I wanted to create a platform that’s about talking about the platform, you know what I mean? It’s a place where people can connect and say arbitrary statements about Twitter itself. People were hooked instantly. Nobody knew what it was, but everybody seemed to be talking about it. We created our very own API so users can send feeds to their websites and apps broadcasting what they have to say about twitter. Now imagine Facebook, but you leave all the ‘meta’ information. Now that’s a reality! No more CityVille invites, just Facebook talking about Facebook itself with timestamps and shit. That’s what we have, and that’s why it is 2012 and Twitter hasn’t collapsed to Facebook. Twitter is simply and beautifully the ‘meta’ platform.
-Jack Dorsey, Twitter CEO

But that’s not all – a senior developer for the $7 billion dollar company provided additional insight as to why this marketing strategy was so effective:

People want fame! Sure, they can tweet information about their dogs, kids, new ski jackets, or their latest romantic endeavor. But those aren’t areas where people can connect to 100% of the time. If Twitter is just a platform to talk about twitter, EVERYONE on Twitter knows what it is and likes Twitter, otherwise they wouldn’t be reading that tweet. So they’re compelled to read it.

Jack Dorsey originally expressed concern about how people wouldn’t get on with their lives – and simply tweeted about tweeting. It still goes on today, though to a lesser degree. He is in the works of a new web app calculating Twitter statistics, with a state-of-the-art AI engine. The app determined that Twitter updates providing valuable information has increased by 0.2% in the past quarter, a higher growth rate than any other quarter in Twitters’ existence. “Valuable information” is equated to those tweets of learning value or those influencing the world around us. For example, constructively talking about #OWS would be considered valuable, and the app activists simply eating chips and trolling the hashtag are filtered out.

An American dubstep enthusiast remains skeptical, claiming the earplug sales had nothing to do with the rise of dubstep:

The rise in earplug can be anything – it’s ridiculous to assume it’s dubstep that’s the cause. In fact, most dubsteppers are deaf already anyway due to the extra dirty beats and overloads of bass. After dubstep reached wider audiences, which is especially prominent in the past year… it’s safe to say brostep is the cause of the rise in earplug sales. Why would dubsteppers purchase earplugs if they can’t hear in the first place?
-Hugh O’Reilly, Dubstep Enthusiast

Dubstep enthusiasts have hastily made a distinction between those that are well integrated in the electronic music scene, and your average Joe that tends to like artists such as Skrillex and Flux Pavilion. Marketing companies are already realizing this and manufacturing bass-resistant earplugs that appeal to a wider audience.

Instead of making our earplugs handle extra-dirty beats, we’re simply making them handle dirty beats. We’re noticing far more sales in the ones that are optimized to hear “Scary Monsters & Nice Sprites” at the right levels – and it’s as if it’s being played on noise-cancelling headphones. With our new technology, we’re able to make the earplugs drown out any other dubstep artist, since Skrillex is all these so-called “brosteppers” listen to.
-John Burroughs, Marketing analyst for EarBeatz-n-Dirty-Thangs Headphones

.

It’s hard to know where electronic music will go next with sub-genres that resemble so closely to the dissonant likes of Merzbow, but with melody. How will the scene continue to evade pop culture without going straight to noise?

Image by thewaxgrid. Creative Commons Share-Alike

 It was in our own Canadian agenda to appoint Michael Taylor as a Senior Adviser to Health Canada… but looks like someone won the …er… ratrace. We figured having him influence the operations of Health Canada will bring some new big businesses to Canada, and allow the GMOs to ‘trickle down‘ to the smaller scale farmers.
-P.M Stephen Harper

Stephen Harper intended on having Michael Taylor sort out the plentiful problems with the costly price of organic foods, and proclaimed the economical benefits of switching to exclusively GMO. He declined to say anything further regarding the subject, as the question was asked during his weekly dinner with Nickelback frontman, Chad Kroeger. Joanna Nelson, a college student attending McGill University was very unhappy with his remark, and followed up on his comments on the GMO food industry:

GMOs means big business, not small, family-run operations. And guess who gets a b—-r for Big business? Stephen Harper does. Encouraging GMO’s is the last thing we need. -Joanna Nelson, Student

It wasn’t long before many other Canadians started showing disappointment, especially with Harper not responding on the issue, now saying he is too busy dealing with the problems in Attawapiskat, which he will be seemingly devoted to for the next while.

On January 14th, Obama came clear on the reasoning of this decision:

Food labeling is important to keep the people of our country in top shape. Being a true patriot, we must do what we can to preserve the American stereotype of junk food enthusiasts. In addition, acknowledging our high budget deficit, we encourage GMO foods by providing subsidies to GMO farmers for cheaper foods in the nation. This provides ‘room’ for higher tax rates to pay off that debt. And don’t get me wrong, I love my Big Macs”.

After speculation and discussion regarding President Obama’s comment, Michael Taylor backed Obama:

I’ve been financing the FDA for years already to prevent milk labels from displaying GMO-related content. After a few years, the FDA and I became buddy-buddy with each other so it was only natural that I acquire this position with them. I’m eager and thankful to have more influence benefiting the nation’s food supply. Starvation is the leading cause of death in the U.S – so it’s my job to ensure that every citizen in this nation resembles a cow. And that’s after the cow has received the Monsanto bovine growth hormone treatment.

Health food advocates have been advised that the impact of the changes in the US food supplies will only be pertinent to aisles outside of the organic section of your local grocery store. Health foodist Judith McGilvery argues what she believes is the inevitable:

If my local, organic lentil burgers find a single trace of corn by-products as a result of this outrageous decision, I will have to find a new place to live because the dependability of this country is out of wack

. She proceeded to consume a Joe Louis after the statement and wept, claiming that it’s the end of Joe Louis snacks as we know it.

What are your thoughts on Obama’s decision of appointing Michael Taylor to the FDA?

Image Credit:

Write at the intelligence level of a grade 9 student.

I agreed. Sure make it easy to understand, it’s a tutorial for godsake. Later, I realized that this mentality is used everywhere in marketing – and to the point that it could be making a difference in the way we think. On a grand scale where all marketing and pop media / figures / artwork is targeting wider and wider audiences, and attempts not to go over anyone’s head to increase revenue, readership, or whatever they’re trying to acquire changes the way the consumers perceive. For example, when it comes to social media, people are far less interested in articles when they’re at higher reading levels:

The subjects many pop musicians target revolve around our inherent nature or deeply embedded conditioning we have. This includes sex, desire for wealth, love, and consumption. Not that those are topics that should be ignored – they can all be explored endlessly. It’s just in most cases it’s at the forefront of music, and happen to be the most exposed where other topics could be equally explored that can lead listeners to a wider, more diverse creative mentality.

The pace of our consumption and pace of daily lives has shown a noticeable increase too, that details are missed more. Wake up, reply to the texts you received overnight, read the headlines while eating breakfast, go to work, take breaks from work to tweet about the game last night – etc. This too is a subject that can be explored endlessly. Our culture makes these notions habitual and covert in regards to how it diverts attention. Over time, we need stronger and stronger stimuli to keep us entertained, and this immediatism diverts us from contemplation and meditative practices of spacial awareness.

When books get more complex, they can be difficult reads and more boring than ‘quick facts’. It’s not like everyone should go out and read Finnegan’s Wake because “it isn’t most accessible book in the world”. However, before this technological/cultural acceleration really started taking off, books were the medium of entertainment, and the slower pace of recreation and living provided more time for awareness and critical thinking.

Do you feel that we’ll keep moving in this direction? Do you feel there has or hasn’t been a decline in modern thought?