4 ms·

Are we sure all the examples cited were manufactured? Isn’t it possible that in a lot of the examples, someone had a bad day and other people responded with kin

Are we sure all the examples cited were manufactured? Isn’t it possible that in a lot of the examples, someone had a bad day and other people responded with kindness?

andsoitis 3y ago
why would you lament your failure or your mishappenings by broadcasting to the world?
- tptacek 3y ago
  Ordinary people do that all the time.
- csydas 3y ago
  Hard to tell, guess it'd be great if we had an example of such a thing so we can check it by comparison. Maybe we can find such an example on twitter... But maybe it's worth challenging the question a little; what exactly is wrong with doing such a thing? What are the potential positives and negatives if one were to be more open with their failures? Are there any situations where a failure still yields positive results and an analysis of such a failure is useful? The article itself is not very good and I think the article's author tries to hard to take an alleged social media story where an emotional outburst resulted in a performer getting better sales. Already the article is extremely light on details for this story, and the story itself doesn't seem as important as the author's segue into their point about "sob stories"; I read this as a trite example to vault to a larger point that I don't think the author ever makes, but their opening sentence is quite revealing: > "There are few behaviours considered more unflattering than actively seeking pity." This premise is too much for me to accept without further elaboration from the author, as it introduces a lot of questions on this view point that I don't think the article even tries to answer. The focus on how failure should be something we don't show is very unusual, since there are so many fields where failures are part of the expected process, and you're supposed to learn and discuss failures, not hide from them. I can't really get what the article is meaning to express except a general rant about "sob stories", but the rest of the text just seems to go on regarding something about social media, and while I'm not quite sure what I'm supposed to understand from it, what I did understand was the author maybe just doesn't like the format of discussion on social media and common habits on social media. That is fine, I am not big on the social media format as well, and I just choose not to use it a ton as a result. So there is something about 'sob stories' and social media we're supposed to understand, but I'm not really sure what it is. Tying it to an artist that "used their sob story to fill seats" and implying that this was a scam with extremely light details is not convincing to me.
- efinarcisists 3y ago
  [dead]
- xboxnolifes 3y ago
  Fishing for compliments/reassurance. It's not like these marketing strategies rose from nowhere, they are learned from real behavior.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- treis 3y ago
  I think it's a natural reaction. "No ducking way is only 1 person showing up going to make me quit" sort of thing. Not everyone reacts that way but certainly some do. Why share that reaction on social media? I don't really get it either but I assume the same motivations that lead them to share everything else
- Hnrobert42 3y ago
  Well, maybe these people only have a few followers on social, so they don’t think they are sharing it with the world. Indeed, if they are lamenting, the fact that no one came to their reading, maybe they assume no one reads their social media. It’s only quote with the world” after it goes viral.
galleywest200 3y ago
Where does the article say they were faked? > While it may be true that Grier only had one audience member at her initial preview, people soon realised that she had posted a nearly identical tweet at the start of the Fringe in 2022. Pity moved tickets both times. It seems the article is talking about "pity marketing" as a whole, even if true.
- LBTables 3y ago
  Yeah this is the point. Whether the claim is true or not, as a marketing tactic it has nothing at all to do with the quality of the product being sold. Marketing for a comedy show should convince me of the conedian's humor, not try to guilt me into filling an audience seat for them.
- Hnrobert42 3y ago
  “These cheap and often obvious tactics”, “This manufactured pity”. I don’t know that the article says the events were fake. It questions the motivations of the people posting the events. My comment was that many of these posts may not be part of deliberate “pity, marketing” efforts.
Mordisquitos 3y ago
The implication isn't that the examples were manufactured. Rather, it is that once they had occurred, the subjects involved publicly shared the incidents with the express intent of self-promotion and not merely for emotional support — hence the term "pity marketing".
- Hnrobert42 3y ago
  Yeah, but are we sure that’s why they shared them?

Are we sure all the examples cited were manufactured? Isn’t it possible that in a lot of the examples, someone had a bad day and other people responded with kindness?

andsoitis 3y ago

why would you lament your failure or your mishappenings by broadcasting to the world?

tptacek 3y ago
Ordinary people do that all the time.
csydas 3y ago
Hard to tell, guess it'd be great if we had an example of such a thing so we can check it by comparison. Maybe we can find such an example on twitter... But maybe it's worth challenging the question a little; what exactly is wrong with doing such a thing? What are the potential positives and negatives if one were to be more open with their failures? Are there any situations where a failure still yields positive results and an analysis of such a failure is useful? The article itself is not very good and I think the article's author tries to hard to take an alleged social media story where an emotional outburst resulted in a performer getting better sales. Already the article is extremely light on details for this story, and the story itself doesn't seem as important as the author's segue into their point about "sob stories"; I read this as a trite example to vault to a larger point that I don't think the author ever makes, but their opening sentence is quite revealing: > "There are few behaviours considered more unflattering than actively seeking pity." This premise is too much for me to accept without further elaboration from the author, as it introduces a lot of questions on this view point that I don't think the article even tries to answer. The focus on how failure should be something we don't show is very unusual, since there are so many fields where failures are part of the expected process, and you're supposed to learn and discuss failures, not hide from them. I can't really get what the article is meaning to express except a general rant about "sob stories", but the rest of the text just seems to go on regarding something about social media, and while I'm not quite sure what I'm supposed to understand from it, what I did understand was the author maybe just doesn't like the format of discussion on social media and common habits on social media. That is fine, I am not big on the social media format as well, and I just choose not to use it a ton as a result. So there is something about 'sob stories' and social media we're supposed to understand, but I'm not really sure what it is. Tying it to an artist that "used their sob story to fill seats" and implying that this was a scam with extremely light details is not convincing to me.
efinarcisists 3y ago
[dead]
xboxnolifes 3y ago
Fishing for compliments/reassurance. It's not like these marketing strategies rose from nowhere, they are learned from real behavior.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
treis 3y ago
I think it's a natural reaction. "No ducking way is only 1 person showing up going to make me quit" sort of thing. Not everyone reacts that way but certainly some do. Why share that reaction on social media? I don't really get it either but I assume the same motivations that lead them to share everything else
Hnrobert42 3y ago
Well, maybe these people only have a few followers on social, so they don’t think they are sharing it with the world. Indeed, if they are lamenting, the fact that no one came to their reading, maybe they assume no one reads their social media. It’s only quote with the world” after it goes viral.

galleywest200 3y ago

Where does the article say they were faked? > While it may be true that Grier only had one audience member at her initial preview, people soon realised that she had posted a nearly identical tweet at the start of the Fringe in 2022. Pity moved tickets both times. It seems the article is talking about "pity marketing" as a whole, even if true.

LBTables 3y ago
Yeah this is the point. Whether the claim is true or not, as a marketing tactic it has nothing at all to do with the quality of the product being sold. Marketing for a comedy show should convince me of the conedian's humor, not try to guilt me into filling an audience seat for them.
Hnrobert42 3y ago
“These cheap and often obvious tactics”, “This manufactured pity”. I don’t know that the article says the events were fake. It questions the motivations of the people posting the events. My comment was that many of these posts may not be part of deliberate “pity, marketing” efforts.

Mordisquitos 3y ago

The implication isn't that the examples were manufactured. Rather, it is that once they had occurred, the subjects involved publicly shared the incidents with the express intent of self-promotion and not merely for emotional support — hence the term "pity marketing".

Hnrobert42 3y ago
Yeah, but are we sure that’s why they shared them?