OK, they’re not all annoyances. But I liked that headline.

So here’s the story. Although they’ve since been told by a federal judge they were full of it, the American Society of Composers, Authors & Publishers (ASCAP) recently tried to say that if one’s cell phone rings — and the ringtone is a recording of a copyrighted song — it’s a public performance and it’s members deserve compensation.

In a word: bullshit.

ASCAP was suing AT&T and Verizon in an effort to raise more revenue for it’s members, but to call this move a stretch is an insult to stretches everywhere.

My point here is not simply to pick on ASCAP. Really.

My point is we’re in a world that’s changing faster than anything we’ve ever seen, especially when it comes to entertainment options, which are now digital and expanding to new devices (like cell phones) at light speed. As a content creator myself, I believe in compensation for those who create. I think piracy is wrong, and I think groups like ASCAP should defend the rights of their members and ensure they are fairly compensated for the use of their creations.

However, I don’t think they should be ridiculous, bordering on stupid.

Things like ringtones are the 2009 version of sampling. How far would ASCAP have gotten in 1979 going after Panasonic for royalties that might be due because I took an album to a party and played it for my friends? After all, I paid for the album — but I played it for my friends. Horror! In reality, many of my friends probably purchased the same album after hearing it at the party. It was an ecosystem that evolved more slowly than today’s, so it made sense, and everyone — including music industry executives — seemed to be able to keep up. Today, it’s just plain moving too fast for too many — but I believe it is their responsibility and, in fact, their job, to keep up.

Consider: A recent UK poll showed illegal file sharers buy much more music than those that don’t share files. It appears that they’re “sampling” lots of music and, in the end, buying lots of music they like. Kind of like listening to the radio in 1977! This isn’t new news, as this 2005 article from The Guardian confirms.

Companies and organizations need to be slower to sue and quicker to embrace new business models and figure out how they can make more money — for themselves and the talent that creates the content they represent. Where would we be if the makers of buggy whips had continued to simply sue the auto industry rather than evolve into makers of brake pads?

All that said, please don’t make “Baby Got Back” your ringtone while setting your phone to ring on a 10!

posted by Doyle

Just when I think I’m going to leave AT&T alone, the saga keeps getting better.

My voice service is so bad that I filed an FCC complaint against AT&T. Yesterday, during a meeting, I received two phone calls from an 800 number I didn’t recognize. Since I was in a meeting, I didn’t take the calls, but no voice mail was left. The calls came in at 2:43 and 2:45, and at 2:59, I received this email:

Mr. Albee

I am the Specialist assigned to the complaint regards to your wireless service; and the information sent to Federal Communications Commission. I have been attempting to reach you, without success. If you would still like to discuss your complaint, I can be reached at 800-498-1912 ext 47113. My office hours are 7:30AM to 3:30PM (PST), Monday through Friday.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Sincerely

Rebecca Kilby
Customer Relations Specialist
Office of the President
West Region AT&T.
1 (800) 498-1912 ext.47113

Yep… left the number in on purpose. If you’re moved to call, feel free. And, I won’t even comment on the grammar (that’s a copy-and-paste). Seriously, AT&T?

What you can’t see in this post is the variations in sizes of the fonts. Clearly, this is a cut-and-paste job designed to provide a paper trail to say to the FCC “see, we tried to call… they didn’t respond!” At least they could have given their employees a template to follow that had proper grammar and punctuation!

My issues:

1. Would you send an email to a client after calling twice in about 120 seconds saying “I’ve been trying to reach you, unsuccessfully”? I wouldn’t. That’s rude and unprofessional. It might cost me a client. That’s how I feel about this.
2. I received an email from my friend and colleague Justin at Boldface Design. He received a similar call/email a couple of days ago. He returned the call, left a voice mail and has yet to receive a return call. Guess they’re too busy double-dialing people like me so they can tell the FCC they tried to call “multiple times.”
3. If the email (above) was actually written by a customer service professional, that person should be counseled — immediately. Looks to me like legal had a hand in it (based on the cut-and-paste, the fact that the word “Specialist” is capitalized, and other clues) and they’re simply covering themselves. Any company that lets the legal department dictate the customer service is doomed.

