Discuss on the forum: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1526561-what-do-we-do-now/► GET MERCH: https://lttstore.com► GET EXCLUSIVE CONTENT ON FLOATPLANE: http...
She’s just the manager of the account, not publicly facing on OnlyFans. She was asked to complete a task well within her job description, that is not against her will, she is against the job. A before you say looking at genitalia wasn’t in the job description I urge you to look up what facebook moderation is like.
The kind interactions (including pictures and such) you get on OF vastly differs what you will get on other platforms. That’s not in the job description.
And to your last point, she was a social media manager, not a Facebook moderator. How does that compare? Are you intentionally making bad faith arguments?
She is a social media manager, onlyfans is social media regardless of the content that is usually posted. As for the reason I brought up Facebook moderation is, what do you think is usually posted there? Minion memes? Photos from trips? Well those moderators are often subjected to beheadings, rape, and other very graphic content. Do you think that was explicitly stated when they got hired?
Of course, Facebook isn’t exactly the premier ‘good place to work’, but this is common throughout any industry that takes submissions for the populous. And I am not making any arguments whatsoever on whether or not she should actually have to see “comments from people talking about how they wanted to fuck me and my co workers.”.
As for the reason I brought up Facebook moderation is, what do you think is usually posted there? Minion memes? Photos from trips? Well those moderators are often subjected to beheadings, rape, and other very graphic content. Do you think that was explicitly stated when they got hired?
No likely not, and Facebook clearly deserves a proper reckoning. But I don’t see how this relates or makes it ok.
And I am not making any arguments whatsoever on whether or not she should actually have to see “comments from people talking about how they wanted to fuck me and my co workers.”.
Would you say LTT/LMG sells itself as a channel about sex or porn or the likes? No, it’s a tech channel and as such one would expect tech related social media. You could state that the function of the job is unchanged, but the job content is also relevant here.
It was expressly against her will as per her own words. And as for why “a woman”, its rather well known women already deal with much more sexual harassment and maltreatment online than men do. Just look at the market of AI generated porn of celebrities and online personalities as proof of this. So forcing a woman, who already has a public presence no less, to manage a platform such as OnlyFans, and constantly see and have to manage sexual objectification and harassment towards her as well as her coworkers, is unacceptable in my opinion.
She is not publicly facing on OnlyFans she manages the account. So her being a woman has absolutely nothing to do with your last sentence. Of course I won’t debate your personal opinion, but she isn’t being forced. It’s a job within her job description.
This will be my final reply on the matter as I do not believe you are operating in good faith. But in case you are:
Firstly, the idea that you “cannot be forced to do something within your job description” is unequivocally false, and a sign of a toxic work environment. She actively requested to not be put in charge of a platform that made her uncomfortable, and the request was denied and she was forced, against her will, to do so. I have never in my life worked at a place where I could not request to be taken off a project or task due to being uncomfortable with it. This is not a point of discussion, this is a categorical fact.
Secondly, it does not matter that she was not public facing on OnlyFans. She, alongside her coworkers, were active public figures on multiple LMG affiliated channels during her employment. And OnlyFans is a platform known to be near exclusively used for sexual gratification, and it is therefore entirely unsurprising that the LMG OnlyFans account received a large amount of sexual advancements, objectification, and harassment of LMG employees. And due to my prior comment, I fully believe a large majority of what was received would have been targeting the women employed at LMG. Therefore, putting one of the main victims of said harassment and objectification in charge of managing it is wholly and entirely unacceptable behavior by the management at LMG.
These are not complex concepts, and are not even all that contemporary anymore. And as such I do not feel there is any real discussion to be had on the matter, there are people more intelligent than I that do a better job expressing these things in more empirical detail. I suggest you seek them out if you need more detail than I have provided here.
I don’t know what you mean about harassment for life. She wasn’t publically facing on the OnlyFans. And yes I have seen. You didn’t answer my questions however.
They probably meant “sexual harassment”. Legally speaking, “sexual abuse” typically refers to sexual assault against a child. Verbal/online interactions would generally fall under “harassment”.
It should have fallen on her manager to handle, and she should have put her foot down on that.
Other good ways to improve that particular situation could have been separating her identity from the social media accounts, so that it wouldn’t be clear who exactly was managing them. It paints a target on her back as an attack vector (very dangerous due to her lack of experience) and target of harassment. That’s part of why many big brands do not publicize who exactly is managing their social media accounts.
At the end of the day, management needed to do better and Madison could have pushed back more. It’s just a job, theoretically one she could replace somewhat seamlessly given her capabilities, and the fatal mistake was idealizing it. That probably compounded all of her grievances.
No, it’s realistic. If a manager at your workplace asks you to do something you don’t like, you say “I don’t want to do it”, and they insist - you push back. Is it toxic and stupid that they did that? Yes. But companies get away with this shit because people don’t push back.
Speaking up publicly after-the-fact is great too. It raises awareness and helps give a voice to people whose livelihood is tied up in a company they can’t stand to support due to toxic working conditions. It helps raise awareness to C-suite execs that there may be a managerial issue causing it. It’s a good step that some companies take in stride, and actually turn around to improve things. Time will tell if that’s the case here.
You can’t force a woman to manage an OF account against her will, knowing VERY WELL what she’ll be exposed to. That’s fucked up.
