Thursday, March 24, 2016
Facebook Ad Progress
Friday, March 18, 2016
My Experience with Attitudinal Responses
I’ve graduated from the school of hard knocks when it comes
to my attitudinal response and how I deal with it. It would have been nice had I had this class
twenty years ago, I wouldn’t have had the experiences to feel like a heel, make
me look at myself and why I think this way.
So yes, I’m aware of my attitudinal response, and I’ve learned to let it
simmer until I really find out what’s going on.
The first attitudinal response experience happened when I
was just eight years old. My Dad is a
cowboy/team roper and all that entails.
Let’s just say he looks the part.
We were at a roping in northern California when this young kid (maybe
25ish?) showed up with longer blond curly hair, a Hawaiian shirt, and spurs on
his tennis shoes. My Dad said, “Are you
kidding me? Get that shiz outa here,
this isn’t a hippie roping.” This kid is
what we in the roping world like to call a wolf. He not only out roped them but out roped them
all week-end and took everyone’s money, including my Dad’s. Dad did give him a run for his money, but
this kid as we would come to know as Tommy Flenniken, proved to us that how you
are dressed is no indication of how good a roper you are. And really in life. While we'd like to think we can judge others aptitudes, and/or character by the way their dressed, I have been wrong way too many times. My Dad still likes to tell that story to this
day. That was my first “drunk
Mexican,” as it were.
The second story is more of an attitudinal response in
reverse, but a lesson all the same. I
would’ve been about 30 years old and my oldest son was 5, his sister 2 ½ and a
brand new baby. We would always stop at
a gas station in Alpine on our way to Idaho Falls, top off, grab our bug juice and
cheese sticks (Chance is Hypolgycemic so he had to have some protein with all
that sugar) and we'd be on our way. There was a young girl that reminds me of Johanna Mason on The Mockingjay played by Jena Malone, that was the cashier there. She wore all black, different colored hair monthly, various body piercings etc...she was just a tough nut to crack. But her and my Chance had this kind of funky endearing relationship. She was kind of ornery to him, and he just thought she was funny. He just found her being different, interesting I think. You have to remember that this was 15 years ago, way before Hunger Games and this type of look was acceptable. Anyway, I didn't know her name so we'll call her Johanna, was smoking outside when we pulled up to the station. I proceeded to get the kids out, and Chance ran up to her, stood on the curb, his little hands were in fists and he yelled at her, "Smoking is bad, stop it!" and he ran into the store. She looked at me and said, "Tell your self-righteous little brat that smoking isn't bad and he should keep his comments to himself." I took a deep breath and said, "Well, that's one way to look at it.......Or........ his Grandpa just died of lung cancer after months of suffering, so maybe, Chance just likes you, and he doesn't want you to die." She glared at me and threw her cigarette down and walked in the store. I got the baby out of her car seat and came upon this scene: Chance was standing there with bug juice and cheese stick in hand, she was knelt down talking to him. "So you had a rough week huh?" He just looked at the floor. "I'll tell ya what, I won't quit, but I promise to cut back and only smoke if I absolutely have to." His little tear stained cheeks looked up at her- "Promise?"
"I promise." He dropped his treats and grabbed her by the neck and hugged her as tight as he could. At first her hands were straight at his side not touching him, she finally put her arms around him and they hugged. That juxtaposition of my "self-righteous" five year old and this purple-haird, tatooed, pierced gal is forever burned into my brain. We never saw Johanna again, but her and Chance's interaction forever changed me. She had an attitudinal response toward him, and I was just privy to her changing and opening her heart.
