Apple blogger calls "bullshit" on me
Chuqui, who is was an Apple employee, has a point. Apple employees ARE allowed to blog. They just aren’t allowed to be spokespeople, as Chuqui admits. So, they don’t feel empowered to talk about anything that they are working on, as Chuqui admits. That’s completely different from what Microsoft, Sun Microsystems, Adobe, IBM, and other tech companies tell their employees.
Lots of Apple employees have told me that they want to blog about work. He says the goal should be communication, not getting credit.
Absolutely!
But what he doesn’t admit is that Google has changed everything. Now I totally expect to be able to find an employee at a company running a product group. Here’s a test.
Go to Google. Type “OneNote blog.” You’ll find Chris Pratley. He runs the team. I can tell him his product sucks in his comments.
Now, go back to Google. Type “Apple MacBook blog.” Do you find an Apple employee? No. You find a corporate page. Send an email there. Does it go to the right person? I have no idea. Certainly bloggers who’ve tried that recently due to Apple’s rebooting problems are getting unstatisfactory answers.
Anyway, you can see the difference in how Apple treats online communication in Chuqui’s post. At Adobe I see tons of blogs. At Microsoft I see tons of blogs. At IBM I see tons of blogs. At Sun I see tons of blogs.
The difference is telling.
And the fact that Chuqui thinks it’s about credit is telling too.
Oh, well, it ain’t my company.
UPDATE: Chuqui doesn’t work at Apple anymore. He did for years. I am sorry for missing that he doesn’t work there any longer.
October 28th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
You’ve also yet to establish an actual need for blogging beyond:
1) I like blogging, so everyone should do it.
2) It worked at Microsoft, Adobe, and Sun, and since all companies are the same, everyone should do it.
3) It’s the only possibly acceptable way to find out what your customers want so everyone should do it.
1) is a personal option, 2) shows a lack of understanding that Apple is not MS, and 3) is just ridiculous.
You’re very good at beating the blogging drum, but when it comes to hard business reasons for it, you tend to fall down.
October 28th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
I’d rather have Apple be more open and inviting of feedback about their products than a blog. I simply don’t see the point of a blog because all it does is get comments that they probably can’t do anything about.
The MacBU blog is infuriating because they’ve already made decisions that suck for me. I just have to accept it or stop buying. At this point, I’m going to stop buying MacOffice because OpenOffice does what I need.
October 28th, 2006 at 1:04 pm
[...] Ahhh…now it’s Apple’s turn.. Why Apple doesn’t have a blogging policy. And the lack of employee blogs. [...]
October 28th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
exactly. it’s their business. too bad for them and apple users. It’s their choice in the end. Who’s to tell who’s right or wrong?
October 28th, 2006 at 1:12 pm
I’m in a similar situation working for a news organization. Those with editorial control can’t blog, but as a technical person I can… though not on behalf of the company or in competition etc. etc.
I don’t think to many companies will go down the slippery slope of banning blogs (and other forms of online contact including blog comments, forum posting, newsgroups, etc) except in cases of: bias, speaking on behalf of a company, or doing something to damage the brand.
I personally think my situation is rather fair. Some may disagree, but there is a legitimate business/ethical reason for the rule. It’s also not a blanket statement, there are exceptions for cases such as mine, where the reason for banning certain activities just don’t apply.
I’d personally love to see Apple blog. If they followed Sun or MS’s model and provided and encouraged groups and employees to blog, I think it would dramatically improve the brand, and the products. A perfect example is the IE blog for Microsoft, and Planet Mozilla for Firefox. Both blog systems are very effective communication methods for building community among product users, and allow dev’s to keep up with users (and vice versa).
It’s a powerful medium. But businesses do need to make sure it’s not abused by employees. I think it can be done reasonably if a company sits down and comes up with a logical policy.
Personally, I’d like to see companies adopt software like Planet, if not to simply encourage employees to blog as a bonding/community activity. Bonus points if it’s used like a Sun, Microsoft.
October 28th, 2006 at 1:13 pm
The above statements don’t reflect the opinions of my employer.
;-)
Sorry… couldn’t resist.
October 28th, 2006 at 1:21 pm
We’re having this discussion in the comments at Scripting News. There’s some question as to whether the latest software update addresses the MacBook random shutdown problem so many people are having. We’re not sure. Apple’s communicaiton on it is really slim. Yet there *is* a conversation about it on the net, it’s just that Apple isn’t part of it. This is long-term dangerous for Apple, as any political consultant will tell you. Better to be in the discussion if it’s about you.
October 28th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Chuqui is no longer an Apple employee.
October 28th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
Hey Robert- This is a little off topic, but since you mentioned at the conference that you have about 800 e-mails unanswered, I thought I’d mention this suggestion here instead. Any chance you are going to put the MyBlogLog widget on your blog that shows the recent readers? I’d love to have a way to click-through to blogs of other Scobleizer readers. You’ll even get “Scobleizer community” (and for all you wondering- I do not work for MyBlogLog). Hopefully you’ll consider it!
October 28th, 2006 at 1:51 pm
Robert,
Chuq is not an Apple employee. You might want to throttle the river of news down a bit in order to gain a little context and get the facts straight.
October 28th, 2006 at 2:26 pm
Chuq isn’t an Apple employee anymore, but he’s been blogging for a long time, and he was an Apple employee up until quite recently. So if Robert’s allowed to talk about blogging at MS, even thought he’s not a MS employee anymore, then Chuq gets the same bye.
October 28th, 2006 at 2:46 pm
I love how Scoble and Winer will ignore this:
“Here’s the fun part: while Scoble talks about blogging as if there is no way to communicate without it being on a blog, he completely misses the bigger picture.
IT AIN’T ABOUT BLOGGING. It’s about communication. it’s about sharing information. It’s about solving problems. And while Scoble loves to babble about blogs (because he is, ultimately, a blogger, not a communicator), Apple employees have been out there working with the customer base.
Wander through any of the lists.apple.com mailing lists, one of Apple’s core communication tools with their developers.”
i.e. Anyone who wants a discourse with Apple employees can find it; the discussion simply will not be occurring with their favorite pet and primary source of income/hype, “the blog”. If you want to talk to devs, sign onto the appropriate lists. If you have a customer support issue, go to the discussion groups. Simple.
October 28th, 2006 at 2:57 pm
Wow! I decided to check out Winer’s “discussion in the comments at Scripting News”. His discussion invovles 5 comments, only 1 addressing Apple. If you scroll back through his archives, you find another post where the turn around was quick on his repar and there, there are quite a few comments… But in this case, the discussion is also buried in with about 20 other topics so it’s difficult to follow whether it’s an Apple discussion or a Martin Scorcese discussion.
This is what Apple’s supposed to be participating in? They are supposed to comment in Winer’s personal blog that throws many stories into one? Absurd.
“Yet there *is* a conversation about it on the net, it’s just that Apple isn’t part of it.”
Actually, there are MANY conversations, and Apple is participating in the one’s on their support site and mail lists. How they are supposed to know that they need to comment in your personal comments, I do not know.
October 28th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
“Chuqui, who is an Apple employee”
Huh?
He left Apple *months* ago. That’s why he called it a “post-mortem.”
October 28th, 2006 at 3:12 pm
Lol, I new that the Mac fans would come out in defense of their company, Apple is no different than any other company,it should let it’s employee’s blog, but of course that just couldn’t happen.
Apple employees have to toe the corporate line, and I’m just amazed that the Mac fans think this is all right.
I like Apple, I just don’t understand some of it’s fans, Apple has made it’s shares of mistakes, but I just can’t believe that apple’s above crticism in the eyes of some people.
October 28th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
I can’t speak english :)
October 28th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
It’s pretty unusual. Consider Google, whose blogging star is Matt Cutts. Matt discusses SEO, when you’d think the last thing Google would want is for one of it’s employees to be talking about it, but Google knows it’s important to have a human voice on the net, so they let him do his thing.