Why “a woman” specifically? And how would that be against her will?
Because the internet is exceptionally shit against women in particular, and because she clearly stated she didn’t want to do it.
This is kinda basic stuff.
She’s just the manager of the account, not publicly facing on OnlyFans. She was asked to complete a task well within her job description, that is not against her will, she is against the job. A before you say looking at genitalia wasn’t in the job description I urge you to look up what facebook moderation is like.
The kind interactions (including pictures and such) you get on OF vastly differs what you will get on other platforms. That’s not in the job description.
And to your last point, she was a social media manager, not a Facebook moderator. How does that compare? Are you intentionally making bad faith arguments?
No, lets keep this civil my guy.
She is a social media manager, onlyfans is social media regardless of the content that is usually posted. As for the reason I brought up Facebook moderation is, what do you think is usually posted there? Minion memes? Photos from trips? Well those moderators are often subjected to beheadings, rape, and other very graphic content. Do you think that was explicitly stated when they got hired?
Of course, Facebook isn’t exactly the premier ‘good place to work’, but this is common throughout any industry that takes submissions for the populous. And I am not making any arguments whatsoever on whether or not she should actually have to see “comments from people talking about how they wanted to fuck me and my co workers.”.
No likely not, and Facebook clearly deserves a proper reckoning. But I don’t see how this relates or makes it ok.
Would you say LTT/LMG sells itself as a channel about sex or porn or the likes? No, it’s a tech channel and as such one would expect tech related social media. You could state that the function of the job is unchanged, but the job content is also relevant here.
It was expressly against her will as per her own words. And as for why “a woman”, its rather well known women already deal with much more sexual harassment and maltreatment online than men do. Just look at the market of AI generated porn of celebrities and online personalities as proof of this. So forcing a woman, who already has a public presence no less, to manage a platform such as OnlyFans, and constantly see and have to manage sexual objectification and harassment towards her as well as her coworkers, is unacceptable in my opinion.
She is not publicly facing on OnlyFans she manages the account. So her being a woman has absolutely nothing to do with your last sentence. Of course I won’t debate your personal opinion, but she isn’t being forced. It’s a job within her job description.
This will be my final reply on the matter as I do not believe you are operating in good faith. But in case you are:
Firstly, the idea that you “cannot be forced to do something within your job description” is unequivocally false, and a sign of a toxic work environment. She actively requested to not be put in charge of a platform that made her uncomfortable, and the request was denied and she was forced, against her will, to do so. I have never in my life worked at a place where I could not request to be taken off a project or task due to being uncomfortable with it. This is not a point of discussion, this is a categorical fact.
Secondly, it does not matter that she was not public facing on OnlyFans. She, alongside her coworkers, were active public figures on multiple LMG affiliated channels during her employment. And OnlyFans is a platform known to be near exclusively used for sexual gratification, and it is therefore entirely unsurprising that the LMG OnlyFans account received a large amount of sexual advancements, objectification, and harassment of LMG employees. And due to my prior comment, I fully believe a large majority of what was received would have been targeting the women employed at LMG. Therefore, putting one of the main victims of said harassment and objectification in charge of managing it is wholly and entirely unacceptable behavior by the management at LMG.
These are not complex concepts, and are not even all that contemporary anymore. And as such I do not feel there is any real discussion to be had on the matter, there are people more intelligent than I that do a better job expressing these things in more empirical detail. I suggest you seek them out if you need more detail than I have provided here.
Have you seen how men act when they’re horny? Especially on the internet? She probably still gets gross DMs constantly.
They basically set her up for harassment for life.
I don’t know what you mean about harassment for life. She wasn’t publically facing on the OnlyFans. And yes I have seen. You didn’t answer my questions however.
Because she will expierence sexual abuse there.
What do you mean by sexual abuse?
They probably meant “sexual harassment”. Legally speaking, “sexual abuse” typically refers to sexual assault against a child. Verbal/online interactions would generally fall under “harassment”.
Anyone can be sexually abused, not just underage people.
Yes that’s true.
It should have fallen on her manager to handle, and she should have put her foot down on that.
Other good ways to improve that particular situation could have been separating her identity from the social media accounts, so that it wouldn’t be clear who exactly was managing them. It paints a target on her back as an attack vector (very dangerous due to her lack of experience) and target of harassment. That’s part of why many big brands do not publicize who exactly is managing their social media accounts.
At the end of the day, management needed to do better and Madison could have pushed back more. It’s just a job, theoretically one she could replace somewhat seamlessly given her capabilities, and the fatal mistake was idealizing it. That probably compounded all of her grievances.
Head of HR is Linus’ wife. Yes, it is that bad. Even telling her manager, would have netted zero result.
She should not have needed to push back more nor should anyone need to “push back more” in their job. That’s victim blaming.
No, it’s realistic. If a manager at your workplace asks you to do something you don’t like, you say “I don’t want to do it”, and they insist - you push back. Is it toxic and stupid that they did that? Yes. But companies get away with this shit because people don’t push back.
Speaking up publicly after-the-fact is great too. It raises awareness and helps give a voice to people whose livelihood is tied up in a company they can’t stand to support due to toxic working conditions. It helps raise awareness to C-suite execs that there may be a managerial issue causing it. It’s a good step that some companies take in stride, and actually turn around to improve things. Time will tell if that’s the case here.