Girl Scouts Are Taking Credit Card Payments For Cookies And It’s Diabolical

It&;s Girl Scout cookie season, which means our wallets are getting smaller and our pant sizes are getting bigger.

Seasons vary by place. Here&039;s how to find yours.

But in these hip modern times, how can you get your Thin Mint fix if you don&039;t carry cash?

According to a 2014 report by Bankrate and Princeton Survey Research Associates International, 50% of Americans carry $20 or less every day, and 9% don&039;t carry cash at all. Retailers are adapting at varying speeds.

Oh, the burnt caramel taste of sorrow&;

Giphy

The Scouts know this is a problem, though, and they&039;re trying something new: mobile credit card readers.

Giphy

That&039;s right. Some Girl Scouts have started using Square to take payments, and people around the country have taken notice.

Square doesn&039;t have any official data on the prevalence of its readers among the Scouts, and Troop 87 didn&039;t respond to requests for comment about why they decided to try the mobile card readers.

Square did say it has seen a trend of more parents telling the company they&039;ve started using readers, as well as more social media chatter about scouts around the country using them in 2017 than in 2016.

The readers didn&039;t come from an official Girl Scout partnership with Square, and there probably won&039;t be one in the future.

Square was excited about the scouts, though: “We love when sellers use Square in creative ways. As you can imagine, their customers are equally as excited that they don&039;t have to carry cash anymore.”

There&039;s an expense for the convenience, though: the company takes a 2.75% transaction fee for all credit and debit card transactions.

Who are these scouts of the future?

Meet Ava Burns. She&039;s a seven-year-old Girl Scout and is in the first grade in Austin, Texas. She&039;s sold 720 boxes of Girl Scout cookies this year, the most of anyone in Troop 87.

It&039;s only her second year in Girl Scouts, and last year she sold 500 boxes.

Her goal for 2017 was 650, which she&039;s obviously already beaten. Her mom, Briana Burns, attributes the increase to one big change: a Square credit card reader.

“I think 90% of the people who weren&039;t carrying cash, which were mostly young people, turned around and bought something when they heard we took credit cards,” she told BuzzFeed News.

Briana Burns

Last year, Ava and her mom had some trouble. Several potential cookie buyers walked away empty-handed, saying, “Ah, I want to buy some, but I don&039;t have any cash.”

The same thing started happening when cookie season started again on January 18 this year. But two days into the season, Troop 87 offered its members the chance to use Square readers to process payments for cookies. Ava wanted to try it out, so she brought the reader with her when she was selling door-to-door after school and when setting up cookie sales booths at Walmart or Walgreens on weekends.

Sales end this Sunday, and Ava is currently the top seller in her troop. Briana said that the other scout with a Square reader is among the top three as well. Briana predicts more people will use the readers in 2018 because of how successful they were this year.

“Ava asked me last week if we had met our goal, and I looked, and we were already 70 boxes past it,” Briana said.

It wasn&039;t just Ava&039;s mom using the reader to take payments, either.

Ava herself became well-versed in using Square to take credit card payments. The two had set up shop outside a Walmart one day when Briana started having trouble getting the reader to scan a card — “They&039;re easy to use, but a bit touchy,” she said — when Ava snatched the iPhone and the reader with a quick “Ugh, mom, just let me do it,” and swiped the card herself.

“It really empowered her to see technology as a means to achieving her goals rather than a spare time thing,” Briana said. “She&039;s my little entrepreneur.”

The reader had other benefits, too.

The troop had instituted a two-box minimum for transactions using the Square reader, so all the customers who didn&039;t have cash had to buy more cookies by default. What a burden to have ~two~ boxes of Samoas instead of one.

It was also safer. After a successful day of sales, Girl Scouts can be carrying plenty of cash. In the California Bay Area this year, a Girl Scout and her mother were allegedly robbed at gunpoint for the cash they&039;d collected from cookie sales.

“Having the reader at the booths, especially when it&039;s just me and Ava, makes me feel like we&039;re less likely to be targeted because there&039;s less cash on hand. And we don&039;t have to run into Walmart to make change or go to the bank to deposit all this money,” Briana said.

On one of her Saturday shifts from 11-1 outside of a Walmart, Ava sold 130 boxes of cookies, beating even the iconic San Francisco Girl Scout Danielle Lei who set up shop outside of a marijuana dispensary in 2014 and sold 117 boxes in two hours.

Bottom line: Ava&039;s a champ.

Ava is hoping to use the rewards from her cookie sales to go to Girl Scout riding camp, as her mom did when she was a scout. Her favorite cookie is the Samoa, also known as the Caramel Delight. Briana&039;s is the S&039;More, the new cookie for 2017 that became one of this year&039;s top sellers.

Quelle: <a href="Girl Scouts Are Taking Credit Card Payments For Cookies And It’s Diabolical“>BuzzFeed

How YouTube Serves As The Content Engine Of The Internet's Dark Side

How YouTube Serves As The Content Engine Of The Internet's Dark Side

YouTube

David Seaman is the King of the Internet.

On Twitter, Seaman posts dozens of messages a day to his 66,000 followers, often about the secret cabal — including Rothschilds, Satanists, and the other nabobs of the New World Order — behind the nation’s best-known, super-duper-secret child sex ring under a DC pizza parlor.

But it’s on YouTube where he really goes to work. Since Nov. 4, four days before the election, Seaman has uploaded 136 videos, more than one a day. Of those, at least 42 are about Pizzagate. The videos, which tend to run about eight to fifteen minutes, typically consist of Seaman, a young, brown-haired man with glasses and a short beard, speaking directly into a camera in front of a white wall. He doesn’t equivocate: Recent videos are titled “Pizzagate Will Dominate 2017, Because It Is Real” and “PizzaGate New Info 12/6/16: Link To Pagan God of Pedophilia/Rape.”

Seaman has more than 150,000 subscribers. His videos, usually preceded by preroll ads for major brands like Quaker Oats and Uber, have been watched almost 18 million times, which is roughly the number of people who tuned in to last year’s season finale of NCIS, the most popular show on television.

His biography reads, in part, “I report the truth.”

In the aftermath of the 2016 presidential election, the major social platforms, most notably Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit, have been forced to undergo painful, often public reckonings with the role they play in spreading bad information. How do services that have become windows onto the world for hundreds of millions of people square their desire to grow with the damage that viral false information, “alternative facts,” and filter bubbles do to a democracy?

And yet there is a mammoth social platform, a cornerstone of the modern internet with more than a billion active users every month, which hosts and even pays for a fathomless stock of bad information, including viral fake news, conspiracy theories, and hate speech of every kind — and it’s been held up to virtually no scrutiny: YouTube.

The entire contemporary conspiracy-industrial complex of internet investigation and social media promulgation, which has become a defining feature of media and politics in the Trump era, would be a very small fraction of itself without YouTube. Yes, the site most people associate with “Gangnam Style,” pirated music, and compilations of dachshunds sneezing is also the central content engine of the unruliest segments of the ascendant right-wing internet, and sometimes its enabler.

To wit, the conspiracy-news internet’s biggest stars, some of whom now enjoy New Yorker profiles and presidential influence, largely live on YouTube. Infowars — whose founder and host, Alex Jones, claims Sandy Hook didn’t happen, Michelle Obama is a man, and 9/11 was an inside job — broadcasts to 2 million subscribers on YouTube. So does Michael “Gorilla Mindset” Cernovich. So too do a whole genre of lesser-known but still wildly popular YouTubers, people like Seaman and Stefan Molyneux (an Irishman closely associated with the popular “Truth About” format). As do a related breed of prolific political-correctness watchdogs like Paul Joseph Watson and Sargon of Akkad (real name: Carl Benjamin), whose videos focus on the supposed hypocrisies of modern liberal culture and the ways they leave Western democracy open to a hostile Islamic takeover. As do a related group of conspiratorial white-identity vloggers like Red Ice TV, which regularly hosts neo-Nazis in its videos.

“The internet provides people with access to more points of view than ever before,” YouTube wrote in a statement. “We&;re always taking feedback so we can continue to improve and present as many perspectives at a given moment in time as possible.”

