Final draft of my video on Anonymous and the media

Rough Draft of video on Anonymous and the media

Here is my rough draft. I need to redo a lot of things - I'm re-doing the voiceovers and probably doing the video on After Effects rather than Vegas. Any feedback is appreciated, though.

'Revised' script for video (sure to change)

Inundated by pop culture and TV commercials, many in Generation Y , especially technologically savvy males, shared a general disdain and cynicism for the 21st Century culture.
[video flipping through channels of MTV, VH1]

On image boards, especially the “anything goes” board /b/, soon ballooned into a haven for teenagers and 20 somethings who needed a place to release their emotions anonymously or look for entertainment, advice or a sense of community, among others.
Contributors to 4chan formed their own variation of language, broke away from the rules of society by shedding their identity and the ideas and opinions that were held back from the daily grind in the physical world were unleashed on the image board. More often than not, posts were usually in a sarcastic and playful attitude meant to produce the most “lulz,” a term synonymous with appeasement or laughter.
[screen videos of 4chan, excerpt from interview]

The board turned into a center of a quasi-counter-culture movement in which the group began to take actions against celebrities, celebrity wanna-bes or groups that misused the Internet. These actions ranged from sending 10 pizzas to people’s houses, prank calling cell phones, posting flashing images on a support message board for people with epilepsy and posting messages on Oprah’s website claiming to be part of a global pedophile network that is raping children everywhere.
[screenshots of raids, epilepsy screen shot and Oprah video]

The attacks never garnered much media attention and the board basically was unknown to much of society. Then, in January 2008, a video was posted on YouTube that showed Tom Cruise talking about his religion, Scientology, among other topics. As the video gained popularity, the Church of Scientology tried to have the video removed from YouTube. This infuriated many contributors to 4chan and other anonymous message boards, and the raid on the Church of Scientology ensued.
[show Cruise video then it being cut off halfway through]

From January to April 2008, hundreds of news articles and broadcast reports were published about the conflict between Anonymous and the Church of Scientology.
[bombardment of broadcast and print reports]

These reports were mostly brief intros of the battle and the news media generally portrayed the Anonymous movement in the same prototype they had made for hackers of the 1990s and 80s and other youth rebellion movements. Though some journalists delved deep into Project Chanology and Anonymous, some labeled the group as “cyber-terrorists,” or called their actions hate crimes. They mostly dwelled on the many crude acts that ANonymous carried out.
[Fox 11 report and other misleading news reports showing the slime of Anon - also mix in some clips of actual Anon attacks]

These stories rarely, if ever, took the stance against Scientology, and the hundreds of comments following the news articles or videos often complained about the lack of reporting on Scientology’s supposedly shady activities. This inadequate reporting also extended to all Anonymous related activities.
[collage of video responses from Anon, interview quotes from Landers]

But they also got the word out about these shady activities because of the ability to comment on stories or videos. If the story missed these points, posters, possibly from Anonymous, posted their insights about Anonymous. Anonymous in a sense formed its own unprecedented form of news media through blogs, YouTube and Digg. This method of truth-seeking extended past Project Chanology and changed along with the news forms of media.
[screen capture of typing in blogger, Digging article, typing comments on story, interview quotes from Landers]

While Project Chanology has fallen considerably from the ire of the news media and Anonymous, the loosely organized group continued it's crude counter-culture behavior while also holding celebrities and businesses accountable on the Internets. Just recently, it is suspected that a prominent hacker, Weev, outed Amazon.com after several gay and lesbian literature and films were taken off it's top-selling lists. Though Amazon claims it was an internal error, many on the interwebs believe it was purposeful censoring.
[Amazon fail news reports, screenshots]

Advanced script for final video

Here is a more detailed mapping of my video. It took awhile so I could put together this little video piece using Flash. Let me know if this theme and style could fit well with the topic.

