Ashton is in Desperate Need of an Ego Stroke

Posted on April 16, 2009

3


 

 Evening Sweeties

I LOVE TWITTER! I used to be all about Facebook (and I still like it) but Twitter is way cooler in my opinion. EXCEPT for Ashton Kutcher trying to take over with his endless quest to have his ego stroked.

This afternoon I posed a question to the Twitter-universe: 

“Can someone give a substantive argument as to why a million people should follow Ashton? The 10,000 Malaria nets is not the answer I seek.”

 People on Twitter sending out messages like “#follow @apulsk because he’s going to buy 10,000 nets to stop malaria in third world countries.”  

Upon a surface glance that might sound soooo cool but I beg to differ.

First and foremost in my opinion Twitter is an amazing tool for people to engage, communicate, and connect with others.  I believe that people especially celebrities that don’t follow back are  MISSING the true essence of Twitter and frankly I feel that it is merely about EGO if one is to follow only 70 people but have over 900,000 people or more following them. How is someone going to ask others to follow them when they blatantly show they don’t care about doing the same in return? It’s not my responsibility to virtually stroke Mr. Kutcher’s ego! He needs to look at Demi and his famous celebrity friends for that task.

Okay now I know most of you are thinking  “well he is going to give 10,000 nets to fight Malaria in Third World countries, that is why we should follow him.”

  Did anyone read that he initially offered the lucky millionth follower a “Guitar Hero”?  That is just down right insulting. Not because he is a multi-millionaire and he could afford to offer so much more;  the insult to injury comes by the gross level of pretension that eminates from buying followers with the hope of winning a game that millions of people (who are not millionaires) can afford on their own. Another question I have: when did Mr. Kutcher decided to become so philanthropic? Is there a history of creating organizations or giving money to agencies that fight diseases in other countries? OR did his PR team tell him that Madonna was all over the AIDS issue in Africa so he should go with “fighting Malaria” as a ploy to gain followers? I don’t know for a fact  BUT I’d bet my bottom dollar that if @apulsk DID have a solid history of philanthropic giving he would have offered the notion of donating to one of his charities or causes before offering up one Guitar Hero?

My opinions on this issue have nothing to do with “not liking” Ashton Kutcher (whatever that means anyway) .  I’ve watched Punk’d and his other contributions to the entertainment industry and I’ve chuckled. Yes, he is married to Demi Moore and they are a rockin’ hot couple. Appearing to be “a nice” guy and being married to a hot celebrity isn’t enough for me to follow you WITHOUT providing me with an iota reciprocity either within the Twitter-universe or in the world at large. I just think that people need to be more discretionary and ASK QUESTIONS before blindly following someone merely because they are a celebrity. Another issue: the supposed gift of 10,000 Malaria nets to “Third World”.  The term “Third World” is an archaic, racist, and imperialistic term that should be abolished from our vocabulary it’s 2009 people. Ask yourself what the term is “supposed” to mean. If you gave it even 1/2 a second of thought anyone with an education and a rational mind would STOP using it.  What specific countries are those nets going to? What facilities will receive those nets? Are the nets going to individuals and families? OR is it going to resorts and hotels? Are these 10,000 nets going to come with beds and a roof too? Or are they just going to be thrown at UNICEF or The Red Cross’s door ? By no stretch of the imagination can I even pretend to be an authority on communicable diseases BUT I am taking a wild stab in the dark with this hypothesis: it is going to take a bit more comprehensive giving, research, and attention to eradicate Malaria.. (just a stab in the dark folks)

I don’t care that the Twitter profile for CNN was not created by Ted Turner’s CNN. That fact is irrelevant to me. The man who opened the account is tweeting the news based on reports that come straight from CNN and that is what counts. The CNN profile does not follow ANYONE butthere is reciprocity in this instance because CNN at large provides the world with innovative news and that is a form of giving back. It’s about giving and receiving. It’s about the ying and the yang.

I was not going to be able to attend the Inauguration of President Obama but through Facebook and CNN I and millions of others people who could not be in D.C were able to participate in the experience. That is why I’ll follow CNN (or the guy who created the account )over @apulsk any day of the week! I’d actually follow Brittney Spears over @apulsk. Hey.. whether you like Brittney or not AT LEAST she is providing her fans with entertainment whether she is on her Circus Tour or providing crotch shots for the paparazzi, PLUS she follows back! Following people is amazing! I have learned a wealth of information and made some fabulous connections from followers. 

 Until @apulsk follows more than 70 people back I’m not down with following him no matter how many Malaria nets he says he’ll give to the marginalized, desperate, and needy “Third World” (this last statement was totally facetious and filled with sarcasm) 

More sweet treats served soon

 

 

Night Night

Advertisements