October 28th, 2006 at 4:01 pm
Apple = Think Different,… You don’t expect Apple’s to jump on the blogging bandwagon just like everybody else now do you?
October 28th, 2006 at 4:34 pm
I echo what Zawodny said, hence his post-mortem title..
October 28th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
I’d also like to see apple blog. It’s surprising that Steve doesn’t - how ’bout a video-blog? c-mon?
To their credit, apple hosts one of the most lively and useful converstions on the web: got to discussions.apple.com –> their forums, by product are well used and content-rich.
October 28th, 2006 at 5:45 pm
“Anyway, you can see the difference in how Apple treats online communication in Chuqui’s post. At Adobe I see tons of blogs. At Microsoft I see tons of blogs. At IBM I see tons of blogs. At Sun I see tons of blogs.”
What differences would those be? Are you suggesting these companies are making more money because more of their employees are blogging? Is Apple suffering in their public perception because they aren’t blogging? Sure, maybe you think less of them, but does the market? Does the public? Seriously, what are the things Apple is not achieving as far as success goes, by their apparent lack of the Scoble Blogging Strategy”? And what, specificially, have these other companies attained in the way of bottom line success by blogging. For example, there seems to be a log of XBOX MS bloggers, but the division is still losing money. There seem to be a lot of bloggers in the Online Business Division at MS, but that division is still losing money. So…what are the “differences”, exactly? Beyond you thinking its cool they blog.
October 28th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
Think different does not mean, don’t think Critically .
October 28th, 2006 at 7:29 pm
Goebbels: Blogging is about communication, how is it about anything else?
To me, I find blogs more transparent than some hidden away forum and more believable then some marketing spiel written on a corporate site.
Have a look at fordboldmoves.com. I think this site is fantastic. Whilst it’s being led by Ford Corporates (rather obvious) it still gives a for and against motion, usually by a third party, and asks you, the consumer, to comment. If companies can leverage this type of communication and build better products they do two things; 1) build a better company and 2) build a better rapport with their consumer.
October 28th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
“To me, I find blogs more transparent than some hidden away forum and more believable then some marketing spiel written on a corporate site.”
And to me, I find blogs a pathetic useless mouthpiece when employees with no true decision-making capability claim to be speaking for the company when nothing real comes of it. So what?
To this date, I haven’t seen anything effective come out of a company’s blog. Unless you think that companies with poor images in the consumers eye passing themselves off on susceptible dupes like yourself as more responsive and open is effective.
October 28th, 2006 at 9:11 pm
But wouldn’t you say Apple is doing just fine without transparency via blogging? And wouldn’t you also agree that blogging *will* change the nature of how Apple operates and that there are potential problems to wide-spread corporate blogging?
Frankly, I don’t see overwhelming incentives for Apple. Rather, I think Apple employee blogs will just introduce undesirable noise and spins to Apple’s finely tuned marketing and PR engine.
IMHO, blogging is not a magic potion that’ll work for every company. It’s a double-edged weapon that should be taken up when the needs are clear and problems are well understood.
October 28th, 2006 at 9:19 pm
Microsoft has lots and lots of bloggers because they’re trying to repair the reputation of the company. Apple has the reputation of angelic perfection, so there’s no need for them to blog.
October 28th, 2006 at 9:23 pm
Goebbels : Bang on. ‘Company blogs’ dont feel ‘quite real’. At best, they are extensions for some technical documentation.
October 28th, 2006 at 11:23 pm
@23 And yet Ford still continues to bleed money. Go figure.
October 28th, 2006 at 11:40 pm
Bat: none of the bloggers I know at Microsoft are doing it for that reason.
#25: should I link to all the people who have rebooting problems on their Macbooks? Oh, actually I have.
And should I get into Steve Jobs’ problem with stock options? http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/16/is-apples-options-scandal-over/
http://www.google.com/search?q=MacBook+rebooting&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Sure, Apple is doing just fine without blogging.
October 28th, 2006 at 11:46 pm
Goebbels: >>And to me, I find blogs a pathetic useless mouthpiece when employees with no true decision-making capability claim to be speaking for the company when nothing real comes of it.
It’s pretty obvious you’ve never read any of the blogs at:
http://adobe.blogs.com
http://blogs.msdn.com
http://blogs.technet.com
http://blogs.sun.com
http://www-03.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/
I learn a LOT from these blogs. But, I guess you are already all knowing and all that. I wish I could read your blog since you’re so knowledgeable.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:35 am
The great success and failure of the Apple way is the utterly unified design, system and communication.
There are alot of pluses to this way of doing things, but man it can be brittle. You don’t get to hear the Munchkins blog, you get to see The Man Behind The Curtain At A Time Of His Choosing.
And we _all_ wait to hear the lowdown on those goddamn keynotes, don’t we? And even when the products fail, they still seduce.
Will there be a next generation company that is able to make hardware/software that is as compelling without a sociopathic aesthete leader? Imagine the Meryl Streep character in “The Devil Wears Prada” as Woz!
Woz is great, Woz tells the truth, but Woz could not have saved the co. and the core principles of design and usability which Apple still teaches to everyone else.
A Modest Proposal
Apple is creating alot of ill-will by not acknowledging their mistakes quickly enough. Maybe the Rev A buyers could sign up for a subscription fee. It could be a special .Mac account (Probably an extra $83.33/mo., which would include some Apple stickers.)
They would purchase the latest and the greatest, which would be produced in limited editions first. They would use the machines for 6 mo. or until they broke down or exhibited some incredibly wack symptom (like mooing, frying testicles, blue tinge on a screen etc.) The Rev A device would then be returned to the closest Apple Store where a Genius would interrogate them for a few hours. They would then get a voucher for the real release of the device, Rev B.
The $1k/year spent by each member of The Bleeding Edge Corps would easily subsidize the money spent on the support staff to deal with their feedback, interrogation, vouchers, etc.
And we would all benefit.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:36 am
I had lnch with a few Apple folks earlier this week. They won’t even talk about work off the record. I’d say Steve has them all scared to death.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:31 am
Each campany has its strategy .. By the way, Microsoft or Sun bloggers can also have a negative effects on their campanies ..
October 29th, 2006 at 2:15 am
“And should I get into Steve Jobs’ problem with stock options? http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/16/is-apples-options-scandal-over/
http://www.google.com/search?q=MacBook+rebooting&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Sure, Apple is doing just fine without blogging.”
And what would blogging do re: the Job’s stock options problems?
Really?
You think blogging by the company being investigated by a SEC investigation would help?
In what way?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:22 am
Robert,
I’m not sure what you mean by Google being good at having employees blog. I always thought they were uptight about employees blogging their work.
So Google these (you started this):
‘checkout blog’ - brings the Official Google checkout blog
‘booksearch blog’ - Inside Google Booksearch, a bland booky blog written by employees, got to be ‘official’
‘docs and spreadsheets blog’ - brings the Official Docs and Spreadsheets blog
’sketchup blog’ - brings the Official Google Blog
‘desktop blog’ - brings the Official Google Blog
So a speedy test for five Google products brings one real employee blogging - and from a quick read of that blog I’m not sure telling him his product sucks will do anything, thoough I’d happily try (not that I do think that product sucks, you know what I mean).
I don’t think Google employees really blog about their work.
October 29th, 2006 at 3:16 am
Robert,
What’s the difference between a discussion forum and blog in terms of the interaction between a company and its customers, suppliers etc?
The Apple defenders here have a point, but if there’s a difference I’m missing I’d appreciate your insights.
I personally think Apple could indeed benefit from blogs. But rather than have employees blog, I’d instead like to see some senior people in the company blogging.
This would help to demystify the company to outsiders and help to address the #1 issue at the company from the pov of investors — what happens when Steve Jobs goes. That’s why the stock option thing is/was so worrying to The Street…
Strategically, Apple should be using blogs to give profile to some other leaders. It’s important that there be a widely trusted successor to Jobs. Blogs are a great way for candidates to build a connection with the public.
