Yes, it was dishonest.
Yes, it was stupid.
Yes, it was very misleading on how that book was marketed. But the problem with that book is that it could now be used against the Deaf community. Let's consider a possible scenario.
If hearing parents with deaf/hh children have questions about the Deaf community wanting to know what it is like all one has to do is to show them a particular book containing mostly empty pages. A book that could aptly describe the Deaf community as one person could say to the hearing parent, "A book with very little to show for with lots blank pages." Upon that explained realization parents would recoil in utter disbelief and amazement at the effort of that dishonesty to fool people into buying that book. And conclude it'd be far safer to keep their deaf/hh child away from that Deaf community.
What a nice way to keep shooting themselves in the foot again and again and again and again. Credibility continues to crater.
Anybody want to buy London Bridge for a buck?
26 comments:
Exactly.
These same closed society people clearly lack not only critical thinking skills but they also lack skills on strategy planning as well. I see it happening again and again. They have yet to win a single battle since I've been monitoring their actions. Unbelievable.
Actually, I know some people who thought it was funny and bought the book. Some time ago, I bought a book called, "What Men Know About Women" as a gag gift for a male friend. Inside were blank pages, too.
After I watch some vlogs, I think what James Kittell did on a blank book is far out but It will lead mistrust his business ASL Media, LLC .
What if someone want to order his next project DVD and turn out DVD is blank.
domino effect? perhaps
marla..
yes, these people knew what they were buying. They knew what was inside.
But, according to some deaf buyers, they didn't know.
I would not buy a book, if I can't look inside. I go beyond the intro and the outline, I actually look in several places before I'll buy a book. That's why there's this saying "Don't judge a book by its cover."
A couple of things here:
I have difficulty believing that a reasonably intelligent parent, or a hearing person at that, would read this book and assume that hey, this must mean the Deaf Community knows nothing about audiologists and doctors.
Secondly, if people *do* assume that, or other things about the Deaf Community based on that book, then they're stereotyping us. It's *one* book that's clearly a poor attempt at a joke. A book that for the most part, the Deaf Community has spoken out against.
It reveals a lot about the author and seller of the book. Not about the Deaf Community, and I don't appreciate people trying to associate one or two persons' poor conduct with the entire Deaf Community.
Deaf pundit, who are the people trying to associate one or two persons' poor conduct with that of the entire Deaf Community?
Read my blog again. I said that book can be used against the Deaf community as a whole. No where did I say that the book is representative of the Deaf community.
McConnell,
I disagree. You are really saying the book represents the Deaf Community. Otherwise, how could it be used against them?
DP, that's the funniest ever comment coming from you telling ME what I am saying? I know what I said. Did you not see the question mark in the topic title? And how I came with a possible scenario of how a book could be used or seen as?
Russell, made an excellent video comment reply in response to Aiden Mack's vlog about the book rip-off.
http://www.deafvideo.tv/81884
It's about how people could view or perceive what the Deaf community may look like. Watch what Russell had to say.
DP, you're not me. I know what I'm saying. Either I didn't make it clear to you, or that you didn't understand.
Watch out for that paranoia thing.
Mike,
Can you please stop being arrogant? Nothing against you or your content, but your horrendous attitude seeps through your posts.
Again, this isn't against you as a person or against your content, but it'd be nice to see someone with a semblance of humility for a change.
Thanks.
anony 9:22 PM, I wasn't the one who tried to tell people what they are actually thinking. I certainly didn't have that arrogance in mind to even do that.
Yes, it was a poor example. It doesn't typify hundreds of excellent products put out by the d/Deaf community.
The bad joke is obvious: audiologists and speech therapists know nothing about Deaf people.
How it was marketed was deceptive and obviously exploitative: $15 for an unfair "gotcha!" when similar books on women, etc. were just $5. However, it targeted the Deaf community, not parents.
People who understood the ASL marketing also have seen the immediate criticism and extremely unfavorable reviews.
Because of this, I fail to see your point that it could lead a hearing parent to wrong impressions about the Deaf community.
Not all parents are fully informed of what the Deaf community is like. You know how people have to deal with the myths that Deaf people are bad tippers. Next, are some of them going to believe that Deaf people are only good at ripping people off like the relay scam or other scams?
It's about adding one negative image after another that, to some, may get a bad impression about the Deaf community.
Watch Russell's comment in the link I provided. I agree about how it could create a negative perception. You might not see it but you're not them, the parents, looking from the outside in.
James Kittel just announced.....
http://www.jsk2.com/
White Ghost
Mike --
To say that you did not SAY the book is representative of the whole Deaf community is quite cynical and disingenuous.
Despite what you may think about the literacy of Deaf people, the fact is that many of us ARE quite adept readers, with the ability to infer, interpret and evaluate a writer's tone and intent.
Just look at the title of this very post. "A mostly blank book = Deaf community?" Although you qualify this title with a question mark, it is clear to us that you are snidely insinuating that the Deaf community is "a blank book with nothing of substance to it".
If this were an isolated instance, one might be able to dismiss this as oversensitivity or reading too much into your words. However, in post after post, your blogs have been filled with condescending, dismissive words and phrases aimed at Deaf people, ASL, the Deaf community, and anything Deaf-centric, more or less. One has only to look at the titles of your blogs (that you yourself so conveniently provided a while back) to see this. I won't even go into an analysis of the content of these blogs, but rest assured, I could very easily do so in order to prove my case.