YouTube

All this is a far cry from the platform’s halcyon days of 2006 and George Allen’s infamous “Macaca” gaffe. Back then, it felt reasonable to hope the site would change politics by bypassing a rose-tinted broadcast media filter to hold politicians accountable. As recently as 2012, Mother Jones posted to YouTube hidden footage of Mitt Romney discussing the “47%” of the electorate who would never vote for him, a video that may have swung the election. But by the time the 2016 campaign hit its stride, and a series of widely broadcast, ugly comments by then-candidate Trump didn’t keep him out of office, YouTube’s relationship to politics had changed.

Today, it fills the enormous trough of right-leaning conspiracy and revisionist historical content into which the vast, ravening right-wing social internet lowers its jaws to drink. Shared widely everywhere from white supremacist message boards to chans to Facebook groups, these videos constitute a kind of crowdsourced, predigested ideological education, offering the “Truth” about everything from Michelle Obama’s real biological sex (760,000 views&;) to why medieval Islamic civilization wasn’t actually advanced.

Frequently, the videos consist of little more than screenshots of a Reddit “investigation” laid out chronologically, set to ominous music. Other times, they’re very simple, featuring a man in a sparse room speaking directly into his webcam, or a very fast monotone narration over a series of photographs with effects straight out of iMovie. There’s a financial incentive for vloggers to make as many videos as cheaply they can; the more videos you make, the more likely one is to go viral. David Seaman’s videos typically garner more than 50,000 views and often exceed 100,000. Many of Seaman’s videos adjoin ads for major brands. A preroll ad for Asana, the productivity software, precedes a video entitled “WIKILEAKS: Illuminati Rothschild Influence & Simulation Theory”; before “Pizzagate: Do We Know the Full Scope Yet?&033;” it’s an ad for Uber, and before “HILLARY CLINTON&039;S HORROR SHOW,” one for a new Fox comedy. (Most YouTubers have no direct control over which brands&039; ads run next to their videos, and vice versa.)

This trough isn’t just wide, it’s deep. A YouTube search for the term “The Truth About the Holocaust” returns half a million results. The top 10 are all Holocaust-denying or Holocaust-skeptical. (Sample titles: “The Greatest Lie Ever Told,” which has 500,000 views; “The Great Jewish Lie”; “The Sick Lies of a Holocaust™ &039;Survivor.&039;”) Say the half million videos average about 10 minutes. That works out to 5 million minutes, or about 10 years, of “Truth About the Holocaust.”

Meanwhile, “The Truth About Pizzagate” returns a quarter of a million results, including “PizzaGate Definitive Factcheck: Oh My God” (620,000 views and counting) and “The Men Who Knew Too Much About PizzaGate” (who, per a teaser image, include retired Gen. Michael Flynn and Andrew Breitbart).

Sometimes, these videos go hugely viral. “With Open Gates: The Forced Collective Suicide of European Nations” — an alarming 20-minute video about Muslim immigration to Europe featuring deceptive editing and debunked footage — received some 4 million views in late 2015 before being taken down by YouTube over a copyright claim. (Infowars: “YouTube Scrambles to Censor Viral Video Exposing Migrant Invasion.”) That’s roughly as many people as watched the Game of Thrones Season 3 premiere. It’s since been scrubbed of the copyrighted music and reuploaded dozens of times.

First circulated by white supremacist blogs and chans, “With Gates Wide Open” gained social steam until it was picked up by Breitbart, at which point it exploded, blazing the viral trail by which conspiracy-right “Truth” videos now travel. Last week, President Trump incensed the nation of Sweden by falsely implying that it had recently suffered a terrorist attack. Later, he clarified in a tweet that he was referring to a Fox News segment. That segment featured footage from a viral YouTube documentary, Stockholm Syndrome, about the dangers of Muslim immigration into Europe. Sources featured in the documentary have since accused its director, Ami Horowitz, of “bad journalism” for taking their answers out of context.

So what responsibility, if any, does YouTube bear for the universe of often conspiratorial, sometimes bigoted, frequently incorrect information that it pays its creators to host, and that is now being filtered up to the most powerful person in the world? Legally, per the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which absolves service providers of liability for content they host, none. But morally and ethically, shouldn’t YouTube be asking itself the same hard questions as Facebook and Twitter about the role it plays in a representative democracy? How do those questions change because YouTube is literally paying people to upload bad information?

And practically, if YouTube decided to crack down, could it really do anything?

YouTube does “demonitize” videos that it deems “not advertiser-friendly,” and last week, following a report in the Wall Street Journal that Disney had nixed a sponsorship deal with the YouTube superstar PewDiePie over anti-Semitic content in his videos, YouTube pulled his channel from its premium ad network. But such steps have tended to follow public pressure and have only affected extremely famous YouTubers. And it’s not like PewDiePie will go hungry; he can still run ads on his videos, which regularly do millions of views.

Ultimately, the platform may be so huge as to be ungovernable: Users upload 400 hours of video to YouTube every minute. One possibility is drawing a firmer line between content the company officially designates as news and everything else; YouTube has a dedicated News vertical that pulls in videos from publishers approved by Google News.

Even there, though, YouTube has its work cut out for it. On a recent evening, the first result I saw under the “Live Now – News” subsection of youtube.com/news was the Infowars “Defense of Liberty 13 Hour Special Broadcast.” Alex Jones was staring into the camera.

Quelle: <a href="How YouTube Serves As The Content Engine Of The Internet&039;s Dark Side“>BuzzFeed

Elon Musk Slams Union Drive At Tesla Factory

Tesla CEO Elon Musk listens as President-elect Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with technology industry leaders at Trump Tower in New York, Wednesday, Dec. 14, 2016. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Evan Vucci / AP

In a lengthy Thursday night email to Tesla employees, CEO Elon Musk defended his record as an employer, and appealed to workers not to join the United Auto Workers union.

In the message, first leaked to Electrek.co and later obtained in full by BuzzFeed News, Musk took direct aim at claims made earlier this month in a Medium post by factory worker Jose Moran. Moran alleged that long hours of physical labor once forced six of his eight team members to take medical leave simultaneously. Musk disputed this allegation, claiming a Tesla investigation has proven it to be false. “After looking into this claim, not only was it untrue for this individual’s team, it was untrue for any of the hundreds of teams in the factory,” he wrote.

“The forces arrayed against us are many and incredibly powerful. This is David vs Goliath if David were six inches tall&;”

The Tesla CEO also lambasted the efforts of the United Auto Workers union to unionize Tesla employees at the company&;s Fremont, CA factory, calling the organization&039;s tactics for doing so “disingenuous or outright false.” Musk alleged that the UAW&039;s “true allegiance is to the giant car companies, where the money they take from employees in dues is vastly more than they could ever make from Tesla.”

“The forces arrayed against us are many and incredibly powerful,” Musk wrote. “This is David vs Goliath if David were six inches tall&033; Only by being smarter, faster and working well as a tightly integrated team do we have any chance of success.”

Moran&039;s post — which was later followed by a press conference and a Facebook video — detailed how low pay, long hours, and difficult working conditions are making life difficult for Tesla employees. Moran argued that unionizing would improve the factory workers&039; situation.

Musk immediately swung back at Moran, telling Gizmodo that he was a union plant; earlier this week, during a Tesla earnings call, Musk told investors that the unionization “isn&039;t likely to occur.”

Moran denied Musk&039;s claims that he&039;s paid by the UAW to lead unionization efforts. His communications team, Storefront Political, declined comment on Musk&039;s email.

Musk&039;s email includes a point-by-point rebuttal of a number of Moran&039;s claims. Regarding long hours, Musk said overtime has actually decreased by 50% in the last year, and that the average employee worked 43 hours a week. Regarding compensation, he noted that Tesla factory workers earn equity, and therefore, over a four year period, earned “between $70,000 and $100,000 more in total compensation than the employees at other US auto companies.” On issues of safety, Musk said Tesla&039;s incident rate is less than half the industry average, and noted that the goal is to be “as close to zero injuries as possible.”