Apple also needs to address this growing perception that employees live/work in fear. That it’s a closed environment. Is it really? Why would any of America’s brightest grads want to work there if that’s the common perception out there? That’s an issue for investors again, the company’s ability to attract talent.
To correct this perception, an effective approach would be to encourage employees to blog. However, I don’t think the objective should be to serve customers. They already have an established online system for that.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:09 am
“While Redmond blogs, Cupertino ships.”
October 29th, 2006 at 7:31 am
@Goebbels: Haha, oh “dupe” is a bit harsh.
I can’t comment on whether they are or aren’t making a difference. I don’t think either of us can, as we’re not involved directly with the company.
What I can say is that I believe that communicating directly with your consumers/employers/employees/general public can only be a good thing. Any feedback, good or bad, is valuable. How you obtain it, who cares? Whether its forum, blog, feedback form, support call.. does it really matter?
I’m sure if Apple allowed their employees to blog, if they removed this blog-and-be-fired mentality, they could learn something valuable from their own employees, as well as the commentors. It’s the whole ‘on the off chance’… but it still a ‘chance’.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:35 am
Sorry I should clarify this a little better. As Robert said above, “Apple employees ARE allowed to blog. They just aren’t allowed to be spokespeople, as Chuqui admits.” When I say “allowed their employees to blog” I mean unrestricted, rather than with their hands tied.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:17 am
[...] Eine Randbemerkung im Scobleizer-Blog, die mich nachdenklich macht. Autor Robert Scoble, einer der besten Kenner der weltweiten Blogging-Szene, schreibt aus erster Hand, dass Apple-Mitarbeiter zwar Webtagebücher schreiben dürften, sie sollten nur ihre Arbeit nicht erwähnen. [...]
October 29th, 2006 at 9:38 am
Notice how Robert is suddenly posting Apple stories and iPod vs. Zune stories. He always seems to do that when his blog gets boring and nobody is comenting. Not surprising…
October 29th, 2006 at 9:49 am
Apple does not need to blog ! Instead of always promising - they deliver.
Blogs have not only positive effects like better customer awareness (BTW, do Apple really need it ?), but also negative - like leaking information to competitors, slowing down purchases of customers who will wait for next version of ABC, damage to marketing plans - as when entire information is given to public in the same time as product hit stores - people read about it and go to store to buy it same day.
Microsoft have to use blogs because it takes infinite time to release something - as well it does not hurt MS to do so - as this will make any potential competitors scared and does not hurt sales as MS is monopoly - no way for customers to escape to other vendor. Also this can be influenced by Microsoft business strategy - fast follower - not leader.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:01 am
Scoble, last I checked Nasdaq removed any threat of delisting and Apple is far ahead of any company taking care of their backdating issues. How would a blog help?
Apple has also released an update to the shutdown issue. How would a blog help?
What magic does this word “blog” have for you?
October 29th, 2006 at 10:03 am
er…um…how would blogging have ameliorated the Jobs stock options backdating issue? Please explain.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:27 am
Apple is brilliant at marketing products and upholding a legendary mystique around the company’s image. It’s not about luck, but careful management of ‘the message’. As long as Apple is playing at this level, there’s no reason to introduce bloggers who might dilute or confuse that message. Would you respect Apple more if you learned about company infighting over iPod colors? Apple’s image is so untouchable that it’s hard to imagine that kind of behavior occurs, although it certainly does at some level. Blogs would expose a ‘human’ side to Apple that it doesn’t need to show the world. The world already trusts and loves Apple.
Until the day comes when Apple starts to lose the trust of its customer and its image comes down to earth, don’t expect to see blogging happen.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:39 am
Scoble how does this blog post ( http://www.zillowblog.com/zillow_blog/2006/10/zestimate_accur.html ) help your favorite new pet from possibly being completely shutdown?
Does saying something silly and Web 2.0ish over and over again like “Zestimates” help? Does saying we aren’t offering appraisals help? Does saying “we are doing our best” help? As I see it, they are a 2.0 bubble company that never properly inspected whether or not their “business” was legal. And just because they had the blogs, social aspect, the new web tech, the VC money… well, it looks like they have serious reason to be concernedabout being around next year.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:46 am
>>What’s the difference between a discussion forum and blog in terms of the interaction between a company and its customers, suppliers etc?
A discussion forum usually doesn’t get found in Google.
Also, in a discussion forum you don’t know as much about the person talking. I wrote 100,000 newsgroup posts in the 1990s. I never knew whether the guy writing from Microsoft ran the team or was just an intern. On a blog I know that very well.
Also, with a discussion forum I hear a multitude of voices. Maybe I only want to hear from the folks who run the team. In a forum I have to put up with lots of noise. On a blog I can hear from, say, Mark Cuban without having his thoughts polluted by (or made harder to find) by other people.
But it all comes down to what changed over the past eight years: Google. Normal people use search to find stuff. Blogs get found. Messages left on forums do not. (Largely, I know there are exceptions).
October 29th, 2006 at 10:51 am
Goebbels: love how you call Zillow my favorite pet. That kind of language tells me you aren’t here for a conversation and that you aren’t accurately looking at what I’ve done. I’ve done dozens of interviews with Web 2 companies. Not just Zillow.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:11 am
#37: yeah, Cupertino ships computers that reboot often (my ex wife has a MacBook and it’s already rebooted). They also did stock option back dating, which is threatening to become a big story for Apple execs, including Steve Jobs. And my new MacPro’s Apple software has crashed twice in its first 10 days of life. All while running commercials that claim that their stuff never crashes.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:17 am
A discussion forum usually doesn’t get found in Google.
Bullshit. Anytime I Google for troubleshooting information, I get links to discussion forums that apply to the issue with the same frequency as other web sites.
Also, in a discussion forum you don’t know as much about the person talking. I wrote 100,000 newsgroup posts in the 1990s. I never knew whether the guy writing from Microsoft ran the team or was just an intern. On a blog I know that very well.
No Robert, you don’t KNOW. You take the poster at their word. But you don’t KNOW. Blogs are not magical identity checks that come with absolute proof of ID. When you say things like that, you really kill your credibility, and start looking like some mindless blogging fanboy.
Also, with a discussion forum I hear a multitude of voices. Maybe I only want to hear from the folks who run the team. In a forum I have to put up with lots of noise. On a blog I can hear from, say, Mark Cuban without having his thoughts polluted by (or made harder to find) by other people.
I’d rather hear from the people writing the code, not the talking head in charge of them. Hmm…I get that on Apple’s mailing lists all the time. No talking heads. Of course, it’s not like the people in charge of Microsoft are blogging. Sinofsky stopped, not that his was ever anything but blathering about generic managerial stuff. Where’s Ballmer’s Blog? How about Gates? RIght now, that whole “blogging from the top” thing is a little light at Microsoft.
However, I have more interesting questions for the “King of Open Communications”
Where on PodTech’s site can I find information on the executive staff? Oh, you’re there, but you’re not the Pres/CEO/Etc. Oddly, there’s nothing that’s easily found on the PodTech site. Where are the blogs from the PodTech executive staff other than you? Why did I have to search for PodTech CEO on PodTech’s site to find out that John Furrier is the CEO? That’s not very open Robert. Why are all his entries on http://www.podtech.net/home/author/johnfurrier/ nothing but interviews with others? Where’s his blog about PodTech? Why isn’t it on the home page as a link? That’s not very open Robert. Maybe you should get the PodTech executive staff blogging, before you whine about the people in charge at Apple not blogging? Because right now, PodTech’s not doing real good.
But it all comes down to what changed over the past eight years: Google. Normal people use search to find stuff. Blogs get found. Messages left on forums do not. (Largely, I know there are exceptions).
