t be needing them any more, — and, finally, she joins him in the bed naked. And then, with no more ado, he eats her. And there the story stops, sometimes with a direct moral — not to talk to strangers — and sometimes without it. The story disturbed me, and I put it into Sandman, in the Serial Killers’ Convention story, where it represents a number of things at once, and is also itself.
The wolf defines Red Riding Hood. He makes the story happen. Without him, she’d just be another girl on her way to her grandmother’s house. And she’d leave her goodies behind, and come home, and no-one would ever have heard of her. But he’s not just her wolf: he’s all the wolves on the edge of the world, all the wolves in all the stories, all the wolves in all the dreams of wolves; flashing green eyes in the darkness, dangerously honest about what he wants: food, company, an appetite.
And if I could be any literary figure, I think, today, I’d be strangely happy to be him.
TRANSLATION: if they get him for breaking the law, it’s going to because the girl was underage.
UPDATE: Oh, the irony. I was banned from commenting at /r neilgaimanuncovered because the moderator read my biography on Wikipedia. La, whatever shall I do? Anyhow, I’ll continue to mine the subreddit for information, but now they won’t get what we dig up without reading VP and Fandom Pulse.
Feminists are such retards.
FEMINIST: Why won’t men speak out against rich, famous men attacking young women?
EVERY FEMINIST ALLY:-total silence-
VD and JDA: Rape and sexual assault are bad. Neil Gaiman is also bad.
FEMINIST: Shut up shut up shut up! Not you, you’re too evil! Now, why won’t men speak out against rich, famous men attacking young women?
UPDATE: The poster and photo referenced in Gaiman’s blog post. He’s just one fedora short of euphoria. Now you know why only losers and overweight, insecure goth girls ever thought he was cool.
The mainstream and SF/F medias remain eerily silent about Neil Gaiman and the accusations against him. Virtually no one of any note in the SF/F community besides me, Larry Correia, Jon Del Arroz, and John Scalzi have addressed the matter at all, and Scalzi, who purports to be close friends with Gaiman, is refusing to say anything beyond noting the accusations, even though Gaiman has hired the same crisis management team, Edendale Strategies, that worked for Ezra Miller and Marilyn Manson, and has also cancelled his only public event since the accusations were made public.
But social media is certainly paying attention:
Just here to tell my own personal experience: I was friends with one of his former personal assistants, and I remember her telling stories back in the early aughts about having to “pull Neil off of a 15 year old fan.” She said this with kind of an eye-roll like it wasn’t uncommon, simply a part of the job. Given that, I think we’re about to hear much worse stories than the ones in this podcast.
Yeah, I keep hearing (what are so far) rumors of this kind and it’s unsettling to say the least. I’m waiting for more information but at the same time I feel like I know what’s coming.
Neil was very important to me at various times in my career. He was my teacher at Clarion. He blurbed my first novel. He invited me to perform at TED. We’ve always been friendly. My impression was that he’d dated fans in the past, during headier younger days, but now knew better. But now that survivors have gone on record? I have zero problem cutting all ties. I want to say that publicly and explicitly. No personal favors—and no creative works, frankly—are worth more than the safety and well-being of these two young women. And who knows how many others. I also say this because you better be sure I’ll be paying attention to whoever stays silent.
Thank you so much for saying Neil Gaiman. His silence and the silence of everyone in his orbit in the wake of this is making me feel like I have lost contact with reality.
it really is bananas how much more heat the sff community has for, like, guys accused of being social-climbing jerks than for the neil gaiman allegations
Me: I wonder what Neil Gaiman is saying about this. Me 30 seconds later: oh look, he hasn’t posted anything in over two weeks, what a freaking coincidence! At this point in the process, that’s nearly an admission of guilt.
First Neil Gaiman disappeared for obvious reasons. Then Ken White disappeared because (I assume) he just chose to do so. If John Scalzi disappears then my feed will basically be empty.
Whatever does or doesn’t come of the Neil Gaiman allegations, the fact remains that many many people (myself included, to an extent) have spent years extolling The Sandman, whose beloved protagonist condemned a woman to eternal torture for checks notes rejecting his advances
Absolutely WILD for Amanda Palmer’s first tweet since June 19 to be scolding Joyce Carol Oates for not reading the Alice Munro article before speculating on it considering she’s actively avoided addressing her part in the Neil Gaiman allegations. Particularly wild seeing as Amanda Palmer deleted comments from her Instagram on Saturday asking her about the Neil Gaiman allegations (including the allegation that 13 young women came to Amanda about Neil’s behaviour and that she personally hired the 14th to be their nanny)
LOL Reddit’s Neil Gaiman board is banning all discussion of him allegedly liking rough, non-consensual sex and instead only allowing discussion of his work. I guess we’ll soon be seeing the r/hitler subreddit shifting its focus to an art appreciation thread?
Ngl, I’m kinda disappointed at the fact that the comic community isn’t talking about the Neil Gaiman sexual assault allegations. I find it very hypocritical that they will so swiftly condemn others for racism and bigotry, but when a big name like Gaiman is accused, pure silence.
I’ve known this about Neil for years. A close friend of mine is a local artist who has worked for Neil and Amanda off and on for years and had to deal with Neil’s advances. They knew of others as well. I have posted about Neil’s behavior on occasion on social media and sometimes women reach out privately to thank me for saying something, they have long feared coming forward due to the harassment they will likely face. I’m not going to debate anyone here, but yes I spoke to the reporter behind this, who happens to be well known and award winning. He was looking for information, not a story, and the information is what informed the story he wrote, from people I know and a lot of others. What is presented in this podcast is a tiny fraction of what I and others are aware of. This is what can be demonstrated right now with the permission of the victims willing to come forward and face the inevitable abuse Neil’s fans will heap upon them, but there are others, a lot of others. This is the tip of a very large iceberg.
