sasha

it's the first run of the voice in SK? i would love to see BoA there

what a lovely news to start the week off

it's BTS who've been at the peak of their career every year since 2016 so whoever the hell really knows how the future will turn out for them. last cb made it hard to gauge their current level of hype because of their newish promo style, yt's changed algorithm, pandemic, ON being an undoubtedly lesser hit than BWL. Adele and BTS's promised 2020 releases are the most anticipated albums for me but i guess seeing whoever outsells whom gonna be a bit of added entertainment

no and thank you

we are barely in the 2nd Q so what's the point in counting dem chickens? those ggs didn't have their cmbs yet, neither BTS are finished with 2020. as for achievements and impact BTS did release the best selling album ever in SK(again) so whoever is going to be their competition would need to release a very solid hit indeed

no if they still hope to go on road with this material. no one would release DVD of the tour before the tour even began. doing a stream with never/rarely performed b-sided from past albums would make sense but it requires preparation from artists&production team and might be not worth the time in the end. so basically streaming for free already existing content is the easiest and most effective option

watched it yesterday and it's a very good movie yet its reputation made me expect more? i legit started to research on it later to see what went over my head. for 2019 Irishman is also something i want to watch but for that one i would need company lol

if suing is "not it" the alternative is to do nothing. BH is acting through appropriate channels that will take into account that they are a minor. apparently men in SK pay 800$ fine for soliciting prostitution so i'm sure the parents won't go bankrupt over this case and the kid will have a well needed run in with authorities. that is police and not school or parents with whom BH have no business interacting with.

it wasn't a joke, it was a prank to "raise awareness". no punchline or any humour at all, dark or otherwise. it was just dumb, the sort of 1st Apr thing you would expect to see from bad trolls on twitter and first i honestly thought that's what it was. so depends on a "joke" but with something like that i would be just upset they be so stupid

ON - why so fucking much auto tune idgi just why. i don't even have sensitive ears but bloody hell does it take some getting used to even the film didn't make it better. could have been a perfectly nice song but the vocal processing on it is abhorrent

so many producers/song-writers are coming out with credits rn lol, seems like 7 was outsourced to great extent. it's going to be interesting to listen to

for sure didn't expect it to be a compilation album but in retrospect 2 trailers should have clued me in. it's a quick wrap on a MOTS but i'm excited. bit wary after Zara Larsson, what with SIA being another power vocalist, but still it's exciting too. love her and it's amazing that they brought her in

holy shit! the blackmail part is rotten but it truly must feel liberating and she is in a good spot in life with a solid support system so congrats on coming out)

you say i have no logic in what i'm saying only to go and paint a picture of a "sociopath" Seungri who with the help of ingenuous k-pop marketing machine tricked us all. like it's all black and white and criminals and assholes of this world can't be genuinely likable or have a genuinely good qualities about them. you know it takes guts to do certain things authentically but you won't be caught dead calling a "victim" gutless. you know there is a sizeable % of idols who wouldn't enjoy even a modicum of commercial success in arts industry if they didn't go into k-pop but we ain't gonna discuss how aware of that idols themselves. yeah, i am the one with pink glasses on for saying there is a tendency to dehumanize and remove any will from humans behind the idols because it's convenient to fans and haters alike.

if you don't seem to understand what i'm saying(which seems to be the case for every user i replied to) how can you disagree with me. this thread is like mostly people making assumptions and addressing some points i didn't make and me trying to explain myself again and again. that's what i meant about the pity party. yes, the industry is horrible and manipulative. if that's what you want to talk about with each other go ahead. defense from u misconstruing my posts? saying acting out a wholly manufactured persona gets harder the more time you spend acting it out and nay impossible in long term and under constant pressure unless you have certain personality is not equating the whole phenomenon of public persona to being a sociopath. saying there are very real aspects, both negative and positive, of celebrities' personality you can observe based on say their career choices, work ethic etc. ain't saying they are 100% authentic cause i watched some show and now i know the "real" them. if anything is "real" or "authentic" in those industries it comes from individuals. what i'm fucking saying - their public persona doesn't have to be 100% authentic to give people acting it out the courtesy of not calling it m., it just has to not be 100% manufactured.

