My original article is here.

Instead of directly addressing the arguments and points of contention circulating in the blogosphere, Julia explained the rationale behind the 3.0 moniker, "Sometimes editors fall so in love with their ideas, they neglect to properly explain them. Judging by some of the blog posts about our ‘Public Relations 3.0′ agency business report cover line, that seems to be the case here."

She continues, "Honestly, I thought it was obvious. When I started covering the industry in 2000, it was already in the midst of a long-running transition from providing focusing on communicating to the media and to the public through the media, to its place in the C-suite where managing corporate reputation, CSR, employee engagement, and boosting sales would be part of the job description.

Now public relations is at the beginning of its third age, when it is demonstrating its unique facility for navigating environments where the companies and brands have less and less control. Rather than lamenting the decline of traditional media’s influence, the PR industry is embracing the new platforms and communities that test their creativity and the authenticity of the messages.

This change is happening much more rapidly than with PR’s previous transition, when even two years ago we were still getting letters to the editor about how little respect the profession is afforded. But even if the changes are occurring quickly, they are no less significant.

So that’s the rationale. Public Relations 2.0 was simply not far enough – the industry has quite suddenly found itself facing a refreshingly high set of expectations from clients and the public alike."

This is probably the most important discussion facing the industry, because I think much of the PR vs. PR 2.0 vs. PR 3.0 discussion is still leaving people spinning with confusion and many are unsure how to even engage in this new form of media.

My response…

"Julia, kudos for responding to the blogosphere.

I originally reacted to your assessment that we were entering the 3.0 era because the industry isn’t truly ready for it, nor are we even close (so says the people are blazing the trail for the betterment of the rest of the industry, as well as those still trying to figure out how to engage in social media.)

Your point, “Rather than lamenting the decline of traditional media’s influence, the PR industry is embracing the new platforms and communities that test their creativity and the authenticity of the messages,” captures where we need to be, not where we are. I spend a lot of my time these days helping others “get it.” The truth is that many PR people, in fact, most PR people are attacking new media in the same fashion as traditional media – if at all. Remember this is an industry that is guilty of not even reading the publications they pitch, let along blogs, podcasts, etc.

Honestly everything that’s documented by PRWeek only validates the whole basis of PR 2.0, it doesn’t leapfrog it. In my post, I highlight the principles behind how I define the 2.0 era.

It all started with the technology that enabled the socialization of media, progressed with the people who embraced it to create new content, and it will end when PR can legitimately engage. Then, and only then, will PR 2.0 fold back into PR (without the need for a rev number behind it.)

We have a tough road ahead of us, as I’ve said before, and as many have already written, PR isn’t invited to the table here. The masses think we don’t get it, so we have a lot of PR for the PR to undertake.

In the meantime, the economic rationale highlighted in PRWeek only demonstrates the demand for these “new” services and expertise by companies looking to jump in. However, this new breed of “smarter” PR pros are a rare commodity.

The higher set of expectations by clients (or executives for those in house) isn’t realistic either for defining 3.0 as most are still unsure how to measure it, or are still either intimidated by the thought of losing control of their messages or still think that social media is not a legitimate use of marketing resources.

The only true expectations that exist are those of the public, and more accurately, the people that make up the public (producers, participants, and readers alike). It is their expectations that place the greatest emphasis on the evolution and necessity of PR 2.0 – or as better described, more effective, sincere, and smarter PR.

For now, it is the difference between spin and evangelism. It’s also the difference between storytelling and influence.

This is an incredible opportunity for the PR industry to escalate its perception by integrating value, direct engagement, and an entirely new set of metrics that prove ROI. It’s up to us to put the “pro” back in the PR Professional title.

PR 3.0 is only confusing the market more. This existing confusion is where we need to focus. Perhaps we can talk 1:1 so that we can collaborate on a concerted way to help the rest of the industry catch up, while also helping businesses understand how to embrace this new world of social media and PR."

Additional reactions:
Wordymouth
EngageinPR
Murphy’s Law
PRWeek’s The Cycle
Geoff Livingston

Comments

Excerpt from my post, “And let me point out, that there will not be a 3.0 or any other rev numbers, unless there is another tremendous evolution, fusion, or breakthrough in the practice, science, and art of communications.”

