Paul O'Flaherty: Recent Episodes
None
I get it. X/Twitter is evil. Meta is bad. Zuckerberg is clueless about his userbase. Threads is overly censored. Mastadon is too difficult for regular users to grasp. Bluesky is Twitter without Elon but nobody is there.
I wrote less than a month ago, spurred by the latest wave of Twitter refugees to other platforms, about how most people have forgotten that social media is supposed to be about being social, about being part of a community and having fun. That the features of the platform don’t matter as long as it adequately supports the growth and enjoyment of the community you’re involved with.
Unfortunately the shiny syndrome is real, and logging into Threads presents me with little more than a stream full of people talking about how awesome Bluesky is and how it has X, Y, or Z feature and it’s Twitter 1.0 again.
“I’m moving”, they proclaim. Along with “I’m thinking of moving”, “Should I move?”, and other such nonsensical statements that are both a declaration of intent and an attempt at engagement bait.
F.Y.I. I have a Bluesky account. It’s not revolutionary, it’s not “all that”, but I like it. It’s just getting headlines right now because it’s gone from 9 to 14.5 million users during the US election.
All of these people are trying to recreate a sense of community that they had elsewhere, and will never be able to do so, because despite being driven by ideological problems with any given platform, unless your entire community moves to the new platform, and doesn’t fragment in the process, it will never be the same.
And that’s the problem. The shiny syndrome is mostly driven by whatever ideological reason prompted us to the leave a platform in the first place.
We left Twitter because it’s a hateful shithole and, well, Musk. Remember when this happened with Facebook as well in the late 2010’s, with people deactivating their personal accounts and vowing to be anywhere but Facebook?
We tried to rebuild and find the same sense of community on Threads (or wherever), to follow the same people. But they’re not all there, and probably never will be. Looking at you Stephen King.
Yet, instead of recognizing that things feel different because our community doesn’t exist on the new platform in the same way, we look at feature parity, and other trivial things, and latch on to them as something to blame, or chase from platform to platform as we attempt to regain the glory days.
Bluesky is young, it’s Twitter 1.0, it’s got near feature parity, it hasn’t got advertising, it’s not run by that arsehole oligarch, and it’s got a small user base, so we can start fresh. We can build again, free from the ideological issues stemming from big tech, Meta, Musk and the like.
Except it will last all of about 10 minutes.
You won’t recapture the feeling of community you had, and if you do, it will be fleeting. The platform will grow, users will flood in, forcing the need for monetization, which coupled with large amounts of people devolving into complete dicks due to lack of accountability, and the need to pay the bills to keep the lights on, will mean more moderation.
And just like that your shiny platform on a hill will become another sprawling hive of scum and villainy. Or it will collapse under its own weight and the inability to monetize sufficiently without alienating its user base.
Either way, you’ll get disillusioned, and much like the Meerkats in those ads, start eyeballing the next set of shiny objects that may temporarily fit your ideological needs, but never truly fulfill your sense of community.
So what do we do? How can we build a community that satisfies our ideological needs, and allows us to build a community we can enjoy.
As I see it, there are only three solutions.
Before talking about the solutions let’s get on the same page first. It’s a given that you’re never going to be able to recapture what you’ve had before. No matter how great, or bad, the next thing is, it will always be different. Come to terms with that.
Ready? Let’s continue.
The first is the easiest solution. Suck it up.
If you think for more than a few seconds about it, you’ll find an ideological reason not to be on every platform, so just find the community you want to be part of and engage with them where they are. Don’t worry about the platform features, because as a whole, the community doesn’t or they wouldn’t be there.
The second is a little harder, but still relatively easy: be everywhere. Follow the people and creators you like on whatever platform they’re on, that presents things in a way that feels good to you. Are they only on Instagram? Fine, follow them there. Someone else you like is on Bluesky? Follow them there. Engage with people on all platforms. You’ll eventually find communities that you like and fall into usage patterns that suit you.
The third solution is the most difficult, but also the most rewarding: Build your own platform that nobody can take away from you.
Having your own blog on your own domain is a great start for this. You can publish your own content (video / images / music/ written word etc..) without fear of moderation or being buried under a deluge of other users posts.
Your followers can engage with you anywhere you choose to publish a link to your content. You can contribute content that is more than a proverbial soundbite to the communities you engage with no matter where that community calls home.
People can engage with you on your site, and you can engage with and reach them in so many ways that social networks simply don’t afford you control over or opportunity to do.
You’ll need to start thinking about social networks differently. You need to start seeing them as fleeting tools that can be used to build community around a place that you control. I’ve been harping on about this for decades:
With your own domain you can have your own space on the web, where you are in control and you own everything. Nobody can take it away, nobody can change the rules, it’s your identity and your place.
I wrote that more than 15 years ago when the big thing was Facebook vanity URLs.
Your own site gives you the ultimate control, and when you combine plugins with modern content management systems the possibilities are endless. The OG Dave Winer’s thoughts on bringing back blog rolls via live updating OPML files that you can subscribe to which create an ad hoc social network is exciting.
Finally, I want to give you a bonus fourth option: Go touch grass and hang out with real friends in real life. Social networks are very much inauthentic, bad for your mental health and full of garbage, influencers and scammers with their own agenda, and is on life support in many senses.
Your life would be so much better just reading the news in an RSS reader and discussing it with real people over a cup of coffee.
AI (artificial intelligence) is biased because we are. It’s trained on data created by, curated by, and endorsed by us people, and unfortunately, no matter our best intentions, we are all biased in one way or another.
We can’t help it. We can, and should, work to fix our biases, but Avenue Q was right, everyone’s a little bit racist, sexist, (insert bias here)ist.
Elizabeth Laraki ran into this problem when she saw a promo picture of herself that appeared to have been altered to make it a bit more sexy: opening buttons and showing a peek of bra that wasn’t in the headshot she’d sent to the conference organizers.
He quickly reports back that the woman running their social media used a cropped square image from their website. She needed it to be more vertical, so she used an AI expand image tool to make the photo taller. AI invented the bottom part of the image (in which it believed that women’s shirts should be unbuttoned further, with some tension around the buttons, and revealing a little hint of something underneath).
A 2023 post from IBM lists 10 different reasons why AI might display or develop biases. They are:
Algorithm bias, Cognitive bias, Confirmation bias, Exclusion bias, Measurement bias, Out-group homogeneity bias, Prejudice bias, Recall bias, Sample/Selection bias, and finally Stereotyping bias.
Given all of these potential ways that AI can be biased and influenced from inception, it’s amazing that we have any trust in it at all.
Cognitive bias and confirmation bias are very interesting to me, because some of it is caused by the inputs of us human meat sacks when using the AI.
Every AI I have used so far, whether it’s ChatGPT, Copilot, Google Gemini or something else, has a little thumbs up and a little thumbs down at the end of every response.
It’s the AI’s way of getting quick training data. Was it a good response, or was it a poor response? Smash that ~~subscribe~~ thumbs up button!
Those little thumbs are the vehicle for confirmation or, to my mind, endorsement bias. If I keep thumbing up the answers that I like, rather than the factually correct answers, then the algorithm will be “trained” that the answers I thumb up are likely the most correct.
As a single user, my thumbing up of responses may have a negligible impact, as it would be overruled by the large numbers of other users thumbing up the “correct” responses.
But… when it comes to AI image or video generation, we forget the one important factor:
For every person that creates a banner for their blog post, fakes an image of a politician doing something nice, or generates an image of a kitten frolicking with unicorns, there are legions of horny teenagers and basement dwelling adults spending countless hours, running countless iterations of prompts trying to get the AI to output even the merest hint of a breast or genitalia.
If you don’t believe me (you fool) just hop on over to somewhere like 4Chan (but first make sure you have a throwaway browser with a damn good adblocker installed) and quickly survey the boards. I’m not responsible for what you see, or for the therapy you’ll need afterwards – you have been warned.
Hundreds of people sharing AI generated porn of every type and kind imaginable, and sharing prompts with each other as they all try to refine and coax the algorithms to output a virtual version of the real stuff they can find elsewhere for free. The mind boggles, and I need bleach for my brain.
If what they are doing doesn’t count as confirmation training, I’m not sure what does. And they are simply one sub-faction of the one-handed wanker tribe, which has factions across hundreds of sites, and legions more that never share or post online.
My point is this: if AI is flawed from the start, from the very data we enter into it (let’s scrape the web shall we?), flawed by our implementation, flawed by poor data labeling, and further flawed and influenced by our interactions with it, why the heck do people even trust it, or have the expectation that things will get better?
It’s a miracle her shirt came out looking like a shirt at all.
