One thing I love about Facebook spokesperson Randi Zuckerberg – she says exactly what she thinks, and she isn’t afraid to use the power of Facebook to back up her opinions.
Mean bar bouncers can lose their Facebook pages (this was later retracted but remains funny). Meanwhile, Holocaust deniers are given a pass.
Now she’s taking on the Republican party, and the Republican party is fighting back.
At a Startup2Startup event last week Zuckerberg talked about her experiences at the Republican and Democratic presidential conventions last year. The relevant clip (care of Ustream) is above.
“At the Democratic national convention we were like rock stars,” Zuckerberg said. “At the Republican national convention I sat in my hotel room by myself for three days, no one would meet with us, I was like begging people to meet with us.” Randi also recounts a conversation on a plane where a Berkeley professor calls Zuckerberg “you’re like the most powerful person in the world.”
The Republicans aren’t amused. Matt Burns, the Director of Communications for the 2008 Republican National Convention left a long comment, calling Zuckerber “full of sh*t”:
With all due respect, Randi Zuckerberg is totally full of sh*t on this one – at least as her comments relate to the Republican National Convention.
As the Director of Communications for the convention, I can tell you we worked closely with Google/YouTube, Ustream.tv, Microsoft, and countless other companies to create a comprehensive and successful online campaign. Those efforts were recently recognized with five “Pollie Awards” from The Association of Political and Public Affairs Professionals. And we utilized Facebook – even if it wasn’t up to Ms. Zuckerberg’s standards – as part of our overall strategy.
Is it possible Ms. Zuckerberg sat alone in her hotel room during the Republican National Convention because she never actually contacted anyone? Or maybe she forgot about the major hurricane barreling toward the Gulf Coast on the eve of the Republican National Convention? Or maybe she didn’t really want to be around a group of conservative Americans in the first place?
According to the Wall Street Journal: “’At the Democratic convention we were like rock stars,’ Zuckerberg said Thursday to a conference crowd of what could safely be called Democratic-leaning entrepreneurs and investors.”
Wait. Ms. Zuckerberg bashed Republicans while speaking to an audience of her liberal friends? Shocker!
In all seriousness, can Ms. Zuckerberg tell us what the Democratic National Convention did with Facebook – aside from pet their enlarged egos and take them to glitzy parties with the Hollywood elite – that Republican National Convention planners didn’t?
I guess next time we won’t make the mistake of letting the business of nominating our Presidential candidate get in the way of the folks at Facebook being treated like rock stars.
Apologies to Facebook. Our bad.
Whenever Randi speaks, point a camera at her. There’s almost certainly a story in there somewhere. All I hope is that Facebook never muzzles her. As the most powerful person in the world, we need to hear more from her, not less.
I’ve emailed Burns for confirmation that he left the comment, but the language is definitely his style.
Update: Burns has responded:
YES. I left it.
I LOVE Facebook as much as the next person, but think the criticism was a
bit misdirected. I can’t speak for the McCain campaign because I wasn’t
working on its new media efforts, but the convention itself made
unprecedented efforts to incorporate new media into our campaign. Over the
course of our convention, we attracted 1.7 million unique visitors, and
strategically partnered with Google/YouTube and Ustream.TV to draw an
additional 7 million unique viewers to our content. And the GOP convention
had more Facebook “friends” than the Democratic National Convention. We had
about 10,000, while the Dem Convention had about 3,300.GOP facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/GOPconvention2008Dem facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=5209534425Also encourage you to read the following news item:
http://www.gopconvention2008.com/news/read.aspx?id=557
No sound on your video, or is it just me?
do you have speakers on your computer? are they tuned on? sound works fine for me.
max sound level on youtube, max sound on pc, can just ONLY about hear it. can hear the whoosh techcrunch at the beginning fine though, just not her. Leaves a lot more time though to try and read that body language.
Same thing happens on my end. Max sound on youtube player, max sound on speakers and I can barely hear that she is talking. Can’t hear enough to understand what she is saying. But at least there was a transcript.
and the speakers are plugged in right?
All is well on my end.
