Carbon Chemist

Tag: Twitter

  • Taylor Swift Fans Are Leaving X for Bluesky After Trump’s Election

    Taylor Swift Fans Are Leaving X for Bluesky After Trump’s Election

    [ad_1]

    Following the US presidential election, Swifties, the name for Taylor Swift’s fans, are fleeing X for Bluesky. X’s owner, billionaire Elon Musk, was one of Donald Trump’s biggest backers, funneling over $100 million into the Trump-supporting America PAC; stumping for the candidate on the campaign trail; and boosting Trump’s messaging on X. Musk also helped Trump tap into a distinctly right-wing male audience. Swifties, who have built a robust community on the platform formerly known as Twitter, took notice. By Thursday, less than 48 hours after Trump won the presidency, they were starting to flock from the platform for good.

    “I love the idea of building a new community here and would love not to have to support Elon in any way,” says Justin, who goes by @justin-the-baron.swifties.social on Bluesky and asked to use only his first name for fear of harassment. “Elon is of course a big Trump supporter, which doesn’t align with Taylor’s values or the values of Swifties.”

    Though there are Swifties on all sides of the political spectrum, the community prides itself on being a positive and accepting space. After Kamala Harris was announced as the Democratic nominee for president, Swifties began to mobilize to support her. In September, Swift herself endorsed Harris. In an Instagram post announcing her support, Swift cited AI-generated images of herself and her fans that had been used by Trump to imply she’d endorsed him.

    Following the endorsement, Musk posted, “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.” Musk, who has repeatedly shared concerns about declining birth rates, has at least 11 children with at least three women. According to The New York Times, he also offered his sperm to Nicole Shanahan, the former running mate for independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (She declined.)

    Irene Kim, an organizer with Swifties for Harris, says that the outpouring of misogyny following the election pushed her and many other Swift fans to abandon X and seek refuge on Bluesky. Though research has found that hate speech and disinformation increased after Musk took over the platform, the election of Trump seems to have supercharged it. A report from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue found that in the 24 hours following Trump’s electoral victory, phrases like “Your body, my choice,” parroting the election night rhetoric of white supremacist Nick Fuentes, rose 4,600 percent on X.

    “I think that’s the kind of rhetoric we want to get away from,” Kim says. She also notes that X’s recent update to the “block” feature, which allows people to see the profile and posts of users that have blocked them, has contributed to a more negative experience on the platform. “Twitter has definitely become such a hellscape,” Kim says.



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • After Trump’s Victory, the 4B Movement Is Spreading Across TikTok

    After Trump’s Victory, the 4B Movement Is Spreading Across TikTok

    [ad_1]

    The 4B movement originated in South Korea, and encourages women to opt out of marriage (bihon), childbirth (bichulsan), romance (biyeonae), and sexual relationships (bisekseu). Born out of protests against South Korea’s culture—instances of dating violence, revenge porn, and gender wage gaps are widespread—the movement has grown in recent years. South Korea has the lowest birth rate of any country, and despite government incentives, many women still feel the country’s patriarchal structure makes the cost of motherhood too high, and refuse to be “baby-making machines,” according to reporting from the New York Times.

    Although it started in the late 2010s, the movement didn’t really gain attention in the US until earlier this year. New York magazine published a long feature on it in March in which writer Anna Louie Sussman laid out the ways in which 4B adherents were, as Barbieri demonstrated on TikTok, cutting their hair and eschewing beauty products. “The blowback and fear that 4B practitioners experience underscores their conviction that Korea is still a frightening place for women,” Sussman wrote, noting the threats and attacks women, and specifically 4B protesters, receive.

    Some creators who spoke to WIRED were already participating in the movement before the election. Dalina, who uses they/them pronouns and asked to withhold their last name for privacy reasons, was casually seeing a man when, they say, “he made a joke along the lines of like, ‘I considered coming inside of you.’” Dalina says at that moment their blood ran cold. “I thought, ‘Why does that sound like a threat?’ It’s like, because it is a threat … He also knew that it was a threat.”

    Since then, Dalina, who goes by @senoracabrona on TikTok, says they have sworn off romantic and sexual entanglements with men. Their video, including text telling women to look up the 4B movement, has garnered more than 130,000 views on TikTok.

