The online news site Windows Phone Thoughts just posted a piece on the Mobius 2009 invite-only event, where Microsoft shows developers and others what it’s doing in the mobile space. It’s a critical annual platform for the company to lay out its plans, and as such a good gauge of where things are headed. Thing is, check out the photo below from the article (pay close attention to the computers). (via DF)



-posted by Paul

The BBC invites 13 year old Scott Campbell to swap his iPod for a Walkman for a week.

It took me three days to figure out that there was another side to the tape. That was not the only naive mistake that I made; I mistook the metal/normal switch on the Walkman for a genre-specific equaliser, but later I discovered that it was in fact used to switch between two different types of cassette.

(via Daring Fireball)

-posted by Paul

It’s no secret that we run Macs around here, and one of the popular (and controversial) retail programs is something called MacHeist – basically a collection of multiple software titles sold for one rock bottom price. I’ve avoided participating in this (as a customer) in past years due in no small part to that controversy, which circled around the question of whether the group that puts on MacHeist screws the participating vendors.

I’m an ardent proponent of independent software vendors, and I like to support the creation of good software, which I define as both useful and elegant. As such, I thought it best to steer clear of MacHeist on general principles.

On the other hand, it’s unarguably one hell of a deal. And with this latest go-round, it appears that they’ve largely addressed the equitability in regard to the participating vendors, at least according to a number of those vendors themselves. Moreover, MacHeist donates a percentage of proceeds to charity, which is of course a plus.

So, I jumped in with both feet. Now the interesting thing about how MacHeist works is that there is an initial group of applications, and if they sell enough bundles, then additional apps are “unlocked” for everyone that has purchased. Which obviously generates not only the mob mentality that fuels any auction, but also adds to the word-of-mouth marketing of the whole bundle.

And here’s where things get interesting, and either brilliant or diabolical, depending on your point of view. After making the initial purchase, I receive periodic status updates on how they are progressing toward unlocking additional applications. Then I receive a “special Twitter offer” for two bonus applications that have been thrown into the mix, “all you have to do is click this link.” Said link takes you to a MacHeist page where you have to verify that you have a Twitter account (so now they have my user name and account) and then takes you to MacHeist’s Twitter page, where you must follow them. Of course you can always un-follow at a later date, but my guess is that many customers won’t do that.

Thus far, MacHeist has gathered additional customer data for later marketing purposes, and gotten customers to follow the Twitter version of the company’s promotional newsletter. Not bad. But it gets better (or worse).

After you follow MacHeist on Twitter, but before you receive the additional software, you have to post a promotional tweet to your account:

I bought the @MacHeist 3 Bundle. 12 Top Mac apps worth $900+ for just $39 AND I just got Delicious Library 2 FREE!

Once you’ve gone this far in the process, it’s extremely likely that you’ll follow through regardless of whether you find this distasteful or not. I did. And I have to admit to being torn: is this a brilliant social marketing program, or an abuse of social media?

-posted by Paul

In honor of the final edition of the Seattle Post Intelligencer...


Watch Journalism (1940) in How to Videos  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

-posted by Paul

While the Seattle PI might is on the chopping block thanks to the Hearst Corporation, it is apparently only the first of a series. The New York Times reports today that the SF Chronicle is next, with more or less the same rationale -- lack of profitability -- that Hearst gave for the PI.

Hearst said in its statement that The Chronicle, which it bought in 2000, lost $50 million last year and has lost money every year since 2001. Among the changes the company said it wants to see is “a significant reduction” in its union and nonunion employees.

So the paper’s basically never made any money since being bought, and now Hearst must suddenly either get out of its union contracts or shut it down. Interesting.

-posted by Paul

This hits uncomfortably close to home on a number of levels. (via Daring Fireball)

-posted by Paul

Uber blogger Jason Kottke, commenting on a post by Dan Lyons (of Fake Steve Jobs fame), makes an interesting analogy about the ability to monetize blogging:

As businesses go, blogging is a lot like shining shoes. There are going to be very few folks who own chains of shoe shining places which make a lot of money and a bunch of other people who can (maybe) make a living at it if they bust their ass 24/7/365. But for many, shining shoes is something that will be done at home for themselves because it feels good to walk around with a shiny pair of shoes. Everyone else will switch to sandals (i.e. Twitter) or sneakers (i.e. Facebook) and not worry about shining at all.

-posted by Paul

Merlin Mann over at 43folders had a very interesting post on what makes a good blog.

Good blogs are the product of “Attention times Interest.” A blog shows me where someone’s attention tends to go. Then, on some level, they encourage me to follow the evolution of their interest through a day or a year. There’s a story here. Ethical “via” links make it easy for me to follow their specific trail of attention, then join them for a walk made out of words.

There's a lot of interesting information in the full article, all of which is useful in understanding not "how do I get my blog noticed" (which is what most of these types of articles focus on) but more "how do I have a blog that doesn't suck."

Good reading.

-posted by Paul

I just got around to reading a rather long, but fascinating article in the NY Times on the idea of resurrecting old "dead" brands, such as Nuprin, Brim Coffee, Underalls, Salon Selectives, etc.

This is essentially the situation that River West brokered with the Nuprin brand, which was a dead line of ibuprofen painkillers (once upon a time backed by the widely known “Nupe it” ad campaign). Its trademarks were acquired by River West and sold to CVS, where it is back on the shelves as a stealth store brand. (And presumably enjoying better margins than it would if, like a traditional store brand, it competed solely on low price, not trustworthy-brand familiarity.) My read was that this is what Stone thought should happen to Brim — and that Earle had mixed feelings, believing, perhaps, that Brim could come back as something bigger. Even Stone seemed at least somewhat intrigued with the possibilities of licensing a brand that was familiar but dead. “With Stanley we have to be careful — this is a famous brand; we have to do everything right and mitigate all the risks,” he says. “But with Brim, the risks. . . .” He paused. “There really are no risks.” This brings us to Earle’s ideas about the potential upside of faulty consumer memory. Maybe, for instance, you’re among those who remember Brim. But do you also remember that it was a decaf-only brand? That’s actually why you could “fill it to the rim.” River West’s research found that many who recall the Brim brand have forgotten the decaf detail.

