Dale Dougherty, CEO of Make magazine, accuses Naomi Wu to be fake

[Tac Eht Xilef]

The way everyone (especially her) is freaking out over 1-2 tweets is the real problem. Or the opinion of a person. On a Sunday. Now, he is supposed to resign.

Really don't want to get involved in this, because I'm utterly sick of all the sad****s in the world who get their jollys by being dicks to other people behind the anonymity of the net ... but it's not just "1-2 tweets", or "the opinion of [one] person", or even just "on a Sunday".

Dale's post was the explosion at the end of a fuse that was lit months ago by the people involved in the subreddit linked earlier (now deleted) and some associated blogs (all the ones I know of are now also deleted). Blogs like "sexycyborgisaliar.blogpot.com" - again, deleted, but with at least one relevant post preserved for posterity at http://archive.is/GE0he

Look at the dates. Posted May 6th 2017. Comments from August 2017.

So no, it's not just one or two tweets, or just one person, or on a Sunday. Multiple people have been targetting her for months (at least). Across multiple blogs, reddit, etc. Dale decided to blow it open when he did - either because he believed what was being written about her, or because he wanted to get in on the controversy being stirred up. Either way, he deserved what he got.

[rsjsouza]

So ignoring all other issues at play here, let's play devils advocate on the "image/branding" issue alone and turn the tables over and see what happens, as I think this is an interesting side discussion. And this can apply to anyone, not just Naomi.

I get invited to lots of conferences and faires, but let's say I started dressing up in a Borat Mankini in videos and renamed my channel and twitter handle to RealSexyDave and started turning up to interviews and site visits in said mankini and that was now my "look" and "brand".
What would happen? I'd get dis-invited quicker than you can blink, and all requests to feature or present at any conference or faire would be met with deathly silence, that is practically guaranteed.
And I'm a "white male".

I completely understand the point you are trying to make, but It is very difficult for a male to sell himself as a sexy symbol up to the point of being disavowed from the community - the Borat Mankini is pretty much rejected by 100% of the society, men and women. 

In other words, to really feel the issue is to picture a hypothetical scenario where, for example, you stop receiving invitations because of your stance on religion and God - something that "sells" to part of your audience but it can be considered egregious by others and at the same time is not related to the core subject of your channel. I am pretty sure you would be ticked off, especially if a major company in the market released a public statement claiming you were a fraud.

And it's not just appearance, it could be your political leanings. Say you tweeted constantly about the Jews or *insert controversial political hot topic here*, the result would be the same, you'd miss lots of opportunities regardless of how good you are and your body of work are.

In all fairness, it seems that nowadays you don't need a lifetime of tweets - only one can take you to the galleys. 

How many celebrities have been dis-invited from events or had their careers ruined by a single tweet because people and companies don't want to be associated with what that person said?

Take Dilbert creator Scott Adams, his very successful speaking career was completely ruined because he said Trump would win the election and outlined his technical reasons why. And he didn't support Trump, it was purely a technical commentary on his chances. Boom, engagements cancelled and no more invites, career gone.

That is the ideology police state, and could well be the case here.

[EEVblog]

I completely understand the point you are trying to make, but It is very difficult for a male to sell himself as a sexy symbol up to the point of being disavowed from the community

It's also quite hard for a girl to do it to, but a literal string bikini at events will do it just as well as a mankini would.
No one, male, female, or ommpa-loompa can avoid that when you are on the extreme end of societal norms.

In other words, to really feel the issue is to picture a hypothetical scenario where, for example, you stop receiving invitations because of your stance on religion and God - something that "sells" to part of your audience but it can be considered egregious by others and at the same time is not related to the core subject of your channel.

I'd laugh at them, shrug my shoulders and move on. Maybe poke fun at them publicly or something as a bonus.

I am pretty sure you would be ticked off, especially if a major company in the market released a public statement claiming you were a fraud.

Of course, anyone in any field of endeavour would be pissed off when someone calls them a fraud. I would resist that vigorously, just like I do when people accuse me of being a paid shill for companies.
Naomi should totally defend herself against those sorts of accusations, and the best way to do that is to point at stuff you've done, or do new stuff to prove them wrong.

In all fairness, it seems that nowadays you don't need a lifetime of tweets - only one can take you to the galleys. 

Indeed.

[retiredcaps]

In all fairness, it seems that nowadays you don't need a lifetime of tweets - only one can take you to the galleys. 

With all the CCTV, public cameras, twitter, smartphones with microphones/cameras, etc, you should always conduct yourself as if what you say and express will be front page news in your local community/city.