Elon has apparently indulged his desire to see what everyone is saying behind his back by making it so that X/Twitter users can see everyone’s posts, even if they’ve blocked them, which has resulted in an exodus of users to other platforms. There’s no word on how it has impacted Threads, but Bluesky has jumped up to number 2 on the U.S. app store.
This has had zero real impact on my life, and I normally wouldn’t give a crap about it, except that it has resulted in a large uptick in the gatekeepers discussing why one platform (read that as the platform they prefer) is better than the others. Threads is best because it’s not X. Mastadon is federated (Feder what? Isn’t he a tennis player?). Bluesky has it’s own protocol….
It’s kind of pissing me off. It’s not that these people haven’t always been there doing the exact same thing, but right now there are so very many of them, and guess what, most users DON’T CARE!
Most users hang out on a platform for only 2 reasons – community and habit. It really is that simple. They follow the people they want to follow, and interact with the community they love.
If the people they follow, and the community they love move elsewhere, they’ll move too. Heck they might even split their time across more than one place, because no single platform is the best place for every community.
So many people have forgotten what the “social” part of social media is about, and instead come off as miserable gatekeeping assholes.
You know the kind of people I’m on about: they’re the same people who go to the bar and only talk about how much better this bar is than other bars, discussing who is at the other bars, and completely forgetting that they are at the bar with people who want to have fun with their friends.
We don’t care WHERE we are. We’re here to have drinks and hang out with our friends and meet new people, not to be so obsessed with everywhere else that we drive people away.
Yeah, there’s a reason I’m just heading off to the bathroom every time you come talk to me.
It’s funny how this post started. I recently posted an image to my Threads account of my purple Xbox controller and the mouse that I use, calling them my “weapons of choice for work and play.”
Innocently enough, somebody asked me how my mouse (a Microsoft Surface Mobile Mouse) compares to the Microsoft Arc, and I explained how the Arc just didn’t feel right in my hand. My reply led to them saying that I must have “arthritis or something” else wrong with my hand, and then limiting the replies so that I couldn’t respond to them.
I’m not sure what to think of this or what to call this behaviour.
I find myself wondering just how insecure someone must be to make a statement like that, which in itself is relatively benign, but then feel the need to make sure that I can’t reply to them. I guess hearing that the product they like isn’t universally adored is more than their tiny psyche can handle.
Well, let me tell you something buddy! I don’t have arthritis or anything else wrong with my nearly 46-year-old hands. These ambidextrous wanking machines function absolutely perfectly and that’s one of the things I like about the Microsoft Mobile Mouse – it’s perfect for ambidextrous people, good for lefties and righties. So no matter which hand you want to use while you’re spanking the monkey, this mouse will perform. Now there’s an endorsement!
On a more serious note, this interaction got me thinking about how we give users the ability to control speech online while offering them anonymity.
In this case, Threads gives users the ability to saunter anonymously onto another person’s post, drop an insult, a comment, or some insane theory, then limit replies so the owner of the thread can’t reply. This leaves the poster with only two options: hide the comment for everyone, or block the user. Hardly ideal or conducive to rich discourse.
It’s 2024 and I find myself asking should anyone be anonymous on social media anymore? And why do we give people the anonymity and the tools to be assholes online?
I’ve been around since the beginning, since before social media as we know it was even a thing. I watched the Arab Spring unfold, Occupy Wall Street occupy the collective attention of the world, the #MeToo movement, and so many other cultural events organized, promoted and propped up via social media.
I’ve heard all the arguments for anonymity on social media. From protecting minorities, to protecting the identities of people with abusive spouses and partners, to protecting people from governments interfering with their free speech and speaking to abuses of power, and more.
They’re all really good, really compelling, really valid arguments.
But are they really?
I would argue that in 2024, anonymity on social media causes more harm than any good it might do.
Let’s not kid ourselves here; people’s lives are so interconnected online that almost anyone with an hour to spare and half decent Googling skills can track down and know almost everything about anyone.
Don’t believe me? Tell any married woman that you think her spouse is cheating on her and see how fast she digs up the details of every account their spouse has ever interacted with, anonymous or not.
Now imagine what a Government can do with a court order (and a lot of the time they don’t even need that: a request from law enforcement will do) that compels social media companies to hand over user data. We’re not even talking about employing any effort.
So, while social media anonymity might present a veneer of security, it’s really just that, a thin flaky veneer. Scratch the top layer at all, and it crumbles.
Which brings me back to why allowing anonymity on social media causes more harm than good.
When I wrote about forced anonymity online way back in March of 2011, I came to the conclusion that compelling everyone to operate under their real name would create a new kind of anonymity characterized by being hidden under the veil of social conformity, and that would be a bad thing.
I was wrong.
Social conformity is the thing that makes societies work. Yes, you have outliers, and you have rebels, and they can push the system forward and make changes that make things better, but overall, society works because we all agree to laws, rules, modes of behavior, and other things that are acceptable to us as a collective.
The collective citizenry must live, work, play, and thrive. And in the real world, in real society, anonymity (with a few exceptions) is generally seen as unacceptable, as the antithesis of civilized behavior. It’s “cloak and dagger” shit, and that never ends well.
Today, the only people that get anything from anonymity on social media are the assholes, the racists, the homophobes, the trans haters, the bigots – the collective anal leakage of humanity, if you get my drift.
They get a sense of empowerment, because they grab that anonymity and hold it close to them like a nazi flag security blanket that makes them feel enabled, entitled, and safe to spout their hate and vitriol.
Worse, their collective feeling of empowerment trickles upward (one of the few times they’ll admit anything does) emboldening the Musks, Tates, Rowlings and other hatemongers, which then creates an increasingly dangerous cycle as their fame encourages even more anonymous cretins.
It’s the perceived anonymity that platforms the circle jerk of hatred and grants it a veneer of legitimacy.
And what foul acts hasn’t social media encouraged or enabled? How many has it helped radicalize? How many has it bullied? How many has it killed? How many will it kill?
Let’s not kid ourselves here. The extremism, the hatred that is championed by X/Shitter, Truth Social, and others, and that leaks into every platform, isn’t going away anytime soon. It’s not a fad, it’s not a bug, it’s a feature of anonymity, and it will remain so as long as assholes can congregate, secure in their feeling that nobody knows who they are under their pointy virtual KKK wizard hats.
There’s a reason your mother called you by your full name when you were in trouble. It made certain that you knew you were about to be held accountable for your behavior, and you dreaded it. The announcement of your full name also served the double purpose of putting any siblings within earshot on notice that said behavior was unacceptable and would not be tolerated.
The shock of being called out like that was usually worse than the actual punishment, as was the inevitable ribbing by your siblings.
Maybe it’s time to pull the hood off social media users and call all of its citizens by their full name.
A while back I wrote a post defending companies who detect the use of adblockers to prevent people who are using them from viewing content. This stemmed from a privacy complaint made to the Irish Police – An Garda Siochána – that detecting adblockers was spyware.
Over on YouTube, user Hikari Unmei, left me a very lengthy and well-thought-out post, and I’d like to address some of their points in the comment.
I’ll quote Hikari here, but for the sake of brevity, it’s not the entire comment. The full text is available on the YouTube episode:
…but I think you miss the point of the complain. The problem with ads is that they track our activity to personalize them and have a better chance to get a sale. The downside is that all that information about us is (was) not regulated, and US companies keep them indefinitely, while in the EU we have the Right To Be Forgotten, and countries like mine even force any business to delete all personal information after 6 months unless the person consents to give it for longer. [Sic]
Take off the tracking part, and the EU will leave you alone. As a person who happens to be European but have lived in another continent too, I’m not being unreasonable by putting my privacy over your entertainment being free. If that’s the issue, ask US companies to cut off services in the EU, or at least develop two separate business models, one for US citizens who prefeer to pay in privacy and risk security breaches, and one for EU citizens who don’t like companies keeping tabs on our every last movement. [Sic]
Where do I begin?
As a fellow European, born and raised in Ireland, I fully agree with the need and desire for privacy. Everyone’s privacy and data is sacred and should be protected at all costs. I have ridiculously European sensibilities on this, but I’m also a realist…
As someone who has created content in one form or another for the better part of two and a half decades, it’s painfully obvious that the economics of content creation and distribution are being overlooked, or willfully ignored, in the discussion around adblockers. Privacy is paramount, but “goodwill” won’t pay content creators.
Dumb, untargeted advertising won’t generate enough revenue to pay content creators . Dumb, untargeted ads don’t make money, because advertisers need to be sure they are reaching the right audience. I’d be surprised if you could even sell such advertising en masse anymore unless it’s local advertising in a very local niche – e.g. a store in your small town advertising on a website aimed specifically at your small town.