We often play off of the idea of turning old developments into news on the theory that "if you haven't heard it, it's news to you" – but this takes it much further. Interesting stuff if you're into understanding brand recognition.

-posted by Paul

Following up on the Debating Twitter post from earlier this week, this morning found me doing some research and design work for our clients that are targeting the MySpace/ Facebook crowd. Now, a little back story is in order: I have a rather unique last name. It is Eastern European in origin. Specifically Polish, according to most records. Most all of my relatives, those that aren't back in the old country, are based somewhere in and around Milwaukee, Wisconsin, with some having migrated to Michigan, and a little splinter group that went first to DC, where I was born, then to California. That's pretty much it. Suffice it to say that if someone has the last name of Forecki, we're related by blood or marriage.

Also, I'm old. Okay, not really, but -- as the late George Carlin would say -- older. I've been around a while. I predate the Web and email. Back in high school I was using Apple computers that weren't a Macintosh, because those hadn't been invented yet. And I've been in technology and around computers ever since. I know things. Like Google.

Specifically, I know about Google Juice, which is basically the idea of owning your name on Google rankings. Thanks to the fact that I'm in technology PR and that my name (and email address, damn you spammers!) is plastered all over the Internets, I've generally owned most of the Google searches for Forecki. (Except for a certain author who has been my nemesis on Google searches for years and who shall now remain nameless lest I help her rankings.)

All of which to say that I basically pwned Forecki-wannabes on Google. And Facebook. And LinkedIn. In fact, to the point that I stopped really searching a year or two ago, because it seemed pointless (and a little vain, but that's beside the point). Unfortunately, while I wasn't looking my relatives clearly launched a sneak attack. In the form of a new generation of teenagers and twenty-somethings. Their offspring, with the same last name. These kids know things too. And they are suddenly crushing me on Google. There are almost a dozen on Facebook. One has even registered forecki.com for crying out loud.

Sigh. I need to get busy.

-posted by Paul

We've been exploring ways to use Twitter for PR purposes on behalf of our clients, so I was quite interested to see that the McCain and Obama presidential campaigns on having an "online debate" on Twitter. It's an interesting development, if for no other reason than the fact that a 140 character response will hopefully keep the answers on-point. Hopefully.

Stay tuned for our thoughts on Twitter and PR in a future post.

-posted by Paul

The NY Times has an interesting article up about journalistic ethics on the campaign trail. You may recall a recent flap over Bill Clinton's critique of a Vanity Fair article as "sleazy" and "slimy" during an interview. Or Obama's comments about how frustrated Pennsylvanians "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion."

Turns out that both of these were the result of amateur reporting by a single individual.

The woman, Mayhill Fowler, who calls herself a citizen journalist, wore no credential around her neck and did not identify herself, her intentions or her affiliation as an unpaid contributor to Off the Bus, a section of The Huffington Post. While her digital audio recorder was visible in her left hand during that encounter last Monday, she says, she did not believe Mr. Clinton saw it. “I think we can safely say he thought I was a member of the audience,” she said in a telephone interview on Friday.

This has created quite a stir in journalistic circles, with many opposed to the practice, including Newsweek columnist and reporter Jonathan Alter. Others, not so much...

But to Jane Hamsher, a onetime Hollywood producer who founded Firedoglake, a politics-oriented Web site that tilts left, Mr Alter’s rules of the road are in need of repaving. For starters, she said, the onus was on Mr. Clinton to establish who Ms. Fowler was before deciding to speak as he did. That he failed to quiz her at all, Ms. Hamsher said, was Mr. Clinton’s problem, not Ms. Fowler’s. As a result, Ms. Hamsher said, the public got to experience the unplugged musings of a former president (and candidate’s spouse) in a way that might never have been captured on tape by an old boy on the bus like Mr. Alter. “It’s hurting America that journalists consider their first loyalty to be to their subjects, and not to the people they’re reporting for,” she said. Told, for example, that the Times ethics policy states that “staff members should disclose their identity to people they cover (whether face to face or otherwise),” Ms. Hamsher was dismissive.

To be blunt, I call Bullshit! on this one. As someone who has worked alongside the media for more years than I care to remember, I can say that there are clear ground rules. For example, we counsel our clients to be aware that everything they say in an interview may be "on the record" even if they ask that it not be. But it must, MUST, always be made clear that this is in fact an interview, because on the other side of this slippery slope is Paparazzi journalism. And that's not the type of media environment I want to live in.

The press has enough credibility problems as it is, they don't need amateurs that don't know how to play by the rules. If you want to write and publish for yourself, go right ahead (it's called blogging). But if you're going to tape record someone for an interview that you are using in the article, you make it clear at the start. Period.

-posted by Paul

VOXUS has long been an all-Mac shop, so I suppose it's natural that we have a number of iPhones running around the office. As the owner of one, I've always found it interesting that the ringtone used in the Apple ads is not commercially available (didn't know THAT, did you?). Well, until now, that is. LifeClever has tracked down the fact that the tone actually is available, it's just buried in the sound effects folder with iLife '08. They've even created a downloadable version for you here. And if you like that, you might also like this similar tone from Helder Luis that gets progressively louder.

[via DaringFireball]

-posted by Paul

Most people have had some iteration of the dream where they show up naked for a final college exam they haven't studied for. The PR version of that dream is jumping on a conference call where you badmouth an editor, only to find out that the editor has been silently listening. If you're interested in knowing how that feels, you can ask the folks over at UK carrier O2, which did exactly that for a call with The Register.

I don't even want to think about this.