    With the election of Trump, and all the threats to reproductive rights and LGBTQ+ rights and misogyny that entails, women online seemed to be channeling the fear they felt into action in similar ways.

    Barbieri says when she posted her original 4B video it was the result of something she’d been investigating for several months via her involvement in feminist spaces on Reddit, Facebook, and Instagram. After her post went up, she got several negative comments from men, but was surprised to find a lot of support, particularly from women interested in the movement.



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Election Denial Conspiracy Theories Are Exploding on X. This Time They’re Coming From the Left

    Election Denial Conspiracy Theories Are Exploding on X. This Time They’re Coming From the Left

    [ad_1]

    While at publication time the Associated Press’ vote count was indeed 16 million votes lower than that for the 2020 election, the explanation is trivially simple: The entirety of the vote hasn’t been tabulated yet.

    “Election denial is anti-democratic, whether it comes from the left or the right,” David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation and Research, wrote on X. “No, 20 million votes aren’t missing. Votes are still being counted in many states, including millions in CA alone. Number of votes in 2024 very close to 2020, when all are reported “

    Posts relating to these conspiracy theories began to gain traction around 2:00 am Eastern, PeakMetrics data shows, which coincides roughly with the time the election was called for Trump—but even as Americans went to bed, the number of posts did not decline.

    “By 8am ET, the number of posts per hour had surged to 31,991,” PeakMetrics wrote in an analysis shared with WIRED. “There was perhaps a surprising lack of overnight drop-off in posts from 2am-7am ET—when typically posts would decline as the US hits sleeping hours. The steady increase in posts on the Kamala recount/missing votes narrative throughout the overnight hours may simply reflect the intensity of this discussion—or may point to inauthentic or automated posting behavior.”

    Unlike the election denial movement in 2020, which was inspired by Trump’s refusal to accept the results, these conspiracy theories haven’t received any support from the candidate. On Wednesday, Harris urged her supporters to accept the results and assured them her team “will engage in a peaceful transfer of power.”

    The phenomenon of left-leaning or anti-Trump accounts posting conspiracy theories on social media platforms, referred to as BlueAnon, came to prominence earlier this year in the wake of the assassination attempt on Trump’s life in July.

    “Any event that seems improbable will always invite conspiracy theories about what ‘really’ happened,” says Mike Rothschild, an author who writes about conspiracy theories and extremists. “In this case, it’s a factually incorrect narrative that there are tens of millions of missing votes, and that Russian bomb threats sabotaged the Harris campaign. Neither are true—turnout appears to be down, and many states, including California, are still well into counting. And while bomb threats are never acceptable, they’re not the reason why the Harris campaign lost every swing state. To write Trump’s win off to conspiracy theories is to not live in reality.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s Twitter Takeover Set Off a Race to the Bottom

    Elon Musk’s Twitter Takeover Set Off a Race to the Bottom

    [ad_1]

    But for years, public pressure from government officials, civil society, and the media pushed tech companies to invest in teams and tools that could at least somewhat address issues of hate speech or misinformation on their platforms, so they could say they were making a good faith effort to deal with the issue.

    Musk’s purchase of Twitter signaled a change, according to six former trust and safety employees from Twitter and Meta.

    When Musk took over Twitter in October 2022, he quickly fired more than 50 percent of the company’s workers, including almost all of the company’s trust and safety and policy staff—the people tasked with creating and enforcing the platform’s policies around things like hate speech, violent content, conspiracy theories, and mis- and disinformation. Since then, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Discord have all made cuts to trust and safety staff.

    Shortly after Musk purged Twitter of its trust and safety teams, other companies began layoffs. In November 2022, Meta laid off 11,000 employees, including many trust and safety employees. In January 2023, Google followed suit, axing 12,000 people. Earlier this year, Twitch, which is owned by Amazon, disbanded its Safety Advisory Council.

    “I think that Elon really opened the floodgates,” says one former Meta employee. “So then other tech brands were like, ‘We can do that too, because we won’t be the black sheep for it.’”

    Meta spokesperson Corey Chambliss tells WIRED that the company has “40,000 people globally working on safety and security—more than during the 2020 cycle, when we had a global team of 35,000 people working in this area,” though he did not address how many of those people are staff versus outsourced workers.

