Fascinated by conspiracy accounts (one of the biggest) misreading the Taylor Swift situation this badly
So in their eyes Taylor Swift sold her music rights to George Soros, and now she’s TIME’s Person of the Year, which “doesn’t come cheap”. Ahuh.
Yeah man, Taylor Swift losing the rights to her own songs, famously a thing she did willingly and wasn’t extremely outraged about. I don’t even listen to Taylor and I know what “(Taylor’s Version)” means
Also, he didn’t expose anything! Taylor Swift herself spoke about a Soros buying her music rights in 2020! And it wasn’t George Soros, it was his adult son Alex, who’s best buds with Scooter Braun. This isn’t a conspiracy he unraveled. It’s a shitty rich kid engaging in thoroughly routine shitty rich kid behavior with his friends. George Soros isn’t involved in any way and may not even know about it since it’s all through Alex’s company, and Alex Soros doesn’t even own the recordings in full, he just invested in Braun’s purchase of them. This was all widely documented three years ago!
Anyway this originates with Laura Loomer, who asked: did she get the rights to her music back in exchange for…a get out the vote campaign?
Taylor Swift is the most popular entertainer in the world. Everyone knows about this. Except for conservatives who are confused.
Their smoking gun: she has to have the rights to her music back if she’s doing old songs on the Eras tour! Checkmate liberals!!!
*deep sigh* They bought the rights to her masters. This is why she’s rerecording her albums! Who doesn’t know this??? I’d rather they be lying than they just genuinely believe this but their followers are eating this the fuck up. Wow. Just wow
So the right-wing press is currently in meltdown about Queen being cancelled, they’re cancelling Queen you guys. Those woke Millennials and Gen Z made them remove “Fat Bottomed Girls” from their Greatest Hits album.
ALT
So is this true? Erm, no. What blog do you think this is.
There’s a bit of deception in the headline here, which is of course all most people read. “Fat Bottomed Girls cut from Queen’s greatest hits to appease younger audience”. But if you go on Spotify right now, you’ll find several versions of it, still uncancelled and listenable. So what gives?
ALT
Well, by “to appease younger audience” they don’t mean Millennials or Gen Z. They mean much younger. See, the song was only removed…on a platform for literal children.
ALT
Specifically, children 3-12. We’re not talking about Millennials (whose youngest members are in their twenties, by the way) being sensitive here, we’re talking about eight year olds. Now, whether “Fat Bottomed Girls” is inappropriate for children or not is a discussion you can have, but it’s a discussion no one is having, because they’re reading a misleading headline designed as right-wing outrage bait, and talking about it as if the song has been banned for everyone, and not been left off one niche music service for grade schoolers. What a sweet life these people lead, you don’t have to read anything when you can just get mad over a headline and decide it’s the result of whichever group you hate the most
Anyway you can still listen to any Queen song you like, provided you aren’t getting your music from one specific website for children
I looked into Yoto more and it’s not even a streaming service. It’s some type of media player, that runs music off cards
Story after story is eliding what’s happening by just saying it’s a “youth” platform, knowing their audience thinks Millennials and Gen Z are all still teenagers and that they’ll blame it on them cancelling…what? People who mock the left’s body positivity think they’re mad at “Fat Bottomed Girls”?
The site’s description says the songs they included may have “adult themes” but no “profanity”, and honestly, I’d bet they cut it because “fanny” is a slang term for vagina in some countries. Like. It’s probably that simple. They’re mad a media player for five year olds cut a song for having a sexual euphemism in it and like. Why
So the right-wing press is currently in meltdown about Queen being cancelled, they’re cancelling Queen you guys. Those woke Millennials and Gen Z made them remove “Fat Bottomed Girls” from their Greatest Hits album.
ALT
So is this true? Erm, no. What blog do you think this is.
There’s a bit of deception in the headline here, which is of course all most people read. “Fat Bottomed Girls cut from Queen’s greatest hits to appease younger audience”. But if you go on Spotify right now, you’ll find several versions of it, still uncancelled and listenable. So what gives?
ALT
Well, by “to appease younger audience” they don’t mean Millennials or Gen Z. They mean much younger. See, the song was only removed…on a platform for literal children.
ALT
Specifically, children 3-12. We’re not talking about Millennials (whose youngest members are in their twenties, by the way) being sensitive here, we’re talking about eight year olds. Now, whether “Fat Bottomed Girls” is inappropriate for children or not is a discussion you can have, but it’s a discussion no one is having, because they’re reading a misleading headline designed as right-wing outrage bait, and talking about it as if the song has been banned for everyone, and not been left off one niche music service for grade schoolers. What a sweet life these people lead, you don’t have to read anything when you can just get mad over a headline and decide it’s the result of whichever group you hate the most
Anyway you can still listen to any Queen song you like, provided you aren’t getting your music from one specific website for children
Claim: Michael Jackson’s music video for “Black or White”provoked outrage for scenes where the musician destroys racist graffiti.
Notes on Tumblr: ~900
Verdict: False
Buried in a post rightfully attacking the casting of a white actor as Michael Jackson and people using the lyrics to his song “Black or White” in a misguided attempt to defend it is this claim about the ending sequence to the song’s music video. Unfortunately, while the overall point is correct, this claim is not true.
The post contains a link to the rare full version of the video, which it is dubbed “Black or White: The Complete Version”. We’ll see why this is the case later. It indeed does contain scenes of Michael Jackson destroying racist graffiti. But these scenes were not the same when the video debuted on November 21st, 1991 on FOX, MTV, and BET, when this post claims people were outraged by the scene because of its anti-white supremecy statement.
That brings us to the Complete Version. Far from being the object of outrage, the racist graffiti was added digitally to this later release of the video to quell outrage by making the destruction more understandable:
As the full video is infrequently shown (even the official upload on Youtube is a short version) and the edited version of the long video has long supplanted the controversial original when shown on TV or released in compilations, it’s easy to assume that the more popular form of the video is the original. However, this is not the case.
Did the video for Michael Jackson’s “Black or White” inspire anger among white viewers for its statement against racism when it aired on the FOX network in 1991? Not quite.