Make sure to watch through to the end; the situation got worse since the original video clip was created.
Direct Vimeo link: http://vimeo.com/31100268
Via: http://www.swiss-miss.com/2012/01/a-video-on-protect-ipsopa.html
So you ask all them culture and arts dudes and dudettes to bitch about the Hildebrand case. Or rather, how certain media (Weltwoche, cough) or certain political figures (Lei, Blocher, cough) kicked the Swiss society in the balls, or are hugely misjudged, or totally wrong so we need to Do Something™. And how we guys and gals feel about it, generally speaking, artistically and whatnot. Being all artsy and cultural and stuff about it, too.
Well, my estimate: We hate it. At least, I do, which means quite a few persona unless I take my meds, or enough beer. Or, preferably, both. But I digress.
I can’t know what Hildebrand did or didn’t do for sure. That’s sorta the point: You can’t prove your innocence. That’s why we have all them laws and regulations in place, so nobody gets damned without any proof. Proof as in The Law™, rather than some arbitrary morality talk you spew because, well, you think you’re right, or your opponent is in the wrong party, or fucks your stock returns.
This is important: The laws are in place simply because one guy’s or gal’s moral understanding will be different from what others will deem appropriate. That’s the main reason we have laws to begin with. Going all “but it’s wrong!” simply because you lost a couple of thou on the markets is not very, well, moral.
But as the Hildebrand case has been, mainly, a discussion between different media exponents, with few political powers chuckling about how everybody turns moral all of a sudden, there isn’t anything I could add to this aspect of the pseudo-discussion.
What I can comment on is the way either side talks about what they think is reality. It may be in the eye of the beholder, but for Gods’ sake stay consistent! In this respect, the Weltwoche-SVP-Blocherarian bunch loses. Not because I don’t like them, but because they negate their own statements all too quickly.
Reality, conceived by society, is made up through discourse. And, in the end, reality is what the majority decides on. Reiterating statements that have been negated long ago is not a sign of a sane mind, but might be sensible for your cause. Reacting to people asking you why you’re lying with “you need to see the big picture, and I didn’t lie, reiterate” is insane behaviour, no matter what. Which is fine by me, mark the meds above, but for fuck’s sake:
Keep consistent in your arguing!
Well, as I’m supposed to answer this plea artistically, let me add a photo. Make of it what you may.
So after a Sandisk Extreme SDHC 30MB/s* or whatnot decided to die on me right in the middle of shooting a bloody fireworks (this one) I just shrugged my shoulders and went all, well, you know? Shit happens. Get over it. Smile. Then I kicked that table and now my toes are numb.
It was the second, rather expensive, Sandisk card to go belly-up on a job, the third in total. In different cameras, but all of them after about two months of usage. So I donned my spy hat and investigated. That is, searched on Google. The shit I found made me wonder about quality control – not necessarily on Sandisk’s part – just as much as about internet culture as a whole.
There’s camera manufacturers trying to tweak their firmware to accommodate Sandisk cards. There’s a shitload of people going all “never had any problem with them, so don’t buy cheap copies on eBay”. But at least in my case, I bought them cards in two different legit, brick-and-mortar shops. And they both failed on me rather spectacularly. The cards, not the shops.
My ages-old Transcends still work. My Panasonics still work. And not cards from the lowly levels of classmanship, no, we’re talking speedy Class 10 shit here. For half the price, without the marketing bullshit telling me how awesome their new SD cards were, plus a funky brand name and an arbitrary MB/s number next to it.
But still I’m told by too many people: “Well, don’t buy pirated copies and stop bitching”. Mine aren’t knock-offs. Or rather, if they are, two of the largest Swiss retailers buy from the Chinese Mafia. Or something.
Which would make some sense considering their corresponding corporations are at each others commercial throats. And at least one of said corporations doesn’t seem to mind cutting corners.
Hrm.
Well, yes, they did. Apparently, the nick-name I’ve been online with for 12 years doesn’t cut it. No matter I put it in pee-goes – “ ”, that is – with my full private name cosily wrapper around it. No matter I’ve been a beta tester with Google Mail in the past, with the exact same name, and have been invited to beta-test Google+ with my nick, too.
No matter hardly anybody who’s heard of me via Facebook, Twitter, various blog comments, too many forums to count, my very own web site, my publications both in print and on the wobble will ever find me without that nick-name in quotes. Possibly neither of my co-workers of the past 10 years. Or, at least, recognise me immediately, thus perhaps adding me without a second thought. Thus adding to Google’s pool of relevant information, rather than irrelevant spam.
I’m told the real-name policy is meant to reduce spam risks. I love the irony.
So I can only assume Google+ is not about being social, at least not on the web. Google apparently wants to know everything about your meat, not what you’re known for on the wobble. Using many of Google’s offerings from day one (sometimes, day -42)? Having paid for software with this very Google account, using Google Checkout? No matter, we don’t want the full picture, we just want to nail your ass in real-life.
But hey, great. I was into the Google deal, was prepared to share my personal info for great services in exchange. Nothing comes for free, and I accepted to have Google know shitloads about me in exchange for what they had to offer. If they don’t want the data pertinent to my actual life, I guess I’m off scott-free. They now have a Google+ profile no longer directly linked to anything relevant I did online, published or shared online, not even a nick-name that has been properly registered for real-world use. Make that two nick-names. That’s two levels of profiling they’ve just dropped because the spelling looked funny to them. Two levels of relevant metainformation they could have sold to companies, or used in-house.
Or, at least, they just ruined any incentive for me to use their product, thus providing paying for with more information. After all, it used to be quid pro quo, no? My info for using your services. Having a social service that still wants to know everything about me (they asked for a scan of my ID, plus cell phone number) while making it impossible for acquaintances to hook up with me … Well.
The deal’s slightly off when a company that makes money off online profiles bans online personas.
Make sure there’s something on the telly the people that elect you into office will laugh about. Even better, present a mix of things people will laugh at, and – ideally – feel the urge to grace the bog with the contents of their stomaches.
It’s always nice to look down on white trash, ennit? Bad teeth help.
Then, for full effect, air it on private TV so nobody can say you officially tried to reduce the average IQ of your citizens by using tax money. A holier-than-thou perspective helps, too.
Sounds like a great conspiracy theory, no? Frankly, I don’t know whether I’d prefer the conspiracy, or the fact that it’s a show that’s only aired because, well, shitloads of people enjoy watching other people flirting with committal (or admission) to the odd mental asylum or two.
The free market is a bitch, it sells to the highest bidder. But as long as there’s enough people who enjoy watching faked orgasms by bass players, just after a Chinese designer was shat on for mispronouncing her age, and some gal marketing herself as an orphan due to the gun-violence death of her father, well – it’s a market controlled by the customer.
Count me in. Damn.