3 ms·

Unfortunately, some of the problem may be the language we use to advance our points. Here's a phrase that I think really does illustrate this: "Making it hard

by geebee 11y ago

Unfortunately, some of the problem may be the language we use to advance our points. Here's a phrase that I think really does illustrate this: "Making it harder to share your home in San Francisco may make it impossible for some of these hosts to afford to stay in their homes and in this city." I really do want to discuss this reasonably, but to me, this is clearly a misuse of the word "share". There is a powerful emotion around "sharing", and to say that San Francisco is making it harder to "share" your home does have a different ring than saying it is making it harder to "rent out your home short term". I will certainly agree that there can be some ambiguity around the word "share". For instance, if two people both pay equally for a large sandwich, they might say they "shared" it rather than "split it". But when you list your room on a website for a certain price, and someone pays you for it, I don't think we're anywhere close to that ambiguous grey area. This is clearly a quid-pro-quo commercial transaction. They can be friendly transactions, people can get to know each other through these transactions. I'm not even saying it's an undesirable transaction (more or less everyone I know things that airbnb has its place, though there is great disagreement over how these rentals should be regulated). But I really don't think it's "sharing" by any reasonable definition of the term.

seiji 11y ago
clearly a misuse of the word "share" Yes, it's not "sharing" when a middleman takes a fixed percentage of all transactions and works for maximizing their revenue. The way you get your astrotuf terms to be less astro-turfy is to use them as often and in as many non-hostile situations as possible while still engendering them with a sense of "this is all for the best." http://mondato.com/blog/apptivism/ http://mondato.com/blog/apptivism/ and http://www.fastcompany.com/3022974/tech-forecast/is-peers-the-sharing-economys-future-or-just-a-great-silicon-valley-pr-stunt http://www.fastcompany.com/3022974/tech-forecast/is-peers-th... and http://www.wired.com/2014/12/sharing-economy-pr-stunt-turned-real-business/ http://www.wired.com/2014/12/sharing-economy-pr-stunt-turned... and google is your friend.
alexqgb 11y ago
This is putting it politely. Using the word "sharing" in this context is more than a misuse, it is a deliberate misrepresentation. As such, it represents an clear ethical failure. The fact that it's so public signals that you are dealing with a company that, on a very fundamental level, lacks an essential measure of courage, foresight, and integrity. It is—in simple terms—total bullshit. I say all this having just returned from a wonderful weekend that was made much better by Airbnb. It was a great service, I enjoyed it immensely, and it's sad to see that something so good could be ruined by leadership that threatens their brand by describing what they do with such overt dishonesty. The sharing economy is real, it is also cash free. That's by definition. If you were making money you are not "sharing" anything. You are conducting short term rentals, and that's a very different beast. If you insist on using language like "sharing" anyway, don't be surprised when people respond with a few choice words of their own. If those words sting, consider that proof that your own use—or misuse—of words really does matter. Related: when facing a political backlash, don't make your own position worse by giving your enemies even more ammunition.
sama 11y ago
That's a good point; now that everyone calls it the sharing economy that's the word that came to mind. But I'll change it.
- chralieboy 11y ago
  "Sharing economy" is just the marketing term for it. If I share a bench with you, I'm not charging you for the privilege. I agree that it is the word we use, but it doesn't accurately communicate what we're talking about. It's a difficult line to walk. On the one hand, sharing sounds nice. Even as capitalists we are suspicious of efforts to make a profit. And many of the "sharing economy" services are about using things that you personally own and selling use of them to the public. On the other hand, when AirBnB/Uber/etc try to make an economic argument for their services, it is clearly not around sharing. We're exchanging value (my empty home, parked car, etc.) for value (your dollars, as a proxy for work you have done.)
  - spikels 11y ago
    I used to share a ski house in Tahoe. Should I expect to pay part of the rent or not? I think the term "share" is strictly agnostic on who pays but also does have a gifting connotation that appeals to marketing. I have no problem with its use here but if there is a better word what is it?
  - bduerst 11y ago
    I get that you're trying to break down "sharing economy" by the semantics of the word "share", but even in your hypothetical the bench is [presumably] owned by the city, who has granted already access to it for everyone. By sharing access to economic goods and services that were previously unavailable, waste from market inefficiencies are being eliminated. Just because companies are profiting from this waste elimination doesn't negate the fact that shared economies can still be beneficial. Even so, considering the size of these markets now, I don't think people are going to confuse "Sharing economy" with altruism.
    - geebee 11y ago
monort 11y ago
Sharing means using some resource jointly, it doesn't matter if money change hands, if owner uses the resource too. Your definition of sharing sounds more like gifting.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- geebee 11y ago
  I disagree. I acknowledge the existence of reasonable ambiguity in the term "sharing". However, airbnb is no where near this zone of ambiguity. Airbnb rentals are clearly a quid-pro-quo commercial transaction, and it is absurd to try to call this "sharing".
jsprogrammer 11y ago
I think it depends on the context. If you are cohabiting with the guest (for example, an actual bed and breakfast), then it would be correct to say that you share your home. If you give exclusive access to the guest, it would be more correct to say that you are renting, leasing, or subleasing your home.
Mz 11y ago
My understanding is that AirBnB was originally envisioned as more like couch surfing, but with money involved. I have never done it, but from what I have read, couch surfing really is about sharing your home. It is not just about finding a place to sleep, but about meeting people and making new friends. I have read articles about AirBnB where hosts talk about time spent with renters in their own home and how the social piece is as also important to them, not just the money. I am not saying you are outright wrong to feel the way you feel, but I am saying that for some people, AirBnB really is about sharing their home and their lives, not just subletting for money.

