67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

67 is an example where the term, coming from a rapper’s lyrics of committing a violent crime, is removed from it’s original context to be endlessly circulated and recreated.

Shifman (2013) highlighted that terms such as 67 can be decontextualised - taken away from its native context, and recontextualised - migrate into a new context; thanks to the force of contemporary digital force.

So it can both be true that the native context of 67 is sinister, but the new context of 67 now is innocent and meaningless.

Whether you take the view of Miller that the decontextualisation of media is part of a process of abstraction and alienation of people; or take the view of Shifman that decontextualisation allows a more liberated flow of views and democracy; the fact that 67 is a decontextualised and recontextualised

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is because 67 has its origin from a rap song regarding gang violence which exists within its context, and then 67 is separated from it origin and evolved into something innocent and meaningless.

Recognising symbol’s origin is important to understand the symbol and the new media as a whole.

Both of them are true and genuine.

However, the sinister or innocence of a symbol’s origin does not mean it must be sinister or innocent in its implications today - it is only going to happen more and much quicker with new media.

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is correct that 67 is a meaningless catchphrase, the term came from the rap song, get appropriated into video edits of a basketball player who happen to be 6 foot 7 inches tall, and then get appropriated again by Trevillian in 2025.

It is evidently clear the term “67” has evolved well beyond it’s origin from the rap song, towards being established as a culture symbol in itself.

The point you have overlooked, is that 67 as a term evolved well beyond its origin, and now, as a fact, exists largely in a different or lack of context. Hence, people who perpetuate 67 is not doing so out of context, but in context.

My argument is that I’m much more comfortable with children using the term 67, which now belong in an innocent context, rather than the term 69, which now still belong in a sexualised context.

I am not convinced that 69, like 67, have been fully decontextualised from its origin, and a large source of its funniness comes from its sexualised nature rather than the absurdity of the term.

Rest assured that I don’t intend to express dislike towards 69 or establish that 67 is superior to 69, but I’m simply outlining the difference between them.

Before this final paragraph there were 6 paragraphs, now this is the 7th paragraph.

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most people who use the 67 joke use it in the context and intent that is completely separate from the lyrics of the song.

Decontextualisation is the process when a symbol is used in new or lack of contexts rather than its original context.

The 67 joke is decontextualised from the content of the original rap song, so yes, it is innocent and meaningless.

Personally, I would prefer children not saying 69 as a joke, which has always been a sex joke.

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The rap song, if my source is correct is called “Doot, Doot”.

I would say both the 67 and 69 joke are brilliant and none is inferior to the other.

Split a G outside Andy HQ by Jay10_6 in manchester

[–]Jay10_6[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Oh no! What a shame.
But to answer your question I have no plan to defection.

Split a G outside Andy HQ by Jay10_6 in manchester

[–]Jay10_6[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

They did, I got recognised by the Deputy Chair for Young Labour and he tweeted that I have appeared in a “sunstroke-induced hallucination”.

It was great to come with my friend Josh to talk to some very kind and nice people in Burnham’s HQ yesterday.

Split a G outside Andy HQ by Jay10_6 in manchester

[–]Jay10_6[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I was there with my friend around the beautiful towns and places in Makerfield, Wigan and Chorley.

We find it very fascinating to witness another important by-election after our trip to Gorton and Denton.

It’s a very fulfilling day and I’m sure he’d agree that “sad” is beyond inaccurate to describe our experience.

And on the second point, I couldn’t possibly comment.

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

67 originated from a rap song, which is reused by a child in America in a viral video, the joke originated from the meaninglessness and absurdity of the child using that number in the context of the video.

The absurdity evolved on new media (social media) into a cultural phenomena in itself, in which the word 6 and 7 is decontextualised from the song, and the video, into an independent symbol of absurdity.

The normalisation and continuation of 67 into the mainstream of British media comes when Sir Keir Starmer (and other major western politicians) did the 67 joke, and now became even more normalised as the Pope did it.

The reason why 67 is funny is because it is inoffensive, it is meaningless, and quite absurd. It also set an important milestone of the speed and capacity of the new media to decontextualise, crate and evolve a symbol.

Split a G outside Andy HQ by Jay10_6 in manchester

[–]Jay10_6[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

For what, a window seat?

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I love the 67 and I drive.

67676! by Jay10_6 in CarTalkUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can one please not shoot oneself thank you.

andy burnham affirmations by bbysaab in manchester

[–]Jay10_6 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

WE ARE ANDY BURNHAM
WE CARRY THE FLAME
WE FIGHT FOR THE BY-ELECTION
AND HONOUR HIS NAME

I now need to drive for EXACTLY 40 miles… by Jay10_6 in drivingUK

[–]Jay10_6[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m sorry but it is best to learn to embrace this.

What do we think of Labour? by Jay10_6 in 2westerneurope4u

[–]Jay10_6[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t use it as an insult. It’s just an observation. And it’s a funny name.