Ed Brill

Post a Comment

1. 1  Mike Lazar  | 2/21/2008 11:02:03 AM

   Ed -- Since I am still one of their resident experts, I'll see what I can do as well. I'll push from my end.

1. 2  Declan Lynch http://www.qtzar.com | 2/21/2008 11:07:22 AM

   I don't think a followup email will do the trick, we have all unsubscribed :-)

1. 3  Jamie Jenkins  | 2/21/2008 11:46:35 AM

   Agreed. There are plenty of other sources of information committed to serving their Lotus Notes/Domino customer base. The damage to their reputation has been done, and Christine's response only further indicates their ignorance of this fact.

1. 4  Duffbert http://www.duffbert.com | 2/21/2008 12:07:49 PM

   Color me another one who would have never seen their "apology" had it not been posted here on Ed's blog. I've already unsubscribed from their sites and newsletters, and have no intention of going back.

1. 5  Ian Scott  | 2/21/2008 12:26:28 PM

   I got that email this week - and not for the first time - and it did cause offence. There was nowhere on the site to register a complaint so I'm very pleased you picked up on it. An apology would be most welcome.

   Incidentally, I just typed this into Google:

   'searchdomino migrate modern platform'

   edbrill.com ranked 1st and 3rd. Good show.

1. 6  Paul Robichaux http://www.robichaux.net/blog | 2/21/2008 1:53:03 PM

   I'll reiterate: I know the editorial management at Windows IT Pro magazine is willing to carry content on Notes and Domino, but a) no one's offering to write articles on those topics and b) subscribers aren't demanding it. That's definitely something that the community can change.

1. 7  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 2:27:52 PM

   Ed, I'm curious as to why you keep attacking SearchDomino.com's editors when we are on the side of our audience. As a marketing person, I know you understand that editorial and sales efforts are separate at most companies, as they should be. And from an editorial perspective, we have always been supportive of the Lotus Notes Domino platform.

   Matt forwarded me your email and I officially responded on your blog and Greyhawk's. In addition I tried to call you to discuss this matter, but you have not returned my phone call. Instead you seem to want to continue bashing a publication that has always supported your company's product.

   I am confused and disappointed by your hostility on this topic. We have done everything we can in my power to manage this problem, but we are not the enemy here.

   As for why Matt did not respond, it is because I am still the ranking editor managing the SearchDomino.com site, so I felt it was appropriate for *me* to respond.

   On a final note, we are ultimately a business. Our sales team sells advertising that keeps our company operating and also provides editorial with the resources we need to manage our content initiatives. While there has always been a separation of church and state when it comes to editorial and sales efforts, that doesn't mean we can produce editorial without the sales that keep the site afloat.

   I'm sorry that the vendor was using offensive language in their ad copy and that's why I asked sales and marketing to change that. But that was the most I could do. Editorial cannot control what advertising is sold on the SearchDomino.com site.

   I hope those of you who have concerns about SearchDomino.com going forward will please speak to us directly. We really do care about your opinions and feelings and do our best to deliver to you the editorial content you want and need.

   Thanks for your time.

   Regards,

   Christine Herbert

   FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DID NOT SEE MY ORIGINAL RESPONSE LETTER IN FULL, HERE IT IS AGAIN:

   Hello, SearchDomino.com community.

   We have received several emails from you over the past couple of weeks with concerns about a sales campaign that has been running on the site and we’ve observed the discussions in the Domino blogosphere. Many of you have criticized the site for allowing this advertisement to appear on SearchDomino.com.

   As Executive Editor of SearchDomino.com, I wholeheartedly agree that Lotus Notes Domino is a “modern” platform and I hope you will be happy to know that, at my request, our sales and marketing team has modified the offensive wording in the ad campaign to be more respectful to our Notes/Domino members. SearchDomino.com will no longer use this or any other vendor’s negative characterization of Notes/Domino in sponsorship initiatives on our site.

   To be clear, as the site editors, Matt Gervais and I have minimal involvement in the sales and marketing campaigns on the site and we care immensely about what our readers need and want from SearchDomino.com. We work hard to make sure we are delivering independent editorial content that helps you do your jobs. By definition, this means that we will from time to time provide information on topics that are not absolutely aligned with the IBM Lotus corporation -- topics of interest to some of our members, such as tools to migrate off Domino to other platforms.

   We hope you continue to give us the opportunity to provide you with helpful Notes/Domino technical information, and we apologize for the disruption and frustration this issue has caused for many of you.

   Please continue to let us know your concerns and keep us up to date on other issues we can develop for the site. We always appreciate your feedback.

   Sincerely,

   Christine Herbert

1. 8  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/21/2008 2:56:14 PM

   Christine, thank you for your comments here. I rarely check voicemail, especially on vacation, and don't choose to have my unified messaging automatically deliver voicemails into my e-mail. Perhaps an e-mail of "we'd like to speak to you" would have been enough to be professional in responding to an e-mail.