    Musk’s sudden firings made it so that “anybody else could come along and nicely fire their teams and give them severance and it was nicer. Better,” says a former Twitter employee who was fired by Musk.

    After Musk fired the trust and safety staff, experts warned that this cut, coupled with Musk’s “free speech absolutism,” would allow toxic content to flood the platform and ultimately cause an exodus of users and advertisers, leading to Twitter’s eventual demise. Hate speech and misinformation did increase and advertisers did pull their dollars. Last year, X fired members of what remained of its elections team. Around the same time, Musk posted on X, saying, “Oh you mean the ‘Election Integrity’ Team that was undermining election integrity? Yeah, they’re gone.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Reason Your Election Anxiety Feels Worse in 2024

    The Reason Your Election Anxiety Feels Worse in 2024

    [ad_1]

    Americans need to log off. Unplug. Shoot the TV. It seems impossible. Less than five days from Election Day in the US, most people can’t help but check the news—or TikTok or X—at least once a day. Swipe, refresh, repeat. By Tuesday, the connectedness will be constant. Mentally, political stress takes a huge toll. Given that anxiety can be exacerbated by uncertainty, the 2024 election feels worse than it has ever before. There’s a reason for that.

    I don’t just mean the general sky-is-falling stuff—the militias on Facebook organizing ballot-box stakeouts, the conspiracy theory spreaders, the cybercriminals potentially waiting in the wings. Some version of those nerve-janglers has been around for years. Now, though, there’s a new factor upping users’ blood pressure as they doomscroll: AI misinformation.

    Clearly US voters worry about how misinformation might impact who wins the election, but Sander van der Linden, author of Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity, notes that the anxiety around AI might be more existential. “If you look at the problem from a more indirect perspective, such as sowing doubt and chaos, confusion, undermining democratic discourse, lowering trust in the electoral process, and confusing swing voters,” he says. “I think we’re looking at a bigger risk”—one that fuels polarization and erodes the quality of debate.

    According to an American Psychological Association survey released last week, 77 percent of US adults feel some level of stress over the future of the country. It gets worse. Sixty-nine percent of adults surveyed said the race between Vice President Kamala Harris and Donald Trump was a cause of “significant stress”—a figure that’s up from 52 percent in 2016, when Trump beat Hillary Clinton. Nearly three-quarters of respondents thought the election could spur violence; more than half worried it could be “the end of democracy in the US.”

    Christ.

    On top of all of this sits the threat of AI-generated falsehoods. For more than a year researchers have warned of election misinformation from artificial intelligence. Beyond the polls, such misinformation has played a role in the Israel-Hamas war and the war in Ukraine. 404 Media called the aftermath of Hurricane Helene “the ‘fuck it’ era of AI-generated slop.” (Actually) fake news lurks around every corner. Earlier this year, the World Economic Forum released a report claiming AI misinformation is one of the biggest short-term threats the world faces. Bad election information and fake images can also bring in serious money for X users, according to a BBC report this week.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s America PAC Has Created an Election Denial Cesspool on X

    Elon Musk’s America PAC Has Created an Election Denial Cesspool on X

    [ad_1]

    For months, billionaire and X owner Elon Musk has used his platform to share election conspiracy theories that could undermine faith in the outcome of the 2024 election. Last week, the political action committee (PAC) Musk backs took it a step further, launching a group on X called the Election Integrity Community. The group has nearly 50,000 members and says that it is meant to be a place where users can “share potential incidents of voter fraud or irregularities you see while voting in the 2024 election.”

    In practice, it is a cesspool of election conspiracy theories, alleging everything from unauthorized immigrants voting to misspelled candidate names on ballots. “It’s just an election denier jamboree,” says Paul Barrett, deputy director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at New York University, who authored a recent report on how social media facilitates political violence.

    Since endorsing former president and Republican nominee Donald Trump following the first assassination attempt against him in July, Musk has become one of Trump’s most important financial backers, pouring more than $100 million into the America PAC since July. The PAC has also been a pillar of the Trump campaign’s ground game in swing states. WIRED reporting found that Blitz Canvassing, a contractor for the PAC, was threatening canvassers in Michigan, and transporting them in U-Hauls.