The money has to come from somewhere. A balance has to be struck, because the situation isn’t black or white, or either/or.
Adblockers affect far more than just the ability to monetize content, they affect the process of content creation. They typically don’t just block ads, but block the data and analytics collection that lets me know what type of user is watching the content I create.
If I know nothing about who is listening to my podcast, watching my videos, or reading my posts, how can I effectively create content for them? Are they men or women? Should I be writing in British English or American English? Do more women than men watch after the one minute 30 second mark?
There is a balance to be struck between privacy and monetization.
Business models that allow a content creator to get paid that aren’t a subscription model (either directly or through something like Patreon), or an advertising model, don’t exist. Not at the level where they are effective on a large scale.
If there are any, I would love to hear about them, because that person should be a billionaire for fixing this problem.
The only way to distribute content for end users at scale, with almost zero privacy infringements, is not to offer the content to anyone who doesn’t pay upfront, and that hurts everyone. Nobody gets free stuff, advertisers and small businesses lose out, content creators lose discoverability on platforms, and they incur prohibitive distribution costs if they are discovered after trying to do it without the resources of an established platform.
We are not that far removed from the days when content creators would incur massive bandwidth bills from their hosts when something blew up. Third party platforms like YouTube insulate creators from such risk. In 2009, when YouTube was only a minuscule fraction of the size it is today, it cost $700 million to run the platform, and it’s just one platform.
In 2023 YouTube served 2.7 Billion users but had only 100 million paying users. In other words, for every user that is willing to pay, or can afford to pay for ad-free content, there are 26 that cannot or will not, yet still consume the content. And those paying users are not just getting ad-free YouTube, they are getting YouTube Music and other freebies for the price. The incentive to subscribe is far more than just watching creator content without enduring ads for Chewy.
If YouTube (which is just one of many creator platforms) was to disappear tomorrow, what chance would a small self-hosted creator have given the myriad costs and lack of efficiencies of scale? YouTube is just one of many, many platforms.
And don’t get me started on paywalls – even if I give away access to my content for free, paywalls essentially make me undiscoverable without incurring large marketing and labor costs. This makes my content inaccessible to many and reduces my ability to create content.
If you tell me that I can’t detect if someone is accessing my content, on my site, in a manner which I deem to be theft, that I have to allow it to happen or damage my own discoverability and ability to earn income? No thanks. I’ll just stop creating because the ROI isn’t there.
Take this post as an example. So far, I have written about 1300 words this morning – and that took me a few hours. Someone (my long-suffering girlfriend with her English degree) will edit it, because I suck at typing and spelling. Tomorrow, I will spend time creating graphics for it using a service I pay for, recording it with the equipment I bought, editing it with the software I paid for, uploading it to the website I pay for, to the podcast host I pay for, then spend time distributing it and promoting it, etm.
I only do it for reputation, but many people make a living from it. Many rely on what they earn to pay their bills, and employ teams of people to create the content you watch for “free.”
If content creators can’t get paid because they can’t make money, even though their content is good, most of them will stop creating content.
We have to find balance. We have to give a little to get a little. We just have to find the right balance, and turning off the tap at either end solves nothing.
Let’s get one thing straight here, accessing content that requires you to pay for it without doing so is theft. Plain and simple.
There are essentially two ways to pay for content online – watch the ad or pay for a subscription. If you fail to do either, then you are robbing the creator and the platform… unless, like me, the content creator specifically puts out their content for free – free as in beer!
Yes, privacy matters and is extremely important. It’s important to me both as a creator and as a consumer. Consenting to having your data used is vitally important in online tracking, but you as a consumer aren’t the only one with a right to consent.
Consent in creator content is just like sexual consent.
The content I create is like my genitals, and I have every right to stop you looking at them or touching them. If you enter my home, or see me outside, and try to touch my genitals, I have every right to know who you are, and to take every means to stop you from touching them if you don’t agree to my conditions that allow you to do so.
Keep your thieving hands of my nuts, they’re pay-to-play.
There is an adage: you should never meet your heroes. You don’t have to worry about that, because there are no heroes anymore. Social media killed them.
I’m not talking about Batman, Wonder Woman, Luke Skywalker, or any other fictional character – that’s a whole other debate. I’m also not referring to genuine, bona fide heroes like firefighters, or people who selflessly help others, though they are amazing and deserve our gratitude.
I’m talking about hero figures. The figures we look up to, the figures we aspire to be like. The figures who make us ask ourselves: “what would they do or say in this situation?”
I’m referring to the people old farts like me looked up to when we were kids, teens, and even into adulthood.
Young people don’t have hero figures anymore, and neither do I. Mine all died, or self-destructed, and have never been replaced.
They can’t be replaced, and for the same reason young people don’t have hero figures – the internet won’t allow them to exist.
Let’s be clear here with respect to younger generations, and those of us who are older, internet savvy and perhaps naively young at heart: following, liking, and subscribing do not a hero make.
Hero figures, the colossuses of music, screen, stage, science, writing, intellectualism, all had one thing in common – a mystique born of us knowing almost nothing about their private lives.
For the most part, outside of what was said in interviews, or shown in magazine exposés, most of what we knew about these figures came from their public appearances and what they put out into the world, much of which was crafted to cultivate the image they wanted the world to have of them.
Ask any publicist from the 80’s: not every hotel room that was smashed up by a “hair band” was the result of a drug- and alcohol-fueled orgy.
Today, it’s a different story. Everything that anybody with the tiniest amount of celebrity does is reported, scrutinized, reworded, misquoted, taken out of context, and flat-out lied about. Even things that were at one time innocent are dug up, taken out of context, and all of this used for the benefit of others to fuel agendas (both good and bad), to generate rage-bait, clickbait and advertising dollars, or simply so someone with an inferiority complex can feel superior for a few minutes.
The worst part is we do it to ourselves. Obviously I’m not a celebrity, but who knows, maybe someday I’ll be lucky enough to make a living by becoming a meme. Hawk Tuah.
You might even be one too. But until then, we will keep posting every inane thought we have online, every picture, every meal, every party, every drink…
We’ll comment, endorse, like, share, and argue on every political, social, medical, and scientific post we come across, regardless of our actual level of knowledge and giving no deference to the notion that some asshole will dig the post up in 10 years to get us fired from our jobs. Not aligning with corporate image and all that.
Even worse, we’ll start podcasts, and freed from the constraints of a writers’ room, tempering opinions, and a script, we’ll pull the curtain back revealing the man behind the wizard. Everyone gets to see the hairy balls hanging below the too short housecoat.
I’m not saying that’s how one of my hero figures fell from grace, but I’m not saying it isn’t abso-fucking-lutley how it happened either.
You can’t have heroes when every flaw, every word, every action is scrutinized and dissected by a multitude of people, for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which are jealousy, greed, and personal agendas.
But that’s what we’ll do, because we want to feel attached, connected, seen, and loved.
We’ll do it despite the fact that we shun personal relationships in favor of the screen in our hands. Because we won’t talk to people at coffee shops, or on the train, or at the store. We’ll do it because we live in our bubbles with our earbuds in at the grocery store, and anybody who wants to interact with us is weird and creepy.
Yet we still want to be loved, and seen, and recognized.
We want our existence to be validated and we want to connect to something bigger than ourselves. So we reach out the only way we can – online.
Some will do it just for the connection, others for attention. Some will have other motives as well, but without a guiding principle, without someone to look up to, to emulate, to aspire to be like, to aspire to be even better than, what happens?
I’ll tell you: we become the heroes of our own stories. Sounds great right: be your own hero?
Sure does, but villains are also the heroes of their own stories.
Let that sink in for a moment. Villains are the heroes of their own stories.
In the desert of the real, and the realm of fiction, there is very little that separates villains from heroes.
What makes a hero? What makes a good person a good person? When you get down to brass tacks, what separates good from evil?
In stories, the difference between the hero and the villain is typically guidance – whether it’s friends, real connections to people, mentors, a positive influential figure to look up to and gauge themselves against – what the hero has the villain lacks.
Those very same things usually prevent people, real and fictional, from becoming the villain at inflection points.
We spend more time isolated, seeing the world through the lens of an increasingly polarized, greedy, and cynical internet, desperate to make our mark, but ultimately only hastening our own downfall.
The media, particularly social media, more than put the final nail in the coffin of heroes.
They’re not coming back, not on the internet at least.
Seven years ago, I wrote about the thin veneer of social media. That was a different life, a different time, a different world, a different me. Yet, while many things have changed, “fake it until you make it” is still the most damaging and counterproductive advice you can give someone.