well i didn't spend time to try and be as logical and concise to explain why i don't like the word used in a certain way just to be drugged for which is essentially a refusal to through another pity party

what's there to address? that nobody actually owes YOU to show anything beyond what they want to show you? you like missing any point i'm trying to make. you kept bombarding this thread with western examples how images were reduced to "the ... one" image that is similar to idols being promoted for their e.g. aegyo. i said "well it's impossible to be the 2D character trait when there are hours of footage of you". you say what does it matter if it's edited and shows only what they want you to see. YES, it's what they want to show you but are they 3D characters or the 2D character trait in those BV, RUN etc.? then you say they are controlled and don't have freedom. YES, i agree. did they themselves wrote off their freedom to have the career they want? we seem to agree on that one too. is that shows an aspect of individual's personality when they make a choice to exchange their freedom to have something they want? yes or no? there are plenty of successful artists who have public relationships. there are successful artists who have ironclad resolve to not compromise their artistry. so that seems to be a yes on that one too. yes we're completely in agreement on "idols make the choice to have their image and creative freedom controlled and therefore both the music and their image isn't 100% authentic". the only thing i don't agree with is that m. can be easily used in relation to an individual. not because i think i know "real" them or they are 100% authentic or whatever but because it sounds like it's dehumanizing the actor at worst or shifting responsibilities at best. if you think it's a suitable word, then ok. i'm tired of this conversation

i think you don't actually read what i'm saying or just project some extreme naivety on my words. to answer my own question: i think idols are fully responsible for their compromised artistry. yes. because it's a choice they made in order to have the career they want.

once again, that was the clearest i can explain myself. "how far i go to receive the benefit" is an aspect of someone's character, as is "how far i go when i'm anonymous". and those generally are not the flattering aspects. i combine them together for that reason - they are unflattering and so people overlook them. the "controlled and manufactured" in idols' behaviour that we sense or see in retrospect as fake is the "how far am i willing to go" aspect of the individual's character. like your JLS idols are obliged not to date, once they were even contractually obliged not to. indeed you can't get clearer than that with "take responsibility to do that in order to receive this". and the only scenario where i use sociopath is when assumed that it's possible for human beings to embody the "marketed manufactured image" in much higher proportion to their own character regularly and continuously for hours. ----- ok, let's take your barista. if i see him for 5 min one morning and he is politeness embodied i think "well, it might have been a "manufactured" politeness" cause that 5 min is the only exposure to the barista i've had and we all know that corporation "Starbucks" requires of their employees to be 2D-polite in order to receive a paycheck. (is that the level of analysis you want me to stop at?) if i get my coffee there every workday and i observe the barista maintaining the same politeness, i never see him mess up an order and sometimes i witness him sidestep some difficult clients while maintaining his composure i might think "he's professional, responsible and has control over his emotions" which are empirically observed aspects of his work persona. indeed people usually won't think baristas are sociopaths or deceitful for doing their job - whether they are good or bad at it. what you keep telling me is there in OP. i likened an idol persona to our work personas already, so my assumption in the first place was that generally idols ain't some sociopaths and have your average balance of conscious-sincere when they act out in the world as public personas. except does your barista have cameras in his face during every minute of every shift? does he work under uniquely stressful conditions? is his background, his actions outside the work are subjects to public knowledge and judgement? we all would agree that the idols' environment is unique, won't we? they work within the industry that was manufactured in a certain way and under the public scrutiny. so maybe the criterion on what is regarded as "fake" and "deceitful" should be different than those we apply to baristas? i say i don't like m. used in relation to individual and people ask me "well you don't pretend to be the "funny one" on your job?" so why can't we dissociate that behaviour from an actor when it comes to idols. and like fine. do that. ----- here is the example of a more particular question that imo is rooted in those technicalities we're discussing: are idols responsible for their own compromised artistry?

