this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
849 points (96.0% liked)

Not The Onion

12295 readers
1039 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 57 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why would the Superbowl need to be rigged for her to do this? Everything the woman does is already reported and televised everywhere.

[–] beardown@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

The theory is that it needs to be rigged so that the Chiefs are in the super bowl because she is linked to Chiefs player Travis Kelce. So Kelce playing in the Super Bowl gives her a very plausible reason for being there and for being heavily featured with him

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I get that. What I'm saying is it doesn't matter. She's got media attention 24/7 if she wants to say something. Anyone who would be swayed by her is already listening.

[–] beardown@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

But it would look weird if she was there and heavily featured and the Chiefs weren't playing. This result makes it look much more "natural" which makes it easier for the public to accept and not question ("She's his gf, of course she's there! And if she just happened to endorse Biden/diminish Trump at or after being heavily featured on the most watched tv program of the year by far then that's just a coincidence!")

The point is that this introduces her to a mainstream American audience in the most "natural" way possible. Which then allows her to persuade the public throughout the rest of the year because we all will feel like we already "know" her. Plenty of people already "know" her, of course. But we don't need to reach those people. We need to reach the undecided and out of touch Americans in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Arizona - and we do that by using the Super Bowl as a political branding opportunity with our cleancut and All-American characters of Taylor Swift and her classy bf Travis Kelce.

It's pretty simple marketing/branding/persuasion. Not even the most complicated marketing effort that she herself has been involved in.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But they don't need the super bowl for that. She could go outside wearing a Biden t-shirt and it'd be plastered all over everyone's screens in 20 minutes. Going to the effort of rigging the Superbowl to get Taylor Swift in front of people is just unnecessary. The work is already done for you.

[–] beardown@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The people you're trying to reach are the people who would never hear about her wearing a shirt like that.

You need uneducated swing voters in swing states. Aka, people who perpetually have their head in the sand. Using the Super Bowl is one of the only ways to reach those people and is one of the only remaining artifacts of the monoculture

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why would they give a shit about Taylor Swift's opinion if they're not already aware of her?

[–] beardown@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Why do people currently give a shit about Taylor Swift's opinion if they used to be unaware of her?

The goal is the spread her influence and encourage more Americans to follow her. Particularly women, who are more likely to support Swift and Democrats anyway

I don't think any of this, if true, is bad btw. It's how "free and fair" elections have always worked in the United States, or at least for the past 60 years. And it's worth it if it means Trump does not win

Doesn't mean we should pretend that our government doesn't regularly do things like this though

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 9 months ago

Why do people currently give a shit about Taylor Swift’s opinion if they used to be unaware of her?

Because they're morons? She's a manufactured celebrity. Her (or any other celebrity) opinion on politics should mean nothing to anyone.

[–] Pulptastic@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Haven't the chiefs been in 3 of the last 4 SBs? They're a strong team, it's not much of a surprise.

[–] beardown@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago

They're genuinely not a strong team this year. They have no passcatchers outside of Kelce and their rb is a 7th rounder. Obviously Mahomes is good, but that's about it. They're the weakest they've been since this dynasty began, which is partially because they've had weak draft picks from all of their recent success.

So it strains credulity a bit that they're in the super bowl again given this team. San Francisco should destroy them without much of an issue - we'll see if that's in the script though