Filed under: Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Comment, Corporate Gaslighting, Culture, Fake Attitude, Linkedin, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Prejudice, Technology
Over the past few weeks, I’ve had 2 very unpleasant interactions with LinkedIn.
The first was when I discovered my personal account had been blocked by them.
No warning.
No reason.
Just blocked.
I had to look on Google to find out how I could get in contact with them, and after discovering that I had to submit proof of my ID – they got back to me to say that someone had found a post I’d written offensive due to it’s adult content … and as they felt it contravened some LinkedIn policy I’d never heard of, they needed me to apologise to them before they would reinstate me.
Now I appreciate the image I chose was provocative, however it was not just for shock value … it was part of a presentation/post I was giving about the terrible, sexist, bullying behaviour men subject women to in the work place every single day – so I found it remarkable they ignored the context – which was clear – and just banned me and demanded an apology.
I told them I refused to apologise because it’s a genuine presentation about a genuine issue … however, as they appeared to be OK with that sort of behaviour, I would report them to the workplace commission for equal rights as well as the #MeToo organisation.
Unsuprisingly they reinstated my account saying ‘they appreciate I wasn’t trying to be offensive’, despite having previously said they agreed with whoever complained about my post and – contrary to most legal protocols – regarded me guilty, even though they had not sought any information or context about the post from the person being accused.
But pathetic and annoying but that was nothing compared to what was yet to come.
So a week later – which seems a very strange coincidence – the Corporate Gaslighting LinkedIn account was banned.
Again no warning. No explanation. Just banned.
So I went through the same thing and then they got back to me with this …
Yep, the issue is simply the account is under Corporate Gaslighting’s name rather than my own – despite all contact details are.
But here’s where it gets even more annoying.
“Due to the nature of this account, we won’t be able to remove the restriction and/or merge this account with another one.”
That’s right.
It’s blocked. Forever.
Not because they couldn’t link it to my account but because they didn’t want to. Because of the ‘nature’ of the account.
And this is where I’m confused because surely the nature of the account is perfect for LinkedIn?
In fact, when I read the LinkedIn ‘purpose’, which states:
‘Connect the world’s professionals to make them more productive and successful’
… then I can’t think of a more perfect partner for LinkedIn.
But no. They don’t want it.
It’s fine to have shady recruiters taking money from their clients to spam anyone they can get to. It’s fine to have men use their site to hit on women. It’s fine to pretend you’re a z-grade shrink with a guaranteed answer to everything you could ever wish for. It’s fine to allow ‘members’ to spout blatant lies about their achievements or sales tools. It’s fine to have people use the platform to talk about the conformity of professional appearance … but it’s not OK to have someone who is dedicated to helping professionals being systematically undermined by bad leaders, because the way I filled in their form is a violation of the LinkedIn User Agreement and Professional Community Policies.
I’ll tell you what’s a violation – LinkedIn’s claims they are a community. That they want to help people succeed. That they want to connect people together.
LinkedIn wants everyone to follow their orders. What they have decided is right. What works in their best interests. And if for some reason that doesn’t happen, then they let their god complex run riot – before hiding behind anonymous people and policies that don’t allow for context or conversation … just a brazen and contrived ‘computer says no’ guilty verdict, with all the humanity and consideration of an ATM machine.
Dear LinkedIn. You are in danger of becoming the absolute opposite of what you claim to be about, because if you were, you’d have created your own version of Corporate Gaslighting, but no, you’d rather just ban it. But then, when you’re paying your CEO almost $14,000,000 per year, I appreciate the last thing you’d ever want to do is to take any sort of stand against any sort of professional misconduct, for fear of alienating the companies who allow your CEO to be paid such an obscene amount.
Linkedin has incredible potential to be a real force for good.
Not just for corporations, but employees too.
It could influence real, positive change.
It could drive shifts in values, attitudes and rewards.
It could challenge the rules of what ‘professionalism’ supposedly means and looks like in the modern age.
It could help shape the future of work in ways that benefit all.
And while some could say they are doing this in their own way, the past few weeks have suggested to me their focus is on keeping the C-Suite happy rather than helping people create a new version of the C-Suite.
It’s a shame, because the whole industry is begging for some sort of major change but instead, they not only prefer to keep things exactly the same … they are using their power to ensure it does.
If you – or someone you know – are having your confidence systematically undermined, by colleagues … you are not alone. There is help out there. Not at Linkedin.com but at TheyTriedToKillMeButI.Live
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, America, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, China, Corona Virus, Culture, Cunning, Empathy, Equality, Linkedin, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Perspective, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Point Of View, Prejudice, Presenting, Professionalism, Relevance, Resonance, Social Commentary, Social Divide, Social Media
So a few weeks ago, I saw a tweet that asked about ‘most awkward’ presentation.
Given I’d just read a terribly superficial [and out-of-touch] document they’d written on China, it reminded me of something that happened with me and McKinsey in China a few years ago.