You DO know that forums are web sites, right? so unless the forum operator takes positive steps to prevent it, they get hit by Google just as much. The difference is, there’s a lot more NON-forum content, so that will, unsurprisingly, show up more than the forums will. But stop trying to push the idea that Google overlooks forums. It’s just not correct.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:18 am
Where does calling one company your pet foreclose the possibility that you’ve talked to others?
I’m trying to have a conversation, but you are avoiding how a blog would help with a tech issue and a financial/legal issue which they have addressed in other, more effective ways. You are avoiding discussing how companies that blog still have significant issues not helped by blogs. And you repeat the silliness about a couple of Apple issues which they have clearly been trying to address and they have discussed to the public.
So if you want to cry and take your ball home because I used the word “pet” (oooh, evil), that’s fine. Just shows how effective a blog is, doesn’t it?
October 29th, 2006 at 11:41 am
John: I’ve done thousands of searches, and so have those of us who work in the forum business (you do realize that I ran a forum as well as a blog at Microsoft, right?) and to claim that forums show up in Google searches as well as blogs is just false. Absolutely false.
And, yes, PodTech sucks when it comes to blogging.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:42 am
Is it big problem not to work on Apple, not to work on M$?
October 29th, 2006 at 11:44 am
“Blogs are not magical identity checks that come with absolute proof of ID.”
Sorry, John, but of course, they are. And Steve Jobs did have a blog for a while:
http://www.justonemorething.com
October 29th, 2006 at 11:48 am
>>er…um…how would blogging have ameliorated the Jobs stock options backdating issue? Please explain.
My point is that many who own Apple stock do so because of this visionary in faded jeans and black polo-neck — Steve Jobs.
Who the heck else is there at the company if he were to be taken out because of stock option abuses. I can’t name single senior executive who could fill his shoes.
Obviously, they exist. But I can’t name one? I can’t see their faces? Are they scared just like everyone else at the company? Is there anyone at Apple with a bit of backbone?
Now if some senior hitherto faceless people at Apple were bloggers, we’d have a better sense of who actually runs the company. It’s certainly not one man. But who?
October 29th, 2006 at 11:49 am
Strange, I do this search:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLJ%2CGGLJ%3A2006-30%2CGGLJ%3Aen&q=apple+support+discussion+macbook&btnG=Search
And I get form results from macnn, macintouch, Apple’s support site, Ars journals, notebookreview, autodesk, macosx.com… I even get search results from Apple’s web site.
Scoble, you are off your rocker if you claim Google doesn’t search forum results.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Strange, I do this search:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLJ%2CGGLJ%3A2006-30%2CGGLJ%3Aen&q=apple+support+discussion+macbook&btnG=Search
And I get form results from macnn, macintouch, Apple’s support site, Ars journals, notebookreview, autodesk, macosx.com… I even get search results from Apple’s web site in the first couple of pages of results. There are more forum results than blog results (and this has been a popular blog topic).
Scoble, you are off your rocker if you claim Google doesn’t search forum results.
October 29th, 2006 at 11:59 am
“My point is that many who own Apple stock do so because of this visionary in faded jeans and black polo-neck — Steve Jobs.”
No, they own the stock because of good financial results. But how would a blog help?
“Who the heck else is there at the company if he were to be taken out because of stock option abuses. I can’t name single senior executive who could fill his shoes.”
Because you’re not well informed. It’s relatively obvious who the current replacement is likely to be. I didn’t need a blog to know it though.
“Obviously, they exist. But I can’t name one?”
And that’s your fault. You can look at their exec profiles or read a financial report for the answer.
“I can’t see their faces?”
Is that a question? Their bios have pictures.
“Are they scared just like everyone else at the company?”
No. Does not having a blog make you scared? Are Ballmer and Gates afraid?
“Is there anyone at Apple with a bit of backbone?”
It takes a ton of backbone to work at Apple. Just read the most recent entry at the ApplePeels BLOG to see how much individual backbone is required.
“Now if some senior hitherto faceless people at Apple were bloggers, we’d have a better sense of who actually runs the company. It’s certainly not one man. But who?”
Jobs runs the company. Tim Cook is the No. 2. Fadell runs the iPod division. Ives does the design. Johnson runs the retail. Oppenheimer is the CFO. Schiller runs Marketing and is another possible replacement candidate for CEO (but unlikely). Serlet and Tamaddon handle software. All learned without the use of a blog.
So the question remains: how does a blog help with a financial issue? Particularly one that no one in their right mind would discuss?
Or more obviously, there are over 200 companies being investigated for backdating: show me one single company discussing it (or anything else) in a blog in a manner that it has helped them one inota.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:00 pm
Sorry for the double post.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:16 pm
Goebbels: I never said a blog would help with that. Go back and read what I wrote. I wasn’t talking about blogs when I brought that up. Thanks for trying to make this conversation only about blogs. I was trying to point out that Apple’s reputation isn’t as pure as many Apple fans make it out to be.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:26 pm
Goebbels,
I never said they should blog about options backdating. I said blogs could help Apple address the common perception that Apple is nothing without Steve Jobs.
You’re obviously familiar with Apple, but most people, including on Wall Street, are not.
Apple’s stock sank on the stock options news for one reason only. It started with a report called “Risks of options irregularities at Apple (and Pixar)” by Merrill Lynch’s Richard Farmer.
He pointed a finger directly at Jobs for possible options irregularities at Apple and Pixar.
That spooked The Street. Their reaction was simply what I’ve already explained. Fear that Apple is nothing without Steve Jobs.
Apple is nothing without Steve Jobs. That’s the widely held perception, as evidence by how the market reacted when Steve Job’s name was brought up as possibly being ousted over options issues.
So, right or wrong, this perception is a problem for Apple. Perception is reality.
October 29th, 2006 at 12:32 pm
Scoble, are you on crack? If you are referring to my last post, since I was quoting Dominic, I think I was responding to him. But even so, these are your quotes:
“Do you find an Apple employee? No. You find a corporate page. Send an email there. Does it go to the right person? I have no idea. Certainly bloggers who’ve tried that recently due to Apple’s rebooting problems are getting unstatisfactory answers.”
“#25: should I link to all the people who have rebooting problems on their Macbooks? Oh, actually I have.
And should I get into Steve Jobs’ problem with stock options?”
“yeah, Cupertino ships computers that reboot often (my ex wife has a MacBook and it’s already rebooted). They also did stock option back dating, which is threatening to become a big story for Apple execs, including Steve Jobs. And my new MacPro’s Apple software has crashed twice in its first 10 days of life.”
Seems to me you aren’t interested in a conversation if you are claiming you didn’t say the things you did say. If they are unrelated, then they are meaningless comments. If, however, they are somehow RELATED to this discussion, how is it now invalid to ask how a blog would help these matters?
October 29th, 2006 at 12:41 pm
“You’re obviously familiar with Apple, but most people, including on Wall Street, are not.”
No, Wall Street is perfectly well informed with everything I mentioned. Claiming they aren’t is to be misinformed.
“Apple’s stock sank on the stock options news for one reason only. It started with a report called “Risks of options irregularities at Apple (and Pixar)” by Merrill Lynch’s Richard Farmer.”
No, not one reason only. Not just concern about Jobs. It’s called financial restatements and any financial controvery. And Sank? They went from 67 to 64. Guess what the price is now? 80+
Essentially, you are showing that you are poorly informed: maybe you should read some other sources besides BLOGS.
“Apple is nothing without Steve Jobs. That’s the widely held perception, as evidence by how the market reacted when Steve Job’s name was brought up as possibly being ousted over options issues.
So, right or wrong, this perception is a problem for Apple. Perception is reality.”
This is a crude and simplistic perception often conveyed in blogs. How would a developer’s blog at Apple change that exactly?
Or more significantly, why do the blogging “elite” take such exception to this one company only? Is it because they are perfectly successful withOUT using their lifeline?