The publishing industry knows. The publishing industry absolutely knows about Gaiman, has known about him for decades, and is now preparing for sufficient information to come out that will sink him entirely. Hollywood will probably fight harder and try longer to protect him, but the publishers don’t want to be caught with large stocks of books they can’t sell.
I can tell you that the female junior staff at Harper used to warn each other about him.
They are really pushing them Neil Gaiman books REAL HARD. The sales prices are ridiculous. Like, “We gotta get in there before the whole public gets in the know” levels of hard.
I’m pretty sure the example in the cited Girls scene about “Chuck Palmer” is supposed to be a plausibly deniable reference to both Chuck Wendig and Neil Gaiman, which sure tells me the writer had heard the same convos as me in 2016.
There is also at least one confirmed report that Random House is removing Gaiman blurbs from forthcoming books.
There are even some very old posts referring to Gaiman’s alleged past behavior on Tumblr.
UPDATE: Less than eight hours after this was posted, presumably as a result of this post, the linked article about a negative reference to “Chuck Palmer” was disappeared. However, it was archived and can be seen here. The reason the “Palmer” is believed to be a reference to Neil Gaiman is because at the time, he was married to his second wife, Amanda PALMER.
UPDATE: Posted on Reddit. There is a moderate probability that PrudishChild is either a) a sockpuppet of Neil Gaiman’s or b) an employee at Edendale Strategies.
PrudishChild: Any reason to think he set up the gmail, or had access to it? I thought someone else set it up and he just commented on it.
voxday: Yes, there are very good reasons to think Mr. Gaiman set up the Gmail, as well as the BathBookNeil Tumblr site.
The mediocre parenthetical dialogue is very indicative of his writing.
There is no “Jolene Parton” who is a bored college student. JOLENE is a song by Dolly PARTON released in 1973. As a music journalist, Mr. Gaiman would be familiar with it, whereas few, if any, college students would be. Also, the only Jolene Parton in the USA is in her 60s now, far too old to be the bored college student.
The fake surprise. Mr. Gaiman knows Rule 34, so he’s not going to be surprised at a naked bath site. The whole dialogue between Gaiman and “Parton” is fiction written by the same person, presumably Mr. Gaiman.
Mr. Gaiman appears to have a bath fetish. He writes about bathtubs more than any author outside of the plumbing industry. He writes nearly as often about baths as George RR Martin writes about rape.
The BathBookNeil site hasn’t been taken down yet, while other damning articles such as the Splinter article about the coded “Chuck Palmer” reference believed to be about him and Chuck Wendig on the show GIRLS were vanished within eight hours of being cited.
Googlers already know if he set the Gmail account up or not. The truth will come out eventually.
Remember this guy and his untimely demise the next time you feel inclined to mock someone for their non-mainstream opinions. He obviously would have been much better off if, instead of mocking Aaron Rodgers for his skepticism, he had listened to the quarterback’s well-informed advice.
Matt Driscoll, a 43-year-old columnist and opinion editor for The News Tribune (TNT), died unexpectedly at his Tacoma home this Sunday. Driscoll reportedly suffered an apparent medical emergency from which he could not be revived. The official cause of death is yet to be determined, according to TNT.
It was reported that he had received a COVID-19 vaccination.
In recent times, Driscoll had been vocal about NFL star Aaron Rodgers’ controversial views on COVID-19 vaccines. He accused Rodgers of engaging in “performance art” after the latter warned people about potential side effects of mRNA vaccines.
Rogers “repeated popular conspiracy theories about Covid vaccines, cited a number of discredited sources and claimed he was being ‘cancelled’ and ‘censored’ for ‘doing his own research.’” I swear to god: It’s like performance art at this point. — Matt Driscoll (@mattsdriscoll) January 11, 2024
It’s as dangerous to believe your own rhetoric as it is to smoke your own supply. In fact, it’s considerably more dangerous. No doubt Driscoll felt very smug about rejecting all those “discredited sources” right up to the moment that the vaxx took him out.
The Germans are already going totalitarian. No wonder German corporations are heading for the exits. Keep these precedents in mind when the pendulum keeps swinging and they start crying about free speech and freedom of the press.
A decision by the German government to ban a “right-wing extremist” magazine may be linked to an interview it conducted with Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, she has suggested.
She made the claim on Tuesday, hours after the crackdown on Compact magazine was announced by Berlin. The move also affected associated companies and individuals. The 80-minute interview with Zakharova was published last Saturday.
“Apparently, people in the German Interior Ministry watched the interview on Monday. And on Tuesday the newsroom was raided, and the publication was banned,” the spokeswoman said.
She included a selection of her quotes that she believes Berlin may have found objectionable, including: “Germany does not get Russian natural gas for the sole reason that the US has prohibited that.” Later in the day, she uploaded the full video of the interview on social media, saying this was a precaution in case the original becomes censored.
The German government targeted the monthly magazine with the ban, along with its associated online TV channel, as well as other entities and individuals. Search warrants were executed on Tuesday in Brandenburg, Hesse, Saxony, and Saxony-Anhalt, targeting the properties of leading contributors, managers, and main shareholders, it said in a statement.
It’s certainly going to be amusing to hear the screams when media institutions start being banned and the properties of leading contributors, managers, and main shareholders are targeted by governments around the world because someone interviewed an Israeli government employee or a US corporate executive.
The terms of future engagements are being established. When new rules are introduced, don’t hesitate to play by them. But the collapse of the European Union can’t come soon enough for the good of the European peoples.
