Bills Entire Marketing Dept Steps Down

[NoSaint]

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Do you consider the Bills' marketing to have been great?  Anything special?  If not, 3 people won't be hard to replace.

It’s weird. It’s almost like that wasn’t the point at all. But you just can’t resist. 

 

[KD in CA]

10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

They weren't fired, they quit----dream jobs in the most high profile pro sports league in the country--during a pandemic.

 

What facts do you think are still yet to be made known that would make this a good thing or not a bad turn of events for this organization?

 

You don't know that.  In the corporate world, people are allowed to resign rather than being fired all the time.

 

 

[folz]

9 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Simple question doc.  You doubt Graham is reporting fact on this story?

 

WEO...it's not that he isn't reporting fact (at least in the article itself), people are reacting to the "sensational" headline not matching the facts of the article itself. Unfortunately, that is so called news/reporting these days (i.e. click bait). it's not just Tim...it's just the sad state of most reporting these days. Now in this case, it's not that big of a deal, but in a time where people only read headlines and then get triggered by them, I do think it is a bit disengenuous to sensationalize your headlines.

 

Tim's headline reads "Buffalo Bills' entire marketing department resigns..." When you read that headline, you think that, what, 10-30 disgruntled people walked out en masse. But, when you actually read the article, in fact, two people have resigned and maybe a third person will if his "sources" are correct. Sure, the titles of the three people seem like they were leaders in the department, but I don't know and he doesn't tell us. Tim also does not report on how many people total are in the marketing department. I mean, sure, if the department is 5 people total, then 3 people leaving is major. If the department is 20-30 people, then 3 people leaving is hardly the "entire" department. Let's say for instance that the department has 20 people (and it may be larger than that, I don't know), then 3 people leaving is 15% of the staff. That is equivalent to me writing an article about a company of 200 employees and my headline reads, "X Company's entire workforce resigns." But it turns out to be only 30 people of the 200. Thirty people leaving would be a significant story to report, but I would be misleading my readers by saying, in essence, the company has no  more employees. But Tim doesn't give us those facts to assess for ourselves.

 

Instead, he goes on to speculate how bad things must be because these employees are leaving during the pandemic. Well, what if the answer was like someone else said, that they no longer think sports is a stable place to work going into the future because of the pandemic (or a hundred other scenarios, they got hired away, they have child care issues, an ill family member, etc.). It could be for any reason. Yes, them leaving at the same time makes it seem like it could be something, an issue in the department or organization, but again there is nothing to back that up. He does not quote the former employees or anyone from inside PSE. So, how does he/we know what their reasons for leaving are? 

 

I have no idea what is happening at PSE. It may be a sh%t show and these employees really did resign because they are supremely unhappy with how the organization is run. I'm not here to defend PSE. But, there is no question that Tim's headline seems completely sensationalized (either click-bait or agenda motivated) without him providing any more information than he did in the article. 

 

Edited August 28, 2020 by folz

[hmsmystic]

10 minutes ago, folz said:

 

WEO...it's not that he isn't reporting fact (at least in the article itself), people are reacting to the "sensational" headline not matching the facts of the article itself. Unfortunately, that is so called news/reporting these days (i.e. click bait). it's not just Tim...it's just the sad state of most reporting these days. Now in this case, it's not that big of a deal, but in a time where people only read headlines and then get triggered by them, I do think it is a bit disengenuous to sensationalize your headlines.

 

Tim's headline reads "Buffalo Bills' entire marketing department resigns..." When you read that headline, you think that, what, 10-30 disgruntled people walked out en masse. But, when you actually read the article, in fact, two people have resigned and maybe a third person will if his "sources" are correct. Sure, the titles of the three people seem like they were leaders in the department, but I don't know and he doesn't tell us. Tim also does not report on how many people total are in the marketing department. I mean, sure, if the department is 5 people total, then 3 people leaving is major. If the department is 20-30 people, then 3 people leaving is hardly the "entire" department. Let's say for instance that the department has 20 people (and it may be larger than that, I don't know), then 3 people leaving is 15% of the staff. That is equivalent to me writing an article about a company of 200 employees and my headline reads, "X Company's entire workforce resigns." But it turns out to be only 30 people of the 200. Thirty people leaving would be a significant story to report, but I would be misleading my readers by saying, in essence, the company has no  more employees. But Tim doesn't give us those facts to assess for ourselves.