The flagship publication that has made a business out of documenting “what is” versus “what is…changing” without necessarily helping their readers understand the evolution, decided to place a stake in the ground and call attention to their forward-looking vision, or as some would say, ignorance.

I guess they missed the whole fact that the industry was still coming to terms with how the Web swept the rug from underneath it, thus changing the game forever, and threatening the eradication of generations of less-than-web-savvy PR professionals.

And what’s even worse, is that in this age of Social Media, I couldn’t even comment on the article. I was given a link to editor@prweek.com.

According to Julia Hood, EIC of PR Week, “PR has gone through other incarnations in the past, but what is happening now is so fundamental, it can only be described as the next iteration of the industry – or PR 3.0, as we have designated it.”

Stating that the industry is entering the age of PR 3.0 is absurd, premature, and irresponsible. If anything, this article could have validated PR 2.0, but instead they chose to leapfrog it.

Here’s her argument for PR 3.0 has they “have designated it:”

“Staffing has been on the increase”

“… increasing revenue per employee…”

“…an average of 17% growth among firms that reported the previous year.”

“Edelman’s astounding 26% growth…”

“…Schwartz Communications pulled in 22% growth, Qorvis increased by 31%, Taylor (formerly Alan Taylor Communications) was up by 36%, and Integrated Corporate Relations showed a 48% rise…”

PRWeek’s rationale for evolving into PR 3.0 is driven by revenue? Are you kidding me? Some of our other friends tracking the economy might call this growth, or an upward trend. But to call it an entirely new era of PR is laughable, sensationalist, and so off the mark that it demonstrates why PR and spin go hand in hand.

Oh yes, we’re living in a time where PR has evolved more in the last 10 years than it has in the last 100. The press release is finally evolving, the Web is now interactive, citizens are now more than journalists – they’re influencers, and Internet marketing is driving new PR campaigns. Social media has, and will only increase, in its influence for redefining not just PR, but all media in general.

Honestly, I’m still defending, justifying, and defining the ideas and principles behind PR 2.0 and social media and how it all integrates into traditional PR. This is where the discussions need to focus in order to improve the industry, and, it can only be done through art and practice, not through revenue.

I’m talking about PR for the PR – forcing the discussion outside of the likes of PRWeek and into global forums where people can exchange real world information in order to share and learn from each other in the face of the new web and Social Media.

The idea and the mantra behind the PR 2.0 movement is to reach PR people outside of the echo chamber to help them evolve, improve their game, learn the technology that’s driving social media, and most importantly, participate in the conversations taking place without them (not initially as a PR, but as a regular person genuinely engaged in conversations to participate and learn.)

Social media and (PR 2.0) is about respect, passion, conversation, and insight. It so much more than blogger relations, wikis, social networks, Second Life, blogs, tags, podcasts, etc. Those are merely the tools used to engage in the conversation. But PR is all about, or should be about, knowledge, understanding of the markets, and the channels used to reach them with the most compelling and meaningful messages.

New PR, PR 2.0, whatever you want to call it, is more about being “smart” enough to participate at an entirely new and more valuable level of engagement. It’s about reading the publications, blogs, networks, where you want to participate. It’s about living and breathing the product/service we represent.

It’s the difference between spin and evangelism.

It’s also the difference between storytelling and influence.

It all eventually merges back into PR – with a long trail of communications professionals that will be forced to jump ship for the betterment of the PR industry as a whole.

With Web 2.0 attracting mainstream attention, PR 2.0 (and everything 2.0) has PR and marketing professionals drooling while seeing dollar signs – rejoicing that their ship has come in. Yes, unfortunately, it shows in the numbers. But I’d like to think that this is an opportunity for PR professionals to put the “pro” back in their title.

PR 2.0 is not because of Web 2.0. It is because of the Web – or the Live Web as Doc Searls calls it. The evolution of the Web has forced communications professionals to step out from behind the “great wall of PR” to interact with the people formerly known as the audience and the “people” aka influencers aka experts that also reach them.

The interactivity of the web, combined with the ability to transform readers into content producers, is forcing PR’s evolution along with it – regardless of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0.

The idea is to fuse the best of PR, technology, marketing, and the Web. No BS. No hype.

PR should understand markets, the needs of people, and how to reach them at the street level – without insulting everyone along the way.

