usually the most notable consequence of some high-visibility event (in millennial media outlets anyway) -- viral take, mostly fruitless protest or hashtag -- is that one or two Leaders will get a book deal, some of the top followers get clout, and everyone else gets an indulgence
not in the USA, certainly. the ideal here has always been to do well by doing good. If you're doing well in the process of doing good, if you're getting a little clout as a treat, then you're not guilty of genuine bad faith. You're just following in the footsteps of others
-
-
'the ideal' = the professed goal Yes, the professed goal has always been to profit off creating positive change. The real goal, however, for many, is really just to profit, positive change or no. That's bad faith. I think we agree on this?
-
@tereseaimee and I have gone back and forth on this, but we’ve concluded that most of them are naive enough, intellectually limited enough, or high enough on their own supply to believe what we perceive as pure profiteering is still “doing well by doing good.”There are exceptions - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
