Slashdot Mirror
Industry Group Sponsors College Course To Create Fake Blog
Scott Jaschik writes "At Hunter College, professors are debating the ethics of a course in which an industry group paid for a class to develop a fake student who would write a fake blog to discourage other students from buying knockoff products. The controversy involves both commercial interference with academic freedom and the ethics of 'guerilla marketing.'"
This is different from all of the 419/v1@gr@ blogs on blogger how, exactly...?
It sounds like those companies really have a handle on how to get the youth on-side.
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
Cooperate sponsored fraud in order to deter legal purchases of questionable knock-off products.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
I love the brag. The Industry Conclusion is correct, though not the way they want it to be.
Conclusion:
The campaign will live beyond the event as the Web sites will remain live, and students will be reminded by the giveaways to Break the Chain of harmful of harmful events that can result from counterfeiting.
They are going to have a hard time living this one down. Fake blogs, with more than 300 myspace friends, including Justin Timberlake! What they have managed to do is indelibly link their brands to fake. Hyped, expensive fake regardless of real quality. How do they expect anyone to trust them again? Their stuff is better why? Because they spend money on BS like this? Because the "real" stuff comes from a sweat shop with a sharper whip? It's hard to imagine a better example of the harm imaginary property does and they festering pile of lies that supports it.
The blog finally admitted that it was fake: http://encounterheidi.blogspot.com/2007/05/here-is-catch-i-am-totally-not-real.html . I love how the students who created this blog chose the ditsy valley girl stereotype to convey their message, and stuck with the persona 'till the bitter end: "Here is the catch- I am totally not real!"...the bolding was me.
You were critically hit for no damage. The bruise will look nice, and maybe the scars will make good party talk.
They are attempting to create a counterfeit person to persuade people to dislike counterfeit goods.
Counterfeiting of goods does suck, but this does not seem to be the way to get people on your side...
The industry group in question was the IACC - International anti-Counterfeiting Coallition - their mandate being to fight the production and sale o fraudulent knock off products. They were essentially paying for a class to create a fraudulent student with a fraudulent blog while preventing any sort of critical discussion or analysis in the class.
Ho hum. Just another case of corporate hypocrisy, move along, move along....
As a Hunter student I am outraged that I was not monetarily compensated with part of this graft.
Ubiquitously - A Ubiquity Developer Community
How about we write a fake blog about a fake industry that gets fake repercussions for meddling where it shouldn't?
What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
You can add patronizing to that list.
If students are so dumb that they need to be told basic smarts by a blog (fake or otherwise) then they should not be in University.
I want to meet the kids that would sign up for a class like that. It's like those anti-piracy commercials they put at the beginning of rental dvd's "Hey kids, do what the man says, or we'll make you sign a settlement for a couple grand, and tell your friends how not cool it is"
Ze Atomic Device! It iz Ztolen!
You must be new here
"I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
Idiotic. As a Hunter alum I'm extremely disappointed. The professors at the school always kicked ass, but we got screwed on the administration a few times.
They should be debating the ethics of high book costs and the small changes that force you to buy a new book each year for no new info as well other carp fees that are pushing College costs up not stuff like this.
The blog was not sponsored! I met this poor Heidi girl and she was really heartbroken about that counterfeit handbag, so we swapped our sob stories. I got real cool Dell as a birthday present, but then it turned out it had a counterfeit copy of Vista installed. Not only the wallpaper had a slightly different color, but the fonts on the screen were not as crisp and defined as on REAL Vista. Worst of all, I couldn't enjoy any of the Windows Genuine Advantage downloads.
Then I started reading up on that and discovered that software counterfeiting is invariably linked to crime and even terrorism. Wouldn't somebody think of the children! Be a broken link in the chain and stop software piracy! Most importantly, don't undermine american capitalism by using free software that is anyway full of stolen code and patent infringements!
The "fake blog" portion of the story is compelling, but it isn't the whole story. all in all, the actions of the university and the coalition (the IACC) were pretty repugnant. The school engineered the course to teach the industry viewpoint and ensured (via industry observers) that the professor did not deviate from the talking points. when the story initially broke, the school decided that it was an internal matter and didn't merit any outside scrutiny.
The professor in question voiced real ethical problems with the course but was basically told to shut up and teach--because he didn't have tenure that was pretty much his only option. The job market for PhD's without tenure isn't exactly robust.
Never mind that this was basically taxpayer subsidized indoctrination.