-posted by Paul

BBC News: Daily Caffeine Protects Brain

(via DaringFireball)

-posted by Paul

For those that participate in the blogosphere – and by participate, I don't mean just "read" – there is a definite symmetry to the comments section. Comments typically start with a somewhat reasoned argument, and eventually devolve into comparing the author to Hitler by page 11. Paul Graham has written an interesting essay on disagreement on the web that makes compelling reading:

If we're all going to be disagreeing more, we should be careful to do it well. What does it mean to disagree well? Most readers can tell the difference between mere name-calling and a carefully reasoned refutation, but I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages. So here's an attempt at a disagreement hierarchy.

(via DaringFireball)

-posted by Paul

Blogs are obviously gaining in stature and influence compared to traditional media. This recent article by The Guardian offers up their list of the 50 "most powerful" (seemingly a euphemism for "most influential") blogs today. We regularly read a number of these, which makes us powerful by extension, right? Shockingly, this blog isn't on the list. Clearly an oversight. Maybe we're on the "most easily distracted" list.

-posted by Paul

John Gruber over at Daring Fireball rips into Wired for the (at least in his opinion) decreasing quality of the articles Wired magazine. His current target: the cover story by Leander Kahney on Steve Jobs.

For instance, Kahney writes:

Everybody is familiar with Google’s famous catchphrase, “Don’t be evil.” It has become a shorthand mission statement for Silicon Valley, encompassing a variety of ideals that — proponents say — are good for business and good for the world: Embrace open platforms. Trust decisions to the wisdom of crowds. Treat your employees like gods.

To which Gruber responds:

What do any of these things have to do with “evil”? Who, prior to Leander Kahney here in this piece, has decided that this is what Google means by not being evil? These three things may well be apt descriptions of Google’s corporate strategies (although it’s debatable), but they’re unrelated to Google’s “Don’t be evil” mantra. Mediocre employee cafeterias are evil?

I have to admit that I don't find this piece to be one of the better articles to come out of Wired... it is clear to me that Kahney started with a highly questionable theme (that Apple is judged "irredeemably evil" in light of the tech industry's thorough embrace of Google's mantra), and refused to let it go no matter how torturous the metaphor became later in the article. As a writer, I have run into this issue myself – sometimes your initial enthusiasm blinds you to thematic and structural issues down the road. Yet one would hope that Kahney's editors could work with him to improve the piece before publication. That appears not to have happened in this instance.

-posted by Paul

11/15/2104

At 14:52:28, FreedomFighter69 wrote:
Reporting my first temporal excursion since joining IATT: have just returned from 1936 Berlin, having taken the place of one of Leni Riefenstahl's cameramen and assassinated Adolf Hitler during the opening of the Olympic Games. Let a free world rejoice!

At 14:57:44, SilverFox316 wrote:
Back from 1936 Berlin; incapacitated FreedomFighter69 before he could pull his little stunt. Freedomfighter69, as you are a new member, please read IATT Bulletin 1147 regarding the killing of Hitler before your next excursion. Failure to do so may result in your expulsion per Bylaw 223.

At 18:06:59, BigChill wrote:
Take it easy on the kid, SilverFox316; everybody kills Hitler on their first trip. I did. It always gets fixed within a few minutes, what's the harm?

(via Kottke)

-posted by Paul

This gets very, very awkward.

Yes it does.

-posted by Paul

Rachel just posted about an interesting "workplace experiment" over at 37signals. I'm a huge fan of the company, regularly use their Backpack hosted application and routinely read the company's popular "Signal vs Noise" blog. In fact, I was reading this particular entry at home when Rachel called and asked what I was doing. I replied "learning about how to make VOXUS better..." or words to that effect, and I am always looking for good ideas. As such, I have some thoughts on the 37Signals experiment, which breaks down into three areas:

Shorter Work Weeks: the company has instituted a 4-day work week...

We found that just about the same amount of work gets done in four days vs. five days. So if that’s the case we could either push everyone to work harder during those five days or we could just skip one of those days. We decided to skip one of those days. So recently we’ve instituted a four-day work week as standard. We take Fridays off. We’re around for emergencies, and we still do customer service/support on Fridays, but other than that work is not required on Fridays.

The last sentence is the kicker. This abbreviated work week is not a new concept, and I agree with it in general as it applies to companies that produce products. Hell, I had friends that worked at aerospace companies that were doing this in the 80s and 90s, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear that it goes back further than that. But notice that 37Signals doesn't give its customer service/support business an extra day off. Why? Because a service business has to run on its customer's schedule. From our standpoint, even having our primary account folks work a part-time schedule is problematic, because in a service business clients expect to be able to reach you whenever they need you, and expect you to deliver work on their schedule, not yours. Certainly there is a great deal of latitude in approaching this issue, and a strong set of mobile and collaborative tools can work wonders. But it remains a fundamental difference between companies that manufacture goods and companies that provide a service.

Funding People's Passions: another 37Signals innovation...

We decided that 37signals would help people pay for their passions, interests, or other curiosities. We want our people to experience new things, discover new hobbies, and generally be interesting people. Part of the deal is that if 37signals helps you pay, you have to share what you’ve learned with everyone. Not just everyone at 37signals, but everyone who reads our blog. So expect to see some blog posts about these experiences.

This is... insightful. I am quite intrigued by the approach, which is a riff on the traditional "lunch and learn" that has been kicking around at companies for years. I'm not sure what we're going to do with the idea yet, but it's definitely a keeper.

Discretionary Spending Accounts: and finally...

We’re in the process of giving everyone at 37signals a credit card. If you want a book or some software or you want to go to a conference, it’s on us. We just ask people to be reasonable with their spending. If there’s a problem, we’ll let the person know. We’d rather trust people to make reasonable spending decisions than assume people will abuse the privilege by default.

Again, not a new idea, and we already more or less do this at VOXUS. The part I like best about their approach is embodied in the last two sentences. I have personal experience with companies that basically managed down to the lowest common denominator; if someone did something wrong, an entirely new policy or process was instituted company-wide to address the issue with one person. Which is just dumb, and frankly an example of bad management. Trust, verify and correct is much better.