Work closely with Google? Comprehensive and successful online campaign? The only comprehensive and successful online campaigns were Ron Paul and Barack Obama. Definitely not John McCain. And calling Randi Zuckerberg “totally full of sh*t” does not help.
http://online.w...4650049199.html
http://www.poli...1108/15487.html
http://www.news...logger-platform
Is it ironic that she is gleefully laughing about this? Clearly she is riding the coat tails of her kid brother and has no personal worth. She could have left her hotel room to “socialize” in the real world, but that would have required the motivation to mingle with her enemies. How convenient it was to hide in privacy and blame the Republican party later. Perhaps the Republicans were not as friendly. That very well may be true, but how would she know if she was happily hiding out?
Facebook is a platform that should not reap personal benefits of political alignment. It would be like a newspaper sponsoring a politician.
I laugh in her transparent face.
That was a bit harsh…I wouldn’t say no personal worth…She is a smart and accomplished person, but just didn’t act professionally in this interview and perhaps others.
Huh? What did she accomplish? Before FB, what exactly was her claim to fame?
That was a bit harsh…I wouldn’t say no personal worth…She is a smart and accomplished person, but just didn’t act professionally in this interview and perhaps others.
Actually, Mr. Burns, if you knew ANYTHING about social media & Facebook in general, you would know that the DNC *group* is NOT the same as the DNC Page – which had +17k fans, compared to your 10k fans.
http://www.face...tion/5550624217
Idiot.
Good catch, but you can’t use facts to argue with Republicans. They consider that cheating.
Or liberal media lies. Like the Holocaust.
Failed in life, lost your ventures, and now you’re blaming the Jews, huh? How convenient.
Carry on, loser.
I am a Jew idiot. How easily sarcasm flies over the head of those it was intended to defend.
please take this discussion over to one of the many facebook pages on holocaust denial. it’s not welcome here.
Yeah, take this crap to http://www.anonboard.com or something.
@rick, learn some reading comprehension skills.
haha yes, i saw that the DNC group and was wondering why it was not a page, so i searched it and there was a page with 7k more supporters
i think this is what michael should email him back with
The sound (aside from the TechCrunch bumper) is out of phase left-right, so if it combines to mono it cancels itself out. Make sure you are listening in stereo, if possible.
It is working for me.
working fine for me also?
The main difference between the DNC and the RNC is that the DNC realized early on that new technology and social networks could really help their candidates get elected. Some Democrats and many more Republicans still refuse to admit this or give in to the new ways of “reaching out” to voters. Now we are beginning to see politicians from both parties open up facebook, myspace, and twitter accounts as a way to communicate with voters and future voters.
I bet you’re right. The DNC appears to have a much more diverse and aggressive outreach campaign and it’s working. They’re not afraid of the new and different mediums.
The DNC on the other hand is afraid of talk radio
Isn’t talk radio dead? All I hear from it is so much static and dead air.
Yeah and thankfully so it’s full of old school mentality(the GOP).
Yeah, that terrible old school group that created the greatest success story in the history of civilization, and includes among it’s successes a society where you have the time and luxury to sit at home and rant about “old school people” over the communication system they devised for you. Let’s put an end to this successful, wealthy, powerful world leader crap immediately… oh wait, we elected someone to do that for us.
What’s a radio?
The Obama iPhone app was cool, was their a McCain app?
Sorry about the ego bruise at the RNC Randi.
She’s just somebody’s sister.
Why the posts about her?
Where are the posts about Bill Gate’s cousin who works as a janitor at Microsoft while you’re at it?
Why don’t we care what he thinks?
well being a spokesperson is a lot different than being a janitor. With that said, I think what you’re talking about is nepotism over doing a good job. It’s a shame.
Chris, I think that she should have organized a meeting with the Fox News team, either Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity. She surely would have been interviewed by them, because Fox News tells the truth and the viewer decides.
good point
she is just another jewish princess from the east coast
Randi is a little on the egotistical side, IMO.
But… I don’t think social media would have helped the RNC anyway; most of their voters are older and more mature. The DNC targeted the younger / persuadable crowd… which is by far the majority of social media users.
Just a little bit, yes. Wow.
