millie sevEN

Alex Cooper calls out Alix Earle in new video.

for sofiadreamsof who likes journalism sm i just wanna start with, the fact that you speak in a academic/professional way doesn’t immediately make information credible. you claim this article is research based but in reality is written in order to discredit the boycott side. you start explaining how you wrote it based on research but then you say that the research is “private lists” “ot6 supporters” and “whistleblowers.” problem here, these are all “sources” that are pre filtered and already aligned with previous interpretations. you claim to have done research on both sides but the whole article is discrediting and attacking the boycott side. “hunger for attention” unprofessional and biased, if you had done proper research you’d be listing good and bad things from both sides, in reality you didn’t analyze the antiboycott side equally. you cant go around pretending to be giving good information and research-based articles when all of then are made to attack the boycott side. i think what got me is your attempt to pretend you’re a professional, when you can’t even write like one by heavily showing on which side you are. also the article isn’t based on valid real information, but mostly on your speculations. tracking our followers and usernames, speculations don’t count as facts btw. you’re assuming “they’ve lost but won’t admit it” and “they can no longer back down” when there’s no quote or data that support your claims. there’s so much imbalance in most of your articles in which you barely analyze the anti-boycott side, and continuously pick and choose whatever you want from the boycott side to fit it into YOUR own narrative. “they don’t have articulated demands” “the only clear demand is that they want heeseung back” and this an example of incomplete representation! here’s where you either didn’t research properly or you decided to ignore this part so we would look as the bad guys. we’ve stated multiple times that heeseung isn’t our only goal/reason for this boycott and that our main goal is for enhypen to have creative freedom and better treatment. we also have a whole headline together with our tags that mostly explains what we want. also, contradiction at its finest: you claim that the boycott side is small group, however you state that we’re highly organized and have a whole movement, trending every day. you claim we’re a small minority while at the same time attributing us high levels of coordination. once again, you have no way of proving how this is measured. you’re using professional language (partially) while using selective info, twisting facts which makes it look like you KNOW what you’re talking about and like this is a factual argument but in reality the whole article is lacking. you heavily attack and paint the boycotters as the bad side without analyzing the antiboycott side properly. you’re favoring their side over anything and where i want to get with this is that you can’t act professional on an article while actively being biased.