Why is toxic fandom destroying everything?

[StarMan]

At one end of the spectrum, you have those firmly entrenched in the anti-woke brigade that dutifully following their assigned YT grifter and cry w0ke whenever someone not equipped with a juicy, white heterosexual penis saves the day - and that's as far as their critical analysis goes.

On the other, you have the SJW zealots who will jump to the defense of a show - not necessarily as a fan, but as an ally. Those that are fans - at least the most unpalatable of this subset - will take umbrage at any criticism and happily tar every detractor with the same bigot brush.

All on the usual platforms, X, FB, etc. It does bleed over into discussions forums like this, unfortunately.

Hot take: The way to marginalize toxic fandom is to produce a good product.

If you make a good product, the vast majority of the audience doesn't give a shit about what a bunch of whiners on YouTube and Twitter think about diversity. For example, The Expanse had a diverse cast, with strong female characters. The first Black Panther film was a success with a majority Black cast. Was there fanboy whining calling them a "woke" show or movie? I'm sure, but they were a marginalized element given the quality of those products.

Not discounting that this element of fandom exists and is a pain in the ass, but the counter-argument is that when a studio like Disney puts out something that's not well-received, it's easier to blame that reception as being a function of the assholes within the fanbase than to admit their work had flaws.

All opinions are subjective, but there are arguably legitimate reasons to dislike something like The Acolyte that go beyond the bigoted fanboy bs. Personal opinion, leave the politics out of it for a second, and judge it on its own terms for what it is, and that entire "power of one, power of two, power of maaaaaaannnnnyyy" sequence was just goofy beyond goofy, even for a universe with talking dog people and giant gangster slugs. And going beyond that, it's just a poorly paced show that's central mystery is poorly structured with characters making decisions because the plot needs them to.

House of the Dragon (with a non-binary lead) and Fallout, to add to your examples.

I sometimes wonder if companies like Disney that telegraph how diverse their product is, are doing so with the intent of stirring the pot? Hell, what % of D+ viewership is hate-watching? You gotta pump those numbers!

If you really don't like something and pay for the privilege of watching it to confirm your negative preconceptions, well - Disney thanks you for your service.

 

[Campe]

I'm fine with the concept of people not liking something. Quality is subjective and that's okay. What I scratch my head about is people taking the time to review bomb sites because you don't like it or making HUNDREDS of YouTube videos designed with the sole purpose of speaking negatively about something. If you have that much time on your hands, or if you don't like it that much, maybe find something else to enjoy. Life is too short for THAT much negativity. It does seem to add a layer of toxicity to what really boils down to as an opinion. Like something, don't, I don't care. But why give yourself an ulcer over it?

I mean, I'm used to being on the opposite end of popular opinions. I enjoyed TLJ and am not a fan of Picard season 3. But while I've spoken my mind about both of those things, its never occurred to me to create a 4 hour YT video just to speak about how I didn't enjoy Picard.

 

[The Realist]

I honestly find it a lot more fun to celebrate things I enjoy than bitch about things I don't. I'm not here to pretend I've never done the latter, but I'm always happier singing the praises of something I love.

 

[theenglish]

I honestly find it a lot more fun to celebrate things I enjoy than bitch about things I don't. I'm not here to pretend I've never done the latter, but I'm always happier singing the praises of something I love.

I agree. I enjoy debating the merits and faults of things, maybe because I rarely fall into absolutes. If it is something I don't like for whatever reason then I rarely post about it. I also try to be quick about changing my perspective when called for. The recent Civil War was an example where I jumped on something at first and then pulled back when I knew more about it. I also don't dive into a fray to defend liking something when many others don't--I mean what is the point as our reactions are often subjective. I really liked Love and Thunder, but at the time, many posters felt differently about the show. I think I stated my opinion a couple of times but didn't fall into arguing about it.

I do enjoy debating points of something, especially when I like it. I did that with the 3 Body Problem because I had some specific opinions that were different than another poster--but overall, I really enjoyed the series and think it is so well done that it really needs some recognition for that.

What I can't stand is when people trash something and say it is not because the lead is female/non-white etc or not because of the political stand of the show--but then they can't come up with any legitimate reason why the show was bad.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Hot take: The way to marginalize toxic fandom is to produce a good product.

