Posts tagged sociology
Does Amanda Chapel matter?
Jan 3rd
The mysterious, mean-spirited, self-proclaimed “strumpette” Amanda Chapel is the most divisive personality in the social media movement. She relentlessly shoots poison darts at nearly every voice of authority on the social web. It’s typical for her to characterize many of her A-List blogger targets as:
- “Baby babble”
- “Full-on non-stop shameless surreptitious sleaze”
- “The cacophony of dopes”
- “Sacs de douche”
- “Self-important fatuous boobs”
… and worse. But her commentary can also be positively brilliant, insightful, and hilarious. There is no humor so sublime as pomposity pricked.
All this venom sometimes leaves me wondering if she’s a just a pesky mosquito annoying everyone at the social media picnic or if she is having a meaningful impact on the evolution of the social web. Does Amanda Chapel even really exist? Does she matter?
I decided to ask her these questions myself. Here is my interview with Amanda Chapel, which was conducted last week via email (I added the hyperlinks):
MWS: You are one of the most reviled personalities on the blogosphere. Why are you so mean?
AC: Actually, that’s two separate questions. With regard to “reviled,” I am/we are anti the general Web2 Cluetrain commie crap. We poke at the movement’s weakest links. We show their Golden Calves for what they actually are, i.e. self-serving buffoons. That said, we also take no prisoners. As such, we lay claim to, and inspire, the inverse of the movement’s immature passions … as does anyone who thinks critically … as does any skeptic who refutes a bogus pseudo religion.
As to “mean,” I am cutting. Satire and mockery are biting at their best. Poignant is poignant. It’s smart and often cuts through the clutter. I also believe that the “David Letterman Beat It To Death School of Comedy” is VERY effective and resonates.
MWS: So you refer to yourself as “we.” This begs the question, are you real? Are you even a woman?
AC: The identity issue is so old and tedious frankly. It’s been asked and answered SOOOO many times. Sadly, it keeps coming up because the nature of the SMedia crowd tends to be literal minded. Brian’s interviews with Bill were pretty explicit.*
“We” means a group represented by a single brand. Asked and answered.
All to say, you can call me Amanda Chapel. That’s what we are.
MWS: One of your biggest criticisms is that many of the A-List bloggers don’t have the business experience or credentials to have a voice of authority in this space. Why are you different? Why should we listen to you?
AC: I’m not selling anything. I’m questioning. Those two things are NOT on equal footing. “Doubt” is not about credentials, per se; it is about the strength of the argument. That said, we stand on what already exists. The core of our system/Union is NOT enthusiasm; it’s rationalism.
MWS: What is pissing you off the most these days?
AC: Most? That’d be Liz Strauss, Brian Solis, and Deepak Chopra. Ironically, as more light has been shed on the ethereal emptiness of the movement, its “evangelists” have gotten bolder and strident. They’ve become irrepressible caricature. It’s like watching amateur Benny Hinns whistle on the way to the bank, having only increased their flocks after being busted on 60 Minutes. Arrrgh.
MWS: You have been one of the most visible voices of dissent for several years. Have you made a difference?
AC: Many say I have made a significant difference. Frankly, I’m not so sure. I think I’m more of a catalyst than a direct agent for change. Our outrageousness with Strumpette,** etc. made it safe for critical thinkers like you, Bill Sledzik, Sean Williams, Joel Postman, Ike Pigott, et al. to occupy the middle.
MWS: Do you have plans to ever shed the Amanda Chapel character or are you in it for the long-haul?
AC: I think the character is only good as long as our argument is relevant. Let’s put it this way: most of the failure of Cluetrain, etc. is pretty basic. But it is a bubble that sadly continues to grow. However, the FTC, Congress and business are waking up. I’m certain when the bubble breaks a new canvas will present itself. I’m pretty excited about that actually. It’s long overdue.
MWS: So far I have not been the target of your fury. What would I have to do to have you take a crack at me?
AC: We’ve seen you slip on occasion. But that’s rare. To REALLY get our attention, I’d think you’d have to have had a serious head injury.
______________________________________________________
The title of this post is “Does Amanda Chapel Matter?” so I’ll offer an opinion.