My third experience with attitudinal response took place a couple of year's after Chance's experience with Johanna. I had met this gal at a party and something told me she was struggling, and I thought I really needed to reach out to her in friendship. So for a year, I'd go out of my way to say hi, tried to strike a conversation, suggest we might do something while the kids were in school. I got no reciprocation out of this girl at all. One day I was in the grocery store and she was ahead of me in the line. So I smiled and said hi, and tried to make small talk. She paid for her groceries, glared at me and ran out the door. I thought to myself, "That's it! I've had it. I'm done making an effort with her, what a snot!" So from then on I didn't really acknowledge her existence. When I'm done, I'm done. A couple month's later we got an invite to her yearly Christmas party. I was shocked we got it and even considered not going, but we went. An hour after the party started she pulled me aside and asked if we could talk. She said, "Remember that day at the grocery store?" Uh yeah, the day I wrote you off? I thought to myself. "Well, I have (a rare condition) and I barely made it to the car and threw up. The kid who was gathering the carts said he'd be back with a hose. I was so embarrassed. I have been so sick for over a year, but I have since had surgery. But I just wanted you to know, that I know I've been distant, but I just was so miserable, I couldn't do anything, even if I wanted to. So yah, I'd love to do something now." Oh my gosh, talk about making me feel three inches tall. Here I had labeled this girl as a stuck up snot, written her out of my life when she was dealing with some pretty heavy stuff. We ended up becoming pretty good friends. That moment taught me that while things may look normal, we never really know what other people are going through.
These experiences and 30 years more have taught me that things aren't always what they seem. Take a step back and as I like to say, just let things unfold. I've learned to do it in all areas of my life. And nowadays when I recognize I have an automatic response I am able to catch myself and ask why. Some answers don't come overnight but they will come eventually. Sometimes I feel like a real failure when they happen, but the only time you fail is if you don't learn. So I learn and move on, and isn't that what life's all about?
My third experience with attitudinal response took place a couple of year's after Chance's experience with Johanna. I had met this gal at a party and something told me she was struggling, and I thought I really needed to reach out to her in friendship. So for a year, I'd go out of my way to say hi, tried to strike a conversation, suggest we might do something while the kids were in school. I got no reciprocation out of this girl at all. One day I was in the grocery store and she was ahead of me in the line. So I smiled and said hi, and tried to make small talk. She paid for her groceries, glared at me and ran out the door. I thought to myself, "That's it! I've had it. I'm done making an effort with her, what a snot!" So from then on I didn't really acknowledge her existence. When I'm done, I'm done. A couple month's later we got an invite to her yearly Christmas party. I was shocked we got it and even considered not going, but we went. An hour after the party started she pulled me aside and asked if we could talk. She said, "Remember that day at the grocery store?" Uh yeah, the day I wrote you off? I thought to myself. "Well, I have (a rare condition) and I barely made it to the car and threw up. The kid who was gathering the carts said he'd be back with a hose. I was so embarrassed. I have been so sick for over a year, but I have since had surgery. But I just wanted you to know, that I know I've been distant, but I just was so miserable, I couldn't do anything, even if I wanted to. So yah, I'd love to do something now." Oh my gosh, talk about making me feel three inches tall. Here I had labeled this girl as a stuck up snot, written her out of my life when she was dealing with some pretty heavy stuff. We ended up becoming pretty good friends. That moment taught me that while things may look normal, we never really know what other people are going through.
These experiences and 30 years more have taught me that things aren't always what they seem. Take a step back and as I like to say, just let things unfold. I've learned to do it in all areas of my life. And nowadays when I recognize I have an automatic response I am able to catch myself and ask why. Some answers don't come overnight but they will come eventually. Sometimes I feel like a real failure when they happen, but the only time you fail is if you don't learn. So I learn and move on, and isn't that what life's all about?
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
OTM #3 Print is Back, Back Again
I was curious about this article for two reasons: 1- I'm a self-confessed book nerd and pretty much love anything about literature and 2- If Brooke Gladstone bothers to edit something, it's got to be interesting.
The article was not what I expected, it did talk about the possible death of books thanks to the ebook industry but, it also had other segments that were interesting, and about books but not related much to the title. But that's OK, it was a fun podcast.
