A Chronicle of Outrage Marketing Part 2

Yesterday I posted about the Twitter exchange between sci-fi author and Baen editor Christopher Ruocchio and Nick Mamatas over the Baen anthology The Chronicles of Davids. https://camestrosfelapton.wordpress.com/2019/10/19/a-chronicle-of-outrage-marketing/

What I didn’t do is show examples of how the legitimate (and pretty mild) comments about the anthology were then leveraged. No big surprises here but I’m keen to watch this unfold because it is the sort of thing that in a years time will have transmogrified and become part of Puppy-lore i.e. that time the whole of liberal/SJW/antifa/Bernie Sanders formed a giant army to destroy the careers of every writer ever called Dave, or some such.

Bounding into Outrage

First off “Bounding into Comics”. This is a pop-culture news site that takes as its editorial premise the whole SJWs-are-destroying-everything-we-love worldview. Notably, it has been a regular shill for Vox Day’s comic book company Arkhaven. Earlier this year, the site pushed a smear campaign against the writer Alyssa Wong (see item 2 in this Pixel Scroll http://file770.com/pixel-scroll-7-31-19-yes-its-true-this-scroll-has-no-pix/ ) in a post by the site’s lead editor John F Trent.

The Bounding into Comics version of the story is here https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/10/18/outrage-group-criticizes-baen-books-for-releasing-an-anthology-by-people-named-david-due-to-lack-of-diversity/

The breathless framing of an “outrage group” sets the tone and it is downhill from there. However, the bit which I think best sums up the article is this:

Baen Books Gets Mobbed
In a bizarre turn of events, Baen Books was soon descended upon by a handful of social justice-focused users who criticized the anthology for its lack of diversity:

Oh my! Baen books gets mobbed? By who? By “a handful”. That bit is at least accurate, it is literally a handful of people quizzing the premise of the anthology. Essentially hardly anybody and in no sense a mob. It’s a minor example of point 8 in Umberto Eco’s Ur-Fascism: the enemy is both strong and weak. The SJWs are a mob and they are mobbing (i.e. it is an attack) but also they are a handful and bizarre etc etc. The terrifying mobbing of Baen book’s Twitter account includes a Brittany Speers gif and some people asking genuine questions.

Outrage Hunters International

Hey it wouldn’t be outrage marketing without our blog regular and Gamergate supporter, Larry Correia. Over on Facebook Larry too has leapt to the defence of Baen — the poor publisher currently beleaguered on twitter by a quizzical face emoji and Brittany Speers:

“I’ll do an actual blog post when I get the chance, but if you are curious what has outraged all the SJWs on Twitter this week, it is having an anthology where everything is Dave based isn’t “inclusive”. (When Baen released an all female anthology to demonstrate that women have always been in sci-fi, all the SJWs ignored it)
You should buy this book just because it will upset Nick Mamatas, and he’s a friggin idiot.”

Well “all the the SJWs on Twitter” is obviously intended to be hyperbole but on that initial Baen thread it’s maybe five people making very mild comments. Over Twitter as a whole, obviously a few more people talked about it but I follow a lot of left-leaning sci-fi accounts and social-justicey people and The Chronicles of Davids made barely a blip. I’m not sure I’d have even mentioned the Nick Mamatas Tweets except that Baen sort of falls into the remit given to me by SJW headquarters.

There’s 70+ comments to Larry’s post (apparently the flounce off Facebook and over to MeWe is happening slowly). Mind you the main comments in all places I’ve seen this discussed is 1. ‘Why Barry’ and 2. ‘Wasn’t that a Dr Seuss story?’

Of course, what we won’t see is anybody discussing Nick Mamatas’s actual point about the anthology and what he deftly terms “affirmadave action”. As for making him ‘mad’ Larry himself described that rhetorical tactic once to me:

“You can always spot the dishonest dismiss attempts because no matter how righteous your claim or how much you’ve actually been wronged, they always paint their opposition’s words as ranting, whining, You Sound Angry, so on and so forth. It’s very predictable.”

I have zero reason to think Nick Mamatas would be remotely upset if one of Larry’s followers bought the anthology.

Recursive Outrage Paradox

Of course, now I’ve talked about the talking about or when others talk about the talking about this will be cited as being further evidence of some deep SJW campaign to persecute Baen or conservatives or Daves in general. It’s not, obviously.

Back to the dilemma: ignore or discuss? Ignoring amounts to self-silencing and discussing can feed into a toxic cycle. The anthology itself is both fine and yes, also an example of how systemic bias can operate without a malicious intent. That’s really pertinent in understanding the nature of how biases operate and wow, magically doesn’t not make that assemblage of Daves horrible people AND notably I haven’t seen anybody suggesting that they are (OK at least one is but not because of the anthologising or Daveness).


18 thoughts on “A Chronicle of Outrage Marketing Part 2

  1. Baen Books Gets Mobbed
    In a bizarre turn of events, Baen Books was soon descended upon by a handful of social justice-focused users who criticized the anthology for its lack of diversity:

    “A handful of social justice focused users” denotes a “mob”? Really?

    What would these people do if they lived during the days of the 60’s and 70’s when there were actual protest mobs? (Or hell, even in Hong Kong right now, for that matter.) 🙄

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Remember, America’s noble attorney general, William Barr, has just warned us about how the left deploys “savage social media campaigns” against conservatives. A campus right-wing group a couple of years earlier protested it was being persecuted with “snarky vitriolic email.”
      Since the religious right got organized in the 1980s, they’ve been squealing that being criticized is persecution, or the forerunner to “secularists” throwing them into death camps. Basically they want all the glamor of being martyrs without the inconvenience of martyrdom.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. …left deploys “savage social media campaigns” against conservatives.

        Because it’s just so hard to react to truth when all the right has is lies. You have to pity them. They’re sooooo pitiful.

        Liked by 3 people

  2. I don’t think Mamatas is aware of or cares about Puppy nattering. As he pointed out, he has stories in Baen anthologies and was mostly just amused that they tried to paint him as a Tor author.

    Again, the outrage marketing isn’t marketing for the anthology. I doubt they’re encouraging anyone much to buy it. And it’s not even to defend Baen Books. It’s just to market the social idea that bringing up civil rights topics is bad, unreasonable and threatening. It’s the hamster wheel of doom.

    Liked by 6 people

  3. RWNJs all have to believe that their foes are red-faced and stammering with steam rising from the collar area just as they have to believe that they are patient, forbearing, and humorous throughout (and in reality jumped to personal insults in their first reply and are now using all caps and multiple punctuation marks). This is because they have a script, and by god they are going to follow it, and YOU are going to follow it, or at least they’ll act like you did.

    The script is found in the Jack T. Chick pamphlet, BIG DADDY? They’re the courteous, clean-cut youth who defeats the puffing evolutionist with Bible verses and PIltdown Man. He’s who they see when they look in the mirror, and every time someone on the Christian Right makes a movie that’s essentially a knockoff of BD, they actually pay to watch it. Not that the movies acknowledge Chick, of course, because that could run into money if you’re not careful.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Back to the dilemma: ignore or discuss? Ignoring amounts to self-silencing and discussing can feed into a toxic cycle.

    Discuss, but discuss wisely. Be clear about what we’re criticizing. Be clear about what we would have wanted instead, or what sanctions we want. And maybe let the discussion go after a few exchanges – don’t be dragged into a long fight about relatively minor issues.

    I think there’s a general problem that we’re not good at discussing things that are not OK, but also not a cardinal sin. By “we” here I mean a very general “we as a society” – I don’t think the left / progressives / whatever can claim to be better than right-wingers here.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.