Flack's Revenge

My colleague Bennie tweeted a story from Ragan’s yesterday – Don’t Trash Press Releases Yet – which reminded me of a post I have been considering.  Since I have been scooped, I might as well go out with my post now, by adding another chapter in my PR Death Watch series.

For all the talk of the death of the press release, it is actually the press release and hard new story that is enduring, and edging out other types of content – and making tactics like soft news story and features pitching increasingly irrelevant in the process.

I refer to my own experience as evidence. Also, I spoke with representatives from the major press release distribution services, and they said that in general they have not seen a letup in the volume of press releases in recent years..

For further validation, one can also take a look at the Techmeme leaderboard, which tracks the sources generating the greatest amount of buzz in tech.  For the most part, these are news organizations and news-driven blogs, not sites that focus on extensive analysis or opinion.

There are several forces at work here.  The first is the enduring power of institutions.  One need look no further than the Jay Leno saga as an example.  What seemed like a bold experiment failed because late night talk occurs at late, night no exceptions.  There’s a whole system at work that reinforces this truism – viewing habits, diminishing draw of network programming in general, what else is on at these hours, etc.

Similarly, the creation, distribution and coverage of news is an ingrained institution. There is an ecosystem that reinforces this, and thus drives demand for press releases.  Put simply, press releases are an accepted way of packaging newsworthy info (or info that aspires to this level of noteworthiness).  Inhabitants of the ecosystem include marketing departments, PR firms, press release distribution services, Websites, SEC, consumers and investors.

Another factor is something I call Info Darwinism (also refer to ideas behind the science of memetics).  The clamor of the Web, and the burgeoning growth of various channels of info forces us to be selective and focus on Info with an Edge, i.e. hard info;  the info that jumps to the top of the Web heap, rises above the din and grabs our attention.  This could be hard news, it could be rumor, gossip, easily digestible but fun and attention grabbing snippets, info that relates to YOU and your concerns.

It is all about survival of the “fittest” info. The crowd applies their wisdom and filter, deciding what info is hot and what is not.  They consume the info and share it, elevating its rank and bringing it to wider recognition in the process.

AT&T’s cellular network leaves a lot to be desired, according to many.  However, if you are willing to put up with it, you too can become the proud owner of an iPhone, since AT&T is still the only network that supports the world’s coolest device.

And why, pray tell, is AT&T’s service so bad – and apparently getting worse every day (if you believe news reports and the stories that get told and retold)?

Because of all those iPhone users jumping on board, of course, and their streaming, browsing, uploading, texting and talking.  It makes perfect sense that these data hogs put a hurt on network resources and rob it of precious bandwidth.

All well and good, except network tests show that AT&T has the best network for data, according to a NY Times article by Randall Stross: AT&T Takes the Blame, Even for iPhone’s Faults.

The article cited independent testing by two firms.  Here are the results from the article (the first, based on tests by Global Wireless Solutions, and the second from Root Wireless, a company that ran close to 5 million tests involving smartphones and the major carriers):

The results place AT&T’s data network not just on top, but well
ahead of everyone else. “AT&T’s data throughput is 40 to 50 percent
higher than the competition, including Verizon.”

In every market, AT&T had faster average download speeds and had
signal strength of 75 percent or better more frequently than did
Verizon.

The article suggests that the poor network performance is due to the iPhone design… but people simply do not want to believe that a company as cool and tech savvy as Apple could be at fault, and are more apt to blame AT&T:

Roger Entner, senior vice president for telecommunications research at
Nielsen, said the iPhone’s “air interface,” the electronics in the
phone that connect it to the cell towers, had shortcomings that “affect
both voice and data.” He said that in the eyes of the consumer, “the
iPhone has the nimbus of infallibility, ergo, it’s AT&T’s fault.”

Note: The article asks the question – but does not answer, at least to my satisfaction – why Consumer Reports ranks AT&T lowest in cellphone service if the company truly does have a better network. It seems to imply that the dissatisfaction stems from iPhone users and the iPhone design.  Randall has opened our eyes and cast some doubt on some conventional wisdom, but I am not sure the “myth” has been completely and undeniably busted.