Intuit possibly succumbs to the Streisand effect
Intuit possibly succumbs to the Streisand effect
Intuit CEO Sasan Goodarzi claims it’s not accurate the company lobbies against free tax filing.
The CEO of Intuit (who make financial software) did an interview, and it seems a pretty normal interview. But some senior guy at the company asked for part of the interview to be deleted, after it took place.
By putting in that unusual request (rather angrily), more attention is being drawn to the interview.
Thoughts?
As another comment said, I also dropped everything and read the article. So yeah I guess that'd mean Streisand effect is coming into play.
Regarding the topic at hand: I don't care what these companies say at this point. The fact is that in the past, I have used their services, clicked the "free" button, did some things, and then ended up having to pay them money.
Until the day comes that I get a letter in the mail from the government saying, "Here's how much you paid in taxes, if you're cool with that then please disregard", I will not be satisfied.
Until the day comes that I get a letter in the mail from the government saying, "Here's how much you paid in taxes, if you're cool with that then please disregard", I will not be satisfied.
NZ does that. More accurately, they email you to tell you that there's a letter available online - I don't think they send physical mail by default.
Then they pay any refund straight into your nominated bank account.
Maybe every six months or something so I can keep track of it yes. Also if you are a registered charity and offer tax deductions, why can't you just submit the credit directly to my tax account so I can see that on the six month statement? Trying to make me Remember it and submit receipts feels like one of those stupid rebate deals where they make the process unnecessarily cumbersome just as a barrier to entry.
Most of that interview is deadly dull and there’s no way I would have read to the end.
Very nice of Intuit to highlight the juicy parts.
Tbh the exchange is a bit testy. Even if they didn't request it to be removed, I have a feeling it would have gone viral.
But the Streisand effect is going to show the coverup and the juicy parts. It's just....amazing
[Drops everything to read the article. ]
same
No one from Intuit has any business asking an interviewer to, essentially, falsify data that can easily influence share price. If Goodarzi can't take the heat in an important interview, then her minions failed to prep her adequately. That's a "you" problem, Miss "I am Intuit", not the reporter's problem.
Absolutely, these corporate types are so clueless when it comes to public messaging.
They realized that it's obvious that they're the bad guys, and the interview response wasn't convincing. But then to try to bully the interviewer into deleting it? That just seems stupid.
There's a reason they do it. For every time we hear about it, there are 100 stories that got buried using the same strategy
And chances are, the company has got away with it before. It just didn't work this time.
Eh. Honestly, the line of "questions" was rather stupid.
"Why aren't you lobbying to make your business irrelevant" is essentially what the interviewer pushed aggressively.
Sure, I get calling out a CEO for deflecting tough questions with corporate BS. But it was a pretty dumb line of questioning in the first place.
Why isn't Google lobbying for privacy protections?
Why isn't Comcast lobbying for net neutrality?
Just make your statement and ask for comment. "Our listeners consider Intuits lobbying against tax reform that would benefit tax payers to be adversarial to their customers. What would you say to them?"
I don't know, I see Nilay's question as "why aren't you doing what's ethical?" and I always welcome that line of questioning.
I see the question as, you say you are lobbying the government to simplify the tax code but this is actually what simplifying the tax code would look like. The subtext is, y'all aren't doing what you claim.
Overall I think the guy came off pretty poorly throughout the interview.
I have more important things to do than to lobby the government to send a tax bill.
Why would the CEO be dumb enough to say this in an interview? If your business model is fucking people, your CEO has to have a cool head when asked if he’s fucking people!
There are people who have never heard of the Streisand Effect.
Step 1: go on record
Step 2: punch self in crotch
Step 3: have someone else angrily insist you didn’t and/or that should be stricken from the record because you yelped.
Everything looks by-the-book here.
Considering I would have never heard of this otherwise, yeah I think it's the Streisand Effect at work. But what a bizarre thing to want scrubbed from the Internet. Like it's not a particularly hard-hitting question and the CEO clearly had a prepared, corporate-speak answer ready. It feels like something that wouldn't have attracted any attention if they hadn't called attention to it. So, classic Streisand Effect I guess.
Decoder podcast which this is from and specifically Nilay Patel is awesome, if you're not subscribed check it out
https://pca.st/podcast/01a33f10-fcfe-0132-18b7-059c869cc4eb
There's a good episode a few months back where the CEO of Logitech tries to justify the mouse subscription.
He's also one of the hosts of the Vergecast https://pca.st/podcast/5cda9490-4117-012e-1622-00163e1b201c