Politicians, CEOs, celebrities, sports figures, etc should all know this by now.

"It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently."
Warren Buffett

[rsjsouza]

I completely understand the point you are trying to make, but It is very difficult for a male to sell himself as a sexy symbol up to the point of being disavowed from the community

It's also quite hard for a girl to do it to, but a literal string bikini at events will do it just as well as a mankini would.
No one, male, female, or ommpa-loompa can avoid that when you are on the extreme end of societal norms.

I wouldn't be so sure, as there are many examples of women considered "too hot to be an engineer" or some other idiocy that gets slammed around on the interwebs.

In other words, to really feel the issue is to picture a hypothetical scenario where, for example, you stop receiving invitations because of your stance on religion and God - something that "sells" to part of your audience but it can be considered egregious by others and at the same time is not related to the core subject of your channel.

I'd laugh at them, shrug my shoulders and move on. Maybe poke fun at them publicly or something as a bonus.

Well, Bunnie's blog indicates she is taking a financial hit - that would change things, especially if you still didn't reach the critical mass to sustain losses of audience/patronage or did not yet diversify your revenue stream. In her particular case, it seems she has another source of income. 

I am pretty sure you would be ticked off, especially if a major company in the market released a public statement claiming you were a fraud.

Of course, anyone in any field of endeavour would be pissed off when someone calls them a fraud. I would resist that vigorously, just like I do when people accuse me of being a paid shill for companies.
Naomi should totally defend herself against those sorts of accusations, and the best way to do that is to point at stuff you've done, or do new stuff to prove them wrong.

100%

[rsjsouza]

In all fairness, it seems that nowadays you don't need a lifetime of tweets - only one can take you to the galleys. 

With all the CCTV, public cameras, twitter, smartphones with microphones/cameras, etc, you should always conduct yourself as if what you say and express will be front page news in your local community/city.

Politicians, CEOs, celebrities, sports figures, etc should all know this by now.

"It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently."
Warren Buffett

Yes. One thing I learned in the many ethics trainings I have done is called the "newspaper test": how would it look if the newspaper published it in the front page?

That alone is almost a good reason to sack the CEO: a puerile judgment that can negatively affect the company brand.

[EEVblog]

I'd laugh at them, shrug my shoulders and move on. Maybe poke fun at them publicly or something as a bonus.

Well, Bunnie's blog indicates she is taking a financial hit - that would change things 

Sure, and I'm not blaming her for fighting back.
Dale is a douche, and by all means fight him, but she should be careful that she doesn't let this whole things consume her.
As I said, the best way forward for her is to point to her work and to keep on doing more stuff that proves people wrong. There basically is no other way to progress forward.
Looking at her twitter feed for example, it's nothing but being consumed by this, and I think that's unfortunate. Actually even before this incident her twitter feed was mostly about similar stuff and her struggles.
For sure, talk up about this stuff and try and change things, but be careful not to let it define you.

The fact is she has, by her own choice, taken on a persona, a look, and a brand that is on the edges of societal norm (and I think that's great BTW), and the fact is that will always hinder her in some areas. Just as would happen to anyone else who is "on the edge" of those societal norms, whatever that may be.
This is not your usual "female in tech" issue (although I'm lead to believe that's especially difficult in China).

[EEVblog]

That alone is almost a good reason to sack the CEO: a puerile judgment that can negatively affect the company brand.

I think it comes close to a sackable offence for such a high profile position.
This wasn't just a one-off outburst. As someone mentioned above, it was lead up to over several months, and he ignored the advice he sought from someone with impeccable reputation who is personally involved that disproved his narrative, and went ahead and slandered anyway.

Personally I think the response should involve Naomi on the front cover of the next issue of Make, 3D printing a bust of Dale with a giant dick on his head 

[chriswebb]

* It's important to realize that her boob job was not for the same purpose as many women get breast enlargements. Typically it's to make money by pandering to (some) male's fetish, doing porn, marrying some rich guy. In her case it was part of a theme - becoming an artificial person, a cyborg, while pursuing a public technology arc. It's more like a kind of artform. I don't like fake boobs in general, but admire her choices for their creativity.

So you don't think she got fake boobs to appeal to lonely men who make up a large percentage of the maker scene?

Not that I fault her for it. She can do what she wants with her body, but let's be realistic here. Even if she uses it to attract an audience, who cares?

[chriswebb]

So you don't think she got fake boobs to appeal to lonely men who make up a large percentage of the maker scene?

To extend your statement, it sounds like it also means all actors/actresses underwent plastic surgery are not true artists?