So, AT&T irritates me so much that I file a complaint with the FCC, and instead of working with me, they simply check off boxes and irritate me further. Yet, my monthly bill will arrive and AT&T will expect payment. I love my iPhone, but the service it’s tethered to is awful. Just. Plain. Awful.

Have to say… I’m mystified at AT&T. Your handling of these issues is a complete joke. And Apple, really? Your customer service, in my experience, has always been nothing short of excellent. Why do you put up with this nonsense out of such an important business partner?

Oh, and Rebecca? You’ll be hearing from me first thing Monday. And if I miss you and you don’t return my call, I’ll keep trying. If it becomes a problem, you might check YouTube for the recordings.

My recommendation, AT&T? Quit throwing gas on the fire and treat your customers with the respect we deserve.

To all of the Balloon Boy Skeptics out there, I owe you an apology.

A few weeks ago, millions of people across the country were glued to their computers, televisions, Twitter feeds, etc. watching and waiting in horror as the drama of “Balloon Boy’s” flight unfolded. We’ve since found out (or sincerely assume) that this was a complete hoax – nothing but a money-hungry family wanting an extended fifteen minutes of fame.  If you can’t tell, I’m still a bit bitter as I was one of many who were actually generally concerned and at times terrified for the well being of this young boy.

Although I don’t want to give any more attention to this ridiculous incident, especially since it’s finally quieted down, it definitely got me thinking about some things.  I, like many others in Colorado, first heard about this on Twitter, by following the fabulous @cbs4denver and @mistymontano. I read aloud some of their initial tweets to my colleague, Melissa, because hearing about a flying saucer with a 6 yr. old boy in it was too funny to actually be true. We both got a good laugh out of it.

As we learned throughout the day what was really going on, or at least suspected, my laughter quickly subsided. But for others it did not. Like wildfire, news of #balloonboy spread on the Internet and as we learned the name of the family involved, hoax theories and suspicions arose and the jokes starting flowing.

First there was the whole Wife Swap saga (two appearances in fact!) Then, there was the irony that the boy’s name was Falcon and that Falcon was taking his first flight. Then came the lovely rap videos that the Henne family made. As snarky comments were being made on Twitter, I couldn’t laugh. I was stunned that in the midst of a possible tragedy, people were already assuming the worst. I immediately judged those who were making jokes and taking cracks at the family and the boy supposedly still in the balloon – and now I apologize for my judgment.

But now that it’s all said and done, it brings up an interesting point. Some of the folks I follow that were in fact right calling it a hoax, whether it was the appropriate time to do so or not. So, how soon is too soon to start voicing the skepticism? Was it okay for people to start questioning the family long before we even knew that Falcon was safe? Where do you draw the line in Tweeting real-time during a potential tragedy?

In an era of social media and citizen journalism, folks had every right to become skeptical and question certain aspects of the story. While I preferred to wait until after we knew the outcome to begin to voice my apprehensions, many did not. At the time I thought it was a little too soon, but now I realize that many of the skeptics were just doing their jobs as good citizen journalists and asking questions that any good reporter would do.

Regardless of which side you were on that day, we’ve all begun to the learn the truth and the suspicions and bad jokes will continue in the wake of this “fake” tragedy – now, rightfully so.

Also, probably the best “photo” I’ve seen of the whole hoax can be found here.

The outstanding CBS-TV news program 60 Minutes did a piece last night called “The Movie Pirates” which outlined the global problem of motion picture piracy. Overall, an interesting piece. Sadly, in the end — thanks in large measure to what I think is a lack of technology background and understanding on the part of correspondent Lesley Stahl — it turned into a piece that gave corporate media a chance to get a plug in for network regulation without ever uttering “net neutrality” or anything close.

