Subject:
|
Re: Arkham Asylum - A cool set, but a bit disturbing.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 7 Jun 2007 16:41:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7118 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mark Larson wrote:
| |
In lugnet.licensed.batman, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
I agree, but the buttterfly effect is arbitrary. There is nothing to say
that your response mentioning the cartoons may not draw a random search to
Richie’s post that sets any potential (and exceedingly unlikely) commotion
off.
|
Which is exactly my original point. Any focus group could stumble upon
Richie’s original post and get all up in arms over it and start some sort of
movement against LEGO. Putting the idea out there, anyone can read it and
over-react any number of ways.
|
Yes. But my point here is that by responding with a reference to the cartoon
you’re making it a little bit more likely to be seen by the very people that you
think may get upset. I sincerely doubt that either post will cause a calamity
but it pays to remember that the ‘butterfly’ in the ‘butterfly effect’ may not
be the one you expect.
| |
| |
I just don’t consider Richie’s point to be particularly alarmist (although I
don’t really agree with it either). He didn’t demand that Lego remove it or
anything, merely brought a certain disturbing similarity to their attention.
|
He does suggest that it should be removed. This is posted on a public message
board which anyone could read and having no knowledge or familiarity with the
LEGO company could blow out of proportion. Much like some may think I’m
doing. But perhaps a better place to start would be to contact LEGO directly
if he’s that concerned.
|
IIRC this forum exists as a way of bringing stuff to the attention of LEGO and
is occassionally perused by employees of LEGO. It’s also a good way to gauge
other people’s views (like your own) so that someone reading it from LEGO can
see both the original ‘issue’ and responses.
When people rang up to complain about Janet Jackson’s breast there was no-one
involved to say... ‘Hey, it’s just a breast’. Here, at least, someone from LEGO
can read your responses too.
| |
Issues attract focus groups, focus groups pressure advertisers and that can
affect company’s profits and people’s jobs.
|
I agree but I just don’t think that’s going to happen from a fairly obscure
internet forum.
| |
| |
This is not without precendence given that LEGO have acted on disturbing
similarities before.
|
In my opinion, there is no reason for LEGO to act on this particular issue.
That is my main problem with the original post. I respect Richie 100% but the
original issue does annoy me. I could probably use Tim as an example of how
to take that with a grain of salt. Thanks.
-Mark
|
In my opinion there wasn’t any reason to act on the first one either... but it
happened.
I think the main point I’m trying to make is that sometimes the response to an
issue can be as ‘alarmist’ (for want of a better word) as the original issue.
The Danish embassy may have remained unburnt had one person in an editorial
meeting in a small Danish newspaper had said “yes I think the response is
alarmist but oh well” rather than “yes I think the response is alarmist and it
should never have been made”.
Tim
PS. And likewise I hope I’m managing as respectable a discussion as I believe
you to be (since Dave reminded me of that last bit of your original post).
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
71 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
