On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 13:27, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On 5/15/14, J.M. Porup <j...@porup.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 11:53, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> >> Nicolas Vigier:
> >> > It's a little sad that so many people like to use the word "DarkWeb"
> >> > to talk about .onion websites, because it sounds like something scary
> >> > or bad.
> >>
> >> Agreed. The word "dark" is already a negatively perceived word. And
> >> DarkWeb also has become a negatively perceived term.
> >>
> >> Let's find a positive term to talk about .onion websites! Any ideas?
> >
> > I think the likelihood of repositioning the "Dark Web" brand in
> > people's minds is approximately zero.
> >
> > I would recommend finding a way to turn the negative into a positive.
> > Embrace the negative with a joke, for instance:
> >
> > Use the Dark Web. "Go Over to the Dark Side."
>
> I like the idea of using humour.
>
> And I completely disagree that "common vernacular can't be changed".
> On the other hand, a "new brand" would be much easier to reposition
> than the existing brand ("dark web").
>
> The problem I believe is two-fold:
> 1) we need a new term - this the easy part
> 2) we need a good and significant reason for people to use it
>
> When the two happen together, we get the change.
A bit like trying to convince people to use "cracker" instead of "hacker."
A lost cause, unfortunately.
Positioning is about tip-of-the-mind word association. Once positioned,
a negative connotation can be nearly impossible to dislodge. (By "brand"
I mean any word in general use whose meaning you want to manipulate.)
You can try to fork a term, so to speak. But whatever you do, you
have to hack what's actually in people's minds, not what you wish
were in people's minds. That generally mean refactoring the term
is preferable to a fork.
j
--
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