PR 3.0, as defined by PRWeek, is a slap in the face to all of the new media pioneers who have tirelessly worked to help bring PR into the conversation – and in doing so – improve the business of PR and the skills of those who practice it.

For those who haven’t read my series of what PR 2.0 is and isn’t, here’s a quick recap:

I started discussing the concept of PR 2.0 during Web 1.0 as a way of analyzing how the Web and multimedia was redefining PR and marketing communications, while also building the toolkit to reinvent how companies communicate with influencers and directly with people.

PR 2.0 is an opportunity to not only work with traditional journalists, but also engage directly with a new set of accidental influencers, and, it was also our ability to talk with customers directly.

PR 2.0 is not because of, or limited to, Web 2.0. It is, however, influenced by it.

PR 2.0 isn’t Social Media. And Social Media isn’t Web 2.0. These are also distinct movements that can complement and inspire each other.

PR 2.0 incorporates the tools that enable the socialization of media, providing smart folks with the ability to reach folks directly.

Social Media is important because it represents the democratization of news and information.

Social Media frames “media” in a socialized context, but it doesn’t invite PR (as it exists today) to market through (or to) it. However, worthy individuals can participate in conversations as long as they participate as a person and not a marketer.

PR 2.0, in principle, is the ONLY method for conducting PR in the long tail.

UPDATE #1: Keith O’Brien of PRWeek blogs some of the initial industry response to its Agency Business Report – "Mike Manuel says yes. Brian Solis gives a definitive no."

UPDATE #2: I responded, "Just to be clear, my post wasn’t in direct response to the Agency Business Report, it was specific to PRWeek’s claim that the industry was moving towards a new age – PR 3.0 as designated by the staff.

By aligning PR 3.0 with revenue and business growth, PRWeek is misleading and confusing the already bewildered masses of PR practitioners and company marketing executives who are still trying to figure out the new world of Social Media.

Our discussions about PR (insert number here) should first focus on helping these people “get it,” instead of trying to coin a movement that hasn’t yet amalgamated."

UPDATE #3: Keith O’Brien’s response, "...what we (the Royal We, at least from my perspective) wanted to get across was that social media was not tremendously impacting the bottom line (yet) and that execs were agreeing with your statement – that everyone needs to get it. Perhaps when everyone gets it, we will be at 3.0. Or 2.3. (insert number here)."

Comments

Tag:

The salient paragraph: ““Every industry has an ambulance chaser segment, and in crisis situations, this is the group that smells blood and goes in for the kill. I was addressing my comments to those people, who probably don’t even read PRWeek, because they are only interested in the next big company to list on their website.” I wonder if any of those who contacted JetBlue had genuinely good advice and didn’t fit into this category.

I’ve been mostly complimentary about JetBlue’s handling of its crisis (here and here). From a crisis communication standpoint, the company has done most things right. There are things the company could have handled better and some actions it missed altogether. I’m hardly alone in noting the missed opportunities and suggesting ways to improve the airlines’ communication to passengers and prospective passengers. Communication and marketing bloggers have been all over this story, running the gamut from Seth Godin to Shel Israel, from BusinessWeek to Crisisblogger Gerald Baron.

I don’t think anybody at JetBlue is listening, though, so don’t expect any of these suggestions to find their way into the airlines’ mix of strategies. They don’t want to hear it.

In fact, according to an article in this week’s issue of PRWeek, anybody who contacted the airline with suggestions is now persona non grata.

Jenny Dervin, director of communications at JetBlue, is quoted tossing off this gem:

JetBlue corporate communications does not have a PR AOR, nor do we ever intend on getting one. Those agencies that felt the need to contact our CEO and the corporate communications department directly, telling us exactly what we were doing wrong, were not helpful, and they are all going to go on a special list that I’m going to share with my colleagues in the PR industry, encouraging them never to do business with those companies.

