Broken record 2.0
In some ways I wish I had gone to the Network Stars Atlanta Seminar Tuesday night. I am impressed that so many people (175!) showed up – once again, just goes to show that Atlanta isn’t some piddly little second-tier place just because we’re not New York or San Francisco. I’ve heard lots of positive reactions about the event. But reading J’s post should make it obvious why I’m glad I didn’t go.
Am I cynical? I don’t know, but it’s just that these are the perennial questions – how much do you reveal? what is “professional?” what are the risks? etc. – and I’ve been in conversations about them too many times to count over the last several years. I feel like a broken record with this stuff – how many times can I say the same thing? Is it worth it to keep saying it? I get irritated with others for not “getting it” and irritated with myself for being so repetitive.
It’s not the fact that the questions keep being raised that irritates me so much; it’s the way in which they are typically presented: very one-sided, with lots of presumptions and suppositions and pre-conceived notions that go unchallenged. As I said to Toby in an email, “I think the ways in which personal and business presence intersect online is a fascinating and relevant topic.” The dynamic during and feedback from my BlogOrlando session shows that presenting this topic as more than just the superficial clichés of “personal vs. professional” encourages some great dialogue and critical thinking. It’s the interpersonal aspect of social media that is so much more interesting to me than “how do you position yourself in the market” and “how do you install WordPress.” They call it social media for a reason, after all.
As for Geoff Livingston, one thing that really annoys me about getting into it with people like him is that we inevitably end up talking about two different things. He’s over there at J’s blog saying he’s a private business owner and he’s allowed to run his business however he wants. Well, duh! Nobody is saying he doesn’t have the right to run his business how he wants! I don’t know where anybody has ever said that. What a lot of people are saying, though, is that hey, maybe that’s not the best way to run your business, and it might be worth considering other options, because you might be shooting yourself in the foot.
Maybe I shouldn’t have left that snarky* comment toward him at J’s blog, but I just couldn’t help myself, and who cares anyway? It’s not like he’s going to consider me an “equal” in any sense of the word anyway – I have POLE DANCING PHOTOS and TALK ABOUT SEXUALITY and USE THE F-WORD, for heaven’s sake! (Shades of Dave Mastio.) Toby had graciously attempted to introduce us via email, after I inquired about who spearheaded the Tuesday night event and whether they might be interested in presenting my defunct BlogHer Atlanta panel topic. I doubt I’ll get a response or that he would be interested, so it’ s not like I’m “burning a bridge” or anything. I’m used to that kind of preemptive dismissal by now, after nearly seven years of blogging. It never ceases to dishearten me, though.
I absolutely agree with Ellie that my panel topic needs to be presented in a space that is not already coded as sex-positive. That’s how real shifts in perspective happen – getting outside the echo chamber (a term I don’t like, but I’m writing this quickly), engaging with people and presenting them with viewpoints they might not have previously considered. That’s what was so great about my BlogOrlando session.
So, I’m still looking for a space – or spaces, plural! – for that discussion. But if I don’t find it, I’ll just keep doing what I’ve always done: make my own space. One of the greatest, most transgressive powers of social media, after all, is that we can all speak our truths with our own voices and not be beholden to someone controlling, with an iron fist or a red pen, what we can and cannot say.
* Aside: did you know that “snark” is a contraction of “snide” and “remark?” I recently found that out. Makes total sense!
I understand your hesitation to engage because I hate repeating myself too. I also dislike it when I am present a different opinion to someone but all they want to do is prove they’re right. It’s a conversation not a competition.
I like when you present a civil critique of an opinion you disagree with and are met with a response that your opinion is “laughable.”
Because that’s professional.
“* Aside: did you know that “snark” is a contraction of “snide” and “remark?” I recently found that out. Makes total sense!”
I did not. Thank you, Amber! That should totally be an answer on Jeopardy, hopefully so someone gets it wrong and Alex Trebek can reply with his unique brand of Canadian snark. :)
[...] was trying to fit this into my previous post on the topic but couldn’t find a way to work it in. Anyway, I want to address something Nikki said a while [...]
What’s even funnier about this post is that I am criticized for not agreeing with you when I didn’t even respond to your original comment. As to Rusty and J, I’ve said my piece on this topic.
I respect other people’s rights to differing opinions, and also will not yield on my view. It’s based on my experiences — not an opinion — having my tattoo photos vetted on the web, reactions to posts where I used the word mothereffer, losing speaking engagements for saying the eff word, etc. As well as seeing other folks reactions to those, and realizing how they impacted my business. Thus my stance.
Anyone that really knows me can testify that I offer plenty of personality on the web. And I suggest that you ask toby about me instead of just judging.
I do find it laughable to see people defend themselves and their right to act out on the web so vehemently. In Shakespeare’s words, “Thou doth protest too much.” And as to your rights, it’s your brand, your path, your career. You will attract the opportunities that suit you.
Like I told, Jay, different strokes for different folks. Good luck, and as I said to Toby, I wouldn’t have left your comment if I wanted a speaking engagement from me, but that’s cool. I am sure you will get plenty of additional opportunities, and I look forward to meeting you.
This entire discussion thus far has been about where employers and employees set their boundaries. Everything else has been a sideshow.
The funny laughable protests here are your continued insistence that your boundaries aren’t set on the conservative side of the spectrum, and the insistence that it would suit every company and employee to reside in the same conservative place on that spectrum.
I guess it’s easier to sell books if you pretend there is a one size fits all solution to questions of work-life boundaries, but it’s laughably unrealistic.
Geoff says, “different strokes for different folks. ”
+
Rusty says, “you pretend there is one size fits all solution.”
=
Laughable.
People referring to themselves in the third person is laughable.
Glad were both laughing now. I feel better ;) Good conversation.
[...] Almost universally (with the exception of Rohit) all of our interviewees felt some sort of blogging was a necessary activity for companies. My caveats are the time thing, which is the final segment, and a willingness to let control fall to the wayside. This may mean getting thwacked in the head by negative comments from disagreeing parties. [...]
[...] frankly online marketing is not about silly personalities with motorcycles (me) or rubber ducks or even pole dancing. If you want to defend your right to be stupid — all in the name of a personal brand — [...]
[...] they don’t “get” social media the same way I do. Hell, there are plenty of people who call themselves social media experts who feel VERY differently about it than I [...]