    Earlier in October, Musk appeared at a Trump rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, where he repeated false claims that Democrats would allow undocumented immigrants to vote illegally, and encouraged Trump’s supporters to vote.

    In January 2021, the company then known as Twitter banned Trump’s account for incitement to violence during the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol. But since taking over and rebranding it as X, Musk has fired many of the people on the teams that worked to keep mis- and disinformation off the platform. Last year, X fired much of what remained of its elections integrity team. After the news broke, Musk posted on X, saying, “Oh you mean the ‘Election Integrity’ Team that was undermining election integrity? Yeah, they’re gone.”

    Barrett says that the America PAC’s Election Integrity Community group augments the work of other election-denying groups, like former Trump adviser Cleta Mitchell’s Election Integrity Network. “This is a parallel anti-election, anti-democracy campaign designed to sow confusion and lay the groundwork for baseless objections to elections after Election Day. This is going on all across the country, and it’s extremely dangerous,” says Barrett. “And we’re going to see the results of it almost immediately when the polls close on November 5th.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inside Two Years of Turmoil at Big Tech’s Anti-Terrorism Group

    Inside Two Years of Turmoil at Big Tech’s Anti-Terrorism Group

    [ad_1]

    The four tech giants have presided over the consortium since they announced it in 2016, when Western governments were berating them for allowing Islamic State to post gruesome videos of journalists and humanitarians being beheaded. Now with a staff of eight, GIFCT—which the board organized as a US nonprofit in 2019 after the Christchurch massacre—is one of the groups through which tech competitors are meant to work together to address discrete online harms, including child abuse and the illicit trade of intimate images.

    The efforts have helped bring down some unwelcome content, and pointing to the work can help companies stave off onerous regulations. But the politics involved in managing the consortia generally stay secret.

    Just eight of GIFCT’s 25 member companies answered WIRED’s requests for comment. The respondents, which included Meta, Microsoft, and YouTube, all say they are proud to be part of what they view as a valuable group. The consortium’s executive director, Naureen Chowdhury Fink, didn’t dispute WIRED’s reporting. She says TikTok remains in the process to attain membership.

    GIFCT has relied on voluntary contributions from its members to fund the roughly $4 million it spends annually, which covers salaries, research, and travel. From 2020 through 2022, Microsoft, Google, and Meta each donated a sum of at least $4 million and Twitter $600,000, according to the available public filings. Some other companies contributed tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars, but most paid nothing.

    By last year, at least two board members were enraged at companies they perceived as freeloaders, and fears spread among the nonprofit’s staff over whether their jobs were in jeopardy. It didn’t help that as Musk turned Twitter into X about a year ago, he kept slashing costs, including suspending the company’s optional checks to GIFCT, according to two people with direct knowledge.

    To diversify funding, the board has signed off on soliciting foundations and even exploring government grants for non-core projects. “We’d really have to carefully consider if it makes sense,” Chowdhury Fink says. “But sometimes working with multiple stakeholders is helpful.”

    Rights activists the group privately consulted questioned whether this would count as subsidies for tech giants, which could siphon resources from potentially more potent anti-extremism projects. But records show staff were considering seeking a grant of more than tens of thousands of dollars from the pro-Israel philanthropy Newton and Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust. Chowdhury Fink says GIFCT didn’t end up applying.

    This year, Meta, YouTube, Microsoft, and X amended GIFCT’s bylaws to require minimum annual contributions from every member starting in 2025, though Chowdhury Fink says exemptions are possible.

    Paying members will be able to vote for two board seats, she says. Eligibility for the board is contingent on making a more sizable donation. X had signaled it wouldn’t pay up and would therefore forfeit its seat, two sources say—a development that ended up happening this month. It had been scheduled to hold tiebreaking power among the four-company board in 2025. (Under the bylaws, Meta, YouTube, and Microsoft could have ejected Twitter from the board as soon as Musk acquired the company. But they chose not to exercise the power.)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Stan Accounts That Keep Posting Through Brazil’s Ban on X

    The Stan Accounts That Keep Posting Through Brazil’s Ban on X

    [ad_1]

    For weeks, some 40 million Brazilian X users have been beholden to the whims of Elon Musk and the country’s government. Back in April, Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes opened an inquiry into the social network after Musk snubbed a court order asking the company to block accounts that backed former right-wing president Jair Bolsonaro and allegedly spread hate speech and misinformation.

