6 ms·

And the attacks on George Soros?

rspeer 8y ago
That's the part about "Definers" at the end of the article. They make sure not to say his name. Their claim is -- and this is ridiculous -- their PR team thought people needed to know that a campaign criticizing Facebook was funded in part by "a well-known critic of Facebook" and it's entirely coincidental that this well-known critic is the bogeyman of the right. (Who would have guessed that Facebook critics criticize Facebook?) Of course, as a response to their PR organization supposedly doing nothing wrong, just presenting people with vitally important tautologies, they have fired them. It's remarkable how much of this response just mildly confirms the New York Times article. (We reject the claim that Facebook execs all use Android just because Zuck hates Tim Cook! They use Android because they need an operating system on their mobile phones, and because Zuck hates Tim Cook.)
drak0n1c 8y ago
While pointing out funding from George Soros is an overused trick reliant on ad hominem, I do not see how it is any more outrageous or racist than the even more common trope of vilifying projects because they are linked to the Koch brothers. I'm part Jewish myself and I don't think criticism of Sheldon Adelson or George Soros for their political activity is necessarily anti-Semitic.
- pteredactyl 8y ago
  Agreed. To criticize Soros or someone who's Jewish is somehow automatically anti-semitic. I don't get it. It's frightening.
  - snowwrestler 8y ago
    That's not the issue. The issue is that actual, proud anti-Semites have created and pushed horrible conspiracy theories and gross content about George Soros for years, and any PR company worth their salt should know that. Knowing that sort of thing, navigating a message through the broader cultural context, is job #1 for a PR firm. It is why PR exists as an industry. So, Definers either consciously played into those attacks on Soros, or are incompetent.
    - pteredactyl 8y ago
      ...

That's the part about "Definers" at the end of the article. They make sure not to say his name. Their claim is -- and this is ridiculous -- their PR team thought people needed to know that a campaign criticizing Facebook was funded in part by "a well-known critic of Facebook" and it's entirely coincidental that this well-known critic is the bogeyman of the right. (Who would have guessed that Facebook critics criticize Facebook?) Of course, as a response to their PR organization supposedly doing nothing wrong, just presenting people with vitally important tautologies, they have fired them. It's remarkable how much of this response just mildly confirms the New York Times article. (We reject the claim that Facebook execs all use Android just because Zuck hates Tim Cook! They use Android because they need an operating system on their mobile phones, and because Zuck hates Tim Cook.)

drak0n1c 8y ago

While pointing out funding from George Soros is an overused trick reliant on ad hominem, I do not see how it is any more outrageous or racist than the even more common trope of vilifying projects because they are linked to the Koch brothers. I'm part Jewish myself and I don't think criticism of Sheldon Adelson or George Soros for their political activity is necessarily anti-Semitic.

pteredactyl 8y ago
Agreed. To criticize Soros or someone who's Jewish is somehow automatically anti-semitic. I don't get it. It's frightening.
- snowwrestler 8y ago
  That's not the issue. The issue is that actual, proud anti-Semites have created and pushed horrible conspiracy theories and gross content about George Soros for years, and any PR company worth their salt should know that. Knowing that sort of thing, navigating a message through the broader cultural context, is job #1 for a PR firm. It is why PR exists as an industry. So, Definers either consciously played into those attacks on Soros, or are incompetent.
  - pteredactyl 8y ago
    ...