If you make a good product, the vast majority of the audience doesn't give a shit about what a bunch of whiners on YouTube and Twitter think about diversity. For example, The Expanse had a diverse cast, with strong female characters. The first Black Panther film was a success with a majority Black cast. Was there fanboy whining calling them a "woke" show or movie? I'm sure, but they were a marginalized element given the quality of those products.

Not discounting that this element of fandom exists and is a pain in the ass, but the counter-argument is that when a studio like Disney puts out something that's not well-received, it's easier to blame that reception as being a function of the assholes within the fanbase than to admit their work had flaws.

All opinions are subjective, but there are arguably legitimate reasons to dislike something like The Acolyte that go beyond the bigoted fanboy bs. Personal opinion, leave the politics out of it for a second, and judge it on its own terms for what it is, and that entire "power of one, power of two, power of maaaaaaannnnnyyy" sequence was just goofy beyond goofy, even for a universe with talking dog people and giant gangster slugs. And going beyond that, it's just a poorly paced show that's central mystery is poorly structured with characters making decisions because the plot needs them to.

Yep, definitely. Well said. If a show is good, it will find its audience and stand on its own. But if a show isn't doing well for whatever reason, they immediately blame the fans. That doesn't sit well with me, as now legitimate discussions can't be had without being lumped in as a detractor. I really wish this would stop as it's really not constructive, and it's not a great way to build a rapport with an audience. It makes me less likely to watch. The whole industry seems to have become a political hot potato.

 

[fireproof78]

It would be great if people just showed the same courtesy, patience, and respect to others that they would like to be shown to themselves. What's so hard about that? Why does everything have to be contentious?

Because we have to be right. Right now, what I see in people, is a very strong black and white thinking. Having an "other" to fight against gives more purpose because you don't get attention for being happy and peaceful and supportive. You don't get recognized.

What does get talked about? Conflict. Conflict gets talked about. We're talking about it right now. Words like "destroying" get used even not a damn thing is destroyed. Hyperbole makes actual dialog difficult, and I find that fans use hyberbolic language (I know I do) and that decrease communication, increases conflict.

We're our own worst enemy. You want people to be polite? Give them attention when they actually do a good job at being polite. Ignore the rest.

 

[Garak]

I don't really think about toxic fandom, it's not really a thing that factors in for me when I decide if I like a tv show or a movie. It's pretty easy to ignore

 

[BillJ]

On this particular day, when they bring you your food, it's a piece of warm steaming cat poop. The garnish is nice, but it's still warm steaming cat poop on a plate.

Could’ve just said your favorite restaurant got rid of the dishes that you like and replaced them with stuff that you aren’t fond of. You’re getting across your point in a far less combative nature.

 

[BillJ]

Hot take: The way to marginalize toxic fandom is to produce a good product.

Good by whose standards?

 

[fireproof78]

Good by whose standards?

Mine, of course.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

And nothing will change unless Youtube and all those other sites change their approaches and algorithms towards "prefer positive takes" instead of "amplify negative takes". Which is not gonna happen since, as others have said, negativity brings more clicks and therefore revenue and therefore money.

It is not just a matter of negativity; if YouTube skewed only toward "preferring positive takes" that would--ultimately--lead to YouTube becoming a catch all not just for legitimately honest takes, but shills, obsessed fans who are just as aggressive against any criticism (in the middle of their praise for some product) as the negative individuals are for their particular interests.

Without balance (good luck with an attempt to find it), a platform would become not much more than PR for entertainment companies, who already have a dominant voice, and would like nothing more than having a platform overflowing with "I see / buy it all and love it all! It's the greatest ever!" type channels.

Recently there has been a push by Disney, in particular, to preemptively defect criticism by warning of toxic fandom before a show even airs. This is a deliberate attempt to lump groups 3 and 4 together, and delegitimize good faith criticism.

Indeed.

 

[Anwar]

Hot take: The way to marginalize toxic fandom is to produce a good product.

If you make a good product, the vast majority of the audience doesn't give a shit about what a bunch of whiners on YouTube and Twitter think about diversity. For example, The Expanse had a diverse cast, with strong female characters. The first Black Panther film was a success with a majority Black cast. Was there fanboy whining calling them a "woke" show or movie? I'm sure, but they were a marginalized element given the quality of those products.

