this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
230 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37717 readers
463 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

At least, some of the recent controversies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] andrew@radiation.party 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Re: Madison, she sprinkled a bunch of non-issues (edit: I don't mean to downplay the more serious issues she raises! I'm concerned that this would leave room for others to do so) or things that are normal for companies that aren’t super huge- the journal/lined paper debacle for example. Of course the company focused on profit is going to ask you to make do with essentially the same thing. That’s super normal.

Being asked to manage the OF despite objections isn’t super bad when you are literally hired just to do social media. It’s unpleasant, but most jobs are going to have unpleasant moments. At a similar pay scale, I’ve been required to go into homes where folks had COVID. Coworkers have been shot at. I’ve seen things I really would have preferred not to. No job is perfectly sane in that sense.

Some of the issues where Madison said “they wanted me to do x and I couldn’t because y” (red footage editing/ram comes to mind) feel like issues where she would be told something, then would vent in her head instead of going “hey, I don’t have enough ram to edit that footage!” - something I’ve encountered a ton with less experienced (in a business sense, not skill) hires.

The managerial and behavioral issues she brings up are awful but not entirely surprising given the type of folk who stick around there. It indicates a systemic issue and that usually happens due to a lack of oversight and course-correction, or outright malicious management. I’m hopeful that it’s the former.

Last but not least, she repeatedly states it was her dream job. This is an experience that should hopefully show her to never meet your heroes! Dream jobs usually suck unless you get lucky, because they have lots of rough edges. Hopefully she’s doing something that brings her more joy now.

[–] twistedtxb@lemmy.ca 77 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You can't force a woman to manage an OF account against her will, knowing VERY WELL what she'll be exposed to. That's fucked up.

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Why "a woman" specifically? And how would that be against her will?

[–] eendjes@feddit.nl 65 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because the internet is exceptionally shit against women in particular, and because she clearly stated she didn’t want to do it.

This is kinda basic stuff.

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She's just the manager of the account, not publicly facing on OnlyFans. She was asked to complete a task well within her job description, that is not against her will, she is against the job. A before you say looking at genitalia wasn't in the job description I urge you to look up what facebook moderation is like.

[–] eendjes@feddit.nl 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The kind interactions (including pictures and such) you get on OF vastly differs what you will get on other platforms. That’s not in the job description.

And to your last point, she was a social media manager, not a Facebook moderator. How does that compare? Are you intentionally making bad faith arguments?

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you intentionally making bad faith arguments?

No, lets keep this civil my guy.

She is a social media manager, onlyfans is social media regardless of the content that is usually posted. As for the reason I brought up Facebook moderation is, what do you think is usually posted there? Minion memes? Photos from trips? Well those moderators are often subjected to beheadings, rape, and other very graphic content. Do you think that was explicitly stated when they got hired?

Of course, Facebook isn't exactly the premier 'good place to work', but this is common throughout any industry that takes submissions for the populous. And I am not making any arguments whatsoever on whether or not she should actually have to see "comments from people talking about how they wanted to fuck me and my co workers.".

[–] eendjes@feddit.nl 24 points 1 year ago

As for the reason I brought up Facebook moderation is, what do you think is usually posted there? Minion memes? Photos from trips? Well those moderators are often subjected to beheadings, rape, and other very graphic content. Do you think that was explicitly stated when they got hired?

No likely not, and Facebook clearly deserves a proper reckoning. But I don’t see how this relates or makes it ok.

And I am not making any arguments whatsoever on whether or not she should actually have to see "comments from people talking about how they wanted to fuck me and my co workers.".

Would you say LTT/LMG sells itself as a channel about sex or porn or the likes? No, it’s a tech channel and as such one would expect tech related social media. You could state that the function of the job is unchanged, but the job content is also relevant here.

[–] juni@skein.city 36 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It was expressly against her will as per her own words. And as for why "a woman", its rather well known women already deal with much more sexual harassment and maltreatment online than men do. Just look at the market of AI generated porn of celebrities and online personalities as proof of this. So forcing a woman, who already has a public presence no less, to manage a platform such as OnlyFans, and constantly see and have to manage sexual objectification and harassment towards her as well as her coworkers, is unacceptable in my opinion.

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She is not publicly facing on OnlyFans she manages the account. So her being a woman has absolutely nothing to do with your last sentence. Of course I won't debate your personal opinion, but she isn't being forced. It's a job within her job description.

