‘Like’, ‘Dislike’, and ‘Likeable’

Rumors on Facebook updates are not new, but the one that never ceases to die is the ‘arrival’ of the ‘Dislike’ button. But here is a good news for Facebook aficionados out there – The largest social media platform has finally come up with the much awaited ‘Dislike’ button. But it’s not where everyone expected it would be. While Facebook confirmed regarding the testing of thumbs-down buttons, it doesn’t mean we would soon get the oft-requested ‘Dislike’ button on our News Feeds. The ‘Dislike’ button is currently available only on Messenger Apps, and not on News Feeds. It’s a thumbs-down emoji, the equivalent of a ‘Dislike’ button.


The elusive new feature has been rolled out to a small number of users who can use the emoji to respond to individual messages. For fear of being misused, the social media giant had constantly ignored the call for ‘Dislike’ buttons. The much-popular ‘Like’ button was launched in 2009, and since then users across the world have been requesting for its counterpart: the ‘Dislike’ button. It’s true that some posts, images, and statuses warrant ‘Dislikes’ replies. But dislike is never a positive, and might even get misused to clog a person’s or brands page with an avalanche of dislikes, turning them into cesspools. The ‘Like’ button doesn’t really mean we like a post of a status. It’s a kind of acknowledgement. But when it comes to sad and disgusting posts, confusion mounts up. Those are the times we wish for a ‘Dislike’ button to express our displeasure and disagreement, or to downvote them. But looks like Facebook team won’t easily give into our demands.

The presence of thumbs down button will foster immense amount of negativity. It will be misinterpreted as an indictment of the brand or user who posts a message or shares an article. It can even down several paid ads. Negativities will drive users and brands away. Simply put, it can turn Facebook will turn into a platform where people and brands fear to step into.

That said, what Facebook needs immediately is not a ‘Dislike’ option or a slew of reaction buttons. It needs a team of expert moderators with expertise in high-end technologies that help remove posts, images, comments, and so on that are brimming with unreasonable hatred, pedophilia, pornography, racism, and violence. Facebook or Twitter, content moderation is far from perfect now. Problems of hate speeches, trolling, vitriolic posts, bullying, threats, and other harassments are perennial. With growing number of users and staggering number of content (both text and images), the entire moderation efforts of humans or usage of conventional technology tools are not even equivalent to a drop in the ocean. The need of the hour is cutting-edge and scalable software tools with high-end technologies like artificial intelligence that identify and quarantine obscene and sensitive content as quickly as possible.

P.S. – Not a week has gone past since the private pictures of some well-known celebrities were leaked online. Not a month has gone by since a woman posted a malicious comment about a terminally ill five-year-old. When will social media platforms take effective steps to flush out offensive content and clean up their pages? ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ buttons are not as indispensable as clean and kid-friendly content.

Speak like a leader

Warren Buffett is one among the the most successful and widely respected investors of all time. His business acumen is well-known and is highly inspiring. Mr Buffett is also famous for sharing humorous insights and wise advices without complex jargons. The CEO of Berkshire Hathaway is a master at using folksy tales and memorable quotes about investing and entrepreneurship are both interesting and refreshing. But a recent comment has got him into some hot water.

In interview on CNBC, Warren Mr Buffett made a strange analogy on Kraft Heinz’ takeover bid for Unilever. He used a weird metaphor to explain the failed deal and how things unfolded. Unilever formally rejected Kraft Heinz’s $143 billion takeover bid earlier this month. If inked, it would have been one of the largest deals in the corporate world. Kraft Heinz didn’t return with a high offer, but decided to withdraw the proposal.

According to the transcript from CNBC, here is what the Oracle of Omaha said:

“Well, if a diplomat says yes, he means maybe. If he says maybe, he means no. And if he says no, he's no diplomat. And if a lady says no, she means maybe. And if she says maybe, she means yes. And if she says yes, she's no lady. So he probably got a maybe and didn't know whether it was coming from a diplomat or a lady, essentially. I mean, that's what frequently people get.”


The bon-mot is clearly chauvinistic and inappropriate. The objectionable statement and comparison has sparked outrage across the world. “Warren Buffett’s analogy for Kraft’s failed Unilever takeover is cringe-worthy”, tweeted Fortune.com.


As per a recent article on www.independent.co.uk, Warren Buffett has made many wildly sexual troupes in the past as well. In a 2007 letter to investors he compared unsuccessful business deals to women’s physical appearance - “A line from Bobby Bare’s country song explains what too often happens with acquisitions: 'I’ve never gone to bed with an ugly woman, but I’ve sure woke up with a few.'”

The likeness that Mr Buffett used in a 2002 letter is no different. Here is how the “Wizard of Omaha" explained a “director's responsibility to oust likable but under-performing managers” – “Directors must react as did the chorus-girl bride of an 85-year-old multimillionaire when he asked whether she would love him if he lost his money. “Of course,” the young beauty replied, “I would miss you, but I would still love you.”

What he wrote on a “CEOs who manipulate earnings by taking restructuring charges” too had a crude, crasser comment - “Their behavior brings to mind Voltaire’s comment on sexual experimentation: “Once a philosopher, twice a pervert.

Looks like he has a long history of using sexual metaphors to explain business concepts and investments strategies. But the objectionable statement comes at a time when the number sexual harassment cases are on the rise.

Revered people of his stature should watch their words while making public statements. The should avoid actions and utterances that are demeaning, disturbing, and controversial. But regrettably, many people in top leadership positions are yet to take ‘control’ of their tongues. Such wordplays and double-entendres are definitely annoying and derogatory. Some slips happen unknowingly, and can be forgotten and forgiven after a genuine apology. But repetitive usage of sexual innuendos is not mere faux pas.

Investment advices from the Berkshire Hathaway CEO are timeless. What’s wrong is the way he sprinkles some X-rated humor into them. It’s no secret that many get attracted to sordid metaphors that persuade them to listen even to the driest topics. But off-color humor on women cannot be taken lightheartedly. Well-regarded leaders like Mr Buffett should stop using such coarse witticisms that degrade women.

It’s always fascinating to listen to extraordinarily successful business leaders. to. But they should not cross the razor-thin line between humor and vulgarity and talk about women in deplorable manner in the guise of light banters or jokes. It’s unacceptable.