- Stick guy watching collage of pop-glam, getting angry

- guy sending a pizza to someone, saying lulz

- guy watching tom cruise video on computer, getting infuriated

- rapid fire of news reports

     > stories - CNN, Oprah, other report - moving news clips

- reporter not understanding Anonymous

   > reporter typing stupid stuff about Anon

   > Fox 11

- reporters having trouble with new media

   > how do i use this thing (camera)?

   > where can i find this twitter thing?

- stick guy typing on blogger, typing comment on story and show youtube videos of responses

(many of these will have voiceovers and interview clips as well)

Initial rundown of video about news media and Anonymous

Anonymous formed as a counter-culture movement against the pop-glam culture of the 21st Century. They started by pulling pranks on celebrities like sending pizzas and prank calling them.
VIDEO - voiceover, video of pranks mixed with press reports, Oprah clips, maybe Matthew Milan quote

Media and general interest piqued after Tom Cruise - Scientology video incident
VIDEO - voiceover, clips of video reports with flood of multiple screenshots of stories on the conflict

Media did not portray Anonymous in a good light usually - didn't really understand motives behind actions
VIDEO - Fox 11 report with response from Anonymous (youtube clips) Landers quote

Media's misunderstanding of culture dates back a few decades. Never understood hackers of 80s and 90s. Until recently, MSM failed to realize importance of the Internet and new media
VIDEO - voiceover, media clips about MSM's failure to embrace technology and understand it

Anonymous found ways to maneuver past MSM to get their version of the truth out. w/ comments, Youtube and Digg.
VIDEO - show youtube clips, screenshots of comments and # of comments, Landers quote

Research Project paper

The technology knowledge gap between 18-30 year olds and their parents is sometimes as vast as the Internet. In the real, physical world, people of Generation Y, especially those immersed in Internet culture, there are few places for them to fit. But in a world where there is no identity, no religion and few guidelines, they are allowed to be what they could never be in real life. This is just the reason Web sites like 4chan and Encyclopedia Dramatica exist.
Based on similar image boards in Japan, 4chan started in 2003 as a simple image board that allowed people to rate and comment on them. Anonymity was virtually required, allowing posters to say what they felt and rate the images not on who posted them but on the actual message.

"While it is possible to use Internet nicknames on 4chan, it is generally frowned upon, so posts listing the author as "Anonymous" are the norm, especially in the site's chaotic "random" forum. Anonymous became the name for the users of the site as a whole--a sort of hive mind of popular opinion."

— Chris Landers, Baltimore City Paper

The image board, especially it’s “anything goes” board /b/, soon ballooned into a haven for teenagers and 20 somethings who needed a place to release their emotions anonymously or look for entertainment, advice or a sense of community, among others.

Contributors to 4chan formed their own variation of language, broke away from the rules of society by shedding their identity and the ideas and opinions that were held back from the daily grind in the physical world were unleashed on the image board. Though some great thoughts came from this collaboration of anonymous minds, much of the conversations were menial, disrespectful and sometimes disturbing. More often than not though, posts were usually in a sarcastic and playful attitude meant to produce the most “lulz,” a term synonymous with appeasement or laughter.

Inundated by pop culture and TV commercials, most of the anonymous posters shared a general disdain and cynicism for the 21st Century culture. The board turned into a center of a quasi-counter-culture movement in which the group began to take actions against celebrities or celebrity wanna-bes. These actions ranged from sending 10 pizzas to people’s houses, prank calling their cell phones, posting flashing images on a support message board for people with epilepsy and posting messages on Oprah’s website claiming to be part of a global pedophile network that is raping children everywhere.

"As the Internet has grown in popularity, a disturbing phenomenon has occurred: Everyone thinks they are special. We have news for you... You aren't special. You are a mindless horde of filth, traversing the universe on a small ball of dirt. … We are Anonymous, and our numbers are vast. We are everywhere, and we never forgive. Wherever someone takes themselves too seriously, we will be there. Wherever someone has an inflated ego, we will be there. We will do it through madness. And we will remove you from the high place you have built yourself."