October 29th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
Come on folks. Robert is not attacking and I am not defending Apple. That kind of name calling might add jest to *personal* conversations but it does degrade *public* conversations. People with opposing views are neither attackers nor defenders. An opinion doesn’t define a whole person, not even a whole facet in my case.
The reason I comment on Robert’s posts is because a) I like the kind of conversations he starts, b) his readership is nicely balanced, and c) he is a nice guy. Not unlike small town barbershops where people talk in leisure and is remembered later with fond memories, I think everyone should appreciate having a place where you can go to find interesting conversations.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
This might be a duplicate post because my earlier seem to vanish into Robert’s Askimet.
Goebbels,
You have no idea what you’re talking about. You think The Street is informed, which is wrong.
Here’s a great piece by Barron’s blogger Eric Savitz on how the Street perceives Apple, Jobs and the options issue:
Apple Shares Rise As Investors Express Relief Over Jobs’ Retention
“Despite Apple’s (AAPL) revelation on Wednesday that the company has found 15 instances of options backdating- some of which CEO Steve Jobs knew about - investors have bid up the company’s shares this morning, apparently relieved that Jobs is still running the company.
“Nevermind the fact that former CFO Fred Anderson quit the board, or that financial restatements are coming, or that two former execs apprently involved in the backdating have been ID’d in the probe - the conventional wisdom is that the reference is to Anderson and former general counsel Nancy Heinen - and the information turned over to the SEC. The key is, Jobs, at least for the moment, seems to have dodged personal resposibility for what happened.
Some comments from this morning:
* Shaw Wu, American Technology Research:To us, this sounds very similar to Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) where Mark Hurd admitted he was aware of the investigations, but wasn’t aware that the activities were potentially illegal…We continue to believe that even in the worst case scenario where AAPL is guilty of improper options grants, we do not believe Steve Jobs is liable, the reason being the compensation committee at AAPL is run by an independent board that is not comprised of employees of AAPL.
* Benjamin Reitzes, UBS: We believe the financial impact on Apple will be minimal…While CEO Steve Jobs was aware of some favorable grant dates, he did not receive or benefit from these grants. It seems to us that he was likely unaware of the accounting implications (deduced from Apple’s disclosures). While we may hear a bit more about this issue in the news, we continue to operate under the view that Jobs is on solid ground based on the current facts.
* Richard Farmer, Merrill Lynch: Not Jobs’ finest hour but he likely stays CEO, in our opinion…assuming regulators concur with the assertion that he was unaware of accounting implications, and other matters. We do not believe the question of personal benefit from options irregularities to be as important as whether Jobs knowingly engaged in personal misconduct (e.g., encouraged accounting to deviate from stated procedures), neither of which appears to have happened, according to Apple’s investigation…Some risks persist: the possibility that regulators’ findings and conclusions may not concur with those of the special committee of the company; unresolved potential issues during Jobs’ tenure at Pixar; restatement risk; delisting risk….We continue to recommend share of Apple, with a price objective of $88.
You see, it’s all about Jobs. Now at some point Jobs will leave Apple. Question is, who will replace him and what do we know about him or her? Blogs could help with this succession issue, which is amplified by Jobs’ larger-than-life persona. If you don’t understand this by now, I can’t make you.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
Dominic, I can search the web for posts specifically about someone too… So what? Of course, any analyst will be concerned about the CEO… they aren’t going to be concerned that Chuqui left the company. Again, so what? What has been the response on Wall Street?
They remain UP. Way up in comparison to the rest of the sector. So where’s the problem.
As for claiming that blogs will somehow answer the succession issue, this is absurd. What company, even a company with CEO bloggers, is going to talk about executive succession plans before there is an actual transition? Answer: Zero.
Secondly, are you arguing that low-level employee blogs will give some insight? That seems unlikely. Why would any of the thousands of Apple employees know? Only the top 5 execs and Board will know. If you are arguing for Exec blogs, Microsoft has a problem.
And, finally, please explain how a blog is more effective at answering a succession issue than standard reporting, financial statements, and a ton of other sources. It simply is not so.
Sure, you like blogs. We’d like to hear more from inside Apple, sure. That’s nice. But claiming that the lack of blogs from within Apple specifically about work within Apple creates a problem is absurd. It’s a huge leap that makes no sense. Apple has one of the best images in the industry. Companies with blogs have far worse images. Simple.
So… no, I guess I don’t understand. I’m perfectly aware that analysts cover Apple. I’m perfectly aware that they would express concern about a very effective, powerful, and magnanimous CEO. I’m also completely aware that Wall Street is very happy with Apple and that any stock concerns have been dealt with through financial statements, investigations, and what not. I do not see how you’ve created anything close to a logical argument that a blog would eliminate or solve any of their concerns or that there is any sort of perception issue outside of a small community of whiny bloggers who want more juice… and to have their medium validated. If you can make that argument, I’m happy to hear it.
October 29th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
Heesh!
Apple has a problem that blogs could help fix. Their problem is that the stock is heavily hinged on a perception that the company is nothing without Jobs.
That perception isn’t only mine or just bloggers’, but it is held by the investment analysts who follow the company closely.
I gave you three comments from Wall Street analysts that demonstrate that their concern is Jobs’ future, not the restatements. I gave you these because you said Jobs wasn’t the issue in the options scandal, that restatements were. You were wrong.
So the perception of Steve Jobs as the main reason behind Apple’s recent success is perhaps the biggest single risk facing the company from an investment perspective. If he goes, the stock will suffer, and that will damage the company in other areas… low morale etc
Blogs by Apple executives could help to build profile for people other than Jobs. The could put different faces and personalities to the company. This could help people understand that while he’s important, Apple is more than Steve Jobs.
I’ve only said I think executive blogs would be good for Apple. I never said other blogs would be valuable. But I’m not saying they’re not valuable either.
Goebbels, you’re a troll and have added no value here.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:18 pm
Goebbels, I apologize for calling you a troll. Reading over a couple of your comments here, I see you have added value here.
Sorry.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
“Apple has a problem that blogs could help fix.”
How? You haven’t explained yet.
“Their problem is that the stock is heavily hinged on a perception that the company is nothing without Jobs.”
If this is their ONE “problem”, it’s not a problem. There stock is doing EXCELLENT.
“I gave you three comments from Wall Street analysts that demonstrate that their concern is Jobs’ future, not the restatements.”
No, actually, all of your quotes said it probably was no concern at all.
“I gave you these because you said Jobs wasn’t the issue in the options scandal, that restatements were. You were wrong.”
No, I said there were multiple concerns. You are trying to force your own subjective interpretation on these statements that say, “Looks like there is no concern” (and they are paid to consider any risks) to mean they are concerned Jobs will go away and without Jobs they will be in trouble.
“So the perception of Steve Jobs as the main reason behind Apple’s recent success is perhaps the biggest single risk facing the company from an investment perspective.”
This is your belief alone. I do not see any analyst saying they are concerned about Apple or its stock because all of its success is due to Jobs.
“If he goes, the stock will suffer, and that will damage the company in other areas… low morale etc”
All theory and speculation. And, again, how the hell does a blog change that. If Apple had 5,000 blogs and Jobs died tomorrow, there’s still a problem.
“Blogs by Apple executives could help to build profile for people other than Jobs.”
And they could NOT. Also, I have a “profile” of Cook, Schiller, Ives, Oppenheimer, and Serlet without having blogs.
“This could help people understand that while he’s important, Apple is more than Steve Jobs.”
And what if Apple wants everyone to think that it is all Jobs? I bet Jobs and Apple are perfectly happy with this perception currently.
“I’ve only said I think executive blogs would be good for Apple.”
And, again, why are we talking about Apple then? MS, Google, and others have blogs, but most of them do not have executive blogs (excepting Sun). Scoble seems to be talking about low-level staff, not executives. I’m sorry if my arguments (with both of you) seem to be at cross purposes; however, if we are only discussing exec blogs then that has its own unique problems and specifically calling out Apple is absurd. 99% of all companies do not have exec blogs and for very good reasons.
