Christine Laubenstein was appalled to see a Facebook "like" button on a boston.com story detailing Markoff's bloody writing:
It showed that 18 people had already "liked" the article. Reading this gave me a bad taste in my mouth. Boston.com was advertising that 18 people had liked how an allegedly twisted man had supposedly performed this twisted act during his suicide, and encouraging others to do the same (like the article)?
Topics:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Yes...
By Hey Nonny Nonny...
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 1:44am
If you're twisted enough. It's naive to expect that there aren't nutcases out there, Adam!
Laubenstein is off-base
By O-FISH-L
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 1:50am
I think it's clear that the "like button" is there so readers can indicate if they like the quality of the reporting, not the acts / incidents described therein. Lets face it, there's very little good news in a big city newspaper. It would be rather sadistic to think that the Globe's button is there for us to show our happines when a family is killed in a car crash or twins die in a pool. Readers can like a story without liking the tragedies reported. Sheesh.
It could also mean....
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 8:05am
That people are happy that this person is dead. It doesn't have to mean that they "like" suicide.
Good points. It's just that
By anon
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 8:40am
Good points. It's just that seeing the like feature at the very beginning of the article did not feel right to me at all. I wanted to know what happened before being immediately asked to like an article related to suicide.
I think it's good the feature was switched to the bottom. That seems like a decent compromise. At least this way Boston.com doesn't have to be all paternalistic determining which articles people should and shouldn't like.
Oops forgot to include my name on the above comment
By Christine Laube...
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 9:07am
It's Christine Laubenstein
Sure, but that's still a
By mike
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 8:53am
Sure, but that's still a terrible thing.
terrible that he is dead?
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 8:55am
Or that pepole like that he is dead.?
Both.
By mike
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 10:24am
Both.
I wouldn't say I "like" the fact that he is dead.
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 10:33am
But I wouldn't say it is terrible.
Very reassuring that you'd
By mike
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:04am
Very reassuring that you'd feel that way about the death of a defendant in a crime.
Please.
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:19am
This guy was a murderer. And he was a "defendant of a crime" just like Hitler was. Both murderers.
To serve and protect, folks!
By mike
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:21am
To serve and protect, folks!
Pete Nice trots out Hitler to justify an ignorant comment
By Anonymous
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:26am
about jailhouse justice. Sheesh.
When you said two police academies, I thought you meant training but clearly you meant comedy jokes.
I'm not talking about him as a bad person.
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 1:03pm
I'm talking about Hitler being "guilty" or "innocent". Legally he has never convicted of anything. Legally that means he isn't "guilty" of anything. It does not mean he did not do anything wrong. In fact, even the Nuremberg Trials had legitimate issues about the legitimacy of the court. In the end we know that Hitler and the Nazis killed people and that killing people was wrong.
And your selective reading and understanding continues. Nowhere did I talk about "jailhouse justice", I only spoke about how I felt. I didn't say he deserved to die, just that I didn't feel terrible that he died.
Please
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:36am
The law says he was innocent until proven guilty, which he had not yet been. There was solid evidence that he was a murderer, but it was up to a jury - not you - to make that decision.
Pretty damn telling that you don't get that.
I'm not talking about the law
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 12:15pm
He either killed that woman or didn't kill her. The jury doesn't decide that and neither do I or you. If someone else killed him before the trial it would be different. I think he killed her, therefore I don't think it is terrible that he his dead.
There is a distinction
By HenryAlan
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 2:32pm
There is a distinction between legal status and guilt. There was a great line used by Marlon Brando in "A Dry White Season," regarding the South African court system. I can't find it just now, but he said something along the lines of "in South Africa, the law and justice never cross." I wouldn't suggest that is accurate in the case of the United States, but it is nevertheless an instructive observation.
The Law: Markhoff was never found guilty of a crime
Justice: Markhoff was a murderer
Pete Nice's vision of justice in the US
By Anonymous
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:22am
dispenses with Article III constructs as redundant and superfluous. Instead policemen, DAs and jailers can find facts, determine guilt and met out punishment.
Here is where you are wrong (again)
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 12:22pm
dispenses with Article III constructs as redundant and superfluous. Instead policemen, DAs and jailers can find facts, determine guilt and met out punishment.
