How Not To Connect With Fans: Let Them Vote And Then Ignore The Vote

from the nice-going-kiss dept

Someone who prefers to remain anonymous sends in this example of how the band KISS tried and failed (miserably) in its attempt to "connect with fans." Apparently the band held an online contest to get fans to vote for where KISS would perform -- calling it the "You Demand It Tour." Well, people voted, and the second largest vote getter was Manchester, New Hampshire. So what happened? The band ignored the vote and booked a show in Boston instead. In response, some local radio folks are starting a petition to try to get the band to actually live up to its promise to go where fans demanded:

Three months ago - when KISS launched their "You Demand It Tour", Buzz Lumpa's jumped all over it in an effort to bring KISS back to the Verizon Wireless Arena. The deal was that the band would rout their tour to the cities that wanted them most - and that meant the cities that cast the most votes. Manchester NH did just that - beating out EVERY major U.S. city! We cast more votes than New York City, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and yes- Boston. Over 240 cities were vying for the band - and Manchester NH placed 2nd in the U.S.! And yet, when KISS announced their tour itinerary, Manchester NH was NOT on it. The band chose to play Boston instead. KISS lied to you.

Of course, given Gene Simmons' comments on new business models and the experiments of bands like Radiohead to better connect with fans (Simmons claimed it was killing the recording industry) perhaps this is no surprise.

26 Comments | Leave a Comment..

No One Will Trust Elections So Long As Questionable Voting Machines Are Used

from the time-to-fix-the-system dept

Following last week's New Hampshire primary, I've been besieged by people pushing stories suggesting massive problems with Diebold/Premiere's optical scan machines. It's well-documented that the machines have poor security and can be hacked, but it's a big leap to go from "can" to "were." And while some point to discrepancies in the vote tallies in places that used the Diebold counters and places that hand counted, a more thorough look at the numbers doesn't suggest anything nefarious. However, the really key point is that, thanks to years of doubletalk from e-voting vendors, as well as story after story after story about e-voting insecurities -- which none of the major vendors took seriously -- we've now reached a point where many people's natural conclusion is that these insecure machines were at fault. This is an issue that could have easily been solved years ago if the folks at Diebold/Premiere, ES&S, and Sequoia hadn't acted like e-voting security was a private matter, rather than a matter of national interest. If they had recognized that their own business prospects would be much stronger if the populace actually trusted their machines, perhaps they would have actually responded to security concerns, rather than laughing them off or denying them entirely. So while there may not have actually been any security problems with the voting machines last week, it's Diebold's fault that so many people think it's plausible.

24 Comments | Leave a Comment..