Good point.

[Mr. Scram]

Yes. One thing I learned in the many ethics trainings I have done is called the "newspaper test": how would it look if the newspaper published it in the front page?

That alone is almost a good reason to sack the CEO: a puerile judgment that can negatively affect the company brand.

That sounds great and holds some truth, but is opmistic drivel at the same time. Everyone has moments he isn't too proud of or where he was outright wrong. It's how we learn. Even the Bible says something about throwing the first stone and that's a rather old book.

Somehow society loves people falling from their pedistool and modern technology has made that all to convenient. It's about time we learn that we all are flawed and heroes don't exist.

Please note that I'm in no way defending Dougherty.

[3db]

@RealSexyDave:

WTF !! 

[3db]

Will there be an EEVBLOG mankini ? 

[amyk]

Here's a vid with her on Serpentza's channel that you may not have seen, which is more conversational

Putting aside her appearance, there's still something about how she behaves which feels unnatural to me, even more so than her usual videos. From her movements, she seems extremely nervous and uncertain. Then again, SexyCyborg, so perhaps that's deliberate and intended...

involved in the subreddit linked earlier (now deleted) and some associated blogs (all the ones I know of are now also deleted). Blogs like "sexycyborgisaliar.blogpot.com" - again, deleted, but with at least one relevant post preserved for posterity at http://archive.is/GE0he

Better save a local copy for future reference. Trying to silence any dissenting opinion is most certainly not doing her any good either...

This in particular caught my attention:

She has almost zero presence on the China Internet. [...] There are no tech blogs created by her in Chinese, no articles written by her in Chinese, no maker how-to's written by her in Chinese. Seems strange that all her tech is only written in English and provided on websites that aren't even allowed in China.

It would be good to hear from the users of Chinese electronics forums (16rd, 38hot, 51cto, amobbs, dzsc, etc.) to see if they've seen her participate there. (I only come across those sites when they appear in searches, and need to use Google Translate to understand most of it.)

[nctnico]

What effect? Did anyone unsubscripte because of this?

She has reportedly lost sponsorship deals.

Aren't the sponsors the problem then? You'd expect a sponsor to do some due diligence before terminating a contract.

Anyway IMHO what Naomi does is show technology can be used for creative/cool projects and some are clearly aimed at women. Her skirt with lights for example gives a cool lighting effect.

[Cerebus]

What effect? Did anyone unsubscripte because of this?

She has reportedly lost sponsorship deals.

Aren't the sponsors the problem then? You'd expect a sponsor to do some due diligence before terminating a contract.

Anyway IMHO what Naomi does is show technology can be used for creative/cool projects and some are clearly aimed at women. Her skirt with lights for example gives a cool lighting effect.

I thought that, back on the first page of this thread, that you'd said you were getting your coat...

For me this thread is closed.

[janoc]

Aren't the sponsors the problem then? You'd expect a sponsor to do some due diligence before terminating a contract.

Yes and no - you will be hard-pressed to find a sponsor that wants their brand associated with some controversy. Few sponsors/advertisers care about whatever you are doing, they care about their brand first and foremost. So expecting them to stand up for you should anything go south is really naive. It is about the money only in the first place.

The Make magazine has a large influence and following in China and now its CEO says that the person promoting your brand is a fraud. The result is that your marketing department goes batshit crazy and will immediately sever any connections in order to protect the brand from being tarnished by it. Who do you think people will believe? A Chinese girl (= a nobody) or a respected Westerner and head of a very popular magazine?

It is the same thing as this video demonetizing BS on Youtube - why do you think Google is doing it? Because advertisers don't want to be associated with certain things. That Google took a very dumb approach to it is another issue but the origin of it is the same.

[Macbeth]

I thought that, back on the first page of this thread, that you'd said you were getting your coat...

Do you want a cookie?

Scratching my head - Cerebus is saying nctnico was getting their coat, then quotes NANDBlog who clearly did get the coat on page 1?

As for Naomi - I'm sure she is legitimate - I mean it's not like she is pretending to do stuff 12 year old kids can't do? Of course someone else is behind the camera for some of her videos, even helped her lift a heavy box, but so what?

Ok she has a SexyCyborg image she likes to portray and I'm glad that Chinese society allows this - see her video with all the "aunties" getting selfies with her and absolutely nobody Weinsteining or molesting her.

So refreshing compared to Western Europe which is embracing vibrant multicultural Islamic diversity with FGM, child sex slave grooming gangs, "honour" killings, acid attacks, and finally for fashion - full burkha and niqabs as beachwear vs Naomi's modest 3D printed wearables.