I still don't see this working into a trip to Greece for Rachel, however.

-posted by Paul

Although we're not sure what to call it (anniversary? birthday?), VOXUS was officially TWO YEARS OLD on Saturday, March 1. To celebrate we gave everybody the day off. Woo Hoo! And for the record... over the past two years our staff and revenues have both tripled. Not a bad present at all. Special thanks go out to all of our fantastic clients... we couldn't have done it without you. Here's to Year Three!

-posted by Paul

UPDATE: pictures from the party on Monday...

You may have noticed a little new paint and spackle around here. We haven't "officially launched" the new site, so stay tuned for more commentary and keep your eye out for a promotional mailer or two. Still, it's up. Whew.

We hope you like it.

-posted by Paul

You may have noted a certain, um, sparseness to the blog postings of late. There's actually a reason for this. (Not a good one, mind you, but still...).

You see, we are putting up a new web site, and the idea was to hold blog posts to roll over into the new site. But like all tech projects, this one has experienced certain unanticipated delays. So we have neither a new site nor any recent blog entries to show for all the hard work of the last several weeks. While the site redesign is still being wrestled to the ground and beaten about the head and neck, we will post these updates to ensure that we don't close out December with NOTHING to show. Enjoy.

And stay tuned for updates on the new site.

-posted by Paul

Following up on my earlier post about David Pogue's Imponderables blog entry at the NY Times, I'd like to highlight one company's effective use of the comments section of Pogue's blog. Pogue posed the following question as an Imponderable:

Wi-Fi on airplanes. What’s taking so long?

A spokesperson for AirCell, a company that it trying to address that very issue, posted the answer (at least as they see it) in the blog comments. The comment was well written, not overly hype-driven, addressed the question directly and was signed by a company representative – as opposed to the ubiquitous "anonymous" signature line. Pogue in turn took the comment and elevated it to the subject for his next post.

This is exactly the way these things should be done. Well played, AirCell.

-posted by Paul

David Pogue poses an interesting question in a blog post on "Imponderables" ...

Do P.R. people really expect anyone to believe that the standard, stilted, second-paragraph C.E.O. quote was really uttered by a human being?

No. But a well-written quote isn't "stilted" – it should actually have a distinct voice that you can hear in your head when you read it. And it should provide an opportunity to present information that won't otherwise easily fit in the release text. If it is simply a rehash of what does already appear elsewhere in the release, the PR person needs to either rewrite the quote or kill it.

Unfortunately the quote (and the rest of the release, for that matter) sometimes gets dumbed-down as part of the editing process. Which is of course the bane of writers everywhere.

-posted by Paul

Some of the VOXUS crew had a chance to participate last night in a midnight promo for Amazon, Microsoft and the huge launch of Halo 3. The setup: our friend and former co-worker Kevin Pedraja of Sterling Communications was selected for hand delivery of the new third edition of the hit Halo game for Xbox 360 as part of an Amazon launch campaign. The kicker: Halo's own Master Chief made the delivery. The Associated Press covered the event (pics not posted yet). Check the video below for more. Music by Edgen.

Halo Unbox

-posted by Paul

While I am still waiting for someone to invent the flying car that I was promised in the '60s, it looks like rayguns are coming every closer to delivery.

Off-the-shelf combinable fibre laser amplifiers are currently limited to 200 watts each, according to DARPA: and it wants to push this up to 1kW to start with, then to 3KW in the next phase. That would mean a Raytheon/Sandia style bundle would scale up to 100kW or even 300kW, well into the proper-deathray range. The DARPA chaps, though - perhaps upset by people calling them mad scientists - try to avoid talking about blaster guns too much.

I can't wait, although if we're having trouble as a society figuring out how to regulate a .22 cal pistol, I'd hate to see what happens if we ever get blasters that can vaporize a building.

-posted by Paul

Interesting article in the NY TIMES on the new wikiscanner service, which identifies the source of edits to various Wikipedia entries. This of course means that anyone can track changes made by non-objective parties – for example changes made by an ExxonMobile employee regarding the Valdez spill. It brings to light interesting questions regarding the ethics and objectivity involved in writing and editing Wikipedia entries. We often get involved in the creation of wikis on various client products, etc., but if our employees or clients ever edit a particular entry written by somebody else, I would hope that they identify themselves and work through the sites "talk" mechanism. Still, interesting reading...

-posted by Paul

Clients often ask us about company or product awards... what's the advantage, how do you get them, are they worth it, which ones should we go for, etc. A major award from a reputable source can be worth gold in terms of the validation it provides, and we spend a significant amount of time managing award programs for clients. Much of that time is spent sifting through the various opportunities to identify the awards that are worth it – in other words, those that are reputable, on target and offer a reasonable chance for success.

Then again, there is certainly a lot of crap out there. So what are some awards worth? Not so much, given that you can win for a product that literally does nothing.

-posted by Paul

As we mentioned before, VOXUS is up for a Mobile Village award. It's a reader's choice award, and if you're interesting in helping out, voting steps are below. Signing up and voting takes less than five minutes; don't ask how we know. We certainly didn't vote for ourselves. We would never do that.

Voting ends 9/26.

1. Visit Mobile Village
2. Click on the top right hand "Sign Up Now" link
3. Fill in required fields and submit (“Thank you for registering!” will appear upon completion)
4. Next, click on "click here" and then "vote here" to select VOXUS in the following category: Wireless/Mobile Technology PR Firm
(you will need to confirm your email address at the end of the ballot)

A number of other VOXUS clients are participating, including AirMagnet, CipherLab and Formotus.

-posted by Paul

Dan Rayburn of media outlet StreamingMedia.com takes a press release from EdgeCast out behind the woodshed for a beating. Interesting reading if you want to know how "marketing-ese" can be perceived by the media. (And no, we didn't write it, thank god.)

