Dad and I have recently conversed about Twitter. Here is a blog post describing what is believed to be the first firing because of Twitter:
"I confess to feeling a little sorry for the much maligned CiscoFatty who seemingly (does anyone have the facts?) lost her job op at Cisco by issuing the following Tweet:
Cisco just offered me a job! Now I have to weigh the utility of a fatty paycheck against the daily commute to San Jose and hating the work.
Not only did a senior Cisco person receive the tweet and respond, asking her ‘who is the hiring manager?’ but the whole story has hit the blogosphere and mainstream media with such force one wonders just what the real problem is here. First, one might read CiscoFatty’s comment in several ways, not just as a dismissive note about Cisco and the dangers of selling one’s soul for corporate reward. It might be a statement about the conflicting nature of the decision to be made, as in, “I have to determine the importance of money over possible job dissatisfaction”, but who wants to give the benefit of the doubt anymore? Second, just what was that Cisco employee doing replying to a tweet when he might have been doing something more productive with his time? I don’t see Cisco as holding any moral high ground here.
The nature of Twitter throws into relief a distinction I sometimes make between communication and information. We all communicate, and most of our communications are meant to be transient and targeted, gone as soon as the recipient’s memory fades. This is the interaction signal of life. Communications become information when they are recorded in a form that makes them reproducible. Twitter sits at that interface, taking the intentionally temporary and rendering it artificially permanent. Soon, there will be need for new apps or new information professionals, the Tweet-curator. I may have to decide if I want to do that for a fatty fee…….not."
"I confess to feeling a little sorry for the much maligned CiscoFatty who seemingly (does anyone have the facts?) lost her job op at Cisco by issuing the following Tweet:
Cisco just offered me a job! Now I have to weigh the utility of a fatty paycheck against the daily commute to San Jose and hating the work.
Not only did a senior Cisco person receive the tweet and respond, asking her ‘who is the hiring manager?’ but the whole story has hit the blogosphere and mainstream media with such force one wonders just what the real problem is here. First, one might read CiscoFatty’s comment in several ways, not just as a dismissive note about Cisco and the dangers of selling one’s soul for corporate reward. It might be a statement about the conflicting nature of the decision to be made, as in, “I have to determine the importance of money over possible job dissatisfaction”, but who wants to give the benefit of the doubt anymore? Second, just what was that Cisco employee doing replying to a tweet when he might have been doing something more productive with his time? I don’t see Cisco as holding any moral high ground here.
The nature of Twitter throws into relief a distinction I sometimes make between communication and information. We all communicate, and most of our communications are meant to be transient and targeted, gone as soon as the recipient’s memory fades. This is the interaction signal of life. Communications become information when they are recorded in a form that makes them reproducible. Twitter sits at that interface, taking the intentionally temporary and rendering it artificially permanent. Soon, there will be need for new apps or new information professionals, the Tweet-curator. I may have to decide if I want to do that for a fatty fee…….not."
posted by Anonymous at 5:27 PM
2 Comments:
I choose not to participate in Twitter.
Technology is a dangerous thing. You might be making a wise choice.
Post a Comment
<< Home