Related Posts
Facebook (Meta) Hey there! I’m interested in applying for the Rotational Product Manager role at Facebook/Meta. I’m currently working as both a Senior CSM and a Product Specialist at a Health-Tech company. Would anyone be willing to offer a referral (I feel weird making this post, but, he we are haha). Happy to chat if needed. Appreciate your help :)
Hey folks
I got a call from TCS to interview for a new unit formed within org with the name of Business Transformation Group as per new org restructuring. Anyone from TCS who can help to understand more about this?
Does it cater to only niche technologies or how does this actually function?
Tata Consultancy
More Posts
Additional Posts in Advertising
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Not sure this is a fair example of that. Controversy surrounding Jones isn't new and Kelly's show is. The show must have known that interviewing a polarizing hateful conspiracy theorist wouldn't bolster her journalistic bona fides. So why is this advertiser's response surprising?
Also, context is king. A financial institution in which people have their life savings does not want to be associated with conspiracy theorists.
Our inability to distinguish "risky" ideas from baseless hate is also not new. We have seen where it leads us. Normalizing it is arguably much less courageous FCB1.
SR 1 - I disagree about the negative impact interviewing Alex Jones has on Kelly's journalistic bona fides. As crazy as Jones is, he has a growing audience that reaches millions of people, has been given WH press credentials, and consults the president frequently (which is bonkers). Given his access and influence, I think it's important for the public to understand who he is. The real issue is not Kelly's decision to interview him - she's not giving him a platform. What is truly repugnant, and newsworthy, and controversial, is the fact that he is embraced and empowered by the current President of the United States, who is the one that's given Jones a platform.
I understand that perspective and agree with some of it, but I'm not sure how a marquee interview during the rollout of a Sunday night news mag show alongside world leaders could be construed as not giving him a platform. She doesn't have to endorse his views to normalize him by providing that media access. Why does his reach entitle him to perceived legitimacy?
My argument is that he already has a platform that was given to him by Donald Trump. His reach does not confer legitimacy on his views, but rather validates his impact on our political culture. Alex Jones is already influential, regardless of whether or not Megan Kelly is interviewing him. It bears repeating that he's an informal advisor to POTUS (as wtf as that is). It's important for the public to understand where so much of these conspiracies are coming from, and how much they are influencing the executive branch of our government. How good Kelly's piece of course remains to be seen.
Would they have pulled the ads if 60 Minutes did A piece on him? Probably not. I think it shows that American doesn't trust MK more than anything. She better hit him hard, otherwise that bias will be confirmed.
And kudos for Chase -think I'll go open an account in support