-posted by Paul

There's an old adage from the bygone era when print journalism used to be, you know, printed... "Never argue with a man that buys ink by the gallon." Well, apparently the owners of the Pepcom trade events have never heard of this. At least, that's the only way to explain their threat to "ban all CNET and ZDNET journalists" from the trade events they sponsor. In a nutshell, Pepcom got its panties in a bunch when CNET hosted a free after-the-event get together, presumably because it was parasitic in regard to the Pepcom event. Which is ironic coming from a company that makes its living putting on "sub-events" that take advantage of such shows as CES and CTIA. For more, read this post from ZDNet's David Berlind.

-posted by Paul

Redfin has a post up highlighting the recent NakedTruth event. This is how the media works.

-posted by Paul

As part of our recent launch campaign for CozyBug's unique new local online classified service (think: eBay and Craigslist mashup), we arranged for a radio spot on the nationally syndicated Into Tomorrow with Dave Graveline show. These are always fun to script, and you can check it out below.

Podcast

-posted by Paul

Fake Steve Jobs offered up some interesting commentary on media manipulation around the iphone introduction:

Our biggest trick -- and it's not really a big stroke of genius or anything -- is simply to make a huge and dramatic presentation and then not let anyone actually see the phone. That way everyone can project their hopes and desires onto the object and build it up in their imagination as some great special unique magical device. We call it the Obama Maneuver. This creates a deadly combination: loads of demand and very little actual information.

After which he goes on to explain how Apple manipulates reviewers. You can argue the accuracy of this, but clearly it wouldn't work for companies without the star power of Apple. Still, one can dream...

And by the way, if you haven't checked out the full FSJ blog, you should. Hilarious.

-posted by Paul

One of the sites I visit regularly is John Gruber's Daring Fireball, and I was intrigued by this explanation of why the site is comment-free:

I wanted to write a site for someone it’s meant for. That reader I write for is a second version of me. I’m writing for him. He’s interested in the exact same things I’m interested in; he reads the exact same websites I read. I want him to like this website so much that he reads it from the top to the bottom, and he reads everything. Every single word. The copyright statement, what software I use, he’s read it all.

If I turn comments on, that goes away. It’s not that I don’t like sites with comments on, but when you read a site with comments it automatically puts you, the reader, in a defensive mode where you’re saying, “what’s good in this comment thread? What can I skim?”

It’s totally egotistical. I want Daring Fireball to be a site that you can’t skim if you’re in the target audience for it. You say, “Oh, a new article from John. I need to read it,” and your deadlines go whizzing by because you have to read what I wrote.

If I turn comments on I feel like it’s two different directions. You get to the end of my article and you’re like, “let’s see if there’s anything interesting. Let’s see if there’s any names I know.” That’s really it. Sometimes a design decision is what you don’t put in, as opposed to what you put in.

-posted by Paul

Friday fun... Five Flickr sets that aren't driving the long-term traffic you'd hoped for... (via Kottke)

-posted by Paul

Posted without comment. (via Kottke)

-posted by Paul

It was a big holiday weekend, so I'm coming to this a bit late, but I thought it worthwhile posting something in honor of Memorial Day. "In 1904, disgusted by the aftermath of the Spanish-American War and the subsequent Philippine-American War, Mark Twain wrote a short anti-war prose poem called "The War Prayer." His family begged him not to publish it, his friends advised him to bury it, and his publisher rejected it, thinking it too inflammatory for the times. Twain agreed, but instructed that it be published after his death, saying famously:

'None but the dead are permitted to tell the truth.'

"The War Prayer" was eventually published after World War I, when its message was more in tune with the times."

The Washington Monthly has created a video of the prayer, narrated by Peter Coyote. The English Major in me finds it fascinating because this is a piece of Twain's work that I wasn't familiar with. That, and the fact that it is a powerful comment on today's political climate. So: The War Prayer.

-posted by Paul

A little Friday humor before the long weekend...

-posted by Paul

Our client Attenex has three marketing jobs open – so if you or someone you know has a marketing bent, drop them a line. Attenex is a fast-growing software company in a hot market (legal discovery) and needs good people quickly.
 
Here are the openings:
 
Marketing coordinator

Marketing communications manager

Product marketing manager

Happy hunting.

-posted by Paul

Wired Magazine and A-list blogger Jason Calacanis are having a bit of a blog spat about the ground rules for an interview. Wired reporter Fred Vogelstein asked Calacanis for an interview, to which Calacanis agreed, providing that it was conducted via email. Which is when the fireworks started, because Vogelstein doesn't do email interviews, apparently.

I understand both sides of this issue: reporters prefer the freedom and spontaneity of a verbal interview because it can often lead to a more interesting story. Interviewees are often leery of a verbal interview because the freedom and spontaneity can lead to an unfortunately more interesting story. Fine. But it seems to me that casting aspersions in public as the basis for your stance – witness Calacanis' implication that reporters are hacks that quote people out of context and Wired's response that people that won't do a phone interview are cowards with something to hide – strikes me as a bit over the top. If you want an interview and the only way you'll get it is via email, then either agree or move on, don't call names. And if you want to use email to ensure that your responses are as accurate as possible, then say that and don't imply that the reporter is untrustworthy unless you want to start something. Clearly there are some big chips on these shoulders, and the ability to air this sort of spat in public does a disservice to blogging in general.

-posted by Paul

Proving that you can track and measure just about anything... I present to you America's Top 10 Bloggiest Neighborhoods. The Pearl in Portland is #6. (via Kottke)

-posted by Paul

A new subscription-based magazine targeted at people who blog. I'm really not sure what to think of this. (via Kottke)

-posted by Paul

If you're a web designer, or just interested in design in general, be sure to check out the upcoming An Event Apart: Seattle conference. Quite the high-powerd lineup of speakers, and it's great to see them coming to our neck of the woods.