“Goebbels, you’re a troll and have added no value here. ”
Oh, shut up. Why are you talking to me then? I’ve added more to this post than anyone. A troll does not do that.
Here is a summary of points that began with this post and/or that I would like to make.
It is a MYTH that Apple does not have or does not allow bloggers.
It is a MYTH that Apple does not have a blog policy; it is the same as their communication policy which applies to everyone in all media forms.
Even though it is specific policy that no employees should act as spokesmen, there are blogs at Apple which do specifically address internal issues and products (like the Safari blog for example).
(Now my points specifically:)
There are pros and cons to all media including blogging; bloggers like to pretend that cons don’t exist for blogs.
There are pros and cons to having an open communication policy and there are pros and cons to having a singular, controlled, and directed communication policy. Blogging does not negate having a controlled communication policy.
Blogging does not trump all other modes of communication. You can’t pretend there is no communication because you like blogs better than PR, interviews, forums, mail lists, discussion groups, events, etc… but sorry, blogs are not special.
Even if you have internal blogs, you still have issues.
Bloggers like to pretend Apple has some unique problem because they are both the most controlling of their own message and the most effective in the market at communicating and maintaining a positive perception.
Now, if you’d like to bitch a Ballmer and others for their stock woes and lack of exec blogs have fun. I will still argue that they are unnecessary and that blogs are overblown.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:28 pm
Consider these questions:
MS has crap loads of blogs, do I have any idea who succeeds him? NO.
MS has crap loads of blogs, many specific to IE… they have even asked for tons of feedback, does that change my perception that IE is a load of crap and that they have got all the feedback in the world to make it better (prior to and despite their calls for input)? NO.
So… specific to the only two examples ever raised in this entire post about Apple, how is MS any better for having blogs?
They aren’t. Silly bloggers think they are validated and some people perceive a more open company (but this is only within the relatively small community of bloggers and blogreaders)… The rest of the world still has the same perception concerns. And even many readers like myself and others posting here still feel they have issues which have not been addressed by blogs. So what’s so special? What’s so problematic for Apple (particularly when they have one of the best perceptions of any company in the world and are one of the most successful)?
Is it so hard to see where I’m coming from?
October 29th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
#49: Robert, Ray Bolger would be proud.
I don’t think a weblog’s going to fix the Macbook issue. I’d place my money on revised firmware.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
“MS has crap loads of blogs, do I have any idea who succeeds him? NO.”
I meant to throw “Ballmer” in there somewhere obviously. Sorry about that.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
John: I’ve done thousands of searches, and so have those of us who work in the forum business (you do realize that I ran a forum as well as a blog at Microsoft, right?) and to claim that forums show up in Google searches as well as blogs is just false. Absolutely false.
So when I do searches on Open Directory issues, I’m NOT seeing hits to various tech forums in the same proportion that forums exist to other web sites
See robert, this is where you work your “magic”. I did not absolutely state that forums show up in google searches as well as blogs or other web sites. What I said was, (and really, it’s from your own Web Site, you should really try reading it more):
The difference is, there’s a lot more NON-forum content, so that will, unsurprisingly, show up more than the forums will. But stop trying to push the idea that Google overlooks forums. It’s just not correct.
You’re trying to insinuate that forums are somehow overlooked by Google. Wrong. What does happen is that because non-forum content VASTLY outnumbers forum content, you see far more non-forum hits on a Google search. Oh wait, that’s a lot more reasonable than what you accuse me of saying. Because I didn’t say what you accuse me of.
And, yes, PodTech sucks when it comes to blogging.
Hmm…so maybe you should put your own house in order before you point the finger at Apple? You look rather toolish otherwise. Or, to wax biblical, “Remove the beam from thine own eye before thou pointest out the mote in mine”. At least Apple has a page with their executive staff clearly listed on it, what’s PodTech’s excuse?
Who the heck else is there at the company if he were to be taken out because of stock option abuses. I can’t name single senior executive who could fill his shoes.
Obviously, they exist. But I can’t name one? I can’t see their faces? Are they scared just like everyone else at the company? Is there anyone at Apple with a bit of backbone?
Dominic, really, at least try a little. The current second in command at Apple is Tim Cook. Here, read about him: http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/cook.html
Note the link to photos. In fact, this link: http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/ has photos of all of Apple’s senior staff. It would appear that you can in fact, see their faces. Any other questions? (You know, for someone in the investment reporting biz, you don’t seem to be very good at finding basic information)
Scoble, you are off your rocker if you claim Google doesn’t search forum results.
Goebbels, it’s just Robert being annoyed with me, because I have a Blog, sign my own name, and question his authoratay. You’re far easier to dismiss :-P
Blogs by Apple executives could help to build profile for people other than Jobs. The could put different faces and personalities to the company. This could help people understand that while he’s important, Apple is more than Steve Jobs.
Pfft. nonsense. For one, where’s the great number of major tech company CEO blogs. There’s Jonathan Schwartz at Sun. Okay. But: No Ballmer, No Gates, No Hurd and so on.
How many people STILL think of Microsoft and Bill Gates as being one and the same? More than you want to think. Tell me why all the Microsoft blogs haven’t fixed that.
Of course, that fact that your blog is one of the ways you keep your perceived professional value, just like Robert, (only perhaps not as single - mindedly) would have nothing to do with your insistence that somehow, a blog would help Apple’s stock price, (80.41 as of friday, care to compare that to Microsoft’s? Blogs don’t seem to matter there), Apple’s rep, (um, it’s as good/bad as ever. Blogs don’t seem to matter there), or whatever else you think the magic spell of the blog will do for Apple that they are doing now without bloggers.
Let’s see, could Apple improve its communications? Undoubtedly. Are blogs the only, or even necessarily the best way to do that. No, not even close. They’re just one way to do that. That’s all. You and Robert really need to stop confusing the tool for the tool box. They are not in fact the same.
Your insistence that Apple’s chief executives not writing about how cool they and Apple are is somehow hurting them from an investment perspective is rather inane when you look at Apple’s stock price over the last 3 months, (up over $15 a share), the last six months, (up over $10 a share), the last year, (up around $20 a share), the last two years, (up by something like $40 a share), or the last five years, (Up by what, $70 a share?). You may not like how Apple does things, but when you look at the stock price (up), their product line, (continuous improvements), hell, even their market share is up around 5%, a really huge accomplishment when you think about it…well, your argument that they need blogs is rather weak.
Meanwhile, let’s look at the poster child blogging company, Microsoft: Oh dear. Rather um…not good. Oh, how about Sun: Oh, that’s ugly. Now that’s not to say that all companies that blog suck. Google’s stock isn’t making anyone cry.
But stop with the blogging fanboyism. It’s lame.
October 29th, 2006 at 2:52 pm
people, it’s sunday. get some fresh air.
October 29th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Sean, the North East is under massive gale force winds and I’m watching football, drinking beers, and laughing at these posts… with a couple of friends and my father. (In case you were concerned about my free time/ socialability.)
October 29th, 2006 at 5:18 pm
[...] Recently, an ex-Apple person, Chuq von Rospach, wrote eloquently and sincerely about this, and Scoble, who was basically Microsoft’s first blogger (and a former employee of mine at UserLand) called him on it, and I have some facts that aren’t part of either of their stories, I was there at the dawn of Apple’s blogging policy, on two occasions, and imho the truth is closer to what Scoble says that to what Chuq says. [...]
October 29th, 2006 at 5:30 pm
“And should I get into Steve Jobs’ problem with stock options? http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/16/is-apples-options-scandal-over/
Sure, Apple is doing just fine without blogging”
I think they are. Look at their latest quarter results. Regarding the stock options. Steve himself apologized for this. He didn’t apologize in his blog? Who cares? He did so. And nothing will come of this than what’s already happened. This is another nice media (and blog) story. Gives them print.
