3 ms·
Death threats are obviously inexcusable. This shouldn't even have to be said. But this is a classic PR strategy. When you do something that makes many people v
by pekk 13y ago
Death threats are obviously inexcusable. This shouldn't even have to be said.
But this is a classic PR strategy. When you do something that makes many people very angry, all you have to do is wait for someone to say something incivil. Then make headlines with whatever it is they said.
Then the message shifts to how you've been wronged. And any time anyone complains or argues against what you did, associate the critic with the death threats and demand that they distance themselves from them. At this point there is no way for the critic to be heard again, and the line of inquiry is broken. Either they halt their criticism and turn to apologizing for something they didn't have anything to do with, exactly as if they were responsible - or they can be effectively smeared as supporting or even responsible for death threats. If not that individual, then whatever group they are part of can be effectively stereotyped as vicious animals who make death threats.
For example, this is what the Adria Richards people did when it became apparent that their case was controversial and Richards' actions were subject to criticism: they changed the subject to death threats, and the conversation of the original event never really resumed.
Actually, nobody really even has to say anything incivil in reality. It only has to be plausible that SOMEONE might send a death threat. (This is ALWAYS plausible; there are so many crazy people out there.) Then it's easy to claim or fake the evidence.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- DerpDerpDerp 13y agoIt doesn't require that Ars be in on it - or even necessarily Facebook. But why do you think it's improbable for a company and their acquisition to plot a PR move? PR people for corporations lie all the time - look at the Sim City release for EA, and the obvious lies about the online component from their PR person. Edit: For the record, I don't think that it's what happened. I think it was just crazy people being crazy. However, your objection is nonsense and doesn't preclude what the GP was alleging to be the case.
- JDDunn9 13y ago- Oculus founders have an interest in tuning out the negativity - Ars (or the media) has an interest in hyperbole and sensationalism to get views - No one has anything to gain by making death threats...
- pekk 13y agoNo collusion is necessary. It works with any number of people. Even if just one person receives* a single death threat then they can change the subject. Everyone in that person's tribe, already disclined to listen or accept any criticism of their partisans, will line up to condemn the death threats and welcome the change of subject. They might recognize this as part of a PR strategy, or not, it doesn't affect the execution. That's assuming there is no intent to handle the PR disaster. Most organizations in this position will have or appoint someone to come up with some messaging strategy, whether that is a spokesman or PR firm or private mailing list. But the effect is really the same. No conspiracy required.
- daenz 13y agoYep. If they're really receiving death threats, that's something they take up with the authorities. Articles like this are just a transparent attempt at getting brand sympathy. They do nothing else.
- baby 13y agoDirectly made me think of this scene in season 1 of House of Cards. Brilliant.
- teamonkey 13y agoUnfortunately death threats are a very real and toxic problem in the gaming community. I'd say not only is it believable, but both Oculus and Facebook were somewhat naïve for not expecting them. Or perhaps they weren't expecting the stalking and harassment to be serious. Either way, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt because it does commonly happen and they have every right to be annoyed about it.
- misingnoglic 13y agoHell, even the creator of /flappy bird/ received death threats, that's how common they are online.
- Gatsky 13y agoI don't agree with this at all. I am a person. I have never had a death threat. If I get a death threat, I would probably be rather upset, and inclined to say something about it. I don't think there is too much else going on here.
- phil21 13y agoThen you've done nothing controversial on the Internet. Death threats are simply background noise. As a hosting provider I don't think a day goes by we don't get one about something or other from some crazy. Most of these people send these off with about as much care as folks post on 4chan, and really don't put much weight behind the words they are typing. Used to bother me, but you get over it pretty quick. Cost of business of doing anything that gets even a remotely large following on the Internet, bonus points if you get some controversy.
- daviding 13y agoI agree with you that it looks like a legitimate PR strategy, but in this case I don't buy that. Look at the context of how this info was delivered. This wasn't some response to a journalist or a press release, it was a reply to a reddit thread that Palmer has frequently chatted on. At around about the same time that evening he also went in to if Star Wars lore about the Expanded Universe was being killed by Disney or not, or if Yuuzhan Vong was a force power in the balance prophecy. It seems unlikely this was a centrally masterminded PR strategy but just someone saying what was on their mind at the time. He may have good PR instincts, although even thinking that seems cynical to me, and it seems random enough to be an honest comment.