Thinking about this some more: if they're trying to do an isolated sit-down with you, where they can selectively-edit your words, (suggestive of a hit piece), there's a couple of things you could do to fuck with them.

- Be filmed somewhere public with a fluid background. Coffee shop. Park. Nightclub. Plant some friends to move around in the background. If people are changing position between shots, editing will be far more apparent.

- Have a girl hanging off you. Tell her beforehand to stroke your chest, raise and lower her sunglasses, push her hair back over her ears and back etc. If they try to edit, continuity will be a motherfucker. They'll try to pull in tight on you: that's why you make sure she's touching you affectionately. Those damn hands will make their lives a nightmare.

You have to do it. There's no question about it.

Be very careful about not accepting their frame though. Very little can be produced from an on-the-spot videotaped session out on the town. Every slip up will be them spinning you as a failure or "creep".

Quote: (02-21-2014 04:13 AM)torontokid Wrote:  

Awesome man... first Roosh getting TV appearances... then Neil selling his script to Hollywood... Tuthmosis with his two viral articles, and now this.

RVF is really going places. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. Who knew a few years ago that all this would happen?

Now all we need is for BB to write his first best-selling novel and the circle is fucking complete.

Best advice so far has been the Ryan Halliday recommendation. He's Tucker Max's guy, and.Tucker has fared much better than Mystery, Style, and Janka.

Do it, but get some media training. These stories only go two ways, he's a villain preying on women, or a clown that you can't believe.

WIA

Quote: (02-21-2014 10:23 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Best advice so far has been the Ryan Halliday recommendation. He's Tucker Max's guy, and.Tucker has fared much better than Mystery, Style, and Janka.

Do it, but get some media training. These stories only go two ways, he's a villain preying on women, or a clown that you can't believe.

WIA

QFT

Quote: (02-21-2014 10:23 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Best advice so far has been the Ryan Halliday recommendation. He's Tucker Max's guy, and.Tucker has fared much better than Mystery, Style, and Janka.

Do it, but get some media training. These stories only go two ways, he's a villain preying on women, or a clown that you can't believe.

WIA

Relevant article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanholiday/...planation/

Quote:Quote:

If you don’t know, you should. Because media manipulation currently shapes everything you read, hear and watch online. Everything.

In the old days, we only had a few threats to fear when it came to media manipulation: the government propagandist and the hustling publicist. They were serious threats, but vigilance worked as a clear and simple defense. They were the exceptions rather than the rule—they exploited the fact that the media was trusted and reliable. Today, with our blog and web driven media cycle, nothing can escape exaggeration, distortion, fabrication and simplification.

Sweet, looking forward to updates. Good luck.

Good luck Christian

Good luck!

Wald

I work with them sometimes. Hope I'm on that shoot.

Thanks for the feedback RVFers, much appreciated.

If I were to offer advice, I'd say be yourself, but a more subdued version of yourself. Try to keep the language clean, don't be too hyper, just be as professional as possible. They are looking for you to embarrass yourself, but if you remain the consummate professional, it would bode much better for any appearances as anything too extreme is what they will use on any promotional pieces.

I work in an office that has been the victim of "hit pieces" from the media. Generally in our experience, 1/4 of them have been shady asshole reporters trying to get a name for themselves and 3/4 of them have been ok. I don't think they will get too aggressive here considering the timeslot and reach of the program (its not primetime). To bring up the manosphere and ROK would probably get edited out since it will confuse the viewer. You can certainly do it, but anything outside the scope of what they want to report on (likely the "Playboy Lifestyle" and PUA training) will be deleted.

All the best with this. Definitely the right decision to do it.

Quote: (02-21-2014 05:02 AM)Cyr Wrote:  

Excited for you man. Should be epic. On a side note, MikeCF was saying its better to be successful than be liked. Whether thats true or not, this should hit both. The people who matter (guys who could really benefit from your books/ advice) will like you, and anyone who doesnt wasnt worth it anyway (likely to be a feminist or extreme white knight).

