b3tSwappers leavetAlivetfpf2s2c08 SWAPPERS LEAVE - PLEASE! f1c09 - the word, a remote control of reactions? - c10 by Alive/Digital c09In case you haven't already guessed from the title, this article relates to another by me which appeared in issue #24 of c10Generation c09called: f4"Swappers Leave - NOW!" f1It seemed to cause a little ripple, and quite a few guys felt the need to express their disagreement with me in various mags. Namely c10Darkhawkc09, c10Damonc09, c10Nemes!s c09and c10Kalfc09 (you can find Kalf's in this very issue of Gen). Not to mention all the wonderful comments I received from disgruntled Sceners on the Net. Thanks, I really appreciated all the abuse guys! Well, I was going to write a boring direct-responce to my friend Darkhawk's article published in c10ShowTime #5c09, but I really have nothing more to add or change about my opinion on Swappers. So to save covering old ground from my original article, I'd like to view it all from a different perspective and perhaps reveal the truth behind everyone's disgust towards my article. I'm not going to draw any conclusions here, merely point you in the general direction of my thinking, maybe you'll agree, maybe you wont. In fact, maybe this is one of those articles where there's nothing at all to agree or disagree on, merely food for thought. Anyway, I don't know - read on and decide for yourselves. f2c08 WORD POWER! f1c09You don't have to be a literary expert to realise that words - along with language - are an extremely powerful tool. Depending on which you choose, words can provoke an array of designed responses from your reader. From laughter, to tears of pure frustration. From thoughts of love and peace, to those of aggressive hate and war. But more importantly, certain f2words have the power to make people stop and think. f1A word isn't simply just a word. They are almost living entities with a life all of their own. Like humans they have their own identities and personalities and - just like humans - some are more agreeable to the masses than others. Every single word has its own particular meaning, conjures its own particular images and effects its reader in its own particular way. This dynamic nature of words is what makes them so powerful, and sometimes dangerous. Of course, words are only an abstract concept and cannot in anyway hurt you physically. However, the mental effect in some cases can be just as devastating as a full-on assault from c10Mike Tyson c09- especially if the recipient is of a weak, susceptable nature. Select the right words, for the right people, at the right moment in time and a writer could very well start c10World War 3c09! Writers - especially those in the diskmag Scene - must choose their words very carefully. Not only in order to create the right and appropriate atmosphere but also, it would seem, to avoid "offending" or provoking any particular sub-section. This is something you must consider if your aim is to stay on the right-side of the masses. You can say almost anything, however adverse, about almost anyone on the Scene - as long as you select your words with caution. That's the key. If you don't choose your words with care, if you dare to be bold and state your opinion with force, you could well run the risk of people actually considering your opinion. And if that opinion just happens to conflict with their's; that is when the trouble begins! To quote our resident editor, c10Kalfc09: f4"[...] in the end the guy that the article is about will always get angry, because some people cannot accept the reality and the opinions of other people." f1Indeed, and if the words you use to voice your opinion are somewhat raw it makes your opinion even more real, and that's what some people detest more than anything, but why? Is it because these raw words force them to face the truth? Maybe. f2c08 SWAPPERS LEAVE - NOW! BUT WHAT REALLY GOT YOU? f1c09I think this was what people disliked most about my f4"Swappers Leave - NOW!" f1article. They didn't like the way my opinion of Swappers came across. Its tone didn't conform with today's subtle and objective style of Scene journalism, and f2that f1was what they found so objectionable. It wasn't f2what f1I actually said that rattled the cages of Sceners like c10DarkHawkc09, c10Kalfc09, c10DV$c09, c10Damon and c10Bluntc09, it was the f2way f1I said it and the words I chose that really got to them. I don't blame them for being affected, I probably would have been too if I were a Swapper. The only thing I do blame people for is not being able to see the purpose of its style. I wanted to provoke readers into actively thinking about what I had to say, so I made a point of using forceful language. I don't believe you can bring about active thought through passive opinions when it comes to Scene-based topics - especially if your article revolves around a tired subject like Swappers - they need an edge. My aim was simply to force people into thinking about something most Sceners would usually dismiss without a second thought. Judging by the various reply articles, hate-emails and outraged comments I got from people on IRC - my plan seems to have worked! I wonder, would I have got any response if the article was objective and passive? I doubt it. Would anyone have even thought twice about my words? No. There, simply by choosing the right - some would say wrong - words, I have achieved what I set out to do: people have actually bothered to take note of a subject most thought was long gone-and-burried. Great! Or is it? Are there any negative consequences for editors when they adopt this brutal word-use approach? Of course there are. Will you make enemies of people that find it hard to swallow brutal truth? Yes. Will you loss all hope of chart success? Well - in my case - considering roughly 70% of all votesheets are filled by Swappers, of course. Will you get accused of using negative, oversized Spandimerda by people purposely missing your underline intentions? Sure you will. I'm not saying the upfront approach will win you any votes or "friends" on the Scene and people searching for ulteria motives will always be quick of the mark to misinterpret your intentions as simple egotism, but at least you'll be able to take comfort in the fact that some people have actually listened to you - whether they agree or not - and surely that's the most important thing for any editor. Am I right? Maybe, or perhaps making friends and appeasing Sceners with underhand articles to win votes is more important. Who knows.