ascinating, fascinating, how the King's song has awakened the lion in the Dutch individual. The harmonious singing that some had undoubtedly hoped for, has not materialized. The support for the end product parted like the Red Sea before Moses. What could have gone wrong? And why does the whole situation remind us so much of recurring patterns in internal communication?
The text analysis of the Official King's Song (HOK) during Pauw and Witteman was both amusing and disturbing. As teaching material for primary education, the text can apparently fill several lessons. Lessons in how not to put things into words. Unfortunately, the music was not discussed at all. But it relates to the text more or less as asphalt relates to the white stripes. That things went wrong with the content of the King's Song may be clear, but they are not of essential importance for the reflection on all the commotion in social media.
Support basethe support for HOK, honduras mobile phone number list which the initiators undoubtedly assumed was there, turned out not to be there. The “popular verdict” (i.e. from those who are active online and have listened to/watched the song) came as a bolt from the blue. The posts and comments descended on their senders like a swarm of hornets. Let us assume that all the criticism that Ewbank had to deal with was not aimed at him personally, but at his role as figurehead of the entire initiative. It is of course a pity that many cannot (or do not want to) make the distinction between person and role. (There is still a lot of communication work to be done here.)