But then a Berkely professor DID say she was the most important person . . . that’s got to count for something.
i think this is one of those cases no one knew who the hell she was. i took me about 6 months ago to even know mark had a sister.
Randi needs to remember that, as a PR professional, not to mention a representative of Facebook, she shouldn’t alienate 50% of the population.
Its easy to live in an echo chamber of folks with similar political views. Its also dangerous to an open mind and can cause some really bad groupthink.
The DNC did not have a better or more aggressive outreach on the Internet – some of the democratic campaigns did, which is a pretty big difference. The DNC and RNC are in the business of catering to their big donors, not reaching out to the masses. Thats one of the primary party/candidate divides.
well said…there is certainly a reason you won’t hear, say, Tiger Woods make political statements…ever. Both Democrats and Republicans buy Nike etc.
Democrats golf?
She isn’t alienating 50% of “the population.” She alienating the 50% of political consultants who ignored her already. What’s she got to lose with them? Her goal is to scare the next generation of Republican candidates into listening to her.
Anyway, your statement about the DNC is a red herring. Zuckerberg said “Democrats,” not “Democratic National Committee”. If she was paid more attention to at the Democratic convention, it’s because the convention-goers (mostly political staffers and supporters) who made up that convention are more clued-in than the wonks who attended the Republican convention.
And that’s the problem (for the Republicans). Democrats at every level, from grassroots up to the top of the Obama campaign were working the social media last year. The people at the top of the McCain campaign, however, think that putting attack ads on YouTube is a comparable strategy. It’s not. And that’s a mistake that most of the establishment Republicans are still making — concentrating on “putting out a message” while the renegades like the Tea Party organizers are moving rank-and-file Republicans in a different direction.
At this point, it isn’t Democrats who are out-organizing the Republicans. It’s other Republican establishment who are out-organizing the Republican establishment.
As a conservative-leaning Libertarian she has successfully alienated me and I now think the woman is an idiot. Good thing I rarely use facebook anymore and am now a twitterholic!
I think you are a fool if you actually think that Republicans are going to make the same mistake twice by disregarding social media. She didn’t need to “scare” anyone.
They’re making the same mistake now.
While Michael Steele is wasting time on TV and radio talking about the hip hop Republican party, and the other morons whose names I forget are holding pizza parties, the teabaggers are organizing the base out from under the Republican Party.
The GOP thinks it’s got 4 more years to get this right, and it doesn’t. If they want to be a contender in 2012, they need to start now.
Good point. But then again, this lady obviously has issues. Typical liberal mentality that the world revolves around her. Hope she doesn’t delete my facebook page for saying so!!! Especially when she finds out that I don’t believe in man-made global warming…
Bang on. BTW, the lefties want to believe that their hip use of social media, etc., paved the way for Obama to slide into the White House. In fact, one thing and one thing only accomplished that feat: his inept, tone-deaf, rock-headed disaster of a predecessor. Nixon begat Carter, Carter begat Reagan, Dubya begat Obama. The pendulum swings eternally.
If you want to complain about feeling alienated by someone’s language, please do so politely – it’s much more convincing.
The fact that a politician adopts a new technology early is only part of what marks success in this new age of political participation.
The key difference between Obama’s vs. McCain’s social media strategies was that Obama’s campaign appeared to listen. For example, look at the difference between each candidates “following” vs “followers” ratio.
http://twitter.com/barackobama
https://twitter...m/SenJohnMcCain
A participatory democratic election needs go run both ways. Although there has been an uptick in the adoption of new technology, the question remains; are the using the tools correctly?
It looks like McCain is updating his own Twitter account. Also, I’d bet that Obama (or whoever setup his account for him) just used an auto-follow… I’m also guessing they (the people who run his account) don’t read messages from all +700K people.
Following that many people makes Twitter useless IMO.
I agree. It’s purely a perception of interest. However, I do believe the Obama camp was doing more than simply auto-following (not to say that they weren’t). Not only does a response give the impression that they care, but it encourages the followers to engage. The Obama campaign definitely used the tool to gather important insight into their following. If they didn’t follow back they wouldn’t facilitate engagement. Obama created his personal brand with social media & used his dedicated following as political leverage. Remember before 2004 this guy was just like you and I, an unknown personality on the national stage.