Let me get this straight. A communications professional watching the crisis effort unfold sees a gaping hole in the plan (e.g., the CEO’s pseudo blog has not been updated since February 1 and allows no comments) and has the nerve, the temerity, the balls to pick up the phone and offer up a suggestion. For his trouble, he gets put on Jenny Dervin’s blacklist. It must be that Jenny and her team of seven full-time communicators have all the answers and don’t need any advice from anybody else. That must be why…

• When the blog was finally updated, it was with a verbatim copy of the email that JetBlue had distributed
• The email, addressed to passengers, went to people who had never flown JetBlue, and in some cases was sent multiple times to the same email address
• No commenting was opened up on CEO Dave Neeleman’s blog despite the fact that allowing passengers to vent, to get their frustrations off their chests, might have been the smartest communication tactic JetBlue could have employed
• It was never suggested that passengers stuck on planes that icy February day be given free flights for a year, or 40 free flights (Godin’s suggestion), or some other remarkable compensation that would have turned the conversation completely around
• Neeleman’s “Late Show with David Letterman” appearance featured an uncomfortable Neeleman dodging Letterman’s questions, clearly based on a briefing he’d had with a communiations staffer who told him, “Whatever you’re asked, here’s what you say…” (It’s immortalized on YouTube, of course…here are part 1 and part 2.)
• The JetBlue Hostage blog is alive and well

It must be nice to know everything so you don’t have to welcome any recommendations from well-meaning professionals who may actually know what they’re talking about. Or maybe there’s some other channel Ms. Dervin would prefer people take. Carrier pigeon, perhaps? In any case, my esteem for JetBlue has plummeted after reading Ms. Dervin’s arrogant tirade. If there’s anybody I wouldn’t want to work with, it’s someone who thinks she has nothing to learn. That puts her at the top of my new list.

Comments

Reddit | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

The PRWeek story suggests that the factors a CEO considers when making decisions “is a combination of information and experience, advisors and gut instinct, and PR pros have a critical role to play in this mix.”

I haven’t had a chance to go over the story-and won’t for a bit, since I’m about to go deliver a talk-but the email I received from Tim McHugh at Plesser Holland (handling PR for PRWeek, I guess) points to these findings:

• The search for talent is the biggest challenge for CEOs. (No surprise here-CEO Magazine’s annual survey always has recruiting and retention as a top CEO concern.)
• 77% of CEOs feel that digital/online strategy is important to the organization’s overall plans, but only 8% of CEO’s have blogs, and only 19% say they will start their own blog in the next two years.
• 77% of CEOs rank developing current customer relationships as one of their highest priorities, even above bringing in new business-addressing shareholder needs comes in last.

Have a look. When I get a chance, I’ll update this post with some observations.

Comments

Tag:

Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Shel Holtz is principal of Holtz Communication + Technology which focuses on helping organizations apply online communication capabilities to their strategic organizational communications.

As a professional communicator, Shel also writes the blog a shel of my former self.

Here are three at which I’m speaking/presenting:

• PRWeek Forum, November 6-8, Meriden, UK. The exclusive networking and meetings event for senior in-house PR directors, according to organizers PR Week UK. I’ll be leading an interactive session on the role organizations can play not only in dealing with the spread of online opinion (what people are saying about you and your brand) but also taking part in the conversation.
• Delivering The New PR, November 10, London. The fifth and final (this year) event in a successful sell-out conference series run by the University of Sunderland. I’m very much looking forward to collaborating again with Philip Young, Tom Murphy, Elizabeth Albrycht, StuartBruce and Chris Rushton in helping communicators figure out how to deliver the new PR. As before, my segment will be on business podcasting.
• Le Web 3, December 11-12, Paris. This event has evolved out of the two “Les Blogs” conferences that took place in Paris during 2005 and is now a substantial and signficant conference sponsored by TechCrunch among others. Le Web 3 is focused on the next generation web (aka Web 2.0), mobile services, virtual communities, old and new media and other themes. I’m part of a panel that will lead discussion on the theme “Life 2.0: are digital worlds creating a virtual life better than our real life?”
  If you plan to be at any of these events, do let me know.

Also, the sixth annual IABC EuroComm conference takes place in Dublin on November 13-14. I can’t be at this event, more’s the pity. As an IABC member in Europe, I recommend IABC EuroComm to any communicator, whether you’re an IABC member of not, who’s looking for an unparalled professional development opportunity that otherwise you’d need to travel to the US to experience.

Reddit | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Neville Hobson is the author of the popular NevilleHobson.com blog which focuses on business communication and technology.

Neville is currentlly the VP of New Marketing at Crayon. Visit Neville Hobson’s blog: NevilleHobson.com.

Keane

Keane executive David Garnick was shown the door for inappropriately trying to use investor relations to further his career. According to The Boston Globe (reg. req.):

Keane executives also confronted Garnick, he said, about a Sept. 21 e-mail exchange he had with a New York public relations representative, Hugh Burnham of Gutenberg PR.