Now that it has been shown beyond all reasonable doubt that the IP-industrial-complex had been engaging in propagandizing, I wonder how those students who willingly cooperated with these personifications of evil feel. Oh how their reputations have been now-and-forever tainted, soiled, sullied and disgraced by the purveyors of GREED! What else is there to academia than to stand as an alternative to and a critic of the vagaries and exigences of commerce?
Dumping gasoline on a fire is never enough, so there has been added ammonium perchlorate co-spray.
Won't it be a little obvious that it's fake when people read "So yesterday I was listening to my Ipod, don't buy a zune or anything else, buy an ipod because they're so much better, and I saw a cute girl" "and then today I was driving in my DODGE CHARGER, buy a dodge charger, don't buy ford made products".
Also, why are professors debating the ethics of the course? Was the course created knowing that some company was going to pay the students to make a fake blog? Seems to me this issue should have been dealt with long ago.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
As opposed to a real student?
-Aegis Runestone-
As long as there was a prominent disclaimer at the top saying "this blog is a work of fiction and is done as a class project under the auspices of Dr. I. M. Controversial at QuestionableEthics University" then I don't see the problem.
What's that you say? There wasn't a disclaimer? The student gets an F.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
With the right lawyer this thing could snowball.
Main Entry: 1libel
Pronunciation: \l-bl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, written declaration, from Anglo-French, from Latin libellus, diminutive of liber book
Date: 14th century
1 a: a written statement in which a plaintiff in certain courts sets forth the cause of action or the relief sought barchaic : a handbill especially attacking or defaming someone
2 a: a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression b (1): a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt (2): defamation of a person by written or representational means (3): the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (4): the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel
"I guess I'm gonna fade into Bolivian."
I would love to know if the students also had to pay for the class, just like they do for any other class. Also did the students get a full outline of the class before they signed up for it, like most other classes offer?
Sounds to me like this is a case of double dipping. The school gets the corporation to pay for the class, and then they turn around and get the students to pay for the class as well. I'm sure every University and College would love to be paid double for each class they teach. Sounds like this is more about the greed of the school, than it is about actual teaching.
Also where is the state on this? I don't know about their state but the state of Missouri has Sunshine laws. Basically if you take state or government money, then everything has to be open and clearly detailed about what you do with the money and everything associated with it. You can't have secret board meetings, or secretly spend the money on anything. Everything in the school has to be open and transparent, even school groups that receive money from the school, since they get it from the government.
Sounds like a *HUGE* violation of the "Sunshine laws" to say that this whole review, etc. is an internal school matter. It certainly would not be the case in Missouri.
It's stealing if you buy a fake Coach sweatshop-produced bag, but it's only immoral to buy a real sweatshop-produced bag!
Thank God it wasn't a Facebook profile. They could have ended up in jail.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=545
Res publica non dominetur
...George P. Burdell will hijack that blog in about five minutes.
rj
But you can buy a 500$ coach bag. America rules.
slashdot?
Engineering is the art of compromise.
For anyone interested in complaining to the member companies about this... here is a link to their membership list.
Some members are no surprise and don't care if their customers hate them (RIAA, MPAA). Others are more likely to respond to bad press (Apple, Microsoft, Vivendi). Other sponsors are directly responsible, such as the government agencies (many in the USA and Canada) and the states of North Carolina and Wisconsin.
Send a letter or e-mail, maybe this crap will not happen again, at least not in academia where it is so easily detected.
No, I'm New Here
Do you propose that there is a tradeoff? Does the debate over academic integrity somehow preclude a debate over textbook pricing? Also, it is patently clear how and why textbook price increases world. Textbooks are durable goods, but are used only once (usually) by the first owner. The owner then has a strong incentive to resell the book to the next student in line. Textbook makers KNOW this, so it is in their interest to get schools to push to "student editions", "editions with added material" and new editions for each class. Schools are in a position to agree because that means more money for professors who write the textbooks and they don't front the cost. It isn't an ethical problem. It is a fairness problem and an economic problem.
A large number of professors are searching for ways to allow students to avoid these costs. Most professors I know allow students to use old editions, check new editions of from the library and offer excerpts of the books online for free. Most students that I know buy books used and don't bother with newer editions unless the professor is adamant about it--even then they usually don't get the book.
