reminder: this post is an opinion (check the category); that means that these are my thoughts. This opinion is, in no way, representative of the thoughts of my employer, my friends, or even my spouse (eventhough she does actually read my blog).
msmobiles.com has published this piece about Microsoft “influencing” the blogosphere. What’s the issue? Microsoft loaned Peter Rojas, editor-in-chief of Engadget, a HTC Universal device for two weeks. Peter subsequently wrote a FAQ / very basic review and posted several photos of the device.
So why does it matter? Regarding the HTC Universal, Microsoft is only part of the equation. In my opinion, more people care about the hardware than the software of this device. Guess who makes the hardware? HTC. Gosh, that’s not Microsoft, is it? Plenty has been written about Windows Mobile 5.0 by now, and what Peter wrote did not even go in-depth on WM5.0. Certainly Microsoft would like to get the word out on their platform, it’s good stuff, but I think that calling this action a bribe is a little much.
Besides, usually when you bribe someone, they usually write a rather glowing review (and omit any negative comments). I do not see that here. In fact, Peter touched on some things that weren’t so good, or needed improvement. As I see it, the answers to the FAQ were 99% factual; the 1% I see as subjective content lies in statements like ‘WiFi is way, way better on the Universal’.
There have been a number of articles on the HTC Universal to-date, and this one will only serve to further promote it. So who wins?
Engadget – they featured a forthcoming ‘hot’ device. They have, I’m guessing, gained a few new readers and have, again, proved to their existing readers that they can get early access to new hardware -this will keep those readers coming back.
Microsoft – Readers see cool hardware running their new mobile OS and want to find out more about it. They also may be interested to find other devices running the OS
HTC – Readers see cool hardware made by this OEM and are not only excited about purchasing it, but also interested in what else they have to offer
msmobiles.com writes:
If Microsoft loans new fantastic, yet unreleased, mobile phone to editor in chief of certain news website, but at the same time it denies the same favor to all other news websites, and if this website then publishes positive stories about this phone, then can it be called "bribe"?
Here’s what I think:
msmobiles.com was wanted to review the device and was snubbed by Microsoft and is taking issue with the fact that Engadget was loaned a device. Maybe I’m wrong. I am making a statement of opinion, not fact. Am I ‘anti-msmobiles.com’? No. If I was I would not link to them so frequently from my blog. They have, for the most part, good information. I do think; however, that sometimes they can be a bit sensationalist[1] in their reporting. Their choice. You and I, gentle reader, can choose to pay attention or not. Choice – ain’t it great? Is this a case of Microsoft influencing the blogosphere? I do not think so.
-Nino
[1] and yeah.. the title of this post was intentionally sensationalist (IMO)