Let me be very clear: I do not condone the piracy of intellectual property and believe those who engage in the activity for profit should be punished. However, I also do not condone ridiculous schemes to limit my ability to use and enjoy the content I’ve paid for or the slippery slope of network management that can limit our ability to get the data we want from the Internet connections we pay for. An example for each:

First, let’s think about digital rights management (DRM) and how it limits our ability to use and enjoy what we paid for. I use this example frequently: I remember buying an album in high school (won’t tell you which one… too much potential abuse!) and really liking one of the songs. So I drove to my friend Mark’s house, and we listened to it. Our friend Greg called, and we went to his house, where we listened to the song. We all liked it. We then took the album to the party and played it there, and it was a hit. Sounds reasonable, right? But imagine if when we got to the party, instead of playing the song, a voice came from the speakers that said “I’m sorry, but your license for this music only allows you to play it on three different stereos. You may not play this content here.” Sadly, it’s not much different than many DRM schemes we all accept and deal with today. Instead, because I could play that album for my friends — and they liked it — the sampling that took place generated the sale of 10 or more additional copies of the album.

Second, let’s look at the potential for “packet sniffing” and how it can be used badly and against us. I will defend any ISP’s right to manage its network — that makes it better for all customers. However, if ISPs were able to legally limit certain bits while letting others go through unfettered, that would be problematic. For example, let’s say my ISP also offers telephone service, but I chose to use Skype or Vonage instead. What if, through deep packet inspection, my ISP was able to degrade my service when I’m on a voice call through a competitor, making the service so bad I caved in and signed up for their service. That’s not fair, and it’s not what I pay for. Think this is crazy? Comcast was already found to be doing similar activity when they were caught placing false-reset packets in BitTorrent streams by several users, a violation of its own Terms of Service. The FCC got involved, but not because of the denial of content, but because it was a violation of Comcast’s Terms of Service with it’s users.

Which brings us back to 60 Minutes this evening. The story did a great job of telling the story of piracy from many points of view. Director Steven Soderbergh told how piracy is limiting the number of projects which get made by studios. While this doesn’t hurt the mega-stars, it does hurt the camera operators, the grips, the caterers and the thousands of others who only work if movies are being made. In the end, it hurts us as consumers as well, by limiting our choices. I agree.

But when Ms. Stahl began to describe what she called “a whiz-bang technology called ‘BitTorrent’” and how it made it easier to pirate movies, I had the feeling we were headed south. The story concluded by basically indicting the Internet for Hollywood’s $6 billion per year piracy problem. My issues:

• Ms. Stahl’s level of technical expertise and her probable understanding of her audience caused her to position BitTorrent transfers as some new and bad thing. It was inferred that the only real use was to pirate movies. From this report, I could see many people supporting legislation they don’t fully understand.
• I’m curious how the $6 billion figure was arrived at? If the assumption is that every pirated copy takes a full-priced legal copy out of the studios’ hands, that’s a seriously flawed number. If users wanted to spend $29.95 on a movie, they certainly wouldn’t purchase one shot on a camcorder in a theater… they’d buy the real thing. These folks are looking to save a few bucks.
• One industry source said “I wish Al Gore had never invented the Internet.” Again, given the audience, this can open the door to a favorable response to legislation many won’t fully grasp.

So what can we logically assume Mr. and Mrs. Middle America took away from this report? Maybe, “We need to regulate this Internet thing to stop these bad people from stealing money.” Sadly, all that does is escalate the already irritating game of cat and mouse between pirates and DRM schemes. I’d like to offer another solution: Let’s stop protecting business models and let the free market economy take over.

What if we let people who wanted to watch a movie the day it comes out on their home theater system do so… but we charged them $50. Right now, I have to go to the theater to watch a movie if I want to see it when it first comes out whether I like that experience or not. Maybe I don’t wait for DVD just to save money, but maybe I’d rather watch the movie in my home on my equipment with my friends. In the end, people are not passionate about theaters, they’re passionate about the movies they can see there. Let’s let Hollywood (and every other industry, for that matter) deliver their content in the way that they believe can make them the most money. It’s the same reason many restaurants offer dine-in, carry-out and delivery — because they recognize that not everyone wants the same experience. Entertainment content providers need to understand this paradigm to succeed in the evolving marketplace.

