Jobs a good 'un?
Celebrity deaths, and more specifically the reactions thereto, are a curious business. The print and broadcast media will necessarily adopt a measured and neutral tone, mostly painting each newly-extinguished life in a positive light in all but the most heinous cases.
Meanwhile in the worlds of the internetz and social media, which require no such filters of tact or taste, there are explosions of activity. On my Facebook feed, there will be several "RIP actor X/pop star Y" status updates, to which more obscure names often prompt amusing "whos that then hun?"-style responses. Yesterday I noticed one or two more elaborate ones, "Thanks to Steve Jobs for changing the world" for example, as well a couple of links to inspirational Youtube clips. There is nothing wrong with positivity of course, although I can't help feeling that when some people (and it's always the same people) put up an RIP for every single semi-famous person it's more of a reflex action than a genuine emotional response.
The flipside of this is the inevitable avalanche of death-based gags - I do wonder who coins all these to begin with. Can anyone apply for the job? And do they get prepared in advance, obituary-style? - and general trolling. Anonymity gives full reign to some peoples' darkest sides, and speaking ill of the dead is one thing that's guaranteed to wind folk up.
Somewhere inbetween the above lies a third way, and it's here where the (in)famous have their lives weighed up with at least a pinch of objectivity - mixed with a large dose of anonymity of course. Steve Jobs is a more divisive figure than most. Much of the antipathy is directed more towards what he represents rather than him as a person, although this could be said about everyone really - we don't "know" them properly after all. This piece is a good illustration of that - more scorn is poured upon the Apple fanboys and apologists here rather than the man himself.
I do find such stuff interesting, I think because it goes against the grain of prevailing opinion and I'm the sort of contrary bugger who tends to take against things if they get too popular (and yes, who buys into the counter-arguments perhaps rather too readily). You can't seriously argue that Jobs was a bad man, based on the available evidence. But that doesn't mean that you can't have an objective argument about his legacy.
I have zero time for all the tedious Apple fanboys vs da haterz quibbling that goes on. I own an iPod, an Android phone and two Windows PCs (ooh get me!), so brand loyalty means very little to me. Far more interesting is the question of how worthwhile all this modern technology - of which Apple are by far the most successful recent exponent - is. Would humanity be that much worse off without mobiles, tablet computers and MP3 players full stop? And before you answer this, it's worth bearing in mind that this sort of tech has only been of benefit to the relatively small, affluent echelons of the global population. For a great many, owning an iPod is about as realistic as reaching out and touching the sun.
It's also a curious irony that Jobs will be remembered by most as some kind of demi-god, whereas Bill Gates - who has done an awful lot for charity over the years - is more likely to remain the devil in many eyes. Just how frighteningly powerful a force has marketing now become?
Were I to be asked who my heroes are, I would give a flippant response of Steve Bull or Rolf Harris and try to move on. Were I pressed further, I'd have to admit that I don't have any, because heroes can only ever let you down. That might sound needlessly cynical to some, but I'd lean more towards realistic. Everyone has their foibles after all, which is what makes people so fascinating. Who'd seriously want to be friends with someone who was practically perfect in every way?
And thus death becomes one of those occasions where the internet and social media indisputably do add to humanity's cause. Because if you take all the platitudes, the bad-taste gags, the trolling and the debating and put it all together, you may just end up with something approaching an accurate representation of a life lived and its impact on others, for better and worse.
Meanwhile in the worlds of the internetz and social media, which require no such filters of tact or taste, there are explosions of activity. On my Facebook feed, there will be several "RIP actor X/pop star Y" status updates, to which more obscure names often prompt amusing "whos that then hun?"-style responses. Yesterday I noticed one or two more elaborate ones, "Thanks to Steve Jobs for changing the world" for example, as well a couple of links to inspirational Youtube clips. There is nothing wrong with positivity of course, although I can't help feeling that when some people (and it's always the same people) put up an RIP for every single semi-famous person it's more of a reflex action than a genuine emotional response.
The flipside of this is the inevitable avalanche of death-based gags - I do wonder who coins all these to begin with. Can anyone apply for the job? And do they get prepared in advance, obituary-style? - and general trolling. Anonymity gives full reign to some peoples' darkest sides, and speaking ill of the dead is one thing that's guaranteed to wind folk up.
Somewhere inbetween the above lies a third way, and it's here where the (in)famous have their lives weighed up with at least a pinch of objectivity - mixed with a large dose of anonymity of course. Steve Jobs is a more divisive figure than most. Much of the antipathy is directed more towards what he represents rather than him as a person, although this could be said about everyone really - we don't "know" them properly after all. This piece is a good illustration of that - more scorn is poured upon the Apple fanboys and apologists here rather than the man himself.
I do find such stuff interesting, I think because it goes against the grain of prevailing opinion and I'm the sort of contrary bugger who tends to take against things if they get too popular (and yes, who buys into the counter-arguments perhaps rather too readily). You can't seriously argue that Jobs was a bad man, based on the available evidence. But that doesn't mean that you can't have an objective argument about his legacy.
I have zero time for all the tedious Apple fanboys vs da haterz quibbling that goes on. I own an iPod, an Android phone and two Windows PCs (ooh get me!), so brand loyalty means very little to me. Far more interesting is the question of how worthwhile all this modern technology - of which Apple are by far the most successful recent exponent - is. Would humanity be that much worse off without mobiles, tablet computers and MP3 players full stop? And before you answer this, it's worth bearing in mind that this sort of tech has only been of benefit to the relatively small, affluent echelons of the global population. For a great many, owning an iPod is about as realistic as reaching out and touching the sun.
It's also a curious irony that Jobs will be remembered by most as some kind of demi-god, whereas Bill Gates - who has done an awful lot for charity over the years - is more likely to remain the devil in many eyes. Just how frighteningly powerful a force has marketing now become?
Were I to be asked who my heroes are, I would give a flippant response of Steve Bull or Rolf Harris and try to move on. Were I pressed further, I'd have to admit that I don't have any, because heroes can only ever let you down. That might sound needlessly cynical to some, but I'd lean more towards realistic. Everyone has their foibles after all, which is what makes people so fascinating. Who'd seriously want to be friends with someone who was practically perfect in every way?
And thus death becomes one of those occasions where the internet and social media indisputably do add to humanity's cause. Because if you take all the platitudes, the bad-taste gags, the trolling and the debating and put it all together, you may just end up with something approaching an accurate representation of a life lived and its impact on others, for better and worse.
Comments