As far as who controls the Twitter account. Who cares…the president has better things to do then tweet. I’m sure both the candidate & their publicist have access to their accounts. A few select tweets were probably created by the candidate themselves.
re: “I do believe the Obama camp was …”
Remember –
just because you believe it, it’s not necessarily true.
This may help you in life.
I’d make her sit in her hotel room alone too. I don’t think I could stand more than 2 minutes in the same room as her. The only reason she’d get that is because she had the dumb luck of being Mark Z.’s sister. Other than that, I don’t see that she has anything going for her.
no doubt…me either. in fact i felt a sense of relief when that video ended because i was getting such a bad case of second hand embarrassment. anybody else probably would be fired for looking so stupid. oh and those arms…holy cow! aint that facebook place got a work out program or is it just all snickers and soda?
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! i laughed out loud – she should have skipped the conventions and headed to the gym – holy case of the chubs!
Matt – hope you cherish those “Pollies”, great consolation prize. You lost badly and a professional response would have at least acknowledged your role in that.
The popular vote was 69,498,215 to 59,948,240. I would not call that losing badly.
You don’t have to be a Republican to know that Randi Zuckerberg is full of shit. I am a Democrat and I knew that 2 years ago.
Who the hell she thinks she is? What did she ever do to even suggest that she is the most powerful persona in the world? You’re borderline delusional, baby.
“To out myself… I’m a left leaning libertarian” – Dave
I couldn’t help but yell “Woohoo” when you said that Dave. haha
I thought her comment would breed controversy at the time when she said it, but as far as I interpreted it, I thought she only spoke truthfully regarding how she felt.
One thing maybe to note though, republican powerbase’s age group is significantly higher then democratic parties. As such, social media, which resonates with younger crowd the older may not have the high ROI the Republican party was looking for. That also being said, maybe the republican party should start listening more to the youth as well, and consider using social media to target the younger crowd specifically. I’m sure it was discussed and strategized about, but not executed on aggressively as much as the Obama campaign did in 2008.
actually, the reason i asked Randi the question was because i think she’s right, and i wish she wasn’t… in order for there to be checks & balances in our gov’t, the Republican party really needs to get its shit together better on social media.
like i said i lean left, but i don’t really want the Dems to get *too* powerful either, or we’ll see the same sorts of abuse we got over the past 8 years.
equally digitally-empowered left & right aisles are essential to the country moving forward in the right direction.
whether or not Randi spoke her mind, she certainly spoke the truth.
perhaps mr. burns should take out his frustration on his own party for not doing more of their digital homework. McCain might still have lost to Obama anyway, but the social media strategy could certainly have been more thoughtful on the conservative side. hopefully they take on more of that in the future, so we have more balance on the issues like free trade & economic empowerment that occasionally the Dems don’t historically support quite as strong.
- dave “still leaning left but libertarian” mcclure
What I love about social media sites is that it represents the voices of the masses. It is fundamentally giving the ability for folks to questions ideas and views and create social causes. This result in direct impact on policies and political issues in this country and abroad. What the left and right does not get is that social media has the power to impact politics like nothing before it. Since the masses can now question ideologies and ism. Let it be capitalism, fundamentalism, communism, etc… They can create social causes and build consensus around issues rather than endorsing an entire ism or political party. This makes the right and left watchful to facebook. So bottom line is that companies can let these established political organizations to dictate what issues get covered. Alternatively these companies can continue to empower the voice of the masses through sporting causes, issues, groups by empowering the users to continue to have a voice. The first will be more profitable the second is more gratifying.
Dave,
Based on my research it would appear that the Dems outspend the Reps by $166,890,796. So unless thats the going cost for maintain a social media network. There might have been something else involved.
http://en.wikip..._election,_2008
Candidate (Party) Amount raised Amount spent Votes Average spent per vote
Barack Obama (D) $532,946,511 $513,557,218 69,498,215 $7.39
John McCain (R) $379,006,485 $346,666,422 59,948,240 $5.78
@Rodney: um, maybe… just maybe the effectiveness of the Obama social media strategies were what enabled the difference in fundraising.
so yeah, there was definitely something else involved.