Sorry, 60 Minutes and Lesley Stahl, but I think you got taken in on this one — perhaps by the very kinds of powers you’ve done such a great job bringing down over the years.

Should bloggers disclose they’ve received a product for free when writing about it? Should we assume that someone who is handed a trade show goodie bag has been bought off? If that’s all it takes to compromise journalistic integrity, we’re far worse off than anything the Federal Trade Commission is trying to legislate against.

Full disclosure: In the mid-‘80s, as the editor of A&E Systems Magazine, the PR people from Autodesk bought me a really nice dinner during a trade show. I then published a favorable review on the latest version of the company’s computer-aided design software – without mentioning the suspected “bribe.”

Were my readers duped into buying something they shouldn’t have? Although Autodesk was an advertiser and plied me with drinks and food, I maintained journalistic objectivity. Had I not been loyal to my readers with honest information, the free market would have eventually taken care of the problem by weeding out a weak product and a magazine that couldn’t be trusted. Autodesk brought value to the marketplace and productivity gains to their customers, and it was my job to report on their progress, free dinner be damned.

Years later, as I drifted from journalism to the “dark side” of PR, I became the one buying dinner. It was really just out of courtesy as the host inviting someone to hear some news. I think we all understood each other’s role. But over time it became common for journalists to refuse the free meal because their media outlet now had policies that prohibited them from accepting “gifts.”

Personally, I would feel a bit silly if I was a journalist whose company didn’t trust me on my own to maintain editorial integrity in the face of a nice dinner or some trade show schwag.

Payola-grubbing, unethical journalists and bloggers aren’t hiding behind every tree. Sure, there are a few out there. But there are millions more out there who take the personal responsibility to make purchasing decisions on their own, as carefully and with as much diligence, research and comparisons as they care to make. We don’t need legislation protecting us from any and all ethical sleights of hand.

Let’s just leave it at that, and leave the government out of it.

As I’ve gotten deeper in my PR experience, I’ve realized and started to greatly appreciate my sales background. What I’ve discovered is that good PR skills have a strong element of sales – the ability to “sell” a story to reporters.

Sales, or to sell something, is being able to get your point across in a persuasive manner using the proper communication skills, recognizing shared goals and the occasional conflicting opinions. Sales consists of persuading someone to better recognize your perspective and often times it leads to an agreement on the problem or issue. The point is that having a sales background is, and always will be, an invaluable tool in someone’s communication arsenal.

Photo Courtesy of PCWorld Blog

When it comes to public relations, having good sales skills comes in handy a lot, especially when you pick up the phone to pitch.  Pitching news pubs is the PR equivalent of cold calling and if you don’t feel comfortable picking up the phone, calling a complete stranger and trying to convince them that your story is worth writing about, or at least looking into, you are dead in the water. The basic rule to live by when pitching a PR story is there are only three possible things that can happen once you are actually talking to the right person:

•    The reporter says he or she is interested, does an interview and runs a story.
•    The reporter isn’t interested
•    They hang up on you (which although it usually doesn’t happen often, every PR professional has experienced it at some point in time).

That’s it! How bad is that? Now the last one may seem a little harsh, but it happens (not to me, of course!). The point is that you need to sell yourself first and then sell the story. You have to sell yourself as someone who is able to carry a conversation with the reporter or editor, and you need to do it quickly.  Reporters and editors are on schedules and deadlines, so make it personable and to the point. Because you recognize that their time is important, get to your pitch quickly and make sure you include all of your pertinent information. The most important part of the call is closing the deal with as Doyle Albee says, “no fuzzy agreements” hanging in the balance. Get a solid agreement on how to proceed, whether it is a follow-up call or email, sending a press release, scheduling the interview, etc.

What is my point in all this? Having a sales background has prepared me to make my case quickly and keep it simple. Having been hung up quite a few times in my days of cold calling, I know how important it is to be clear and concise when making a sale and when pitching a story. It’s important to be cognizant of the other person’s time so get to the point and get to the point fast.

PR professionals have to learn to combine a bit of basic salesmanship and the art of storytelling into one, and the successful ones have mastered this.