“There will also be little things that come along like free frozen yogurt stands scattered around the factory.”

In addition to defending Tesla&039;s record as an employer, Musk told workers that he plans to improve life at the Tesla factory, which is currently in the process of switching over its lines for production of the Model 3. For example, when the Model 3 reaches “volume production,” Musk said he&039;ll throw them “a really amazing party.”

“There will also be little things that come along like free frozen yogurt stands scattered around the factory and my personal favorite: a Tesla electric pod car roller coaster (with an optional loop the loop route, of course&033;) that will allow fast and fun travel throughout our Fremont campus, dipping in and out of the factory and connecting all the parking lots,” Musk wrote. “It’s going to get crazy good.”

Tesla declined comment. The full text of Musk&039;s email is below.

If you have information on working conditions or unionization efforts at Tesla, please contact the author directly, or tip us anonymously via contact.buzzfeed.com.

For Tesla to become and remain one of the great companies of the 21st century, we must have an environment that is as safe, fair and fun as possible. It is incredibly important to me that you look forward to coming to work every day. For that, we must be a fair and just company – the only kind worth creating.

This is vital to succeed in our mission to accelerate the advent of a clean, sustainable energy future. The forces arrayed against us are many and incredibly powerful. This is David vs Goliath if David were six inches tall&033; Only by being smarter, faster and working well as a tightly integrated team do we have any chance of success. We should never forget the history of car startups originating in the United States: dozens have gone bankrupt and only two, Tesla and Ford, have not. Despite the odds being strongly against us, my faith in you is why I am confident that we will succeed.

That is why I was so distraught when I read the recent blog post promoting the UAW, which does not share our mission and whose true allegiance is to the giant car companies, where the money they take from employees in dues is vastly more than they could ever make from Tesla.

The tactics they have resorted to are disingenuous or outright false. I will address their underhanded attacks below. While this discussion focuses on Fremont, these same principles apply to every Tesla facility worldwide.

Safety First

The workplace issue that comes before any other is safety. If you do not have your health, then nothing else matters. Simply due to size and bad luck, there will always be some injuries in a company with over 30,000 employees, but our goal is simple: to have as close to zero injuries as possible and be the safest factory in the auto industry by far. The Tesla executive team and I are absolutely committed to this goal.

That is why I was particularly troubled by the safety claim in last week’s blog post, which said: “A few months ago, six out of eight people in my work team were out on medical leave at the same time due to various work-related injuries. I hear the ergonomics are even more severe in other areas of the factory.”

Obviously, this cannot be true: if three quarters of his team suddenly went on medical leave, we would not be able to operate that part of the factory. Furthermore, if things were really even worse in other departments, that would mean something like 80% or more of the factory would be out on injury, production would drop to virtually nothing and the parking lot would be almost empty. As you know firsthand, we have the *opposite* problem – there is never enough room to park&033; In fact, we are working at top speed to build more parking. Also, hopefully our darn BART train station will open before all hell freezes over&033;

After looking into this claim, not only was it untrue for this individual’s team, it was untrue for any of the hundreds of teams in the factory.

That said, reducing excess overtime and improving safety are extremely important. This is why we hired thousands of additional team members to create a third shift, which has reduced the burden on everyone. Moreover, since the beginning of Tesla production at Fremont five years ago, there have been dedicated health and safety experts covering the factory and we hold regular safety meetings with operations leaders. Since the majority of the injuries in the factory are ergonomic in nature, we have an ergonomics department focused exclusively on this issue.

The net result is that since January 1st, our total recordable incident rate (TRIR) is under 3.3, which is less than half the industry average of 6.7.

Of course, the goal is to have as close to zero injuries as humanly possible, so we need to keep improving. If you have a safety concern or an idea on how to make things better, please let your manager, safety representative or HR partner know. You can also send an anonymous note through the Integrity Hotline (this applies broadly to any problems you notice at our company) or you can email.

Compensation

At Tesla, we believe it is important for everyone to be an owner of the company. This is your company. That is why, unlike other car companies, everyone is awarded shares and you get to buy stock at a discount compared to the public through the employee stock purchase program. Last year, stock equity grants were increased significantly and it will happen again later this year once Model 3 achieves high volume.

The chart below contrasts the total comp received by a Tesla production team member who started on January 1, 2013 against the total comp received over the same period at GM, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler. A four year period is used because that’s the vesting length of a new hire equity grant. I believe the equity gain over the next four years will be similar. As shown below, a Tesla team member earned between $70,000 and $100,000 more in total compensation than the employees at other US auto companies&033;

Work Hours

Another issue raised in the UAW blog was hours worked. First, I want to recognize how hard you worked to make our company successful. Those hours mattered to you, to your family and to our company, and I can’t tell you how much I appreciate them.

However, the pace needs to be sustainable. This is why the third shift was established and why we created alternate work schedules based on feedback from various teams in the factory.

These changes have had a big impact. The average amount of hours worked by production team members this year is about 43 hours per week. The percentage of overtime hours has declined by almost 50% since the super tough time we had last year achieving rate on the Model X, which is probably the hardest car to build in history. What an amazing accomplishment&033; It is also a lesson learned, which is why Model 3 is designed to be dramatically easier to manufacture.

Fun

As we get closer to being a profitable company, we will be able to afford more and more fun things. For example, as I mentioned at the last company talk, we are going to hold a really amazing party once Model 3 reaches volume production later this year. There will also be little things that come along like free frozen yogurt stands scattered around the factory and my personal favorite: a Tesla electric pod car roller coaster (with an optional loop the loop route, of course&033;) that will allow fast and fun travel throughout our Fremont campus, dipping in and out of the factory and connecting all the parking lots. It’s going to get crazy good

Thanks again for all your effort and I look forward to working alongside you to create an amazing future&033;

Elon

Quelle: <a href="Elon Musk Slams Union Drive At Tesla Factory“>BuzzFeed

Which Messaging App Should You Use?

WHY ARE THERE SO MANY?!

There are so many ways to send a message these days. Google Voice recently added texts, group messaging, and transcribed voicemail after not updating their app for *five years,* bringing the number of Google&;s messaging apps to four (including Hangouts, Allo, and Duo). Facebook&039;s got two apps (WhatsApp and Messenger). Microsoft&039;s got two apps (GroupMe and Skype). Apple also kind of has two apps (iMessage and FaceTime).

That doesn&039;t include all of the other, independent messaging apps out there like Viber, WeChat, LINE, Telegram, and Kakaotalk, to name a few.

It&039;s true. We live in a time of TOO MANY messaging apps. So if you&039;re feeling lost in this ~brave new world~ of online communication, here&039;s a guide to the best platforms.

Christopher Furlong / Getty Images

The ~*ultimate*~ cross-platform messaging app is WhatsApp.

The ~*ultimate*~ cross-platform messaging app is WhatsApp.

WhatsApp (free, iOS, Android, Windows phone and web) is the Ultimate Messaging App. It has a giant user base, is super fast, works on many different devices (even Blackberry&;), has an easy-to-understand interface, and provides end-to-end encryption.

Plus, the Facebook-owned app has over one billion users on its platform, so it&039;s likely that some of your friends already using it.

WhatsApp offers free text messaging, group messaging, voice, and video calls over cellular data or Wi-Fi. It has a simple, easy-to-understand interface, without the overwhelming bells and whistles of the Viber and Line apps. The app is also fast. Multimedia (like photos, videos, audio messages and files up to 100MB) are compressed automatically by the app, so they send quickly even when connection is poor.

One of my favorite features is the ability to “star” messages with important reference information and access all of those starred messages in one, convenient place.

You can send and receive WhatsApp text messages from your mobile phone or the web. There is, unfortunately, no native desktop app and you can&039;t voice or video call from the web.

The app is encrypted end-to-end by default, but it can record metadata like the date, timestamp, and phone numbers associated with a message, according to a recently revised privacy policy. The app also announced last year that it was going to start sharing user information with Facebook, though it did let users opt out before agreeing to the updated terms of service. If you didn&039;t opt out before updating, you got an additional 30 days to make your choice.

