Archive

Archive for the ‘Social network’ Category

Social Network vs menti deboli: Domenico Dolce, Stefano Gabbana e Sir Elton John, oggi, ci danno una lezione.

March 17th, 2015 No comments

Dove risiede la libertà di espressione? Quale dove sono i limiti della legge sull’istigazione all’odio? Social Network vs menti deboli, ci avete mai riflettuto? Domenico Dolce, Stefano Gabbana e Sir Elton John, oggi, ci danno una lezione.

Wired scrive oggi nella sua pagina un super articolo, che qua riportiamo in parte (e che vi consigliamo leggere completamente) ma che ci ha fatto pensare molto sul l’influenza dei social networks oggi.
Mi preme dire che non sono fanatico di nessuno dei due partecipanti (ne della musica di Elton John ne dell’abbigliamento di Dolce&Gabbana), ma invece sono molto interessato nel soggetto di discussione, MANIPOLAZIONE DI MASSE e, se da qualche parte esiste, anche DEMOCRAZIA.

Le chiavi di lettura di questo articolo sono:
1- Grazie ai social network, siamo tutti capaci di controllare il 100% delle menti debole o senza personalità?
2- Conseguenze di un post, qualunque social media sia.
3- Oggi siamo tutti capaci di controllare le masse, e senza un minimo di coscienza le conseguenze potrebbero essere devastanti.
4- Grazie alla loro influenza su i nostri politici, oggi si potrebbero scegliere le sorti delle leggi e della vita tra 20 anni, Proprio oggi.
5- Dove risiede la libertà di espressione?
6- Quale dove sono i limiti della legge sull’istigazione all’odio?
7- Social Network vs menti deboli, ci avete mai riflettuto?

Yuleisy Yamiley 

JE SUIS DOLCE GABBANA elton jhon

Je suis Dolce&Gabbana. Original design by Dr. Pietros Cannon.

 

Dolce & Gabbana: ma non eravamo tutti Charlie?

“…..Sul tema ho ovviamente le mie idee. Una delle quali, per esempio, è che l’amore non può certo costituire un sacrilegio rispetto agli “schemi prestabiliti” della tradizione. O, peggio, della presunta “normalità”. Lo Stato, come ho già argomentato sulle adozioni ai single, deve smetterla di mortificare i cittadini dividendoli fra persone di serie A e serie B. Semplicemente perché, assegnando o negando diritti sacrosanti in base a parametri senza fondamento, mortifica sé stesso e tutti i suoi cittadini. Inclusi quelli ingiustamente privilegiati.

D’altra parte il fenomeno degli uteri in affitto (di qualsiasi orientamento siano le coppie che vi ricorrono) mi lascia abbastanza perplesso. Specie per le implicazioni neocolonialiste che si porta dietro. Non è un caso che la Thailandia abbia appena vietato la pratica. Ricordate il caso della 21enne Pattaramon Chanbua che ebbe due gemelli “per conto” di una coppia australiana? Uno dei due nacque con la sindrome di Down e i genitori “committenti”, una volta resisi conto della situazione, si rifiutarono di prenderlo con loro, lasciandolo alla poverissima madre naturale. Questo solo per dire che le implicazioni sono decine e non tutte auspicabili. Anzi.
Ma, ripeto, questo lato del dibattito, in particolare se squadernato con l’usuale approssimazione da social network, in questo momento non m’interessa. Per quanto paradossale possa essere. M’interessa pormi e porvi una domanda di metodo: fino a poche settimane fa non eravamo tutti Charlie? Voglio dire, c’è un qualche tipo di proporzione fra le frasi di Domenico Dolce e lereazioni arrivate dai vip di tutto il mondo, a cominciare da Martina Navratilova passando per Ricky Martin fino a Victoria Beckham? Dal profumo scaricato nella tazza del cesso alle mutande scagliate nel cestino fino alle camicie infilate nella differenziata o alle minacce di falò dei capi D&G (Courtney Love). Per non parlare, ovviamente, delle dichiarazioni, dei tweet, dei post. Fra i quali il più equilibrato rimane in fondo il primo, quello di Elton John su Instagram.
D’altronde basterebbero le parole di Stefano Gabbana a chiudere la questione: “Crediamo fermamente nella democrazia e pensiamo che la libertà di espressione sia una base imprescindibile per essa. Noi abbiamo parlato del nostro modo di sentire la realtà ma non era nostra intenzione esprimere un giudizio sulle scelte degli altri. Noi crediamo nella libertà e nell’amore”. Che poi, se anche avessero voluto esprimere un giudizio sui “figli della chimica e sui bambini sintetici”, non avrebbero forse potuto farlo? Quale sarebbe stato il problema? Le nostre emittenti trasmettono a getto continuo le bestialità di chiunque riesca a impossessarsi di un microfono, Twitter si trasforma spesso in un suk dell’odio e due personaggi pubblici – più o meno rispettosamente, il punto mi pare alla fine questo – non possono dire la loro di fronte a un giornalista che li sente per un periodico?
Ripeto: non eravamo forse tutti pronti a immolarci per la libertà d’opinione appena tre mesi fa? O forse c’è un equivoco: siamo disponibili ad accordarla solo a certe categorie – i buffoni di corte, gli umoristi, i giornalisti – imprigionando chiunque altro all’interno di assurdi obblighi d’opinione legati alle dichiarate preferenze sessuali? Da qualsiasi fonte derivi e a (quasi) qualsiasi argomento si applichi, il pensiero unico ci fa fare più passi indietro che in avanti. Intendo sul piano dei diritti per tutti. Certo anche il pensiero stupido non è che aiuti molto….”

