![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Note to self
Mar. 21st, 2008 10:02 amMust remember not to post entries or comments today, because of that boycott/strike thing.
...oh, wait.
...oh, wait.
Mar. 21st, 2008
(no subject)
Mar. 21st, 2008 02:15 pmSince ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
chasethestars wants some actual content and not just notes ;), and since I fall into her second category of friends (the actively informed ones), I feel compelled to weigh in on the current situation.
I first saw the story here in![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
no_lj_ads about Anton Nossik, the "Chief Blogger" of SUP (our Russian overlords) being interviewed for a Russian Internet site. The original is in Russian, but there are translations here and here. In it, he's dismissive of the concerns of these striking users, labels them "idiots" and the tactics "blackmail", and confirms the removal of new Basic accounts was done because they were not profitable.
Linked to inthe_lj_herald is a statement in Nossik's own journal, in which he claims he was misrepresented as the head of SUP. He denies making the claims attributed to him, calls himself a "Social Media Evangelist", and basically tries to absolve himself of any responsibility of speaking for SUP. He also refuses to list what his actual capacities are in someplace appropriate and visible, such as his userinfo page; instead, he tells people to seek out that information on the Internet in general, then criticized it as being out of date.
Here's the thing that gets me, though (as if that weren't enough). Anyone who has been in a sufficiently large organization should know that there is supposed to be one avenue of communication. It might be a dumb example, but in my fraternity days, we were always told never to claim to speak for the house. If a reporter wanted some kind of opinion, always say "no comment" and refer them to the chapter president. That prevents one guy from making the entire organization from looking bad. Nossik can't have it both ways; he can't grant interviews to reporters, trash the users and the site's founder, then claim he's not empowered to speak for the organization and say "it's just my opinion". As one of Russia's "most visible bloggers", a SUP employee, and a longtime LJ user, he has to know that reporters are going to ask his opinions and that they will be representing the company. Either he is the company spokesperson, or he shouldn't grant the interviews.
chasethestars wants some actual content and not just notes ;), and since I fall into her second category of friends (the actively informed ones), I feel compelled to weigh in on the current situation.I first saw the story here in
no_lj_ads about Anton Nossik, the "Chief Blogger" of SUP (our Russian overlords) being interviewed for a Russian Internet site. The original is in Russian, but there are translations here and here. In it, he's dismissive of the concerns of these striking users, labels them "idiots" and the tactics "blackmail", and confirms the removal of new Basic accounts was done because they were not profitable.Linked to in
the_lj_herald is a statement in Nossik's own journal, in which he claims he was misrepresented as the head of SUP. He denies making the claims attributed to him, calls himself a "Social Media Evangelist", and basically tries to absolve himself of any responsibility of speaking for SUP. He also refuses to list what his actual capacities are in someplace appropriate and visible, such as his userinfo page; instead, he tells people to seek out that information on the Internet in general, then criticized it as being out of date.Here's the thing that gets me, though (as if that weren't enough). Anyone who has been in a sufficiently large organization should know that there is supposed to be one avenue of communication. It might be a dumb example, but in my fraternity days, we were always told never to claim to speak for the house. If a reporter wanted some kind of opinion, always say "no comment" and refer them to the chapter president. That prevents one guy from making the entire organization from looking bad. Nossik can't have it both ways; he can't grant interviews to reporters, trash the users and the site's founder, then claim he's not empowered to speak for the organization and say "it's just my opinion". As one of Russia's "most visible bloggers", a SUP employee, and a longtime LJ user, he has to know that reporters are going to ask his opinions and that they will be representing the company. Either he is the company spokesperson, or he shouldn't grant the interviews.