-posted by Paul

Steve Rubel is a VP with mega-agency Edelman PR. Steve has also found Twitter and been posting his goings-on. Which last Friday included throwing his unread copy of PC Magazine into the trash. Not a good thing for an exec at a tech PR agency to be posting. Jim Louderback, the editor-in-chief for PC Mag took note and called him on it. Which led to this apology from Steve. Now I have to be honest in saying that I get bombarded with tons of free subscriptions from the tech magazines. Some I read, some I toss. And what I do read is more often online than in hard copy. But this does point to the downside of Twitter... the very stream-of-consciousness metaphor that makes it so popular, and powerful, also makes it easy to type before you think. (via DF)

-posted by Paul

You may not have noticed, but there is a serious storm brewing in the collision of Apple, network security and technology PR. It started earlier this month when Washington Post reporter Brian Krebs posted an article entitled "Hacking a MacBook in 60 Seconds or Less" about a WiFi security exploit that was demonstrated at the Black Hat security conference. The security researchers, Jon "Johnny Cache" Ellch* and David Maynor, both of SecureWorks, made a disingenuous statement that "they weren't picking on Macs here, but..." and in fact the article itself is clearly trying to exploit Apple's security reputation to grab a cheap headline. Well fine, but then it turns out that maybe there wasn't a hack at all, as the security researchers didn't actually use the MacBook's built-in WiFi hardware or software, but rather added a third-party card and driver and then hacked that. Which set off storm #1 wherein a huge number of bloggers, reporters and users said -- justifiably -- WTF?

Not content to leave well enough alone, and apparently not thinking clearly enough to provide a well-reasoned response, Krebs came back with this in a subsequent post: "During the course of our interview, it came out that Apple had leaned on Maynor and Ellch pretty hard not to make this an issue about the Mac drivers — mainly because Apple had not fixed the problem yet. Maynor acknowledged that he used a third-party wireless card in the demo so as not to draw attention to the flaw resident in Macbook drivers. But he also admitted that the same flaws were resident in the default Macbook wireless device drivers, and that those drivers were identically exploitable. And that is what I reported. I stand by my own reporting, as according to Maynor and Ellch it remains a fact that the default Macbook drivers are indeed exploitable." Translation: they said it and alluded to a big coverup so it must be true. And just to fuel the fire, Krebs added: "Again, the point was not to pick on Macs, but..." (article headline not withstanding -- maybe it was added in production, yeah, that must be it...) To which a now considerably annoyed collection of journalists, users and bloggers responded: WTF?

So then Krebs comes back with another response that acknowledges that while he inexplicably hasn't acknowledged this in his two previous articles on this subject, he has in fact seen the exploit working directly on Apple hardware/software. Um, okay, but why didn't you say that to begin with, or at least in your subsequent followup? And then the plot thickens: Apple denies that Secureworks has shared any exploit with them, with Apple spokesperson Lynn Fox rather unequivocally (?) stating: "Whatever they are claiming to have found, they haven't shared it with us." And then, Secureworks itself added this disclaimer: "This video presentation at Black Hat demonstrates vulnerabilities found in wireless device drivers. Although an Apple MacBook was used as the demo platform, it was exploited through a third-party wireless device driver — not the original wireless device driver that ships with the MacBook. As part of a responsible disclosure policy, we are not disclosing the name of the third-party wireless device driver until a patch is available." Adding insult to injury, Secureworks is apparently now not returning Krebs' phone calls asking for clarification: "I have several times now asked SecureWorks to share with me more specific information to back up their claims, but so far I have received no further details. If I hear back from SecureWorks with any more material information, I will update the blog."

So, what is really going on? Unfortunately, almost a month later, we don't yet have a clear answer from a security standpoint, which is just ridiculous. What we do know, however, is how not to handle this from a PR standpoint.

PR LOSERS: Maynor, Ellch and Secureworks, who clearly took advantage of the Mac's security reputation for professional gain and have thus far failed to substantiate their claims. If you buy into the myth that any coverage is good coverage, then I guess you'd be overjoyed. But if the objective was to enhance their reputation as outstanding and responsible security consultants, I'd say they're not doing too well thus far. A simple statement clarifying the situation was warranted weeks ago: is the MacBook hackable or not?

PR LOSER: Brian Krebs – went for a diggable headline and it came back to bury him. Had a chance to clear it up in a subsequent post but botched it. Came back a week later and tried again. Had apparently still not tried to use the usual journalistic technique of verification, and two weeks later that didn't turn out so well.

PR LOSERS: Tech Journalists – who unfortunately have also jumped on the argument from both sides, using sensationalist headlines around the story and a red herring argument: that the Mac hack was clearly done with third party hardware. Duh. We knew that on day one, and it is neither "admitting falsification" to clarify that nor a "vicious attack" to seek clarification on the true question: is the MacBook hackable? Could we see a little bit of, I don't know, actual reporting or investigative journalism? Hmmm? Maybe?

UNKNOWN: Apple. If their PR statement can be taken at face value then they are going to come out of this way ahead. If details come out indicating that they are being disingenuous, then not so much.

So is there a winner in all this? I believe so: a number of bloggers who come at this either from the Mac or from the security side have taken a well-reasoned, in depth look at the issues and, although reaching opposite conclusions, have at least attempted to sort out all of the conflicting claims and counter-claims while staying focused on the real issue (say it with me here): is the MacBook hackable or not?. As a PR professional that has been at this longer than most of the people mentioned in this post, I find it fascinating that bloggers are stepping in where journalists and columnists used to tread. Technology journalists will always remain central to what it is that we do, but we have long been encouraging clients to pay more attention to the blogging community in key markets. This confirms that recommendation. (Clarification: Rich Mogull of securosis.com, the security blog mentioned above, is a long time Gartner analyst and someone we've dealt with for clients. So one could argue that he doesn't count as a "blogger" – but it was on his blog that he tackled this issue and this is my article so I get to classify him as I please. So there.)

* as a footnote, can we please all agree that, in the tech industry at least, having a hip nickname like "Johnny Cache" makes you sound like an idiot?

