Filtered

Microsoft's PR shocker

Check out this Wired yarn on what happens when Microsoft's PR company accidentally sends a journalist who's writing a story about Microsoft the in-depth file used to track his every move. Just spectacular.

It's no secret that PR's keep files on journos - they use it to justify billing rates and as part of broader strategies to massage the message. What's amazing about this is the level of detail, including internal Microsoft emails which give you an insight into what their hoards of PR people do all day long. And people wonder why we journos are cynical...

So you think you can copy

First, a confession. I found myself watching "So you think you can dance" the other night. I usually have a 2 second attention span when it comes to talent/reality shows of any description. My only (lame) excuse is that my wife and sister were watching the show with the sort of passion you expect from fans of this TV genre.

Anyway, the moment I happened to walk past and tune in was when the blonde legged host was telling us about how the show had become a global phenomenon. They showed clips from the show as it was broadcast in nations like Turkey, Israel, the US, UK and so on. Yes, people can dance badly regardless of their background...

Then it hit me -- television has co-opted the social networking trend on a massive scale. Think about how many people a show like this can impact in each country - you've got thousands of people who all try out to get on the show. Each person has lots of friends and family they bring along for the ride, telling them to watch the show on a certain date etc. Then you've got all the people who attend the actual filming, and the wider population who just can't get enough of reality TV where non-TV professionals are the stars.

That sounds a lot like broadcast TV's take on social networking to me. Throw in SMS voting and various web-related feedback mechanisms and it's an interactive, ongoing live event. Sure, American Idol and others have already been down this track. But it's another reminder that traditional media are not afraid to steal good ideas from the web and turning them into lots of cash. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but as much as it pains me to say this, it seems to work.

Wiki-media

News that Enron Boss Ken Lay wouldn't be turning up for court sparked something of an update frenzy on Wikipedia, oddly enough. This Reuters yarn recounts the minute-by-minute updates to Lay's entry as the news morphed from an apparent suicide death to heart attack brought on by the stress of the trial.

Makes you wonder what Wikipedia this thinking regarding the future of its Current Events section, and Wikinews, both of which I've bookmarked and subscribed to in Bloglines for daily reference.

So now we wait, again

I've resisted writing about the David Richards vs Scoble argument that was nicely moderated by Phil Sim over the weekend.

But now I'm really starting to get interested. You see, the plot keeps getting thicker.
A few quick observations. First, Charles Wright is funny (it helps if you imagine the smirk of glee on his face when he writes stuff like this). Secondly, David "Riches" (as C.W. calls him), will never back down. I've competed against him while I was Editor-in-Chief at Australian Reseller News, so I too talk from experience. Thirdly, is it just me or is Scoble slighting Australian journalists? Ok, maybe not. But ya better be careful, we all carry big knives, keep crocodiles as pets and live with kangaroos. In fact, I *really have* seen a kangaroo on a street in suburban Sydney (Frenchs Forest to be precise, for the local punters at home), but I digress...

Up next, Steve Gillmor is also funny, and right as usual (btw Steve, I'd comment on your blog if that sign-in thingy wasn't so onerous). Office is on the fast train to dead-ville thanks to the hosted apps evolution.

Now for my value add. I did my own bit of digging today. I spoke to an industry source who I have a very strong sense was quite possibly David Richard's source, although the person dodged that direct question (adding to my suspicion). This person, who I will not name, said to me that the 60 per cent figure was based on "strong speculation."

Was that strong enough to include in the Windows Vista story I'm running in the Australian Financial Review on Tuesday? Nope. But it's great blog fodder. And truth be told, I don't actually care if the figure is 60 per cent or otherwise. As the subtext of DWR's rebuttal points out, either he or Microsoft will be right on the code rewrite/completion front.

So now that Ray Ozzie is in charge, as per Steve's post, and the new ship dates are announced, we sit and wait. We've got calendars with reminders, and thanks to this great bit of theatre, a well documented online trail to set the stage.

Meanwhile, how funny is this NYT yarn that says Microsoft delayed Vista to keep HP happy.

...Yet unlike Dell, Hewlett-Packard sells extensively through retailers, whose orders must be taken and shelves stocked. That takes time.

Hewlett-Packard, according to a person close to the company who asked not to be identified because he was told the information confidentially, informed Microsoft that unless Vista was locked down and ready by August, Hewlett-Packard would be at a disadvantage in the year-end sales season.

Bomb the messenger

NYT: The Arab satellite channel Al Jazeera urged Britain and the United States on Tuesday to investigate a British newspaper report that Prime Minister Tony Blair had dissuaded President Bush from bombing the station's headquarters in the Persian Gulf.

The media's iPod moment

NYT:  Putting print on the grid is a necessity, because the grid is where America lives. But what the newspaper industry really needs is an iPod moment.

The story goes on to float the idea of a portable news reader/tablet gadget, something I've been hearing on and off for a few years.

What's far more interesting to me is what I call the "TV Week strategy." The advent of TV scared newspapers until they realised that they could make money writing about TV. Hence the birth of TV magazines, TV guides, and endless stories about TV ratings. That's all good fodder for selling paper.