    On August 30, Brazil’s top court suspended X, giving internet service providers five days to comply and causing fan accounts to send up flares alerting their followers that they’d be going quiet.

    During the blackout, several fan accounts and other Brazilians on X tried to bring their followers over to platforms like Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky, the latter seeing a 2 million user jump in the days after the ban went into effect, bringing its total users to around 8 million. Tumblr, long a hub for fan activity, also saw a 350 percent increase in users, according to a report in TechCrunch. But many users found it hard to rebuild the followings they had on X.

    “It’s undeniable that, for many businesses, the suspension of X has affected the way they communicate with customers,” says Brazilian journalist Raphael Tsavkko Garcia. (His work has appeared in WIRED.) “The same goes for artists and influencers who have seen an important platform for promotion disappear overnight.”

    Those who couldn’t transfer all of their followers from X to other platforms still vowed to maintain the new accounts they migrated to. Izadora Vasconcelos, who is behind Miley Cyrus Brasil, an account with more than 93,000 followers, says that “while X is under a businessman who thinks he is bigger than the laws of a country,” she and the other admins on the account will “keep Bluesky and X, at least for a while. So we don’t have to start from scratch again.”

    While the platform has been down, fans also lost access to their archives and all the work they’d put into curating them, Driessen notes, memory-holing “valuable pieces of pop cultural history” in the process. Even the accounts that have been able to continue posting sporadically still aren’t available for fans within the country who want to scroll through their old posts.

    On September 18, when X briefly rerouted internet traffic to get around Brazil’s roadblocks, fans rejoiced. “I know it’s just a silly app, but it’s where I [feel] safe,” wrote Thaís Garcia, the person behind the Taylor Swift account @thalovestay. “I’m not in a good place mentally, and these past week was horrible without having here to distract myself.”

    The reprieve was short-lived, but on September 20 X’s lawyers told the Supreme Court they’d found a legal representative for Brazil, a step toward getting the platform turned back on in the country. The company is now reportedly complying with some of Brazil’s other requests in hopes that the X ban will be lifted, perhaps as early as next week.

    Once that happens, and it seems like it will, Brazilian stans and their international followers will be able to access the full breadth of the communities they built on Musk’s platform—even those who have already moved on.

    Amaral notes that because many of the fan accounts are linked to more progressive artists, some of them may be reluctant to return to X due to the lack of moderation. “We know that for many fandoms, being part of a minority (whether in terms of gender, race, etc.) is a key aspect of their identity,” she adds. There is a symbiotic relationship between politics and pop culture, and “after this sort of Ragnarok for Brazilian fan accounts/fan culture,” Amaral says, many of the folks behind the accounts will have to consider whether they want to return.

    Even before X’s suspension, Beyoncé Brasil’s administrators had been working on revising and building out their website. It’s been nice to have something that’s “100 percent ours,” Silveira says. “I would say [the X account is] like a photo album: It’s good to revisit it, but we won’t die if we don’t have it.”

    Gabriel Leão contributed reporting from São Paulo.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • X’s First Transparency Report Since Elon Musk’s Takeover Is Finally Here

    X’s First Transparency Report Since Elon Musk’s Takeover Is Finally Here

    [ad_1]

    Today, X released the company’s first transparency report since Elon Musk bought the company, formerly Twitter, in 2022.

    Before Musk’s takeover, Twitter would release transparency reports every six months.These largely covered the same ground as the new X report, giving specific numbers for takedowns, government requests for information, and content removals, as well as data about which content was reported and, in some cases, removed for violating policies. The last transparency report available from Twitter covered the second half of 2021 and was 50 pages long. (X’s is a shorter 15 pages, but requests from governments are also listed elsewhere on the company’s website and have been consistently updated to remain in compliance with various government orders.)

    Comparing the 2021 report to the current X transparency report is a bit difficult, as the way the company measures different things has changed. For instance, in 2021, 11.6 million accounts were reported. Of this 11.6 million, 4.3 million were “actioned” and 1.3 million were suspended. According to the new X report, there were over 224 million reports, of both accounts and pieces of individual content, but the result was 5.2 million accounts being suspended.