They started out under the age old premise, "movies murdered theater, TV murdered radio so naturally ebooks would murder hard copy." False on all of these above. Some data I thought was interesting, "The ebook industry has leveled at 25% of the market share, after a high of 40%." As previously mentioned I am a book nerd. If I have one resentment about college, it's because I'm doing so much homework it cuts into my leisure reading time. And yes, I belong to Goodreads.com. Yes, I have tried to keep track of how many books I've read and how I've rated them. And yes, nothing is more endearing to me than a good friends book recommendation. But this article asked and answered a question I have pondered often........"What's driving the sales of paper books and why?" It's a simplistic answer really, books are physical, you can touch them vs. the alternative. I wrote in a previous blog that if I am feeling mentally out of sorts I can usually attribute it to the fact I am spending too much time in my on-line world and not enough time in my physical world. I had a professor ask me once what I held against on-line marketing, after all I seemed to have a knack for it. Because it's in the virtual world and there's something about my biological makeup that does not dwell well in that world for very long. I personally am a hands on person. I like producing things, making things, seeing actual results from things. When I start to feel down, I have to go outside, ride my horse, sew a quilt, get my fingers dirty in my garden, or read a book. Yes, read a book. Finishing a book is an accomplishment of the smallest sorts. I may have not gotten anything done really, but by hell, I finished my book. It's physical. I can hold it, turn the pages, curl up with it on a couch in front of the fire on a rainy day. One of my most fond memories; a dear friend of mine had lost a child. Month's after the funeral she was needing comfort. We thought we'd go shopping. We ended up in Barnes & Noble, Mexican Hot Cocoa in hand curled up on an over-stuffed chair, reading our fave books for an hour. Few words were spoken, but she needed it, I needed it, and we were perfectly content enjoying each other's silence as it were. Books fulfill a physical requirement for "real-life" that ebooks in the virtual world never will, which is why theater is not dead. There's nothing like partaking of "real-life."
The rest of the podcasts was about the fact that adult coloring books have been selling in the millions. In the 60's it was about political satire, currently it's about letting go of stress. Again, it's physical, you can't create an app that gives you the satisfaction of creating something physically, even something as simple as a picture with color pencils.
Another segment was on South Korea's quest for a Nobel prize. Interesting.
Another segment was on a man who loved books too much. He actually did research and stole valuable old books. Been in prison several times in the process of amassing his sought after library but evidently he has received great satisfaction as well in his library.
Last but not least was the segment about Amazon opening a brick and mortar store, which seems like a total oxymoron for them, but when you look at the real reason why they are doing, it really has nothing to do with selling books. They want to collect data about shoppers at brick and mortar stores and sell this data to other retailers. They can collect this data online but previously they could not collect this data at a physical store. When you go into a store, you're basically anonymous. However, they have figured out how to not make that anonymous anymore. It's all about the data.
Nothing is quite what it seems anymore, so I think I'm just going to go home, draw a lavender bubble bath, make some peppermint tea, and read a book. And doesn't Amazon wish they knew which one?
The article was not what I expected, it did talk about the possible death of books thanks to the ebook industry but, it also had other segments that were interesting, and about books but not related much to the title. But that's OK, it was a fun podcast.
They started out under the age old premise, "movies murdered theater, TV murdered radio so naturally ebooks would murder hard copy." False on all of these above. Some data I thought was interesting, "The ebook industry has leveled at 25% of the market share, after a high of 40%." As previously mentioned I am a book nerd. If I have one resentment about college, it's because I'm doing so much homework it cuts into my leisure reading time. And yes, I belong to Goodreads.com. Yes, I have tried to keep track of how many books I've read and how I've rated them. And yes, nothing is more endearing to me than a good friends book recommendation. But this article asked and answered a question I have pondered often........"What's driving the sales of paper books and why?" It's a simplistic answer really, books are physical, you can touch them vs. the alternative. I wrote in a previous blog that if I am feeling mentally out of sorts I can usually attribute it to the fact I am spending too much time in my on-line world and not enough time in my physical world. I had a professor ask me once what I held against on-line marketing, after all I seemed to have a knack for it. Because it's in the virtual world and there's something about my biological makeup that does not dwell well in that world for very long. I personally am a hands on person. I like producing things, making things, seeing actual results from things. When I start to feel down, I have to go outside, ride my horse, sew a quilt, get my fingers dirty in my garden, or read a book. Yes, read a book. Finishing a book is an accomplishment of the smallest sorts. I may have not gotten anything done really, but by hell, I finished my book. It's physical. I can hold it, turn the pages, curl up with it on a couch in front of the fire on a rainy day. One of my most fond memories; a dear friend of mine had lost a child. Month's after the funeral she was needing comfort. We thought we'd go shopping. We ended up in Barnes & Noble, Mexican Hot Cocoa in hand curled up on an over-stuffed chair, reading our fave books for an hour. Few words were spoken, but she needed it, I needed it, and we were perfectly content enjoying each other's silence as it were. Books fulfill a physical requirement for "real-life" that ebooks in the virtual world never will, which is why theater is not dead. There's nothing like partaking of "real-life."
