I. The Backlash: When Social Media Becomes the Story When Slipknot announced their 2027 (sic)est Stadium Tour , with Marilyn Manson opening the Wembley Stadium show and joining them for the South American dates, including The Town in São Paulo, the reaction was almost immediate. Thousands of comments appeared beneath the announcement, many from people saying they would no longer attend. Some described the decision as disappointing, others said they would not spend money on a concert that included Manson, and some presented the booking as a betrayal of what they believed Slipknot represented. The reaction was real, and there is no reason to pretend otherwise. What interests me, however, is what happens after that initial reaction: how it is collected, amplified, repeated by music publications, and gradually transformed from a collection of individual responses into something that can begin to look like a universal verdict from “the fans.” The current coverage makes that process fairly e...
May 9 - Anti-SLAPP Rulings Revealed and Why Marilyn Manson Has a Strong Case for an Appeal Anti-SLAPP laws work by putting more burden than usual on defamed plaintiffs like Manson, forcing them to clearly show at the outset that their case is legitimate. In California, the reason strict anti-SLAPP laws exist is because they have so many cases to go through, and it helps to alleviate the pressure of the courts by making cases less time consuming by eliminating certain aspects of a claim before they go to discovery. The major drawback of this is that a plaintiff must enter the case with all their evidence in hand when it comes to defamation claims even before discovery can be conducted. Thus, it makes it almost impossible for a defamation claim to pass into the discovery portion of the case unless the unquestionable evidence already clearly exists. In some cases, like Manson's, the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim can also be part of the anti-SLAPP. Summary of the...