By Tim Tapp
There's an interesting dilemma inside the Beltway and across Silicon Valley when something they do not like comes along. They have to ask themselves, "do we squash a story and starve it of attention, or do we mercilessly attack it?"
When the Freedom Phone announced its launch in the late summer, that was the exact dilemma that journalists, activists, and "debunkers" faced. They certainly had the option of ignoring the Freedom Phone in its entirety and pretending it didn't exist. They also had the other choice of attacking the Freedom Phone outright, slandering it, and calling it a "scam." They did the math and decided that attacking the Freedom Phone was the better choice.
It looks like their calculations were wrong - the more they attacked the Freedom Phone, the more units it sold. Now, the Freedom Phone is sitting on upwards of 6 million dollars of sales, a backorder that spans months of shipments, and thousands of customers eager to get their product as fast as possible. In everyday language, the calculations of the journalists, activists, etc., is what we call a "fail."
What pundits and commentators failed to realize is that millions of Americans actively distrust them. People don't just tune them out; they automatically feel the urge to do the opposite of what they say. If they say that something is good, the people instinctively believe it is bad. If they say that something is a scam, the people feel inspired to investigate it themselves and draw their own conclusions. When these disguised activists decided to attack the Freedom Phone, they were actually communicating to America a simple message: "look closer, there might be something good here."
Looking closer at the Freedom Phone only showed a secure, capable, and entirely affordable product. Combined with the ever-increasing censorship from Big Tech, the invasions of privacy from Silicon Valley, and a nonstop deluge of misinformation and Orwellian false truths from the mainstream media, and you have a perfect storm to make the Freedom Phone white-hot. Nobody trusts fake debunkers and "fact-checkers" anymore, and the more that you try to "debunk" something, the more that the average person feels that you're lying. As a result, Freedom Phones sales skyrocketed, conservatives circled their wagons, and the rest is history.
This isn't the first time this phenomenon has happened. Months ago, Parler came on the scene as an alternative social media platform dedicated to free speech. The timing was pretty good. Twitter had just finished another round of bans and crackdowns of conservative voices. And President Trump's base was beginning to worry that Trump would be banned from social media (which he was later). Enter Parler, and its platform, which is meant to give the average user a voice.
The attacks against Parler were instantaneous, libelous, and relentless. Journalists claimed it was a hive of "nazis," activists claimed it was full of "terrorists," fact-checkers claimed it would steal users' information. They threw everything at it to see what would stick, and for a while, it looked like their efforts worked - Parler had to go offline for a short time when their backend processors banned them.
But now Parler is back, better than ever, and with their own hardened platforms ready for future fights. We see a similar tune played with the Freedom Phone. Each time an obstacle is placed in their way, they find a way to not only navigate the problem but to blaze a path for anyone else to follow in their footsteps.
So how would you stop something like the Freedom Phone from succeeding in the future? (Not that I want to help those who target conservative voices or services meant to help conservatives to be heard.) How do you shut something out of polite society, intimidate its users into silence, and keep it out of the public spotlight? I'm not sure (nor would that ever be my goal). Still, my advice is to do the exact opposite of what they did for the Freedom Phone - unless the plan is to make it an overnight success again. Of course, these people could try being honest and reflecting reality in their messaging, but then when the American people know the truth ... that typically does not work out very well for them either.
There's an interesting dilemma inside the Beltway and across Silicon Valley when something they do not like comes along. They have to ask themselves, "do we squash a story and starve it of attention, or do we mercilessly attack it?"
When the Freedom Phone announced its launch in the late summer, that was the exact dilemma that journalists, activists, and "debunkers" faced. They certainly had the option of ignoring the Freedom Phone in its entirety and pretending it didn't exist. They also had the other choice of attacking the Freedom Phone outright, slandering it, and calling it a "scam." They did the math and decided that attacking the Freedom Phone was the better choice.
It looks like their calculations were wrong - the more they attacked the Freedom Phone, the more units it sold. Now, the Freedom Phone is sitting on upwards of 6 million dollars of sales, a backorder that spans months of shipments, and thousands of customers eager to get their product as fast as possible. In everyday language, the calculations of the journalists, activists, etc., is what we call a "fail."
What pundits and commentators failed to realize is that millions of Americans actively distrust them. People don't just tune them out; they automatically feel the urge to do the opposite of what they say. If they say that something is good, the people instinctively believe it is bad. If they say that something is a scam, the people feel inspired to investigate it themselves and draw their own conclusions. When these disguised activists decided to attack the Freedom Phone, they were actually communicating to America a simple message: "look closer, there might be something good here."
Looking closer at the Freedom Phone only showed a secure, capable, and entirely affordable product. Combined with the ever-increasing censorship from Big Tech, the invasions of privacy from Silicon Valley, and a nonstop deluge of misinformation and Orwellian false truths from the mainstream media, and you have a perfect storm to make the Freedom Phone white-hot. Nobody trusts fake debunkers and "fact-checkers" anymore, and the more that you try to "debunk" something, the more that the average person feels that you're lying. As a result, Freedom Phones sales skyrocketed, conservatives circled their wagons, and the rest is history.
This isn't the first time this phenomenon has happened. Months ago, Parler came on the scene as an alternative social media platform dedicated to free speech. The timing was pretty good. Twitter had just finished another round of bans and crackdowns of conservative voices. And President Trump's base was beginning to worry that Trump would be banned from social media (which he was later). Enter Parler, and its platform, which is meant to give the average user a voice.
The attacks against Parler were instantaneous, libelous, and relentless. Journalists claimed it was a hive of "nazis," activists claimed it was full of "terrorists," fact-checkers claimed it would steal users' information. They threw everything at it to see what would stick, and for a while, it looked like their efforts worked - Parler had to go offline for a short time when their backend processors banned them.
But now Parler is back, better than ever, and with their own hardened platforms ready for future fights. We see a similar tune played with the Freedom Phone. Each time an obstacle is placed in their way, they find a way to not only navigate the problem but to blaze a path for anyone else to follow in their footsteps.
So how would you stop something like the Freedom Phone from succeeding in the future? (Not that I want to help those who target conservative voices or services meant to help conservatives to be heard.) How do you shut something out of polite society, intimidate its users into silence, and keep it out of the public spotlight? I'm not sure (nor would that ever be my goal). Still, my advice is to do the exact opposite of what they did for the Freedom Phone - unless the plan is to make it an overnight success again. Of course, these people could try being honest and reflecting reality in their messaging, but then when the American people know the truth ... that typically does not work out very well for them either.
RSS Feed