12 hours ago
Monday, January 09, 2006
TRANSFORMATION ≠TRANSVESTITE
There is campaign going on to remove the horrendously over-priced British chain Transformation (sort of the Michael Salem of the UK) as the top reference when you Google "transvestite." The idea is to make the Wikipedia entry number one by adding references to it in blogs. Which I've just done.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Thanks for helping out, Caprice! Especially as you girls in the US don't have to suffer the Transformation shop yourselves!
Although I really must check out Michael Salem, sounds like a similar outfit!
I posit a different viewpoint. Free enterprise is exactly that; free. You don't have to like Transformations, but they have a valid and working business and marketing model. Their business plan appears to be highly successful; that means they are making money, legally and presumably ethically. I see nothing wrong with their efforts; they serve fantasy, and charge for it. Some are willing to pay that price, others' aren't. That's business. Removing them from top spot on Google means, er, what? Insofar as I can tell this campaign is without meaning.
I made a more comprehensive statement on my blog, but as this is Caprice's space, I'll refrain from providing the address.
Carolyn Ann
Well, I left a comment in reply to Carolyn Ann yesterday, but it seems to have disappeared into cyberspace. Of course, I failed to save a copy, but let's see if I can remember what I said.
Carolyn, do you think that just because a business is making money legally and ethically (whatever that means), it should be immune from criticism on political grounds?
I know some of the people promoting this campaign have based their support on an anti-capitalistic basis, and my little post might be interpreted that way. But the original purpose of this campaign was quite different. The complaint was that the Transformation website gives a very distorted view of transvestites as they, we, are today. First impressions are important, so when someone Googles "transvestite" and gets the Transformation site first, they can easily get an incorrect idea about us--particularly if they stop there, and it is the only site they look at.
Therefore, a campaign to move up a website with a more complete description of transvestism, such as Wikipedia, is not "without meaning," as you posit. It is a direct, logical action to combat one of the problems people have with Transformation.
The original meaning of a protest, and the current meaning can be different. Which to use? The current one... And the original one. To differentiate them, both protests are meaningless; one is just has less relevance than the other.
I'm not saying that protest is irrelevant, in any setting. Haliburton would be so lucky... I'm stating that, in my (not humble) opinion, getting a company from top spot on an obscure Google listing ("transvestite" [i]is[/i] obscure) is a meaningless exercise. A protest should have some tangible and sustainable goal. Not some trivial placement on an arbitrary list.
I suspect that Transformation's marketing plan includes being at that position; they may even pay Google or some other firm to ensure that it stays there. In which case the entire exercise is pointless. A website "Transformation_Sucks.co.uk" might be more beneficial. I laid out a concept and overall plan in either my blog or a response to Siobhan, I forget which.
If their marketing plan is to cater to "transvestite", then they are doing an exceptional job. While I may not like their marketing effort, I can't really fault it.
I don't see what affect this effort would have on Transformation. A more direct and logical effort to persuade Transformation to change would be to affect its bottom line; this won't do that. Or if it did I completely fail to see how.
While I do not expect you to know the answer, is Transformation even aware that this protest exists? So far I haven't seen anything, but I haven't gone looking. The Internet is a big place, they may not be aware of it. Maybe someone should tell them, to make sure? (I'm not being facetious, merely practical. An invisible protest is exactly that - invisible.
Well, I've said what I'm going to say on this. It's not that important to me. If someone can make it important to me, I'll pay attention. Failing that, it's been nice "chatting" with you, and I do enjoy reading your blog!
Carolyn Ann
I think I see your confusion. This campaign is not a protest. Its aim is not to convince Transformation to change anything, at least not directly. It is trying to directly counteract the distortion Transformation's website does to the true image of today's transvestite.
It is irrelevent whether Transformation knows about the campaign. In fact, it is better if they don't know, so they don't take counter-measures.
BTW, I don't believe Google takes money for placement in their main list. Other search engines did this, and caught hell. They only get paid for the "Sponsored Links" listed on the right.
Now I'm really confused.
What's the purpose of an invisible campaign? (Which, by action and definition, is a protest). For Transformation to change, surely they would have to know about it.
If someone talks about me, do I care? Not really. If they talk about me and then tell me what was said, do I care? No, but I know not to talk that person again. So what, exactly, does this whatever-it's-called intend to do? Displace some business from #1 to #2? On an arbitrary list? How does that let Transformation know that the CD community doesn't like their marketing? Or convince them why they should care? Call me old fashioned, but I always thought a protest had to have a discernable goal, and a visible outcome.
Google may not take payment, but someone does - otherwise there's no discernable reason for Transformation to be at the top of the list.
If they didn't know, I'll lay dollars to donuts they do now. (No, I haven't emailed them; it's not worth my time. They can do their own market research). The people they (theoretically) pay will know, and by extension, so will they. So, why should they care? Do the people participating in this whatever shop there? (Presumably not) Are they going to stop doing that? (They already have).
So, and I feel old-fashioned asking this, why should they care about this campaign or whatever-it-is?
Confused, but at least your blog is clear
Carolyn Ann
Post a Comment