Mothman Librarian

Let’s talk about all the sneaky photos and videos people are taking of Connor and Hudson.

Take a moment to imagine how they might be feeling about the invasion of their privacy and the violation of their basic humanity.

Not getting it? Recall how you’ve been reacting to all the stories about women unknowingly being filmed with meta glasses.

Still not getting it? Think about how you reacted to Hudson being hounded and filmed against his will by those paps in Paris.

Are you getting it now? How invasive it is? How wrong it is? How dangerous it could be?

Connor and Hudson deserve to be able to walk down the street without unknowingly being filmed or having their photos taken.

So, if you see them out and about, treat them like the humans they are.

If you want to say hi, fine, go for it, politely.

Maybe even ask for a picture, but be respectful if they say no.

And stop taking pics of them without their permission.

I don't think any of it is ok. The public street pictures help identify their neighbourhood - where they are staying, which gym they go to and lead to increasingly intrusive, dangerous and disturbing stalking like Connor being touched without consent and followed to his private residence or Hudson being photographed inside the private gym clearly without his knowledge or consent.

If you call yourself a fan of either or both of them, please don't spread these non-consensual photos and videos and call out the stalkers instead of encouraging their behaviour.

They will be working in Toronto for months, and the situation is already spiralling badly with stalkers reportedly flying in to harass them. They will be forced into lockdown, it will impact their mental health being hunted for pics, and it will burden the production to have to increase security.

Emmy Martin's article is decent coverage for those completely unfamiliar with ao3 and Fanfiction spaces as a whole, even while it is entirely interested in analyzing this expierence distinctly through the Heated Rivaly fandom (probably for the name recognition and current popularity)

It feels frustrating to read this article because its "neutrality" is fixated on not discussing the ethical questions raised from this expirence-both about fandom "witch hunt" and mob mentality (both things are referred to in the article without further explanation of those terms in the context they are used) AND completely disregarding the complexity of addressing AI use in fandom.

The article ends the discussion of @heatedrivaltyai 's report with discrediting their intent in publishing because "the popularity of the texts shouldn't matter" because the texts mentioned are popular within the fandom. And while I think as a stand alone piont this is relevant, It does disregard the reports discussion of intent (requesting ai use disclosures and providing readers informed concent when chooseing fics), choice of fic highlights, author's backgrounds in the discussion of ai use before the reports publishing.

This article does not address Relevant and Timely pionts of discussion for tjis report specifically:

Authors not reporting ai use or outright lying when readers asked for disclosure before the report. Martin spends a notable amount of time discussing OpalApparition and this authors work's relevance to this report while not addressing the explicit lying this author did about their ai use before they stepped away from writing.

The harassment and ongoing use of "witch hunt" in discussions of ai use in fanfiction.

Why, especially in discussions of fans not wanting ai and asking authors about their use of generative AI, do we see the term witch hunt keep appearing? Especially in the case of authors who are adamant they do not use it, only to be shown to have used it undisclosed even after these requests? It is a charged term that this author does not interrogate in their writing and people's use of it in quotes here in the article.

There is a relevant discussion sround how harassment IS in fact getting worse in fandom spaces (at least more explicitly) and navigating the "appropriateness' of using ai can be fandom specific and incredibly socially nuanced and it NEEDs to be apoached with empathy and curiosity, and how that largely is not happening.

I have said it before but this report the article is based on should be examined through the lens of how undisclosed ai use has erroded trust in fandom- especially newer fandoms (like heated rivalry) that are establishing their social ettiquette and expectations post 2020 fandom boom.

TLDR; this article has some relevant discussion but I feel incrediblely frustrated by mainstream reporting on fandom acting like readers asking for appropriate disclosure of ai use, violation of trust, and lack of informed consent when it comes to topics in ai are all crazy fan girlies emotionally melting down and are just half passed harassing fan creators for just using ai. This author is soft on details when it comes to reporting on the nondisclosure of ai use people where hurt angry and frustrated by. The author is also detailed and ensured they emphasized harrasment, and quotes that referred to "ai witch hunts" throughout the article in a way i feel leads readers to assume the response to ai use report was disproportional.

If you want to talk about toxic fan behaviour, do it. If you want to talk about ai use in fandom, fucking fo it. But half assing BOTH discussion is incredibly frustrating, Especially in an article that's clickbait title says "the heated rivalry fandom meltdown was epic".

Read the report, read the article; have your own opinion on it all.