we really do use same terms but assign them different meaning. persona is a psychological term, right? personas are parts of you, no bad connotations there. you sense something that "controlled and intended to be appealing" in someone's persona, circle it out and call it manufactured. i don't. i say it sounds dehumanizing. because the semantics imply dissociation of what is part of someone from that someone. it's not only the "real" that belongs to an individual, the "fake" also belongs to an individual. think of anonymity. people often think it's not "real" them when they act out anonymously. do idols think it's not "real" them when they act out as public personas? but it's them acting it out. nobody scooped out idol's "realness" and exchanged it to manufactured "fakeness", there is no extension "Personality trait assigned by company" that can be installed unbeknownst to all that's "real" - it's all willed by an individual. they know the rules, they take the responsibility to abide by them and they benefit - that's their persona in function. now. image. image is a marketing term. companies can manufacture an image of a public figure who is just starting out. but the more exposure individual gets, the more their public persona blends with that image. which leads back to the disassociation trouble. individual might have an antisocial personality disorder and continue to rely heavily on this market-born image, constructing the most efficient public persona for whatever purpose they have. in this case couldn't find a better word than m. to describe their persona. that's the best i can do to explain my thoughts. if that doesn't make sense than nothing will. and i suspect that you think i am being naive and want idols to be "real" but in my mind it's quite the opposite as i don't attribute their "fakeness" to anyone but them. i'm just not a fan of dissociating celebrity personas from human beings the belong to as it's the heart of all "they rich and fake anyway so they can take it"

because of the thread, where fans were agreeing with using m. in relation to individuals. not about what Dr Phil's was trying to do. i think it sounds dehumanizing, that's it. seems like it's common and others don't agree

didn't know that. almost all my knowledge on SG is from this vid lol and sorry, i missed your reply. your point was that being called m. is more of an extension from groups on individuals? like i said in OP i agree that manufacture metaphor fits group-companies well. the topic though was made because of that thread about the guy who wants to be Jimin, so from the start it was meant to be more about language and idols and us fans

i don't think that "personas are personas" needs to be repeated in every post, it's here in OP. and i don't strive to know anything beyond what they want to show me nor do i have delusions about knowing the "real" them - if it's something that needed to be spelled out. ok, what i'm getting rn is that you need to have freedom to do and say anything you want to not be called manufactured. i disagree. nowadays, esp. in k-pop where they have cameras in their faces hours on end, i don't feel it's accurate to call their personas that unless you think idols are sociopaths who won't say or do things unless it's confirmed to be the best thing to say or do by market research. let's talk the Spice Girls and BTS. i still hear people refer to the first as "baby spice" etc. but then take SJ who was the "quite&cold one" in debut era. it was his image for awhile because he was a "blank canvas" and that is "unknown in public sphere". did this image survive the endless exposure? no. does is it mean we know everything about him. also no. now we have the "WW handsome" that did somewhat stick. it's superficial but also it's "he is the handsome one" gag that was reinforced by BTS themselves. and yet is he referred by "WW handsome" by anyone? no. ok, now twt. they don't post whatever they want but it's them who post it, we don't have any doubt about that, right? they regularly and directly act out their personas, if that's still not enough to recognize that it's part of them more than it's a part of manufactured industry then idk.

i meant rookies are more of a blank canvas as perhaps were those artists before. what i wanted to say a) SNS is a direct line of communication and b) couple years in you have millions of things idols wrote with their own hand and said with their own mouths with literal days, weeks and months of footage of them on and behind the scene available. you can see where it caves when they avoid questions, avoid being associated with opposite sex etc. but those are particular things, no need to dispose of the whole personality all together.

define what is "trained to be a personality" or to be "assigned a personality"? cause to me it has the same energy as people thinking that what they do on the internet anonymously is not really them - wrong, whichever way you act out in the world IS you. except when you are anonymous you become free of inhibitions and when you are at work additional inhibitions are imposed on you. idols can be assigned roles that are somewhat personality traits - cute, cold etc. - but this is 2 dimensional to the whole 3D pic. i don't have the exact word in my lang for that but based on pure definitions it's more dehumanizing than anything to me. like i see in what sense people are using it but for me it rings wrong so i'm having a conversation about it lol i see, so it's common to use it in this way? also it's pre-SNS times when the public exposure was limited to traditional media. probably more similar to rookies' situation where you don't have much of a presence in the beginning, just press releases, what's-you-names and party tricks on variety shows. but couple years in idols usually grow into their skin