Denial: MPAA Pretends That No Big Sites Have Joined SOPA/PIPA Protests
from the living-in-denial dept
Living in what can only be described as pure denial, the MPAA announced today that the SOPA/PIPA protests "failed to enlist big sites." Honestly, there's really not much more to say about that. Google. Wikipedia. Facebook. Amazon. Craigslist. All participating. Let's just stare in wonder at the MPAA's hubris and ability to deny reality.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blackouts, denial, pipa, protect ip, protests, sopa
Companies: google, mpaa, wikipedia
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah. Is reading even a prerequisite to work for the MPAA?
From the article that the MPAA linked to:
"Something this big - which looks to be the largest and most prolific online protest ever in the short history of the Internet - that's bound to get the attention of lawmakers across the board," said Jeffrey Silva, an analyst at Medley Global Advisors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
smaller site.
Alexa graph.
What does that make Reuters then?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: smaller site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: smaller site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I thought yesterday's statement by Chris Dodd was as "pot calling the kettle black"/hypocritical/ironic as it could get. I stand corrected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wikipedia
Wikipedia did not have an outage. All you had to do was turn off JavaScript and Wikipedia worked just fine. Wikipedia even told you that in their message about SOPA/PIPA.
Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wikipedia
And the "Wikipedia outage" was from one of their tweets. As were "reports" that people were upset about this and blah blah blah. It was pretty far fetched and truly grasping at straws to denounce/belittle today's events.
Like I said, they were putting a spin on everything going on today, as well as things that have been happening lately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reuters
However, now that same Reuters URL (I believe - it's the one linked from the MPAA's Twitter feed) is singing a different tune: Pockets of Internet go dark to protest piracy bills. The article is completely re-written.
It's pretty obvious that Reuters thought the protest would fizzle, and wrote the story yesterday. Now that it's actually a big deal, they're scrambling to cover their tracks. Pretty amusing, actually.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reuters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Reuters
Sad, but probably not. I cry for My Country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reuters
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They mean facebook/twitter
It's like ignoring the crowds and highlighting the 5 people who stayed home during the Arab Spring uprising in Egypt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wikipedia? pfft...insignificant. The worlds largest encyclopedia should offer it's website in Klingon, then it might be 'big'
Reddit? Please...only about 100 mil unique hits per month. They need to somehow offer their site to the world's penguin population, THEN..it'll be big!.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quick Fact Check
For fun, MPAA is #96,830, RIAA is #146,123.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Quick Fact Check
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Quick Fact Check
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Quick Fact Check
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Quick Fact Check
Actually, if you use MPAA/RIAA Standard Accounting Procedures, the MPAA website is 27 places ahead of Reddit because MPAA hits count as 4 each (the same way their astroturfing group counts stuff).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And what does that tell you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Welcome to the fold, brother.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That the people passing laws that go after anyone deriving any benefit from piracy are absolutely and completely clueless. That almost everything - including the old media industries - derives some level of financial benefit from piracy, and it's extremely difficult to find something that doesn't to any extent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Its this:
Piracy is a service problem.
The way to defeat piracy is to
provide a better service than the pirates.
Not take a shit on the First Amendment!
-source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvXo4sGB7zM&feature=share
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The solution is a /better/ business model!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What the ??
Article posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:44pm EST (under 1hr ago).
Err. MPAA tried to jump the gun? But to back-post a tweet? With an article made in the future?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Phones clearing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MPAA You need to go down !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet Another Analysis of the MPAA's Statement
"Only days after"
The date of the blackouts was determined before the white-house released their statement. The use of the word "only" implies that having the timing of the blackout was somehow improper, unreasonable, or wrong.
"the White House and chief sponsors of the legislation"
Intentionally grouping the White House and chief sponsors together so that it is unclear who the actions and positions in the rest of the sentence are attributed to.
"responded to"
"Responded to" doesn't mean removed, fixed or addressed. Responded means anything other than silence, up to and including "screw you."
"to the major concern"
Note the singular of "concern." They acknowledge that there are other concerns, and that they did not respond to them.
"expressed by opponents"
By using the word "opponents", they reveal that they see this as a game. There are many other words they could have used there. The game theme keeps popping up later as well.
"and then called for all parties to work cooperatively together,"
They just finished saying that they see people who don't support the bill as their challengers in a game, that there are concerns they didn't respond to, and then somehow think we'll believe that they want all parties to "work cooperatively together." This is clearly a lie. The other things they've said indicate that they don't want that at all.
"some technology business interests"
"Some" is a pretty weak word to represent a quantity that tends to mean "not many." They want to minimize the number. Including the word "interests" evokes the term "special interests" and the negative connotations associated with it. (I find that particularly interesting as this is coming from an organization that's whole reason for being is to influence policy. Where as the "technology" businesses are actual businesses.)
"are resorting"
They use "resorting" to imply desperation or a last-ditch effort, that they believe the blackouts were a hasty reaction and not well thought out or carefully considered. That's not true. We know there was lengthy discussion, advanced planning, and careful coordination between many parties before hand, especially in the case of Wikipedia.
"to stunts"
You know, "stunts", like Evel Knievel jumping a flaming car or a seal balancing a ball on it's nose; implying hollow and pointless entertainment with no real purpose or effect. It's too soon to see all of the effects of this, but early indications are it's been quite effective.
"that punish their users"
This is an attempt to persuade people that encounter the blackout that the site isn't punishing the MPAA - it's punishing them. (Again, interesting coming from an organization that not only literally threatens to punish it's users every time they use their supporters products with a red warning about big punishments but has also actually punished it's users, including children and elderly people by suing them for enormous sums of money.)
