Unfortunately it got that nickname for just being a terrible story.
Unfortunately it got that nickname for just being a terrible story.
6 comments
The internet and the current social media fad have kicked the rumour mill into overdrive, it's interesting to watch how organizations respond to rumours.
What isn't reported on are the organizations who play it old school and ignore rumours. On the other hand social media lets organizations be aware of and respond to rumours and PR disasters more quickly, which is valuable. I wonder which strategy will win.
I suspect (and hope) that people will learn to ignore the complainers, that not every criticism is worth catering to. Right now I think organizations are scared of rumours and people's influence over social media so they're overreacting to every little criticism. I imagine PR depts also find ever more bitching the harder they look, and feel the need to deal with every one.
Very interesting times ahead, that's for sure.
The internet and the current social media fad have kicked the rumour mill into overdrive, it's interesting to watch how organizations respond to rumours.
What isn't reported on are the organizations who play it old school and ignore rumours. On the other hand social media lets organizations be aware of and respond to rumours and PR disasters more quickly, which is valuable. I wonder which strategy will win.
I suspect (and hope) that people will learn to ignore the complainers, that not every criticism is worth catering to. Right now I think organizations are scared of rumours and people's influence over social media so they're overreacting to every little criticism. I imagine PR depts also find ever more bitching the harder they look, and feel the need to deal with every one.
Very interesting times ahead, that's for sure.
What isn't reported on are the organizations who play it old school and ignore rumours.
Unfortunately that's not interesting enough news to report, so only the PR disasters are reported because that gets more clicks.
I do wonder what the future of social media really will be. It is a very interesting human experiment. People or companies who make a joke or do something even slightly controversial can be hammered with negativity and attacks by thousands of users. More and more effort has gone into trying to forcibly identify who real people are behind the social media accounts (like Facebook demanding pictures of your ID, forced linking of phone numbers to accounts, building shadow profiles for people based on content other people post about their friends/family, etc), and part of that effort was in hopes to "get higher quality comments" - like when youtube wanted to force your real name next to everything. Turns out, that really didn't stop many people from saying terrible things on the internet.
>What isn't reported on are the organizations who play it old school and ignore rumours.
Unfortunately that's not interesting enough news to report, so only the PR disasters are reported because that gets more clicks.
I do wonder what the future of social media really will be. It is a very interesting human experiment. People or companies who make a joke or do something even slightly controversial can be hammered with negativity and attacks by thousands of users. More and more effort has gone into trying to forcibly identify who real people are behind the social media accounts (like Facebook demanding pictures of your ID, forced linking of phone numbers to accounts, building shadow profiles for people based on content other people post about their friends/family, etc), and part of that effort was in hopes to "get higher quality comments" - like when youtube wanted to force your real name next to everything. Turns out, that really didn't stop many people from saying terrible things on the internet.
As much as I dislike negativity, hate, and nonconstructive participation, it is important to me that people are allowed to say those things. And I think anonymity is very important on the internet; the proposals for real names and "internet licenses" are worrying. Anonymity brings out people's worst, yes, but it's useful to gauge societal undercurrents that would never be discussed in polite company. I once heard grafitti described the same way: as an unfiltered view into the issues plaguing a city and worrying its citizens. Suppressing the symptom prevents treating the cause.
I do wonder what the future of social media really will be. It is a very interesting human experiment. People or companies who make a joke or do something even slightly controversial can be hammered with negativity and attacks by thousands of users.
There's an interesting psychological effect here which confounds things: for some segment of the population, a company doing controversial things is attractive, and caving to social pressure from a few (thousands out of millions) very unattractive. Just like how spineless or insecure people are unattractive.
As much as I dislike negativity, hate, and nonconstructive participation, it is important to me that people are *allowed* to say those things. And I think anonymity is very important on the internet; the proposals for real names and "internet licenses" are worrying. Anonymity brings out people's worst, yes, but it's useful to gauge societal undercurrents that would never be discussed in polite company. I once heard grafitti described the same way: as an unfiltered view into the issues plaguing a city and worrying its citizens. Suppressing the symptom prevents treating the cause.
>I do wonder what the future of social media really will be. It is a very interesting human experiment. People or companies who make a joke or do something even slightly controversial can be hammered with negativity and attacks by thousands of users.
There's an interesting psychological effect here which confounds things: for some segment of the population, a company doing controversial things is attractive, and caving to social pressure from a few (thousands out of millions) very unattractive. Just like how spineless or insecure people are unattractive.
it is important to me that people are allowed to say those things
That is the single most important thing, and of course the reason I don't use many websites (FB, Google, Twitter, Reddit, etc.). Anonymity is really equally as important, and both uncensored and unmonitored discussions are pretty much a thing of the past.
>it is important to me that people are allowed to say those things
That is the single most important thing, and of course the reason I don't use many websites (FB, Google, Twitter, Reddit, etc.). Anonymity is really equally as important, and both uncensored and unmonitored discussions are pretty much a thing of the past.
Jobes' Autobiography is known as "The Widow Maker" among sensitivity readers.