Simone Cosimi
Giornalista

L’articolo lo trovate in originale su: WIRED http://www.wired.it/attualita/media/2015/03/16/dolce-gabbana-non-eravamo-tutti-charlie/ )

7 Tips to manage online critics

January 24th, 2014 No comments

Following are seven tips for managing the critics online.

Create an internal policy. Everyone on your team—both internally and externally—needs to understand what your policy is for managing critics online. A bad situation can be made worse by a well-intentioned employee or external partner who doesn’t understand your policy. The policy should lay out who will respond to critics, what they’ll say, how quickly they’ll respond, and what to do if someone not authorized to comment sees or receives a comment.

Be cautious. When dealing with critics, particularly if they’re anonymous, you don’t know how severe the reaction could be or how successful they may be in creating an online crisis involving hundreds or thousands of others. A good rule of thumb is to publicly say you hear them and you’d like to discuss offline. Then take it to the phone or in person. Get it out of writing so you can hear the tone of voice or see body language. Don’t get defensive or engage in a back-and-forth debate online.

Assume the best. Even if you think the answer is obvious or right in front of their face, sometimes the critic is misinformed, doesn’t know where to look for the information on your site, or may be unwilling to search. When they complain about the obvious things, be helpful, pleasant, and non-defensive. You should never assume malicious intent until you’ve covered the obvious.

Consider the medium. Unless you run a sports, religious, or news site, it’s unlikely anonymous trolls will want to spend their every waking moment criticizing you. So keep your goals in mind. Consider the medium of the criticism and the message of the critic. If it’s directly on your blog or on Facebook, it’s far more difficult to ignore than in a tweet.

Deleting posts. While deleting posts may remove the damage for the time being, when people discover you’re doing so, they’ll take you to task for that… and it won’t be pretty. Consider a politician who lies about his affair. Soon enough we all find out; cue news conference, with his family standing next to him, to admit the affair he lied about for months. It’s far worse to be found out later than to attempt to ignore it to begin with. And, when you’re transparent about your blemishes, an amazing thing happens: Your community comes to your defense and the critics sulk away.

Use common sense. Take your corporate hat off and think like a human being. No one wants to be talked to in corporate jargon or to be showered with pre-approved PR messages. Be understanding, listen, and make things right. Don’t act like a robot that can only repeat one or two messages. Use common sense when responding. Ask yourself if the critics have real complaints or they’re someone just harassing you. If it’s the former, be patient and give the person time to vent their frustrations.