 

Instead, he goes on to speculate how bad things must be because these employees are leaving during the pandemic. Well, what if the answer was like someone else said, that they no longer think sports is a stable place to work going into the future because of the pandemic (or a hundred other scenarios, they got hired away, they have child care issues, an ill family member, etc.). It could be for any reason. Yes, them leaving at the same time makes it seem like it could be something, an issue in the department or organization, but again there is nothing to back that up. He does not quote the former employees or anyone from inside PSE. So, how does he/we know what their reasons for leaving are? 

 

I have no idea what is happening at PSE. It may be a sh%t show and these employees really did resign because they are supremely unhappy with how the organization is run. I'm not here to defend PSE. But, there is no question that Tim's headline seems completely sensationalized (either click-bait or agenda motivated) without him providing any more information than he did in the article. 

 

Good post-

Simply proof point 1034 why I have a complete lack of trust for most media-  just tell me what happened from an objective point of view- not what you think about it!

Edited August 28, 2020 by hmsmystic

[KD in CA]

1 minute ago, folz said:

 

the titles of the three people seem like they were leaders in the department

 

 

According to the story, one was a 'Marketing Manager' which is a title for a 30 year old.  Another was "Marketing Coordinator" which is an entry level job that's a half-step above Admin Assistant and frequently the lowest paid person in the entire organization.  In fact, I just googled the person named in the story and it's literally a college kid.

 

This story is as 'fake news' as it gets.

[Doc]

9 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

It’s weird. It’s almost like that wasn’t the point at all. But you just can’t resist.

 

OK, let me put it another way: would it be strange if they were being forced-out because they were nothing special at their jobs?

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Felt like this was a good place to post this. Did ya'll know Billy Buffalo is not allowed at games this season? Ever since Billy Buffalo became a thing the Bills haven't won a playoff game. Coincidence? I think not. I've emptied my savings and 401k and put it all on the Bills to win the Super Bowl.

Edited August 28, 2020 by Buffalo_Stampede

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

OK, let me put it another way: would it be strange if they were being forced-out because they were nothing special at their jobs?

is that what you are asserting happened here, doc?

[folz]

14 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

According to the story, one was a 'Marketing Manager' which is a title for a 30 year old.  Another was "Marketing Coordinator" which is an entry level job that's a half-step above Admin Assistant and frequently the lowest paid person in the entire organization.  In fact, I just googled the person named in the story and it's literally a college kid.

 

This story is as 'fake news' as it gets.

 

So, basically, it should have been a two sentence tweet, not an article, "Vice president of marketing Shaena Kershner resigned two weeks ago. I am looking into the reasons why."

 

If the level of the other two employees are as you say, then they are hardly a news-worthy story. I work for a smallish company (about 500 employees). With our lower level employees, about a third progress in the company and the rest are turning over constantly (each for different reasons). Some are changing professions, following their dreams, looking for better opportunities, moving to a different part of the country, just not working out, they don't like the job, don't fit the culture of the organization, etc. 

[Doc]

11 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

is that what you are asserting happened here, doc?

 

It's a very real possibility.  Remember the furor over Dave Wheat being let go and then the Bills hired that Sinnarajah guy a few months later?  I doubt they'll have trouble finding people to fill their shoes because, again, it's not like they were amazing at their jobs.

 

Oh and read what Kid in CA wrote.

[KD in CA]

3 minutes ago, folz said:

 

So, basically, it should have been a two sentence tweet, not an article, "Vice president of marketing Shaena Kershner resigned two weeks ago. I am looking into the reasons why."

 

If the level of the other two employees are as you say, then they are hardly a news-worthy story. I work for a smallish company (about 500 employees). With our lower level employees, about a third progress in the company and the rest are turning over constantly (each for different reasons). Some are changing professions, following their dreams, looking for better opportunities, moving to a different part of the country, just not working out, they don't like the job, don't fit the culture of the organization, etc. 

 

Or maybe, "VP Marketing leaves Bills, no one notices for two weeks.  Also, Marketing Intern goes back to college."

[NoSaint]

6 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

It's a very real possibility.  Remember the furor over Dave Wheat being let go and then the Bills hired that Sinnarajah guy a few months later?  I doubt they'll have trouble finding people to fill their shoes because, again, it's not like they were amazing at their jobs.

 

Oh and read what Kid in CA wrote.

have I said anywhere that I think it’ll be hard to fill the positions? 
 

what are you arguing with me about at this point ?

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

have I said anywhere that I think it’ll be hard to fill the positions? 
 

what are you arguing with me about at this point ?

 

My apologies then.  It's much ado about nothing.

Edited August 28, 2020 by Doc

[NoSaint]

12 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

My apologies then.  It's much ado about nothing.

it was just too hard to leave it be without the edit? 