No where do I say these people are allowed to met out punishment or determine guilt where it would have an effect on the actual person.
You can't tell me how I should feel about this person dying either.
I had a similar thought.
By anon
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 12:00pm
I had a similar thought. Maybe that makes me a bad citizen.
I should know better, since I once saw a misguided prosecutor somewhere tear into someone I knew who was innocent, and it was a horrifying violation of the person. They weren't convicted in the end, but it left them traumatized, to this day, and no fun to hang out with.
Guess I will remind myself of that when I'm willing to convict someone in my head just because officials make an accusation and say there is evidence. For the same reason, I probably shouldn't think "good riddance" that Markoff apparently killed himself before trial.
You don't have to think "good riddance"
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 2:12pm
But if you don't have a terrible feeling inside you like you might get when someone dies, don't worry, I don't think there is anything wrong with feeling that way.
There's nothing wrong with
By mike
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 2:15pm
There's nothing wrong with thinking it because you personally know the person to be an ass. Or when a person has had a chance to defend themselves against criminal charges, and failed. Or when you are not an active agent of the criminal justice and prosecution system.
Hogwash. We demand
By HenryAlan
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 2:36pm
Hogwash. We demand professionalism from our law enforcement officers precisely because we understand they are human and subject to the same emotions and contradictions afflicting all of us. Yes, in his action as a public servant, a police officer must be dispassionate, but his personal view need not coincide with his professional obligation.
Exactly HenryAlan.
By Pete Nice
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 2:43pm
At least I know one person understands what I said. Well two considering I know Will LaTulippe would back me up on my feelings as well as the distinction between guilt and justice.
great legal minds like .... WL
By Anonymous
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 11:24am
Absolutely true. But in the case of "officer" Nice what he represents as his professional point of view is equally as troubling as that which he represents as his personal view. For example, law enforcement has a duty to protect the well being of suspects in custody. Nice never mentions it and moves right along to how he's not troubled by the suicide of an apparently guilty murderer. What Hitler has to do with it is beyond me but that's the nature of the point of view being represented by Nice, from both a personal and professional point of view. Nuremberg. Say what?
- - - - - - -
Can you really like a story about Markoff's last minutes? Yes, In a broad sense you can find something about it interesting enough to want to draw it to other people's attention, whether you like it, dislike it, find it incredible, fund it stupendous, admire the writing or the reasoning or find the reasoning fallacious. The word "Like" in this instance is a blunt instrument.
Give me another break.
By Pete Nice
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 1:42pm
Am I supposed to mention every little thing about Markoff's life and death to show you how I feel or can I just tell you that I didn't lose any sleep over his death? Sorry I forgot to write 3 paragraphs explaining whether or not the Sherrif's office did or didn't follow policy by letting Markoff die.
The point about Hitler was that he was never convicted of anything so he isn't really "guilty" of anything. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong or that we should feel bad about his death because he didn't have his day in court. This was in response to Mikes comment regarding my feelings about an "innocent" person.
Same thing with the Nuremburg trails. Some people argue that the Nazis that were tried and convicted at Nuremburg should not have been since they didn't really break any laws (Nazis did not sign or were a part of many Geneva agreements)
I did not say
By mike
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 1:49pm
I did not say "innocent".
Also, I really strongly question if the case against Markoff was as airtight as that against Hitler. But whatever.
Ok.
By Pete Nice
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 1:57pm
Very reassuring that you'd feel that way about the death of a defendant in a crime.
Is what you said. But your tone infered to me that I shouldn't feel as bad just because he wasn't found "guilty" yet. From what I heard, the case against Markoff was pretty airtight, and my point about the Nuremburg trials was in regards to universal jurisdiction and the problems of even calling Hitler "guilty" of anything.
Different Example
By anon
Wed, 08/25/2010 - 3:02pm
A kid grabs a candy bar and runs from the store. Clerk doesn't bother chasing him or calling cops. Did the kid do it? Of course he did. The fact that there was no trial doesn't negate the truth.
Another kid is wrongly convicted of armed robbery after the clerk mistook him for someone else. Is the kid guilty? Of course not. The trial doesn't replace the truth.
Millions of things happen every day without trials to determine whether they actually happened. It is fair to base an opinion on something other than a court case. It is reasonable to believe something without hearing sworn testimony on it.