Have a written external policy. The policy should describe when you will delete comments or ban critics, and establishes the tone of the conversation allowed on the site. For instance, the policy at Spin Sucks is that you can’t swear (we’ll edit out the swear words if you do) and the discourse must be professional. We once had a troll who copied and pasted his rude comment to the top of the stream every time the community pushed it down. He had been responded to, so we told him that if he continued to do that, his comments would be deleted and he would be banned. He stopped doing it. The written policy helps you moderate the conversation in a professional but open way.

It’s a very uncomfortable position to be in. None of us want to be criticized.

But, as the saying goes, if people either love you or hate you, you’re doing something right.

 
By Gini Dietrich

Source: allbusiness.com

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg admits disappointment in shares but hints at new products

September 14th, 2012 No comments

Facebook Inc. chief executive Mark Zuckerberg admits to being disappointed about his company’s crumbling share price, but argued that Wall Street did not yet grasp the full long-term potential of its slow-growing mobile business.

facebook sardi innovation

In his first major public appearance since the No. 1 social network’s rocky May IPO, Facebook Inc. CEO Mark Zuckerberg soothed investors by hinting at new growth areas from mobile to search.

The chief executive, who has himself lost billions of dollars on paper since Facebook’s market debut, admitted to disappointment about his company’s crumbling share price, but argued Wall Street has yet to grasp the full potential of its fledgling mobile business.

Speaking at theTechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco, the 28-year-old co-founder looked confident in a gray T-shirt and jeans as he hinted that the company was “halfway through” a cycle to “retool” and offer new advertising products.

His delivery helped drive Facebook shares up more than 3 percent after hours to above $20, building on a 3.3 percent gain in regular trade on Tuesday.

Facebook became the first U.S. company to debut on stock markets with a value of more than $100 billion. But it has since lost more than half of its capitalization as investors fret about slowing growth.

 

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Square CEO Jack Dorsey: I never wanted to be an entrepreneur

September 10th, 2012 No comments

SAN FRANCISCO — Startup lightening struck twice for Jack Dorsey: He’s a cofounder of Twitter and the creator and CEO of payments venture Square. Both companies now have multi-billion-dollar valuations, putting Dorsey in the rare pantheon of serial entrepreneurs with multiple home runs.

It’s a role that wasn’t originally on his radar, Dorsey said Monday in a talk at TechCrunch Disrupt. He wanted to be actor Bruce Lee, he quipped.

Jack Dorsey twitter founder square ceo

Jack Dorsey

Dorsey’s talk was light on specifics — he offered no new details on how things are going at Square or Twitter — and heavy on inspiration. Now a top executive at two of Silicon Valley’s most buzzed-about ventures, Dorsey spoke about his twisty journey to the business world’s peak.

“I wanted to be a sailor, to explore and experience the world,” he said of his early career visions. “I wanted to be an artist, specifically a surrealist — my favorites because they see the world in a very, very different way.”

Dorsey, who taught himself how to program at 15 and was inspired to build Twitter by his obsession with maps and data, outlined his philosophy of entrepreneurship to an audience packed with founders and investors.

“A founder is not a job,” he said. “It’s a role, it’s an attitude and it’s something that can happen again and again and again.”

One of Dorsey’s core beliefs is that “life happens in intersections.” Another is that developers should be building technology that will eventually disappear as it integrates into peoples’ lives.

Dorsey’s two businesses take aim at giant industries: Twitter is a top player in the social networking field, while Square hopes to reinvent the entire payments market. He encouraged other founders to stop nibbling around the margins and swing big.

“We don’t want disruption where we just move things around,” he said. “Speeches will not disrupt.”

In fact, he’d like to see the entire word tossed out of the tech lexicon.

“I think we have to change the name of this conference,” Dorsey announced from the stage.

Disruption is “like an earthquake,” he said: “It has no values, it has no organizing principles, it has no direction and it has no leadership.”

 

That’s not what the tech industry should be aiming for, he thinks.

“What we want to bring into the world is revolution. Revolution has values, revolution has purpose, revolution has direction, revolution has leaders,” Dorsey said. “Revolution looks at the intersection ahead and pushes people to do the right thing.”

His advice: “Pick a movement, pick a revolution and join it.”

By Laurie Segall
Source:  http://money.cnn.com/