The rebooting issues? There’s a firmware update out which Apple say should fix this. We’ll give it time to see if it does. They’ve acknowledged the problem, released an update. Done. So what if it wasn’t talked about on some employee’s blog? Blogs aren’t everything. It seems like some bloggers have a mightier-than-thou attitude these days. Hey, we’re better than the “old school” press, blah blah blah. I’ve seen tonnes of blogs with inaccuracies, misinformation. So don’t cry when the real press fires back questioning bloggers. :)
This whole idea that, hey blogging is it, all companies should blog and blogging will fix it. That’s overstating it.
As some others have mentioned, there’s a vibrant discussion going on at Apple. discussions.apple.com is the place to go.
Some companies just blog to try and improve their image. Microsoft I’m looking at you. Their image sucks. So what are they trying to do? Get lots of bloggers out there. Their image still sucks.
“Apple has a problem that blogs could help fix.’
This was the best line. Got a problem? A blog will fix it! :)
October 29th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
[...] Well its some classic corporate blogging action that I’m looking forward to. Some cultures (read: APPLE) simply do not allow their employees to blog about the company. Looks like Intel may buck that trend through Tinyscreenfuls. If its successful, perhaps, like Microsoft, it can generate a sense of goodwill, integrity and trust that ad-dollars just can’t pay for. Provided, of course, that it sticks to being an honest blog (cough, cough Wal-mart!). [...]
October 29th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
Scoble, is it even REMOTELY possible that you can see where blogging my not actually help a company? And that it could be a waste of company resources? Are you even willing to entertain that other side of the argument? Sure, blogging can be helpful to some companies, but I think the larger the company the less impact blogging on the company.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
Ah, great! We get to have Winer stick his head into it again: Chuq is wrong, Scoble is right (even though he doesn’t dispute anything Chuqui says, only goes further to say its not enough) and HE WAS THERE!
Brilliant! Winer, Chuq is saying: anything that Apple may want to control (to say through Jobs or some other vehicle… or something it doesn’t want said) cannot be disseminated by an employee not authorized to do so. Simple. In which case, Scoble did act as a spokesperson. Second, you weren’t THERE when this policy was formed. Jobs talked to you and someone sent you a story (and you were a part of many, many examples of an attempt to eliminate leaks). Jesus, you don’t have to inject yourself into every single blogging story… Scoble will always kiss your ass. No need to misconstrue and conflate a story you have nothing to do with.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:14 pm
LayZ: >>Scoble, is it even REMOTELY possible that you can see where blogging my not actually help a company?
Yes. But then I could see how answering the phone might not actually help your company if you didn’t do it right either.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
@61 “I said blogs could help Apple address the common perception that Apple is nothing without Steve Jobs.”
Puh..leeze. The people that have that perception are likely very out of touch and likely haven’t much of a clue of what a blog is. Those that are familiar enough with what a blog is likely know how to figure out the Apple chain of command.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
Scoble, are you claiming not having a blog is the equivalent of not answering the phone?
October 29th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
No.
October 29th, 2006 at 7:21 pm
@65. And at some point Ballmer will leave MS. What’s your point? Who will replace him? Ozzie? Johnson? Raikes, Mundie? (BTW,I found those names on the MS corporate site, not from a blog) What blog amongst the plethora of blogs that are associated with MS explains their corporate succession plan?
October 29th, 2006 at 7:28 pm
this comments section proves two things to me:
1: Apple fanboys and loyalists will stop at nothing to defend their precious Apple
2: The impact of blogging (by any company) hasn’t been felt as widely as some might have previously assumed.
Blogging has a ginormous impact, solves problems quickly, AND will be crucial and nearly required by the next generation of informed users. And if they are anything like the users of today, 90%+ won’t be using Apple machines.
Fanboys- stop ruining conversations with your blind loyalty and defensive nature. IF anything, this is why Apple doesn’t blog, because many of its own users would make it impossible for anyone on the outside to fairly question or challenge an issue related to the company. One negative comment on an Apple blog post and BOOM! 163 fanboys biting the head of someone for even suggesting that Apple may be wrong, etc…
Enough already, seriously. You make up a tiny % of users yet spend most of the time bashing Microsoft and defending what only 5% of the world even uses. Get that white, plastic chip off your shoulder.
Jack
October 29th, 2006 at 7:48 pm
@81. Then what’s your point? Are you finally conceding that blogging is simply another communication tool and may not be for every company? And that companies can be successful, even in the tech industry (cough! Apple! cough!) without blogging?
October 29th, 2006 at 7:50 pm
[...] There’s been some conversation/debate recently about the lack of Apple blogs in the blogosphere, which got me thinking… [...]
October 29th, 2006 at 7:53 pm
@86 “Fanboys- stop ruining conversations with your blind loyalty and defensive nature. IF anything, this is why Apple doesn’t blog, because many of its own users would make it impossible for anyone on the outside to fairly question or challenge an issue related to the company. One negative comment on an Apple blog post and BOOM! 163 fanboys biting the head of someone for even suggesting that Apple may be wrong, etc…’
People are ruining the conversation by questioning the value of blogging? I think many of the so-called “fanboys” have raised valid issues in questioning Scoble’s position on blogging. It has little to do with Apple and more to so with showing where the bottom line value to a company is in blogging. Is Apple being hurt by not having an official blogging policy? Wall street and investors would likely say “NO”. Is Ford, GM, Sun being helped by blogging? Again Wall Street and investors would likely say “NO”. If I remember correctly it seems last year sometime Scoble was asked the same questions by Amazon (which he failed miserably in answering). So, this has nothing to do with fan-boyism, but everything to do with questioning the overall value of blogging from a corporate perspective.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
Robert, you say you aren’t making telephones and blogs equivalent, yet, whenever someone brings up that blogs are not in fact a necessity, you trot out your phone strawman.
You can claim whatever you want, however, your actions say different.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
“No.”
Wow, you are being really bold about participating in this conversation, Scoble.
October 29th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
@#89
“Is Apple being hurt by not having an official blogging policy? Wall street and investors would likely say “NO”. Is Ford, GM, Sun being helped by blogging? Again Wall Street and investors would likely say “NO”. If I remember correctly it seems last year sometime Scoble was asked the same questions by Amazon (which he failed miserably in answering). So, this has nothing to do with fan-boyism, but everything to do with questioning the overall value of blogging from a corporate perspective.”
You go on to further flame Scoble for something entirely unrelated that happened last year. Not to mention, in your recent post #89, you didn’t “question the value of blogging” nor did you comment on its importance in a corporate setting. Enough with the trolling please, it’s needlessly adversarial and leads to wasted time. Can you really speak on behalf of Wall Street investors? Another thing you said “wall street and investors”? Uh… typically that is the same group of people. It’s like saying “Washington and Congress” or “Deadheads and Hippies”.
That’s the beauty of blogs, what Scoble and most others know, but what some doubters do not. Writing a blog allows that content to be reviewed and instantly digested by more people than any forum post or any press briefing. It also allows anonymous or incredibly official responses in seconds.
OK, so it’s the Fanboys, AND trolls….
Jack
October 29th, 2006 at 8:47 pm
John and LayZ: go back and read what I wrote. Not what you thought I wrote. I said that blogs could hurt companies. So could answering the phone, if done improperly. So could speaking on stage. So could a variety of things. That doesn’t take away from their power as tools of business.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:18 pm
I think they are reading you just fine, Scoble. You seem to be unwilling to clarify your position from something extremely vague, and they seem to be trying to draw you out. For example, it seems to me, you are saying: blogs can only hurt if executed very poorly. Whereas, we are trying to determine whether you are willing to admit there are pros and cons to any communication even if it is done well. For example, can you concede that blogs can diffuse and homogenize a company’s message, etc?