Now more than ever, being your true self is the only path to happiness, and the only way to maintain a semblance of sanity in this increasingly sanitized, polarized, soft-censored, self-censored, self-centered, and curated online world.
Very little is real online.
Your friends’ feeds are curated to make their lives appear the way they think they should look to those on the outside, which is ironic, as that judgment is based on the falsehood of others doing exactly the same thing.
The opinions and language used by the content creators you follow are often tempered and self-censored in order to ensure they can be monetized and be brand-friendly. What they want to say is scrutinized, dissected, run through a boil wash cycle, and then reassembled, because they fear the rage of sexually frustrated keyboard warriors.
It’s sad that creatives have to fear the vocal minority, the people with so little joy in their own lives that reporting content that doesn’t fit exactly into their pathetically small worldview is the dopamine hit in the midst of pent up rage and loneliness that pushes them over the edge, and they sit in their own ejaculate hunting for the next person to argue with, to fuel the cycle.
It’s a terrible way to live, and I don’t mean the keyboard Karens and Chads, although their lives appear devoid of meaning.
I’m referring to the rest of us who bend to their incessant moaning, to those of us who carefully curate the outside view of our personal worlds to appeal to what we think others want to see.
I’m talking about the FOMO, the anxiety, the depression, the inadequacy that we inflict upon ourselves because we follow influencers whose entire lives are carefully crafted lies, assuming they are even real people and not entirely AI generated, and celebrities who have people to craft that lie for them.
And do you know what it gets us, besides huge therapy bills or really bad ~~drinking habits~~ coping mechanisms? I’ll tell you – sweet fuck all of any use.
But it does harm, and not just the aforementioned mental anguish, and stripping of your own happiness.
When nobody is authentic, society suffers. Proper discussion is impeded, and the vocal minority of extremists and scared, pity-worthy, low IQ, self-flagellating Francis’s get to dictate the conversation because the rest of us are too concerned with our image. This has negative knock-on effects all the way up and down the societal chain. But you’re a clever cookie and know that already, so let’s leave discussing it for another post.
Let’s get back to talking about you:
A lack of authenticity prevents others from relating to and bonding with you, online and off.
Sorry potential new friend, but you can’t come around for coffee because my living room never looks like it did that one time I took a picture of it when it was perfect – you know, before we actually lived in it daily. Also, I don’t look like my pictures because filters don’t work in real life and I can’t get you to only see me from above at a 35 degree angle and never look below my shoulders.
And I don’t really speak like that, because I’m deathly afraid of offending anyone accidentally. I actually curse like a drunk sailor realizing he blew all of his cash on the first night of shore leave. Where’s my rum?
If we were all a little more authentic, we’d be profoundly happier. If we posted honestly, shared honest photos, let people see that there are cracks in the veneer, we’d see that almost everyone else is just like us. Flawed, yet perfect in your own way. Happy in your own pants, comfy with the cat hair.
We’d be far more comfortable in collective imperfection.
And the rest of them, well they’re just posers. You didn’t like them in school. You don’t like them at work. You’ve called them names behind their backs at the bar. So why give their obvious lies any mental space?
Don’t waste mental energy on what some rando from the internet, whom you’ll never meet, thinks. And if your friends are judging you because you posted a picture of your yard where your lawn isn’t trimmed tighter than a fresh bikini wax, are they even your friend?
As my uncle says – “There’s only one ‘um. Fuck’um”.
There’s a subtle irony in the fact that while having my coffee this morning, streaming radio from Ireland, I heard the Irish Radio Industry, as part of the European Broadcasting Union, is lobbying European lawmakers to make auto manufacturers keep radios in cars.
To those of us who stream most of our entertainment, removing radios from vehicles in favor of “direct digital services,” might seem like a cost-cutting measure; however, the end result is far more insidious and can have two major impacts on you as a consumer.
Whether or not you are one of the small minority of people who only use their car radio to connect their phone, or if you’re one of the burgeoning group of people who choose not to own a car, at least one of the things will have a major impact on your life.
The first, most obvious, and most immediate impact on consumers is money: the direct impact on your wallet.
For a growing number of cars these days, buying your vehicle doesn’t mean that you have access to, or own everything that the vehicle can do. In fact, for a growing number of manufacturers, if you want to access “premium features”, such as GPS, heated seats, faster Wi-fi, or let’s be honest here, access to regular features you take for granted, you’ll have to shell out monthly for a subscription, even though you’ve already paid thousands to purchase your vehicle.
Those features are already there, built-in, they’re just not “turned on.”
And if you think for even a single second, that connecting your phone via Bluetooth to listen to your favorite streaming service will be tolerated in favor of Spotify being installed in-vehicle and only accessible if you pay for the vehicle’s digital services subscription and internet isn’t going to be a thing…
Did I mention that I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I think you would just love to own. I need to sell it because I’m moving and I know you could give it a “good home” so to speak…
Now let’s talk about the biggest and scariest impact that this overreach of corporate greed could create – the impact on democracy (and as a side note, small business and marketing).
In 2022 (according to Edison Research) 73% of Americans listened to radio while driving in the car. That’s no insignificant number. That’s the kind of reach that would make most advertising companies salivate until their panties are wet (I know it’s a weird visual, just go with it).
It’s also true that a growing number of households no longer own a physical AM/FM radio, but that doesn’t mean they don’t listen to radio. They just stream it via their smart speakers.
That’s not a “gotcha” moment there folks. You’re still listening to radio on a device that you already own without paying an additional subscription. The radio station you’re listening to is still generating its revenue from selling advertising.
If you’re looking to purchase radio advertising, the most expensive time is the hours that everyone is commuting in their cars, because that’s when most people are tuned in.
And as savvy marketers, we purchase it, because we know it has reach, we know it’s effective for small business and local markets. We know that radio ads have a higher recall rate than video ads: up to 10 times more effective, even when we are paying a premium to reach an audience that is otherwise distracted by driving. Heck, even network TV stations advertise their show lineup on prime radio.
And do you think radio is going to have that kind of reach when people are being charged a second monthly internet connection fee just to listen in their vehicles? I don’t think so.
Which brings me to the most important part – democracy.
Sometimes the most severe damage is done inadvertently.
Democracy requires an educated and informed populace to function. Part of being informed requires that the voting populace has access to and is exposed to news about current affairs, domestic and foreign.
Despite the shortcomings of broadcaster conglomeration, radio is still exceptionally good at fulfilling the role of news disseminator to plebs such as you and me.
This stands true whether you listen to a national broadcaster, or a commercial one: most still play “the news” at the top of the hour, and even the most inane of hosts jabbers on about what’s happening locally between tracks.
But what happens when people are only listening to whatever they can play on the underpowered speakers of their phones (driving with headphones / earbuds is illegal in most places, and if it isn’t, then it should be)?
For those of you reading or listening to this post then I suspect you will be mostly fine when it comes to national level news. Your world view probably already extends to consuming news from multiple sources, so you will continue to be well-informed, although your local news awareness will drop considerably. No advertising revenue means no local stations, which means no local news.
Well, when I say you’ll be fine, I mean short-term. Without that advertising revenue even public broadcasters will suffer in their reporting and production abilities and who will be left to inform the populace then? TV networks? Don’t make me laugh.
I guess they could raise taxes to support public broadcasters like they do in some countries… Hold on while I stop myself from laughing in American.
I implore you to look outside the potential impact on yourself, and think for a moment about the large percentage of the voting population in your country that gets its information almost exclusively from TikTok, YouTube, shitrags like The Sun in the U.K., and the equivalent of Fox News in the U.S.
The only exposure these people may have to any form of news that isn’t from within their own online propaganda bubble is what they hear on the radio on the way to and from work.
In a world where these people only use their fingers to point at others, while having the knowledge of the world at their fingertips, is cutting them off from this one exposure to ideas that may be from outside their bubble a risk we really want to take?
It’s 2024 and democracy is under assault across the globe, helped in no small part by corporate greed and its willingness to lie and ignore the truth, and to enable hatred, all in service of shareholder value.
Removing radios from cars seems like such a small thing, but it will hurt you and squeeze your budget even further.
It’s also one more participant in the lineup that is drilling democracy from behind without so much as offering a reach around.
Social Media: the opiate of the masses. Your partner’s favorite way to pass a few minutes, that they’ll admit to.
It’s had a good run. Like a faithful old dog, it has a special place in our hearts, and will always be remembered fondly. But it’s time to put it out of its misery and let it finally go to that farm upstate, before it pisses all over the carpet, shits on the kitchen floor, and blindly stumbles into the dresser sending your precious jewelry crashing to the floor.
