EXCELLENT POST :)
Cheryl

Say I hate you. I have a history of hating you. I do nothing but spend my days hating you. That’s causing an interest around your name, whether you like it or not. It causes people to see what the hell is happening, and more often than not, they see that the person who just can’t let it go is the problem, not you. They become the bully in the court of public opinion.

I disagree that vulnerability isn’t a good thing in business. I think one of the reasons social media has been so effective for a lot of companies is that we get to see that there are real people behind them. That’s exposing a humanness in the very same way.

There’s a difference between being vulnerable and being weak. Being weak will get you eaten alive. Being vulnerable shows people you’re not a robot.

ric: [blink] Okay.

I totally agree that fixing the problem is best. Any energy going into criticism could be put towards something more positive. But if you “scorned” someone, and they’ve been vocal about your derision, more discussion of what a jerk you are is almost certainly not good for you.

Perhaps this piece is assuming vulnerability is in general a good character trait for winning over audiences? Perhaps that works in celebrity land, but politics? Business?

In business and politics vulnerable is held accountable for WHY before it is pitied; before sympathy is granted. If there is no good reason, if you’re vulnerable because you’re a weenie or crybaby, or you live a life of entitlement and are clueless of the status quo, vulnerability will get you hung.

I think it depends how you look at it. If it wasn’t for Levi, Sarah probably wouldn’t even have a platform right now. And she shouldn’t be wasting her time defending herself, that’s kind of the point. These online bullies only have as much power as you give them. Instead of trying to convince people she’s a good mother (which is a losing battle in itself), she should be using the limelight Levi’s giving her to get her message across. She doesn’t have to waste time talking about things that don’t matter or rehashing the same argument. She’s choosing to do that. If she were smart, she’d thank Levi for the spotlight and keep pushing her conservation spiel.

Levi makes her “interesting” in that we even still care what she has to say.

While you’re spot on about the pestering “Levi’s” of the world potentially helping you keep your name relevant, I’m not sure I agree about the “interesting” aspect of your point. For example, Mr. Johnston (to keep the focus of me) is keeping Mrs. Palin off message. Instead of spending her time talking about conservative policy she’s having to defend herself. How do you get your message out?

Once again, great blog!