The rest of the podcasts was about the fact that adult coloring books have been selling in the millions. In the 60's it was about political satire, currently it's about letting go of stress. Again, it's physical, you can't create an app that gives you the satisfaction of creating something physically, even something as simple as a picture with color pencils.
Another segment was on South Korea's quest for a Nobel prize. Interesting.
Another segment was on a man who loved books too much. He actually did research and stole valuable old books. Been in prison several times in the process of amassing his sought after library but evidently he has received great satisfaction as well in his library.
Last but not least was the segment about Amazon opening a brick and mortar store, which seems like a total oxymoron for them, but when you look at the real reason why they are doing, it really has nothing to do with selling books. They want to collect data about shoppers at brick and mortar stores and sell this data to other retailers. They can collect this data online but previously they could not collect this data at a physical store. When you go into a store, you're basically anonymous. However, they have figured out how to not make that anonymous anymore. It's all about the data.
Nothing is quite what it seems anymore, so I think I'm just going to go home, draw a lavender bubble bath, make some peppermint tea, and read a book. And doesn't Amazon wish they knew which one?
Monday, March 14, 2016
Religion 3.0
After going through and reading everyone's posts on religion 3.0 I just wanted to say, "Yeah, what they said." But that isn't the writing assignment, even though I wanted to take thoughts from each one of their blogs and integrate it into mine. But Professor Young seems to have this notion that my work needs to be original, so here you go.
I was raised LDS; however, it was outside of the Mormon belt. (That little stretch that encompasses Utah, Idaho and Western Wyoming.) We lived in Northern California when I was 7 and some friends of the family took me to a Stake Conference. I had never been to anything like that before. (My parents are converts so Stake Conference was the day we didn't go to church.) Everyone stood and sang the closing hymn and as I stood there and looked around I remember what I felt, and I remember thinking, this is something I want to be a part of. That being said I also agree with the last two sentences of Reggie Shaw's Religion 3.0 post. Sharing sacred experiences is tricky and it seems like when you do, the experience really loses some of that spirit of sacredness. So I will just say - that was basically my conversion story. My parents being new to the church, didn't know a lot plus we were raised in nonmember communities so I don't know that I really knew a whole lot about Mormon culture growing up. Mormon culture, is different from LDS religion, do not confuse the two. Where there is a majority of LDS there grows a culture that is not necessarily found anywhere in Mormon doctrine. I experienced this at my first year at Ricks College in Rexburg, Idaho. Here I thought I was a member of the LDS church but I had never experienced this Mormon culture and it was a huge culture shock for me to say the least. I wondered if the church I had been attending for the last 18 years was indeed the same church I experienced at Ricks. Yes, it was really that different. And the same is in reverse. Don't think that whatever LDS religion (culture) you are experiencing here in Utah's Dixie will be the same in nonmember communities across the world. The differences really are night and day. I remember I would call home and tell my Dad, "You've never heard anything like it! They talk about missionary farewells in the grocery stores!! Right where everyone can hear them! Religion is plastered on the front page, green jello salad with carrots is evidently a thing......, Professors talk about the church in Social Media class!!" Haha just kidding, but we did talk about church in my Economics class at Ricks which totally floored me. When my Dad came to visit, there was a story on the front page about whether Mormon farmers should sell barley to the beer company when they knew it was going to be made into beer and the big controversy that ensued. You could have knocked my Dad over with a feather, I tried to warn him. My parents moved a lot (I moved on an average of once a year) but not one of the places we lived was there an LDS majority, so even though we are LDS we didn't think about it much. In Fossil, Oregon where I went to high school population 400, there were 11 different churches, and that did not include our LDS branch. I remember thinking we were all different religions and who cared? There were 10 girls and 4 boys in my class and I don't remember if I ever knew what religion the boys were. I am LDS, my best friend was a baptist preachers daughter and other than that I have no idea what religion the other 8 girls were. Didn't know, didn't care. Which brings me to my last thought, to me religion is personal. Do I love all of the social aspects of the LDS church? I do. Do I love the service opportunities? Again, yes. Have I made some life-long friends? Absolutely. But when it comes right down to it, these things are not the priority. The priority is my relationship to God and Jesus Christ. If I'm the only one in that pew on Sunday morning, well, that's OK. I need it, and that's really the only thing that matters. Me and them.