One of the most disturbing aspects of power and the social web is the herd mentality. You’ve seen it. If Chris Brogan, Guy Kawasaki or Jeremiah Oywang burps, it is tweeted 900 times. That burp gets repeated and codified by other bloggers and soon, it becomes a marketing tenet, a “rule” for social media marketing. That’s called “group think” and it is DANGEROUS. Maybe we should call it “burp think.”
It is difficult to have an impactful, dissenting voice in this arena. It’s like yelling for the opposing team at a home Steeler game – You won’t be heard and you’ll probably be squashed.
But Amanda gets through. She often pisses me off. She’s shrill, offensive and sometimes even flat-out wrong … but her message GETS THROUGH. We need that dissent. Even her detractors should admit we need it. Some of the most important and effective dissenters in history have been anonymous “characters” and maybe that’s what we need to rise above social media’s sycophantic mind muck — a voice who doesn’t play nicey-nice all the time.
I think Amanda matters. What about you?
* This refers to a 2008 series of interviews of Brian Connolly by Bill Sledzik. In this interview, Connolly disclosed that the idea for the Amanda Chapel character started while his friends were watching a basketball game. The idea for the “blog of naked PR” was born, complete with an Amanda Chapel backstory. Between 4-7 people have sustained the Chapel character and signed a non-disclosure agreement. “Amanda” would not disclose the identity of the person or persons who answered these questions.
**Strumpette was the Amanda Chapel blog which was discontinued in 2008.
The social web is starting to feel like high school
Dec 30th

A while back I wrote an article about the fortress-like tendencies of the A-List bloggers and the sycophants who follow them. I compared it to an exclusive country club.
But as I’ve reached a wider audience and gained more experience on the social web, I’m learning that some of the online behaviors deserve even less credit than that. A couple of anecdotes:
- Last month I met with a high-profile blogger/speaker who said he had been “black-balled” by those following Chris Brogan (not Chris himself) because of disagreements he lodged with the uber-blogger.
- Another top blogger told me conference speaking invitations had dried up since he criticized fellow A-list bloggers
- I recently politely disagreed with a number of high-profile folks … who promptly “unfollowed” me on Twitter
- One follower implied I was chauvinistic because I had more men than women on one Follow Friday tweet
- A nasty and unprofessional online fight recently erupted between East Coast and West Coast factions over the issue of social media credentialing.
- Recently, a well-known social media pundit named me as one their favorite bloggers. One of my followers said she now had a “moral dilemma” of whether to follow me or not because she did not like the other blogger.
Pardon me folks, but doesn’t this sound a lot like high school? Or worse.
The petty politics of every day relationships are exacerbated on the social web because we are making very limited assessments of people based on their written words. People seem quicker to judge, and harsher in their reactions without thinking about the real live human beings behind those little icons. I’ve been guilty too.
In the end, I can only be accountable for myself. The social web mantra of “authenticity” and “transparency” is a load of crap. Nobody is truly authentic. Nobody is truly transparent. Nor should you be! However, there is an urgent need for civility, tolerance and honesty in this space. I’ll try my best to walk the talk in those areas and if this makes any sense to you, maybe we can support each other and make the change together.
Thanks for hanging in there through the rant. You may now return to your social media high school home room, wherever that may be. : )
Community alert: Sean Williams, a regular contributor to {grow}, pointed out this timely WSJ op-ed piece on the subject of social web civility. Which was a civil thing to do.
Is blogging a man’s job?
Dec 16th

I read a blog post yesterday that staggered me. It was about a woman who could only find success as a blogger and freelance writer after she posed as a man (under the name of James Chartrand).
The gist of the tale was that she was a talented, hard-working individual who could not make enough to feed her family until she lied about her gender. Once she became “James,” her life changed. She’s been living a double life for years and has attracted a loyal audience to her photo-free, phone-free persona. It made me sad and angry … and it stirred a lot of other people too. It was tweeted more than 2,000 times and received more than 400 comments.
One of those commenters was Jenn Whinnem, who suggested that I blog about the underlying issues. I thought it would be a richer experience if I could capture a woman’s perspective too, so I embarked on an experiment – a virtual chat that became today’s blog post on gender inequality on the social web …
Mark: My initial reaction was “stunned” that this kind of blatant inequality still exists, especially on the social web, which is supposed to be so democratic. I guess that myth has been exploded.
