

The small-minded vision of the technology elite - bdfh42
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/09/the-small-minde.html

======
sfk
Why is Seth Godin's stream of consciousness posted here so frequently? What he
writes is not coherent, not noteworthy in any way and is below the level of an
average _comment_ on HN.

~~~
nostrademons
In the middle of _All Marketers are Liars_ , Seth plays a little trick on his
readers (paraphrased):

"I'll let you in on a little secret. I didn't really write this book. I paid a
ghostwriter to do it while I took a vacation to Tahiti. Then my publisher
slapped my name on the front so it would sell more copies.

"...Just kidding. But you reacted differently to this book, didn't you,
knowing that I didn't write it. You thought you were getting one of Seth
Godin's books, but instead, you got one by an anonymous ghostwriter. It
changes the story you tell yourself about why you bought the book, and that
changes how you think about your purchase.

"That's the power of marketing."

Anyone remember Alanis Morrisette's song _Ironic_? It wasn't ironic at all -
everything she sang about was just bad luck. But that was the meta-irony:
she'd written a song called _Ironic_ that wasn't irony at all.

I think a lot of Seth Godin's writing is the same way. The "product" is crap.
But it's exceptionally well-marketed crap, so people spread it around anyway.
The message is in the medium, not the message itself. Look at it as meta-
writing.

I see that in _a lot_ of his writing. This article was a barely coherent
stream-of-consciousness. And yet here it is on the front page of Hacker News.
You commented on it. I commented on it. I may've ascribed meaning to it that
wasn't even there in the first place. But _that's the point_. He got people
talking.

Same goes for his FastCompany article that's currently #1 on Hacker News. He
took a risk, just as he advised people to do. He spoke on topics that he's not
competent in, with a perspective that's just different enough from mainstream
views to get people talking. And it worked - his article is #1 here. People
talk about it. It got published in a major magazine.

Look at what Seth _does_ , not what he _says_. What he says is almost always
pure drivel. But it's pure drivel that works.

~~~
unalone
Psh. I think Alanis just wrote a bad song and used the meta line to excuse
herself.

I think you shouldn't excuse drivel just because it works. What happened to
doing things well for the sake of doing them well? Just because Seth is good
at what he does, just because Scoble and Arrington are good at arousing
attention, doesn't mean we should look to them for inspiration.

~~~
nostrademons
But he is doing things well for the sake of doing them well. He's a marketer;
he markets well. Look at him as a practitioner, not a commentator, and do as
he does, not as he says.

~~~
unalone
See, I don't think marketing counts as doing something unless you're doing it
in tandem with a great product. Marketing is a secondary talent: if you market
just to market then I consider you a waste. So it's fine when companies like
Apple and Geico have excellent commercials, because their commercials do a
good job of pointing out that they are the best. When you market better than
you design, there's a problem.

------
ghiotion
Seth's blog seems to always make it pretty high on HN. Am I alone in wondering
why? They usually have great titles, but are seriously lacking in content. I'm
not complaining necessarily, but I admit I don't get it. Can someone explain?

~~~
robg
I just posted the article he references, and it is better...but he's still a
marketing guy and I have to think that perspective is often going to ring
hollow with technologists.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=305741>

~~~
biohacker42
I don't think this a marketing vs technology culture clash.

Seth just writes some very good stuff and a lot of stream of consciousness
stuff. The later has a tiny shiny idea at its core, that's wrapped in a tone
of crap.

Perhaps technology demands more precision when expressing ideas, but still we
often see the same style from tech writers.

And that's just it, bad style. Not a culture clash between the great kingdoms
of marketing and technology.

------
petercooper
This is one of Seth's most poorly written posts, which is why I think most
people aren't getting it. It touches a nerve with me though, as it's taken me
a long time to learn what he's saying.

 _When an engineer has a proven ability to ship stuff, to keep things humming
and not crashing, it's easy to fall into the trap of rejecting anything that
hasn't demonstrated that it can work, that hasn't proven itself in the
market._

What he's really saying is that it's the status quo to argue against (reject)
ideas and technologies that are radical - simply because "engineers" are
trained to produce things that "work." Until proven (which takes time),
radical ideas and changes are extremely experimental, by definition, and
likely to cause friction. This does not make them unwise, however.

The key point, in my mind, is that even if EVERY highly educated person in
your field told you that your idea is stupid, wrong, and will never work, you
shouldn't believe them blindly. James Dyson didn't, and now he's a
billionaire. SOMETIMES (but _very_ rarely) everyone else is wrong when you are
right.

------
maurycy
Sounds like a reply to our previous rant on his Firefox thoughts. Also,
reminds me <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/business/30know.html>.

On the other hand, it is easy to say "oh, you have curse of knowledge and
that's why you do not appreciate my idea" even if one has good arguments.

What is interesting that even so bright idea, as the curse of knowledge,
worded by Seth Godin sounds so bad I'd assume it is wrong if not knew it
before.

------
scott_s
And yet, it's the technologists that make new technology. So maybe the idea
needs to refined to "competent technologists make incremental improvements;
great technologists make revolutionary improvements."

Which we already knew. I agree with the people questioning why this guy always
makes his way up HN. Honestly, I have a habit of automatically skipping his
articles, but I fell for it this time because I was curious aobut how bad it
was.

------
henning
What technology elite is he referring to? The Java people? People who, before
Rails came out, never would have given Ruby the time of day?

Or is he referring to the ones who spend their spare time using Smalltalk,
Lisp, Scheme, Factor, Prolog, Haskell and Erlang? They're small-minded and
quick to reject anything the market hasn't accepted? Really?

Those two camps have very different attitudes towards new, unproven ideas.

------
greyman
Over-promising title...Mr. Obvious can't explain, what the small-minded vision
of _todays_ tech elite actually is, nor did he say how to expand it.

------
jamesbritt
"Take a look at the geek discussion boards and you'll see an endless list of
sharp-tongued critics, each angling to shoot down one idea or another."

Untrue.

I do see some people making specious claims, and other people asking for
support for those claims, but I also see a good deal of thoughtful discussion
and excitement over new ideas.

Maybe Godin just sees what he wants to see?

------
jacobscott
It makes sound financial sense for large companies to manage risk. Betting the
(very large) farm on new hotness results mostly in unemployed farmers. At the
same time I see quite a few startups pushing boundaries and making plenty of
things which don't work quite right just yet.

------
MaysonL
Arthur C. Clarke said it better, shorter, and more accurately:

 _"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is
possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is
impossible, he is very probably wrong."_

------
13ren
great link within article, on _competence_ vs. the unknown:
<http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/31/sgodin.html>

_Competent people have a predictable, reliable process for solving a
particular set of problems. They solve a problem the same way, every time.
That's what makes them reliable. That's what makes them competent._

------
maxklein
What I wonder is this - do I belong to that class of people who shoot down
ideas because I am unable to see how great they are? How would I ever know?