Speaking of rings…
I was there, Gandalf. I was there three thousand years ago. I was there the day the strength of Men failed… I mean, I was there dear reader, at the very beginning, on the Bulletin Board Systems, then the forums, and early blogging platforms, on the Friendsters, Live Journals, Bebos, and MySpaces of the time. I watched them all come and go.
People would come in droves, but over time, they would move on to new lands. Drawn to a new precious, but also driven away.
Inevitably, all of these bastions of community and social communication fall, not just to their own hubris, their own insatiable desire for profit at all cost, but to the desires of others to make profit from within.
It’s insidious, but predictable. First come the spammers, with their inane nonsensical comments, their dirty claws dropping copy-pasted responses, and spreading links to sites that would give even the stoutest of orcs an STD.
Then come the bots. Not as individually strong as a spammer, but what they lack in flexibility and adaptability they make up for in sheer numbers. Using every automation trick in the book to flood the networks with their depravity, making teenage boys and lonely old folk alike believe that there are hot MILFs in their town just waiting for them. Such sacred knowledge is just a credit card number away…
Next come the marketers. Cousins to the spammers, the marketers are to be pitied for they actually believe they are doing good! Believing that spreading the word of their masters will bring good to others, that they have managed to achieve what lesser minions cannot. They suck the life slowly out of everything, making every discussion transactional and constantly pitching their master’s wares. So powerful are the marketers that they actually conduct all their planning out in the open, discussing how they will reach and corrupt more citizens of social media, and even get them to pay for the privilege of joining their ranks. Contemptible.
At last come elite troops of the enemy – the influencers and hustle bros. Their vileness is difficult to describe, because up until recently they were amongst the elite of what could be thrown against social media. They wield the influence to destroy from within by whispering evil notions in the minds of the weak. Couple that with powerful greed, narcissism, and a complete lack of self-awareness…
They should have been the final nail in the social media coffin, but alas dear reader, they are not.
Enter the AI Bots, currently called Butterflies. This new foe is an entirely artificial being that can exist in the lands of social media, generate its own content, converse with other AI Bots, and then interact with actual live people to a degree that they believe they are real.
They can still be distinguished from the living by their flawed art portraying mutated beings with extra limbs and appendages. Their speech is similarly betraying, being flat and emotionless, lacking warmth… but they are evolving.
More, better AI Bots with new names from new masters are set to enter the realm, no longer confined to being Chatbots, and I fear there is nothing we can do to stop them, nor do I believe that we should try.
It may finally be time to pass into the West, to leave these lands behind for they can no longer be saved. When all is populated by enemy AI beings indistinguishable from the real populace, what is the point of trying to save it. You cannot trust who you are speaking to, and even the enemy won’t know when it is speaking to the enemy.
If we stay, in time we will be forced out of the realm anyway, as the AI Bots feed off the content we have created and chant endlessly at each other, feeding off each other as they grow more powerful. The only citizens that will remain online will be those whose lack of perception and weak minds make them perfect fodder for the influencers and hustle bros. Is that really what we want to happen to us?
This is where the strength of men truly dies.
It is a battle we cannot win. If this were a single castle perhaps it would be worth defending even though the walls are about to be breached, but this is not a single castle, or land, but the entirety of social media is besieged. No-one can answer if we light the beacons.
It is a bitter pill to swallow, but you cannot prevail when your downfall is brought about simply because “it brings me joy” and “it doesn’t detract from the relationships I have within my life.”
I will miss her, but life flourished in a simpler time before this land of social media was forged. In many ways we were freer, and while I doubt we will be that free again, we will find a new land and a new way.
Raise a sword, or a glass, to social media. Do not mourn her passing, or lament as you awake mornings without the birdsong of notifications.
It was a good run. Let us not draw out the inevitable, making her live on in pain to delay our own sorrow.
Fly, you fools!
I’m just going to throw it right out there that I utterly despise “Algospeak”, a term I first heard about in a 2022 Washington Post article, even though the practice of using euphemisms, emojis or other made up words to avoid offending the censorship overlords of TikTok, YouTube and other social media platforms, has been around for what feels like an eternity.
It’s not that “made up” internet languages are a new thing, remember “l33tsp34k”? Or how about “txt speak” that weird texting language where nobody can spell words or use punctuation so it takes you longer to parse the actual meaning so you don’t make the mistake of helping your uncle jack off a horse, instead of helping your uncle Jack, off a horse?
But at least those “languages”, and I use the term very loosely, had a purpose, kind of.
L33tsp34k, or LeetSpeak for the uncool haxxorz, made us feel cool on the message boards as we script-kiddies (wanna be hackers who used tools made by others instead of doing the work) boasted about our exploits, or wrote messages in the text that scrolled across the bottom of demos (think technical demonstrations of programming awesomeness featuring amazing graphics and music) on the C64 and Amiga demo scenes. Yes, I am that old.
Txtspeak (or SMS language) wasn’t so much about being cool, as it was about efficiency. Limited to 160 characters, typing on keyboards where you had to repeatedly press the same button to get the letter you wanted, and being charged for every single text sent (and sometimes received) forced an efficiency that has long outlived it’s practically. Think of a chicken pecking at nine buttons for her next meal while standing on one leg, with each message resulting in a grain of feed being taken away.
But Algospeak? This has nothing to do with being cool, or technical limitations, or as some may claim, protecting the feelings of others. Nope, it’s all about the Benjamins, the loot, the dough, the cabbage, the clams, cheddar, potato chips, bacon…. Damn, I’m hungry now.
You see, the only feelings that are being protected here are the ones of the advertisers, because if their ads appear next to a word they don’t like, such as “sex” then they won’t want to spend their money on the platform. Because you know, how dare people think about sex, and how dare the platforms not make money at all costs.
Butt “Seggs”, I mean, but “Seggs” is completely acceptable because it sounds like you’re slurring your words after knocking back half a bottle of Vodka, and reads like you have a really weird egg fetish (how are we back to chickens again?), and nobody knows what it means! Right? Nobody, at, all! Right?
A rose by any other name, and all that… If you’re going to get offended or triggered by a word or term, it doesn’t matter what made up idiotic term is being used instead of it when it’s used ubiquitously. You’re going to be triggered or offended regardless.
We’re not even moving the goalposts here. All we’re doing is painting stripes of red, green, and blue on the ball and hoping that it’s enough to confuse the colorblind people.
Of course, the real reason I’m so adverse to all of this is that this verbal smegma has made the jump from online to offline. To the real world, like a linguistic herpes.
As a result I feel like my intelligence is being infected and diminished by people whose entire conversations sound like every word in their vocabulary is made from only 4 vowels and 3 consonants, with some good ol’ vocal fry thrown in for a dash of spice.
It’s depressing, it’s demoralizing, and it just results in me wanting to “unalive” myself even more.
To quote the late George Carlin:
“Sigmund Freud said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Oh yeah? Well sometimes it’s a big, brown dick.”
It’s 2024 and he couldn’t have been more correct.
People are reporting that previously posted obituaries are being flagged on Facebook by Meta’s algorithm as phishing scams or attempts to share malicious software.
I’m not sure if this problem is restricted to Canada, considering Meta’s recent decision to no longer allow sharing articles from Canadian news sources, but if that’s the case, then this is a terrible oversight on their part.
Resurfacing obituaries can be emotionally difficult for many people at the best of times, but flagging them as scams, and then requiring people to submit these posts for review without a way to explain why they’re not scams is ridiculously insensitive.
I have a feeling this will require more than just an “oops, we didn’t mean to do that” apology from Meta, although that’s likely the best we can hope for.
A simple proposal to reduce the number of stupid comments that are made on social media posts that include links to articles:
- Register a click to the linked article.
- Include a minimum 2 minute delay before you can comment on the article.
That’s it. Sounds ridiculously simple, but I guarantee it will prevent at least 50% of the ridiculous comments from people who clearly didn’t read the article, or watch the video, before commenting.
Why am I suggesting this? There are far too many idiots for whom the TL;DR (too long, didn’t read) summary is too much mental work to ingest and instead vomit forth their particular brand of verbal diarrhea immediately upon seeing a post title or headline.
I saw this happen as the first comment on a Threads post recently (I’m not linking to the post, but you can see a screenshot below) and it took every fiber of my being not to jump in and excoriate the person for not reading the linked article.
Clearly the person’s brain excreted a smear of uninformed smegma as a matter of course, and a quick examination of their profile reveals that is their normal M.O.
As a quick aside, despite their comment – a third option was given in the article, and yes they completely missed the point of why this is happening. I’m not joking when I say that I went back to that post 3 separate times to respond, and only just managed to stop myself from hitting “post”.