[–] juni@skein.city 30 points 1 year ago

This will be my final reply on the matter as I do not believe you are operating in good faith. But in case you are:

Firstly, the idea that you "cannot be forced to do something within your job description" is unequivocally false, and a sign of a toxic work environment. She actively requested to not be put in charge of a platform that made her uncomfortable, and the request was denied and she was forced, against her will, to do so. I have never in my life worked at a place where I could not request to be taken off a project or task due to being uncomfortable with it. This is not a point of discussion, this is a categorical fact.

Secondly, it does not matter that she was not public facing on OnlyFans. She, alongside her coworkers, were active public figures on multiple LMG affiliated channels during her employment. And OnlyFans is a platform known to be near exclusively used for sexual gratification, and it is therefore entirely unsurprising that the LMG OnlyFans account received a large amount of sexual advancements, objectification, and harassment of LMG employees. And due to my prior comment, I fully believe a large majority of what was received would have been targeting the women employed at LMG. Therefore, putting one of the main victims of said harassment and objectification in charge of managing it is wholly and entirely unacceptable behavior by the management at LMG.

These are not complex concepts, and are not even all that contemporary anymore. And as such I do not feel there is any real discussion to be had on the matter, there are people more intelligent than I that do a better job expressing these things in more empirical detail. I suggest you seek them out if you need more detail than I have provided here.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Have you seen how men act when they’re horny? Especially on the internet? She probably still gets gross DMs constantly.

They basically set her up for harassment for life.

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

I don't know what you mean about harassment for life. She wasn't publically facing on the OnlyFans. And yes I have seen. You didn't answer my questions however.

[–] CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because she will expierence sexual abuse there.

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What do you mean by sexual abuse?

[–] Chozo@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

They probably meant "sexual harassment". Legally speaking, "sexual abuse" typically refers to sexual assault against a child. Verbal/online interactions would generally fall under "harassment".

[–] src@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Anyone can be sexually abused, not just underage people.

[–] SuperSleuth@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Yes that's true.

[–] andrew@radiation.party 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It should have fallen on her manager to handle, and she should have put her foot down on that.

Other good ways to improve that particular situation could have been separating her identity from the social media accounts, so that it wouldn’t be clear who exactly was managing them. It paints a target on her back as an attack vector (very dangerous due to her lack of experience) and target of harassment. That’s part of why many big brands do not publicize who exactly is managing their social media accounts.

At the end of the day, management needed to do better and Madison could have pushed back more. It’s just a job, theoretically one she could replace somewhat seamlessly given her capabilities, and the fatal mistake was idealizing it. That probably compounded all of her grievances.

[–] robotrash@lemmy.robotra.sh 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She should not have needed to push back more nor should anyone need to "push back more" in their job. That's victim blaming.

[–] andrew@radiation.party 5 points 1 year ago

No, it's realistic. If a manager at your workplace asks you to do something you don't like, you say "I don't want to do it", and they insist - you push back. Is it toxic and stupid that they did that? Yes. But companies get away with this shit because people don't push back.

Speaking up publicly after-the-fact is great too. It raises awareness and helps give a voice to people whose livelihood is tied up in a company they can't stand to support due to toxic working conditions. It helps raise awareness to C-suite execs that there may be a managerial issue causing it. It's a good step that some companies take in stride, and actually turn around to improve things. Time will tell if that's the case here.

[–] 77slevin@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago

It should have fallen on her manager to handle, and she should have put her foot down on that.

Head of HR is Linus' wife. Yes, it is that bad. Even telling her manager, would have netted zero result.

[–] Mechanize@feddit.it 69 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel that your post is belittling a situation that, as narrated, is straight up mobbing and bullying, only acknowledging it in a small paragraph which I feel boils down to a dismissive "awful but only maybe malicious, probably just lack of oversight", while the rest of your comment tries to find excuses and normalizing something that is not.

These:

I was asked about my sexual history, my boyfriends sexual history, "how I liked to fuck".

I was told that certain issues were "sexual tension" and I should just "take the co-worker out on a coffee date to ease it out"

I was told I was chunky, fat, ugly, stupid. I was called "retarded" I was called a "faggot"

My work was called "dogs--t" I was called "incompetent".

"I think the reason you try to be funny, is because you lack any other skills." smiled then walked away.

I watched co-workers get what I had asked for weeks before they did. It took 2 months to get mine.