   My hostility is simple -- it is that you don't seem to understand that *actions* of your organization are turning off your readers, and your best response is "we don't control that". Surely advertising has some guidelines as to what you will and won't accept? Do you accept advertising from *your* competitors?

1. 9  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 3:11:59 PM

   Thanks for your prompt response, Ed. I do understand, believe me. I feel terrible that an advertising campaign offended our readers. My best response wasn't, "I can't control that." It was, "I got that changed because I agree it was a problem."

   I asked that the ad copy be changed immediately and I have talked to my Publisher about making sure this doesn't happen in the future. Going forward, we will be much more careful about what kind of advertising language is allowed on SearchDomino.com.

   But we cannot ban a vendor because they sell a migration product for Lotus Notes. We can certainly keep them from insulting the Lotus Notes product! But I cannot stop them from advertising completely. IBM advertises its products on sites that cover Microsoft products...should that be prohibited as well? I don't think censorship is the answer.

   I know many of you won't like this, but there are Lotus Notes shops that consider migrating. Is that right, is it wrong? That's not for me to say. It's a business issue. Companies decide what is best for them, not me or anyone else. I know a lot of Notes/Domino folks don't like the idea that that's true, but I talk to users pretty regularly who mention that they have some C-level person who's decided to move their company off Lotus Notes.

   By explaining what I think and what I hear out in the trenches, I'm not trying to make excuses for what happened. I agree that it was wrong and I wish it didn't happen. I really do feel sorry about the whole situation and am doing everything I can to make sure my readers are not insulted ever again.

1. 10  Volker Weber http://vowe.net | 2/21/2008 3:20:14 PM

   Ed, I am curious.

   Assuming you wanted to place an ad to convert Exchange users to Domino. What would be your choice? An Exchange or a Domino publication?

   If you would like to place that ad in an Exchange publication would you expect to be turned down since the Exchange publication cannot offend their readership with the suggestion to move to Domino?

1. 11  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/21/2008 3:35:30 PM

   Actually, as I pointed out in my comment, I would expect an Exchange publication to be quite hesitant about running an ad for converting to Domino, at the risk of turning off their readers. The Chicago Tribune does not run ads for the Sun Times, I don't see MSNBC.com ads on cnn.com.

   oh, and C't's rate card says, "The publishing house reserves the right to reject advertisements - including individual calls under an account if: their publication is unacceptable to the publishing house due to their contents, their design, their origin or their technical form".

   contents and origin -- two good control points, and they're pretty standard, right?

1. 12  Richard Schwartz http://www.poweroftheschwartz.com | 2/21/2008 3:51:22 PM

   Be careful what you wish for, Ed. If you convince publishers that it is not in their interests to sell advertisements like this in Domino-oriented venues, then how would you ever get those publishers to carry IBM BP advertisements in Exchange-oriented venues targeted at convincing Exchange users to migrate?

   I think their reaction regarding modifying the language, and paying closer attention to the language of future advertising copy, is the appropriate one.

   A further thought, expanding on what I wrote over at Greyhawk's the other day: if it's a matter of money from the migration companies out-bidding potential advertisers whose products promote adding value to Domino, then perhaps that's an indication that IBM needs to find a way to direct some more co-op advertising funds toward BPs who could/should be advertising in SearchDomino and other on-line venues.

   rich

   P.S. I am not a SearchDomino subscriber at this time, nor am I a potential beneficiary of any co-op advertising funds.

1. 13  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 3:53:03 PM

   Ed, with all due respect, you are comparing things that don't match up. The Lotus Notes migration vendor may be a competitor of yours because you are with IBM, but they are not a competitor of ours. We are an independent publication that covers Lotus Notes Domino technical issues. And again, IBM advertises all the time on sites that cover Microsoft products to try to win over Microsoft customers to IBM.

1. 14  Richard Schwartz http://www.poweroftheschwartz.com | 2/21/2008 4:13:43 PM

   I have to agree with Christine. Not only is it an apples/oranges comparison, it is an incomplete apples/oranges comparison. Saying that the Tribune doesn't carry advertisements for the Times misses a much larger picture in which the lines are very, very blurry. Newspapers and magazines do routinely carry advertisements for television sets. They carry advertieements for TV shows that compete with them for audience time and advertising dollars. TV news shows on NBC do cover "news" about hit shows on other networks, like Survivor or American Idol. The same is true of news shows on all the other networks. Talk show hosts on the various networks bring in the hosts, winners and losers from the reality shows and stars from other shows on other networks as guests; and they routinely promote films that are not produced by their parent company, have guests on who are columnists in print publications not owned by their parent companies, etc.