This isn't an ethical problem. It isn't one actor imposing his will on a large number of students. It is a market reaction to a group of people who are largely indifferent to changes in costs. in other words, as the economy moves from manufacturing to service oriented, the value of a college degree grows. As that value grows, the willingness to attain it grows likewise. For things that are limited in supply and desirable to obtain, price usually doesn't deter buyers TOO much. As a BA/BS becomes basically required to be competitive (we aren't there yet, but we are close), people will become less sensitive to the price of education. WE ought to look to ways to stop this problem before it consumes too much money and forces too many poor people away from education. That debate is important, but it occurs in parallel with demands for academic independence. In some cases defending academic independence helps keep the cost of education down.
Don't believe everything you read online, from any source. MSM, bloggers, etc. Look at what they're saying and evaluate it against other information.
The people at the IACC seem like your typical corporate droids, but they can't be stupid. The must have known when they first commandeered the course that the truth would come out after the course ended ("Heidi" herself admitted she was fake May 2007, at the end of the spring semester), and that guerrilla marketing has a failure mode which frequently involves consumer backlash.
This makes me wonder: Was this whole thing (or at least part of it) an experiment to gauge the intensity and duration of our backlash?
If so, I hope they get the message. The comments on Heidi's blog aren't much more forgiving than the ones on slashdot.
10 Bits= $.25
100 Bits= $.50
110 Bits= $.75
1000 Bits= 1 byte
Honestly, if we had an F.T.C. with any balls in this country, they'd spent a lot more time coordinating with the Fraud division of Justice Department and stop this kind of crap, plus all the damn astroturfing, and that stupid "guerilla marketing" stuff. It's all fraud, pure and simple.
With any sensible reading of the fraud and deceptive marketing sections of the law (sections under US Code Title 15, plus others) surely covers all the tactics used in this kind of activity. Remember, we're talking commercial speech, which has considerably different protections and limitations.
Problem, of course, is that the FTC has been stacked with appointees from industry. Foxes guarding the henhouse, again, as usual. Sadly, this has been going across multiple administrations, and I'm not sure that it will change.
-Erik
There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened.
Students, especially in technology and business programs, like to receive real hands-on experience. These courses review case studies of real companies facing real challenges on a regular basis. In any other situation, students doing work for credit at a private firm would be considered an internship. There's no real difference, so what's different here? Coach has a counterfeiting problem. How do marketing and PR students handle this? They explored the idea of using a fake blog. It was academic research. Nothing new here- this is consistently done all the time in psychology: the double blind experiment.
I don't see a problem with the sponsorship either. Indirectly, students become indoctrinated (others would say specialized) with "corporate" branding throughout their studies anyway. Math and statistics courses tend to focus on using certain packages, for example Mathematica and SPSS. In computer science, it's either the Microsoft suite or specific open source products like MySQL (why not PostgreSQL?) Likewise, biology labs tend to use certain methods with corresponding complex equipment like DNA sequencers, PCR kits, RNA microarrays, etc., especially in biotech courses. Some skills are learned in school that way.
The very concept of such a course is being allowed to be taught at an accredited university is unethical.
...when education deviates from first principles. You start getting courses like "guerilla marketing" or "late Byzantine Women's Studies" or "Topics in Gay Poetry". Though these are probably worth someone's time to study, are they really right for undergraduates who need an education rich in basic skills? Disclaimer: Not against guerillas, late Byzantine Women, or Gay Poets. Just *for* learning basic skills first.
Pretty soon, everything is a potential topic and departments find they can be talked into anything. They are especially vulnerable when some industry group dangles a monetary carrot on the end.
Hunter said they now have a committee to review new industry sponsored courses. First, *now*? Why not before? Second, *all* new courses should submit to faculty review in the department that will teach the course. A proposed syllabus should be reviewed at the bare minimum with a discussion of the teaching approach.
Just callin' it like I see it.
Shit like this is why I want to scream whenever I hear corporations whining about anti-trust laws and how the free market should be allowed to self-regulate. Here's a thought; stop working so hard to break the perfect information that is a fundamental requirement of efficient free market capitalism, and maybe I'll take you a little more seriously.
If you're going to show such complete lack of respect for Adam Smith's ideals, it is unreasonable to ask the government to abide by them. Once you decide to stand up and compete like an honorable person, then you can invoke the term "free market" in your defense.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
...you're supposed to get your ideas of which brand of product to buy by reading blogs? Even ones apparently run by a valley girl? Wow! I have been truly been barking up the wrong tree.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Hello. I ate at Subway and lost 200 lbs. So start eating so you can lose weight too!
