Rinella article.. CUT AND PASTED

[Irrelevant]

I have considered noting that but I have this nagging interest in maintaining access to the optics classifieds...

Who needs Cokslide when we have our own in-house used optics dealer @Schaaf?

 

[BenInMT]

I tried to join Rokslide but they screened me out because I failed the question about who really won the last presidential election.

 

[Foldem]

I see both sides and to me as an engineer here is how I wrestle with it in my brain.

Opportunity is definitely being reduced. Habitat loss, human population growth, animal populations contracting. Guys like Randy, Steve R are definitely bringing awareness and advocacy, which in theory "should" help on the supply side. The problem is that they, along with gohunt and all of the commercialized demands on the resource are greatly increasing the demand side. Which side are they having a bigger impact on? Are they flattening the curve on the supply destruction more than they are contributing to growth on the demand side?

Do you guys like your OTC and easy draw tags? Enjoy them while you can because without a doubt that is not sustainable long term, it WILL be going away someday. I fear all of the commercialization will only accelerate that timeline. I've consumed and contributed to the hunting media for years, but taking a step back to look at the situation I believe that Matt Rinella is much more forward thinking than the rest of the industry, and I think he's right.

 

[RobertD]

Guys like Randy, Steve R are definitely bringing awareness and advocacy, which in theory "should" help on the supply side. The problem is that they, along with gohunt and all of the commercialized demands on the resource are greatly increasing the demand side. Which side are they having a bigger impact on? Are they flattening the curve on the supply destruction more than they are contributing to growth on the demand side?

Great post.

I think the answer is no, but not because of any failings on their part. I also think we overestimate their impact - Randy and Steve are big names in the hunting media world. But their audience on social media isn't any bigger per se than any of the million wannabes on Instagram.

Their following is bigger and more dedicated but the audience is the same.

What I mean by this is that there is a core following for a guy like Randy where he retains real influence that he can use to persuade hunters in a more conservation-friendly direction.

But in the big Digital Wild West communication works differently, since everything has to be compressed and tailored to thrive in an algorithm, and you have this democratized platform that let's anyone who wants try their hand at the algorithm too. And everyone observes what works (grip n grins, how to draw) or in other words what the algorithm favors and content creators start bending towards those norms.

(Of course there are exceptions but this is mostly how it works.)

This is incredibly frustrating, too, because your first reaction is... "Oh, well why don't we use that power to model a new set of values for hunters, and turn THAT into the thing that people become obsessed with" but there isn't any way to do that as far as I can tell.

I've spent the last year or so thinking about it. But further... study, I guess, has led me to recognize that 1) You can't really top-down reorient a community's values if you are just one member or a small minority of members of that community without a tremendous amount of work and 2) it wouldn't even work if you could.

Because the actions we want to see out of hunters (stewardship, political advocacy, conservation) don't have any value as "social currency" in the face of mimetic desire (what drives the whole process) since you don't have something visually impactful to display after completing any of those actions.

This is because the whole process doesn't work like "I want to be a hunter." It's not even "I want to be seen as a hunter."

It's "I want people to see me the same way I see a person I see as a hunter." I want them to look at me like I look at Cam, in other words.

So sadly that's done by, well you all know what it looks like in practice. And you know it is that way because that's what the algorithm determined. It's like the theory of evolution.

This is a good place to segue into my idea about systems requiring/allowing folks to "earn" certain tags or opportunities but maybe I will save that for my next lecture. Anyone who read this far, I'm sorry for the ramble.

 

[OntarioHunter]

Ramble away! You made some sense and that's what counts. Thanks for thinking deeply.

 

[woods89]

I bailed after a couple debates about the intrinsic worth of bobcats to the outdoor experience and the legal process national monuments go through after presidential designation.

Pretty hard to take that place sersly when some dude from Florida is espousing the need to kill all bobcats because they are a carnivore, and one of the moderators is offering up mistaken facts on how multiple use planning works.

Did you ever scroll through the Covid threads over there?

I think the rule of thumb with Rokslide, is that 90% of the value comes from way less than 10% of the content. It's that stuff that keeps me engaged.

 

[JLS]

Did you ever scroll through the Covid threads over there?

Oh heavens no. I left prior to that. The hardcore bro culture with no semblance of conservation ethic wore me out.

 

[Redside]

It's been going on forever, just a different format. This pictograph on the Middle Fork Salmon was the original Greenhorn sheep story. It's got it all, likes, ram pics, even well endowed men Potentially a naked yoga chick too!

 

[Irrelevant]

Because the actions we want to see out of hunters (stewardship, political advocacy, conservation) don't have any value as "social currency" in the face of mimetic desire (what drives the whole process) since you don't have something visually impactful to display after completing any of those actions.

correct, but they do have moral currency, even if we're simply a bank of one. Much of the research around happiness points to "meaning" or "giving back" as a critical component. Instead of volunteering to coach basketball you can participate in some conservation political advocacy and feel like you're actually doing something for a greater cause.