Nicole Nguyen / BuzzFeed News

If you – and most of your contacts – have iPhones, it’s a no brainer: use iMessage.

If you – and most of your contacts – have iPhones, it's a no brainer: use iMessage.

For iPhone users, iMessage ticks all the boxes.

You don&039;t have to sign up for anything. It&039;s the default messaging app on all iPhones, unlike on some Android devices, where there can be up to four messaging apps to choose from (Hangouts? Allo? Duo? The cell carrier&039;s own messaging app?).

It works seamlessly with FaceTime video and audio calling over data or a cell connection. It&039;s encrypted end-to-end (although, only when you message other iPhone users). It works on your phone, it works on your Mac, and it works on your iPad. It lets you send lasers to your friends. It automatically sends texts via iMessage when it&039;s appropriate, and regular SMS to those outside the “blue bubble.” It can handle all kinds of media: GIFs, contacts, location, links, photos, videos, and voice memos.

You can use Siri to check messages or send new messages, and install integrations from the new iMessage app store. You can also access Yelp, Venmo, and Dropbox without ever leaving the Messages app.

Sure, there&039;s still room for improvement. Namely, lack of compatibility with ANY OTHER PLATFORMS (ugh). Apple can also collect some metadata, like the numbers you enter into iMessage, which are sent to Apple servers to determine whether or not the message should be sent through iMessage or SMS. Apple retains that data for up to 30 days, and can be compelled to hand it over to law enforcement with a subpoena or court order.

If iMessage were cross-platform, it might be the Perfect Messaging App. But until then, it&039;s the best option for those with iPhones to communicate with other peeps with iPhones.

Nicole Nguyen / BuzzFeed News

If you prefer features over security, plus texting, audio, *and* video chat, here are some options.

If you prefer features over security, plus texting, audio, *and* video chat, here are some options.

In addition to WhatsApp (read above), Facebook Messenger and Hangouts are some other apps to consider.

Facebook Messenger is more feature-rich, but doesn&039;t have as many privacy and security settings.

The messaging app by WhatsApp&039;s parent company, Facebook Messenger (free, iOS, Android, the web), has some pretty killer features, like being able to use high-definition video and audio calling on mobile or web. Messenger is unique because you can send money directly through the app in the US. There are also bots built into Messenger that can help you diagnose that weird rash or shop for you. One thing to note: users know when you&039;ve read their messages (and vice versa) and there&039;s no straightforward way to disable read receipts, sadly.

The app recently rolled out a new, fully encrypted feature called “Secret Conversations,” which ensures that the message&039;s content can&039;t be read by law enforcement or the company itself. The reason why Messenger is only for the ~moderately paranoid~ is because the encryption feature is opt-in, and needs to be turned on for every conversation, unlike WhatsApp, which automatically encrypts every chat by default. Additionally, “Secret Conversations” only encrypts text messages, photos, and videos sent in the thread, but it doesn&039;t protect audio and video calls.

Google Hangouts is fine, but isn&039;t as secure.

Hangouts (free, iOS, Android, and web) puts text messaging, audio calling, and video calling in one place – but it does not offer full encryption, so Google can wiretap conversations at the request of law enforcement. You&039;ll need to use Google Allo&039;s incognito mode for messaging and Google Duo for video chatting with end-to-end encryption.

And unlike WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger, which allow you to sign up with just your phone number and without a Facebook account, Hangouts requires a Google account.

Nicole Nguyen / BuzzFeed News


View Entire List ›

Quelle: <a href="Which Messaging App Should You Use?“>BuzzFeed

Snap Inc.’s Growth Is Pissing Off Its Neighbors

Getty Images

You can pick out the Snap Inc. employees strolling through the company’s beachside Venice, California neighborhood with relative ease. “Snapchatters,” as they refer to themselves, walk around Venice with company badges clipped to their pants, Macbooks in hand, and stylish sunglasses resting on their noses. And unlike many people in Venice, they wear shirts.

Snap&;s headquarters are in Venice Beach, California. The funky West Los Angeles &039;hood has long been something akin to the Haight Ashbury of Southern California, home to body builders, artists, dropouts and weirdos. It&039;s the kind of place where you can buy pot more easily than a cheeseburger. But ahead of its massive IPO, as Snap has swelled to 1,859 employees scattered across the skate-friendly malecon and beyond, neighbors charge that it&039;s disrupting not only messaging, but also a vital piece of Los Angeles itself.

“They’re turning it into a horrible business park.”

“They’re turning it into a horrible business park,” Dave Martinez, a local barber and longtime Venice resident, told BuzzFeed News of Snap. “Closing shops, locking business doors, and making it office space. Streets that were alive with neighborhood and food and drink are now just locked front doors with security guards who are shooing the exact same people who lived in the neighborhood away.”

Asked about Snap&039;s appetite for Venice real estate, Cesario “Block” Montano, owner of Venice Originals — a local skate shop that recently went online-only — offered a simple analogy: “They’re like a fucking shark.”

Unlike its major competitors Facebook, Google and Twitter, Snap’s operations aren’t consolidated inside a big corporate campus. Instead, the company is scattered across at least 9 buildings throughout Venice, a handful of which are clustered on the same Market Street block. The setup makes for a company more integrated with its neighborhood, but also one butting up against local culture as it grows.

A Snap security guards stands watch outside of one of the company&039;s offices.

Snap’s presence is apparent throughout Venice, a town with a population of just over 40,000. You can see it in subtle ways: local eateries like Tacos Por Favor have been transformed into de facto corporate cafeterias, complete with sign in sheets at the register and cashiers checking Snap badges. There are other, more explicit signs as well: security guards biking around the streets in grey polos inscribed with “Snap Inc. Security” logos.

Snap’s expanding Venice footprint has taken over space previously occupied by local businesses over the past two years, including a local bar called Nikki’s. “It’s messed up man,” local skater Rene Flores told BuzzFeed News. “They’re closing off everything.”

A spokeswoman for Snap declined to comment.

Nikki’s name is still etched on the sidewalk outside of its former digs. Look past the security guards when the building’s door opens, and you’ll see Snap employees eating and drinking inside. On Nikki’s Yelp page — now emblazoned with an all caps “CLOSED” designation, an old review advises, “If you&039;re not coming here for a happy hour in Venice, you&039;re a fool.”

“It’s just getting bigger and bigger and bigger. What’s going to happen?”

Snaps has irked some locals that worry about change in culture. “There is a tremendous amount of land they are renting that is now all dead space,” Venice Neighborhood Council president Ira Koslow told BuzzFeed News. “It’s sort of creeping. It’s just getting bigger and bigger and bigger. What’s going to happen?”

That&039;s not an unreasonable question, particularly for Venice, which has undergone a number of dramatic transformations since its its inception in the early 1900s. The neighborhood has moved from a canal laden amusement area to music mecca to tech haven with many iterations in between. A Snap dominated Venice, some locals say, is just the region’s latest reinvention. “I see Snapchat and all the other startups here as just another point in that evolution,” Juan Bruce, founder of the Venice-based Epoxy, told BuzzFeed News.

A Snap security guard patrols Venice

Alex Kantrowitz

Indeed, local tech employees say Snap’s decision to headquarter in Venice has enhanced the area’s tech scene, drawing in new talent and driving growth. “I moved back here from Boston, expecting an influx of startups at the intersection of entertainment and tech to pop up around Snap,” Zack Servideo, partner at Venice-based Fabric Media explained to BuzzFeed News.

Snap&039;s Venice operations have also been a boon to some restaurants. “Just seeing the revenue we’re getting in the winter months, it’s definitely helping,” Ryan Steed, partial owner of Wild Poke, a lunch spot popular with Snap employees, told BuzzFeed News. About 30 Snapchatters show up to Wild Poke for lunch every weekday, he said.

Snap is trying to be a part of the Venice community in ways that go beyond merely patronizing the local shops. The company is funding a program called Codetalk at Venice’s St. Joseph Center, which offers low-income and homeless women coding and design classes. It’s also funded showers at Safe Place For Youth, a Venice non-profit dedicated to helping homeless young people.

