Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday August 18 2016, @07:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the you-can-run-but-you-can't-hide dept.

TechDirt reports

Earlier this year, we discussed how UC Davis detailed in a report that it spent $175k with a reputation management firm to try bury the 2011 pepper-spraying incident that has become so infamous, as well as to bolster the positive reputation and search results of its former Chancellor, Linda Katehi.

[...] A new report has been issued that makes it clear that the $175k with the one reputation management vendor was just the tip of the iceberg, and that Katehi's obsession with her own online reputation was far more serious than anyone had known. Indeed, her attempts to meddle in her own online search results started long before the 2011 pepper-spraying incident.

[...] While the initial reporting indicated a single vendor had been paid $175k on Katehi's request to try to control messaging about the school and herself through a barrage of good, but trumped up, press, UC Davis actually hired three different reputation management firms to do this, all to the tune of over $400k. And she appears to have been more concerned with her own reputation than that of the school she was to be stewarding.

[...] It goes without saying that as we, the link above, and several other online media outlets are discussing these revelations, and placing them alongside the original 2011 incident for context, the work of the three vendors and the nearly half a million dollars paid to them has failed.

Previous: UC Davis Chancellor Suspended After $175,000 Online Name-Scrubbing Antics
University of California in Davis Spent $175k on SEO and "Reputation Management"


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by bob_super on Thursday August 18 2016, @07:48PM

    by bob_super (1357) on Thursday August 18 2016, @07:48PM (#389711)

    While you're trolling, it is true that female presidents or CEOs are often the targets of a whole lot more vicious and personal attacks than their male counterparts when things go south (whether it's their fault or not). The "boys" just make bad mistakes or get the painful job done, while "heartless bitches" incompetently ruin companies and lives.
    A woman (or minority) who's made it to the top has to be a lot more careful than a white guy in the same position, and I think even anti-SJW crusaders can agree with that.
    Though not to that extent, IMHO. And it should be on her own dime.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday August 18 2016, @08:17PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Thursday August 18 2016, @08:17PM (#389727) Homepage

    Bullshit.

    Women who make it to the top, whether or not they deserved to, often have something to prove and overcompensate -- which leads to the very kind of obtuse thick-headed counterproductive decisions most often associated with men, even if doing so under the cover of MUH VAGINAL SOCIAL JUSTICE.

    A good example of this is to tout "diversity" (with no straight white men!) which is not only a contradiction in terms but throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

    Another example where this was clearly not the case was at a previous employer where most of the software managers were women. Since there are parts of the world outside of San Francisco and New York, where "diversity" isn't beaten to death or even mentioned, women flourished because there was no pressure to act out of the ordinary and behave like bad stereotypes. One of them ended up taking a cushy gig with the UC system to roll out an Oracle database and I can say with certainty that she is still the least obnoxious female employed by academia.

    As a final afterthought, I would like to thank Oprah Winfrey for her push to eliminate the word "diversity" and replace with it "inclusion." The Blacks have been manipulated by the Jews for too long, and it's good to see them return to their post-civil rights-era productivity because Reagan started selling them crack and the Jews started pushing thug culture on their youth.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 18 2016, @08:58PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 18 2016, @08:58PM (#389739)

      Adding-

      I've seen too many women in high positions treated with kid's gloves when they fuck-up.

      While it may still be true that women suffer more sniggling and second guessing, they also don't bear the same personal costs when things go awry.

      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday August 18 2016, @09:13PM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Thursday August 18 2016, @09:13PM (#389745) Homepage

        That's because they were put there by some other person, and that "other person" wants to save face.

        Marissa Mayer, for example. She was placed where she was by fellow Jews, did a tacky photo-shoot for Vogue in which she showed a (heavily airbrushed) underarm, [image.gala.de] and is now on her way to Fat City for being an utter fuck-up. Fiorina could be considered her right-wing counterpart for her own likewise ability to gut American business at the expense of the Middle-class.

        In my somewhat limited personal experience, I have seen that women who deserve to "be there" and move up or take greater offers "out of there" have earned the respect of their peers and supervisors alike and keep politics the fuck out of work. They aren't loud about identity politics or other bullshit, in fact, they don't believe in it, because identity politics are "picking the scab" to a wound that should be otherwise healed.

        Any sane corporate whore, male or not, smartly realizes that those they promote are good at their jobs. Being good at a job other than politics means -- first -- being good at that job and otherwise cleverly avoiding the politics and other non-job-related obstacles which pop up from time to time.

        Unfortunately, hiring often occurs due to nepotism and word-of-mouth. That's the weak link that incompetent workers get bailed from, whether it be because the boss was fucking her or because she was a friend of a friend of a friend of the boss and needed work.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by kurenai.tsubasa on Thursday August 18 2016, @11:02PM

          by kurenai.tsubasa (5227) on Thursday August 18 2016, @11:02PM (#389777) Journal

          I have seen that women who deserve to "be there" and move up or take greater offers "out of there" have earned the respect of their peers and supervisors alike and keep politics the fuck out of work. They aren't loud about identity politics or other bullshit, in fact, they don't believe in it, because identity politics are "picking the scab" to a wound that should be otherwise healed.

          I would like to second this.

          The women who call me sexist simply because of my assigned gender and choice of profession: they completely suck at their jobs. The women who keep the politics out of it (one I didn't even know was a “feminist” until recently) and just git-r-done: some of the most competent people I've worked with. The women who believe in git-r-done instead of identity politics will always find, even in the face of gaslighting, sexually harassing, asshole managers and women supervisors who have loads of internalized misogyny and think it's still 1916, that in the end, once they demonstrate their value over and over again, they can rise to whatever level they wish to without any help from white knights or radfems.

          Glass ceilings only exist these days because of biological factors that won't change and dipshits who play identity politics and think the world just owes them a six figure salary and a corner office for being born with their reproductive system on the inside.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @05:32AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @05:32AM (#389938)

        ..I've seen too many women in high positions treated with kid's gloves when they fuck-up.

        I've worked in a University where a certain female member of the academic staff only got the job (with tenure) because she was such a fuck-up at her previous academic gig...the sneaky swine at the previous institute gave her such glowing references no-one thought to question them.
        The truth only came out when a post-doc from her previous place of employ started working with us, saw her in the corridor and uttered the immortal phrase 'what the fuck is that disaster doing here?' he then catalogued her disasters at the previous place of employ (verified later via 'side channels').
        Nothing was done (she remained there for at least a decade after I left my job there, and about a decade and a half after after the revelations about her past)

        Why was she still employed?

        1. Tenure - hard to get rid of someone once you've foolishly given them it.
        2. Gender - Females in Engineering, got to keep the numbers up irrespective of quality
        3. Ethnicity - She ticked this box as well, being non-white.

        I have to add, on point 3, over the years I've seen quite a number of staff of both genders who have managed to keep their jobs despite being obvious fuck-ups because of that card..again, a numbers game.