Not everyone is going to follow through with that logic, but not every wants to be happy either.

 

[Big Fin]

Just off my biweekly call with our social media firm. We went over what was posted on IG the last three weeks and the results of each.

This information gives some credence to asking the question, that is not addressed in Matt Rinella's comments, "Is the hunting audience being truthful about their social media behavior when contrasted with their criticisms of social media?"

Q: Which of these 18 Instagram images do you think has the most engagement, which would include likes, shares, DMs, etc?

A: The upper right, with Dale and his elk in a classic "grip and grin."

So, one could ask, "Is the hunting audience driving what is being shown on social media or is the content creator driving the social media dynamic?"

As much as I think Matt is making some great points, there is also the realities of how audiences respond to different types of social media content. We continue to make the traditional "grip and grin" a very small part of our posts. In the case of what we reviewed today, 1 of 18 posts were the traditional G&G post and it was the post that got the most attention. Most every time we go through this exercise, the results are the same.

In spite of these consistent results, we will continue to make G&G a very small part of our content, with some months have more and some months having almost none. We have no contracts to monetize our social media, so none of what we post is driven by any monetary result. As part of our video content creation contracts we do share content from sponsors and help them with some of their promotions. I know for some people, their primary revenue source is social media posts and maybe that is what drives their social media content decisions. For us, not the case, but still an interesting fact to add to this discussion is what the audience continually engages in with the highest level of interest.

Just something more to think about in the context of this discussion about social media and hunting.

 

[TOGIE]

good work @SnowyMountaineer callin out the mods again. lolz

am i the only one that nearly passes out after reading all that white text on a black background for too long?

can barely see my hands rn

 

[Irrelevant]

Just off my biweekly call with our social media firm. We went over what was posted on IG the last three weeks and the results of each.

This information gives some credence to asking the question, that is not addressed in Matt Rinella's comments, "Is the hunting audience being truthful about their social media behavior when contrasted with their criticisms of social media?"

Q: Which of these 18 Instagram images do you think has the most engagement, which would include likes, shares, DMs, etc?

A: The upper right, with Dale and his elk in a classic "grip and grin."

So, one could ask, "Is the hunting audience driving what is being shown on social media or is the content creator driving the social media dynamic?"

As much as I think Matt is making some great points, there is also the realities of how audiences respond to different types of social media content. We continue to make the traditional "grip and grin" a very small part of our posts. In the case of what we reviewed today, 1 of 18 posts were the traditional G&G post and it was the post that got the most attention. Most every time we go through this exercise, the results are the same.

In spite of these consistent results, we will continue to make G&G a very small part of our content, with some months have more and some months having almost none. We have no contracts to monetize our social media, so none of what we post is driven by any monetary result. As part of our video content creation contracts we do share content from sponsors and help them with some of their promotions. I know for some people, their primary revenue source is social media posts and maybe that is what drives their social media content decisions. For us, not the case, but still an interesting fact to add to this discussion is what the audience continually engages in with the highest level of interest.

Just something more to think about in the context of this discussion about social media and hunting.


View attachment 204773

View attachment 204774

View attachment 204775

Thanks for contributing to this thread and this idea.

However, my initial response to your conclusion is... "Duh." I think one of the issues we've been talking about is the creation of content that is most "liked" not the content that should be most liked.

It's like offering your kids candy vs a salad. One is good for you, good for us as a demographic, and good for society at large, but the other tastes better so that's what they prefer.

Also, the lower left is hands down the best pic, and the migration route was the best post.

 

[RobertD]

Not everyone is going to follow through with that logic, but not every wants to be happy either.

Right and anyone that truly does probably left social media behind a long time ago, haha

So, one could ask, "Is the hunting audience driving what is being shown on social media or is the content creator driving the social media dynamic?

This is a simpler way to get at the point I was trying to get at earlier.

I think I may have made it sound like algorithms are autonomous and they're not, not really anyway. They're powered by audience input for sure.

I think I also wanted to allude more to the fact that the audience participates right back, so they don't just determine a trend via engagement but also via propagation through mimicry on their own pages.

It's a lot to think about!

 

[RobertD]

Thanks for contributing to this thread and this idea.

However, my initial response to your conclusion is... "Duh." I think one of the issues we've been talking about is the creation of content that is most "liked" not the content that should be most liked.

It's like offering your kids candy vs a salad. One is good for you, good for us as a demographic, and good for society at large, but the other tastes better so that's what they prefer.

Also, the lower left is hands down the best pic, and the migration route was the best post.