Dave Martinez

Enrico Moretti, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, told BuzzFeed News that Snap’s presence will likely be a net positive for Venice. “For each job in the local tech sector in a city, five additional jobs in the local service sector will be created in that city in the long run,” he said. Twitter’s Market Street headquarters in San Francisco he explained, generated more jobs outside its walls than inside. “It’s good for retail, it’s good for restaurants, it’s good for all the local businesses that exist,” he said. “The bigger question is housing costs.”

The answer to that question looks bleak. In the last two and a half years, housing prices in Venice have risen noticeably, according to Suzy Frank, owner of Abbot Kinney Real Estate. A two bedroom one bathroom home that used to rent for $4,000 per month two years ago is now going for $5,000 to $6,000, she said. “You can not buy anything in Venice for under 2 million,” she explained. The increase in housing costs, Frank said, is largely the result of an ongoing influx of tech workers and entertainment professionals in the area. A longtime Venice resident, Frank said she’s not bothered by these changes. “It’s called progress,” she said.

“It’s called progress.”

Progress for some, hardship for others. Venice&039;s rising real estate prices have left some longtime residents struggling to make rent in a town that was once far more affordable. “I wouldn’t be surprised if I’m next,” said one Venice local who has seen a number of friends leave the area thanks to rent increases.

Snap is hardly the sole architect of the change Venice is currently undergoing, but its flashy public profile has made it a lightning rod for locals that view its ongoing expansion with dismay and resentment. “SAVE DOGTOWN&; GET OUT SNAPCHAT,” screams a front page editorial in the February edition of the Free Venice Beachhead broadsheet.

Penned by Venice local Mark Rago, the editorial accuses Snap of using the community like a private campus and calls for protests against the company. “It’s bad enough they have an entire street where a beloved local bar used to be, but now they have all of these other properties all over the community,” Rago writes. “And worse…they just don’t seem to care about locals or the character and spirit of our neighborhood. They are transforming our neighborhood into a private commercial district thus destroying the community in a way that’s reminiscent of a military occupation&033;”

Rago’s is an incendiary screed, but it speaks to the anger and bewilderment that Snap’s rapid expansion has inspired in many Venice locals. It’s not only the change that’s getting to people, it’s the rapidity with which it’s occurring, and the sense that it is utterly inexorable. Rago’s “incomplete list” of Venice properties Snap is nine locations long, dovetails into a second, hypothetical “what-will-they-buy-next” list and concludes with an “Oh wait that’s right –THEY ARE ALREADY TRYING TO BUY THAT” pronouncement.

“It’s happening at a whiplash pace,” said Martinez, the longtime Venice barber. “Before you can even figure out what’s going down the next wonderful business has closed and Snapchat has locked the doors and put a security guard up front.”

Quelle: <a href="Snap Inc.’s Growth Is Pissing Off Its Neighbors“>BuzzFeed

How To Safely Send Your Nudes

A guide to sexting best practices for you and your favorite taker-of-nudes.

If you&;ve ever sent or received a sext, you&039;re not alone. In a 2013 study, about 27% of all smartphone users said they receive sexts on a regular basis, and 12% admitted to sending nudes (though the people polled may have been being coy). That number may even be higher now, as the study came out just as Snapchat, then an ephemeral multimedia messaging platform built around disappearing photos and video, was taking off.

This is a judgment-free zone. If you want to send a nude (and have a willing participant), then send a nude. There’s nothing wrong with nudity&; Human bodies are beautiful&033; But it&039;s also totally normal to want to maintain control of the way your nudes are seen and distributed.

The only way to truly control your nude distribution is to do it yourself. Just follow these simple steps: Take a pic of your goods, download the pic to an encrypted hard drive, drop in a password-protected folder, confiscate your partner’s phone, show them the image, close the file, return their phone, and proceed.

But that’s deeply unsexy&033; And also not how sexting works.

If you decide to send nudes, you assume the risk of those nudes ending up in a public forum, and should prepare yourself for the worst case scenario — but you can significantly lower that risk by following this guide to best practices for ~sensual~ electronic communication. These tips don’t offer a complete guarantee that your nudes won’t be leaked, but they are a good First Line of Defense Against the Dark Interwebs.

One note: If you’re under 18, never, ever, under any circumstances, share a photo of yourself naked. You can be prosecuted as a sex offender, even for sending a picture of yourself consensually.

Reclining Nude by Julien Vallou de Villeneuve / The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Here is the most important sexting advice of all: Only send NSFW content to people you trust. Does the recipient seem like someone who would publish your nudes as revenge or use them as blackmail? Do they seem like they take basic security precautions with their devices (see: tip )? Are they generally …trustworthy?

You can use apps that employ the most secure end-to-end encryption available, but it won’t matter if the person on the other end takes a screenshot, and “accidentally” posts it to Twitter. So make sure that the person you’re sending your Anthony Weiner to is someone who understands the value of the safekeeping of your selfie.

Because, duh&033; If their (or your) phone is ever stolen and left unlocked, your nudes might end up in the wrong hands.

You won’t always know when someone screenshots your sext. Yes, some services will notify you, but there are many ways to get around this.

You won’t always know when someone screenshots your sext. Yes, some services will notify you, but there are many ways to get around this.

Snapchat will display a particular icon (an arrow with spikes) when a screenshot of your Snap has been taken. Instagram will also notify you if the recipient of a “disappearing” Instagram direct message takes a screenshot.

However, neither of these notification features prevent someone from taking the screenshot in the first place, and they could easily take advantage of the app’s biggest loophole: taking a photo of the screen with another device.

Nicole Nguyen / BuzzFeed News


View Entire List ›

Quelle: <a href="How To Safely Send Your Nudes“>BuzzFeed

Corey Lewandowski’s Potential Clients Say He’s Bragging About Access To Trump's Twitter Account

Former Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski

Afp / AFP / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — The former campaign manager for President Donald Trump&;s White House bid has told prospective lobbying clients that he has access to Trump&039;s Twitter account, four sources told BuzzFeed News.

In discussions with representatives from at least two different potential clients — Facebook and financial company Blackstone Group — Lewandowski mentioned having access to Trump&039;s Twitter account as a selling point, according to different sources who were briefed on each meeting by participants. Sources also said Lewandowski brought up the same thing in additional meetings as well, but it&039;s unclear which other companies he was courting when he made the same claim.

In emails, Lewandowski repeatedly denied he mentioned access to Trump&039;s Twitter account or that he met with anyone at either of those companies. “I know facts don&039;t matter to buzz feed but it&039;s not true,” he wrote. On questions about his meeting with Facebook, he simply said: “Never.” And regarding any talks with Blackstone, he said: “I never met Blackstone. Please make sure you accurately report that&; I doubt you will.”

It was unclear to one of the sources briefed by the meeting participants whether Lewandowski was saying he actually has access to the account, or just that he has the ear of Trump and his digital staff.

A White House official told BuzzFeed News that Lewandowski “does not have access” to Trump&039;s Twitter account.

Those in the room who were expecting a detailed government relations pitch were taken aback by the claim, two sources familiar with the meetings said.

“It wasn&039;t a question of whether they believed him or not,” one of the sources said. “It was as weird as him walking into the office and saying, &039;I like chocolate.&039;”

Ed Brookover, who recently joined Lewandowski&039;s firm, said he had never heard the claim. “And we don&039;t discuss what we say in pitch meetings,” he said.

The companies too did not want to comment on the meetings, despite sources who were briefed confirming that meetings with individuals from those companies occurred.

Facebook declined to comment on whether they met with Lewandowski, but confirmed that he is not working for them.

And a Blackstone Group spokesperson said the firm did not engage in discussions about services from his new firm. Asked a follow-up, broader question about any meetings with Lewandowski at all, the spokesperson repeated the same previous response.

Blackstone Group CEO Steve Schwarzman is the chairman of Trump&039;s strategic and policy forum.

Trump&039;s Twitter account has been central to his campaign and his presidency so far. The president makes policy announcements and responds to world events and criticism all through Twitter.

