Category: Business

Posted on

Ah, security through sincerity, gotta love it!

Westpac logo

A telephone conversation last night — once the caller had garbled my name and I’d said that it was me, and I’d asked who was calling:

Caller: I’m calling from [unintelligible] on behalf of Westpac Bank.

Me: Before we go any further, how do I know you’re calling on behalf of my bank?

Caller: Sorry? We’ve been given the database…

Me: Before I discuss any kind of personal or financial information, how do I know you’re legitimately calling on behalf of Westpac bank, as opposed to just some person claiming that?

Caller: [sounding confused] Well, I don’t know…

Me: Well, I guess I’ll be hanging up then. Goodbye.

Another point, of course, is why they thought I might want to discuss anything financial at 7.20pm after a long day — when most people are either unwinding or trying to have dinner.

Dear Westpac, if you have something to discuss, isn’t that my Business Banking Manager’s job? During business hours? I was really happy with the service you’ve given me so far this week — and now you’ve ruined it.

[Update 22 December 2011: I failed to credit the originator of security through sincerity, Eric TF Bat.]

Posted on

Who owns what on the Internet

Thumbnail of Who Owns What diagram

Amy Webb (now there’s an aptonym!) has updated her diagram of who owns the new media landscape. It’s also available as a PDF file.

Coming soon, a widget and RSS feed to help you track acquisitions and mergers in media.

I must admit, I’d much rather see this sort of data presented as a directed graph of ownership relationships, rather than simple lists — something like this diagram. The size of the nodes could represent the companies’ market capitalisation, and width of the lines the percentage ownership or something.

Still, it’s a handy-enough reference.

Hat-Tip to Lee Hopkins.

Posted on

Sensis’ legal bullying revisited

On 19 January I wrote about Sensis’ lawyers sending legal “nastygrams” to small website owners. Professor Roger Clarke has received a response [PDF file], which we can’t copy and paste because it’s a scan of a printed letter.

Professor Clarke reckons the response is “reasonable enough (as far as it goes)”, and he won’t be taking the matter any further. His article on Lawyers’ ‘Nastygrams’ re Trademarks reminds us that lawyers’ letters often make inappropriate demands on behalf of trademark-owners.

It’s vital that people stand up for their rights, and resist corporations getting away with claims that go beyond the already excessive rights that corporate welfare laws in the ‘intellectual property’ arena grant them.

So, we all should say “the Yellow Pages® directory” to help Sensis prevent their trademark turning into a generic word. Sensis is our friend.

The funniest bit, I think, is that the lawyer’s response reckons the original letter was intended to “encourage the proper use of Sensis trademarks”. Lawyers must have a funny idea about “encouragement”: their “nastygram” was a three-page letter in pompous legalese containing veiled threats [PDF file].

Posted on

Web 2.0? “Hey, wait for us!”

Photograph of Bell Aviation Rocket Pack, 1964

Statistics on how businesses use the Internet demonstrate how the Web 2.0 digerati are rocketing so far ahead of reality into their self-obsessed digital fantasy-land that they might as well be on Mars.

ABS figures show that fewer than a third of Australian businesses have a “web presence”.

This week the redoubtable Laurel Papworth complained about that:

Well, that sucks… Not much hope for Web 2.0 if 70% of us can’t get our heads around Web 1.0, is there?

Stephen Collins, who I’ve read for a while and chatted with recently, agrees.

I am disappointed. It indicates just how far behind the 8-ball most business in Australia is…

Laurel associates this lack of penetration with the widespread lack of understanding of the power of the Web, and specifically Web 2.0 technologies, amongst Australian business. I’d have to say I agree.

Really? Disappointed? I see steady growth in those “web presence” figures. I’ll show you in a moment. First, though, I need to tell you why I reckon you’re wrong.

“Disappointment” shows a misunderstanding of what constitutes “business”, even in the 21st Century. And there’s still a lot of work to help businesses lay the digital foundations before we start building so many crystal castles.

Continue reading “Web 2.0? “Hey, wait for us!””

Posted on

Social Media: It’s about the people, not the tools

One of the biggest mistakes businesses make when thinking about social media is that it’s all about the tools — that if only they choose the right software they’ll be a success. That’s about as sensible as thinking your retail business will be successful if only you buy the right bookkeeping software.

Yesterday a client asked:

My friends at [some business] wish to create a social networking section as part of their site, with home pages or profiles for each user. Do you recommend any third party apps for this or a currently operating system?

No, I don’t recommend the tools until I know what the job is.

That question is like being asked, “I want a motor vehicle, can you recommend one?” Before you could answer you’d need to know the requirements. How many passengers? An answer of “6” means a people-mover, not a sports car. An answer of “40” means you need a bus.

Does it have to go off-road? Land Rover time! Does it have to carry 3 tons of bricks? Well, you need a truck, not a car. Do you need to make a social statement with your vehicle? Then maybe you need a Rolls-Royce. Or a Porsche. Or a Ferrari.

Or a packet of Viagra.

Continue reading “Social Media: It’s about the people, not the tools”