Transcript:
In Cosmic Dynamics #39, I told you the story of this mistake I made on LinkedIn last week. You might want to have a listen before jumping into today’s episode. This one might generate some debate… I concluded that all those things we talk about here at Cosmic, all this knowledge and inspiration is useless… like all of the knowledge in the world. Useless… useless... unless… haha
My name is Camille, you’re listening to Cosmic Dynamics, 5 min of exploration on art, change & the music of the universe.
Ok so we’re talking about spending time tweeting / commenting / debating on Corporate green washing announcements vs. not spending any time on this, regardless of that burning feeling inside. Let’s do a post-benefits analysis. Shall we? Again, I refer you to Cosmic Dynamics 39 for the full context.
Well here are a few clues on what we have learnt at Cosmic on this topic, from our research, experiments and projects.
People who allocate time to commenting/tweeting/ engaging with announcements are most often already a fan of the brand or initiative announced / OR have already decided to resist it, to criticize it, to try to change everyone’s mind about it. So what value is my comment creating really? I would argue that - not everyone - but the far majority of the audience who stopped by, scrolled down and considered liking, disliking or commenting is already a fan or a critic. Or are hundreds / thousands of people changing their mind thanks to my few lines?? Eeih… I don’t think so.
By engaging more with the post, you are contributing to its growing visibility on social media. Algorithms favor posts with high engagement, so the more comments, the more visibility.
If everyone hates the post, then that can be quite harmful for the publisher, as we’ve seen before with commercials that turn into scandals
But usually, most of the people are supportive of that type of announcement, so that’s a question to consider: am I contributing to the virality of a harmful comment? If the meaning of dropping my comment that significant? “Yes but if no one points to the greenwashing then brands will be free wheeling…? !”I am not suggesting no one should point to the greenwashing, I am suggesting not you, not me, and not there in the comments section.
That’s for the technical part of the post-benefits analysis
Now, here comes the main consideration:
With that hour of precious time (at least) that this little commenting impulse has taken from my life, not only the time posting, but then thinking about it, writing other comments etc. pathetically reading again, seeing who replied, liked etc…. What alternative activities could have I carried out?
1hour of time. Was my choice of activity… commenting on this post vs. sleeping one hour more? Was it… commenting on this post vs. one hour of full presence with my family? Was it ...commenting on this post vs. watching an hour of a movie or documentary? Commenting on this post vs. one hour of reading? Or was it commenting on this post vs. commenting on another post, tweeting or other social media activities?
That’s the first thing to consider if we’re talking value add. With one hour of time, what alternative value can you add 1st to your life, to your mission, and then possibly to others..
That depends on who you are and what you do but I’ll give an example of alternative activities I could have opted for had I been smarter, more present, more strategic, and more wary of the future of humanity. Had I been more aligned with our mission to pioneer a new culture of change communications.
I could have spent one hour on social media amplifying real solutions to a better coffee world - contributing to the buzz about what we want vs. to the buzz about what we don’t want
I could have spent one hour praising the efforts of the small entrepreneurs working on direct trade, I could have spent one hour facilitating introductions for those guys, sending some ideas, contacts. I could have produced an episode of Cosmic Dynamics about change communications in the coffee world. I could have offered an hour of DJ mixing for a community fundraiser. I could have participated in a brainstorm with progressive coffee entrepreneurs.
All these things, and more… but no. Instead I thought that listening to my impulse and reacting to Nespresso’s announcement was a good thing to do, a good use of my time. Beurk. If you’re not convinced by my arguments yet, here comes another one: Do we need more polarization in the world? Or less polarization? And what did my commenting do? Did I contribute to unifying audiences around true solutions that will lead to a better coffee world… or did I polarize the conversation? Right… the latter. So yes, I consider that this was a mistake!
“Yes Camille, but sometimes it’s ok to be impulsive, and let the angry side of you throw a stone at the bastards”. Is it really? Let me know your thoughts, hello@cosmic.show, on instagram @cosmic.show, facebook, twitter.
In the meantime, since we’re talking about polarisation and exiting the labyrinth of impulses, I am featuring a photo by Franc Pena as art work of the day, it’s titled “New World”... hopefully that’s where we’re headed...