Self-respect is the measure of true success. Integrity above all else and everything else will fall into place. The way to test that is whether or not you can look yourself in the mirror at the end of each day.

Quote: (02-21-2014 03:56 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

Quote: (02-21-2014 05:02 AM)Cyr Wrote:  

Excited for you man. Should be epic. On a side note, MikeCF was saying its better to be successful than be liked. Whether thats true or not, this should hit both. The people who matter (guys who could really benefit from your books/ advice) will like you, and anyone who doesnt wasnt worth it anyway (likely to be a feminist or extreme white knight).

Self-respect is the measure of true success. Integrity above all else and everything else will fall into place. The way to test that is whether or not you can look yourself in the mirror at the end of each day.

That has nothing to do with what Mike said.

Quote: (02-21-2014 03:58 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

Quote: (02-21-2014 03:56 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

Quote: (02-21-2014 05:02 AM)Cyr Wrote:  

Excited for you man. Should be epic. On a side note, MikeCF was saying its better to be successful than be liked. Whether thats true or not, this should hit both. The people who matter (guys who could really benefit from your books/ advice) will like you, and anyone who doesnt wasnt worth it anyway (likely to be a feminist or extreme white knight).

Self-respect is the measure of true success. Integrity above all else and everything else will fall into place. The way to test that is whether or not you can look yourself in the mirror at the end of each day.

That has nothing to do with what Mike said.

I didn't say it did, nor did I quote MikeCF. I was offering up a piece of general wisdom.

Quote: (02-21-2014 04:01 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

I didn't say it did, nor did I quote MikeCF. I was offering up a piece of general wisdom.

Ah, gotcha. You quoted someone who was talking about Mike's post so that is why the disconnect happened.

I agree, you have to keep your integrity no matter what. No amount of success will help you like yourself more.

I do disagree that everything will magically fall into place. We are surrounded by opportunities. It is up to us to take advantage of those opportunities. Most people are too scared or too focused on bullshit to take advantage of what is around them.

It is sort of like people saying someone got rich because he was lucky. Sure, if they were a lottery winner but most successful people make themselves rich by hard work and perseverance which, in the end, made the opportunities that people think was luck.

Good luck mate.. great opportunity

good luck man make us proud!

I'm kinda late to the party, but the one thing about investigative journalism these days is that there is no investigative journalism: fact-finding, objectivity, or even journalism have all been thrown out the window to get the ratings at any cost to justify high fees to advertisers. They start with the story--some sensation or drama--already completed. Interviews, filmed scenes, etc. are just window dressing for the preconceived presentation.

This is going to put your game and frame to the ultimate test. I'm sure you'll be fine though. Use them for all it's worth.

Good luck brother, I reckon you should have a Skype convo with AnonymousBosch. He knows his stuff when it comes to the media - as evidenced by his posts on this thread (and others).

Quote: (02-22-2014 02:13 PM)Alpha_Romeo Wrote:  

I'm kinda late to the party, but the one thing about investigative journalism these days is that there is no investigative journalism: fact-finding, objectivity, or even journalism have all been thrown out the window to get the ratings at any cost to justify high fees to advertisers. They start with the story--some sensation or drama--already completed. Interviews, filmed scenes, etc. are just window dressing for the preconceived presentation.

Was reading an business article about dying vocational fields this morning, and Journalism is one of the big ones. The summary was that investigative journalism has died - they literally can't find many graduates interested in doing it. What they are interested in: generating quick hits (i.e. celebrity gossip / pearl clutching outrage / tabloid bullshit) or content marketing.

Teedub: I'm flattered by the suggestion, but what McQueen is facing requires expert, not amateur, help. I fully back the idea of him paying for a professional PR groomer whose career is based around knowing how the American media works. Might be expensive, but if he kills this, the brand expansion would more than cover the cost.

Personally I wouldn't have done it but best of luck mate. As someone said earlier make sure to keep your own recording and do it on your terms. If they don't, high tail it because they will murder you publicly. Also this should be base attention at best to get your name out there. If you want to appeal to the younger demographic(college students or dudes in their early 20s like me). The Internet is the best place still. If shit doesn't work out keep doing the podcasts and keep being part of the viral shit on Twitter. Best of luck however it may turn out. Also it may not be good to mention RvF because then we'll have feminist trolls non stop for a month or two until they take part in the next fad.