— Posted on an anonymous website after an anonymous attack on Second Life

The attacks never garnered much media attention and the board basically was unknown to much of society. Then, in January 2008, a video was posted on YouTube that showed Tom Cruise talking about his religion, Scientology, among other topics. As the video gained popularity, the Church of Scientology tried to have the video removed from YouTube. This infuriated many contributors to 4chan and other anonymous message boards, and the raid on the Church of Scientology ensued.

The attacks were rarely carried on by the same people, but the cause was trumpeted on the message boards and other posters stepped up to continue the attacks. These members of Anonymous began using many of the same tactics they had used previously, which included voicemails with fake death threats and hacking the Church of Scientology Web site. But the attacks soon turned more peaceful after a self-proclaimed critic of Scientology Mark Bunker told Anonymous to tone the attacks down and do more traditional protests. They listened to the man who became known as “Wise Beard Man” and began protesting outside Scientology churches and handing out flyers that outlined reasons why Anonymous thought the religion was a cult and did not deserve a tax exemption. By the time this happened the raid had gained considerable media attention and came to be known as Project Chanology. 

From January to April 2008, hundreds of news articles and broadcast reports were published about the conflict between Anonymous and the Church of Scientology.

These reports were mostly brief intros of the battle and the news media generally portrayed the Anonymous movement in the same prototype they had made for hackers of the 1990s and 80s and other youth rebellion movements. Though some journalists delved deep into Project Chanology and Anonymous, some labeled the group as “cyber-terrorists,” or called their actions hate crimes. Probably the most famous of these reports came from Fox 11 in Los Angeles, which called Anonymous members “hackers on steroids.” Reports like the one from Fox 11 and Oprah soon became the brunt of many jokes on the message boards and parody YouTube videos.

A general trend seemed to emerge from the coverage of Project Chanology. Anonymous was either labeled as the enemy or given prototypical labels, like in the Fox 11 report, or the reporters would not take sides and mention both sides of the argument. These stories rarely, if ever, took the stance against Scientology, and the hundreds of comments following the news articles or videos often complained about the lack of reporting on Scientology’s supposedly shady activities. But they also got the word out about these shady activities because of the ability to comment on stories or videos. If the story missed these points, posters, possibly from Anonymous, posted their insights about Anonymous.

As the popularity of Project Scientology grew, the movement turned away from its mission for maximum lulz to more of an actual protest. As one of the Scientology protesters told Chris Landers of the Baltimore City Paper, “We are Anon, and we are interwebs superheroes. Who if not us will take on this abomination of faith and capitalism? What would JFK say? He would probably say something like `Hey Marilyn, its not gonna blow itself.' But he would probably also want us to do this."

To many regular posters on anonymous message boards, Project Chanology had slipped out of the hands of Anonymous. As an anonymous wiki page for Project Chanology states, the movement “escalated into a series of legal protests perpetrated by college students, moralfags, and activists who are not familiar with Anonymous or chan culture.” Most posters on Anonymous message boards are labeled fags. New posters are labeled newfags, and moralfags are usually more sensitive posters. Because of the increase of “moralfaggotry” it was reportedly labeled as fail – which means the movement was not a success.

According to the wiki entry, the undoing of Project Chanology came toward the beginning of the movement when project members, mostly Anonymous members, began to recruit on a larger scale at colleges and on social media like YouTube and Facebook.

This split of opinion about Project Chanology represents much of the culture of 4chan and other anonymous message boards. Members of one message board try to shut down other message boards often because of difference of opinion or what they see as disrespect. These attacks even happen within 4chan’s site. In a continually individualistic society in which the Internet has replaced many of the physical means of communication and identity, Anonymous is near the apex. They have no real alliances or friends and they can roam wherever they please on message boards and elsewhere on the Internet without any fear of societal pressure to do what is right or cool.