I've used BioFlex, and I have rock hard abs. Of course, I earned mine through lots of situps, but I did use BioFlex for a minute before they paid me a lot to be a model on this commercial.
God spoke to me.
Why not both? Personally I'm more miffed about forced non-textbook purchases than I am about textbook costs themselves. For instance, there are professors who mandate textbooks for the electronic homework or testing accounts they come with, even though the book itself is essentially unnecessary for the course. I haven't been burnt by that personally, but I have had to purchase other supplemental learning software that was entirely unnecessary in principle but required for my grade.
Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
Did anyone else check out the fake blog/pages? There was a banner ad for a service where you can rent designer purses so you can show them off and then return them without having to pay the full price. It seemed to be a real service. The fact that such a company can stay in business is probably a sign of the apocalypse. Does anyone really know anyone who is so obsessed with designer brands that they would do such a thing? I can actually understand buying a designer product if you believe they actually make better products and are worth the cost. I sometimes pay more for a product from a company who has proven they make quality goods. But do people really buy (or rent) designer products for the sole purpose of showing off... conspicuous consumption of purses?
It makes me appreciate all the intelligent and deviant friends I have all the more. The only brands they consume conspicuously are on the opposite end, with titles like "black label" and "old crow."
Marketing agencies spend a lot on infomercials and they never, ever ring true. They're always obvious inside of 60 seconds of viewing. I can't see how a fake blog would be any different.
Camping on quad since 1996.
But I thought I had a date with you tonight?
Real world analysis: western corporation uses built up societal infrastructure and resources to create brand name and products, using domestic sources, domestic labor, etc and profits. A lot of winners, investors, owners, labor, local top national governments with robust tax base, etc. Fast forward in time to "knockoffs" part- High level decision to move production offshore where it is cheaper, one production run is made-these are now realistically the first generation of the "knockoffs" (although they won't admit it, they are in fact knockoffs compared to the original models in the original nation), sold back to original nation for very short term megaprofit for top 1% or less of the population, the original nation loses a ton of wealth producing jobs and tax base. Offshored nation then takes entire research that's been handed to them free of charge, clones it, sells it, and is in position to lather rinse repeat ad infinitum because no effective "legal" countermeasures are possible against nuclear armed large nation who have proven to be quite capable of ignoring any and all so called "intellectual property" laws. Play acting at little busts now and then results in nothing, corporations in offshored nation can be dropped on the fly and rebuilt under a new name whenever it is necessary.
Moral of story, when large corporations go out of their way to screw their own neighbors and create knockoffs offshore for short term profits over and above the normal profits they were getting in the first place, they should stop whining when the practice continues, what did they expect? They started and legitimized the practice.
by guerrilla marketing to the social fabric vastly outweighs any possible social benefit it could bestow. People practicing it should be wiped out of business without mercy or restraint. For society to work, we have to routinely extend a certain level of trust to people we don't know personally. When that trust is abused by people trying to sneak their products in front of your face with lies and misrepresentation, one of the pillars of society is undermined.
I always thought if I was one of the people aggressively solicited by those actors who were marketing cameras under the guise of needing help to take a picture, I'd have decked the creep when I found out what he was up to, and smashed his camera into tiny little pieces.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
I think you mean 'alumnus' don't you? Assuming you're a bloke (fairly safe assumption on /.) Tell any facebook moderators you know as well, that quirk always irks me.
IF one RTFA, one sees that the teacher was a Computer Graphics nontenured faculty who admits to not being qualified to teach a marketing course. When he tried to introduce multiple viewpoints, his curriculum was rejected. So the course was like a cheap workforce to push an industry group's viewpoints, not a true academcic course where many issues and perspectives would be explored.
There are productive and mutually beneficial ways that industry and university can help each other. Many science and engineering departments do it. But they are done with the clear knowledge and scrutiny of the faculty and student body. There is also always a clear distinction between company sponsored research and academic course work. The way this Hunter fiasco was conducted smeared many of these distinctions, thus ending up looking like a fraud.
Hunter College is the largest school in CUNY, NYC's public university system. So it's all publicly funded.
I'm pretty sure that the school administrators should have known better. New York does have Sunshine Laws, but I don't know the precise details, IANAL,JSGOSWHSBDRW. (....,Just Some Guy On Slashdot When He Should Be Doing Real Work)
Freedom isn't free; its price is the well-being of others.