So if you take a look at The New York Times' growing coverage of blogs, podcasting and Web 2.0 stuff these days, I get the feeling newspapers are applying the same technique all over again. And no, it's not a bad idea at all. It's a virtuous circle. Blogs need mainstream exposure, and newspapers serve a valuable role charting new trends & technology movements in a concise fashion.

Oh, and in case you missed it, I landed a front page story on Thursday Oct 6 covering the Google and Sun Microsystems deal. It spilled to a full page of analysis by yours truly. Plenty of commentators around the world have bagged this deal, and that's fair enough. But in some cases, it's easy to overlook a powerful trend amid all the fashionable knee-jerk reactions. Jonathan Schwartz describes it as a shift in the model for distributing software. Make no mistake, software applications are moving off the desktop and on to the web. In that regard, Microsoft faces the same legacy business issues as newspapers. And that's a big story.

And for the record: an Australian IT media site called IT Journo has one or two freelance reporters that make a habit of beating up on the journalists and the IT media that the site aims to promote (a big passion of its founder Phil Sim).

The site ran piece last week in which it decided that my Google/Sun story, and a shorter piece on the same subject in the national pages of The Australian newspaper, was actually a sign of editors scratching around for a good story (link here for IT journalist subscribers).

It's clear to me that ITJ, and the freelance journalist in question here, got it wrong again. Any IT story that makes the front page, or even national pages, of major Australian daily newspapers should be given its due. The bigger agenda at play, elements of which I've touched on above, is far more interesting than some banal, arm-chair insight.

If ITJ does not appreciate the positive impact IT stories appearing the national sections have on the future of the media, and the IT trade media business in particular, then I'd seriously question whether the writers are aligned with site's pro-IT media industry agenda.

2GB interview

Today was the big day we finally put out a 12 page special report built around the idea that its 10 years since internet companies like Amazon, eBay and MSN started, and 10 years since Netscape's IPO brought internet stocks into the public domain.

Excuse the shameless plug, but in addition to the joy of publishing a package of stories that's been hanging over my/our head since early July, it was fun to get some air time on radio to talk about it.

Chris Smith, afternoon announcer at 2GB invited me on to his show today to talk about the Internet (thanks Chris!). There was a great buzz in their studios at Pyrmont, just west of Sydney's central business district. They were really excited about the package, and of course wanted to dive into the consumer end of the discussion.

But one of the things that continually amazes me, after spending so much time writing for IT trade press, is the layers of complexity and jargon we live with every day. Get on radio, and you've got to boil it down into very clear, uncomplicated terms. "Linda from Camden" called in at the end of the show with a very basic complaint - she finds the web too hard to navigate, and can't find what she's looking for on the search engines. It was amusing at first, but she's got a good point that mapped very well against one of the themes in the package today.

Search engine companies are really only just getting moving with the search business. We've been fooled into thinking that just because Google has a nice clean homepage that the web is simple. In fact, it is hard to find content. The only way I get around many search problems is using a few tricks, like appending ".au" to my searches, or using keywords I know will feature highly in search results. Try explaining all that to Linda from Camden in 5 seconds. We've come a long way on the Internet, but from your average consumer's perspective, it's still the stuff of magic and wonder.

Here's the (2.4MB) file Download 2gb_mark_jones_231.08.05.wma , supplied to the AFR by Media Monitors.

Oh yeah, and the irony of writing about Web 2.0 for print and talking about it today on "old media" like radio didn't escape me. ; )

Badge of Honour

Where I come from, eliciting this kind of response from Google (or any large company) is cause for a few high-fives in the office.

Given that CNet and Google compete for the same ad dollar, I wonder whether Google's hoping the decision will have a financial impact since negotiated scoops will be hard/impossible to get and CNet's traffic will suffer.

Dialogue, not monologue

Finally! An analyst with his head around the opportunities for newspapers in the digital age. This Biz Week article is a welcome read:

People want information, and newspapers have been successfully fulfilling this demand for more than a century. They provide compelling content, but we think it isn't being leveraged to its full extent. Many newspapers are giving away all of their online content for free, and we think greater associated discipline is probably appropriate. Charging for access to premium content and archives of stories, photos, and even front pages is a possibility.

We think new distribution formats, such as spoken-word audio, have potential. In addition, new types of content are being created in the Web world. Blogs and podcasts are a good way to reach a younger audience and can generate advertising revenues, in our view. Real-time chats with writers and other special events could be made exclusively available online.

I'm not an expert on the newspaper business, but I think its companies have more assets and opportunities than people realize. S&P expects newspaper concerns to continue acquiring Net companies, and many are taking steps like those listed above. However, we also believe newspapers have brands, customers, and content that could be used more effectively to drive more online traffic and revenues. Additionally, in our view, new types of content, services, and distribution, specific to the Internet, constitute a notable opportunity.

Real Journalism

Dan Gillmor: If the newspaper business does turn out to be dying, we need to make sure that journalism does not. I apologize to my blogging friends for saying this, but the free for all in the blogging world, however valuable (and I love it), is not sufficient to replace what we'll be missing.

We need ways to combine the best of the old and the new. That's what I'm working on.

One of the most refreshing comments I've read on the subject for quite some time.