<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:series="http://unfoldingneurons.com/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blogketing (re)Visited</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/</link>
	<description>Understanding the accumulation of data</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:14:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" />
	<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://superfeedr.com/hubbub" />
		<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat :: Blogketing Ourselves</title>
		<link>http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat :: Blogketing Ourselves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:29:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/#comment-11</guid>
		<description>[...] guess I kind of touched Jon Toigo nerve when I said he was &#8220;promoting himself&#8221;.  Sounds like he took offense to the term, but perhaps he shouldn&#8217;t [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->[...] guess I kind of touched Jon Toigo nerve when I said he was &#8220;promoting himself&#8221;.  Sounds like he took offense to the term, but perhaps he shouldn&#8217;t [...]<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat :: Sailing the Titanic (Why We Need ILM and Then Some!)</title>
		<link>http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat :: Sailing the Titanic (Why We Need ILM and Then Some!)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:42:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] getting into the debate on blogketing (I&#8217;ll save that for another post), I was pretty impressed by Chuck Hollis&#8217; recent post on ILM. I think he&#8217;s made a good [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->[...] getting into the debate on blogketing (I&#8217;ll save that for another post), I was pretty impressed by Chuck Hollis&#8217; recent post on ILM. I think he&#8217;s made a good [...]<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the storage anarchist</title>
		<link>http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>the storage anarchist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:59:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/#comment-6</guid>
		<description>I think you may have missed my point. I&#039;m not really talking about censoring bloggers opinions and biases...

If you track back to my previous discussions on blogketing (entries 14, 15 &amp; 17 on my blog at http://thestorageanarchist.com), you&#039;ll see I&#039;m really asking whether Corporate  bloggers have the same truth-in-advertising responsibilities as the other more formal marketing communications vehicles, or can they get away with making misrepresentions and unverifiable assertions simply because they&#039;re &quot;blogging&quot; and not &quot;copy writing?&quot;


Every Corporate Blog I&#039;ve seen is governed by a Code of Conduct and/or a Business Conduct Guide, and in most cases, the CoC/BCG also applies to employees who blog outside the shadow of the corporate logo (EMC&#039;s blogging policy indeed covers my blog).

It&#039;s one thing for industry analysts to make outrageous assertions about a vendors&#039; products - it&#039;s how they make a living. And if the vendor doesn&#039;t like it, they have every right to persue correction or retraction (although this works better with some analysts than others).

But I think it is very different when a Corporate Blogger crosses over the line into the land of fiction or omission. In my book, if you couldn&#039;t print the assertion in the front page of your company&#039;s web site, it probably doesn&#039;t belong in your blog. 

Despite all the CoC/BCG&#039;s, I&#039;ve seen many misrepresentations posted as fact on corporate blogs. Some of these wouldn&#039;t have been appropraite for even internal &quot;Company Confidential&quot; communications back in the pre-blog days. And I for one don&#039;t think it&#039;s right - I&#039;m not sure what&#039;s to be done about it, though...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I think you may have missed my point. I&#8217;m not really talking about censoring bloggers opinions and biases&#8230;</p>
<p>If you track back to my previous discussions on blogketing (entries 14, 15 &amp; 17 on my blog at <a href="http://thestorageanarchist.com)"  rel="nofollow">http://thestorageanarchist.com)</a>, you&#8217;ll see I&#8217;m really asking whether Corporate  bloggers have the same truth-in-advertising responsibilities as the other more formal marketing communications vehicles, or can they get away with making misrepresentions and unverifiable assertions simply because they&#8217;re &#8220;blogging&#8221; and not &#8220;copy writing?&#8221;</p>
<p>Every Corporate Blog I&#8217;ve seen is governed by a Code of Conduct and/or a Business Conduct Guide, and in most cases, the CoC/BCG also applies to employees who blog outside the shadow of the corporate logo (EMC&#8217;s blogging policy indeed covers my blog).</p>
<p>It&#8217;s one thing for industry analysts to make outrageous assertions about a vendors&#8217; products &#8211; it&#8217;s how they make a living. And if the vendor doesn&#8217;t like it, they have every right to persue correction or retraction (although this works better with some analysts than others).</p>
<p>But I think it is very different when a Corporate Blogger crosses over the line into the land of fiction or omission. In my book, if you couldn&#8217;t print the assertion in the front page of your company&#8217;s web site, it probably doesn&#8217;t belong in your blog. </p>
<p>Despite all the CoC/BCG&#8217;s, I&#8217;ve seen many misrepresentations posted as fact on corporate blogs. Some of these wouldn&#8217;t have been appropraite for even internal &#8220;Company Confidential&#8221; communications back in the pre-blog days. And I for one don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s right &#8211; I&#8217;m not sure what&#8217;s to be done about it, though&#8230;<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Storagezilla</title>
		<link>http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Storagezilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/07/23/blogketing-revisited/#comment-5</guid>
		<description>Personally I don&#039;t think it&#039;s that bad a thing that bloggers who work for EMC (There&#039;s a difference between those and EMC bloggers. Bloggers who work for EMC are more likely to be blasted by the company for one, I still have some buckshot in my behind from being shot by corporate), are exuberant about what they&#039;ve been working on.

Known bias does add context to information. And if you read something written by someone who knows something about what it is you&#039;re reading about and both they and you think it&#039;s awesome afterwards, well then maybe it is actually awesome.

Or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Personally I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s that bad a thing that bloggers who work for EMC (There&#8217;s a difference between those and EMC bloggers. Bloggers who work for EMC are more likely to be blasted by the company for one, I still have some buckshot in my behind from being shot by corporate), are exuberant about what they&#8217;ve been working on.</p>
<p>Known bias does add context to information. And if you read something written by someone who knows something about what it is you&#8217;re reading about and both they and you think it&#8217;s awesome afterwards, well then maybe it is actually awesome.</p>
<p>Or not.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
