Model response to a dilemma for women in the left-right storm (really?)

[IwantToRetire]

So not satisfied with appropriating the work, ideas and campaigning of one woman and many active supporters, some complete set of nobody film makers have taken it upon themselves to school us silly air heads on how to behave and who to talk to.

Leaving aside the smug condescension of believing the have the right to tell us how to behave, this is a perfect example of where complete nobodies who exploit other people to further their own media career, then assume they are as politically relevant and analytically acute as actual activists.

kaygreen.blog/2022/12/31/model-response-to-a-dilemma-for-women-in-the-left-right-storm/

This is the problem with the media at the moment, presenters and film makers who are just the vehicle to get voices and ideas heard, then think they are entitled to become the spokes person.

Apart from anything else, did these nupties even think maybe we should ask those who the film was actually about. I know they would, having been hand selected as the appropriately politically aligned voices, also refused, but even within the unethical world of these self promoters, do they really think they take precedence.

But it does gives us a clear idea of their moral compass and how they felt able to bandwagon of others work and go to extreme lengths to make sure they are never referred to or acknowledged.

There was no source referenced or linked in the comment I responded to.
This is the comment I responded to:
I saw on Twitter, but don't have a screenshot that 40% of Tucker's viewers are democrats. I think this is missed opportunity.

to which I replied
Id take that with a grain of salt tbh. Twitter is the most notorious fake news hub on the planet, with Facebook a close second.’

🤷‍♀️

No. It isn't quiet.

It is quieter than the statement issued. Quiet is not posting on social media at all about it.

You can really try to twist it for all you like. If they were intending it to be just 'a quiet update' then they were posting in exactly the wrong place.

It’s not “twisting” to have a different opinion on what is quiet or not. Quiet is a subjective measure. There is no need to get nasty about perfectly valid different opinions.

Outside of the purity spiralling versus Fox news stuff, who is this film for if not for a wider audience than people that already know what is going on?

Isn't that the whole point of marketing? I am genuinely confused what the point of making it is. Why bother in the first place?

I post this because it seems to be the next stage in engagement.

Yes, the next stage according to you is more personal attacks by you; which btw, I have reported.

It wasn't quiet. If it was we'd not know about it.

Well that’s not quite true as things often go “viral” unexpectedly and without the intent of the poster for it to be made a big deal of.

No. In this instance it is not subjective. It is actually measurable. There are stats.

That two sentence tweet has been viewed 468.3K times by now and because it requires no expansion, it is very likely that this is a very conservative figure.
Another follow up was viewed 16K on the 30th December.
That main statement has been viewed by 161K times. Kay Greens blog retweet by that account has been seen 973 times.

You can continue to say it is 'quiet'. However, the majority of the replies and retweets were before the follow up tweet on the 30th had gained traction.

It is not that I agree to disagree with you.

Well that’s not quite true as things often go “viral” unexpectedly and without the intent of the poster for it to be made a big deal of.

Like two sentences on a public account to 360k or so followers as a mere "update", for example?

Good to know for next time you do the same. Thanks. I had always tried to hold off.

I think they were very lucky to get invited onto mainstream media at all, given the poor quality of the film they made. To be fair, I only watched a few minutes of it because it was so boring

There was me thinking am I the only one who is bored by this? And the quality (film and sound) of some of it was really poor. Thank you.

I imagine only because it's the only one from the feminist side rather than Matt Walsh etc, and also because of the publicity around cancellations of it where women were allegedly spat at by TRAs etc.

By the way

"That two sentence tweet has been viewed 468.3K times by now and because it requires no expansion, it is very likely that this is a very conservative figure."

and

"However, the majority of the replies and retweets were before the follow up tweet on the 30th had gained traction."

Would look very good in any communication campaign wrap up that I submitted as a brand manager to my marketing manager.

In fact, I would have fucking earned my bonus for those 'two sentences'.

They make a film they didn't want the wrong people to know about and they make twitter posts they don't want people to see.

Crikey, what next?

*They make a film they didn't want the wrong people to know about and they make twitter posts they don't want people to see.

Crikey, what next?*

🤣

A bonus for getting views by less than 1% of your target audience? Please tell me which company does this as I’d love to have a job that rewards such a low bar of performance.

I know right Alison.

A twitter account with 6.3 K followers gets two sentences plastered across twitter and then spurs it on with quick few more sentences on the 30th December and then releases a statement on the 31st December.

We are now talking significant uplift. If they had said nothing, they would not have had anywhere near the coverage they now have. Yet, it is still confined to social media and not reaching the mainstream.

It bears repeating that if that is what they want, that is fine. That is truly their decision. However, they need to also own that releasing those two sentences was also solidifying their PR aims. Again, nothing wrong with that.

Posters attempting to minimise that deliberate PR aim which has been successfully converted into effectively a 'sales uplift' as not being a PR exercise is quite something to see.

Quiet is subjective by definition. You and I can look at the exact same stats and you think it’s not quiet, and I can think it is quiet. Both views are perfectly valid.

Btw, number of views and such do not indicate intent. And a quiet announcement is more relating to the intent of the announcer, not what happens after they post it.

A bonus for getting views by less than 1% of your target audience?

Except this % of "target audience" was decided from the total population of women.

But some of them are the Wrong Kind. The kind that watch the Wrong TV.

Well that’s not quite true as things often go “viral” unexpectedly and without the intent of the poster for it to be made a big deal of.

TBF I never said the source was on that tweet. I said it was someone's viewpoint/opinion. You're the one who mentioned Twitter as a source.

Back on point, had seen the full statement the film makers had put out when it was first posted on Twitter. I didn't engage with it. Had a look this morning at the responses and opinions do seem very split. I wasn't surprised to find that lots of people think it's virtue signalling.

I've said it before but it bears repeating. That statement shows its exactly the authoritarian behaviour as TRAs and other leftist groups engage in and the only difference is these film makers believe in biological sex.

Yes, it is a conservative definition of target audience as millions of men would also need to be exposed to this information as well. So less than 1% is actually a generous estimate.

Because that effort would not have had much more cost than my salary and will have given the brand a much larger voice than it did have. Because this is a very small brand and I doubt there is much budget at all. For a relatively unknown brand, this one has done remarkably well lately and this two sentence tweet encapsulated the support behind it.

That is looking at it from their perspective and their principled one at that.

Now, if my aim was to make this video accessible to as many people as possible, I would have scrapped that and gone for mainstream media.

But that is obviously not their aim. So those two sentences, from an unknown media content company, have paid off.