Of course we could make this work even better by checking outgoing links for approximate length of time to read, or watch time, and then set the delay accordingly. We already poll the link for information anyway, so it’s not any extra work.
I’m aware this solution isn’t perfect, and I know social networks will hate it because user engagement will absolutely plummet if people are forced to actually spend time thinking before commenting, but just imagine how much more wonderful the engagement would be when more forethought is given to comments.
Comments could be an absolute gold mine of insightful discourse, or at worst they could have some real actual thought put into amazing smackdowns.
I’m old, grumpy, not properly caffeinated and I want nice things. And by “nice things” I mean that I want to watch YouTube and am willing to watch ads to do so, in order not to add another $10 – $20 a month to the ever increasing cost (and decreasing value) of subscription services.
According to Matt Navarra (go subscribe to his awesome newsletter) via Android Authority, privacy advocate Alexander Hanff (I’m not linking to an X / Twitter profile) is at it again. Not content with filing a civil complaint with the Irish Data Protection Commission against YouTube’s detection of ad-blockers, he has filed a criminal complaint with the Garda Síochána – the police force of Ireland.
“I consider YouTube’s script to be spyware – aka surveillance technology, as it is deployed without my knowledge or authorization to my device for the sole purpose of intercepting and monitoring my behavior (whether or not ads load in my browser or are blocked by an ad blocker),”
Alexander Hanff – The Register
You don’t walk into a grocery store and demand they turn off their cameras, and tell their security guards not to look at you at all, while you browse the aisles for a loaf of bread. Most people would consider it reasonable that a store is able to protect itself from shoplifters and thieves. You don’t claim that your right to privacy allows you to shoplift at will.
Yet, to my mind, demanding that an online service not be able to detect that you are using an ad-blocker when you visit their website to consume their content is doing just that. Whether it’s YouTube or any other publisher, the content / video / web page you access costs money to produce, promote, store, and deliver to your browser. Using an ad-blocker denies the publisher (and downstream creators) the opportunity to earn revenue.
It’s a strange line for me. I believe that online users should have privacy and the right not to be tracked, but I also believe that companies have a right to make money, and if you’re not going to outright pay for the service, then you HAVE to give up something. You don’t get it for free! Free doesn’t pay the bills.
The EU has laws (and continues to implement laws) that advocate for consumer protection and I tend to agree with them. What I don’t agree with is Hanff’s assertion that being able to detect when someone is using an ad-blocker is spying and outside of the rights of the company.
You wouldn’t argue that Tesco / Aldi etc.. don’t have a right to protect themselves from shoplifters, but that’s exactly what you’re arguing when you say that online publishers don’t have a right to detect people using ad-blockers.
Yes, YouTube has boatloads of money, but how long will it have it if everyone watches for free without any monetization? How long will any publisher stay in business if it can’t monetize its product and is told that it’s not allowed to prevent people from accessing it for free?
Think about that the next time a security guard approaches you as you try to walk out of Aldi with a rotisserie chicken, a bag of frozen peas, and a box of cardboardeaux down the front of your pants.
This may be an unpopular stance, and it’s well known that I am loathe to side with Facebook (Meta) on almost anything, but publishers (and countries) expecting Facebook and other tech companies to pay for linking to their content need to put on their big boy pants and figure out their business and alternative traffic generation models instead of whining!
Let me outline this as simply as I can.
These companies are under no legal or business obligation to link to your content.
Publishers are attempting to double-dip on their implied value agreement with tech companies by charging for the act of linking, simply because they have been unable to figure out how to reach their audiences and provide a sustainable monetizable value proposition for those audiences. They want the hand(s) that feed them not to just provide them with an audience, and generate traffic to their advertising laden pages, but pay THEM for the privilege of doing so.
Publishers already have control over how their content appears on services such as Facebook, Twitter (X), and search engines such as Google and Bing. They can completely customize how all of the elements of the link appear and even block the information from going to search engines or any site they want with a tiny bit of code in their website. I’m 100% certain their content management systems support this.
Don’t try to tell me these publishers, many of which offer advertising services and platforms (often built on the backs of being the middleman between small businesses and the advertising services offered by Google, Meta etc.) to other companies, and are smart enough to build paywalls, aren’t capable of figuring out a little user agent blocking and stopping their content from appearing on these platforms.
This idea of “paying to link to something” is fundamentally at odds with how the internet works. If you don’t believe me then just ask Tim Berners-Lee the inventor of the World Wide Web.
Specifically, I am concerned that that code risks breaching a fundamental principle of the web by requiring payment for linking between certain content online…
Way back in 2007 I was involved in a “debate” with a certain mapping company in Denmark where I lived. That company had sent invoices to website owners (one of which was a friend of mine) who simply linked to an ad supported map page on their website. After a month of very public back and forth on the internet and radio they saw the senselessness of charging website owners for sending them free traffic and ad impressions.
Now, let’s talk about this implied value exchange between publishers and tech platforms.
A Facebook link, Twitter link, Google search result, or Google News link does not devalue the content as created by the publisher. A freely shared link only serves to increase the value of the content as it drives traffic to the (often advertising laden) page. The only time I can think of that a link, even with an excerpt, does not provide value is if the publisher is providing no value other than the headline, and if that’s the case, well, do they get to call themselves publishers or news outlets?
Publishers know the value of the traffic internet platforms send them. They are also painfully aware that without these platforms they would have very little ability to reach any audience. That’s why they don’t simply block these platforms from indexing their websites or use a little bit of code to make their links effectively useless on those platforms. In fact, they implement code such as the opengraph protocol to make sure their links are as optimized as possible to drive traffic, and actively share and promote their content on these platforms themselves.
Finally, lets talk about that headline, link, or even excerpt (which the publisher has complete control over) that appears on third party platforms.
Publishers know the value of headlines in creating traffic. There’s a reason headlines exist. They are a sales tool. They’ve adorned print media, magazines and newspapers forever, because that headline has been the hook to get people to buy the publication. Nothing has changed in this respect except that instead of the headline appearing on a newspaper stand, the headline appears on Facebook or Google and drives traffic to the publishers (advertising laden) site.
But there’s more to it than that. Have you ever browsed for a book in a book store?
Take a look at this book cover and the synopsis on the back.
If you read that cover in a bookstore, or online store, would you claim that you have read the book? No? I didn’t think so, yet many publishers believe that the content shared in a search result entitles them to some sort of additional monetary compensation beyond the free exposure. They believe that what you can see in the screenshot below negates the entire value of their article.
Let’s ignore for a minute the complete idiocy of believing that an online publisher could exist entirely behind a paywall, with no search or social exposure, no content sharing and audience building, using only paid advertising to draw traffic and entice people to pay money to get past their paywall. They know they can’t. That’s why they all SEO the crap out of their article excerpts and share them all over social media themselves. It’s why they all have social share buttons on ALL of their articles – they understand the value of the free exposure and traffic!
Let’s ignore for a minute the potential detriment to a free internet if any website can charge for simply linking to another. Imagine if that had been the case at the beginning. We wouldn’t have search engines, we would never have had a blogosphere, most social platforms would never have existed, and even online news platforms and publishers would have been unable to link to sources and provide attribution. The internet as we know it would never have existed.
Let’s however, look at the idea that a headline is worth paying for, the idea that a reader seeing a headline and excerpt is enough to require payment. When was the last time you saw a newspaper (magazine etc.) on a stand with a blank cover showing only the name of the publication and the publication date? Has a cashier ever stopped and made you pay for reading the headline on a newspaper on the rack as you waked out the door? Never? I wonder why?
Maybe, just maybe, it’s because the value is not in the headline but in the actual content, and if your headline removes all value from your content, then clearly you’re not doing it correctly. The headline draws readers in (gets them to click), and the content is what keeps them coming back. Such a simple concept, who would have thought it?
Now excuse me while I work on my next piece about newspapers going out of business and blaming the internet, even though they never even tried to embrace the internet themselves…
It should be obvious that we hire people that make our companies better. Nobody actively searches out employees that don’t bring something positive to the company. This is true at all levels, from the starter positions through to the c-suite.
Ego (not the Celestial from the MCU), which comes from the Latin, literally meaning “I”, is one’s sense of self-esteem or self-importance, and is perhaps, the single largest hindrance to effective collaboration in the business environment. Put simply, ego leads to self-sabotage, and that self-sabotage can lead to the failure to achieve business sucess.
Experts, people who have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area, can’t really function in environments where decision making is driven by ego.