Now I'd like to address how Social Media affects religion. I read what Professor Young posted - interesting! Instant Christ, interesting! I also read a student's post about how he liked Instant Christ and really, that is what it is all about, if it works for you then by all means, do it. If Instant Christ, or inspiring posts or scripture posts do it for you, then enjoy them! I know at different times in my life I find different posts inspiring (whether LDS or not.) And I seriously mean that. I also believe in opposition in all things so while there is lots of inspiring stuff on-line when it comes to religion, there will also be lots of negative stuff as well. And as with everything in my life including religion, I do not partake of the negative. So honestly, I couldn't tell you what's out there when it comes to the negatives of social media and religion.
Another issue I'd like to address is Candy Roland's (sorry if I spelled your name wrong.) issues of anxiety when it comes to nonmember families etc.... My first husband and I were sealed in the temple and had three fabulous kids. We have since divorced and our sealing has been cancelled (which now means we are not an eternal couple.) and he has since been sealed to someone else. (I actually like her, but feel sorry for her as well.) So here my kids are attending this "Families are Forever" church and their family is not so eternal anymore. And Cassy I don't have the answers. And neither does the church other than, "Have faith, it will all work out." I hope my kids aren't feeling the anxiety you feel/felt. But I make no apologies. I make no judgements. I don't know who's going to make it to the Celestial Kingdom and who's not. My goal is to do the best I possibly can, and to learn to love EVERYONE unconditionally. At this point the only person, I've met that I've deemed it impossible to love unconditionally is my ex-husband, but those are my demons. Which brings me to another blog I've read and agree with. I think religion is good (at least in my case) because I am naturally not a nice person. I have to work at it. And the more I attend and associate with those who are trying their best just like me, the more I learn. If religion, whether LDS or not, inspires the human race to act better, serve, and love, than I believe it will always have a place. But it is up to us to let everyone decide what works for them. In conclusion, my views on religion is all about free agency. I am a huge cheerleader of free agency. I love my religion and it works for me. If it doesn't work for you, it doesn't mean I'm going to love you any less. In fact, I encourage you to believe and live whatever inspires you to be a better person. And that is my take on Religion 3.0
I was raised LDS; however, it was outside of the Mormon belt. (That little stretch that encompasses Utah, Idaho and Western Wyoming.) We lived in Northern California when I was 7 and some friends of the family took me to a Stake Conference. I had never been to anything like that before. (My parents are converts so Stake Conference was the day we didn't go to church.) Everyone stood and sang the closing hymn and as I stood there and looked around I remember what I felt, and I remember thinking, this is something I want to be a part of. That being said I also agree with the last two sentences of Reggie Shaw's Religion 3.0 post. Sharing sacred experiences is tricky and it seems like when you do, the experience really loses some of that spirit of sacredness. So I will just say - that was basically my conversion story. My parents being new to the church, didn't know a lot plus we were raised in nonmember communities so I don't know that I really knew a whole lot about Mormon culture growing up. Mormon culture, is different from LDS religion, do not confuse the two. Where there is a majority of LDS there grows a culture that is not necessarily found anywhere in Mormon doctrine. I experienced this at my first year at Ricks College in Rexburg, Idaho. Here I thought I was a member of the LDS church but I had never experienced this Mormon culture and it was a huge culture shock for me to say the least. I wondered if the church I had been attending for the last 18 years was indeed the same church I experienced at Ricks. Yes, it was really that different. And the same is in reverse. Don't think that whatever LDS religion (culture) you are experiencing here in Utah's Dixie will be the same in nonmember communities across the world. The differences really are night and day. I remember I would call home and tell my Dad, "You've never heard anything like it! They talk about missionary farewells in the grocery stores!! Right where everyone can hear them! Religion is plastered on the front page, green jello salad with carrots is evidently a thing......, Professors