1. 15  Volker Weber http://vowe.net | 2/21/2008 4:34:34 PM

   Do I smell a "with us or against us" situation here?

1. 16  Timothy Briley  | 2/21/2008 4:34:42 PM

   @9 - "I asked that the ad copy be changed immediately..."

   Today is 02/21/2008. Blog postings have been appearing on this topic for weeks now. I sent searchdomino.com an email about this on 01/08/2008. I never heard back. So when I got another email with the same ad, I unsubscribed, ending 7 years of getting your newsletter.

   Christine, my question is "What took you so long?"

1. 17  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 4:39:14 PM

   Hi Tim. I agree that it took longer than would have been ideal. It took a while to move things through the appropriate channels internally and get the approval and changes needed that I had requested. There are several departments involved in changing an advertising campaign and I didn't want to respond to the Domino community until I knew the campaign had been modified.

   I agree that we could have been responsive more quickly and I promise we will try to do better in future controversial situations (although hopefully there won't be any!).

   I'm surprised though that you didn't hear back on your email though. Matt said he has been responding personally to everyone who has been emailing us during this interim time to explain the situation. I'm so sorry you didn't get an immediate reply. :(

1. 18  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 4:52:49 PM

   To add to my previous comment, in retrospect, I probably should have responded to the Domino community to let them know that I was working internally to try to remedy the situation. All I can do now is apologize for not handling the situation better intitially and hope that you guys will give us the chance to prove that we'll do better if there is ever a next time.

   Tim, I also want to say again that I'm sorry that your email was not responded to and also assure you that whatever happened, I know it was entirely unintentional. Matt is really good about responding to emails so I have no idea what happened. He is offline now but I will ask him about this tomorrow.

1. 19  Jeremy Hodge http://www.hodgebloge.com | 2/21/2008 5:05:06 PM

   I can see both sides, however Ed really has to win out on this one. Advertisers and content producers have to line up in "vision". The idea that SearchDomino can win long term by providing the readers by advertising a migration away from the product that their product "SearchDomino" is key on only causes detriment to their own product. An excuse that "advertising sales" doesnt know what "editorial" is doing is a rather moot point. Any advertising run on any page of searchdomino has to be viewed as part of the product, and readership will take it that way. Otherwise, advertisers would not pull advertising from shows that have caused controversy within their readership, such as this has done. Coming from a (techincal) background in advertising and marketing, and haven personally participated in writting applications to evaluate the value of a marketing campaign, I personally know that the marketing world is vary weary of mixing branding messages. How often do you see GM advertising for, during, or in relation to a Chrysler sponsosred event, or vice versa? Next to never, and if you do, I guarantee it wasnt signed off on through the proper channels (process problem, not marketing strategy problem). And that is very on purpose. The competion argument Ed makes is a very valid argument because SearchDomino is DEPENDANT upon the sucecss of Notes/Domino's survival. Also, the argument that a Notes/Domino source is a GOOD place to get information on migration away from Notes/Domino is not correct either. If it were, Microsoft wouldn't feel the need to continually re-release (the same) migration tools to migrate from Domino to Exchange. If I am looking to make a migration, I am looking for the biggest part of help from the community of the destination of the migration, not the source. The source community has no vested interest in making the transition smooth, and actually has interest in making it NOT smooth. The biggest sign that SearchDomino has gotten this wrong is the list of people in this blog that raised their hands and said I left because of this. If they lose readership, they lose revenue, including ad revenue. You can sell ads to people that aren't reading your publication. The next thing that is a HUGE turn off to your readership is playing a bit of the blame game ... "its advertising's fault" ... readership doesn't care ... its all still "SearchDomino", and "SearchDomino" is still the cause. Blaming a different department or division just says "we don't talk and align our vision internally and we have no problem pointing the finger." Own the mistake wholeheartedly and give your honest "we're going to do better" speech and you'll get alot more lattitude from those that didnt just leave in the first place. Having the "copy changed" doesn't solve the issue either, it just says we're more interested in a single advertiser's dollar, than the readership that this ad offended. It's saving a dollar now to lose three dollars later.

1. 20  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 5:43:46 PM

   Jeremy, thank you for your post. You make some interesting points that I will definitely pass onto management.

   I would like to clarify though that I am in no way playing a "blame game" here. When I talked about how there is a separation of church and state between editorial and sales, I was just trying to explain our business model to hopefully add some clarity to the situation.

   I'm sorry the solution I worked for isn't to your satisfaction, but it was the best that I could do. I would like to reiterate though that the editors of SearchDomino.com care very much about what our audience wants and thinks and we do our best to deliver good content to you.

1. 21  Karl-Henry Martinsson  | 2/21/2008 6:32:18 PM

   Just curious: From some postings on Grayhawk's blog, it seems like several people mailed SearchDomino and voiced their displeasure. Did anyone ever get a response?

