Surely you heard the twitter-storm that turned into a media frenzy last week, about the wildly exaggerated rumours of the death of Gordon Lightfoot. But did you know it was an Ottawa woman and mom of two, nothing more nefarious than a biologist, who was the catalyst for the rumour? Read the full story from her perspective in this Globe and Mail article. Best line in the whole piece? “Thankfully, Gordon Lightfoot didn’t believe the radio, or he wouldn’t have made it to his dentist appointment.” *snicker*
I’m just glad I wasn’t the most infamous person on the interwebs last week — for a while there, it was beginning to feel that way!
Related posts (automatically generated):
- Fun with comments Sorry, kiddies, I’ve got nothing for you today. It’s almost painful because I’m in one of those stretches when I have about six or seven ideas for posts clogging up my brain, and the words are just coursing out of my fingertips every time I sit down at the keyboard...
- Tune in to my radio début! How cool is this? A couple of months ago, a producer from CBC radio sent me an e-mail and asked if I’d be interested in coming in to chat about my 365 project. At first, we talked about doing a show around my 100 day mark, but what with it...
- Nova Scotia road trip playlist I tweeted the other day that I was having fun sorting through iTunes to make a Nova Scotia road trip playlist, and Susan asked me if I’d blog my playlist. Sure, why not? Except, now that I have a second to do it, iTunes is being persnickety and I can’t...
- In which my 7 year old reveals Obama’s egregious copyright violation Tristan and I are in the car, sitting in the Tim’s drivethrough on the way to skating lessons. We’re listening to one of my favourite radio program on CBC, Terry O’Reilly’s The Age of Persuasion. The episode is about tag lines and slogans. As it runs through the opening, it...
- In which she evangelizes the H1N1 shot to Canada’s National Newspaper I must be getting a little bit blasé about talking to the media these days, because I actually completely forgot to check this morning’s Globe and Mail after one of their journalists interviewed Beloved and I earlier this week until one of my colleagues commented that he’d seen the article....
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
She should be blogging. She writes wonderfully. What a mountain out of a molehill. I’d have hit the wine bottle too.
At least she got a funny essay out of it
Did you notice her name? (!)
I did, matter of fact.
Could the world be that small?
I think it was weird coincidences week and someone forgot to tell me.
Saw her piece in the Globe a few days ago. Well written, but it’s hard to feel sorry for someone who jumped to conclusions, stood on a mountain and shouted out to the masses.
Dani, don’t compare what happened on your blog last week to the Lightfoot debacle…inspiring academic debate and critical discussion on social media is something to be proud of.
Thanks Annika — but do you really think she did anything wrong? A friend pointed out the comments on the G&M article and people were eviscerating this poor woman, and I was shocked to see the reaction. I have a hard time finding anything for which she should be blamed. She had some info that she tweeted to friends — much like I do a dozen or so times a day. She didn’t go to any particular lengths to propagate the information beyond a simple 3 word tweet to about 100 people. And quite frankly, if we’re expected to fact-check everything we put on twitter — or even on the blog! — I think social media as a whole will just dry up.
Another interesting social media case study!
In re-reading my comments, I can see that I was rather harsh. I do realize that this lady in no way intended to spread false information and I wish her no ill will (which I should have stated earlier).
My beef is in how we sometimes use social media, which (as you have so appropriately pointed out recently) is still a relatively new form of communication with few – if any – rules. I also use sites like Facebook and Twitter, but I just wish people would exercise more caution.
All of this information can potentially become public communication at any point, and we have very little privacy once we have posted something (even if we assume that only our family and friends are consuming it). You and I both know that the “Communications 101″ warning is not to put anything into print that you wouldn’t want to see splashed across the front page of the Globe and Mail.
Yes, I agree, another valuable case study! You really are going to have to start teaching social media one of these days. I hope it’s on your life “to-do” list. =)