talk about the church in Social Media class!!" Haha just kidding, but we did talk about church in my Economics class at Ricks which totally floored me. When my Dad came to visit, there was a story on the front page about whether Mormon farmers should sell barley to the beer company when they knew it was going to be made into beer and the big controversy that ensued. You could have knocked my Dad over with a feather, I tried to warn him. My parents moved a lot (I moved on an average of once a year) but not one of the places we lived was there an LDS majority, so even though we are LDS we didn't think about it much. In Fossil, Oregon where I went to high school population 400, there were 11 different churches, and that did not include our LDS branch. I remember thinking we were all different religions and who cared? There were 10 girls and 4 boys in my class and I don't remember if I ever knew what religion the boys were. I am LDS, my best friend was a baptist preachers daughter and other than that I have no idea what religion the other 8 girls were. Didn't know, didn't care. Which brings me to my last thought, to me religion is personal. Do I love all of the social aspects of the LDS church? I do. Do I love the service opportunities? Again, yes. Have I made some life-long friends? Absolutely. But when it comes right down to it, these things are not the priority. The priority is my relationship to God and Jesus Christ. If I'm the only one in that pew on Sunday morning, well, that's OK. I need it, and that's really the only thing that matters. Me and them.
Now I'd like to address how Social Media affects religion. I read what Professor Young posted - interesting! Instant Christ, interesting! I also read a student's post about how he liked Instant Christ and really, that is what it is all about, if it works for you then by all means, do it. If Instant Christ, or inspiring posts or scripture posts do it for you, then enjoy them! I know at different times in my life I find different posts inspiring (whether LDS or not.) And I seriously mean that. I also believe in opposition in all things so while there is lots of inspiring stuff on-line when it comes to religion, there will also be lots of negative stuff as well. And as with everything in my life including religion, I do not partake of the negative. So honestly, I couldn't tell you what's out there when it comes to the negatives of social media and religion.
Another issue I'd like to address is Candy Roland's (sorry if I spelled your name wrong.) issues of anxiety when it comes to nonmember families etc.... My first husband and I were sealed in the temple and had three fabulous kids. We have since divorced and our sealing has been cancelled (which now means we are not an eternal couple.) and he has since been sealed to someone else. (I actually like her, but feel sorry for her as well.) So here my kids are attending this "Families are Forever" church and their family is not so eternal anymore. And Cassy I don't have the answers. And neither does the church other than, "Have faith, it will all work out." I hope my kids aren't feeling the anxiety you feel/felt. But I make no apologies. I make no judgements. I don't know who's going to make it to the Celestial Kingdom and who's not. My goal is to do the best I possibly can, and to learn to love EVERYONE unconditionally. At this point the only person, I've met that I've deemed it impossible to love unconditionally is my ex-husband, but those are my demons. Which brings me to another blog I've read and agree with. I think religion is good (at least in my case) because I am naturally not a nice person. I have to work at it. And the more I attend and associate with those who are trying their best just like me, the more I learn. If religion, whether LDS or not, inspires the human race to act better, serve, and love, than I believe it will always have a place. But it is up to us to let everyone decide what works for them. In conclusion, my views on religion is all about free agency. I am a huge cheerleader of free agency. I love my religion and it works for me. If it doesn't work for you, it doesn't mean I'm going to love you any less. In fact, I encourage you to believe and live whatever inspires you to be a better person. And that is my take on Religion 3.0
Friday, March 4, 2016
OTM 2 - The Accidental Outing of Rwanda's most Powerful Troll
I actually listened to half a dozen podcasts before I decided to write about this particular one. What I found most intriguing about this article was the similarity between on-line and reality and sometimes how those lines get blurred or at the very least mimic eachother.
The article doesn't appear to be anything too newsworthy other than the fact of who the actors on the stage are, metaphorically speaking.