"or turn them into their corporate pawns"
Again with the game metaphors. The MPAA doesn't produce or sell anything they simply follow the orders of the companies that fund them. Pawns. Furthermore, the whole point of the MPAA is to influence policy makers with campaign contributions and lucrative private-sector employment opportunities. Pawns again. But somehow, when someone is encouraged to contact the person elected to represent them, they're pawns.
"rather than coming to the table"
They are making clear here that they don't want the direction of the country being determined by the voice of the public, but by big players in a closed room sitting around a table making deals. First chess, and now poker.
"to find solutions"
"Solutions" plural. These bills are not the end, in other words.
"to a problem that all now seem to agree is very real and damaging."
We know that all do not agree. It's hard to tell a blatant lie through, it causes psychological discomfort. So, they had to add the word "seem" to soften the statement. The fact that they even put this phrase in there, shows that they know this isn't true. When someone is writing about drunk-driving, do they bother to write that "all now agree it's very real and damaging?" Of course not, everyone already agrees with that. Also, by trying to strengthen "real" with the word "very", they are betraying that they suspect it isn't real but they want us to think it is.
"It is an irresponsible response"
They are saying that the blackout was reckless and that someone just like you could get hurt by it. Classic appeal to fear.
"and a disservice to people who rely on them for information and use their services."
They are admitting that people "rely" on their opponents. If someone relies on you, then you are essential. I'm surprised by this and think it was a slip up on there part.
"It is also an abuse of power"
They are acknowledging that the Internet is powerful and they resent that.
"given the freedoms these companies enjoy in the marketplace today."
This is clearly a threat. They're saying that these companies have too much freedom and they can take it away. "Those are some nice freedoms you have there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to them."
"It�s a dangerous and troubling development"
"Dangerous" is, again, an appeal to fear. The use of the word "development" tries to suggest that these actions are a surprise and were not provoked or precipitated by any events. It's an attempt to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
"when the platforms that serve as gateways to information"
I'm surprised they would use the word "gateways" here. It's a common criticism that they are the "gatekeepers" of content and they just want to lock it up. Perhaps they are trying to imply that "those other guys are gatekeepers too, see!"
"intentionally skew the facts"
"Skew" is a pretty weak criticism, akin to "tilt" or "spin". They could have said, "they are lying", but they didn't because that of itself is a lie and would be too strong for comfort. It also would be too hard to fact check them on that - whereas "skew" could mean anything.
"to incite their users"
"incite" is clearly an homage to mob violence and implies coercion rather than persuasion. (Shouldn't they have said "induce" just for kicks and giggles?)
"in order to further their corporate interests."
They are saying, "See, we're not the only ones with corporate interests. Everyone is doing it so it's okay."
"A so-called �blackout� is yet another gimmick, albeit a dangerous one,"
We know it's called a blackout. Everyone is calling it a blackout. "So-called" is an attempt to weaken the term. "Yet another" is trying to imply that there were previous actions that were also "gimmicks." (Writing a letter to congress is a "gimmick?")
"designed to punish elected and administration officials"
This is a deflection of blame and criticism away from themselves to congress. Guess they're not true friends after all.
"who are working diligently"
They are pointing out that the congress who can't get anything done has a chance here to look like they're doing something and they want us to stop being so hard on them and just give them this chance to save their careers.
"to protect American jobs from foreign criminals."
Of course, "jobs" is the buzzword of the year so that's no surprise. The big old "American" and "foreign criminals" is an appeal to nationalism and patriotism. They went one step short of saying "terrorists." That might have worked ten years ago.
"It is our hope"
"Hope" here shows that they doubt this will work.
"that the White House and the Congress will call on those who intend to stage this �blackout� to stop the hyperbole and PR stunts"
Again with the deflection. "You guys tell them, we're too scared to."
"and engage in meaningful efforts to combat piracy.�
They are implying that they are engaging in some efforts but those efforts are not meaningful. Notice they didn't say "effective." "Meaningful", implies moral righteousness which gels with their line that "piracy is illegal" and therefore must be stopped - no matter if it's actually harmful or the laws practical to enforce.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet Another Analysis of the MPAA's Statement
Brilliant dissection of the "message"!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet Another Analysis of the MPAA's Statement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet Another Analysis of the MPAA's Statement
Saving that along with my copy of the original statement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cigs
Denail
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cigs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As for Wikipedia, this one's obvious: they'll never look for facts, so this site's foreign to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It seems like this has happened all before...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It seems like this has happened all before...
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120116/14480017423/sopapipa-how-far-weve-come-how-far-we- need-to-go.shtml#c929
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They have small link in the upper right hand corner that links to NetCoalition.com. So, yeah, not a whole lot of support there, but, some is better than none.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIAA.COM
MPAA.COM
SONY.COM
BSA.COM
etc...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As far as I can tell, they only consider their sites as 'Big sites', and since they obviously haven't joined the blackout, it means that no big sites have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111221/03240317155/riaas-response-to-infringement-via-its-ip-addr ess-is-to-note-someone-else-did-it.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A defense?
"How could we possibly be guilty of anti-trust violations, when we don't have enough traffic to be counted as a 'Big' site?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@MPAA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/1166/blackoutwin.jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This... statement... is... false!
SOPA protesters are pawns of Google!
SOPA protests have no big sites backing them!
If I didn't know better, I'd swear they thought we were AIs, and were trying to use logical paradoxes on us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
XD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
misunderstanding
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here lies the truth about SOPA/PIPA that Techdirt has not been reporting: what MPAA, RIAA, and Hollywood execs do not want you to see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzS5rSvZXe8
The truth behind why these big companies responsible for SOPA and PIPA are also responsible for piracy itself is far more insidious than even TechDirt realizes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]