-posted by Paul

Sorry for the lack of posts this week, but we've been out at Interop in Vegas -- and I'm happy to report that the networking industry's main tradeshow is definitely looking up compared to past years. Good traffic, lot of buzz. It's been a long time coming, and since our mere existence is proof of a new tech bubble (see previous entry), I have to say that things are definitely looking up for the industry (at least until the bubble pops, that is).

-posted by Paul

The P-I's John Cook blogs about a his new "bubble meter" feature; tracking the signs on an impending tech bubble. His "sixth sign" is: New public relations firms -- touting rosters of new technology clients -- emerge. Since the announcement we sent him about our new firm and its roster of technology clients went out on April 21 and he didn't post this until April 27, I'm sure that the two are completely unrelated. We are not the sixth sign of the apocalypse. We're not.

-posted by Paul

BC-based Apparent Networks delivers AppCritical; gives customers real-time end-to-end view of network performance and its impact on critical applications. The concept of looking at network performance from an enterprise application perspective instead of the typical device-centric view is interesting. We'll report more on this and related news after we get back (and sober up) from Interop in Vegas this week.

-posted by Paul

Port Townsend-based Mobilisa, which we wrote about earlier this week, just announced that they won a $1M contract from the US Navy to supply wireless networks for floating battle groups. The company already does the Washington state ferries; they appear to be on a floating roll.

-posted by Paul

Seattle-based AttachmateWRQ today announced the $495M acquisition of San Jose-based NetIQ. The company is taking NetIQ private, and it will make the newly merged AttachmateWRQ, already our largest privately-held software company, considerably bigger.

-posted by Paul

Kirkland-based SchemaLogic today announced a new "semantics standards workspace" called Aurora: "The collaboration tool was launched to support the recent trend by organizations and industries to facilitate collaboration among hundreds or even thousands of knowledge workers to leverage social networking and online collaboration tools such as wikis and folksonomies with application to business semantics." Interesting...

-posted by Paul

Infospace today announced record revenues of $90.3M and net income of $3.0M. "InfoSpace had an exciting quarter, delivering strong results and record revenues fueled by strength in media downloads and online search."

-posted by Paul

"It’s like a three- or four-minute-long concentrated, faster-cut, and more sarcastic version of The Daily Show." I'm making it my personal mission to drive traffic for this guy. Be sure to check out the archives. (Thanks to Daring Fireball for the link.)

-posted by Paul

We had to cover this one: Portland-based Imbibe Media just launched the premiere issue of Imbibe, "the first-of-its-kind, national consumer magazine dedicated to the entire spectrum of drinks... deserving in-depth exploration of the people, places, flavors and trends surrounding the fascinating world of beverages." Sign me up!

-posted by Paul

Microsoft is building an online storage service, code named Live Drive, says Ray Ozzie in an interview with Fortune. Live Drive, and the similarly named Google Drive, are both designed to basically deliver huge amounts of personal online storage, available from anywhere on the net. Google's service is slated for 2007 delivery, and Microsoft's schedule is unknown. Of course, this technology isn't new. There are a number of companies already ahead of this curve, including Apple with its .Mac/iDisk solution and Amazon with S3. Much closer to home: Seattle-based Punch Networks launched similar services in conjunction with Excite way back in 1999 (Yahoo also launched a similar service back then called Briefcase). The Punch service is still available via the Punch Networks website. Of course, once these companies made their announcements, the VCs came rushing in to finance (xDrive 10/99, iDrive 10/99, SwapDrive 11/99 and the list goes on). More recently Seattle-based Deep9 acquired Punch Networks, and is planning to announce new services based upon Punch's proven code-base later this year. With major players and startups both readying announcements for the next 12 months, it looks like this might be a segment that is poised to take off again. Can the VC announcements be far behind?

-posted by Paul

Portland-based Tripwire has introduced a new professional consulting service for enterprise change management, building on their existing change auditing software offering.

-posted by Paul

There's a handful of Northwest ad agencies (or the NW offices of global firms) up for the prestigious One Show award in NY, including Seattle-based Big Bang, Creature, DDB Seattle, Publicis West, remerinc and Sedgwick Rd.; Portland-based Borders Perrin Norrander, Leopold Ketel & Partners and Wieden+Kennedy; and Vancouver-based DDB Canada and Rethink. There were 17,000 entries from 56 countries, so we think the solid Northwest showing bodes well for the strength of the local ad scene. Good luck to all.

-posted by Paul

Snoqualmie-based Light Sciences Oncology filed Friday for an initial offering of up to $86M, and plans to trade under the symbol LSON. The company, which is using light to destroy cancer cells, expects to enter late-stage trials later this year. The P-I's John Cook has a nice write up.

-posted by Paul

Our friends over at Marqui have posted another great white paper, this one entitled "Invisible Marketing: What Every Organization Needs to Know in the Era of Blogs, Social Networks and Web 2.0." According to Marqui, "this new approach to marketing, call it 'Marketing 2.0,' is as much an attitude as it is a set of tools and techniques." We'll post more once we've digested the fact that we're on version 2.0 now.

-posted by Paul

There's a discussion going on about different types of bloggers. Some characterize it as reporters versus editors, others as referential versus experiential. You'll see both on this blog, as we generally help identify someone else's NW news, but occasionally provide commentary of our own. I think both aspects are useful, but blogs certainly do tend to trend toward one or the other. Perhaps you'll find the perspective interesting as you think about the types of blogs you personally prefer...

-posted by Paul

Here's an interesting breakdown of the world's top city skylines based on subjective analysis of esthetics, height, density, etc. Why do I post this here? Seattle is #15.

-posted by Paul

The P-I's John Cook has a very interesting analysis in his blog on the similar road Seattle high-tech bubble survivors Qpass and Widevine traveled on their way to their respective acquisition and funding.

