I guess I'm the only other person who can't see why a pseudo-sentimental canned response is so much superior to any other canned response.
When Pepsi, or the Whitehouse, the police, or whoever else (aside from those who knew the person, weeping or outraged) gives the canned response about caring, does anybody actually believe them when they say "all of us are deeply saddened...", or whatever you're proposing?
By now, people are immune to any type of official response to anything tragic[1], and don't expect (and really wouldn't want) a candid response of any type.
I know it was broadcast live on the internet, which is why it made the news at all but no normal well-adjusted adult (or child, for that matter) will go from "happy go lucky" to killing themselves live on the internet over the course of an afternoon flame war on bodybuilding.com, of all places.
[1]except perhaps missing child, axe murderer on the loose type thing... and then only in Podunk, really.
I agree. The sentimentalists are denying it. The idea that site operators have to be responsible for the live-feed user-content on their sites is absurd. Yes, this kid killed himself, but if I was the CEO of justin.tv I wouldn't feel bad for the kid. I'd feel bad for the tarnished name of my company. Honestly, people commit suicide ALL THE TIME. And it sucks.... for their friends and family, but suddenly it's broadcast across the internet and I'm supposed to have an interest in this specific incident?
But this story is a sensationalized love-in because other people witnessed the 'suicide'. I'm certainly not calling 9-1-1 every time I read a post trolling some web forums. 99% of the internet is NOT serious business. Most of the internet is people trying to piss each other off and cause trouble.
Honestly, the best this CEO can hope for is if people forget his company was involved, and worse case is the family ends up on Opera bemoaning how horrible the internet is and calling the CEO out to get involved in suicide prevention and better moderate his company's web properties.
_This story shouldn't be about how the internet is a cruel place that forced someone to kill himself. It should be about the real world being so cruel that not a single person in this kid's life cared enough to notice his problems._
It matters if you're trying to build a good reputation for your startup in the public marketplace. As much as we like to think that it's all about the code, these public perception things matter. Ill-considered comments - and even well-meaning comments that have the tone-deaf dissonance of stock boilerplate - have a direct, adverse effect on the public's image of your company. If you run a company like Justin.tv, that should matter to you, regardless of your personal feelings about the suicide itself. That may seem calculated and political, but it's a reality in the unpure world of business.
I guess I'm the only other person who can't see why a pseudo-sentimental canned response is so much superior to any other canned response.
When Pepsi, or the Whitehouse, the police, or whoever else (aside from those who knew the person, weeping or outraged) gives the canned response about caring, does anybody actually believe them when they say "all of us are deeply saddened...", or whatever you're proposing?
By now, people are immune to any type of official response to anything tragic[1], and don't expect (and really wouldn't want) a candid response of any type.
I know it was broadcast live on the internet, which is why it made the news at all but no normal well-adjusted adult (or child, for that matter) will go from "happy go lucky" to killing themselves live on the internet over the course of an afternoon flame war on bodybuilding.com, of all places.
[1]except perhaps missing child, axe murderer on the loose type thing... and then only in Podunk, really.