What are you smoking? Only a very very very tiny percentage of the population uses “social media”. It really isn’t as important as you make it out to be. After all is said and done, it’s just a fad for high school kids and the hype surrounding it is just everyone else trying to make a buck. Not that there’s anything wrong with that either. Just don’t try to make it sound more important than it really is. You just end up looking like a tool.
Having worked for one of the other Democratic Presidential campaigns I can tell you Facebook never reached out to us. We were never offered the chance to be a launch partner or use Facebook Connect. Even when we reached out to them, we were snubbed. Guess it helps when you have a former Facebook staffer working for a campaign.
Preferential treatment was shown and was highly unprofessional by Facebook.
“one of the other” campaigns?
“even when we reached out to them we were snubbed”
seriously you need to stand publicly behind those statements to have any credibility.
state your name, role in the campaign you’re talking about. if you’re calling them out you need to provide facts & stats.
+1
If that’s how you feel, Randi needs to provide some sort of proof that she was “like” begging people from the RNC to meet with her.
I for one believe the statement, it seems fully credible to me.
Unfortunately I can’t since I have to have some sort of relationship with them as I use them for other candidates and organizations.
But you really think all of the rest of the campaign would of turned down working with Facebook closely to build communities?
I’d of jumped at the chance to be a “launch” partner with them like Obama. Other tech companies were much more open and easier to work with.
It’s amazing how the 08 Presidential and what happened tech wise has so quickly been rewritten by over inflated egos and worth.
The difference between the DNC and the RNC, is that at the DNC on TV you could see the whole spread of this country(racially wise). While at the RNC you saw pretty much nothing but middle aged angry white guys.
Finding a black guy at the RNC is like finding Waldo, you were sure that he is there, but you have to look pretty hard to find him.
@Matt: um, dude… have you heard of this guy named Michael Steele who now runs the RNC?
(cough)
your comment may be accurate for the rank & file, but your statement is woefully uninformed at least at the top of the org.
Matt…did you forget about Colin Powell? He swears that he is a totally dedicated republican and will remain so, if Rush Limbaugh will swear a vow of lifelong silence.
As John McEnroe would bellow, “You can’t be serious!” Bringing up Michael Steele and Colin Powell’s names as a response to Matt’s post is like stuttering in protest, “B-b-but, some of my BEST FRIENDS are black!” Please, get a grip: his point (if I can be so presumptuous; correct me if I’m wrong, Matt) was that the two parties’ conventions were visually diffferent and couldn’t have represented better one of the key differences between the two parties. You can’t deny THAT. Matt’s post was right on the money for what it was.
I’m still waiting for the movie sequel, “No Country For (Old White) Men” LOL
The RNC better get with the times or they will be left behind.
When is Jennifer Arrington going to start writing blogs?
I can’t believe he would call that young lady “full of shit”. What an out of line, over the top reaction to her opinion. There’s no need to be that harsh, especially on our young businesspeople, no matter what the politics.
Of course, we don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. : )
I can’t bring myself to care about Randi Zuckerberg. She’s an idiot and a complainer who just road in on her brother’s coattails. I haven’t heard one thing from “the most powerful person in the world” that suggests that she actually deserves her job or understand the responsibility that comes with it. Classless.
Funny hearing whining from someone whose company’s business model is dependent on selling ad space to other companies who run (allegedly) deceptive and fraudulent ads. Every other ad on Facebook is for some kind of scam.
Doesn’t Steve Jobs have a sibling we can talk about? Maybe one without such a grating voice and self-important attitude?
Matt Burns left the comment on WSJ, too:
http://blogs.ws...-media-message/
He has an AOL email lmao, why am I not surprised?
So do I…along with 15 other accounts. AOL does remarkably well with spam.
Well she better make the most of it, next election she’ll just be a groupie for twitter
If Randi Zuckerberg is “like, the most powerful person in the world,” God help us all. I think she’s full of shit, and I voted for a straight ticket of Democrats. Ten years from now — if she’s lucky — Randi will be a colorful little footnote, famous only for having a famous sibling and leveraging that coincidence to the hilt. Like Billy Carter, or Roger Clinton (both of whom, yes, were also full of shit).
