Fat Company: The Flatulence Project

    Newer Older
    1. brend∆n 46 months ago | reply

      all the "social media strategists" are totally hating on this stuff.... they should be stoked, it legitimizes their skill set. How else would you describe a "successful" social media campaign to a CFO? Numbers....

    2. factoryjoe 46 months ago | reply

      I think you mean SMDs (or "social media douchebags")? ;)

      Maybe it's because they didn't think of it first?

      Still, I do think that this campaign is pretty vapid. Likely successful, sure? But meaningful? Hardly.

    3. brend∆n 46 months ago | reply

      totally not meaningful, though i like how it exposes the quantitative mechanics behind how these things work on a large scale. Twitter not a popularity contest? ha! If you pull back that far, you can say everything social is a popularity contest, work, any crowd of people talking, the same dynamics are their, albeit at different scale.

      Let me ask you a question, though, how do you think some videos on YouTube get so many views?

      I know the "soc net" is not as serendipitous as people like to believe. For every guy like you out there figuring out smart ways to better enable communication using these platforms / between these platforms, there are folks out there gaming the shit and selling their services to the highest bidder. And that's good!

      Re: the social media d-bags, a necessary evil, part of the cycle, they remind me of junior designers confusing art and design. I know a lot of people that are soc media people and aren't douche bags, they have a keen sense to share and empower.

      As for the Mekanism folks ( the guys that made this ) - I am sure their rates are rising by the minute :)

    4. factoryjoe 46 months ago | reply

      Let me put it this way: fleas wouldn't exist if there wasn't an environment rife with potential fleabags...

      Success breeds parasites, and parasites diversify the environment, and force updates to structural integrity. It's always about finding the right balance between letting the barnacles exist versus letting them takeover.

    5. brend∆n 46 months ago | reply

      Observation -

      Everyone that heavily participates in the social web uses these kinds of metaphors to describe how they see the ( moral? socialogical? ) effect of this:

      Viral-Virus, Pestilence, infectious ( negative connotation )

      and then the go on to say that "people with REAL influence would NEVER participate.

      The first implies a moral high ground, where as the other implies a social stratification, i.e. it is basically acknowledging the same underlying mechanics are at play, albeit they are not leveraged in a manner that the majority of the minority agrees is acceptable.

      -

      Sorry for the multi rebuttals, I am not trying to troll you, just point out that everyone's knee jerk reaction is all very similar, at a certain distance.

      In a certain sense, I feel like it is more like a Torrent, subverting a network for results that were originally unintended, and thus changes the user experience.

      *EDIT -

      WWCCS - What Would Christian Crumlish Say?

    6. Geilt 46 months ago | reply

      This is kind of like a public click link counter (bitly) where people click the link not to read something meaningful, but to hear about the project.

      Kind of lame, because the only purpose to go there is to see how you/others are doing, and of course to sign up to be in a nice large database of popular users the company can now spam whatever it wants to.

      What better reach to have for products than people willing to spend all day in social media and hence have the opportunity that one of them will tweet, Facebook post about their product?

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts