Dove risiede la libertà di espressione? Quale dove sono i limiti della legge sull’istigazione all’odio? Social Network vs menti deboli, ci avete mai riflettuto? Domenico Dolce, Stefano Gabbana e Sir Elton John, oggi, ci danno una lezione.

Wired scrive oggi nella sua pagina un super articolo, che qua riportiamo in parte (e che vi consigliamo leggere completamente) ma che ci ha fatto pensare molto sul l’influenza dei social networks oggi.
Mi preme dire che non sono fanatico di nessuno dei due partecipanti (ne della musica di Elton John ne dell’abbigliamento di Dolce&Gabbana), ma invece sono molto interessato nel soggetto di discussione, MANIPOLAZIONE DI MASSE e, se da qualche parte esiste, anche DEMOCRAZIA.

Le chiavi di lettura di questo articolo sono:
1- Grazie ai social network, siamo tutti capaci di controllare il 100% delle menti debole o senza personalità?
2- Conseguenze di un post, qualunque social media sia.
3- Oggi siamo tutti capaci di controllare le masse, e senza un minimo di coscienza le conseguenze potrebbero essere devastanti.
4- Grazie alla loro influenza su i nostri politici, oggi si potrebbero scegliere le sorti delle leggi e della vita tra 20 anni, Proprio oggi.
5- Dove risiede la libertà di espressione?
6- Quale dove sono i limiti della legge sull’istigazione all’odio?
7- Social Network vs menti deboli, ci avete mai riflettuto?

Yuleisy Yamiley 

Je suis Dolce&Gabbana. Original design by Dr. Pietros Cannon.

Dolce & Gabbana: ma non eravamo tutti Charlie?

“…..Sul tema ho ovviamente le mie idee. Una delle quali, per esempio, è che l’amore non può certo costituire un sacrilegio rispetto agli “schemi prestabiliti” della tradizione. O, peggio, della presunta “normalità”. Lo Stato, come ho già argomentato sulle adozioni ai single, deve smetterla di mortificare i cittadini dividendoli fra persone di serie A e serie B. Semplicemente perché, assegnando o negando diritti sacrosanti in base a parametri senza fondamento, mortifica sé stesso e tutti i suoi cittadini. Inclusi quelli ingiustamente privilegiati.

D’altra parte il fenomeno degli uteri in affitto (di qualsiasi orientamento siano le coppie che vi ricorrono) mi lascia abbastanza perplesso. Specie per le implicazioni neocolonialiste che si porta dietro. Non è un caso che la Thailandia abbia appena vietato la pratica. Ricordate il caso della 21enne Pattaramon Chanbua che ebbe due gemelli “per conto” di una coppia australiana? Uno dei due nacque con la sindrome di Down e i genitori “committenti”, una volta resisi conto della situazione, si rifiutarono di prenderlo con loro, lasciandolo alla poverissima madre naturale. Questo solo per dire che le implicazioni sono decine e non tutte auspicabili. Anzi.
Ma, ripeto, questo lato del dibattito, in particolare se squadernato con l’usuale approssimazione da social network, in questo momento non m’interessa. Per quanto paradossale possa essere. M’interessa pormi e porvi una domanda di metodo: fino a poche settimane fa non eravamo tutti Charlie? Voglio dire, c’è un qualche tipo di proporzione fra le frasi di Domenico Dolce e lereazioni arrivate dai vip di tutto il mondo, a cominciare da Martina Navratilova passando per Ricky Martin fino a Victoria Beckham? Dal profumo scaricato nella tazza del cesso alle mutande scagliate nel cestino fino alle camicie infilate nella differenziata o alle minacce di falò dei capi D&G (Courtney Love). Per non parlare, ovviamente, delle dichiarazioni, dei tweet, dei post. Fra i quali il più equilibrato rimane in fondo il primo, quello di Elton John su Instagram.
D’altronde basterebbero le parole di Stefano Gabbana a chiudere la questione: “Crediamo fermamente nella democrazia e pensiamo che la libertà di espressione sia una base imprescindibile per essa. Noi abbiamo parlato del nostro modo di sentire la realtà ma non era nostra intenzione esprimere un giudizio sulle scelte degli altri. Noi crediamo nella libertà e nell’amore”. Che poi, se anche avessero voluto esprimere un giudizio sui “figli della chimica e sui bambini sintetici”, non avrebbero forse potuto farlo? Quale sarebbe stato il problema? Le nostre emittenti trasmettono a getto continuo le bestialità di chiunque riesca a impossessarsi di un microfono, Twitter si trasforma spesso in un suk dell’odio e due personaggi pubblici – più o meno rispettosamente, il punto mi pare alla fine questo – non possono dire la loro di fronte a un giornalista che li sente per un periodico?
Ripeto: non eravamo forse tutti pronti a immolarci per la libertà d’opinione appena tre mesi fa? O forse c’è un equivoco: siamo disponibili ad accordarla solo a certe categorie – i buffoni di corte, gli umoristi, i giornalisti – imprigionando chiunque altro all’interno di assurdi obblighi d’opinione legati alle dichiarate preferenze sessuali? Da qualsiasi fonte derivi e a (quasi) qualsiasi argomento si applichi, il pensiero unico ci fa fare più passi indietro che in avanti. Intendo sul piano dei diritti per tutti. Certo anche il pensiero stupido non è che aiuti molto….”

Simone Cosimi
Giornalista

L’articolo lo trovate in originale su: WIRED ( http://www.wired.it/attualita/media/2015/03/16/dolce-gabbana-non-eravamo-tutti-charlie/ )

Following are seven tips for managing the critics online.

Create an internal policy. Everyone on your team—both internally and externally—needs to understand what your policy is for managing critics online. A bad situation can be made worse by a well-intentioned employee or external partner who doesn’t understand your policy. The policy should lay out who will respond to critics, what they’ll say, how quickly they’ll respond, and what to do if someone not authorized to comment sees or receives a comment.

Be cautious. When dealing with critics, particularly if they’re anonymous, you don’t know how severe the reaction could be or how successful they may be in creating an online crisis involving hundreds or thousands of others. A good rule of thumb is to publicly say you hear them and you’d like to discuss offline. Then take it to the phone or in person. Get it out of writing so you can hear the tone of voice or see body language. Don’t get defensive or engage in a back-and-forth debate online.

Assume the best. Even if you think the answer is obvious or right in front of their face, sometimes the critic is misinformed, doesn’t know where to look for the information on your site, or may be unwilling to search. When they complain about the obvious things, be helpful, pleasant, and non-defensive. You should never assume malicious intent until you’ve covered the obvious.

Consider the medium. Unless you run a sports, religious, or news site, it’s unlikely anonymous trolls will want to spend their every waking moment criticizing you. So keep your goals in mind. Consider the medium of the criticism and the message of the critic. If it’s directly on your blog or on Facebook, it’s far more difficult to ignore than in a tweet.

Deleting posts. While deleting posts may remove the damage for the time being, when people discover you’re doing so, they’ll take you to task for that… and it won’t be pretty. Consider a politician who lies about his affair. Soon enough we all find out; cue news conference, with his family standing next to him, to admit the affair he lied about for months. It’s far worse to be found out later than to attempt to ignore it to begin with. And, when you’re transparent about your blemishes, an amazing thing happens: Your community comes to your defense and the critics sulk away.

Use common sense. Take your corporate hat off and think like a human being. No one wants to be talked to in corporate jargon or to be showered with pre-approved PR messages. Be understanding, listen, and make things right. Don’t act like a robot that can only repeat one or two messages. Use common sense when responding. Ask yourself if the critics have real complaints or they’re someone just harassing you. If it’s the former, be patient and give the person time to vent their frustrations.

Have a written external policy. The policy should describe when you will delete comments or ban critics, and establishes the tone of the conversation allowed on the site. For instance, the policy at Spin Sucks is that you can’t swear (we’ll edit out the swear words if you do) and the discourse must be professional. We once had a troll who copied and pasted his rude comment to the top of the stream every time the community pushed it down. He had been responded to, so we told him that if he continued to do that, his comments would be deleted and he would be banned. He stopped doing it. The written policy helps you moderate the conversation in a professional but open way.

It’s a very uncomfortable position to be in. None of us want to be criticized.

But, as the saying goes, if people either love you or hate you, you’re doing something right.

 
By Gini Dietrich

Source: allbusiness.com

The truism “You get what you pay for” is as true as true can be when it comes to building a company website. When small firms fail to budget properly, one of these nightmare scenarios is likely to ensue:

•     The site ends up costing two or three times more than expected, causing all-important post-launch marketing activities to be cut back or eliminated.

•     The site ends up having half or a quarter of the desired functionality, rendering it nearly useless.

•     The site ends up as a series of compromises in design, content and functionality, making a mediocre impression on customers and prospects.

The underlying problem, as these three scenarios suggest, is under budgeting — or not budgeting at all. What’s the best way to set a budget and lay the groundwork for a site that meets your expectations?

Step One: Create Site Specifications
Setting a realistic budget starts with having an idea of what you want the site to do, so let’s start there. Important things to consider include:

•     Design. How much customization do you want? Will a standard WordPress theme suit your needs? Do you need a custom design from the ground up? Something in between? Do you have imagery for your new site, or will photos need to be taken? If so, how many photos (or other imagery such as charts and diagrams) will be needed?

•     Content. How much unique content will your site need? 10 pages? 100 pages? Will it be easy or hard to write? Do you have the ability and bandwidth to write it, or will you need to outsource copywriting? If outsourced, will the writer need to do extensive research to write the copy properly?

