Do Celebrities Control What Their Fans Do And Think On Fan Boards
Recently there was a huge blow up on a Hall and Oates fan page on Facebook.
It started when I wrote an article wondering why Daryl Hall made his 18 year old stepdaughter, March Fry, the back up singer on his new album, “Laughing Down Crying.” The 500 word article was really nothing, just a news item. Okay, maybe the word “nepotism” was tossed around once or twice but Hall was not accused of this.
Apparently I hit a nerve somewhere and the H & O Facebook page blew up. There were literally hundreds of comments on that thread. The administrators should have thanked me because I don’t think that page has ever seen so many visits within a month let alone in just a couple of hours.
Fans were arguing back and forth, things were a bit heated, but no one was being called a name until Daryl Hall’s son surprised everyone and started posting about his father. He used a few choice words to describe him. He was angry. The son also posted a comment on the original article site.
Within an hour every post, including the article, was deleted from the page. The next day I wrote an article about censorship which heated things up quite a bit too but that’s another story.
When the thread was deleted fans of the page were outraged and asked the administrators why they deleted the hundreds of post. They mumbled something about, "... [We've] been talking and have come to the decision that in the interest of the fans and the integrity of the HOF name that things of personal nature, such as were being discussed here today, are not what the board and affiliated sites were meant for. It is by mutual agreement that we are removing that article and any references to it thereof. . ."
This explanation didn’t make people all that happy but I started wondering just what the administrators meant by “affiliated sites.” Does Daryl Hall pay these women to run this Facebook page? Do they have to listen and do what Daryl Hall and his people want them to do? What would have happened if the administrators actually thought for themselves and let the thread remain up?
Yes, Hall’s son did post some harsh comments about his father but it was obvious that the 27 year old man was angry. If Hall’s people told the administrators to delete the comments I wonder why they’re allowing a comment made by the son to remain on the original article page? They didn’t ask me to delete that one. I guess we could come up with an idea or two.
Then strange things started to happen. I was kicked off the Facebook page, nothing to cry about over that. The threads, the few that are there, aren’t saying much. Mostly they post H & O videos that are found on YouTube.
Then a few friends of mine received messages from a woman who said she worked for Daryl Hall and she asked them if they had a copy of the posts that Hall’s son posted. I guess the administrators acted to fast and deleted everything before copying a few important posts.
My friends refused to send this woman the posts A few of us have them but we’re not sharing.
Then I started to get hate messages from some of the women on the board. Yes, I’ve saved them too. I was told that it was shameful for what I did and that they were disappointed. When I asked them just what was shameful they just repeated themselves.
Then they started posting some vile things on the original article page. But for whatever reason they deleted their remarks. Were they ashamed? I doubt it. But if that article page is looked at you will see some of my responses to them. Yep, they deleted their posts but just because they were deleted does not mean they don’t exist because someone copied the posts beforehand. I’m a pro at “ctrl c” and “ctrl v.”
Then other friends started to get messages from the same woman telling them that I’m a loose cannon, they shouldn’t associate with me any more, that I caused Hall’s son to post those things about his father and that I copied his posts for suspicious reasons, and that I had a hidden agenda. I’m still looking for that agenda. I wish they’d tell me what the agenda is.
When I openly asked this woman to just send me an email, a message, or anything at all she just ignored my request. I guess she’s happier that some of the woman post nasty remarks about me. Looks like you can’t say anything but positive things about Hall but it’s fine to send out the minions to post vile things about a writer who, to this day, has no idea what was so horrible about the articles to begin with.
For the record, I am a Daryl Hall fan. I bought his new album and like it. I’ve been listening to him and John Oates since 1980, and I’ve written a lot about Hall and rarely, if ever, said an unkind word about him. But as soon as I questioned his step daughter’s singing ability the attack was on.
Now for the reason that I’m writing this and rehashing everything. Well, I’m doing it because I want to. I’m annoyed that what I thought was a group of semi intelligent women are now wearing blindfolds over their eyes and attacking people, not just me, because our opinions are different from theirs.
Which leads me back to my original question: who controls fan sites, the celebrity or the fan? You tell me.