Wow. Facebook Backlash. Bad Timing. Dilemna.

[Jaime]

I heard that Steve Jobs saw the picture and it made him so sad, he died of a broken heart.

[brandelynmarie]

Maybe add an additional photo with an additional explanation. I'm afraid removing it may cause even more issues. But this is just a suggestion.

[Didacus]

Why not use Obama instead of Steve Jobs?

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Didacus' timestamp='1317887665' post='2315982']
Why not use Obama instead of Steve Jobs?
[/quote]

that makes no sense, and is needlessly politicizing an issue.

[Eternal CB]

ive read some of the comments you've made and i think the action you have taken is appropriate. leave it as is and maybe emphasise that the message of the picture is more about focusing on how we as an individuals "have it good" rather than an attack on Steve Jobs himself. God Bless.

[BG45]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1317889476' post='2315986']

that makes no sense, and is needlessly politicizing an issue.
[/quote]
But this is Phatmass, stuff is always needlessly politicized...

I think people, one in particular on FB, are overreacting to the picture though by refusing to look at the date stamp lest they be proven wrong about how evil Christians are.

[Basilisa Marie]

Maybe what you could do is write an explanation about it and its terrible timing on the facebook page. Thing is, people won't look at the date stamp because they won't look that far into it. But you should still leave it there, because it'll help you explain that it was posted before his death. There's nothing you can do about people sharing it. But at least if you put some explanation on the page it might help stem a backlash.

[Maccabeus]

I think its a good image, It shows the selfishness of humanity.

[FutureSister2009]

I think it should stay up because it's still true

[rhetoricfemme]

I wouldn't bother taking it down. You're right about the time stamp and the fact that if people really get uppity about it, they'll just stick it on their own pages as something to rant about.

To be completely honest, though, I wasn't too fond of the image from the get-go. I understand and appreciate the concept and the message, and actually liked the truck one. But with the image of Steve Jobs/iPad versus the starving children, I think it unintentionally painted an image saying, "This particular man cares more about his toys and money than those in poverty." Not to mention, just because a lot of money went into creating these products, and a lot of people are willing to put a lot of time/money/attention into these products, it doesn't have to be a bad thing. A priest traveling can use it for an iBreviary, missals, notes, etc. It's not that hard to think of all the helpful and less stressful organization our expensive technology can offer the world. Does it hold water to sacrificing in the name of feeding the hungry? Absolutely not. But is it still helpful to our constantly changing and fast-paced world? Definitely.

[cooterhein]

Wow, that is bad timing. Probably best to leave it up and try to do damage control, though. Tough part is figuring out exactly how to do that.

Bad timing is part of it, lack of malicious intent is another part of it. There's also the part where the message of the thing was to feed the hungry, among other socially conscious Biblical imperatives. I think there's one other thing you might want to cover, though.

That message only covers one of the pictures. The entirety of the message is "Concern yourself with the poor and needy; do not concern yourself so much with rampant consumerism and pointless stuff you don't need." And Steve Jobs was chosen as the personal representative of this. Again, there was no malicious intent, but....to a certain extent, however small under normal circumstances....Steve Jobs was cast as "the bad guy." The message was presented in a dualistic manner, in which feeding the hungry and helping the poor is the yin to Steve Jobs and the consumer-driven, corporate, poorly-timed yang. Yes, I use the "yin" and "yang" terms for a reason- the duality of good and evil is not a concept that's central to Christianity as it is in some other religions. You don't [b]need[/b] to have a bad-guy side in order to tell people they should care more about the extremely impoverished. And when you do make that choice, you don't [b]need[/b] to have a specific famous person cast in the role of "the bad guy."

People get the message of the thing. They know what it is you're telling them. Everything you know about the message, they know and they got. They understand it as well as you do, and you don't have to explain it to them as if they don't comprehend. Given the timing, though, they have noticed that Steve Jobs was cast as a bad guy right before he died, and this whole thing came to the attention of most people just after he died. Part of the problem is that many people aren't entirely aware of what the exact timing was, and this is absolutely significant. You should cover that. But the other thing you should cover is the matter of whether you really needed to do it that way. Was Steve Jobs' image used on the "bad guy" side of things because of any necessity? Did it really have to be like this? I submit that there was no necessity, and you didn't have to decide to make Steve Jobs a part of this in any way. Granted, you didn't know he would die the next day, you didn't know what it would look like 48 hours later, there was certainly no intent to do harm to anyone. Nevertheless, his inclusion was strictly elective and not at all necessary. That's what people need to see right now. You need to let them know you get that.

[IcePrincessKRS]

I wouldn't remove it, but if you can edit the description under the image to include your reason why you posted it some people might read that. Now that there's over 100 comments not everyone is going to read them all to see what you've said.

[Sarah147]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' timestamp='1317928572' post='2316651']
I wouldn't remove it, but if you can edit the description under the image to include your reason why you posted it some people might read that. Now that there's over 100 comments not everyone is going to read them all to see what you've said.
[/quote]

I totally agree! I think it's good for people to see the timestamp, too.

[dominicansoul]

i think you should unfriend everybody and block your facebook so only you and your kids and wife have access to it....


oh

...and go into hiding

[IcePrincessKRS]

I just read an article that's fairly tactless. Maybe I should post it in the comments and direct everyone to place their ire there instead.... (after all, this one as written post-death announcement, unlike Dust's image)

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/8-things-didn-t-know-life-steve-jobs-172130955.html