The Anonymous manifesto states that, “Anonymous is legion and when one falls another shall take his place.” For all the claims Scientology has made about ridding the world of Anonymous and all the lawsuits church members have started because of Anonymous’ actions against Scientology, they have done little to dwindle the number of Anonymous /i/nsurgency members on the Internet or Project Chanology protesters on the sidewalks. Protests still take place all across the world in major cities every month with considerable turnouts. Though the news media has mainly forgotten the Anonymous movement, it still continues. According to Alexa.com 4chan’s /b/, Encyclopedia Dramatica and others receive as many viewers as they have since October 2008.

News media still pays a little attention to Anonymous and Project Chanology. News organizations cover the occasional Scientology protest and KESQ-TV from Palm Springs, Calif., recently aired a series questioning the motives of Scientology and highlighting its battle with Anonymous. The series was popular, with thousands of views on YouTube and hundreds of comments on YouYube’s and KESQ’s Web sites. Mentions of Anonymous actions are also still prominent on news aggregation sites like Digg. Though coverage of Anonymous has dwindled, the loosely affiliated group is still strong, albeit without a higher profile than early last year.

In-Class presentation notes

Here is my powerpoint from my in-class presentation. Though my focus has changed to more of an introduction of Anonymous through the eyes of the media, I will still take some points from this presentation.

Field Methods Proposal

I will most likely not be doing any anthropological fieldwork for my portion of the project on anonymity, but that does not mean I don't plan to get insights from others who have delved into the world of Anonymous.

Since I will be perusing the Internet for all media mentions of Anonymous or /b/ for my part of the process, the most observing I will be able to make will be the comments left after articles or videos from the media. I will not delve much into the heart of Anonymous; instead I will determine how it is viewed in the media and why it is viewed that way.

Pure voyeurism of the media is not enough though. To get a full understanding of the media's perceptions of Anonymous I would like to talk to reporters who have actually covered Anonymous and other hackers involved in similar "raids." I could contact Mattathias Schwartz, who wrote this trolling piece for the New York Times, or Chris Landers, who wrote this great article on Project Chanology. These two reporters actually delved into the world of trollers and met prominent anonymous posters in person. They came out of the process with much different perceptions of the culture than other media reports like the ones from Fox 11 and CNN.

These interviews could serve as the talking heads for my research and would hopefully complement my findings on the trends of media perceptions of Anonymous.

Actual Lit Review

For my part of the overall class project on anonymity, I will examine the media's perceptions of the group Anonymous. This will involve scouring the Internet for media references of the group, analyzing how they perceive the group's actions against Scientology and many others, as well as examining anonymous responses posted at the end of those stories. I am hoping to find out whether the media comes to a general consensus. As of right now, the perceptions seem to fall under general labels as criminals, but reporters who dive into the world of hackers seem to come to more of a neutral understanding of the hacker culture.

Since there has been little written specifically about the group Anonymous, I broadened my article research to media perceptions of Internet hackers. I came up with a few general historical trends with my two readings. Hackers are alienated by the media and society because of their technological affinity. The media from the emergence of hackers did not understand  the motivations behind hackers' actions and therefore made possibly biased claims about hackers. The final trend I noticed was the snowball effect of the criminal prototype that the media formed while covering hackers' actions.

There are some problems with the selections I read, though. They are not recent, and have not addressed the changing culture of hackers and specifically the group Anonymous. Also, there is no whole-scale examination into just the media perception of hackers - the perceptions are just mentioned in a historical sort of reference.

I plan to fill in that gap by doing what I mentioned before. I will examine as many references to Anonymous in the media as I can and truly see where their ideas align and how similar they are, as well as seeing the interactions between media-types and people who claim to align themselves with the Anonymous movement.

Lit review (attempt No. 1)

I read two books (OK I read selections of two books) on Google Books on the media and society's perspectives on Internet hackers over the years. My project will focus on the media's portrayal of the group Anonymous, but there is already a precedence set by the media's interaction with hackers over the past two and a half decades.

