I especially like the first comment: “Thanks – this was helpful – the reference to yogurt and informational yogurt especially.” What exactly is “informational yogurt”???
I think he’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who felt his bitch about McDonald’s provided them with any form of beneficial information. So, if I’m following him (and it scares me that I might be), by his own definition he is a yogurt twitterer. But I think David’s “fatuous gasbag” is a better fit.
THAT guy, fyi, is a PR phenomenon. He founded HARO, Help a Reporter Out, a free service that threatens to put ProfNet out of business — tens of thousands of people, reporters and PR people, have come to rely on it. He sends three emails a day and charges considerable sums to place a single advertisement in each one. He’s a shining example of what can be done in today’s space. Dismiss him if you like, but I guarantee you, you’ll learn more and do your job better by paying attention to him.
We interviewed him on FIR, by the way: http://tinyurl.com/dcjgdh
Shel – I’m curious about your reaction to the “yogurt” analogy in that video? While I freely admit to being utterly ignorant about the Twitter phenomenon, the McDonald’s example struck me the same way it struck Reuben.
Did I miss something in the comparison that would clarify why the McDonald’s example he gave isn’t “just yogurt”?
I actually do see his point with the McDonald’s anecdote – that twitter and other social media can have a serious impact on reputation management. That’s all valid, and so I’m not dismissing his point. I just think that example doesn’t jive with his subsequent yogurt analogy.
I don’t anything about this guy other than that he likes to eat burgers for brunch, so if Shel thinks he’s a phenomenon then I won’t quibble with that. But, based on this video, he doesn’t present himself effectively enough to establsh any credibility with me. He may not be a gasbag, but he comes across like one in this clip.
And, in an oddly ironic twist, the fact that we are having this discussion here kind of further substantiates the point he was trying to make with the McDonald’s story.
And–even though I Tweeted this post, Mr. Connected seems to have no idea this conversation is happening.
Or maybe he doesn’t care. But if he doesn’t care about this conversation, why the hell should McDonald’s care about one grumbelly’s grousing?
David, he does know the conversation is happening because he pinged me about it. He’s opting not to engage with someone who starts out by calling him a fatuous gasbag. I’d probably resist, too.
Kristen, I haven’t yet watched the video — which is the point. To pass judgment on someone based on a snippet of video, without doing any additional research into who he is, is problematic. Maybe he sucks on the video, maybe he rocks. We all have bad moments on camera, but it doesn’t diminish the value of our work or our contributions in general.
Okay, now I’ve watched the video.
He had no valid points? Noting someone raving about your product and responding to make him an even bigger fan of the company? C’mon, there was gold in the video.
He wasn’t tweeting during the video. He answered a question by reading out examples from a recent experience.
I also don’t have a problem with the yogurt analogy.
But hey, that’s just me.
Really, you should watch the video Shel because the first half (which only begins with the McDonald’s bit) is really about precisely what is happening here on David’s blog, which in turn validates your point and Shankman’s.
You are right, passing judgement based on a snippet of video is a problem – and that’s exactly in line with the point he makes in the video as well. But rightly or wrongly, it’s part of the social media world. We’re exposed to loads of information, often in small pieces, with no context or wider knowledge or authoritative source, and we form opinions about subjects based on that information. David’s post and this subsequent discussion are another perfect example of how social media facilitates that kind of snap judgement.
Did not say he has no valid points. Said he’s a fatuous gasbag. Or should I have said, “McFatuous”? My evidence:
1. Appears to believe he’s made an incisive discovery that McDonald’s is run a little more rigidly than Madge’s local greasy spoon.
2. Appears to be in love with his own lame “McFail” bullshit.
3. Appears to believe the ensuing lame Tweets might possibly be of interest to anyone.
4. Appears to believe whatever happened to him 30 minutes ago is a perfect analogy for everything.
5. McFails to answer the obvious question: Do you really think McDonald’s franchises are going to get super-flexible because jagoffs Twitter their complaints while they’re standing in line?
6. “Businesses now have to be aware of what they’re doing and retrain their world, retrain their employees to understand good customer service.” All because of Twitter. Sounds pretty fatuous and gassy to me.
7. Then he quotes an author he can’t remember who said, “Treat your customers well, and they’ll be your customers for life.” Tolstoi, I think that was.
And this is all before the unfortunate “informational yogurt” remark.
I am not saying Twitter is dumb, nor am I dismissing Twitter. And this feller may have come up with a great service. And he may indeed be well-paid for his idea. And maybe he’s even a good person.
But he is, by all the evidence available here, a fatuous gasbag.
Hey David: I tweeted about the post long before you did. http://twitter.com/skydiver/status/1354561944 – Unlike you, though, I choose to associate with people who can offer opinions without insulting someone they’ve never met with juvenile comments. And from those I’ve talked to this morning about you, seems like you seem to talk that way about most people. Way to go and build your brand.