Someone's got their panties
By Anon²
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 8:04am
Someone's got their panties in a bunch.
(No subject)
By Dave
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:10am
[img][/img]
touche!
By Anon²
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:49am
touche!
This is why people want a "dislike" option
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 9:36am
The Boston Globe site allows you to link to an article on Facebook.
When you do this, it registers as a like.
That doesn't mean people like it, it means they linked to it.
In a similar vein, I have friends who are having bad days and say so on their FB accounts. I tend to comment on those as "dislike" but others who don't like it hit the like button to let that person know that they saw it and feel for them.
It makes no sense, but it is a quirk of Facebook, not a referendum on humanity.
From what I understand liking
By Christine Laube...
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 10:00am
From what I understand liking a Boston.com article is different than sharing it. When I go to Boston.com's homepage, for example, I'm told which of my friends "shared" particular articles.
Maybe, though, on other parts of the site "like" means like or share. If this is the case maybe it should be changed. I think "like" is a more blatant word than "share" when you're talking about serious/controversial/saddening topics.
It still "tallies" as a "like"
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 10:52am
I see that "so and so shared this", which is kind of a useful feature.
I also noticed that when I shared things the "like" count went up and there was a note on my FB wall that I "liked" an article in the Globe.
It is possible that the Globe has chosen (or that Facebook has organized the interface) to add up all the people who have shared an article through the "like" tally. That lets us know how popular the article is, even if none of our friends has shared it with us.
SwirlyGrrl, Thanks for
By Christine Laube...
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 10:18am
SwirlyGrrl,
Thanks for letting me know that when you share a Globe article (on Facebook I'm assuming) it's treated as a "like". I didn't know this, as I haven't shared a Globe article since they added the like option.
Christine
Facebook's "like" option is totally mislabelled
By Chris Devers
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 10:39am
It's really a kind of "public bookmark" button, which often implies actually "liking" it in the human emotional sense, but more specifically just means that you are making a link from that thing back to your profile, so that you & others will see it on your profile, while also making a note on the original thing (whether on Facebook itself or, in this case, on some other site entirely).
That's why the "dislike button" misses the point, and why Facebook has never implemented it -- and, I'm guessing, probably never will.
It's really a lightweight version of the "share" button, and the right fix would be for them to either merge the two somehow, or clarify when to use "share" and when to use "like". People are obviously confused & unhappy with the way it currently works.
Better Names
By SwirlyGrrl
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:34am
Instead of "like" perhaps they should use "tag" or "note" so they could then say "so and so tagged otherperson's status".
I think they need three buttons
By dirtywater77
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:48am
I've always thought they should have three buttons: Like, Dislike, and Recommend. Like and Dislike would be mutually-exclusive, of course. I think this would solve almost all the complaints about the current "Like" functionality.
Not sure "recommend" is the right approach either
By Chris Devers
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 1:48pm
If there's going to be a third option (hint: there won't be, as it's confusing enough as it is with just two), then it needs to be a more neutral term than "recommend".
I think terms like "tag", "note", or "mark" get closer to the right idea, but they'll confuse people, too. (Not least because "note" already has a specific meaning in Facebook terminology.)
My vote (not that it matters a whit) is for "bookmark", as it gets the closest to what's actually going on, it's a term that anyone with a web browser will understand, and it's value-neutral. You can "bookmark" something without "liking", "disliking", or "recommending" it, and it's seen as a step down from "sharing", though in effect it is in many ways similar to what the current Share button does.
but then they loose their
By Anon²
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 11:53am
but then they loose their branding.
I'm sure they've had this discussion many a time; but "like" was around before the total conversion of facebook from a facebook and twitter like service to a commercial and branded enterprise.
Back in the day you "liked" things that your friends posted, but now it's synonymous with that or a general heads up. Still, there's the option to "share" which is more appropriate, but that takes 2 or 3 clicks..... much to much more my generation to handle.
Plus it clutters up your wall, and means you have deeper opinions and stuff.
CNN, Reuters, and RTVE
By Eoin
Tue, 08/24/2010 - 1:05pm
CNN, Reuters, and RTVE have 'recommend' buttons instead of 'like' buttons. Facebook's API offers it as an option, but not many other news organizations take advantage of it.