Trump has also gone after specific companies using his Twitter account, making corporate America nervous about their stock prices potentially crashing with a single tweet.

Lewandowski recently joined with another former Trump staffer, Barry Bennett, to open Avenue Strategies. Bennett was also Ben Carson&039;s campaign manager last year.

Lewandowski, a hard-charging New Hampshire operative, has been touting his access to Trump — along with his firm&039;s physical proximity to the White House — for weeks.

The pair told Bloomberg Businessweek they&039;ve already signed several clients since opening up their shop in December and disputed that their new roles conflict with Trump&039;s “drain the swamp” campaign message.

“I think what Donald Trump said was, Washington lobbyists have used their special access to the detriment of the American people,” Lewandowski said in the interview. “Our goal here is to help companies grow and expand, which falls directly in line with the goals of this administration.”

Quelle: <a href="Corey Lewandowski’s Potential Clients Say He’s Bragging About Access To Trump&039;s Twitter Account“>BuzzFeed

Here’s Who Drops The Most Cash On Candy Crush And Clash Of Clans

Alberto E. Rodriguez / Getty Images

If you were wondering how games like Candy Crush and Clash of Clans rake in millions of dollars, look to Norway and North Dakota. That&;s where the games&039; power players live.

In a recent study, “iPhone&039;s Digital Marketplace: Characterizing the Big Spenders,” researchers at the University of Southern California analyzed receipts from 776 million iPhone transactions totaling $4.6 billion from March 2014 to June 2015, and found that geography and gender play big roles in who&039;s buying digital goods from the App Store and iTunes.

USC

Researchers also found that in-app purchases account for 61%, or a whopping $2.8 billion, of all in-app purchases made through Apple&039;s stores. They defined in-app purchases as “bonuses or coins in games, for example,” but also included subscriptions within an app to services like Netflix or Apple Music.

The researchers used six categories to sort the various purchases people made on their iPhones: applications (apps), songs, movies, TV shows, books, and in-app purchases.” Purchasing an application, for instance, means paying to download an app and is separate from in-app purchases.

Farshad Kooti, one of the authors of the study and now a data scientist at Facebook, said, “The purchasing gap surprised us. I didn&039;t expect in-app purchases to dwarf all other kinds of media so vastly.”

What&039;s even more startling is that of those in-app purchases, 59% of them were made by only 1% of the 26 million people surveyed. That means this relatively tiny group was spending about $1.65 billion. By comparison, the bottom half of people who bought things in Apple&039;s digital stores accounted for less than 2% of the total purchases.

Among the people studied, nationality was a determining factor in who spends the most in Apple&039;s digital stores. Overall, Scandinavia had the highest concentration of “big spenders,” the term researchers used for the 1% of people who spend almost 60% of the money. The researchers also noted that Greek, Turkish, and Romanian users were more likely to be fall into that category. People in the United States were not as prone to making in-app purchases, but of all the states, North Dakotans were the most likely to do so.

Kooti hypothesized that the reasons for the skew are counterintuitive: “People in the US are more likely to have credit cards, which are what you use to purchase things in the App Store, but since everyone has one, that leads to more casual app users and players than hardcore ones. People outside the US, by contrast, are less likely to have credit cards, so if they’re playing these games and have entered their credit card information, they&039;re likely to be much more serious about gaming and spend more money per person.”

Gender also played a big role in who made a purchase and from what apps. Big spenders were 55% men and 45% women. Of the five most popular games, men heavily favored the war games Clash of Clans, Game of War, and Boom Beach. Women, by contrast, were more into Candy Crush Saga and the farmer-themed Hay Day.

Overall median spending during the time period studied was $31.10 among women, and among men it was $36.20. Peak age for spending was in the mid-30s for men, and mid-40s for women. Kooti hypothesized that, like gamers outside the US who have credit cards, older people who commit to familiarizing themselves with an iPhone game and playing it might be more likely to spend money because of the effort they&039;ve already put into the endeavor.

A breakdown of in-app purchases based on gender and age.

USC

The apps these people spent money on are familiar names: Clash of Clans and Candy Crush Saga have been among the most-downloaded and top-grossing apps for years. After Candy Crush became popular, some people got hooked and couldn&039;t stop buying lives and power-ups to feed that addiction. That obsessive gameplay has lured players into spending sprees that earned the games&039; creators millions.

It&039;s also worth noting that the same company, Supercell, is behind Clash of Clans, Boom Beach, and Hay Day. The company seems to have optimized in-app purchases: there were 330% more purchases in Candy Crush Saga than in Clash of Clans, but the amount per transaction for the latter were much higher, leading to 210% more revenue for the war game.

The app market remains risky, though. Researchers found that around just 0.1% of the apps measured took home 71% of in-app purchase dollars.

Kooti advised future developers that the App Store is a gamble: “People don’t pay attention to the fact that very few apps make any money at all. It&039;s very risky to go after the App Store market, but the apps that do well do very, very well.”

Besides in-app purchases, people spent money on individual songs from iTunes — 23% of the money — about a billion dollars — and buying apps outright — 7% of of the money, roughly $320 million. The study did not account for music purchases outside of iTunes. The people in the study purchased 430 million songs, and in the same period, they made 255 million in-app purchases, which had a much higher value per transaction, according to the study.

Apple raked in $20 billion from the app store in 2015, and that number likely rose in 2016. The company disclosed that it made $3 billion in December 2016 alone.

The study had one major limitation of note. It only targeted users of Yahoo&; Mail, which Kooti said became irrelevant for two reasons: the sample size, 26 million people, was large enough to smooth out demographic differences, and the researchers were comparing percentages of populations that behaved certain ways rather than comparing raw numbers.

Quelle: <a href="Here’s Who Drops The Most Cash On Candy Crush And Clash Of Clans“>BuzzFeed

The First Rule of These Facebook Groups: Don't Talk Trump

Kat Ayres moderates “Heughan&;s Heughligans,” a Facebook group devoted to the Outlander book series and its Starz adaptation. It&039;s a big job. The group&039;s 22,000 members write around 1,000 new posts a day — about everything from the show&039;s stars, Sam Heughan and Caitriona Balfe, to ancient Scottish tea sets — and Ayres and her nine co-moderators have to ensure they adhere to community guidelines that, in part, prohibit the discussion of politics.

“If there’s politics, it&039;s shut down,” Ayres told BuzzFeed News. “It leads to ugliness and bad feelings and drama.”

Leading up to the presidential election, that big job got even bigger. Heughan&039;s Heughligans had banned political discussion since the group started in 2013, but in 2016 political posts became more frequent and, as Ayres put it, “more intense.” She found herself spending hours a day poring over every post, trying to remove political content from the group; it felt like every other comment referred disparagingly to Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. Finally, after Trump was elected and the political talk didn&039;t abate, Ayres and the other mods decided to take a drastic step: They enabled “Post Approval,” which requires everything posted to Heughan&039;s Heughligans to be blessed by a mod first.

“It was around Thanksgiving,” Ayres said. “We wanted to spend more time with our families.”

That&039;s right: It takes the the Heughan&039;s Heughligans mods less time to read and approve 1,000 posts a day than it does to retroactively spot-scrub the page and deal with the conflicts that emerge from letting people discuss politics before the posts can be taken down.

Yet such is the life of a certain kind of moderator in the age of the Trump administration. Across the internet of nonpolitical interest groups, from college football and Catholic community message boards to parenting, professional sports, and New Age Facebook groups, determined — if beleaguered — admins are trying their best to keep their spaces free from politics, which in 2017 really means the looming presence of one extremely polarizing person. They&039;re doing so on behalf of an untold number of users who have quickly found fandom and personal interest communities to be some of the last politics-free spaces on the English-language internet.

“A lot of the messages we get say, &039;Thank you for having this rule,&039;” Ayres said. “&039;Because this is the one place I know I’m not going to have to deal with politics.&039;”

A post on the “N.Y. Islanders Baby&; Uncensored* Isles Talk for Adults” Facebook group.

Explicit or tacit bans on political talk in specialty message boards and other groups are nearly as old as the internet. And indeed, Heughan&039;s Heughligans and other no-politics groups would (and do) readily ban posts about Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, and Hillary Clinton.