She will be remembered for dotting the ‘i’ in “Randi” with a smiley face or a heart.
I reckon that she change her name to have Ayn in front of Rand (with the i being removed) and then she would be remembered for future generations to come.
It’s like the movie Twins. I wonder which one is Danny Devito in this case?
Republicans have no sense of humour unless torture is involved, then they’re a riot!
Q. What’s the difference between Obama giving a speech and a cardboard cutout of Obama giving a speech?
A. The cardboard cutout looks at the camera instead of the teleprompter.
Q. What does Obama say when someone sneezes?
A. I bless you.
Q. Why is Obama spending so much money?
A. Shut up, you racist!
LOL… that’s a good one, actually.
She is useless as an internet personality, but maybe that’s what makes her so compelling. Anybody could be a cheerleader, but it takes a failed cheerleader to really take it to new heights. Plus, she needs to invest in thicker bras.
That said, the hidden subtext may appear that the RNC did not reach out to anybody who would not (or could not) contribute a revenue share.
I actually think the RNC did a good job utilizing social media, but it was a losing battle.
Unfortunately they did not have the better candidate.
Non-story. Yep, RNC blew it. And I’d posit being pro-Obama is an important, if tacit, part of FB PR.
That said, sitting in one’s hotel room is pretty boring.
booooooourns.
Take my poll: (Pls RT) What’s the primary reason Social Media WON’T WORK for the Republican party? http://twtpoll.com/4rjy3v
http://twtpoll.com/4rjy3v
Look, it’s obvious, isn’t it? Social Media and the Republican party are like oil and water. Social Media just won’t work for the Republicans BECAUSE of their value system, which is by nature CONSERVATIVE. They like a closed (think nationalistic) society, where the rapid, viral spread of multiple ideas is a frightening thing that threatens the nature of their desired orderly system.
It doesn’t matter how many “followers” or “friends” the Republicans and conservatives may amass on any given social network or site – the nature of social networking goes against their grain, and so can never succeed for them…which begs the question: what are they to do, then, to harness social networking in their favor? CAN they? My opinion: Hell, no. Like the Republican Party itself, their attempts at a “comprehensive and successful online campaign” will continue to fail. Mr. Burns’ pissy comments are just further proof. #theyjustdontgetit
@proudoldlefty
Explain to me Ron Paul’s great success with social media? He raised in one day $4mm more then any other candidate has ever done in a single day.
#theyjustdontgetit
I’d say that Ron Paul’s success with social media is further proof of why it won’t work for the Republican Party. Ron’s one of the ideas that they just can’t tolerate, so I applaud him for that. And he and his supporters are probably a good example of free-thinkers who WILL benefit from and successfully employ social media.
That said, though, the “success” of any single effort – say, a fundraising effort or a mobilization call – through online tools is not proof of social media engagement. It might actually be more akin to an evangelical preacher on television who can raise $50 million in one show through tribute requests for memento’s and special prayers. A success to be sure, but not the engagement and “conversation” that engenders change.
But I’m open. : )
Stay smug and complacent, God bless you. Keep knocking down those conservative strawmen you’ve erected.
Eh? My whole conservative family is all over Facebook. They aren’t running like nancy boys from the “scary” new ideas. They just think those ideas suck.
New ideas means bad, recycled ideas with new marketing.
OMG! Is this woman for real? What a joke.
“this, uh, lady I sat next to on the plane said I was, um, like, um, the most powerful person in the world, and no one knows it!!”
“[...] it was, like, um, a really incredible moment for me”
“…Yeah” [...] “um, yeah!”
Puke!!
Nepotism is the WORST, evidenced by this dull woman. For god sakes, what is it with people like her? Why are these PR fruitbags always so full of themselves? Is this part of their PR act? Do their professors teach this repugnant egotism in communications school?
I turned on full volume on my PC and Youtube controller, still can’t hear a thing.