Cheers.
PS: McDonald’s had a nice gift-card waiting for me at my hotel room within 24 hours. Big companies do listen to those who make their point in appropriate ways, without resorting to third-grade name calling. Does anyone listen to you? I highly doubt it.
David,
I’m having a hard time understanding why you hated this video interview so much.
Peter’s yogurt example was actually one of the clearest explanations I’ve yet heard about good tweets and bad ones.
His example about McDonald’s was equally informative and entertaining.
This was one of the better interviews of the 30 I did at our Las Vegas event.
Is it possible that you’re taking your well-known hatred for Twitter out on Peter?
Mark
Good score on the gift card. But as far as I know you still can’t get a burger before 11…and I’m still not clear on how that is “informational yogurt” as opposed to just plain yogurt…
Yes, David is a bit of a curmudgeon. That actually kind of is his brand. And, while it may be a niche market, it has a certain appeal.
Mark, I’m taking a lot out on old Peter, but it’s not my hatred of Twitter.
It’s my hatred of Twits, who in the face of economic catastrophe, along the great arch of history and in context of the general beauty and terror and profundity and variety of life on this earth find a way to act smug because they think they know how to Tweet and you don’t.
And make their living, in part or in total, by acting like modern-day sorcerers who hold the secret to your career, if you’ll only read their banal Tweets and tea leaves.
I’ve been dealing with these types since about 1994. There are tolerable technology gurus who mostly help us cope with all the technology changes, and there are insufferable ones who try to scare us into thinking we’re fucked without them. There are ones who stay around and others who quickly disappear.
But attack one and the others come running to the defense, lest anybody call this all for what it is:
Obnoxious at best and a form of emotional, for-profit bullying at worst.
And yes, Peter got the brunt of my rage against this business, because he represented all of it, for the world to see.
Sorry, Peter, your bad luck.
This guy didn’t teach me anything that isn’t taught in a boring MBA marketing class. He does seem smart, but his intelligence is overshadowed by his fidgety, narcissistic (“people are saying peter’s the real deal!”), “twitter winners” personality.
Saying you can’t judge the guy on a short video clip is contrary to the message that Peter is trying to convey in the first place. He should take some of his own advice and polish up that elevator pitch. I couldn’t take him seriously after I heard “Twitter is the greatest thing in the world!”
I especially like the first comment: “Thanks – this was helpful – the reference to yogurt and informational yogurt especially.” What exactly is “informational yogurt”???
I think he’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who felt his bitch about McDonald’s provided them with any form of beneficial information. So, if I’m following him (and it scares me that I might be), by his own definition he is a yogurt twitterer. But I think David’s “fatuous gasbag” is a better fit.
I couldn’t agree more, Reuben. Well said, David. Where did Mark find THAT guy???
On Twitter, I’d guess.
THAT guy, fyi, is a PR phenomenon. He founded HARO, Help a Reporter Out, a free service that threatens to put ProfNet out of business — tens of thousands of people, reporters and PR people, have come to rely on it. He sends three emails a day and charges considerable sums to place a single advertisement in each one. He’s a shining example of what can be done in today’s space. Dismiss him if you like, but I guarantee you, you’ll learn more and do your job better by paying attention to him.
We interviewed him on FIR, by the way:
http://tinyurl.com/dcjgdh
Shel – I’m curious about your reaction to the “yogurt” analogy in that video? While I freely admit to being utterly ignorant about the Twitter phenomenon, the McDonald’s example struck me the same way it struck Reuben.
Did I miss something in the comparison that would clarify why the McDonald’s example he gave isn’t “just yogurt”?
I actually do see his point with the McDonald’s anecdote – that twitter and other social media can have a serious impact on reputation management. That’s all valid, and so I’m not dismissing his point. I just think that example doesn’t jive with his subsequent yogurt analogy.
I don’t anything about this guy other than that he likes to eat burgers for brunch, so if Shel thinks he’s a phenomenon then I won’t quibble with that. But, based on this video, he doesn’t present himself effectively enough to establsh any credibility with me. He may not be a gasbag, but he comes across like one in this clip.
And, in an oddly ironic twist, the fact that we are having this discussion here kind of further substantiates the point he was trying to make with the McDonald’s story.
And–even though I Tweeted this post, Mr. Connected seems to have no idea this conversation is happening.
Or maybe he doesn’t care. But if he doesn’t care about this conversation, why the hell should McDonald’s care about one grumbelly’s grousing?
David, he does know the conversation is happening because he pinged me about it. He’s opting not to engage with someone who starts out by calling him a fatuous gasbag. I’d probably resist, too.
Kristen, I haven’t yet watched the video — which is the point. To pass judgment on someone based on a snippet of video, without doing any additional research into who he is, is problematic. Maybe he sucks on the video, maybe he rocks. We all have bad moments on camera, but it doesn’t diminish the value of our work or our contributions in general.