The simple truth here is: Your title is intended to be derogatory and inflammatory towards the Deaf community (as well as James Kittell himself).
What was that you were saying about "trolls"?
...a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog/vlog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response...
Hmmmm.... the shoe is looking mighty snug and comfy, isn't it?
DonG, you are giving yourself way too much credit here. If the insinuation you are claiming then consider the fact that Tayler Mayer, Amy Cohen, Candy, Russel, and many others who are a part of that Deaf community, I'd be saying that they are like "a blank book with nothing of substance to it". Pretty wild of you to say that, Don. Though wholly untrue on what I was trying to get at and nothing to do with insinuations here.
I have not insinuated anything about the Deaf community since I already explained what people on the outside looking in might think about the Deaf community. I've already included a link to what Russel said to Aiden Mack's vlog where he responded similarly what I've said.
DonG, your imagination continues to run wild and rampant. Quit while you're ahead. And be sure to look before you leap next time.
written in the original post above:
"But the problem with that book is that it could now be used against the Deaf community."
important word in the above sentence - "could". the word "could" also means:
"potential"
"possibility"
"chance"
the writer of this blog then gave his reasons why the book "could be used against the Deaf community." i disagree with the writer but understand his concerns and find them valid.
the book is a gag... a joke. if it was advertised as a gag or joke when it was first announced or advertised online then there would be little to no confusion about the book and its intentions. on that point i agree with the writer of this blog. thanks.
anony 3:33 PM,
Exactly, had they bothered to advertise the book as a gag book then I or anybody else would not have had any problem with it. But had they advertised truthfully and with transparency the number of books sold wouldn't be as high. I'm sure once people saw that it's a gag book as advertised they wouldn't want to plunk down $15 dollars of their own hard earned money for a book that contain mostly blank pages. Maybe $3.00 or $5.00 but certainly not for $15 dollars plus some more for shipping cost.
So, in order to avoid the possibility of low book sales, they choose not to advertise what's really inside that book and what it's for. At least that's what it appears to be the motive behind not telling potential customers about the book.
Unless I missed it, I am surprised nobody has mentioned this yet. The book has been compared with the book, "Everything men knows about women". If you check the book's description on Amazon, you will find a disclosure! It clearly states:
"That's right, between the pages of this telling tome, readers will find 128 blank pages. Because in reality, what do men really know about women?"
Right there in black & white print.
http://www.amazon.com/Everything-Men-Know-About-Women/dp/0836208196/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1287203701&sr=8-1
(and not to mention, much of book cover and many of descriptions and comment were "ripped off" in the book's marketing video)
i.identify.me
Consumers need to obtain their information before purchases. If an individual allows "Spoon feeding" well that is the consumers choice. And SI!, Mike, "the self-promotion and marketing were designed to mislead and deceive the public into thinking it was a legitimate bookful of writings" And Si! It "could" be used against the Deaf community. Let's use another scenario, The so-called "book" focused on "Everything audiologists and speech therapists know about the Deaf." Hmmm...a blank book... "Could" the same "so- called" book be used/marketed against audiologists and speech therapist? Was this perhaps a "double-whammy?" Bottom line is.. as a consumer, you have to gather you facts, and come to your own informed choice in regards to purchases.
One last thought, for now, as multitasking has for some reason, consumed me with baseball and UFC..., Si! My Choice. Who/Whom is in the driver's seat? Marketer or consumer? Who/Whom can "place" one in the driver's seat? Marketer or consumer? Thoughts welcomed....
Is THAT your best response, Mike? *snort*!
Isn't a prime characteristic of trolls a certain obliviousness to the criticisms and counter-arguments of others, as well as an unwillingness to engage in a truly meaningful discourse with the commenters on their (or other's) blogs?
Better put on that other shoe. I imagine it can't be comfortable walking so lopsidedly with a shoe on only one foot.
Margarita,
And if the marketer withheld critical information, how are the customers supposed to obtain this ? No amount of research will reveal that hidden data.
There is a name for that: Snake oil.
i.identify.me
Margarita,
And if the marketer withheld critical information, how are the customers supposed to obtain this ? No amount of research will reveal that hidden data.
There is a name for that: Snake oil.
i.identify.me
DonG, nothing to do trolls here. Nothing to do with "obliviousness to the criticisms and counter-arguments of others" but rather something that I don't necessarily agree with what people say or opine.
Unwillingness to engage? Did I not include your comments??
A simple fact here. I created a scenario in my blog on how one could use that book much to the detriment of the Deaf community's own image. However, you saw it differently, took it personally and negatively and pretty much went off the deep end. And you used such colorful imagination that would've been best left to Sesame Street.
@i.identify.me you stated: "And if the marketer withheld critical information, how are the customers supposed to obtain this?"
Well, as a consumer, I would still search the CEO of the company. Some links that I found, that certainly would have "raised a red flag" before I would purchase from the business owner.
http://www.deafonline2.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3478&pid=52793&mode=threaded&start=#entry52793
and here:
http://www.grumpyoldeafies.com/2006/11/is_this_fake.html
In these tough economic times, you must become consumer savvy.
Post a Comment