I wonder if the medium itself doesn't preclude the kind of messaging you refer to as the salad in your metaphor.

Like I think about a strategy game like Civ or Age of Empires, where certain strategies fail to others as a rule even if the two players are exactly equal in skill. Because mathematically, one is just superior to ther other per the game's rules.

Are platforms like Instagram just not conducive to salad, because candy is a better "strategy" per the "game's rules?"

 

[TOGIE]

Are platforms like Instagram just not conducive to salad, because candy is a better "strategy" per the "game's rules?"

i really think it's just the people (the audience) that aren't conducive to salad. if the "salad" tasted like candy (or looked like boobs) then voila

the game's rules just figure out what is candy in this case.

so yes. candy is the better strategy, but not inherently because of the rules. because of the people.

as i think you've aptly alluded to already.

 

[Big Fin]

That leads us to the point that in all digital media, the algorithm uses the viewers behavior/choices to drive more of what the viewer sees. So, the viewer, via the algorithm is building the funnel that determines their viewing options.

 

[mtmiller]

^^^^^^^^^
I love to hear people bitch about social media platforms and ignorant how it got that way for them.

 

[TOGIE]

That leads us to the point that in all digital media, the algorithm uses the viewers behavior/choices to drive more of what the viewer sees. So, the viewer, via the algorithm is building the funnel that determines their viewing options.

which i think is why the pessimist in me says we're screwed. we have to rely on the people, the viewers, the masses to change it for the better. fat chance it would seem if that's our hope. that is unless social media forces the change or altogether disappears the problem in this specific context will persist and likely worsen.

only God can redeem the real root of the problem, frankly.

i am, however, reminded of a quote in a documentary i just watched with my brother last night:

"...and sometimes you feel like you are f*%*ed, but when you say you are actually f*%*ed, you are only like about 45% f*%*ed.”

 

[hank4elk]

I gave up on RS, MM and 24 when I found HT. No insta or FB. So my perspective is this informed:

Hunting and outdoor sports have long been the antithesis of competition to me. I'm no longer baffled or incensed when people post live updates or record their exploits and publish them. But I feel like those posters are missing out on the best things about being outdoors. Time with friends, time alone, time with nature which for me surpasses all the rest, heals the broken places, reconnects us with the authentic world. Time away from work, current events, devices, traffic, noise, civilization. Time to think, to feel. space and time to just be.

Videos and photos can't fully capture a hunt, a powder run, making love. They can only represent the most obvious aspects, pruriently and poorly.

There was absolutely racism, slob hunting, poaching, swollen egos, toxic personalities, feudal lord landowners, scofflaw trespassers. Some wardens were arrogant, others were professional. When you killed the reward was success, meat in the freezer, handshakes, perhaps a mention @ the family Christmas. There was Boone and Crockett, Pope and Young for those counting inches. Both groups said their highest goal was conservation of game species. However, trophy hunting monetized game and gave more visibility to those who seek to elevate themselves by their hunting "accomplishments."

I wasn't raised with likes, emojis, gifs, icons; they are little cartoons, not reality.

All those moments and emotions I treasure are still available, still sought by many through their lives outdoors. Now social (and all) media distract from those deeply personal experiences, hard to identify and express. The bruh mentality that more is better and biggest is best elevates the outcome above the accomplishing, the grip and grin above the blood, sweat and tears. Images have replaced experiences and stories. "The media is the message," McLuhan wrote in 1964, when hunting media was bragging boards @ local sports stores and articles in a few magazines. Now images are reality, video convicts or exonerates in court, "It didn't happen without pics." We've stopped trusting our own eyes, hearts and minds.

Our role models stopped modeling or we stopped admiring; yielding that authority to counted clicks by faceless strangers, and charlatan influencers with the ethics of a carnival huckster who preaches Sundays as a side hustle. With no live connection between influencer and viewer the video clip is now the expectation of greenhorns. How can these hordes catch a glimpse of the richness of the moments of a blown stalk? How can they come to value anything short of killing the Spider Bull? What are the odds they'll discover the passion of pursuit separate from the dirt nap, when brown is down, DRT? Without real mentors showing real examples by really hunting w them, odds are zero. I wanted to learn all that more than anything, I would have never figured it out without my dad and his friends breaking trail. Without quality mentorship of hunters, the fall woods will continue becoming the video games that used to represent them.

“Civilization has so cluttered this elemental man-earth relationship with gadgets and middlemen that awareness of it is growing dim. We fancy that industry supports us, forgetting what supports industry.” ― Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There

Ditto

 

[Irrelevant]

So we have content that that doesn't represent our culture or our experiences combined with technology that plays on our innate flaws to slowly shrink our echo chamber.

Sweet, glad we sorted that out.