Jenn: I was saddened, but not surprised. Since establishing a professional presence on the social web, I haven’t experienced discrimination (to my knowledge). I have, of course, experienced sexism in the workplace – everywhere really – so I see no reason why it would be any different on the Internet. I realize James Chartrand was pushed into outing herself, but I’m really grateful for the attention her decision has brought to this topic. When I’ve been offered a salary, I’ve had no idea if a man would have been offered more. But “James” knows, and she shared it with us.
Mark: You said you didn’t know if you had experienced discrimination on the web and this made me think about my own behaviors. I looked at who I work with, who I am connecting with on the web, who has been guest-blogging … just any data points I could find. I guess I’m trying to judge my behavior by the numbers. Does that seem silly?
Jenn: I don’t think it’s silly at all. Reviewing one’s own behavior is necessary for change. As for examining the ‘numbers’ aspect of it — well, that’s a pretty hot topic in social media – proving that the time spent using social media leads to dollars for your business. I know it’s something you’ve written about, Mark. It’s important to know which numbers you’re paying attention to and knowing what they mean. You can look at the number of men vs. women you’re following on Twitter, but what is that going to tell you?
Mark: At the end of the day, equality has to come through self-awareness. I can try to look at numbers and still fool myself about how I treat people. I had one boss who treated women terribly … to the point that I was compelled to address it. He said, “Look at all the women who report to me. How can you say I have a problem with women?” In his case, the numbers supported “equal treatment” but his actions were incongruent. So Jenn, what do you do to see yourself more accurately? To make sure you’re congruent?
Jenn: That anecdote is a perfect example of how someone can fool themselves into thinking they’re ‘okay’ and why there’s a real need to keep fighting for equality. For me, that fight begins with my own behavior. I’m the first to admit that I’m often guilty of ‘incongruent’ behavior, and like you, Mark, I find that awareness is the first step in correcting that. I also had an excellent boss (hi Alice!) early in my career who lived the mantra “nurture other women, don’t compete with them.” And, when I think about it, this complements nicely the social media mantra “promote others, not yourself.”
Mark: Do you think that is a social media mantra or a feminine mantra? I ask this because the comment section in my previous blog post on this topic contained speculation that some inequality stems from the fact that men are perceived to be better self-promoters than women. I think the male social media mantra might be “help others, promote yourself.”
Jenn: I’ve read the “promote others” mantra in several blog posts, but didn’t notice if the authors were men or women. But I don’t know that this is a feminine mantra. My experience has been, at least in the work place, that women are more likely to tear each other down to eliminate the competition, rather than help each other out. This is why Alice’s advice was so powerful to me.
I find the conversation about men or women being better at self-promotion more difficult. If we look at gender roles in this culture broadly, I would say that self-promotion goes against socially desirable behavior for women.
Mark: That’s an interesting observation. Perhaps this cultural expectation for socially-desirable “female” behavior is just exacerbated on the narcissistic social web. Instead of being the great equalizer everybody hopes for, it could actually highlight and reinforce aspects of our culture that keep gender inequality in place?
Jenn: If I can back up a minute, where did the idea of social media as an equalizer come from? We encourage the idea of “being human” on the social web … and any space where people are invited to be human means they’re going to do just that. On the positive side, I think this kind of highlighting is a good thing. When attention is drawn to inequalities, it starts to change. Something of a theme in our conversation.
Mark: I say “equalizer” because presumably having access to free, global, immediate communication should provide genders, races, religions, rich and poor with precisely the same opportunity to communicate and connect. But I guess you’re right. If underlying inequalities persist, it’s wrong to think that will change by simply having a new way to broadcast it. It drives home for me again how silly it is when people say the social web “changes everything.” Obviously it doesn’t.
Jenn, our dialogue has brought up some vital discussion points. Let’s turn it over to the {grow} community to add to the discussion …
Jenn Whinnem is a Communication Specialist focusing on developing social media strategy for Golden Compass. You can connect with her via @JennWhinnem on Twitter.
This is the future of social media
Dec 6th

With the dawn of the social web, I can’t think of a more exciting time to be in the field of marketing. But I don’t think we have really seen anything yet! Here are 12 developments I believe we will witness in the future … and probably sooner than you think.