The first selection I read was from "Hacker Culture" by Douglas Thomas. He argues that media and society failed to understand the basic motivations of hackers from the beginning of the technological transformation. For this reason, and the general lack of knowledge or understanding of technology, hackers and other tech gurus were given a cold shoulder because of their relationships with technology. While this was happening, hackers began to form their own communities, bridging the divide between culture and technology - eventually forming their own culture.

Thomas claimed the hacker culture arose when boys received a new medium thorough which they could assert their independence from parents and control over certain aspects of their life. This movement was not accepted though, as Thomas says that parents and society were afraid of the culture because they did not know how to respond to a situation that did not fall into a previous prototype of typical youth rebellion. They were called criminals - unfairly in their mind. A hacker said, "We explore ... we seek knowledge and you call us criminals." The hacker also says that the hackers crimes are of curiosity and outsmarting the status quo - which will not forgive the hackers.

Throughout the increased saturation of hackers, Thomas says the hackers began to change their attack methods. They shied away from more criminal acts and became more political - which could be compared to Chanology.

The second selection was from "The Impact of the Internet on Our Moral Lives" by Robert Cavalier. Cavalier explores the reasons why the societal perceptions of hackers moved from "heroes of the computer revolution" to criminals. One idea he presents is that hackers have changed to become more criminal and indiscriminate than they were in the past, or people have become much less tolerant of their actions. The latter could be explained, Cavalier conjectures, by the government and society's need to demonize a certain group of society - in this case the ever-expanding technological culture. 

Another reason for the transition falls squarely on the shoulders of the media. Cavalier suggests that the media's portrayal of hackers has always been connotative. The words hackers and virus carry with them strong and usually bad meanings. Throughout the years, the media has inundated the public with connotative language, portraying just the controversial, possibly criminal, actions of hackers since the mid-1980s because of the media's taste for the melodramatic. Because of this inundation, society has established a prototype, or common perception, of the hacker as a criminal.

These two readings gave me a historical perspective of why Anonymous is viewed the way it is. It is viewed by the media and society just like previous hackers have been viewed. The difference with Anonymous could just be the scale of connectivity and also the increased ability to find valuable information on the Internet.

Reflections on "Youtube and You" by Mike Wesch

When reading this article, at first I thought of the growing individualism that the Internet age was caused. I always saw Facebook, vlogging, and the ever-growing presence of Youtube as just a growing sense of individualism and in some cases narsicism. While I gave second thought to these ideas after Wesch's demonstrations and explanations of how some people are severely touched by many Youtube videos, I realized these are usually just heat of the moment emotions. The viewers probably tell a few friends about the video, but they forget about it after a few days. It reminds me of passengers on an airplane. You may get to know them and hear some interesting stories, but ultimately you will probably never see them again. They are what Tyler Durden (Edward Norton) calls them on the movie Fight Club - single-serving friends.

In many ways we are becoming a single-serving society, in which we have much more at our disposal, but we are getting further from the collective identity that the country was founded on. With a mutitude of mediums to spread our message anonymously and the mass of information on the Internet, we can learn nearly all we need to know through the web and feel like we can connect to people through the interwebs as well.

Who knows where this will go next, though. Just as Prof. Wesch states in the article, more research is needed to really discover that answer - if it still is intact by the time that research is completed.

Reflections on "No Sense of Place"

After reading chapter 2 of this book by Joshua Meyrowitz, my beleif of the importance of situations and people involved in the situation on a person's behavior is solidified. In terms of the article's influence on my project, which examines the mainstream media's perceptions of the online phenomenon Anonymous, I beleive it will help me with understanding both sides of the situation. On one side, media talking heads are offended by the actions on /b/ and Encyclopedia Dramatica because they are foreign and unruly to them. They have probably not been in a situation like what is on these websites, and therefore can only use opinions based on previous, but separate, experiences. On the other side, for the people involved in Anonymous or Chanology, they have been emersed in that cultural situation and understand the rules, language and typical behavior on those sites. Whether it is a release from their day lives or just something fun to do, these people have adopted a certain behavior that is completely different from what many people claim to be "ethical" behavior - and maybe much different from their own selfs during more confrontational situations.

