So! A lot has happened, since the lovely Jaclyn Friedman and I did conspire to create a hashtag of protest, on the Twitter. Lots of things! Tweeted-by-NYT-writers-and-Jezebel-and-Slate-and-reported-on-by-Mediaite-type things! And you are, no doubt, full of questions. OR CURSING! Lots of you are just cursing, and repeating false claims, and such! That’s why the good Lord gave us the “delete” button. But I thought I should answer a few questions, actually. And since our last post began with numbers, well: Let’s look at some numbers this time, too.
QUESTION 1: Shouldn’t you be focusing on, like, real issues? Who cares about rape apologism from progressive media celebrities, anyway?
The typical number of visitors Tiger Beatdown receives, per day: Roughly 3,000. (Last week, for example. Monday, 3,023. Tuesday, 3,870 w/ two posts and link from high-traffic site. Wednesday, 3,890 w/ link from other high-traffic site. Thursday, 2,907. Friday, 2,210 — low, but we got the post up in the evening, when people were out already. Saturday and Sunday, which are always low because we don’t post, 1,752 and 1,882, respectively.)
The number of visitors Tiger Beatdown received yesterday: 12,741.
Answer: Yes. They care. And they care about it more than they’ve cared about anything else we have ever posted.
QUESTION 2: How on EARTH can people effectively participate in activism, on the Internet??
Number of #MooreandMe Tweets Asking for Explanation/Apology/Support of Anti-Rape Orgs: So many. Too many to count! I don’t know if there’s a tool that will allow me to count how many! Every time I check in at the feed, and then turn away to type this, and then go back to check, there are more of them. And I’m typing this part of the post, in case you wondered, at 4:30 AM.
Number of #MooreandMe Tweets Before Yesterday Morning: Zero.
Answer: When you have a man who has built his career on the presumption that silence in the face of confrontation equals guilt, that refusal to engage with an angry political opponent equals guilt, that refusal to engage publicly equals guilt, a man whose job is essentially walking up to people and demanding that they talk to him in public, and you have a tool on the Internet that allows you to talk to that very man, and that man behaves irresponsibly and oppressively, in a way that betrays the principles of the entire movement he claims to speak for, and he says things that are blatantly untrue in public, so that it is very easy to ascertain that he is either not in possession of the facts or lying about them — when that man, in short, behaves in a way that makes you want to engage him publicly, and the Internet has given you the capability to engage him publicly, so that this man has no option but to (a) respond, or (b) fall into the silence=guilt equation he’s built his very career on? You have a way for people to effectively participate in activism on the Internet, my friends. And, as previously stated, people will participate. Lots of them.
QUESTION 3: Well, okay. And the men you’re calling out — Moore specifically, Olbermann tangentially — may very well have participated in some blatant untruths and biased reporting. Reporting which is, I’ll admit, biased in favor of an alleged rapist, at the expense of the women accusing him, which is never good. And yeah, sure, Keith Olbermann provided all of his 166,533 followers with the name of one of the accusers, via link, in a Tweet that was so widely linked as to exceed even that alarmingly large number of readers and potentially dangerous people. And, yikes, okay, Keith Olbermann also repeated the spurious and unprovable allegation that the accuser (who he indirectly named, thus exposing to potential harm) worked for the CIA, which would undoubtedly rile up any potentially dangerous people reading him. And yeah, sure, Keith Olbermann mis-stated the facts of the case, alleging that consensual sex with a broken condom could be considered rape in Sweden, and not retracting this statement — which, again, reached at least 166,533 people — when it was proven false. And yeah, okay, Michael Moore has laughed out loud, discussing these allegations, and repeated the “it’s just a busted condom” lie more than once on the record and for a television audience, and, well, OKAY, sure, he linked all of his readers to an outdated report on the case containing assertions that have since been proven false or incomplete, and ALL RIGHT, the overall effect of all this was, pretty overtly, intended to minimize any suspicion that Assange could potentially NOT be innocent in the minds of Michael Moore’s many readers, fans, and viewers, including the 719,465 (HOLY SHIT DUDE THAT’S A LOT OF PEOPLE) who follow him on Twitter, using misinformation.
HOWEVER.