If you haven’t already registered for The 17th annual Komen Denver Race for the Cure do it NOW! Online registration closes this evening at 5pm.

If you miss the 5pm cutoff there is still hope…you can register in person at the Pepsi Center either Saturday, October 3, 1-5 pm (east lots, enter off of Chopper Cr. & Speer) or on Race Day, Sunday, October 4 in the registration area, 6-9 am. (Registration prices increase by $5.00 per person).

Metzger Associates is proud to be a sponsor of this  Denver event, one of the largest 5K’s in the country.  It is a fund-raiser for the Denver Affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure.  Last year, the Affiliate netted more than $2.7 million from the event and had 63,809 registrants. This year, the Affiliate is funding 35 projects in the Denver metro area, totaling $2.83 million, funding everything from mammograms to mastectomies, mortgage payments and meals through qualified grantees.

In addition to raising funds, the Komen Race for the Cure® Series is committed to educating the public about early detection, the strongest method of surviving this life-threatening disease. The five-year survival rate is 98 percent when the disease is discovered while still confined to the breast.

The Komen Race for the Cure® Series helps raise awareness of the importance of a positive breast health program – clinical breast exams beginning by age 20 and yearly mammograms at 40 years of age. As an organization, they are committed to ending breast cancer forever.

So if you’re looking for something to do this weekend go check out the sea of pink downtown, known to be an inspirational experience!

For more information CLICK HERE

Again, don’t forget online registration closes tonight at 5pm!

I’ve been pretty vocal about my displeasure with AT&T’s service of late, mostly because I can’t get a straight answer. It’s been a big part of my Twitter stream, and I even wrote a letter to the CEO here.

Then, John Metzger forwards me this voice mail (name and number removed).

Two things:

1. Half our company already has an iPhone, we just don’t have a massive business account. Believe me, if I was paying for all this incompetence myself, I’d be even more vocal.
2. AT&T keeps saying that the iPhone is a strain on the network, and that’s part of the problem. If I had a horse that was struggling to pull a wagon and wasn’t doing a very good job, the last thing I would do is call people and ask them to put more items on the wagon.

Sorry, this just struck me as funny… and as a fail. Please, fix the service I’m paying for before you offer me more.

The event will be co-hosted by Metzger’s Dave Taylor, who manages three blogs, including the popular Ask Dave Taylor blog, and is a national keynote speaker on a variety of technology and social media topics, and Doyle Albee, president and Social Media Practice director at Metzger.

Unlike many social media seminars that simply help attendees set up a Facebook page or a Twitter account, Social Media for Executives presented by Filtrbox has brought together many of the nation’s leading social media experts, each with a specific focus in a key management area — from communications to customer service to human resources — to provide a strategic overview of emerging best practices and strategic management of this important new area.

The day’s speaker line-up includes:

• Paula Berg, manager of Emerging Media for Southwest Airlines.
• Jessica Berlin, Social Media manager for the Resident Shows Division of Cirque du Soleil.
• Deirdre Breakenridge, a 20-year PR and marketing veteran and the author of four books.
• Ari Newman, president and founder of Filtrbox.
• Linda O’Neill, general manager for Customer Operations for EMBARQ.
• Liz Ryan a former Fortune 500 human resources executive and the author of Happy About Online Networking: The Virtual-ly Simple Way to Build Professional Relationships.

The conference is being presented by Filtrbox (www.filtrbox.com).

“Our goal is to present a conference to truly help senior-level executives understand how social media has the potential to impact nearly every area in any company and to discuss the strategies and emerging best practices with industry leaders and their peers,” said Dave Taylor, one of the conference hosts. In order to facilitate interaction with both the speakers and the attendees, space is limited.

For more details or to register, please visit our Web site at www.executivesocialmediabriefing.com.

Dear Mr. Stephenson:

I’ve been pretty vocal with my displeasure about your company in some pretty public forums of late. I thought I’d take a moment to tell you why, as well as offer a suggestion for fixing your problem.