Also apparently some managers didn't like me because I "hadn't gotten drunk with them before" Which was said in that haha just jokin (but actually I'm serious) tone

Are nor normal nor acceptable: for anyone who is in a corporation where this is common place: take a step back and understand that it is not healthy for you, bad power dynamics are a real thing and the abuse of them sometimes can feel normal, especially in small businesses that get a sudden explosive growth. And I don't even want to go into her self harming to get a day off.

You can say it was probably a single person, but the lack of action by management with phrases like "change your priorities", "put on your big girl pants" and stuff like that makes it a Company issue, Company which indirectly accept and endorse that kind of treatment: they being so against unionizing sincerely gets a whole other meaning read under this light.

The notebook case is self evidence of it all: A small thing that normally wouldn't be anything important, but compounded with the stressful environment got emotionally distressful. The fact that such a small thing has stayed with her so long should tell you that she was really not in an healthy mental state.

I don't personally care about the whole LTT fiasco, as an uninterested spectator it's fun to watch from the outside and then change channel, a blip in the media world that will most likely blow down in a couple of weeks. But reading how these actions are belittled is really distressing. Bullying is not normal, and it should never be accepted. Ever.

The full thread for whoever missed it: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1691693740254228741.html

[–] andrew@radiation.party 6 points 1 year ago

Not belittling the situation, toxic workplaces are horrible but they can become so very easily without conscience effort to prevent it. It’s clear that, at the very least, that effort hasn’t been made. I would hope Linus and the rest of upper mgmt don’t intend to normalize sexual harassment, verbal abuse, or threats- rather, they aren’t aware of the extent of it or are feeling upward pressure not to retaliate because they have so many toxic employees.

I’ve made it pretty clear in my message that I blame the company as a whole, and don’t think it’s one person. It’s a systemic issue. Company culture isn’t what you say, it’s what you tolerate, and they’re struggling to even maintain a decent public face.

To say I’m not surprised is not downplaying the situation. I’ve worked (and fought for coworkers, subordinates, and gotten several upper managers fired at) a few jobs where the culture was so horrible and hostile that our turnover rate was over 200% yoy. The writing generally is on the wall in these situations, and their writing was all the technical inaccuracies, sloppiness in content, and absolute negativity that has been displayed in some videos.

What I mean by my earlier message (which might be a hot take) is that the addition of fluff (intentional or otherwise) in otherwise perfectly valid criticism takes away some of the bite and gives fanboys room to speculate about the rest. Nobody should be forced to experience that kind of workplace, but hopefully lessons were learned on the affected party’s end that will help them avoid stepping in another pile of shit like lmg.

[–] aebrer@kbin.social 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At a similar pay scale, I’ve been required to go into homes where folks had COVID. Coworkers have been shot at. I’ve seen things I really would have preferred not to. No job is perfectly sane in that sense.

American? Because this is not normal up here in Canada.

[–] andrew@radiation.party 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

US yes, but in Canada I’m sure there are many jobs where you are required by that job to do or see things you’d really rather not.

Ultimately there is some ownership of the situation required- put your foot down and say “no, I’m absolutely not doing that”. If they reprimand you- well, time to look for a company that doesn’t penalize employees for that particular issue.

Idealizing the employer makes it significantly harder to do that. Hopefully the debacle gave Madison insight/life experience that many people never have the chance to obtain.

[–] robotrash@lemmy.robotra.sh 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're in here a lot with a vaguely apologetic (on lmgs behalf) and victim blaming attitude. Do you work there or some shit?

[–] andrew@radiation.party 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't think calling LMG a pile of shit is very apologetic nor an indicator that I'm somebody who works there.

I also don't think "management needs to do/should have done better" and "I hope she is doing something that brings joy" and "I hope she was able to pull good insight out of a shitty situation" is very victim blamey.

It's hard to run a company, and maintain a positive working culture, but there's no excuse if they continue to allow those kind of working conditions. Make no mistake, LMG sucks for how Madison was allowed to be treated (and most certainly others, see also in other comments I've made that it's a systemic problem).

[–] DJDarren@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hold up...LMG has an OF? Why? Is Linus getting his dick out to show the size of their fucking screwdriver?

[–] andrew@radiation.party 8 points 1 year ago

It’s a joke account

[–] olorin99@artemis.camp 6 points 1 year ago

It was an april fools joke that they left up for a couple of months. Don't think there was ever any explict content there.