But over the past year, a half dozen moderators of various political persuasions told BuzzFeed News, something has changed. Begin with a presidential campaign that in the words of one mod was “the most heated and volatile one that most of our subscribers can remember.” Add a president who uses one social network, Twitter, as his own personal news channel, to the point of saturation. Throw in hyperpartisan filter bubbles that create parallel versions of current events (and nasty fights in the comments sections) on the biggest social network, Facebook. Finish it off with a mainstream media that has become all Trump, all the time, and you&039;ve got the recipe for a social internet that seems to be downright Trump-themed, no matter your politics.

In such an environment, the moderators of niche-interest communities say their spaces are more important than ever.

“We look at it as an oasis to get away from all the madness.”

“We look at it as an oasis to get away from all the madness,” said Gregory Christopher, who moderates a Facebook group called “N.Y. Islanders Baby&033; Uncensored Isles Talk for Adults,” which, well, censors political talk. “CNN is just 24 hours a day Trump.”

Christopher, in fact, has had to go further than just banning political speech. His group, which is made up of Islanders fans from across the political spectrum, doesn&039;t allow Trump&039;s image (or the image of any national politician).

“Someone posted a meme of an Isles fan in a Trump mask holding a sign saying “Make the Isles Great Again,” Christopher said. “It immediately set off a firestorm and we asked the poster to take down the post.”

Christopher and Ayres, as well as other moderators, said they don&039;t police political speech simply for the benefit of their users; it&039;s also for the overall health of the communities. As anyone who has spent time on Twitter or Reddit in the last few years will tell you, political arguments can quickly turn toxic.

“It is such an incendiary topic that you’re going to drive people away,” said John Borton, editor of The Wolverine, a magazine and message board devoted to University of Michigan football that significantly limits political opinion online. “It doesn’t matter which side it happens to fall on. You’re going to see people walking away saying, &039;I don’t need this. I can go to a hundred different websites.&039;”

These politics-safe spaces do welcome most off-topic conversation. It&039;s common for users of the The Wolverine to ask for legal advice, prayers for an ailing relative, or grilling tips. Indeed, the ability of these communities to draw in off-topic discussion is part of what makes them communities. But politics — particularly in the age of Trump — is a third rail.

“I don’t mind reading that you lost your yellow Lab, but those aren’t the kind of things that engender the fury that will make people not want to be here,” Borton said.

At times, no-politics rules can lead to unintended and alienating consequences. Olga Tomchin, an immigrants&039; rights lawyer and a former child refugee, submitted a post to a Facebook anxiety support group asking how to deal with stress related to the recent executive order banning travel from some Muslim-majority countries. A moderator of the group asked Tomchin to change the language in her post to make the cause of her anxiety less specific, and less political. Tomchin refused and left the group.

Another tricky situation for no-politics communities arises when someone who is an important figure to the group does something political. Last month, Outlander star Caitriona Balfe tweeted that she would be taking part in the Women&039;s March in Edinburgh. Despite the tweet&039;s relevance to the show&039;s fans, Ayres and her fellow mods decided not to allow any posts referencing it.

Yet for most niche-interest sites, Ayres said, despite pushback from a few posters, this form of censorship is necessary to preserve the increasingly rare places on the internet where people who love Donald Trump and people who hate Donald Trump can come together and talk about something completely unrelated to Donald Trump.

“It&039;s kind of like a vacation on Facebook to come to our group,” Ayres said, “and not have to deal with politics, drama, and constant fighting.”

Quelle: <a href="The First Rule of These Facebook Groups: Don&039;t Talk Trump“>BuzzFeed

Behind The Rise Of The Anti-Trump Twitter Conspiracy Theorists

Behind The Rise Of The Anti-Trump Twitter Conspiracy Theorists

Just after 3:00 A.M. last Friday morning, Huffington Post contributor and progressive advocate Alex Mohajer set to work on a brief investigative project on Twitter. Pulling together red marker-circled articles, graphs, and screenshots from numerous financial websites, he rifled off 16 tweets with prosecutorial zeal and one ambitious goal: to build a compelling case linking Donald Trump to Russia’s $11 Billion sale of its oil giant, Rosneft.

“It’s getting harder to ignore growing evidence that Trump was involved with Russian oil deal,” Mohajer wrote after compling his tweets into a longer Twitter Moments thread. “CONCLUSION? Koch-backed front cos financed climate deniers/alt-right, took control of govt while Trump diverts attn for Exxon, Koch, Rosneft,” he wrote. A minute later he offered a hedge: “ALTERNATIVE CONCLUSION: I am batshit crazy and need some sleep&; Good night world. I will be curious to see if others are able to confirm.”

Mohajer wasn’t wrong to assume that others might try to confirm his tweetstorm. Since the election, he’s emerged as one of a number of vigilante investigators dutifully entering evidence into Twitter’s court of public opinion in hope of exposing corruption in Trumpland. Now that Trump is exercising his presidential power, the tweetstorms are intensifying — and growing ever-more conspiratorial. Unlike their more fantastical Infowars analogs, these vigilante investigators steer clear of explicit allegations, hewing instead to grave insinuations. Their evidence is almost exclusively rooted in already-published reporting; They sift through the tea leaves of unconnected media stories, raising questions yet to be answered by the professionals.

Call it the Alex Jonesification of the left or the rise of the Blue Detectives — the pure id of a strand of conspiratorial thought of the left and the anti-Trump movement. It’s intriguing and eyeroll-inspiring all at once, but for the crowd it’s a mooring force. Most of all, it’s an effective messaging tactic: it’s designed to go viral, to spark outrage — and perhaps even action.

If you spend enough time online, you’ll see Blue Detectives springing up everywhere. Two weeks ago, Google engineer Yonatan Zunger’s wrote a post on Medium that went viral. In it, he laid out a succession of “raw news reports” suggesting that the haphazard rollout and enforcement of Trump’s refugee ban across the country “was the trial balloon for a coup d’etat against the United States.” In the spirit of Silicon Valley A/B testing “it gave them useful information,” he argued. But as some, including Slate, have pointed out, Zunger’s post sometimes elides fact in favor of intrigue; His suggestion that the Department of Homeland Security could become a force loyal to the President alone, for example, does not acknowledge that DHS secretary Kelly was reportedly unaware of the administration&;s immigration order until just moments before Trump signed it.

On Twitter, especially, the Blue Detectives are increasingly active in theorizing that Trump and his associates are involved in a dizzying multi-dimensional plot — and, crucially, are always ten steps ahead of the American public. Perhaps the most infamous example comes from technology and business strategist Eric Garland’s “game theory” tweetstorm, which suggests a cunning on the part of the Trump administration and Russia to distract, dodge, and outwit the American public while bolstering its coffers and power. That 127-tweet screed plows through the last few decades of U.S. foreign policy ultimately arriving at a patriotic-but-empty conclusion, devoid of any compelling revelations about Russia.

This new online conspiracy culture can’t be fully divorced from an election affected more than usual by an actual conspiracy. Russian interference in favor of Trump was open, on state media, and covert, through hacking, which has been widely and convincingly documented. Intelligence agencies have also begun to confirm the credibility, CNN and BuzzFeed News reported Friday, of some elements of a dossier assembled by a former top British spy — though not the most lurid allegations of Russian blackmail. And the Washington Post recently reported that Trump’s National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn, had made false statements about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

Meanwhile on Twitter, writers with a flair for what could be true and a good sense for their audience have taken those investigations well past the brink of what they know. The most effective of the bunch is Adam Khan, a former marketing consultant and tech guru turned Twitter investigator. Khan, who goes by the handle @khanoisseur, is an indefatigable presence on Twitter. Each day he monomaniacally strings together observations, charts and images into detailed tweetstorms that rack up thousands of retweets. None of them make news, but they raise questions and do attract eyeballs.

The images —mostly screenshots from deeply reported coverage of Russia and the Trump organization — are frequently annotated with red type, arrows and lines that encourage the reader to follow Khan’s logic. Veterans of forums like Reddit will see aesthetic parallels between Khan’s work and some of that site’s more conspiratorial r/findbostonbombers-style threads.

