Road to Tempe 2015: Selfie-Gate

In response to last week’s post, Fake Selfie Sunday, people are continuing to question Ragen via her Facebook page about our “trained research”. People like Edward, who simply asked what’s up with all the selfie drama.

Screen Shot 2015-09-09 at 4.45.50 AM

Ragen has created a convenient straw man argument by changing the issue and responding to something completely different. Nobody cares that she removed the GPS coordinates from her images. In fact, this blog has encouraged her to be more vigilant about not sharing sensitive personal information online on several occasions (yet she continues to do so with wanton abandon). The issue isn’t that Ragen removed the GPS coordinates, it’s that many of her “training selfies” were taken within minutes of one another. The proof is in the image metadata, which she didn’t manage to strip properly. And that is how we know she lied again.

It would take Ragen a minimal amount of effort to disprove our assertions about her fake selfies. Instead she deflects the conversation and talks about “haters”, “graphic threats of violence”, and “death threats”. I shouldn’t have to say this, but if someone is threatening to kill you you, go to the police, not your Facebook wall.

Ragen has made multiple allegations against us. We don’t care. Nor will we defend baseless accusations backed by no evidence whatsoever. We are simply calling Ragen out for her bullshit and lies. She calls that “hate”. We call it telling the truth.

8 thoughts on “Road to Tempe 2015: Selfie-Gate

  1. Our of curiosity, how would someone defend against those selfies? Is there some way explanation for it that she’s missing or is it pretty much just a “sucks to be you, you lied” kinda thing?


    • She could post the unaltered original photos (or go through a neutral third party). She could post them with the metadata redacted to only remove the GPS coordinates. She could post any other photos taken in sequence (who takes one selfie?).

      The reason Ragen can’t disprove our claims is because they’re accurate, so her only option is to midirect. The method she used to remove the metadata (“remove properties and personal information” in Windows) is extremely crude. We know she specifically chose to redact “date taken” as well as the GPS latitude and longitude, presumably because she believed it would hide the fact some of the selfies were taken minutes apart. Unfortunately for her, it cannot specifically remove the GPS timing data we used to determine when they were taken. It also left all the other metadata intact, which was used to independently verify the timing with other methods.


  2. Okay! Gotcha. That explanation probably helped a few people like me who were all “Er…how is she supposed to “prove” this…?” I didn’t disbelieve your data or what you had found, I was merely baffled by how she was supposed to correct you guys if she was indeed, telling the truth. The very fact that she specifically chose to take out “date taken” is kinda telling, honestly. There’s no earthly reason to remove the date taken from a photo that I can think of except to ensure that you can claim to have taken it whenever you wish and supposedly, no one can disprove you.

    On the other hand, should I ever choose to take selfies and post them on the internet (which I don’t because honestly, I just don’t find myself super duper fascinating like that most days) I’ll have a better idea of how to strip data from them that actually should be stripped. Something that I had never considered before. So you also just made someone aware of how to use the internet more safety with your blog. Two for one!

    Also, good usage of the straw man argument. Most people actually have no idea how to correctly utilize that concept. But what she’s doing (pretending someone is upset about something they are not and then formatting her answers to explain how they are wrong to be upset) is precisely what a straw man argument does. Also known as the “Lookie Here!” argument in debate. Where you set out an argument that no one ever made, systematically dismantle it and then proclaim yourself the “winner” even though you have never answered their original claims. It’s bad form and an even more telling indicator that she’s got nothing valid to say in response.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s