@tdhurst tells you what to talk about

Yup, it’s true. Tyler Hurst tells you what to talk about. How does he do that? Well, you let him.

I am not exaggerating when I say that every active social media user in Phoenix whom I’ve met in person has talked about Tyler. Everyone talks about what Tyler says and what he does. Most of these conversations involve a mention of what a douchebag Tyler is, but still, he’s the topic of conversation. Even people who don’t like Tyler let him dictate their conversations because they feel the need to complain about him being a jerk.

People talk about Tyler because he’s outrageous, provocative and often ridiculous, but that’s his goal, people! Getting people who like him to talk about him would be good self-promotion. Getting people who don’t like him (and there’s a lot of them) talking about him too amplifies his online persona tenfold. He’s the Howard Stern of Phoenix social media.

Yes, @phxwag and @shalersmom were immature and offensive. Yes, Tyler spouts opinions faster than most people blink. Yes, Tyler is way more of a jerk when he’s on the other side of the monitor from you. But for crying out loud people, if you don’t like him, quit giving him control over the conversation.

The internet and especially social media give us absolute control over the content we hear, watch and read. No longer are we confined to receiving a very limited amount of information from a few content creators. Sure, that gives Tyler a huge platform where he can broadcast his opinions, but it also gives everyone else a huge pile of bricks with which to build a sound wall between his noise and their ears.

If you don’t like what Tyler says, unfollow or block him and stop talking about him. That’s all it takes.

Matthew Petro Recommends

Phoenix coffee shops as chicks you went to high school with (Tyler Hurst)
You cannot circle jerk your way to success (Tyler Hurst)
Buy to rent (Tyler Hurst)

View Comments to “@tdhurst tells you what to talk about”

Sowshull Meedia 30 October 2009 at 11:25 am #

Then again. Maybe we are using him.
Sowshull Meedia 30 October 2009 at 11:26 am #

Then again. Maybe we are using him.
Jennifer Maggiore 30 October 2009 at 12:36 pm #

nice post Petro!
Matthew Petro 30 October 2009 at 2:23 pm #

Yeah, sometimes it's hard to tell.
Matthew Petro 30 October 2009 at 2:23 pm #

Thanks!
tdhurst 30 October 2009 at 2:48 pm #

I'm RIGHT HERE you guys. Seriously.
Sowshull Meedia 30 October 2009 at 5:23 pm #

Oh sure.

And I agree that the best way to get him to shut up is for everyone just ignore him. When you build your world on the idea that you need to instigate people…..in the end you will always need those people more than they need you. We love watching and talking about the train wrecks. But in the end we aren't really engaged in your agenda.

As for using….

A wise person once said….

Me: Why are you #ff Tdhurst, he's a (insert insult here)
Wise Person: Because I want everyone to see what a (insert insult here) he is.

Now there is an argument that is feeding the beast…just like this post, or that comic strip. It's fine. But yes…who is using who?

I will say that while many smart people I respect and admire hate him and have told me personally, many smart people I respect and admire…defend him.

Those conversations were less about him and more about those people. I pride myself on actually listening to what they have to say.

So for example this post of yours:
It's a good and smart post. While it's about Hurst….It's more about you. And what I have learned about you in the writing of it. Of all the Hurst apologists…lol. I believe you are the smartest. I have found value in you…..but does Hurst get any benefit from being the conversation starter?
David_SB 30 October 2009 at 6:22 pm #

I have some thoughts about the concept of a “huge pile of bricks.” In a way, we can use technology to build walls to shield ourselves from personalities and opinions we don't like, but some of the same technology allows for cracks in those walls.

Right now, there's a Phoenix-bashing blogger whom I can't stand. I have unsubscribed to his RSS feed, don't follow him on Twitter, etc. Nevertheless, his posts (or at least their titles and opening paragraphs) are still displayed to me when friends post links to his blog on their Facebook walls or when they retweet him. In other words, I can block someone I don't care for, but I can't always avoid secondary redistribution of that person's words.

To create a better wall, it would be necessary to have a Twitter feature allowing a block of all retweets of a particular person. Likewise, Facebook would have to support user-customizable filtering. Personally, I'd like to screen out not only links to my least favorite blogger, but also anything about Mafia Wars or those silly quizzes.

Since those tools don't exist yet, I have to accept a certain amount of unwanted content that oozes through the cracks in the wall I have built. Maybe that's for the best. We probably all benefit from limited exposure to ideas that we don't agree with. The key is to keep it balanced with a lot more exposure to those we agree with, like, and respect.
Chuck Reynolds 30 October 2009 at 7:44 pm #

Whatever I still blame video games
ousooner44 30 October 2009 at 8:26 pm #

Nice post, Matthew.

I agree: Don't like it? MOVE. ON.
Carlos Miceli 30 October 2009 at 11:11 pm #

And so you write an entire post about him? Am I only one who doesn't see the logic on this?
Matthew Petro 1 November 2009 at 2:46 pm #

You're right that this post isn't really about Tyler. He's just the point of origin for a discussion about social media and influence.

You're also right that conversations with people about Tyler or any other opinionated person are really about you and the person you're talking to. Likewise, this post actually said a lot about me. I have a pretty high tolerance for Tyler's douchebaggery and can filter out the good stuff he says. I think he does make some good points about community, collaboration and social media.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments on this post.
Matthew Petro 1 November 2009 at 2:48 pm #

I thought we blamed video games for teen violence, not douchebaggery?
Matthew Petro 1 November 2009 at 2:48 pm #

Thanks!
Matthew Petro 1 November 2009 at 2:50 pm #

Yup, I completely agree, it's a Catch-22. But wouldn't you say that commenting on this post also is illogical? If you don't like Tyler or this post, doesn't commenting on it just add to the discussion of something you don't like?
Chuck Reynolds 1 November 2009 at 2:50 pm #

oh you're so wrong… video games are to blame for EVERYTHING in the world – you didn't know that?
Matthew Petro 1 November 2009 at 3:26 pm #

It's true that some ooze is unavoidable these days. The most ooze seems to come from those who generate the most noise by being prolific content generators within social media, by being controversial or by being both.

I agree that it's harder to ignore the ooze from social media than it is to ignore traditional media. And, I agree that we need some exposure to ideas we don't necessarily agree with, and that's the beauty of social media (see my previous blog post “What's the point of Simler?” for my thoughts on this). A healthy society feeds off of the interactions between different ideas and viewpoints.
Carlos Miceli 1 November 2009 at 3:49 pm #

But I like Tyler.
ousooner44 2 November 2009 at 9:41 am #

I also like Tyler.
ousooner44 2 November 2009 at 3:41 pm #

I also like Tyler.