•     Functionality. Do you need more than a basic contact form? Do you want to offer downloadable PDFs or other information? Do you want leads from various forms to be tracked? Will you need e-commerce, and if so, what type of payment options? Are there any other functional requirements, such as integration with internal systems or third-party e-commerce sites? Do you want to optimize your site for search engines (SEO)? Will you need W3C or other compliance? Do you want Flash design or a customer portal?

Step Two: Seek Proposals
Once you have a rough list of desired site specifications, you’re in a position to solicit proposals. A web development agency (or freelancer) will need these inputs from you to provide a reasonable estimate. The proposal might match up precisely to your specs, but more likely, it will have modifications based on practical considerations or the agency’s capabilities. This is OK; often, a developer has ideas that reduce cost and yet meet your needs.

Considering three or four proposals on the initial go-around is best, because you’re apt to see a fairly wide range of prices and approaches.

Step Three: Align Expectations and Costs
A likely outcome will be the realization that your desired site costs much more than you expected, but this is OK, because you’re now in a position to have a meaningful review of development options, their real value, and their real cost. The biggest disconnects that are revealed by following this three-step approach include:

•     Design disconnects. Creating images is expensive and time-consuming. Often, firms don’t care about images in the early stages of a project, but later on, when they see boring, text-heavy pages on the test site, they desperately want a lot of customized imagery. Settling for tired stock imagery, the usual Plan B, results in a generic-looking, unimpressive site.

•     Content disconnects. Content is far more expensive and time-consuming to create that most people realize. Firms often assume they can have an employee whip up content at the last minute, and learn too late that’s an impossible task.

•     Functionality disconnects. Firms typically have no idea what pieces of site functionality — some of which were detailed above — actually cost. They become frustrated in mid-project when they ask the developer to “throw in” a little e-commerce and discover it costs $5,000 to do so.

By using initial proposals to set a budget for your site project, you prevent unpleasant surprises down the line. In addition, you’re more likely to find the right developer for your project and create a site that is truly right for your business in terms of overall performance and cost.

Following this plan takes serious upfront strategic thinking and grunt work, but the payoff is big. Pulling a budget out of thin air, or committing your business to a new site without a budget at all, are risky approaches that can drain your bank account and set back your Internet marketing for several years. It’s an unnecessary risk.

 
By Brad Shorr

Source: AllBusiness

The startup: RolePoint, an enterprise-level social-recruitment platform that helps companies find new talent through recommendations from current employees. The startup graduated in May 2012 from San Francisco accelerator AngelPad, which works mainly with web technology companies. AngelPad runs two sessions per year and accepts about 12 startups to each; the most recent program drew some 2,000 applicants.

What it is: While working for a large investment bank in London, Chris Le Breton received an e-mail from a colleague seeking referrals for a new hire. Numerous messages on the subject went around internally, sparking Le Breton’s “aha” moment: Companies aren’t efficiently leveraging their own employee networks to fill job openings.

“Referrals are valued beyond any other hire in companies, and really not much work has been done around that to help the process or help people internally hire for their companies,” says Le Breton, who now serves as RolePoint’s CEO.

With RolePoint, companies circumvent time-consuming or expensive methods like recruitment agencies or traditional direct hiring. Instead, the online platform taps a company’s employees to find candidates within their professional networks and refer them to the hiring manager.

Getting in: AngelPad was intrigued by RolePoint’s technology and capacity for strong leadership among its four U.K.-based founders, but in large part the startup was accepted for what wasn’t there. “We saw an incredible raw potential, and a big part of what was missing was this understanding of how to focus on building a really large company,” says Thomas Korte, the AngelPad founder who mentored the RolePoint team. “Oftentimes for companies that have come from anywhere but Silicon Valley, business is very different. In the U.K., for example, there’s a big focus on revenue very early, so it doesn’t help founders look at the really big picture. [With RolePoint] we saw that if we help them see what they can do with this, it can be so much bigger.”

The goods: AngelPad’s 10-week program focuses on product development and market fit prior to launch, as well as fundraising. The small program’s attention to detail was a draw for RolePoint. Le Breton appreciated the “focus on the quality rather than quantity,” adding that many accelerators just push a gaggle of companies through and hope one takes off.

Lessons learned: Make sure your concept or company aims to solve a well-defined need or problem. “Be very clear on the value you’re adding from day one,” says Kes Thygesen, co-founder and head of product for RolePoint, which has relocated to Silicon Valley since completing the AngelPad program. “Really understand why a company would pay money for this; then you can concentrate on building a solution and validating that solution.”

Adds Le Breton: “Demonstrate traction in the early stages, even if it’s on a very small scale, and then let the investors extrapolate that.”

Looking ahead: RolePoint closed a large seed round from Silicon Valley investors last October, and is working on scaling up the team and product.

By Michelle Juergen
Source: www.entrepreneur.com

Coolest magazine is going into 3 years of publishing products between artists, designers, entrepreneurs and innovative company’s. This magazine seeks to uncover design excellence and advocate for design value. we love the cool products and we also love to understand the process of getting there. we see design driving growth and innovation all over the world.