It is a digital updating of Glenn Beck’s famous blackboard, whose eraser was especially effective on the distinction between correlation and causation. But this is a form of vigilante investigation that’s native to the internet; Gawker once described it as “Chart Brut — a digital middle-ground between the string-and-thumbtack cork-board flowcharts favored by premium cable obsessives like Rust Cohle and Carrie Mathison and the meaningless tangles of agency responsibilities beloved by security-apparatus bureaucrats.”

Khan — who wrote an e-book on how to gain followers and influence on Twitter — uses the social network because he sees it as a direct line to journalists and big thinkers. He views his job as building flow charts of publicly available information to raise the big questions. “I’m not manufacturing anything new,” he told BuzzFeed News. “But I’m taking this piece of reporting from this journalist and showing clearly how it aligns with something else out there. And put together, I think it shows there&039;s a bigger story. If nothing else, I hope my work leads to more people doing their own investigative journalism.”

Zunger&039;s doctored State Department org chart from his Medium post, “Trial Balloon For a Coup?”

Just after the election, Khan quit his freelance consulting job to pursue the Trump investigations full-time. He has so far raised nearly $14,000 on GoFundMe in support of this effort. If he raises enough money, he may write a book. When he spoke to BuzzFeed News in late January, Khan said he’d been getting DMs from government sources with potential tips — among them, one from someone claiming to have a line on Trump’s still undisclosed tax returns.

Recently, Khan riled the tech world with a 23-tweet thread musing about possible ties between Russia, Trump senior advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner and some of the startups in which he’s invested. “The more I dive into Russian-backed/Kushners&039; data collection efforts, the more I&039;m convinced there&039;s a bigger strategy,” Khan tweeted with a link to a different thread on the Kushner brothers’ investments. “Trump potentially has his own shadow NSA,” he further mused. Left unsaid, a crucial caveat: Kushner investments, made via a venture capital company called Thrive do not appear to give the Kushners operational control of the companies in which they invest. The thread checks all the boxes of the viral anti-Trump conspiracy: it’s well-researched, endlessly intriguing, and unsupported by evidence.

The internet has historically been a near perfect incubator for conspiracy theories. Not long after the attacks of 9/11 average citizens flocked to Blogspot accounts dedicated to vigilante investigations of the events leading up to that day. The same happened after Hurricane Katrina, with blogs launching serious amateur analysis of the collapse of New Orleans’ levees. A decade ago, conspiracy-minded bloggers made major contributions to reporting around everything from George W. Bush&039;s national guard service to intelligence failures in the run-up to the Iraq more.

Once these sorts of efforts were largely confined to obscure message boards, little known blogs, and occasionally AM talk radio. Their prominent voices tended to be volatile fringe figures who’d rarely appear in public. More recently — particularly with the advent of the Trump era — they’ve attained much greater visibility. Today, the work of the Blue Detectives and those on the far right is amplified and extended by same-minded people sharing what they want to believe — a byproduct of the social media echo chambers that birthed “fake news.” Once peddled by anonymous tin foil hat-wearers, even utterly unfounded conspiratorial musings are now disseminated by tech employees, opinion journalists —and even some of the left’s well known voices.

Take former United States Labor secretary Robert Reich — a regular on cable news and a professor of public policy at UC Berkeley. Two weeks ago, after a planned visit-turned-riot by Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos, Reich penned a blog post about the event titled “A Yiannopoulos, Bannon, Trump Plot to Control American Universities?”

In their coverage of the riot, far right outlets including Breitbart News had suggested the Trump administration pull federal funding for the school. Reich’s response took a conspiratorial page from the far-right, suggesting that “the possibility that Yiannopoulos and Breitbart were in cahoots with the agitators in order to lay the groundwork for a Trump crackdown on universities and their federal funding.” While not a tweetstorm, Reich made his case in a familiar bulleted list. “Hmmm. Connect these dots,” he wrote before rattling off six semi-related points connecting Yiannopoulos to Breitbart and then the Trump administration. “I don’t want to add to the conspiratorial musings of so many about this very conspiratorial administration, but it strikes me there may be something worrying going on here,” he concluded.

The post is a textbook example of a Blue Detective conspiracy musing. It’s a bit ridiculous, but not quite out of the realm of possibility. It attempts to use well reported information to “connect the dots” and raise an ultimately unanswerable question. And it ends, like so many Blue Detective theories, with a self-effacing nod to readers. Yes, I know how crazy this sounds.

In person, Reich is more cautious about shifting the political discourse toward conspiracy theories. “That fringe stuff is out there more and more and that&039;s dangerous,” he told BuzzFeed News last week. “If we become a conspiracy society, we all carry around a degree of paranoia and that&039;s not healthy for democracy. And that&039;s why transparency is so critically important — we now have a responsibility to call a lie a lie.”

This desire for transparency is a key engine of the Blue Detectives. Its emergence is a side-effect of the rise of the Upside Down conservative media, which, along with its “alternative facts,” audience, and interpretation of the truth, has created two opposing political realities. “We’re way beyond having factual disputes now,” Reich said. “What we’re faced with are bald faced lies and it’s important to be extremely clear about what&039;s a lie and what&039;s true.” With basic facts in dispute, efforts by the anti-Trump resistance to monopolize truth have manifested in a peculiar role reversal. While the far right is building a media ecosystem that looks and feels a lot like the mainstream, some on the left are beginning to resemble the more conspiratorial fringes of the far-right. The resemblance is most uncanny when the two universes intersect, like this conspiratorial tweet about Infowars, which feels like it could have been written by Alex Jones himself:

But the emergence of the Blue Detectives is also a pointed critique of the mainstream press. The message: the media isn’t doing its job so we’ll do the legwork for them. Near the end of his Medium post, Zunger admitted as much. “Conclusive? No. But it raises some very interesting questions for journalists to investigate.” Adam Khan agrees.

“No question there was a huge failing among the media during this last election,” Khan said. He argued that the press is in “trance mode” when it comes to Trump and his distractions. “There’s so much to be chased down in a Woodward and Bernstein manner and so my job is to ask the questions for others to answer. To ask ‘Why? Why isn&039;t anyone else pursuing this angle?’” Khan believes without the right pressure and grassroots investigations from people like him, Trump will only claim more power. “There’s a need to apply more pressure to the press,” he said. “It’s sad, but if that&039;s what it&039;ll take to get the accountability, we’ll do it.”

In keeping with the tradition of the Blue Detectives, Khan is self-aware and by no means reckless. “You have to be careful because you don&039;t want to get into Alex Jones territory,” he joked. “You can’t run around yelling and making accusations. It’s about recognizing patterns that then require more digging.” Khan for his part is constantly thinking about his tone and how frequently he posts in order not to appear like somebody who’s taken his conspiracy too far. “How you do it divides you from somebody who’s asking the questions our senators and media should’ve asked and somebody who&039;s a conspiracy theorist.”

Members of the Upside Down media are paying attention, too. “It’s even happening to people who have reputations in the media for being pretty normal,” new right blogger and Twitter personality, Mike Cernovich told BuzzFeed News. “I saw this great meme the other day that said if there’s ever a terrorist attack in America under Trump the left is going to go full Infowars. And I think that’s totally true.” For Cernovich, the rise of the left’s conspiracy-theory tendencies is an opportunity to appeal to a broader audience.

“Honestly, that’s why I’ve pivoted with my brand and my trolling today compared to a year ago is mild,” he said. While Cernovich is still waging a Twitter war against the mainstream media and the left, his admitted softening highlights just how much the roles of the duelling media ecosystems of the far left and far right have reversed.

“They’ve adopted that fringe level mentality aggressively,” Cernovich said. “People on left are making themselves look ridiculous and so I see it as an opportunity to look reasonable by comparison.”

Caroline O’Donovan contributed reporting to this story.

Quelle: <a href="Behind The Rise Of The Anti-Trump Twitter Conspiracy Theorists“>BuzzFeed