Ego driven decision making, especially from an entrenched “leader,” is one of the primary drivers of talent out of companies. Compare any company with a high-turnover rate compared to its competitors and you can be almost certain that ego is at play.
Poor working conditions, low pay, not treating workers with respect are all valid reasons for an employee to seek greener pastures, and often the impetus behind those things is ego.
Almost nothing will drive top talent and experts away from your business quicker than a manager who operates from ego.
Pay cannot compensate the creative or the expert who has the expertise and the practical experience to discern when a campaign, decision, or project isn’t going to work, but is overridden because someone else has decided “this is what we are doing.”
Experts, creatives, and top talent will always seek other places to work if they are not empowered to do what they are literally paid to do.
So, how do you stop ego from negatively impacting your business?
First, I would suggest that you try to recognize and remedy it within yourself.
If you are indeed the problem and therapy or coaching is too much work, or the idea that you are at fault is too painful to admit, then make an ego driven business solution: I want to make more money, and my company will run more smoothly and more effectively if I step away and appoint someone else to run it.
If the problem is people subordinate to you, you could try to get them to attend coaching (which may or may not work), but I would simply hire someone better suited to do the job. It’s not mean; it’s business. It’s in your interest, your companies’ interest, and your employee’s interest. Let’s be honest, you wouldn’t keep a bald tire on your car while you change the others simply because it’s been there the longest.
Recognize those you need to make your company succeed, and recognize those that succeed. Then let them know that you appreciate them and empower them to do what they do best.
If you are employed at a business where your “superiors” operate on ego, I would recommend shopping your resume around straight away. Talk to your managers and direct reports and see if they listen and enact any positive change.
If nothing changes, run for the hills. You have one life to live, and there is no value in “sticking it out” at a company that doesn’t respect you.
Can you have your cake and eat it? Can you really expect your sales staff to be consultative and deliver real value to your customers if you expect them to play a pure numbers game and practice transactional sales? It’s not that transactional sales are a bad thing (I personally hate them – but that … Continue reading Consultative or Transactional Sales? Pick One!
I’m back on Twitter after having my account suspended for 4 days because I posted a picture of myself, masked and proudly displaying my vaccination card, after receiving my second Covid-19 shot. I don’t have a screenshot of the post, but it looked identical to this one on Facebook: I had my account suspended until … Continue reading The Chilling Effect Of Poor Content Moderation – Looking At You Twitter
It’s a debate almost as old as scrubs themselves: should scrubs be worn outside of the clinic? My take: perception is everything so, hell no! Marketing is essentially the art of persuasion. It is the art of influencing the perceptions of others so that they buy our product, recommend our practice, take the steps we … Continue reading Wearing Scrubs Outside Of The Clinic? A Marketer’s Perspective
I don’t work from home. In this pandemic, I am required by my employer to be in offices 6 days a week. Yet I don’t envy those who have the “luxury of working from home,” because it’s not a luxury. It’s quite the opposite in fact. Let me make this a simple as I can. … Continue reading The Luxury Of Living At Work?
Spotted this earlier today, in the Outlook app on Android, while I was reconnecting my Facebook calendar to my Outlook calendar. It looks like you entered a slight misspelling of your email or username. We’ve corrected it for you, but ask that you re-enter your password for added security. I see this a potential security … Continue reading Facebook Is Correcting Username Misspellings on Login
Fear of failure, fear of what others may think, fear of being unable to do something. It affects all of us in different areas of life. It can lead to stagnation, not achieving anything from over-preparation, and leads to so much unnecessary stress and lost potential. You’re not alone. It happens to me more than … Continue reading Fear Is The Mind Killer
Maybe it was just a glitch in my app, but this morning I received a notification on my Facebook App that Sara had commented on a post (why I got this notification I’m not sure, as I was not following the post) – only to click through and see that it was her own post, … Continue reading Facebook App Mis-Attributing Posts To Other Users?
I’ve been off the scene for quite a while in terms of content creation. In this video (vlog) I lay out the reasons why I’ve been so quiet, what I’ve been up to and what I plan to do about it.
Flat Earth conspiracy theories, the excitement in science, Mike Pence vs the Internet, Ann Coulter vs Delta, rocks with religious writing vs Atheist car windows, and Bill Gates vs money. Doctor Who fans should stay tuned after the episode for some bonus content about the first female Doctor. Stories mentioned in episode 118 of Nothing Serious … Continue reading She Should Have Flown United – Nothing Serious Podcast #118
Money can be tight when you’re starting up your medical practice or small business, and it can be very tempting to save money by buying cheap computers – but this decision can end up costing you more in the long run in terms of lost productivity and early equipment replacement. TLDR; Buy the most powerful … Continue reading Things To Consider When Buying Computers For Your Medical Practice
Both Daniel and the Cranky Canuck join Paul this week to discuss eavesdropping on igloos, dubbing porn, syncing sex toys to videos, disturbing swimsuits, vlogger idiocy, Vietnam war memorials and finding the Fibonacci spiral on Donald Trumps ass. Oh, and you never ask the internet for help… ever! Grab yourself a beverage and enjoy Nothing … Continue reading Tab A Into Slot B – Nothing Serious Podcast #117
Breatharianism – Can you survive on sunlight and fresh air alone? Why does NASA want to probe Uranus? Do we need a Space Corps? Should you get charged for being rude? Do beards protect men from homosexuality? These questions, and more get debated by Paul and Daniel in this special episode of Nothing Serious, Stories mentioned … Continue reading Probing – Nothing Serious Podcast #116
In this special episode, the guys discuss why they do the show, beer made from pee, pornstar relationships, privacy laws and why the terrorists don’t get to win. We also wonder if The Cranky Canuck is the only guy in the world that wants to give drunk Nick Nolte anal? Stories mentioned in Episode 115 … Continue reading Raison D’etre – Nothing Serious Podcast #115
Buckle in as the guys share a real money maker of an idea, figure out how to efficiently funnel beer to party goers, discuss legendary police officers, and then get very tactile with money, renewable energy and Santorum… or something like that… Stories mentioned in Episode 114 of Nothing Serious Podcast include: Why did these … Continue reading Tactile – Nothing Serious Podcast #114
Fidget spinners, avocado toast, rum, misandry, physical abuse, and idiocy – we have it all in this special episode. Listen as Daniel beats Paul in the studio, and the Cranky Canuck gets riled up! Stories mentioned in episode 113 of Nothing Serious Podcast include: Millionaire’s secret to buying your 1st home? Skip the coffee and … Continue reading R34 Spinner – Nothing Serious Podcast #113
Daniel returns to the show which allows the guys to go deep and (dirty minds aside) ask what defines news and entertainment? How does storytelling shape our culture? How super kinky do things have to get for you to want to have hashtag sex? Things get even stranger when Bill Maher blames superhero movies for … Continue reading Avocado Toast – Nothing Serious Podcast #112
What’s wrong with feeding imaginary animals imaginary food, and why is Reddit so upset by it? Should a toddler be allowed to play video games? Are Samaritan laws like the one passed in Canada recently a good idea or do they just provide an easy out for drug abusers who should otherwise be locked away? … Continue reading Samaritans – Nothing Serious Podcast #111
Things get weird as Cranky and Paul discuss the most expensive high-fiber diet ever, children’s rights to privacy online, overreaching schools and whether or not strippers are actually therapists. Things get even weirder when Pornhub sends your mom some very special glasses, and then there’s that skittles ad… Stories mentioned in episode 110 of Nothing Serious … Continue reading In Heat! – Nothing Serious Podcast #110
Pop quiz – You come home and catch your partner in bed with somebody else, what do you do? What do you do? Is circumcision acceptable? What defines pornography? Would you be able to sleep surrounded by 40 other people? Why doesn’t your job pay you to go home for sex? Stories mentioned in episode … Continue reading Inputs! – Nothing Serious Podcast #109
Is stupidity an inherited trait or is it a product of environment? Does being an atheist make you poor in the financial sense as well as the spiritual? Does your butthole make you self-conscious? Had Paul found the greatest hero ever? Get the answers to these questions (or maybe just more questions) and more in … Continue reading Up Yours! – Nothing Serious Podcast #108
Going down? Things get tasty on this week’s Nothing Serious as we discuss failed Burger King commercials, McDonald’s trips, proving the existence of ghosts, going downtown at that time of the month, and when a bloke’s little head decides to exercise its own mind. Grab an order of fries, load up on the ketchup and … Continue reading Is That Ketchup On Your Face? – Nothing Serious Podcast #107
We’re back! Season 2 of Nothing Serious Podcast has begun! Paul, Daniel, and The Cranky Canuck are back to bring common sense to the universe with our own unique brand of humor, cynicism, and sarcasm. Struggling with a year’s worth of pent-up abuse to unleash upon each other, we attempt to tackle issues of privacy, … Continue reading Whizz-bang! Nothing Serious Podcast #106
