Sunday, 20 October 2013

Project week task

I have chosen the recent actions of a California-based punk band Get Crushed! who decided to film a porno on the lawn of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas.
What at first was supposed to be a lesbian orgy ended up having the band’s bassist Laura Lush lie down on the grass and masturbate while her bandmates filmed her.
As a highly controversial topic I expected to find numerous articles that would speak of the actions in a very bad light, however not many media and news outlets covered the topic.
Quite a few pages said what the band had done was wrong, but since everyone hates Westboro Baptist Church it’s alright.
However, thedailyedge.ie and socialnewsdaily.com shine a bad light on the band rather than the church. Claire Murrihy, who is the author of the article posted on thedailyedge.ie, states that what has occurred is a way for a sleazy band to make their point. Thesocialnewsdaily.com call it just the band’s way to get some attention. “There are plenty of ways to get publicity for your band.” is the phrase that the article starts with. Both these news stories are similar, they do not approve of the actions of the band but neither are they too critical of the actions. Both articles are similarly structured, they include screenshots from Twitter of what the band and Fred Phelps (supposedly, it has not been confirmed that it is a legitimate account) tweeted to one another and a quote from Laura Lush saying: “The Phelps family and Westboro Baptist Church are ridiculous and do nothing except spread hate and cause controversy. As a bisexual woman and the bass player of a ridiculous punk band, I wanted to spread my legs and cause controversy”
An article that can be seen to favour the band would be the news story and interview with the band frontman J.P.Hunter in Vice Magazine. It starts with the porno being described as the brainchild of the bassist and ‘star’ of the film Laura Lush. Jak Hutchcraft the author of the article also goes on to say: “As you probably know, the WBC are almost hilariously terrible people, caricatures of evil layering irony upon themselves by claiming to be doing God's work. They hate anyone who has a lifestyle choice that differs from their own, run websites like GodHatesFags, and picket funerals of people they don't like.” The author is clearly taking a stand against the church. Even the questions asked in the interview can be seen as having a laugh at the topic, for example: “Did Laura find it hard to climax under the judgmental eyes of God?”
I would relate my opinion on the topic most to Vice magazine. It did not make me supportive of the band’s actions, however it did shape my opinion on the church. I find it very surprising that there were no articles that were completely against the band’s actions.


http://www.dailyedge.ie/punk-band-get-shot-shoot-porn-1118326-Oct2013/

http://www.socialnewsdaily.com/17503/westboro-baptist-fingerbang-punk-band-films-porn-on-churchs-lawn/
http://noisey.vice.com/en_uk/blog/we-interviewed-the-band-that-shot-a-porno-outside-the-westboro-baptist-church

Leana Loide

1 comment:

  1. Wow. I can't believe I missed this story! I share your surprise that this didn't attract more negative attention, and agree that the general distaste for the Westbro Baptist Church and their own controversial protest-cum-publicity stunts is a likely factor. Did the unsympathetic target make for an inadequate victim? Without a victim to defend is it insufficiently outrageous to attract mainstream coverage? This points to the ambiguous contemporary media attitude to protest repertoires that use spectacle and controversy tactically. Where protest is deemed legitimate it struggles to gain attention, but tactics that are successful in gaining attention are covered in delegitimising terms.

    The question is, is this an appropriate example for me to use in the protest lecture??

    ReplyDelete

Please read previous comments before contributing to the discussion