    While some numbers remain seemingly consistent across the reports—reports of abuse and harassment are, somewhat predictably, high—in other areas, there’s a stark difference. For instance, in the 2021 report, accounts reported for hateful content accounted for nearly half of all reports, and 1 million of the 4.3 million accounts actioned. (The reports used to be interactive on the website; the current PDF no longer allows users to flip through the data for more granular breakdowns.) In the new X report, the company says it has taken action on only 2,361 accounts for posting hateful content.

    But this may be due to the fact that X’s policies have changed since it was Twitter, which Theodora Skeadas, a former member of Twitter’s public policy team who helped put together its Moderation Research Consortium, says might change the way the numbers look in a transparency report. For instance, last year the company changed its policies on hate speech, which previously covered misgendering and deadnaming, and rolled back its rules around Covid-19 misinformation in November of 2022.

    “As certain policies have been modified, some content is no longer violative. So if you’re looking at changes in the quality of experience, that might be hard to capture in a transparency report,” she says.

    X has also lost users since Musk’s takeover, further complicating what the new reality of the platform might look like. “If you account for changing usage, is it a lower number?” she asks.

    After taking over the company in October of 2022, Musk fired the majority of the company’s trust and safety staff as well as its policy staff, the people who make the platform’s rules and ensure they’re enforced. Under Musk, the company also began charging for its API, making it harder for researchers and nonprofits to access X data to see what was really going on on the platform. This may also account for changes between the two reports.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Your Dumb Memes Revived One of Butt Rock’s Biggest Bands

    Your Dumb Memes Revived One of Butt Rock’s Biggest Bands

    [ad_1]

    Creed is having a moment. Actually, if we’re being precise, it’s having innumerable moments, over and over again, all across the internet.

    On Instagram, the band has been repurposed as a comedic device for dunking on President Joe Biden; on TikTok, shitposters imagined what it would be like to explain the butt rock legends to an alien race; and on X, Creed is an easy punchline for commenting on political theater. All the while, those memes are collectively accumulating millions of likes, views, and shares.

    It’s safe to say that if Charli XCX hadn’t already made 2024 a “brat summer,” then this—as far as memes are concerned—would be Scott Stapp season. And Stapp, for his part, seems to be fully aware of it. “I’ve seen so many [memes],” the Creed frontman says. “Some are hilarious and I find myself just laughing, and some are really heartwarming in terms of how much time and energy the fan has put into creating the video.”

    The wildest part of all isn’t that Creed is being memed to death—it’s that the band is seemingly being memed back to life. In 2024, Creed quietly clawed its way back from internet punchline to real, honest-to-god, record-selling rock band. By June, the band found itself back in the charts—the top 40 no less. Last month, the band’s Greatest Hits was climbing in sales.

    As a result of its unexpected resurgence, Creed is even back touring, playing sold-out shows with fellow postgrunge staples like 3 Doors Down. On top of that, they’re selling tickets for arena gigs for upwards of $100. For the super Creed-core, there’s the band’s second-annual Miami-to-Nassau “Creed cruise” in 2025, which lists top-tier tickets for an eye-watering $4,300. Those tickets, by the way, are sold out.

    Sure, old music finds new audiences all the time, often with a bump from the internet—but Creed isn’t other bands. Creed is a band that hasn’t released a new studio album in 15 years and has spent most of that decade and a half as the butt of internet jokes. By industry standards, Creed was, at least until recently, six feet under.

    “Back in 2020, Creed hadn’t toured since 2012, so we were kind of intrigued, I think would be the word, to see the interest and to see the songs having new life and resurgence and renaissance,” says Creed’s agent, Ken Fermaglich, who has been with the band for decades.

    All of that begs a couple obvious questions: Why here and why now?

    According to YouTuber Pat Finnerty, whose channel “What Makes This Song Stink” ritually roasts bands of Creed’s ilk, the equation for Creed’s comeback is a simple one: time + cringe = popularity.

    Creed, Finnerty says, are now past the 20-year mark after which most old bands can feel new again. “But then there’s the meme thing—you see all these memes of like ‘this band sucks,’ but now, to use the parlance of our time, ‘this band fucks,’” he adds. “They’re switching it from ‘this band sucks’ to ‘this band fucks’ and it’s actually funnier for them to get into it.”



    [ad_2]

    Source link