So I wrote this:
As soon as I posted it, I knew it had hit a nerve as my phone was continually buzzing – but whereas it normally stops after about 4 seconds, this carried on. In fact it got more intense. So intense in fact that within 48 hours, it had achieved this:
22,000 likes.
5,500 retweets
300+ comments
In addition to that, I got contacted by people in the US, Mexico and China who said I had set off a vibrant debate in their respective countries via their respective versions of Linkedin, Instagram and Twitter.
Hell, I even got contacted by Consulting Humour [which is apparently ‘a thing’] who wanted to post it.
MADNESS.
But what’s even more mad is that almost everyone who commented was nice to me.
Even the people who disagreed with what I’d written.
And yet, despite all that, I found it overwhelming … like being in a car that’s on the edge of going out of control.
It got so uncomfortable that I had to delete my Twitter for a few hours so I could catch my breath.
But what was obvious was a lot of people have a lot of issues with McKinsey and consultancies as a whole.
The main issue seemingly being they get paid a fortune for their advice but don’t have to take any responsibility for what they recommend.
This was the message a huge range of people working in a huge range of industries said … from small businesses to multinationals to entrepreneurs to ex-McKinsey consultants.
Now I am under no illusion that McKinsey won’t give a shit about what I said – and I don’t blame them – but I do think they should be a bit nervous that an innocuous tweet could create such a shitstorm of commentary and engagement.
However on the off-chance that last sentence encourages the McKinsey lawyers to come after me, I should point a few things:
1. The talk I referred to in the tweet was not a presentation claiming advertising was better than consultancy. It wasn’t even about advertising … more about how cultural innovation can achieve more distinctive brand growth and business optimisation. I think.
2. And while it looks like I pissing on the value of consultants, I wasn’t. I accept, in the right situation, they offer incredible benefits to business … however, when they have no skin in the game – or are offering analysis on cultural behaviour without ever actually interacting in culture – then the effect of their advice can be called into question.
3. But most of all, while I was a cheeky shit in the presentation I gave in Shanghai all those years ago … I definitely said it with a twinkle I the eye and the audience knew that … rather than looking at me thinking I was purely an antagonistic bastard.
Emphasis on ‘purely’.
So while this viral situation was an interesting adventure, I learnt something even more valuable than ‘consultancies’ are the silver bullet to influencer status.
I’m not talking about the grudging respect I might have gained for social media influencers.
Nor the fact I am worried so many people aspire to be one, without maybe realising the mental anguish they will face and the pressure they will place on themselves to perform even better.
No, it’s this …
There are so many people out there who face abuse, judgement and prejudice just for being who they are.
Not just in social media, but in every aspect of their lives.
I can’t imagine having to deal with that level of scrutiny … hell, I couldn’t even deal with 2 days of it and my experience was good.
This not only highlights their strength, but also my privilege.
Of course I knew I had that – but this situation helped me understand it in a way I could feel rather than just understand.
I honestly think it would be worth every white, middle class person to experience … especially the Karen’s of this World, who have the audacity to claim being in their comfortable homes to protect them from catching a deadly virus is equivalent to slavery.
You think I’m making that last bit up don’t you?
I know, it sounds utterly insane to think that could be true.
But in America, insane is often normal.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand Suicide, Cats, Cunning, Linkedin
So now my life has hit a major age milestone – and I apparently become an official fucking dinosaur for adland – I’m guessing this is why I received this random correspondence on Linkedin recently …
Now I appreciate I really, really, really love my cat … but I have to say, I don’t know if I have all the skills or qualities required to become a professional vet recruiter.
Quite frankly, I don’t think anyone who loves their pet wants me to become a professional vet recruiter.
Though I have asked for more details … hahahaha.
[Still haven’t heard back from him yet though]
That said, with Leonel’s lateral thinking approach to his job, maybe he would be better suited to working in adland than pet-care-by-proxy. He’s certainly more qualified than I am … probably – and sadly – in either job.
I don’t know about you but I’m impressed.
And very, very scared.
🐈🐕🥼
Filed under: Brand Suicide, Communication Strategy, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Linkedin, Marketing Fail
I’ve written a lot about Linkedin in the past.
None of it, let’s face it, that complimentary.
Part of that is because of what some users view as professional and part of that is because they show a total lack of understanding of who their users are … but it also doesn’t help its become a place where bullshit head hunters blindly contact you about bullshit jobs.
Or worse, where they ask you for names of people they can then bombard with their bullshit jobs.
Continuing the theme of bullshit and Linkedin, have a look at this …
WHAT. THE. FUCK?
Seriously, what are they talking about?
Why are they going on about ‘secret sauce’?
Why are they trying to make it sound that the average schmuck can have the same power and influence over Linkedin as THE PEOPLE WHO OWN LINKEDIN?
And given no one actually knows what they’re talking about, why would anyone care how Linkedin uses Linkedin to market their secret sauce … let alone the fact that given no one knows what their secret sauce is, it must mean Linkedin is absolutely shit for marketing.