Okay, now I’ve watched the video.
He had no valid points? Noting someone raving about your product and responding to make him an even bigger fan of the company? C’mon, there was gold in the video.
He wasn’t tweeting during the video. He answered a question by reading out examples from a recent experience.
I also don’t have a problem with the yogurt analogy.
But hey, that’s just me.
Really, you should watch the video Shel because the first half (which only begins with the McDonald’s bit) is really about precisely what is happening here on David’s blog, which in turn validates your point and Shankman’s.
You are right, passing judgement based on a snippet of video is a problem – and that’s exactly in line with the point he makes in the video as well. But rightly or wrongly, it’s part of the social media world. We’re exposed to loads of information, often in small pieces, with no context or wider knowledge or authoritative source, and we form opinions about subjects based on that information. David’s post and this subsequent discussion are another perfect example of how social media facilitates that kind of snap judgement.
Did not say he has no valid points. Said he’s a fatuous gasbag. Or should I have said, “McFatuous”? My evidence:
1. Appears to believe he’s made an incisive discovery that McDonald’s is run a little more rigidly than Madge’s local greasy spoon.
2. Appears to be in love with his own lame “McFail” bullshit.
3. Appears to believe the ensuing lame Tweets might possibly be of interest to anyone.
4. Appears to believe whatever happened to him 30 minutes ago is a perfect analogy for everything.
5. McFails to answer the obvious question: Do you really think McDonald’s franchises are going to get super-flexible because jagoffs Twitter their complaints while they’re standing in line?
6. “Businesses now have to be aware of what they’re doing and retrain their world, retrain their employees to understand good customer service.” All because of Twitter. Sounds pretty fatuous and gassy to me.
7. Then he quotes an author he can’t remember who said, “Treat your customers well, and they’ll be your customers for life.” Tolstoi, I think that was.
And this is all before the unfortunate “informational yogurt” remark.
I am not saying Twitter is dumb, nor am I dismissing Twitter. And this feller may have come up with a great service. And he may indeed be well-paid for his idea. And maybe he’s even a good person.
But he is, by all the evidence available here, a fatuous gasbag.
Hey David: I tweeted about the post long before you did. http://twitter.com/skydiver/status/1354561944 – Unlike you, though, I choose to associate with people who can offer opinions without insulting someone they’ve never met with juvenile comments. And from those I’ve talked to this morning about you, seems like you seem to talk that way about most people. Way to go and build your brand.
Cheers.
PS: McDonald’s had a nice gift-card waiting for me at my hotel room within 24 hours. Big companies do listen to those who make their point in appropriate ways, without resorting to third-grade name calling. Does anyone listen to you? I highly doubt it.
And a whiny nerd, to boot.
David,
I’m having a hard time understanding why you hated this video interview so much.
Peter’s yogurt example was actually one of the clearest explanations I’ve yet heard about good tweets and bad ones.
His example about McDonald’s was equally informative and entertaining.
This was one of the better interviews of the 30 I did at our Las Vegas event.
Is it possible that you’re taking your well-known hatred for Twitter out on Peter?
Mark
Good score on the gift card. But as far as I know you still can’t get a burger before 11…and I’m still not clear on how that is “informational yogurt” as opposed to just plain yogurt…
Yes, David is a bit of a curmudgeon. That actually kind of is his brand. And, while it may be a niche market, it has a certain appeal.
Mark, I’m taking a lot out on old Peter, but it’s not my hatred of Twitter.
It’s my hatred of Twits, who in the face of economic catastrophe, along the great arch of history and in context of the general beauty and terror and profundity and variety of life on this earth find a way to act smug because they think they know how to Tweet and you don’t.
And make their living, in part or in total, by acting like modern-day sorcerers who hold the secret to your career, if you’ll only read their banal Tweets and tea leaves.
I’ve been dealing with these types since about 1994. There are tolerable technology gurus who mostly help us cope with all the technology changes, and there are insufferable ones who try to scare us into thinking we’re fucked without them. There are ones who stay around and others who quickly disappear.
But attack one and the others come running to the defense, lest anybody call this all for what it is:
Obnoxious at best and a form of emotional, for-profit bullying at worst.
And yes, Peter got the brunt of my rage against this business, because he represented all of it, for the world to see.
Sorry, Peter, your bad luck.
This guy didn’t teach me anything that isn’t taught in a boring MBA marketing class. He does seem smart, but his intelligence is overshadowed by his fidgety, narcissistic (“people are saying peter’s the real deal!”), “twitter winners” personality.
Saying you can’t judge the guy on a short video clip is contrary to the message that Peter is trying to convey in the first place. He should take some of his own advice and polish up that elevator pitch. I couldn’t take him seriously after I heard “Twitter is the greatest thing in the world!”