-posted by Paul

Seattle-based digital rights management company Widevine not only landed $16M in funding, but managed to score investments from strategic partners Cisco Systems and Canadian telco Telus. Quite the lead into next week's big broadcast show, NAB.

-posted by Paul

Users in more than 20 cities throughout Oregon will be able to wirelessly download at DSL speeds by end of year.

-posted by Paul

Watchguard was a key participant in protecting the network for the XX winter olympic games. Sort of makes up for Bode Miller.

-posted by Paul

Bothell-based nanotechnology company Lumera added two "biotech industry luminaries" to its advisory board.

-posted by Paul

Customer-management software maker Amdocs Ltd. said Tuesday it agreed to buy Seattle-based Qpass, a provider of digital commerce software, for about $275 million in cash.

-posted by Paul

The P-I's John Cook notes that money is already flowing into some NW venture funds, while another half dozen are on the hunt to raise ones. Good news for the local tech scene.

-posted by Paul

Okay, a little random Friday fun. Thanks to the guest bloggers at Kottke for the link...

-posted by Paul

Seattle-based thePlatform added another network (Ooh!, targeting Gen X/Gen Y) to the customer list for their media publishing system.

-posted by Paul

Congratulations to our old Redmond-based friends at ADIC (a client for many years), who just announced two awards from publications in China for their wildly popular tape libraries. Interesting strategy, announcing awards from publications and organizations in other countries, and one which we highly endorse as it shows international traction.

-posted by Paul

We've had an ongoing discussion here at VOXUS on the merits of various Northwest-focused tech news blogs and mainstream media sources. There are certainly some good ones out there, such as this and this and a few others. But interestingly, we haven't been able to find one that is exactly what we're looking for: a single source for general news on Northwest tech companies and events. We have some fantastic newspapers around the region, including the Post-Intelligencer and Times in Seattle, the Oregonian in Portland, the Sun in Vancouver BC, several great Business Journals and quite a few really good mid-market papers. But of course these focus on major regional, national or international news, not just technology. And we can speak from experience: it's hard to get good general tech news coverage in the MSM. And most of the blogs are focused on news about a particular industry, company or market.

So: we've decided to create our own source for general NW tech news. Look for a significant change in the content on this blog. And if you have some news you'd like covered... email us at the address in the sidebar.

-posted by Paul

Tara over at Marqui posted an interesting blog entry about Marketing with Food. Seems she's been getting her fair share of high calorie items from vendors and other folks looking to make a splash with potential customers, partners, etc.

Purely coincidental that we happened to nuke the greater Northwest with fortune cookies at around the same time (if you haven't gotten yours yet, duck and cover because we're still launching. And feel free to drop us a line or throw in a comment with an order.).

Tara posits the question -- do these sorts of food-based promos work? Having participated in my fair share of marketing giveaways over the years, I believe that three characteristics are critical for any successful giveaway campaign: it has to be 1) uniquely related to your company, 2) high quality/expensive or 3) food related. Choose any two. We bet on numbers one and three. I'm not sure where Tara's unnamed pie comes in.

Since this fortune cookie campaign is still in process, we don't yet have meaningful tallies yet on the results, but I can say that we've received substantial positive feedback from a great number of companies. As the objective was to introduce VOXUS to the world, I would have to say that yes, the program is proving to be quite successful. The biggest challenge has been not diving into the huge bag of fortune cookies in our office. Ever try a fresh fortune cookie? I can now categorically state that chinese restaurants apparently do not carry them -- at least not the ones I've ever been to.

So yes, I think food works, as long as it's got something else going for it.

And Tara... you didn't get the popcorn giveaway from Market to the Max? Huh. I'm sure it was an oversight. (snicker)

-posted by Paul

In perusing our traffic logs for the past month, I was surprised to note the number of international visitors to our site. Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Japan, Denmark, the UK and the list goes on... turns out that the developer that created the basic theme for our site (developed in RapidWeaver on a Mac) featured voxuspr.com in his showcase. So welcome, and feel free to drop us a comment if you like what you see or have any suggestions for improvements.

Oh, and for the competing PR agencies that have also been checking out our site -- nice to see you too! ;-)

-posted by Paul

So I've been playing around with Google Finance for the past week, and I have to admit that it's pretty cool. I'm constantly amazed by Google's ability to take what was working pretty well (nasdaq.com, mapquest, etc.) and significantly improve the user experience with a few seemingly minor interface tweaks. In this case, ready access to all the information you need on a single page (no more hunting around, click throughs, or multiple sites), and a stock chart that drags a la Google Maps. I could quote from Lazy Sunday here, but I'll resist...

If you haven't tried it yet, check it out: http://finance.google.com/finance?q=goog

-posted by Paul

I'll admit it... I'm a mac head. I've been using Macs since the mid-80s, and have been fortunate enough to work on them for most of my career. So naturally I'm quick to jump to Apple's defense in any Mac vs PC debate (and considering that one of my coworkers helped direct the worldwide PR effort for Microsoft Windows Server, you can guess the discussions we get into). Of course, jumping to Apple's defense nowadays, when it's among the hottest tech companies out there, isn't much of a challenge. Now the Amelio days, those were tough.

Anyway, I ran across this article in one of the premier tech journals, NETWORK WORLD, that runs through a current TCO (total cost of ownership) analysis for the new Intel Macs vs a typical PC. Not surprisingly, when you factor in the support and other ownership costs of PCs, the cost is twice as much as a Mac over a three year period. Right about now you can clearly separate the Mac fans, who are nodding their heads, from the PC believers, who just made a slightly rude thhhppppptttttt sound. But don't look at me: NWW says it, so it must be true. Tech publications are never wrong.

So why do I bring this up? Well, for one, we're just ramping up our operation, so things like this are on my mind. But more importantly, most agencies out there run a lean and mean shop, and when you don't have a big support staff, the easy usability, configuration and rock solid reliability of Macs make a real difference to the bottom line.

Macs: not just for design departments anymore.

-posted by Paul (via macintouch)