Here’s the issue: I hire you to provide me with one product — the voice/data service on my iPhone. Your company is doing a terrible job with that. Nearly 50 percent of my calls drop. Some days, it’s more than 50 percent. My 3G connectivity for voice and data is spotty at best. In short, I’m not happy with your service, but because I signed a contract with you that seems to say you can do whatever you like and I just have to take it and continue to pay you, there’s really nothing I can do.

That said, I also realize the massive technological issues you face in running a nationwide wireless network. Boulder is probably tough — lots of hills, and it seems we’ve got a high penetration of iPhone users that take up lots of bandwidth. I get all that, and I’m willing to cut you a little slack. But you know what I expect from anyone I do business with?

The truth, Mr. Stephenson. I expect the truth.

I’ve personally been told a number of different stories by several of your customer service people. Three of them — sethbloom, ATTSusan and ATTJohnathon — have reached out to me on Twitter. The problem? They don’t have the information they need to help me. I want to know three things:

• Why has my voice service gotten so bad?
• What are you doing to fix it?
• When may I expect improvement?

Many of my friends and colleagues also have iPhones and are experiencing the same issues. We’ve been comparing notes. Here’s a sampling of what we’ve been told over the last few weeks by various members of your Customer Service group:

• The 850 overlay should fix everything, and I’m told it will be complete on Friday (that would be Friday, Sept. 4. If it happened, nothing got fixed).
• The service has been bad because we’re working on the system, but that will be done within a few days (that was early September).
• We understand there are problems, and we’re investigating them and hope to have things corrected within the next few weeks
  (so, you’ve not started?).
• Six towers are down in the Boulder area, and the rest are overloaded. We’re working on it. (Did they just tip over? All at once?)
• We don’t guarantee service in buildings (OK, but this person had no coverage in their front yard. For 911. Ouch).
• You might need a new SIM chip (Done. No difference).
• Are you turning your phone on and off at least once each day? That will make a difference (my phone usually goes off when I throw it against the wall after three or four drops in a row. And, no, that’s not the problem. I’m kidding about the wall — but not by much).
• We’re putting in a number of new towers and should be done within a couple of weeks (that was August. Again, if it happened…).
• And, my personal favorite: “You must not be having too much trouble, you talked for 18,000 minutes last month. ” “Do you mean 1,800?” I asked. “No, it says 18,000!” (I’ll let you do that math, Mr. Stephenson.)

I don’t think these are bad people. I simply think they’ve not been given the information they need to do their job. Think how different things might be for you if you’d have sent your Colorado Front Range customers a letter with our bill (credit where credit is due, you’re very good at sending those out) that said something like this (I made up the details, but you’ll get the idea):

Valued Customers:

The Boulder/Denver area needs more capacity to provide you with the kind of service we expect. We know this, and we’re working on it. Over the next three months, we will be adding five new cell towers in Boulder County and 10 in the Denver Metro area and we will be changing over to the new 850 spectrum. We’re completing these upgrades in stages, but we expect to have them all complete by Oct. 31. At that time, we’re confident the service quality will increase dramatically on both voice and data.

We know service issues are frustrating. To thank you for your patience as we upgrade, we’ve enclosed a $25 gift certificate good for any purchase at any AT&T Store or online. Again, thank you for being an AT&T customer.

It’s simple, really, Mr. Stephenson. I’m an adult, I know that cellular networks are big, complicated things, and sometimes they don’t work like they’re supposed to. That said, I do expect people that I pay to be honest with me. The iPhone voice/data plan is one of the most expensive available, but you’re treating me like I’m an annoyance instead of a customer. That’s why I’m angry.

If I worked for you, I’d be angry as well, Mr. Stephenson. Sue, Johnathan and Seth seem like good folks that really want to help, but someone in your organization isn’t giving them the information they need to get that done. It’s not doing your customers any good, and I have to believe it’s frustrating your employees. You’ll lose good people that way, Mr. Stephenson.

Until someone gives me some information, or until the problems improve dramatically, I plan to be an online thorn in your side. Maybe if enough of us let you know we’re not happy — publicly and often — we’ll be presented with more options than counting the days to the end of our contracts.

Sincerely,

Doyle Albee
President
Metzger Associates
Boulder, Colorado