October 29th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
@92. No, i don’t pretend to speak on behalf of Wall Street. All I have to do is look at the stock price, 10K report and other related data for these companies and conclude that, well, Ford starting a blog didn’t appear to keep them from losing money. Same goes for GM. On the otherhand, as Goebbels and John Welch have point out, Apple seems to have been doing just fine, thank you, by not having a corporate blog policy. So, I will ask you: Can you point to any, let’s say, F500 company that has directly benefited by blogging? Or, to even support Scoble’s arguemnt.. been directly hurt by blogging? All we are asking is: show the correlation.
October 29th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
@93. Of course anything done poorly will hurt a company Duh! Thanks for that, Capt. Obvious. But, that’s not the question. The question is whether companies are really hurt or helped by not using blogging as one of their communication tools. You say if blogging is done poorly it could hurt. But no one has provided concrete evidence of how blogging actually helps, over and above all other communication tools a company uses. And don’t say it’s not about the bottomline, because it is. EVERYTHING a company does is with the end goal of selling more product.. So, what evidence do we have that companies that don’t blog don’t perform well?
October 29th, 2006 at 10:08 pm
What I’ve learned from this thread so far:
1. Some people think Scoble thinks that corporate blogging always makes things better. (when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail).
2. Scoble really thinks blogging makes things better only when the blogging is done well. He still won’t concede that not blogging might be the right tactic in some cases.
3. Apple is not perfect. (As Auda Abu Tayi discovered of Lawrence)
4. But Apple is pretty darn good and maybe part of their recipe for success is not blogging.
5. People who admire Apple and people who don’t inhabit parallel universes and can barely make themselves understood to each other.
6. People who want all corporations to blog and people who want only some corporations to blog also inhabit parallel universes and can barely make themselves understood to each other.
7. The weekend is the best time for a clever A-list blogger to criticize Apple because people have plenty of time to toss it around and rehash arguments that have been made since time immemorial.
Here’s what I knew before reading this thread: Apple’s ability to control its image and its message is a powerful corporate asset. It defines the brand as much as — and in resonance with– industrial design, user-interface design, advertising design and retail design. All clean. Nothing extraneous.
Achieving that requires ruthless attention to amplifiying signal and filtering out noise. Jobs is all about removing noise. In Apple’s world, blogging is likely to be more noise than signal. A chattering noisy Apple would not be Apple.
(Disclaimer: I worked at Apple from 1986 to 1995.Most of those years we had too much noise and not enough signal. IMHO, it’s much better now. Apple blogs will not improve things for the customers or the shareholders.)
October 29th, 2006 at 10:25 pm
Michael: you’re right. So is LayZ. So is Goebbels. I’m wrong.
Apple shouldn’t blog.
There. I said it. Now, can we call go on with life?
Personally, by saying that, I also need to admit that we love being manipulated by professional manipulators who only want to control what I hear and see from Apple. God forbid some “noise” gets introduced into the conversation.
Nope, can’t have that. Nope. Only Steve Jobs can introduce noise.
Yeah, blogs won’t help here.
At least not until Steve Jobs decides that they are needed. Then, of course, we’ll get blogs from Apple.
Oh, and why introduce the noise of letting employees help customers in newsgroups? What’s so magical about those? Turn them off too!
Oh, and why introduce the noise of letting employees help customers in stores? After all, someone might say something incorrect and get quoted on a blog!
Yes, we need more corporate PR control of the message. Less noise. More Steve Jobs! Yeeeeaaaahhhhhh!
October 29th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
Robert, you still haven’t addressed Chuq’s actual posts - you’ve just gone off the deep end of screeching defensiveness - which does nothing to make you look good.
Chuq described Apple as having a comprehensive communications policy, not a specific blogging policy. Furthermore, Chuq said the communications policy NEITHER precludes running a weblog NOR talking about Apple-related topics on it. Chuq stated that the rules of the communications policy are simple: People who aren’t authorized to do so can’t act as spokespeople for the company, and that people who aren’t authorized to do so can’t reveal information the company considers confidential.
What’s unreasonable about that? As Chuq described it, it seems like the kind of policy that you’ll find in any company that works in a competitive market.
October 29th, 2006 at 10:42 pm
Chris: I don’t know who to believe. I have friends who I trust who work at Apple who say that Apple has told them they are not allowed to blog. Chuqui says that’s not true. I’ll go with my friends since there aren’t very many Apple bloggers.
What’s unreasonable about that? Well, if you’re happy working at a company like that, then I guess nothing at all.
I’d rather work at a company where I can blog about what I’m working on.
That sounds like it isn’t allowed at Apple unless you are an “approved spokesperson.”
So, how do you become an “approved spokesperson” at Apple? And what’s unreasonable about blogging about what you work on? Like those at Sun, at IBM, at Adobe, at Intuit, at Microsoft, are encouraged to do?
October 29th, 2006 at 11:27 pm
Oh, and why introduce the noise of letting employees help customers in stores? After all, someone might say something incorrect and get quoted on a blog!
Yes, we need more corporate PR control of the message. Less noise. More Steve Jobs! Yeeeeaaaahhhhhh!
Robert, you are sometimes just the most craptacularly sore loser on the planet. Every time people counter your OMGBLOGS!!! chanting with, oh, data and logic, you have this total snit fit. Wah. What, you want someone to bounce a ball off your head while asking you to squirt a few? Because with that, you’re that close to being a total crybaby about this. Christ on a pogo stick, grow up already. You like starting shit up, but dear lord, you are totally incapable of handling it once it starts.
I’d rather work at a company where I can blog about what I’m working on.
Pfft…you saying that is like a Mongoose saying “I like snakes”. No kidding Robert, you’d rather work where you can blog. That’s your VALUE. Yeesh. Is this supposed to be some major statement?
That sounds like it isn’t allowed at Apple unless you are an “approved spokesperson.”
Only to you. Did you bother to read what Chuq wrote, or are you still seeing what you want to, i.e. “no blogging == teh suck”?
So, how do you become an “approved spokesperson” at Apple? And what’s unreasonable about blogging about what you work on? Like those at Sun, at IBM, at Adobe, at Intuit, at Microsoft, are encouraged to do?
How about you get PodTech’s blogging problem fixed before you point the finger at someone else? It’s obvious that you didn’t bother to read most of what Chuq wrote, so I’m not surprised that you keep getting it wrong. But right now, your insistence that blogging is so important is ringing rather hollow when your own company isn’t blogging for shit.
October 30th, 2006 at 5:19 am
Many zones do not encourage blogging. In fact, they discourage it to the point of cutting your nads off.
See DOD, NSA, CIA, NASA, DARPA, Skunk still Works, Radmond Research Labs etc.
Forever and a day has a habit of limiting open conversation about technology which could provide quantum leaps in developmental spin off. Blog? Zip it.
JOT just a thought.
October 30th, 2006 at 7:35 am
[...] Robert Scoble has a post about the Blogging culture (or lack of) at Apple. So have they now entered the ranks of the Blog Challenged? Are they yet another example of the PR/Marketing guys sanitising the vibrancy out of an organisation? Posted by Mozza Filed in Uncategorized [...]
October 30th, 2006 at 8:17 am
Robert, Touché (to quote an Apple ad). But it’s not as though there aren’t any feedback mechanisms in place between Apple and customers. You mentioned a few. I’ll bet there are others at work as well.
It’s all a matter of calibration. Depending on what communication problems need to be solved, there are different ways to set the dials. Why does it always have to be set to max blogging?
October 30th, 2006 at 11:29 am
John C. Welch wrote:
“[Scoble has] yet to establish an actual need for [Apple] blogging”
I took a shot at it a few weeks ago:
http://arstechnica.com/staff/fatbits.ars/2006/10/12/5604
October 30th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Well, this comment thread shows exactly why blogs are basically worthless. There is no communication here just bickering and nitpicking.
I do find it funny that the pro-bloggers use many of the same tactics as socialists. Maybe if the USSR had a blog we