Kate Doesn't Like My McDonald's Tone

Kate finds my postings on McDonald's new blog to be arrogant, and my desire for corporate bloggers to get it right to be unrealistic. Actually Kate, I'm sorry you feel that way.  You may not like my style, which you seem to consider caustic.   I would prefer to characterize it as a candid.  In fact, I tried to make both my postings to be constructive in the hope that someone at McDonald's would listen

I am confused about your charge that all A-Listers must know nothing about large corporations, while you single out Jeff Jarvis as a target of your scorn.  You should research his resume as well as the companies who listen to his advice these days. You are right about me. I have spent most of my career in the company of entrepreneurs. I guess the struggle to innovate inside a large organization has always felt suppressive to me, sort of like trying to push a glacier to move faster. But Kate, I'm just not sure why that should disqualify me from commenting on the quality--or lameness--of a blog.

Comments

[steven streight aka vaspers the grate: ethical anarchist]

Naughty Shel, you're not wimpy enough to please the "Don't Offend Anybody" politically corrupt, er, "correct" crowd.

Listen: a blogologist, a blog analyst, a blog critic must be aggressive, sometimes loud and a bit overbearing...just to be heard in the din of millions upon millions of blogs.

Nick Usborne said it well: "...the internet was built on and thrives on the strong voices of its participants. Online you need to have a strong character to stand out from the crowd...articulate, witty, ridiculous, and loud...being blah guarantees that you'll never be heard....Better to be hated by some, than ignored by everyone."

NET WORDS, p. 40, 41

Be as forceful as needed, Shel.

We have to make the corporations wake up and act less retarded.