[Cerebus]

I thought that, back on the first page of this thread, that you'd said you were getting your coat...

Do you want a cookie?

Sure, got a beer to go with it? I would, however, be more interested to know what persuaded nandblog, I got the impression that his position was somewhat, er, entrenched.

[Cerebus]

Sure, got a beer to go with it? I would, however, be more interested to know what persuaded nandblog, I got the impression that his position was somewhat, er, entrenched.

Sure, you can finish mine. Now get off your high hamster.

What's your problem sport? Macbeth obviously can't see what you're getting at, and neither can I. What's wrong with me being curious why nandblog's back in the game when he appeared to wash his hands of it? Have you somehow been appointed "thought reader general" while I was out, allowed to ascribe secret motivations to questioners that they haven't given any actual written hint of?

Have you considered that perhaps it is you who has climbed onto a high horse and, because you weren't looking at what you were doing or what was actually going on around you, now find yourself sitting astride not the grand white charger you hoped for but a child's hobby-horse, looking mildly foolish?

[Cyberdragon]

Do I need to start throwing things at the old married couple again?

What shall it be this time...Ah...I know...

*hurls large breast implants*

The problem with the increase in controversy is that it makes the companies paranoid that any minor innocent little thing might become a big battle of morals, just because they see stuff like this happening. That's probably what's happening with Youtube, they are afraid people like Dale will come in and say utterly stupid stuff that starts a fight of offending people so they try to make everything stupidly over-PC and ruin it for everyone. You can't eliminate the cause of "political incorrectness" because that could be literally anything (large boobed techie) that some sorry little jerk (Dale) gets offended over.

[Marco]

To extend your statement, it sounds like it also means all actors/actresses underwent plastic surgery are not true artists?

They don't even need plastic surgery, they participate in an industry which cherry picks on looks to begin with. Objectification is inherent in acting.

It's regrettable, but the alternative (communism) is worse.

[Cerebus]

What's your problem sport? Macbeth obviously can't see what you're getting at, and neither can I. What's wrong with me being curious why nandblog's back in the game when he appeared to wash his hands of it? Have you somehow been appointed "thought reader general" while I was out, allowed to ascribe secret motivations to questioners that they haven't given any actual written hint of?

Have you considered that perhaps it is you who has climbed onto a high horse and, because you weren't looking at what you were doing or what was actually going on around you, now find yourself sitting astride not the grand white charger you hoped for but a child's hobby-horse, looking mildly foolish?

Aw, come on now. Don't be taking yourself serious all of a sudden. We was havin' fun!
 
Macbeth was pointing out you were quoting ntcnico. There's little reason to call NANDBlog out like that, other than sowing an argument. Expect to be called out in turn. My hobby-horse is ready for it. It's the most ready a hobby-horse has ever been in the history of hobby-horses.

What exactly do you expect when you call someone out like that? Love and cuddles? We can cuddle, but you'd have to hold my beer.

Nobody was calling anybody out except in your imagination. BUT, I did get nandblog and nctnico confused, my bad. I mistook nctnico for nandblog rejoining the conversation, and picked out the relevant message by content, not double checking the names. Similar looking names and easy to confuse if you think you already know what you're looking at. As I say, my bad.

It would have been a lot simpler to clearly point that out to me rather than try to pick a  fight with me. What is the point of taking a simple mistake and rather than correcting it, trying to turn it into a bar brawl? What did you do, come home from the pub spoiling for a fight? Go and sleep it off.

[Cerebus]

Do I need to start throwing things at the old married couple again?

What shall it be this time...Ah...I know...

*hurls large breast implants*

Have you every considered trying to add light instead of heat to a conversation?

I made a stupid mistake in confusing nandblog with nctnico, Mr Scram think's it's a good excuse for a bar fight, and when you could have said something helpful to correct the situation instead you think it's a good idea to hurl a couple of insults into the mix just in case there isn't enough going wrong already. Yeah, real mature...

[Cerebus]

They don't even need plastic surgery, they participate in an industry which cherry picks on looks to begin with. Objectification is inherent in acting.

Take a look at the average British film or theatre cast and I don't think that holds up. Nobody ever picked Michael Gambon, or Bob Hoskins, or Tony Hopkins for their looks.

I'll grant it mostly holds true for Hollywood, but that's a peculiar little corner of its own and some might argue doesn't even count as acting in the proper sense. 

It's regrettable, but the alternative (communism) is worse.

Bit of a non sequitur, I really don't really see where that comes into it. Not rhetorical, I really don't see what your point is there.