You only need to watch the PR (by Nathan Weinberg on the Inside Microsoft blog) that Microsoft received over the past week to understand that more transparency would be a good thing. Danny Sullivan, over on Search Engine Watch made the same point several times.
As I flew across the United States yesterday this story was at the top of page one on every newspaper I saw.
Note to Microsoft employees: if you aren’t transparent about when you deal with governments you will hand your competitors a huge advantage. If it were up to me I’d blog whenever governmental requests come in. One area that isn’t possible is when there are crimes involved, though. Companies regularly turn data over under subpoena.
One last thought on this story. It’s real easy to trash customer trust and very hard to earn it back. Transparency is the way here.
I’ll be at the Search Champs meeting with MSN too and will make these points again there.
How would you handle it if you were running a search engine or blog service and a government asked you to do something, even something with great ends? How would you have handled this case?
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
More transparency you say? Ok, let’s get real then, post your team-comparison salaries, review scores and the benefit-scale plans, and about those NDAs and competitive advantage release dates? Forget them, be more transparent. Talk about lawsuits in progress, hey transparency, you say. Still more transparency? Ok, full open-source code with no legal clauses. Tell me all about your M&A plans and your partnerships. Invite competitors and governments in for strategic meetings and leak everything and anything to the press. Handle personal issues under public glare, trial by blog, not just “he/she left to spend more time with family”. Share developers concerns, in progress, per redoing the stolen code. Share the contents of all those missing Burst emails, share how you managed to sign a double-bill contract under the guise of a subscriptional plan, share how little your CFO is doing to deal with shareholders. Show me all your HR policies, and your policy handbook. And all that stuff marked and emailed CONFIDENTIAL, why that’s not being very openly transparent, let the public know. Information wants to be free you know.
Come on, if you were, truly seriously, transparent, you’d be fired in a few micromilliseconds.
The deed is done, sometimes better to admit (hopefully learn from, ie Gator purchase plans) and move on than to wallow in self-introspection totally. Besides, it’s all make-believe fluff, as until it impacts the bottom line it matters not a single iota, and you are just a marketing court jester, entertaining everyone and fooling lots, but changing nothing.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
Look, with all due respect to Mr. Scoble, who I am sure is a perfectly nice guy, the bottom line is he’s a marketing hack who works for a giant monopoly that does not, and never will, give two shits about the consumer. He’s going to throw out buzzspeak like “transparency” (along with “compelling content”, “added value”, and the Gatesian “super”-anything) whenever MS needs some spin control, such as in this case. Scoble’s corporate “blog” is about PR and helping to rid the company of the “Evil Empire” image than it is about actually attempting to make any changes or to open up a frank and honest discussion with potential customers. Scoble can say that he is going to “push for transparency” all he wants, but the truth of the matter is, he is saying this for public effect only in an attempt to head off any potential bad PR. If this story had not turned out to be headline material, he never would have mentioned it. Scoble, much like the rest of his company, never acts, he just reacts (always imitating, never innovating). He knows nothing will change at his company – MS will roll over like a ten dollar whore whenever ANY (US, Chinese, whatever, it’s irrelevant) government asks them to, all in the name of the almighty dollar and preserving their monopoly. And yes, it goes without saying that Yahoo and AOL’s actions were just as shameful and reprehensible as MSs, so I am not giving them (or Google, for that matter wrt to the Chinese)a free pass – the only difference is that those companies don’t have a “technology evangelist” out front to try take the heat for there PR f*ck-ups.
[...] Quanto mais eu vejo essas coisas, mais eu acho que o Robert Scoble está corretíssimo com suas iniciativas de transparência dentro da Microsoft. A última de suas iniciativas diz respeito às intimações feitas por governos que são sempre atendidas pelas empresas. Em muitos desses atendimentos, são nossas informações que estão sendo enviadas para governos que não tem muito compromisso em manter sigilo sobre nada. [...]
Google’s almost certainly going to have to give up the search data. They’re just objecting to get good publicity. (Pretty smart in the short term, but dangerous in the long term. Once you thumb your nose at the government often enough, they come back and regulate you — just ask Microsoft.)
Google’s almost certainly going to have to give up the search data. They’re just objecting to get good publicity. (Pretty smart in the short term, but dangerous in the long term. Once you thumb your nose at the government often enough, they come back and regulate you — just ask Microsoft.)
Google’s almost certainly going to have to give up the search data. They’re just objecting to get good publicity. (Pretty smart in the short term, but dangerous in the long term. Once you thumb your nose at the government often enough, they come back and regulate you — just ask Microsoft.)
Google’s almost certainly going to have to give up the search data. They’re just objecting to get good publicity. (Pretty smart in the short term, but dangerous in the long term. Once you thumb your nose at the government often enough, they come back and regulate you — just ask Microsoft.)
Google’s almost certainly going to have to give up the search data. They’re just objecting to get good publicity. (Pretty smart in the short term, but dangerous in the long term. Once you thumb your nose at the government often enough, they come back and regulate you — just ask Microsoft.)
[...] Ken Moss hat zwar am 20.1. im MSN Search’s Weblog unter dem Titel Privacy and MSN Search u.a. verlautbaren lassen, dass keinerlei persönliche Daten übermittelt wurden seien (”absolutely no personal data was involved”), dies scheint jedoch die Diskussion hierüber erst richtig angeheizt zu haben: Das ist nicht nur den zahlreichen Kommentaren zu Ken Moss’s Blogposting zu entnehmen, sondern auch den öffentlichen Äusserungen einiger Microsoft-Mitarbeiter (vgl. John Battelle, Robert Scoble und Brandon Paddocks). [...]
[...] *Chuckle*. So Google saw $11 billion in market cap disappear on Friday. And Scoble’s now catching heat on Microsoft NOT admitting they caved and gave up the requested information to the government. But where’s Yahoo in all this? I find it hard to believe that the U.S. Government went after Google and Microsoft and left out Yahoo. [...]
FuzzyBlog: and Google has gained most of that back.
Oh, and the reason it went down? Cause Yahoo showed bad advertising numbers.
FuzzyBlog: and Google has gained most of that back.
Oh, and the reason it went down? Cause Yahoo showed bad advertising numbers.
FuzzyBlog: and Google has gained most of that back.
Oh, and the reason it went down? Cause Yahoo showed bad advertising numbers.
FuzzyBlog: and Google has gained most of that back.
Oh, and the reason it went down? Cause Yahoo showed bad advertising numbers.
FuzzyBlog: and Google has gained most of that back.
Oh, and the reason it went down? Cause Yahoo showed bad advertising numbers.