Burnham alerted him that Wachovia Securities analyst Edward Caso had downgraded Keane’s stock rating from “outperform” to “market perform” because of Caso’s concern that Keane would tap an outside chief executive who would be slower to change the company’s business model.

In his response to Burnham, which Garnick provided to the Globe last night, he wrote, “Thanks for the note. Any way to get some expanded press to follow-up on this that puts pressure on board to make move?” Garnick said this was a reference to the chief executive search.

Garnick is also the subject of the first personnel release I can recall that publicizes an executive’s dismissal for cause.

Rescuecom

Dave Parmet brings us a tale of a start up hoping some legal drama with Google would make them a household name. Instead it’s made them a joke and proves that all press is not good press.

India PR

Hobbit at India PR brings us some tales of bad pr moves and the clients that push the agencies to make them.

HP

And who could forget HP? From BusinessWeek to PRWeek (reg. req.), that story has not finished writing itself.

Some of these stories may not directly involve communications people, but we should be talking about all of them more. Remaining silent, in affect, is pointing the finger at the client. And that’s bullshit.

Yes, it’s a lot easier for me to write this from a lofty, client-side perch, but the challenge is still present now that my clients are internal. My last job was at an agency that, to its credit, did walk from client relationships where the client didn’t take our counsel. Luckily we were only dealing with bad ideas being foisted upon us and not unethical behavior.

If a PR person lets the client push them in the wrong direction to engage in anything from bad ideas to bad ethics, that person deserves the end result. If we don’t point out these issues, we’ll be defined by them.

Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Kevin Dugan is the author of the popular Strategic Public Relations blog. Kevin is Director of Marketing Communications for FRCH Design Worldwide.

Visit Kevin’s blog: Strategic Public Relations.

The company has built a three-story headquarters building, according to a PRWeek report, that includes a welcome center, an information center, and an amphitheater. The amphitheater will be used for a variety of events for clients, employees, and other audiences. The office also will host an avatar of CEO Aedhmar Hynes.

PRWeek quotes Hynes saying that Text 100 employees won’t have to schedule the use of the amphitheater, but that she “envisions the potential of having a global company meeting there, rather than dispensing information through a conference call or e-mail.” She also noted that the company’s presence in Second Life will allow clients to “take advantage of opportunities there and, potentially, lead to new revenue streams for the firm.”

Hat tip to Constantin Basturea.

Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Shel Holtz is principal of Holtz Communication + Technology which focuses on helping organizations apply online communication capabilities to their strategic organizational communications.

As a professional communicator, Shel also writes the blog a shel of my former self.

The release claims that “Unlike many other podcasting services, the Schwartz offering provides quantifiable measurement of the podcast’s effectiveness as well as the ability to bundle podcasts into a comprehensive Podbook.” (I also got a link to the release via email from Sallie Goetsch; thanks, Sallie!)

I was intrigued by the notion of a “Podbook,” which turns out to be similar to the services PR Newswire and PRWeb are offering, bundling similar podcasts into a single offering to which listeners can subscribe. Schwartz describes its offering as “a series of three or more podcasts to one target audience, covering different subjects or one subject with multiple perspectives.”

PRWeek also covered the Schwartz offering and pointed to one of its clients, NetManage. According to the PRWeek piece, the podcast has been a terrific source of sales leads for the company. So I cruised on over to take a look at the NetManage podcast and found…a signup form. No download. No RSS feed. No on-screen player. In order to get the podcast, you have to complete a form so NetManage can call you. Since I didn’t complete the form, I have no idea whether you can subscribe to the feed once you offer up your info, but somehow I doubt it. This looks more like one of those lead-generation tactics of delivering a white paper in exchange for your data.

Which is fine. The idea of getting some useful or entertaining audio as the premium for letting a salesman call you is great, and I’m glad it’s working for NetManage. But is it a podcast if you can’t subscribe to it? Not according to most of the definitions out there, including Webster’s New Millennium Dictionary of English, which offers this definition:

The Web-based broadcast of music which works with software that automatically detects new files and is accessed by subscription

While this isn’t the most accurate definition-certainly most podcasts aren’t just music-NetManage’s offering wouldn’t fit that definition even if it covered other kinds of content. It’s also inconsistent with the vast majority of other podcast definitions, like Wikipedia’s. What NetManage offers is simply downloadable audio. Whether you can subscribe to Schwartz’s Podbook, I don’t know; I couldn’t find it on the company’s site beyond the reference in the press release.

