1. It’s MySpace, looks like they’ve ripped the figures straight from MySpaces’s WIKI.

    There’s a lot of reasons they often can’t reveal the employer, to protect the recruiter, but also to ensure competitors aren’t transparent on positions they’re hiring for or departments they’re building, eg. mobile, music, etc. In this case though, it’s fairly obvious so I agree it does seem a bit silly.

  2. I guess it’s not a good idea to reveal the employer’s name in the case of fishing for a replacement when the incumbent hasn’t been informed they are on the way out – it would be rather disconcerting to see my role up for grabs. And equally wierd if I applied for my own role not realising it was for my current company. Sort of a *pina colada* (song) moment.

    Pre-web 2.0, the recruiter probably quietly notified the company and then told the *prospective* that the position was filled. Now, it would be too easily discussed in communities. Uh oh. Transparency is hell. 😛

  3. A quick look at Alexa.com puts MySpace at #6, so I’d tend to agree with Glenn.

    Been missing your pokes – or is it my turn?

  4. Who(m). Ok *breathes in* “The rule can be stated simply: ‘Whom’ is used when it is the object of a preposition (“To Whom it may concern”) or verb (“The man whom we saw last night”) or the subject of a complementary infinitive (“The person whom we took to be your father”). ‘Who’ is used on all other occasions.”

    So i think it’s Who. I really think about these things far too much.

    Back to point: my position on the industry the job is for, rather than a blanket rule. In this case: show us they moneyyy.

Comments are closed.