by geebee 11y ago

seiji 11y ago

clearly a misuse of the word "share" Yes, it's not "sharing" when a middleman takes a fixed percentage of all transactions and works for maximizing their revenue. The way you get your astrotuf terms to be less astro-turfy is to use them as often and in as many non-hostile situations as possible while still engendering them with a sense of "this is all for the best." http://mondato.com/blog/apptivism/ http://mondato.com/blog/apptivism/ and http://www.fastcompany.com/3022974/tech-forecast/is-peers-the-sharing-economys-future-or-just-a-great-silicon-valley-pr-stunt http://www.fastcompany.com/3022974/tech-forecast/is-peers-th... and http://www.wired.com/2014/12/sharing-economy-pr-stunt-turned-real-business/ http://www.wired.com/2014/12/sharing-economy-pr-stunt-turned... and google is your friend.

alexqgb 11y ago

This is putting it politely. Using the word "sharing" in this context is more than a misuse, it is a deliberate misrepresentation. As such, it represents an clear ethical failure. The fact that it's so public signals that you are dealing with a company that, on a very fundamental level, lacks an essential measure of courage, foresight, and integrity. It is—in simple terms—total bullshit. I say all this having just returned from a wonderful weekend that was made much better by Airbnb. It was a great service, I enjoyed it immensely, and it's sad to see that something so good could be ruined by leadership that threatens their brand by describing what they do with such overt dishonesty. The sharing economy is real, it is also cash free. That's by definition. If you were making money you are not "sharing" anything. You are conducting short term rentals, and that's a very different beast. If you insist on using language like "sharing" anyway, don't be surprised when people respond with a few choice words of their own. If those words sting, consider that proof that your own use—or misuse—of words really does matter. Related: when facing a political backlash, don't make your own position worse by giving your enemies even more ammunition.

sama 11y ago

That's a good point; now that everyone calls it the sharing economy that's the word that came to mind. But I'll change it.

chralieboy 11y ago
"Sharing economy" is just the marketing term for it. If I share a bench with you, I'm not charging you for the privilege. I agree that it is the word we use, but it doesn't accurately communicate what we're talking about. It's a difficult line to walk. On the one hand, sharing sounds nice. Even as capitalists we are suspicious of efforts to make a profit. And many of the "sharing economy" services are about using things that you personally own and selling use of them to the public. On the other hand, when AirBnB/Uber/etc try to make an economic argument for their services, it is clearly not around sharing. We're exchanging value (my empty home, parked car, etc.) for value (your dollars, as a proxy for work you have done.)
- spikels 11y ago
  I used to share a ski house in Tahoe. Should I expect to pay part of the rent or not? I think the term "share" is strictly agnostic on who pays but also does have a gifting connotation that appeals to marketing. I have no problem with its use here but if there is a better word what is it?
- bduerst 11y ago
  I get that you're trying to break down "sharing economy" by the semantics of the word "share", but even in your hypothetical the bench is [presumably] owned by the city, who has granted already access to it for everyone. By sharing access to economic goods and services that were previously unavailable, waste from market inefficiencies are being eliminated. Just because companies are profiting from this waste elimination doesn't negate the fact that shared economies can still be beneficial. Even so, considering the size of these markets now, I don't think people are going to confuse "Sharing economy" with altruism.
  - geebee 11y ago

monort 11y ago

Sharing means using some resource jointly, it doesn't matter if money change hands, if owner uses the resource too. Your definition of sharing sounds more like gifting.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
geebee 11y ago
I disagree. I acknowledge the existence of reasonable ambiguity in the term "sharing". However, airbnb is no where near this zone of ambiguity. Airbnb rentals are clearly a quid-pro-quo commercial transaction, and it is absurd to try to call this "sharing".

jsprogrammer 11y ago

I think it depends on the context. If you are cohabiting with the guest (for example, an actual bed and breakfast), then it would be correct to say that you share your home. If you give exclusive access to the guest, it would be more correct to say that you are renting, leasing, or subleasing your home.

Mz 11y ago

My understanding is that AirBnB was originally envisioned as more like couch surfing, but with money involved. I have never done it, but from what I have read, couch surfing really is about sharing your home. It is not just about finding a place to sleep, but about meeting people and making new friends. I have read articles about AirBnB where hosts talk about time spent with renters in their own home and how the social piece is as also important to them, not just the money. I am not saying you are outright wrong to feel the way you feel, but I am saying that for some people, AirBnB really is about sharing their home and their lives, not just subletting for money.