I may be showing my age by making a reference to Field of Dreams, but I’m amazed by how many people still believe that if you simply build a product or offer a service then your work is done and the money should just start rolling in. Building your product, recording your podcast or starting … Continue reading Building Your Product Is Only Half The Battle – Why The Voices In Kevin Costners Head Were Wrong
Being an entrepreneur is cool right now, but let’s be honest – entrepreneurship is not for most of us. To put it another way – anybody can be an entrepreneur, but most people probably shouldn’t. I went on a spontaneous Facebook live rant about this very topic a few months ago, so if you don’t feel like reading … Continue reading Entrepreneurship Is Not For Everyone
When building your audience or brand you need to be where your customers are if you want to reach them, but limiting yourself to just one network imposes unnecessary limits on your growth. I addressed this very topic on Cranky Gamers with Steven Hodson a couple of weeks ago. We were discussing how Twitch streamers can use social … Continue reading Why Streamers Can’t Rely On Twitch Alone To Build An Audience
Facebook has made a huge investment in their video platform and yesterday I noticed some tests to the layout of pages which would indicate that Facebook expects publishers and businesses to get onboard in a big way (which you really should be, BTW). By making the video and photos sections of pages front and center … Continue reading Facebook Tests Page Layout That Proves The Future Is Video
Over the years my WordPress database had become bloated – very bloated. Despite using WP-Optimize to keep the database in check, 12 years of content, many host migrations and export/import cycles had caused my database to balloon to a massive 98.6 MB in size. Needless to say, this caused more than a few issues when … Continue reading WP-Sweep – You Simply Need To Use It On Your WordPress Install
A huge mistake I’ve made is thinking that I can handle everything myself. If I don’t know it, I’ll learn it. It’s an approach that certainly gets things done but it is not in any way efficient. In fact, it’s about as far from efficient as you can get and in many ways it can … Continue reading Work On, Not In Your Business
Castles stand strong for hundreds of years, and even when they fall or are destroyed the foundations remain. I took this image while playing in the park with my son. Watching Malcolm intently collect and build his small pile of stones (“baby boulders” as he calls them) evoked a memory of working with my grandfather … Continue reading Every Castle Is Built On Strong Foundations
If you can’t clearly define your message, your goal or your product how can you expect buy-in from a client, customer, investor or anybody else for that matter? Update: June 30th, 2017 – Google Spaces has shut down since I wrote this post, I guess highlighting the problem with not having a defined purpose or message. The … Continue reading What’s Your Message?
I had a very pleasant conversation with a someone who is stepping into the role of social media marketer at a small business that currently engages in almost no online marketing. While I believe she will do very well in the position, she asked one poignant question that always comes up with clients new to social media … Continue reading It’s Better To Make Marketing Mistakes Than Not Try At All
Nobody knows your small business like you do. Nobody knows your customers like you do. Unless you’ve got deep pockets to hire the best talent it’s almost impossible to get a surrogate to speak on your behalf with your knowledge, passion, and insight into your small business and your customers. Sure you can use an … Continue reading The Case Against Having An Agency Manage Your Social Media
Video on the internet is huge! Messaging is huge too (and bots inside messaging platforms). It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that messaging and native sharing within the YouTube app is only going to mean more video views for those investing in the platform. The sharing model within the YouTube app is broken. The … Continue reading Messaging Inside The YouTube App Will Be Huge!
Let’s not blame the carrot (Meaningful use) for the stick (Electronic Health Record systems) being too short! If we want to make Electronic Health Record systems (and Practice Management systems) better, cheaper and actually innovate, then we need a standard schema for how core data is stored so that it can be easily exported to a different EHR … Continue reading Lack Of Data Standard, Not Meaningful Use To Blame For Crap EHR Systems
Spare a thought for the humble asterisk (). It has so many uses, yet none as reviled as its use in marketing. Every time you see one you know that there are special terms and conditions that apply, and that things just aren’t what the seem Unlimited is never the same as truly unlimited. Free* … Continue reading The Asterisk – The Enemy Of Honesty
You might not believe it, but stopping to take care of my health and fitness is one of the things that has the biggest positive impacts on my business. I’ve talked before about work ethic, continuous self-education, and the hustle that is required to grow your business, but I’ve only briefly mentioned health and personal … Continue reading Biggest Mistake I Make As An Entrepreneur? Not Looking After Myself
The TLDR version of the post below is that faxing may be costing even small single provider practices upwards of $6000 a year between paper, staff, toner, line rental, safe document disposal and other costs. Electronic faxing to your EMR / PM system can not only save you money but free up your staff for … Continue reading Still Faxing At Your Medical Practice? It’s Costing You More Than You Realize
If you’re not using an address scrubbing service when you send direct mail campaigns then you are probably costing yourself a lot of money. If you look at the banner image on this post you’ll see the 12 pieces of mail that came to my office today. They all came from a single campaign direct mail … Continue reading Save Money – Use An Address Scrubbing Service With Your Direct Mail Campaigns
When you get comfortable you lose out, miss opportunities and generally stagnate – that’s the most important thing I learned in 2015. It’s okay if you don’t read the rest of this post – if you understood the first line you can extrapolate the rest – If you self-educate, apply what you learn, try new … Continue reading What I Learned In 2015 And Why 2016 Will Be Even Better
It goes without saying that the holidays are one of, if not the most profitable times for retailers, but they are especially important those with physical stores. It follows that those businesses such as malls, that make their money from renting space to retailers would do everything in their power to properly notify the public … Continue reading It’s The Holiday Season But Nobody Needs To Know Your Opening Hours
Email is seen by many as outdated, and more of a pain than it’s worth. In this episode of the Drive-By Marketing Podcast, I explain why email marketing is not only “not dead” but is absolutely critical to your marketing efforts.
As many of you may know I have worked with Pinnacle Brain & Spine Center for the past three years. I originally came on-board as an I.T. and marketing consultant and am now in the role of Media Director. It saddens me to say that Pinnacle will be closing its doors at the end of next month – … Continue reading Exciting Times
Building your referral network is central to the success of medical practices and many small businesses. In this podcast I discuss how not following and capturing referral data is one of the biggest missed opportunities and the simple solution to fixing this problem so that you can build the best referral network you can and maximize … Continue reading Missed Opportunity When Building Referral Networks – Drive-By Marketing
Social Media Management tools are a great way to organize all of your networks under one roof and post content to multiple places without getting overwhelmed. In this podcast I talk briefly about two of my favorite time-saving tools, some of the core differences between them and why I prefer Hootsuite over Buffer.
I’ve had a lot of people tell me that they don’t have time for content marketing. In this podcast I explain why “not having time” is simply an excuse that puts you at a competitive disadvantage and why you must be actively engaged in content marketing for your small business to grow.
Over the past few weeks I have been running various Facebook local awareness campaigns for clients. The campaigns were relatively simple and the targeted demographics were very broad. We would just target the appropriate demographic (18+, male and female, 50 mile radius / 24+, female only, 50 mile radius) and appropriate interests with ads designed to build awareness of the … Continue reading Forget The Desktop, Facebook Ads Are ALL Mobile
The eagle-eyed among you, or those who follow me on Facebook or @pauloflaherty will have noticed a few mentions of my latest venture – Veritas Diagnostic Services, LLC, where we aim to address a hole in the healthcare market by making medical imaging affordable to everyone regardless of their insurance status or deductible. The idea … Continue reading Announcing – Affordable Medical Imaging For Everyone
In this podcast I address deleting negative reviews and comments about your company / product / service from review sites, Facebook pages and other locations. I mention the reasons why you shouldn’t delete negative reviews, which include: How it makes your profile looks fake or fixed, as if you were trying to game the system. The … Continue reading Deleting Negative Reviews – Drive-By Marketing
There’s a missed opportunity for podcast hosting companies such as Libsyn, Blubrry and now SoundCloud, to bring social proof to podcasting simply by opening up an API that allows plugins to poll download numbers and display them next to podcast players. Blubrry already has the excellent PowerPress plugin, which I am sure the vast majority … Continue reading Podcasting and Social Proof – A Missed Opportunity
After more than two years and 105 episodes of recording the Nothing Serious Podcast, it is with heavy hearts that we have to put the show on extended hiatus. We may return to do more Nothing Serious in the future, but for now all that remains is to thank our families, friends and listeners who … Continue reading The Long Goodbye – Nothing Serious #Podcast 105