1) Hyper social measurement– At some point soon, Google is going to start doing something bold with the volumes of personal data they’re collecting. Google is in the best position by far to define social media monitoring, especially now that they are taking steps to fold in data from Twitter, Facebook and other platforms. Once Google flexes its social media monitoring muscles, companies like Radian6 will become niche players at best. Complex algorithms will determine real-time sentiment shifts down to the individual. And it won’t be free.
2) Tapping into text messaging– The one communication mode largely untouched by real-time search is text messages. This is a goldmine of information too big to ignore, especially if you’re a “cool-hunting” consumer product company. Entrepreneurs will find a way to tap into the “text stream” by rewarding users for being included in their data-gathering systems. Does this seem improbable? Would people accept a free cell phone and free data service in exchange for their text information being stored in a database for consumer product research and targeted promotions? It would work.
3) The human coupon– The massive quantity of personal information available about you will eventually follow you around. Enabled by GPS and RFID technology, coupons and special offers based on your buying patterns will appear instantly on your mobile device as you near a store. RFID chips embedded in packaging will send messages during your purchase decision to encourage up-selling and cross-selling. For example, if you pick up a blouse off of a rack, a message will direct you to the precise area of the store where you can find a matching skirt … on sale just for you.
4) Radical privacy movement — This intense data gathering and the use of it in a Big-Brother-like manner will spark a backlash, including legislation, assuring the right to be excluded from Internet data-gathering tools. Because of its power and control over voluminous personal details, Google will become the most profitable, and despised, company in history.
5) Man-machine interface. Medical advances and social media platforms will converge. Scientists are already embedding electronics in humans to power limbs, regulate body functions, and enable the brain to access information from micro chips. It’s now possible to think a tweet or control artificial limbs with a thought. Humans will routinely carry a computer inside of them, powered by body heat and motion. You will literally always be on the social web, generating messages just by thoughts. Humans will have markings like tattoos to display the premium, designer brand of devices embedded in their bodies. This will give new meaning to the tagline “Intel Inside.”
6) We become the Internet. Today, people talk about Twitter, Facebook etc., never really connecting that these are all “Internet.” As the social web literally becomes part of our bodies, we will no longer distinguish between listening, talking and electronic communications. In our minds, there will be no more web. It will just be.
7) Massive national ID validation. The social web will become the exclusive source of consumer information, political research/policy development, and education systems. Because of the increasingly critical importance of this feedback and the opportunity for corruption, complex systems to prevent fraud will be needed, including a broadly-implemented government validation program that extends across all platforms.
8) Micro politics — Politicians will use real-time sentiment analysis to craft and re-craft voter appeals right up until the moment they enter a polling station. Political messaging will be nearly-instantaneous and tailored to individuals based on data purchased from Google.
9) Extreme content — Journalism, film-making and advertising agencies will thrive, much to the surprise of nearly everyone. The need for content on the social web will drive radical evolution of these three traditional professions and “Content development and management” will become a popular college major. While most content today is generated through “free” submissions to YouTube, blogs, etc., salaries for the very best and most creative content providers will skyrocket as corporations raise the creative bar to cut through the clutter.
10) The loner workforce. The cultural impact of the social web will have radical implications for managing the workforce of the future. How do you deal with a generation of employees who have been conditioned to communicate through their thumbs? Employee training of the future will look increasingly like video games.
11) Digital divide grows — For many parts of the world, access to free, global communications will be a great equalizer between rich and poor nations, especially as web-based translation services improve and encompass local dialects. However, in countries where people cannot access the web either for economic or political reasons, the digital divide will not only grow, it will become permanent for one simple reason: they will fall so far behind the technology curve they will never be able to catch up. Digital commerce, innovation and technology will be permanently dominated by those nations in the game NOW.
12) Pay for play– Social media is free but the cost of attracting consumer attention will become increasingly expensive, especially with the ability to skip ads. At some point, the cost per impression will be so high it will be less expensive to simply pay people to watch an ad. Combined with the “human coupon” trend mentioned above, this would provide nearly perfect information on cause and effect of advertising campaigns.
Well, that’s enough far-out thought for one blog post and I’m sure you have A LOT to say about it! Your turn. The comment section is now OPEN!






You’re in marketing for one reason: Grow.
Grow your company, reputation, customers, impact, profits. Grow yourself. This is a community that will help. It will stretch your mind, connect you to fascinating people, and provide some fun along the way. I am so glad you’re here.
-Mark Schaefer