The reading clearly falls in line with what one of our classmates mentioned about being anonymous on the message boards or on a protest when he mentioned saying things that he would not have in a situation in which his identity was known. It first people are hesitant to go against the common behavior in a certain situation, but once they see other people adapting their behavior and grow to understand that behavior, they become more apt to behave differently. But that certainly does not change most socially accepted behaviors. This is probably why people who are involved in anonymous raids and say and do things anonymously that they would not dare do in a monitored situation. That is why those same people are usually described as a seemingly normal person by their neighbors and friends - they are expected to act normally around these people.

Reflections on International Herald Tribune piece and "History of Media Ecology"

The IHT article really highlighted the dichotomy of Internet identity to me. On one side you have the hyper-evident identity seen on Facebook and Twitter that shows a representation of a person's real self, and on the other side you have the completely anonymous self that shows up often on Youtube and 4chan and other sites which represents a side that cannot come out within the confines of a social identity.

The article also highlights our conversations on micro-celebrity. The part of the article that stood out to me is when a person said they were angry about people posting pictures from years ago and talking about them, but she couldn't just leave Facebook because she wanted to know what they were saying about her. We want to be talked about and we want to be recognized - even if it is in an ambient medium. Facebook has become popular for this reason. People don't want to be alone just as the article concludes.

"History of media ecology"
One of the main themes I took from this piece was the transition in history from few, the elders, to many, even kids now have e-mail addresses and cell phones. As the media was proliferated throughout society, the people moved further and further apart, from spoken word to books to telephones to the Internet, in which speed is everything and no voice or physical interaction is involved.

Another thing that stood out to me is the mastering of the language it took to be a respected consumer of that media, but as time went on, that language became more and more widespread in society just like the forms of media. Now, in the Internet age, someone needs just to look up information regarding the medium's language on the Internet to participate actively in the medium.

It certainly makes me wonder if the new forms a media that will be developed in our lifetime will follow these same trends.

Reflections on "Post-human anthropology"

After reading Whitehead's article, I understand that in order to study the Internet anthropologically it makes sense that ethnographers need to create the location and means of study themselves to see it first hand. It's hard to just follow people on the Internet. because their is no basis of location or personal observation. There is the observation and control though with a personal creation like Blood Jewel. It is not a physical location, but it is a community that is centered around you - so all interaction is filtered through you.

I had no idea really what post-human meant before a few days ago, and this article certainly solidified my conception of that term. Like the author, I see it as not a reduction of humanity, but an extension of the human identity. As we have discussed in Digital Ethnography class, maybe the different identities we apply on the Internet is an extension of ourselves that was that few people knew existed before - or even now as we mentioned in class with the identity people portray on Facebook. That may be where the importance of anonymity may come into fruition. Without that anonymity, people would be scared of the social consequences of those actions. Now those actions are out in the open - good and bad.

Reflections on Silver's "Introducing Cyberculture"

One of the first things I noticed was the little amount of development in the field of cyber anthropology. It has taken years to study just a small portion of the overall Internet community. But that is not a criticism of the ethnographers; it is a testament to the massive breadth of the Internet's influence on the world. There is no way to study the Internet like a remote Indonesian tribe, especially with the ever-changing technology and design of the Internet.

The study of the virtual ethics code, which was mentioned by Silver in the article as a way some people have chosen to study Internet behavior, really interested me, as I have been interested the whole semester in how completely anonymous message boards like 4chan and semi-anonymous boards like comments on Youtube and online newspapers police the comments. What is unethical on 4chan - which little is - is much different on newspaper websites - which usually even monitor for vulgar language.

When Silver talks about the issues of race and gender, that really struck me. When navigating through the Internet, even on seemingly gender-neutral sites, comments seem to be slanted to more masculine and Caucasian influences. This is seen in the language on Anonymous message boards like 4chan who playfully call other posters fags - just like many college guys - and derogitory racial terms like nigger.

