LinkedIn recently annoyed the president and membership of the American Translation Association by asking them if they’d be interested in translating LinkedIn’s content. Mark Gibbs thinks they are making a montagna da una collina della talpa (that’s Italian for a “mountain out of a mole hill”).
Every now and then a press release comes across my virtual desktop that catches my attention. Sometimes this is because the pitch is unusually good (not too often) or the subject is relevant to my interests, but it can also be because the press release is just plain silly or self-serving or specious, or all of the above.
A recent press release from the American Translation Association (ATA) concerning a survey that LinkedIn sent to ATA members struck me as being in the “all of the above” category.
The release began: “The president [Jiri Stejskal] of the American Translators Association (ATA), the largest organization for professional translators and interpreters in the U.S., today blasted the CEO of LinkedIn in a letter, calling its plea for free translation services from the site’s own members, ‘misguided, troubling and clearly incompatible with the operation of a for-profit enterprise.'”
Now, what this audra (that’s Lithuanian for “storm”) in a tebolli (Icelandic for “teacup”) is all about is that LinkedIn’s survey included a multiple-choice question: “What type of incentive would you expect for translating LinkedIn’s site?”
The choices ranged from “I would want to do this because it’s fun” through “Highlight your … work [as] the #1 translator … in [language name]”, to “Upgraded LinkedIn accounts.” There was also a final option, “other”, where the respondent could enter whatever they wanted (such as “money”).
It all seemed innocent (“ártalmatlan” in Hungarian) enough. What LinkedIn was doing has been described as “crowdsourcing,” which, to quote Wikipedia, is ” a neologism for the act of taking a task traditionally performed by an employee or contractor, and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of people or community in the form of an open call.” But Stejskal was having none of it.
In his letter Stejskal exclaimed (“vzklikniti” in Slovenian): “It’s astonishing that [LinkedIn], whose very existence is predicated on fostering professionalism, would compromise its own professionalism by approaching its members, hat in hand, seeking donations for a for-profit entity.”
Now let’s consider the issues (“izdati” in Serbian) that make this position rather odd. Firstly, LinkedIn was only asking whether the translators would be interested in the project, not demanding that they participate.
There was no coercion, no threats of retribution (“punizione” in Italian), just a “hey, would you be interested and would any of these compensations work for you and if not, what would?” Secondly, I’d hazard a guess that the majority of translators using LinkedIn are doing so using free accounts.
But, it transpires, Stejskal was not alone in his anger (“gniew” in Polish). It seems that translators are a relatively easily insulted bunch and following the LinkedIn survey Twitter was soon a-tweet with angry tweets and a LinkedIn group named “Translators against Crowdsourcing by Commercial Businesses” was formed. There was even an article in The New York Times about the fracas (that’s French).
It appears that the translators’ outrage couldn’t have been greater even if you were to suggest that they are a rather easily insulted bunch whose mothers (“moeders” in Dutch) wear army boots.
What I don’t get is exactly what they are outraged about. How can they blame LinkedIn for asking? It’s not like other organizations haven’t tried the same thing.
As was pointed out on the Global Watchtower blog: “Our research shows that the companies that engage in CT3 [community, crowdsourced and collaborative translation] do actually care about translators and view them as professionals … CT3 is usually reserved for the short phrases that are highly unique to a given community – and are usually an important part of its online flavor and culture.” If the attitude of the ATA and its members was the norm on the Internet there’d be no such thing as free, open source software.
So, to the ATA, its president, and all of its incensed members who are feeling slighted by LinkedIn’s attempt at crowdsourcing: Get over it. Ignore it. You’re just making a şiddetli fırtına (“tempest” in Turkish) in a die Teekanne (“teapot” in German).