Btw, one thing I am confused by facebook’s “holocaust” policy was the fact that Randi/Mark are Jewish themselves.
The real question is she single? I want to be a gold digger?
Hey Randi, you are where you are because of your brother.
Your ego and stupid remarks are going to get you fired one day so please, keep spewing the nonsense that you do.
Enjoy it while you can.
Randi Zuckerberg needs a reality check and a good swat. What a delusional diva.
Give it a rest.. seriously do you want the world to be boring and vanilla. Got to give the girl props for saying what she thinks and not giving a dam what other people think. Aren’t you tired of all these corporations giving us the crap Machiavellian answers? Sure you might not agree with her but at least she is being honest in what she feels which is hard to do in this media controlled world…
agree Gebadia.
I agree. People, and the world, are so much more interesting when honest and not so vanilla. Be who you are, and own it.
Also, the generation to which facebook has the most users from actually respects and prefers straightforward talk and looks upon traditional media tactics as disdainful. So I’d contend she’s actually doing her job well by not giving into traditional pr roles, but in fact speaking honestly and openly.
“Got to give the girl props for saying what she thinks and not giving a dam what other people think.”
Most everyone says what they think; what would make you think this deserves “props”, particularly when what comes out of her mouth is so jaw-droppingly idiotic?
“Got to give the girl props for saying what she thinks and not giving a dam what other people think”
See, ironically I don’t believe Gebadia is saying what SHE thinks here.
Let’s try the P.C. idiom translator — I get:
“Got to give the girl props for agreeing with me”
That’s much better.
No, we’d like the world to be intelligent. I give her props for being willing to say what she thinks, though it’s probably easier when you exist in an echo chamber. Wisdom comes with experience – Randi should remember that she has none.
There are lots of individuals who speak on behalf of their companies who make intelligent and wise observations. Anytime one of the younger execs or employees at Facebook speaks, it smacks of inexperience.
It’s great to say what you think and mean what you say, but Facebook is not a small family business. One has to think beyond their own feelings when representing other’s interests.
That said, any press is good press, and we’re all here talking about this
.
Give her props? What is this? 1920 before women’s suffrage?
She’s an obnoxious twit with a soapbox to utter nonsense. I owe her no props.
why exactly would the republican party be desperate to meet with her? dont they have more important things to do at political conventions?
Exactly! …such as writing speeches that demeaned the work of community organizers, lol, and dressing jus’ folks Sarah Palin in splendiferous clothes. They was bizzzzeee!
So they ridiculed his less than qualified work of being an organizer to be ready for the job of President and you ridicule her clothing but dare not touch her professional experience? Nice. lol
Ouch. More proof #theyjustdontgetit.
No, I was not ridiculing Palin’s clothing. I’ll leave that to Perez Hilton or his mother, Joan Rivers. The criticism is of the hypocrisy. (Old argument that has been trotted out more than I care to revisit it.)
And yes, I dare not touch her “professional experience.” I’ll leave that to…umm… professionals.
Who are we talking about again? LOL
“most powerful person in the world”……someone thinks highly of herself….
No actual denial, however.
Dave McClure’s response on WSJ:
@Colin: if you bothered to watch the video / read the story, according to Randi they gave equal opportunity to both campaigns to take advantage of new ideas for digital media communication (even those thought up by the other campaign).
however, all fairness / attempts aside — since when has it been the responsibility of the private sector to make sure either aisle of the government pull its respective head out of its butt & learn how to use the tools to help get elected / communicate with its citizens?
seriously, stop whining and hit the books. it should be no one’s responsibility but the RNC & DNC, the politicians themselves, and ultimately the citizenry who are their respective constituents to understand and implement digital strategy. the foundations of this country are based on people helping themselves to the tools of their own rejuvenation.
politician: heal thyself.
And my response
@Colin, I’m one of the organizers of Startup2Startup as well and I’m a Republican (I actually worked for McCain in the 90s, and I’m sure he doesn’t share your perspective above). There was no Republican bashing going on here. It is too bad you missed the entire point, that the President sought out communication channels vs. waiting for people to convince them of the viability of those channels. I’m sorry if technology once again is ruining things for the Grand OLD Party. Long live the GOP.