It's about how the Rwandan government is quite active on Social Media. The President - Paul Kagame - has his own Twitter account etc..... The government also harasses and employs internet trolls. While this may seem surprising in our culture the journalists who Tweet and/or have worked in Rwanda are not surprised because of the regular treatment of journalists in that country. If a journalist writes something the Rwandan government doesn't like, they have killed and/or jailed them etc.....so for this government to employ trolls doesn't seem all that surprising considering the culture.
In listening to other OTM podcasts, there appears to be one prevailing theme, "DON'T FEED THE TROLLS," and while most agree, in every interesting podcast, the author always has that one troll that particularly stands out. This story plays along as well. There was a journalist who was tweeting, and a Rwandan government troll came along and harassed her, so a fellow journalist Steve Terrill basically stood up for his (girl) friend and told the troll there was no cause to act like that. The troll of course came after him. However, after doing some research and going as far back in the trolls history as he could Mr. Terrill discovered the troll was indeed a Rwandan government staffer. So the troll and Mr. Terrill keep exchanging tweets until one fateful day the troll forgot to switch his account and he used the Rwandan Government tweet account to call Mr. Terrill out. This of course was the smoking gun and Mr. Terrill knew for sure who the troll was. But, what I find fascinating is the Rwandan government didn't apologize and fire their staff member, they stood behind their own and in turn made Mr. Terrill's life miserable for this accidental outing they claimed Mr. Terrill was responsible for. This is where real-life mimics on-line, the government then blocked Mr. Terrill from ever entering the country again. Just like on-line when you block someone from entering your personal internet space. Mr. Terrill at this point regrets pursuing the troll and the accidental outing which proved it was the government indeed who employs trolls, from his point of view it wasn't worth getting blocked from the country.
I believe this is another case of dirty politics, culture and technology clash. The internet not only mimics reality but reality at times mimics the internet. Power, corruption and politics live on.
I actually listened to half a dozen podcasts before I decided to write about this particular one. What I found most intriguing about this article was the similarity between on-line and reality and sometimes how those lines get blurred or at the very least mimic eachother.
The article doesn't appear to be anything too newsworthy other than the fact of who the actors on the stage are, metaphorically speaking.
It's about how the Rwandan government is quite active on Social Media. The President - Paul Kagame - has his own Twitter account etc..... The government also harasses and employs internet trolls. While this may seem surprising in our culture the journalists who Tweet and/or have worked in Rwanda are not surprised because of the regular treatment of journalists in that country. If a journalist writes something the Rwandan government doesn't like, they have killed and/or jailed them etc.....so for this government to employ trolls doesn't seem all that surprising considering the culture.
In listening to other OTM podcasts, there appears to be one prevailing theme, "DON'T FEED THE TROLLS," and while most agree, in every interesting podcast, the author always has that one troll that particularly stands out. This story plays along as well. There was a journalist who was tweeting, and a Rwandan government troll came along and harassed her, so a fellow journalist Steve Terrill basically stood up for his (girl) friend and told the troll there was no cause to act like that. The troll of course came after him. However, after doing some research and going as far back in the trolls history as he could Mr. Terrill discovered the troll was indeed a Rwandan government staffer. So the troll and Mr. Terrill keep exchanging tweets until one fateful day the troll forgot to switch his account and he used the Rwandan Government tweet account to call Mr. Terrill out. This of course was the smoking gun and Mr. Terrill knew for sure who the troll was. But, what I find fascinating is the Rwandan government didn't apologize and fire their staff member, they stood behind their own and in turn made Mr. Terrill's life miserable for this accidental outing they claimed Mr. Terrill was responsible for. This is where real-life mimics on-line, the government then blocked Mr. Terrill from ever entering the country again. Just like on-line when you block someone from entering your personal internet space. Mr. Terrill at this point regrets pursuing the troll and the accidental outing which proved it was the government indeed who employs trolls, from his point of view it wasn't worth getting blocked from the country.
I believe this is another case of dirty politics, culture and technology clash. The internet not only mimics reality but reality at times mimics the internet. Power, corruption and politics live on.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)