Reading Reflections: 2/9

When I signed up for this class, I had no anthropology experience - other than physical anthropology - and I had no idea what ethnography meant. When people asked me what the word meant, I just said it was anthropology so we must be studying people's behavior.

After reading the Hine article, I definitely have a much further understanding of ethnography as an in-depth study of a certain aspect of human behavior. It gives me more of an understanding of what this class is and what is expected of me as a student of this class.

That being said, I took several points from the article that we could use in the overall Digital Ethnography project. The thing that makes the Internet such a popular form of media is its interactivity - which was also mentioned in the "Wealth of Networks" article. We should not just find a way to make our own project interactive - as we have discussed over the listserv, but we also need to look at how anonymous interactivity has driven the increased use of the Internet, Youtube, Flickr, etc.

For my own project, I feel I could improve it dramatically by studying the interaction of "Anonymous" posters on media reports and how they support each other while not supporting each other at the same time. This would involve a more in-depth examination of say the Youtube video of Fox 11's report on Anonymous. I would examine the comments posted to find a pattern - if there is one - to the perception of the media report.

Falling in line with the "Wealth of Networks," this examination of media reports and the public's perception of them through online comments, will most likely agree with findings in the article that show that people form a weak relationship with people - maybe exchange a few comments with other posters - but quickly move on to other Internet endeavors.

Final trailer and proposal on the media

Anonymous is a group - not even a group but an ideal - shrouded in mystery. Few people have the same definition of Anonymous as it is known on the Internet. Some call them heroes, other call them criminals. Some call them teenage hooligans, others call them lost souls on the Internet. Those even in Anonymous struggle to form a cohesive identity.

As media outlets begin to delve into the world of Anonymous and trolls, they too are having trouble explaining the idiosyncrasies and identity of the Internet phenomenon. Media outlets exist to scour the world of information and sort out information they believe the public should or wants to know. They transpose this myriad of information into news stories that people can understand. In the case of Anonymous, there is no single identity — not even close — therefore there is no common stance from the media.

The media has called trolls "hackers on steroids" and questioned if Anonymous' actions against Scientology are hate crimes; they are obviously interested in this issue and want the public to know. Are these fair presumptions? Or are they taking trolling for lulz out of proportion? Is it just a bunch of kids pulling pranks on their peers and elders like the kids of the past putting cherry bombs in mailboxes or ding-dong ditching? My research will focus on the legitimacy and objectiveness of these media reports. I will determine which side of the issue they fall on - and how the masses respond to that.

Updated second trailer on media

Second attempt at a trailer

media project proposal

The mass media has been blamed for instilling fear in the masses when it wasn't necessary, for taking topics far out of perspective and covering stories that do not deserve the be covered. But the media is sometimes called the fourth branch of the government for a reason. They investigate and dig for information people usually want to know but they don't want to spend the time to uncover. But there are some issues that seem to have no news value but are still covered and embraced by a majority of people, i.e. Britney Spears, Joe the Plumber. Where does Anonymous and Internet trolls fit between those? Is it important to uncover these Internet hackers so the public knows about them and can defend themselves against possible attacks? Or is it a menial task to report on an issue that has no value in a democratic society?

Neither of these seem to be the case. The media has called trolls "hackers on steroids" and questioned if Anonymous' actions against Scientology are hate crimes; they are obviously interested in this issue and want the public to know. Are these fair presumptions? Or are they taking trolling for lulz out of proportion? Is it just a bunch of kids pulling pranks on their peers and elders like the kids of the past putting cherry bombs in mailboxes or ding-dong ditching? Either way, this issue should be and will be covered by the media. My research will focus on the legitimacy and objectiveness of these media reports. I will determine which side of the issue they fall on - and how the masses respond to that.

My first draft of a project trailer

Anonymous' confusing new angle against Scientology

This story is just funny ... and almost seems like the two hooligans wanted fame on their own and went outside the goals of Anonymous. The fact that the greasy goon was charged with hate crimes just tops the cake of ridiculousness.