Ok, thinking about this some more, I'm very suspicious of their motivation.

As a base thought, women make up something like 70%-76% of communication and journalism majors. Advertising also skews to women.

As I mentioned earlier, modern media is skewing tabloid because there's a lack of interest in becoming investigative reporters. I'd mentioned this months ago re: The Business Insider article on the Manosphere. The modern millennial journalist has already drawn their conclusion before writing any 'investigative' story, because true research takes time and effort; coming to their own conclusion would require observation, consideration and original thought; and their minds aren't open to the possibility that they don't already know everything there is to know on any subject and that their morality isn't superior to anyone else's.

So why exactly do they want to do a story on you?

Not putting you down here, my man, but, realistically:

- Your radio show has varied between 4,000 - 9,000 listeners, which is damn impressive so quickly, but is it MSM impressive?

- The Amazon Book Ranking for 'Playboy' is something like #622,000. Again, this isn't MSM notable. So it's odd a major network wants to do a 'story on you'.

So, the potential here is for paranoia. A basic rule of thumb I have is: "never imagine a conspiracy is behind something that could be equally-explained as incompetence." It could honestly be that, which would lead to these two best case scenarios:

- "Let's do a story on a 'Hangover' experience!" (Tabloid 'visual' possibilities: sexy nightclub babes, conspicuous consumption, strippers etc). Google brings them to you, because they're too lazy to do non-computer research. They send out an email or quick phone call, then play Candy Crush or Facebook for the rest of the hour's allotted 'research time'. Meet the girls for a liquid lunch!

- Some chick was thinking about that Ryan Gosling movie and wondered who the guys who teach other guys game are, probably sexually-fantasising about them. Realised it might make a good tabloid story. Google brings them to you, once again, research is too hard.

The Paranoid Thinking:

Darker Scenario:

- "This Red Pill thing is A Thing, isn't it? Can we do something on that?" Expect to get mocked.

Worst Case Scenario:

- ROK has pissed off a lot of people in the last 12 months. Mainly low-resilient upper-middle-class women, who basically are the female population at university, and are the pool from which journalism and communications are drawn. Women are ultra-competitive, and 'punishing' one of us would be a huge notch in their belt. I see that as a bigger story.

In this scenario, it's an 'ambush', and the story is about the 'dark undercurrent of misogyny and bullying rife on the internet'. Words from your articles will be thrown back at you - expect them to pick on the sexual degradation. Prepare for this possible angle beforehand so you aren't visibly flustered. Think about the most likely ambush questions given ROK and your history writing for them so you know exactly what to say. You will need to be the most charming motherfucker alive.

Keep this in mind:

Quote:Quote:

From 'The Devil's Dictionary', by Ambrose Bierce:
"APOLOGIZE, v.i.: To lay the foundation for a future offence."

Like I said, it might never happen. They could simply be aiming for a superficial story, and were that lazy.

I think it's worth getting them on your side though. If it really is a puff piece, and they're serious about watching you teach game to a student, say you think it would be interesting to take a novice. "How about I take one or two of the guys from your office so you can better understand the transformation?" Think the time spent with the guys as forming a bond with someone in the enemy camp.

You could even suggest before shots of the guys, and then bring them out live after a makeover / game schooling in front of some girls from the office, who could whoop and gasp etc. TV loves that kind of trite shit, and you're stealthily getting the women on your side as well, because they get to objectify men as a group, which they love doing.

Like I said. Could go either way. The media are lower than dogs to me. A relative was murdered 15 years ago, whilst a friend lost her daughter to a drunk driver about 18 years ago. A couple of times a year someone in both our families gets a call from our local media to comment on or be interviewed about anything that falls under a current murder or drunk driving accident, or involved laws or sentencing. They never fucking forget. No-one has ever commented, yet we all still get them calling: it's the definition of insanity.