Not discounting that this element of fandom exists and is a pain in the ass, but the counter-argument is that when a studio like Disney puts out something that's not well-received, it's easier to blame that reception as being a function of the assholes within the fanbase than to admit their work had flaws.

All opinions are subjective, but there are arguably legitimate reasons to dislike something like The Acolyte that go beyond the bigoted fanboy bs. Personal opinion, leave the politics out of it for a second, and judge it on its own terms for what it is, and that entire "power of one, power of two, power of maaaaaaannnnnyyy" sequence was just goofy beyond goofy, even for a universe with talking dog people and giant gangster slugs. And going beyond that, it's just a poorly paced show that's central mystery is poorly structured with characters making decisions because the plot needs them to.

The Expanse wasn't that diverse, it started off with a standard white male lead.

You better believe there was backlash to Black Panther. Not as badly as Captain Marvel, but it happened.

And BTW, none of the Studios ever said anything against the fans. That was just fake nonsense cooked up by said fans' persecution complex.

How is "Power of Many" any sillier than anything else we've seen in SW?

 

[F. King Daniel]

It's white noise, I ignore it. An outgrowth of the internet at large, extremism about every possible subject (much of which is a money making exercise, with people fanning flames on Youtube for click money), as well as EVERYONE being able to put forth their opinion while pooping.

 

[BillJ]

Speaking for oversaturation...

...as well as EVERYONE being able to put forth their opinion while pooping.

Which is only proper after eating at a Taco Bell...

 

[Citiprime]

The Expanse wasn't that diverse, it started off with a standard white male lead.

And there was also Chrisjen Avasarala (Shohreh Aghdashloo) ... And Naomi (Dominique Tipper) ... And Bobbie (Frankie Adams) ... And a whole bunch of other characters of different races and genders.

You better believe there was backlash to Black Panther. Not as badly as Captain Marvel, but it happened.

Never said there wasn't. But when people like something and it's successful, no one gives a fuck. Rogue One had a female lead and a diverse cast, and at a certain point no one gave a shit about the people who whined about their "woke" concerns.

How is "Power of Many" any sillier than anything else we've seen in SW?

It's a cringeworthy scene that someone at some point in its creation, development or production should have said something about how stupid it is. That's just the long and short of it. If the Disney executives watched that scene and thought it's indicative of what their audience wants, then they're lost.

 

[Citiprime]

Good by whose standards?

There's a place between a 14% rotten tomatoes score and a cultural phenomenon.

If The Acolyte or Captain Marvel were popular on their own, Disney wouldn't give a shit about the toxic elements of fandoms. Disney is a corporation whose goal is to make money. If either of those properties were popular enough that they made Disney a profit they would not give one fuck what a bunch of incels whined on the internet.

Profit and popularity are the standards.

 

[BillJ]

Profit and popularity are the standards.

Good has nothing to do with either thing.

 

[Citiprime]

Good has nothing to do with either thing.

While there are some exceptions, more often than not, good things tend to be popular. And things people find good are popular, and tend to make a profit.

 

[The Wormhole]

The Expanse wasn't that diverse, it started off with a standard white male lead

Despite a white male lead, The Expanse, both novel and TV series is one of the more diverse properties out there. It actually has the kind of diversity that Star Trek's reputation tells us it has, but in actuality fell rather short of, at least prior to the current run of shows starting with Disco.

 

[Anwar]

And there was also Chrisjen Avasarala (Shohreh Aghdashloo) ... And Naomi (Dominique Tipper) ... And Bobbie (Frankie Adams) ... And a whole bunch of other characters of different races and genders.

Never said there wasn't. But when people like something and it's successful, no one gives a fuck. Rogue One had a female lead and a diverse cast, and at a certain point no one gave a shit about the people who whined about their "woke" concerns.

It's a cringeworthy scene that someone at some point in its creation, development or production should have said something about how stupid it is. That's just the long and short of it. If the Disney executives watched that scene and thought it's indicative of what their audience wants, then they're lost.

All secondary characters, not leads.

Everyone died in Rogue One and was never mentioned again like they never existed, that's why. If they'd survived and had more adventures, you better believe there'd be complaints.

I've seen MUCH dumber stuff in SW.