[Doc]

8 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

it was just too hard to leave it be without the edit? 

 

Why?  Did I say something wrong?

[Turk71]

Are there any good free agent marketing depts still out there? Hope this isn't a major weakness this season.

[What a Tuel]

3 hours ago, NoSaint said:

it’s still strange to see all 3 leave, no?

 

i don’t get the argument that it’s just three as if that’s insignificant 

 

Its not insignificant but the headline purposely leads the imagination on to more significant numbers

 

Also it was a VP, a Coordinator, and a Manager. Who knows for sure but those dont sound like positions that have no subordinates to carry out these things. So again I question "entire" marketing department. Coordinating and Managing the marketing with a vice president to preside over it and no one else? Seems unlikely to me.

Edited August 28, 2020 by What a Tuel

[BobbyC81]

15 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Honestly do not give a single *****.

 

Why do the Bills even need a Marketing department? Are there people in Buffalo who are unaware of the team? Do they think they are expanding the fan base with a cool billboard?

 

I always got a laugh when people referred to Russ Brandon as a "marketing genius". All it takes to market the Bills in Buffalo is posting the schedule. Folks show up.

Exactly.  Do they make commercials for local stations reminding people that the Bills season is near and you better get your tickets before they’re gone?
 

 

[Mr. WEO]

9 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

You don't know that.  In the corporate world, people are allowed to resign rather than being fired all the time.

 

 

 

They likely fired the department?

 

Ok.  That would be an odd bit of the story to leave out, no?

 

9 hours ago, folz said:

 

WEO...it's not that he isn't reporting fact (at least in the article itself), people are reacting to the "sensational" headline not matching the facts of the article itself. Unfortunately, that is so called news/reporting these days (i.e. click bait). it's not just Tim...it's just the sad state of most reporting these days. Now in this case, it's not that big of a deal, but in a time where people only read headlines and then get triggered by them, I do think it is a bit disengenuous to sensationalize your headlines.

 

Tim's headline reads "Buffalo Bills' entire marketing department resigns..." When you read that headline, you think that, what, 10-30 disgruntled people walked out en masse. But, when you actually read the article, in fact, two people have resigned and maybe a third person will if his "sources" are correct. Sure, the titles of the three people seem like they were leaders in the department, but I don't know and he doesn't tell us. Tim also does not report on how many people total are in the marketing department. I mean, sure, if the department is 5 people total, then 3 people leaving is major. If the department is 20-30 people, then 3 people leaving is hardly the "entire" department. Let's say for instance that the department has 20 people (and it may be larger than that, I don't know), then 3 people leaving is 15% of the staff. That is equivalent to me writing an article about a company of 200 employees and my headline reads, "X Company's entire workforce resigns." But it turns out to be only 30 people of the 200. Thirty people leaving would be a significant story to report, but I would be misleading my readers by saying, in essence, the company has no  more employees. But Tim doesn't give us those facts to assess for ourselves.

 

Instead, he goes on to speculate how bad things must be because these employees are leaving during the pandemic. Well, what if the answer was like someone else said, that they no longer think sports is a stable place to work going into the future because of the pandemic (or a hundred other scenarios, they got hired away, they have child care issues, an ill family member, etc.). It could be for any reason. Yes, them leaving at the same time makes it seem like it could be something, an issue in the department or organization, but again there is nothing to back that up. He does not quote the former employees or anyone from inside PSE. So, how does he/we know what their reasons for leaving are? 

 

I have no idea what is happening at PSE. It may be a sh%t show and these employees really did resign because they are supremely unhappy with how the organization is run. I'm not here to defend PSE. But, there is no question that Tim's headline seems completely sensationalized (either click-bait or agenda motivated) without him providing any more information than he did in the article. 

 

 

He said the entire department...

 

People seem hooked on the number of people who make up that department.  It's irrelevant.  If the title had said "all 3 people who make up the Bills entire marketing department have stepped down", would you people be less offended/enraged/triggered?  If JW had written the same article, would you be going off on the title? 

 

In troubled times, people tend not to just walk away from their jobs unless they have another job in hand.  That also would have been part of the above story. 

[buffaloboyinATL]

7 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Its not insignificant but the headline purposely leads the imagination on to more significant numbers

 

Also it was a VP, a Coordinator, and a Manager. Who knows for sure but those dont sound like positions that have no subordinates to carry out these things. So again I question "entire" marketing department. Coordinating and Managing the marketing with a vice president to preside over it and no one else? Seems unlikely to me.

The article was misleading, maybe they should have run it by the marketing department first. Oh wait, never mind...