<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pulling a De Kort</title>
	<link>http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2006/08/30/pulling-a-de-kort/</link>
	<description>A blog about new media, marketing, and communications</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:18:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jay Ferrari</title>
		<link>http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2006/08/30/pulling-a-de-kort/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Ferrari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2006 21:15:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2006/08/30/pulling-a-de-kort/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>What a breakthrough: Donâ€™t shoot the messenger. Shoot the medium!

Since LM doesnâ€™t have the courage to embrace new media and prepare a proper rejoinder, the quickest defense is to dismiss that â€œnewfangled technologyâ€.

When The House of Seven Gables (arguably the first modern novel) was published in 1851, religious idealists railed against the book â€” not because of its content, but because the feared the youth of America would squander precious prayer time and instead sit under trees and read.

Change the year, swap novel with Web, and youâ€™ve wrapped the critique in contemporary clothing. The good news is that todayâ€™s hyper-media consumers are increasingly aware of this dodge. LMâ€™s dismissal of the means of message delivery, rather than dealing with the message itself, is tantamount to confession â€” at least, thatâ€™s what will linger (albeit only for an instant) in our minds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a breakthrough: Donâ€™t shoot the messenger. Shoot the medium!</p>
<p>Since LM doesnâ€™t have the courage to embrace new media and prepare a proper rejoinder, the quickest defense is to dismiss that â€œnewfangled technologyâ€.</p>
<p>When The House of Seven Gables (arguably the first modern novel) was published in 1851, religious idealists railed against the book â€” not because of its content, but because the feared the youth of America would squander precious prayer time and instead sit under trees and read.</p>
<p>Change the year, swap novel with Web, and youâ€™ve wrapped the critique in contemporary clothing. The good news is that todayâ€™s hyper-media consumers are increasingly aware of this dodge. LMâ€™s dismissal of the means of message delivery, rather than dealing with the message itself, is tantamount to confession â€” at least, thatâ€™s what will linger (albeit only for an instant) in our minds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wes Alwan</title>
		<link>http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2006/08/30/pulling-a-de-kort/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Wes Alwan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2006 21:13:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://inspireaction.mindandmedia.com/2006/08/30/pulling-a-de-kort/#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Power to the people!

Lockheed Martin and the Coast Guard would do well to respond by posting their own YouTube video. Seriously.

On the other hand, simply reacting defensively and attacking the medium generally seem to have been counterproductive strategies for companies subjected to this kind of criticism. As in: â€œâ€˜Anybody with a webcam and something to say, regardless of whether itâ€™s true or not, can say it on YouTube,â€™ she said, adding that the company would not ask the site to take the video down.â€

Whatever the authenticity of the engineerâ€™s complaints, LM would do well to explain their position openly and in detail, and not simply claim that their internal (black-box) investigation has settled the matter. Otherwise thereâ€™s a chance theyâ€™ll be explaining their position before a congressional committee.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Power to the people!</p>
<p>Lockheed Martin and the Coast Guard would do well to respond by posting their own YouTube video. Seriously.</p>
<p>On the other hand, simply reacting defensively and attacking the medium generally seem to have been counterproductive strategies for companies subjected to this kind of criticism. As in: â€œâ€˜Anybody with a webcam and something to say, regardless of whether itâ€™s true or not, can say it on YouTube,â€™ she said, adding that the company would not ask the site to take the video down.â€</p>
<p>Whatever the authenticity of the engineerâ€™s complaints, LM would do well to explain their position openly and in detail, and not simply claim that their internal (black-box) investigation has settled the matter. Otherwise thereâ€™s a chance theyâ€™ll be explaining their position before a congressional committee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
