LinkedIn Shut Down Again. Looks Like Someone Wants the Truth Though!
UPDATED: June 15, 2015
This site has stated for more than a year that LinkedIn is a waste of time; but, if you needed more proof it appears Harvard and Davos agree in the context of meetings but the same holds true for networking sites as well.
99 percent of any networking event is a waste of time. “99% of Davos is information or experience you can get elsewhere, on your own timeframe and in a more comfortable manner. When I had my white badge access [an official pass to the conference center] — which I don’t bother with anymore — my friends would laugh because I never went to a session. [But] that’s not where the highest value is. What you can’t get outside of Davos is the ability to have so many face-to-face interactions which either initiate or further key relationships.”
Flagging my LinkedIn as spam for the second time this week, shutting it down.
Funny, it looks like someone is looking for the truth though.
February 28, 2015
For those that don’t know, many sites have analytics that show how the traffic is reaching the page. This helps determine which stories are resonating, how long someone was on the site, how many pages they visited, which tags are used most often, and other helpful statistics. While employers often threat they will obtain this information on other sites, it’s not that easy. However, when you own the site, it is.
So let’s use fact based evidence over time and apply some cognitive reasoning—shall we? The truthful words I have written have exposed truths about certain people and organizations that could portray their image negatively but at their own hand.
So now let’s read a little law only to have context behind the psychology of why the LinkedIn page is likely getting shut down.
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.1
The Big Three
Libel is a method of defamation expressed by print, writing, pictures, signs, effigies, or any communication embodied in physical form that is injurious to a person’s reputation, exposes a person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or injures a person in his/her business or profession.
Slander is a false statement, usually made orally, which defames another person. Unlike libel, damages from slander are not presumed and must be proven by the party suing.
Defamation is any statement, whether written or oral, that injures a third party’s reputation. To establish a prima facie case of defamation, four elements are generally required: a false statement purporting to be fact concerning another person or entity; publication or communication of that statement to a third person; fault on the part of the person making the statement amounting to intent or at least negligence; and some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.
The story that’s unfolding on the page is complex, layered and attempting to lay out facts differently than they have been previously. I’m in no way insulting the readers or the subjects, but there are many characters that will unfold and linking them to well know characters creates an easy association for the reader to assimilate facts quickly and apply that knowledge to new information as we move along down the yellow brick road. Not everyone may want the facts associated with their name (as we’ve seen some crafty manipulation of SEO information), but isn’t it our right to have a full understanding off all the facts without corporate spin? If someone is not liked publically after all the facts are out then accountability of their own actions will likely be a greater factor than any exposed truth.
Companies pay millions to billions to ‘control their spin,’ and it is my goal to demonstrate when information is less than forthcoming, by showing readers certain phrases to look for in press releases and news stories. This information can then be used to help readers determine if they think they are being manipulated for their purchasing dollars or not-so more or less, corporate spin-‘unspun.’ Again, any information is good information it’s how we choose to use it that makes the difference.
Unspun is not illegal. It’s also not appreciated (hello LinkedIn?) by anyone who now may try and claim ‘victim,’ when inevitable loss occurs. Any loss incurred will be at their own hand when truth brings with it overdue accountability. Corporate America is full of felons they just haven’t been convicted yet.
Shooting (or possibly trying to shut down?) the messenger is the easiest ‘target.’ This messenger is broke and will remain broke (regardless incorrect preconceived notions) so do your worst, oh wait….