I swear to god this is nothing more than a bet some people had in Linkedin to see how many times they could put the word Linkedin into an ad. Because any other reason just doesn’t make the slightest bit of sense.
This is another perfect example of when companies try and act in a way that is totally inauthentic to them. Embrace your boringness Linkedin, because at least it will make me think you’re self aware, whereas now, I just think you’re a bloody idiot.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Consultants, Content, Context, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Experience, Friendship, Happiness, Insight, Linkedin, Loyalty, Marketing, Membership, Relevance, Resonance, Social Commentary, Social Divide, Social Media
Many years ago, Toby Young wrote a book by the name of this post.
It was a journey through his bad decisions, bad timing and bad acts.
And while there was a lot of genuinely funny moments in it, you couldn’t help think he was a bit of a twat – which was confirmed with many of his later actions, decisions and behaviour.
I say this because recently I had a dalliance with someone who could best be described as Toby Young, without the humour.
Look, I work in advertising so I’m used to working with twats.
There’s actually a lot less of them than people like to think, but the ones who are there are generally stupendous at twatdom.
But this interaction was not someone I work with … it was someone on Linkedin.
Yes … Linkedin. The platform that is to community what Boris Johnson is to leadership.
Now even though this person and I are not ‘connected’, I do kind-of know him.
He was in Asia when I was there and had a reputation for grandiose statements that rarely could be backed up.
Anyway, I hadn’t heard about him or seen him for literally years, so I was surprised when a few weeks ago, he suddenly came into my life.
He did this by writing a comment under a Linkedin post I’d put up about one of the biggest mistakes a planner can make.
He asked:
What’s the difference between thinking and planning according to you? And is there a difference? And how do you see modern day account planning influencing business and corporate strategy which is really what CEO’s want to see – they’re not interested in ads or creativity unless its making them money?
I answered as best I could … saying I felt he was implying some planners didn’t care about the impact creativity had on the clients business, just their ego and if that’s the case, maybe he’s spending time with the wrong planners, clients and creatives.
In the blink of an eye, he responded with these 2 gems:
First this …
“I’m not implying anything- I’m asking a question. I be;lieve that’s valid on a social media platform. What I’ve foudn theough Experience s that sometimes it’s better to just answer instead of reading too much into it.”
[Spelling mistakes were his, not mine]
And then this …
“You really don’t get social, do you? You can’t be focused and social at the same time. I’ve been studying clinical psychology and the mind for 7 years. It’s two ends of the same frequency . Planners are focused (head) creatives are social (HEART). Open your heart my friend before a surgeon does the job for you. Good luck. You’re mucking around with someone with a lot of medical knowledge and experience.”
That second comment was bizarre.
Judgemental. Condescending. Patronising. Almost threatening.
I have to be honest, I was quite impressed. It’s been a long time since I’ve come across such a prick who can get so personal and so insulting so quickly.
But then it got weirder, because he then sent this:
Seriously, what the fuck?
From slagging me off to interrogating the most stupid shit [like my bloody camouflage background????] to then asking me to give him free information and advice so he can win a client and charge them money for his ‘help’.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised because Linkedin is full of people who think they can just ask or say whatever they want as long as it benefits them. I’m sure we’ve all had headhunters contact us for names of people they should talk to – when they’re literally being paid by clients to know people who they should talk to.
But there’s something about this persons manner that pisses me off.
Maybe it’s the contradiction between acting superior but still wanting stuff.
I can’t help but feel he is someone who read Neil Strauss’, ‘The Game‘ [who also wrote Motley Crue’s, admittedly great, The Dirt … which tells you a lot] and saw it as a philosophy for how to live rather than the exploitative, manipulative and destructive book it actually was.
Part of me really wants to name and shame him.
If he’s doing that to me, what is he like to others.
Women. Or juniors. Or anyone to be honest.
But I won’t because who knows what he’s going through however – as I mentioned in my final response to him – for all his alleged expertise in clinical psychology and social platforms, he sure hasn’t got the faintest idea how to communicate with people.
So I’ll leave him be but if he does comes back [again] I’ll simply point him to this post and hope he understands the responsibility for clarity of communication is with the communicator, not the recipient. Something tells me, he wouldn’t.
But what all this shows is a mistake that companies, platforms and agencies continually make with the idea of community.
I get why it’s so interesting to them, but the problem is – what they think is a community, isn’t.
A community isn’t where you go to continually satisfy your own needs.
In essence, that’s the total opposite of a community.
What a real community is something built on shared beliefs and values … where you want to work together to help push or achieve a common goal. It absolutely isn’t about personal benefit at others expense, it’s about something much, much bigger.
And while it’s power and influence can be enormous …
Linkedin doesn’t get this.
Agencies flogging membership and community doesn’t get this.
And this ‘competitive strategist’ doesn’t get this.
Because the key rule for a real community is about adding to it, not just taking.