You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] djjin14568 [S] ago  (edited ago)

I agree with you on the better overall conversation bit, but the other site's issues lie mostly with corporate interests more than their PR efforts. Don't get me wrong their "we screwed up" PR attempts were terribly bad. But, their bad PR efforts came out necessity to cover up efforts to monetize/raise capital for investors. This is why Victoria was fired, right? They wanted to change the formatting for the AMA's, and she did not like the suggested changes.

0
2

[–] Stanley_Yelnats_IV 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Yes, but a big part of that, and the reason for the initial wave of people here, was because they decided to cut out "offensive" portions of their own community in an effort to become more acceptable on a public level. The problem isn't that they wanted more money, it's that in pursuit of it they tried to "sanitize" the site's image by excising communities like r/fatpeoplehate. The root of the problem was this focus on achieving a clean, positive public image.

The thing of it is, PR is the antithesis of good discussion. One of the reasons you don't tend to get great debates on Facebook is because people type comments with PR in the backs of their heads. "What will this make me look like," "what can I post that will get the most likes so I can 'win' the argument," etc. The best conservations are the most honest ones, and those are created when people don't have to worry about whether their comment will seem too offensive or extreme.

0
0

[–] BloodPool ago 

This was the point I was trying to make. Thankfully, you put it more eloquently.