Brian Lam at Gizmodo must have took note of the upcoming Martin Luther King Day and decided that branding their prank as civil disobedience in the pursuit of the morally superior goal of irreverence while launching the “going on the offensive” PR strategy is a winner.
I really don’t give a crap about Gizmodo or their prank, but it does offend me that they are now attempting to spin it as “civil disobedience”. Henry David Thoreau wrote the defining essay on this subject and in it talked about how it was only through not supporting authority or relying on it that one achieved “moral good standing” to those things that one objects to. If Gizmodo was really interested in civil disobedience or as they call it “corporate disobedience” then they should have stayed home.
The outrage PR strategy generally works best when launched immediately following controversy, waiting 4 days just makes it looked staged and calculated, along with the faux outrage.
Memo to Gizmodo: Stop digging, put shovel down, step away from the keyboard. This whole thing would be over if Brian Lam decided to go have a smoke instead of writing this lame post, but I get the feeling that Gizmodo doesn’t exactly want it to go away.
When did journalists become the protectors of corporations? When did this industry, defined by pranksters like Woz, get so serious and in-the-pocket of big business? This is totally pathetic.