But this post isn’t meant to be a swipe at Schwartz or NetManage, just an observation about the increasingly loose use of the word “podcast.” In the beginning, there was downloadable audio. Podcasting came into being strictly based on the introduction of RSS feed enclosures that allows for the subscription-based distribution of multimedia content coupled with the introduction of podcatching software that listeners use to subscribe. Yet suddenly, I’m stumbling across more and more references to podcasts that aren’t. Jumping on the bandwagon (a sign of podcasting’s increasing popularity, it seems), companies are labeling any audio file as a podcast.

There’s nothing to be done about this. It just bugs me.

Tag:

Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Shel Holtz is principal of Holtz Communication + Technology which focuses on helping organizations apply online communication capabilities to their strategic organizational communications.

As a professional communicator, Shel also writes the blog a shel of my former self.

The “free” bit wasn’t the hook; after all, only a handful of the 70,000 or so podcasts available require a fee, and BMW isn’t going to attract the same fervent desire for its podcasts as Ricky Gervais. No, it was the fact that BMW had turned to podcasts to aid its branding that made me curious. I was also impressed with the approach. The alleged podcasts were videos shot at the exclusive Technology, Entertainment, Design (TED) conference.

So I cruised on over to the site referenced in the write-up and found…wait for it…streaming videos. Nowhere on the site could the word “podcast” be found. Good thing, too, since a subscription feed is what separates a podcast from other online multimedia. Even if you dismiss the RSS requirement, you would still think a podcast could be played on, well, you know, a video iPod. (That’s even part of the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of a podcast.) But these videos can’t be downloaded. They just play as streams in pop-up windows on the web page. They are decidedly not podcasts.

Which is not an issue from BMW’s perspective, since the automaker never claimed they were. (Interestingly, you can both subscribe and download from the TED site.) And I applaud BMW for linking their stylish cars to the premier design conference, not to mention getting videos out of what has historically been a very closed meeting. I even like the headline on the page, a send-up of the Las Vegas tourism campaign: “What happens at TED stays at TED. Until now.”

It appears PRWeek just chose to call these streaming videos “podcasts.” Surely the editors know the difference, since PRWeek has a few podcasts of its own, complete with subscription feeds. So what on earth prompted them to mislabel BMW’s videos?

Befuddling.

Yahoo! My Web | Furl

Shel Holtz is principal of Holtz Communication + Technology which focuses on helping organizations apply online communication capabilities to their strategic organizational communications.

As a professional communicator, Shel also writes the blog a shel of my former self.

You can see this in a recent bevy of news articles and features that just seem to be more in tune with industry trends. Andrew Gordon’s piece this week on Mozilla and open-source marketing is just one example.

Another good one is Keith O’Brien’s new bi-weekly column “What Goes Online,” which looks at how technology and the web are impacting companies. In fact, the second part of his two-part series on engaging the blogosphere (see the first on pitching blogs) just published today and in it he takes a cold hard look at the challenges and limitations that come with corporations trying to navigate the conversational web:

“But people are always going to bitch about your products. Blogs make that process easier and louder today. The bigger conversation needs to go on inside your company, to help executives understand there will inevitably be a lot of posts about various incidents. We should post our response on our blog, put a press release, or contact the Wall Street Journal. The WSJ will eventually write about the situation if it gets enough steam.”

The tone and writing style also feels a little more real, a little more raw (dare I say blog-ish), and it’s cool to see PRW finally linking to outside sources and syndicating its content. It seems only a small step from here to start opening up channels for real-time reader comments and community forming, and who knows, maybe we’ll see that with the redesign, but one thing I’m certain we *won’t see* is a lift on the content firewall for non-subscribers — but I’m not gonn’a bitch about that anymore, because as long as the content is compelling, I don’t mind paying for it.

Mike Manuel is the founder of the award winning Media Guerrilla blog. Media Guerrilla is an insiders take on the practice of technology public relations with a focus on the issues, tactics and trends that are specific to the tech industry.

Visit Media Guerrilla …