Tweets and kisses,
Leonard
rock on leonard
I guess folks need to read what I wrote initially. I’m talking during the primary is when things went down with Facebook and Obama initially. And no, they didn’t offer the same opportunity across the board.
In fact when Facebook connect,partnerships, and programming platform were announced, I did reach out to them and was snubbed.
Reread what I wrote. I was working for one of the other Dem candidates, and saw preferential treatment given.
I then went and found other technology no one was using and implemented that on our campaign with some success.
Randi is Mark’s Joe Biden and Roger Clinton rolled up in one.
This is dumb. Randi is lucky to have fallen into the gig of a lifetime. The notion that some kid knows anything real about PR or marketing is ridiculous. In fact, her public statements are PR blunder 101. I rest my case.
As far as Burns goes, my first inclination was to automatically side with the young, liberal, techie side. However, after having read Burns’ comment, I’m convinced that would’ve been a hurried judgement. He sites possible reasons why Randi’s feelings were hurt, and they all sound highly probable to me.
But again, why do we care? And why anybody attempt to suppose we care about Randy Zuckerburg…or her amature thoughts?
She is not calling herself the most important person in the world in this video, but rather, she is relating with excitement what somebody told her on a plane. Many people would be excited as well in her place, especially at such a young age.
The fact that she is Mark Zuckerberg’s sister is irrelevant. If she does her job well, something about which most people outside of Facebook (that would include me) have no idea, then that is what matters.
I can see how some people would be annoyed at her style (and the princess attitude with the NYC bouncer did not help), but she has got to have some humanity in her too, no? Let her be judged on her achievements.
Meanwhile, the Google Wave is about to rise…
Oh, by the way Michael A… You love the fact that she says what’s on her mind? I like that in most people as well, but it’s by definition anti-PR. PR is all about gaining positive public opinion and mitigating image risks. So, she’s probably better off in any role but PR.
Forgive me, as I don’t have a great understanding of how US Politics works.
But, why was any company being wined and dined by a political party – wouldn’t it usually be the other way around.
i.e. company wants to create revenue by selling stuff, those who buy stuff don’t usually pay (wine & dine) for the privillage. Or has Facebook come up with a new business model – sounds like someone has a big ego.
“for three days, no one would meet with us”
IMO maybe no one wanted to spend time with a short fat mouthy idiot with a grating voice…
“the most powerful person in the world” Yeah, right.
Of course, TechCrunch didn’t lift a finger when this insufferable woman broke Facebook’s TOS and California State Law:
http://tinyurl.com/ca6zen
Yes, she really does think she is the most powerful person on the planet.
I just think it’s funny that Republicans are so big on “Talk Radio”. I mean, they still listen to radio? I encourage Republicans to enter the 21st century. I barely even know what a radio is.
I just think it’s funny that Republicans are so big on “Talk Radio”. I mean, they still listen to radio? I encourage Republicans to enter the 21st century. I barely even know what a radio is.
You mean you *read* blogs instead of having them read to you? How 20th century.
“I just think it’s funny that Republicans are so big on “Talk Radio”. I mean, they still listen to radio? I encourage Republicans to enter the 21st century. I barely even know what a radio is.”
Umm, it’s that thing in that thing that you use to transport yourself to your job. Do you know what a job is?
Eh? Radio reaches 75% of all consumers daily and 95% weekly. Personalities, such as Dan Patrick, focused on his radio show versus his website when he left ESPN. Sports is still bigger than tech news, bro, and so is radio’s reach vs. blogs.
If radio was so dead, why was Air America launched by progressives? Why are some Democrats on the Hill trying to regulate radio and silence rightwing talking heads? Can’t beat them with ideas, noise and nonsense, so regulate and restrict them
I agree, traditional media still has a better reach than the internet, as well as political content.
I think people are over valuing social media’s impact on the election.
The chances of repubs to be reelected considering an unpopular war and a bad ECONOMY was slim to none. The environment was set up for obama to win easy.
Did anyone else enjoy Matt’s response? If politics were this honest (ok, interesting, not honest) people may start to vote after consulting their brains.