In an analysis at Forbes.com, Tom Watson
examines what's behind
the barrage of activist pushback and advertiser suspensions that have greeted Rush Limbaugh after his days of vile attacks on Sandra Fluke and a c.y.a. nopology.
The world of networked hurt that descended on the spiteful media enterprise that is Rush Limbaugh revealed a tenacious, super-wired coalition of active feminists prepared at a moment’s notice to blow the lid off sexist attacks or regressive health policy. [...]
At latest count,  advertisers have pulled the plug on Limbaugh. Each was effectively targeted on Facebook and Twitter by an angry and vocal storm of thousands of people calling for direct action. The campaign was almost instantaneous, coordinated by no individual or organization, and entirely free of cost. Prominent feminist organizers told Forbes that it was social media’s terrible swift sword, led once again by Twitter and Facebook-savvy women, that dealt Limbaugh the worst humiliation of his controversial career, and in many ways, revealed the most potent “non-organized” organization to take the field on the social commons in the age of Occupy Wall Street and Anonymous. [...]
“What’s most interesting to me is that in the last two years or so specifically, women have been leading the charge online to campaign for themselves against this kind of abuse, largely thanks to advances in social networking,” said media technologist Deanna Zandt, author of Share This! How You Will Change the World with Social Networking. ”In the past, we’d have to wait for some organization to take up the cause—create a petition, launch an email campaign—and outside of traditional feminist movement types, those campaigns rarely reached widespread acceptance.”
Watson says this should not be seen as just some left-right battle. Liberal icons have also been targeted, he says, pointing to the "brilliantly-organized" campaign against leftist film-maker Michael Moore and liberal TV anchor Keith Olbermann.
In that instance, blogger Sady Doyle sparked fury and a twitter campaign 15 months ago with a post taking Moore to task for providing bail for Wikileaks founder Julian Assange when he was accused of rape. She spurred her supporters to battle both Moore and Olbermann for being dismissive of the accusation. Addressing Moore, she wrote:
...you’re the face of the Left. You have the platform, you have the power, you have the cash and the fame and the name and face recognition: You claim to speak for us. And when you speak, you don’t stand against rape. [...]
We are the progressive community. We are the left wing. We are women and men, we are from every sector of this community, and we believe that every rape accusation must be taken seriously, regardless of the accused rapist’s connections, power, influence, status, fame, or politics.
Her supporters used the #mooreandme Twitter hashtag to push for apologies from the two men. They got them.
Watson quotes feminist writer Kate Harding:
“I think the public aspect is really important. #mooreandme, the Limbaugh boycott, the Komen/Planned Parenthood uproar all worked because there was somewhere to express ourselves visibly. Who knows how many feminists were sending letters and making phone calls over similar instances in the past? But without any way for an outside observer to measure it, the target of a boycott or letter-writing campaign was never forced to acknowledge that criticism publicly. When your brand’s Facebook wall is overtaken by feminist outrage, you can’t just write it off as a few man-hating cranks and continue on as usual.”
Send an e-mail to the Armed Forces Network, telling them there is no place on military airwaves for talk like Limbaugh's
Blast from the Past. At Daily Kos on this date in 2003:
One of the Bush administration's mantras is "if we lead, people will follow". Hence, they refuse to work in consultation with allies (whether in the foreign or domestic arenas), fully expecting everyone to line up behind them once decisions are made.
This strategy is in full effect at the UN Security Council, where the administration is expressing confidence the US has the votes to pass a war-authorizing resolution.
"We are proceeding, we're pushing ahead," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters. "There is not metaphysical certainty about anything but our plan, everything we are doing, all our intentions and what we anticipate will indeed happen is this will be put to a vote in which the president remains confident in the outcome."
But as "boldly" as the administration may be pushing war, it seems the Security Council will have none of it, as Russia and France have both indicated they will veto the resolution.
Tweet of the Day:
Maybe Rush thinks ovarian cysts are good things. After all, a pilonidal cyst kept him out of Nam. http://t.co/...
— @tbogg via web
High Impact Posts are here. Top Comments are here.
Comments are closed on this story.