Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Michael Bauser
Is this you? Claim Profile »
2 months ago
in Does Twitter Monitor Its Brand? Fake-Twitter.com Suggests No on danny brown - social media pr and marketing
I think you're gettnig worked up over nothing. It's a prank site, like all those 'fake headline'' sites that were hot (for about 5 minutes) a few years ago. People will create fake tweets for their friends, trick other friends into reading them, and have a dumb laugh.
Nobody's going to be seriously injured by this site, and it might even be legally-defensible parody. Once you get over the surprise of reading a prank tweet, it's terribly easy to see it's a prank, and/or prove to your friends it's a prank, because the domain name is fake-twiiter.
Nobody's going to be seriously injured by this site, and it might even be legally-defensible parody. Once you get over the surprise of reading a prank tweet, it's terribly easy to see it's a prank, and/or prove to your friends it's a prank, because the domain name is fake-twiiter.
2 replies
Danny
Hi Michael,
That's not guaranteed. Depending where a story or link ends up, it's not always clear where the originating site was. Additionally, no matter where or what the domain is, the "lack of understanding" about social media by a lot of people and businesses could cloud awareness of authenticity.
As an example, you post on your website that you may not be the Bauser that people are looking for. This may be from an inaccurate web search or just a mistake.
Now, say something is posted on the Fake Twitter site. That goes into the search engines and is then open to language or translation iterations worldwide. Perhaps particular translations don't come out better than others and it looks like it's a genuine statement by the person or company involved.
Should that company then have to pay thousands of dollars just to clear their name and any misinformation that arose from the fake site? Look at the incorrect information that came out from a citizen journalist story about the health of Steve Jobs. Apple's share prices tumbled and cost the company millions of dollars.
There are ways to have fun, I agree, but I'm not sure that a site that has the potential to cost people and businesses reputations as well as dollars is the way to have it.
That's not guaranteed. Depending where a story or link ends up, it's not always clear where the originating site was. Additionally, no matter where or what the domain is, the "lack of understanding" about social media by a lot of people and businesses could cloud awareness of authenticity.
As an example, you post on your website that you may not be the Bauser that people are looking for. This may be from an inaccurate web search or just a mistake.
Now, say something is posted on the Fake Twitter site. That goes into the search engines and is then open to language or translation iterations worldwide. Perhaps particular translations don't come out better than others and it looks like it's a genuine statement by the person or company involved.
Should that company then have to pay thousands of dollars just to clear their name and any misinformation that arose from the fake site? Look at the incorrect information that came out from a citizen journalist story about the health of Steve Jobs. Apple's share prices tumbled and cost the company millions of dollars.
There are ways to have fun, I agree, but I'm not sure that a site that has the potential to cost people and businesses reputations as well as dollars is the way to have it.
I'm with Danny here. The site's tasteless and stinks of legal issues waiting to take it down.