   I understand that editorial and sales staff are separated, that is how it should be at any publication, to avoid that sales droids try to manipulate journalists/editorial staff.

   However, it is important that the sales droid know what they can accept and not accept, and where it could be published.

   When I worked at a weekly IT publication, it was even made sure that if a Microsoft product was tested, no Microsoft ad could be on that page, or the opposing page.

   I don't think you would be able to sell ads in say "Ford Mustang Magazine" that say "Mustangs are useless, go buy a Camaro, it is a modern car." The magazine would not accept the ad, and the readers would probably cancel their subscriptions. Just as people have been canceling their SearchDomino subscriptions now.

1. 22  Duffbert http://www.duffbert.com | 2/21/2008 7:41:01 PM

   Christine... I don't expect either "side" in this discussion to give much. I've written for a few Domino publications that have folded due to ad revenue issues. Survival dictates that you take the money when and where it's offered. On the other hand, getting emails from your site with Unify featured prominently is a sure way to alienate your readers. But that's been discussed on both sides above.

   If I may offer another view as to why the Domino community wonders about your direction. I blogged about your coverage of the Lotusphere conference here: { Link }

   Couple this decidedly negative article (remember, that's YOUR editorial content) with ad sponsorship from companies wanting people to migrate off of Notes/Domino. Looking at these two things together, it's no wonder that more than a handful of your former readers choose to question your editorial slant based on your ad content.

   Ultimately it comes down to 1) you have to pay your bills, and 2) readers can decide where they want to get their content. Since there's no cost of exiting your site (as opposed to doing something like switching email providers or home page portals), readers aren't bound or tied to you any more than you're bound to them in terms of what you write. Either side can enter or exit the "relationship" at any time for any reason. You made choices, we made choices.

1. 23  Bill Malchisky http://www.EffectiveSoftware.com | 2/21/2008 8:08:23 PM

   Ms. Herbert:

   Thank you for your professionalism and ownership of this matter.

   The following URL is from your site and located in the upper left corner, under your logo --

   { Link }

   It reads, "The Web's best Lotus Notes and domino-specific information resource for enterprise IT professionals."

   Sometimes with the rush of the business day, things we see daily and know well get lost in the shuffle. Is this just marketing creating hollow rhetoric, or what your firm truly believes its service to be?

   I discount the censorship argument, when a company depends on one product line and chooses to embellish it. How many Budweiser or Dunkin' Donuts Coffee ads does one see in a Starbucks? Providing advertising for an alternate beverage would be counter to the experience that Starbucks provides its customers. Thus, limiting here is not censorship, but good business. Now advertisements from the flavored additions to their coffee are in-line with their customer experience, as would be promotions around those condiments. There are plenty of places one can go to get input on multiple beverages or products; your customers come to you for the Lotus experience, like a Starbucks does for coffee

   Know your market and what you preach. If you deviate, then you confuse your customer base and well, from the posts here, many felt you deviated and registered their opinions with their service change.

   I wish you and your firm continued success and hope that whatever direction you choose, you synchronize your mission, advertising, and experience to suit your clientele. Up til now your firm has created an excellent track record in the Notes arena; I hope to see it continue.

   Regards,

1. 24  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/21/2008 9:57:32 PM

   Duff, you make a good point about the news stories for Lotusphere. But, I have to tell you, our news team tried to get someone at IBM Lotus to give us a pre-show interview and they were unresponsive to our requests.

   Our news writer was actually quite upset that no one at IBM would give her the time of day. That was when she decided to do the interview with the Burton analyst instead. Also, Matt actually did post-show and pre-show podcast coverage that was quite positive and enthusiastic. You can see all the stories we did for the show in the link below.

   { Link })

   I think overall our coverage was fairly balanced. But if IBM had been responsive to our request for an interview, they would have had even more positive representation. In fact, I would love to see IBM more involved from a sales and editorial persective on SearchDomino.com.

   I know this whole thing has caused some really visceral reactions for all of you, but circumstances are often much more complicated and multi-dimensional than they appear on the surface or at face value. We're doing our best to respect SearchDomino.com readers, deliver to them the editorial content they need, while still paying the bills to run the site.

   I hope over time we can reprove ourselves to those of you who have become disappointed or jaded. From an editorial perspective, we're just trying to do the best job we can for you guys with the limited resources available to us. Thanks for "listening" to my point of view on this situation here today.

1. 25  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/21/2008 10:14:07 PM

   @24 this is indeed much more complicated and multi-dimensional, Christine.

   I can only speak for myself here. I was scheduled to do a press interview with Christina Torode, the Techtarget reporter who wrote the story Tom Duff linked to, during Lotusphere on Monday at 2:30. I was called by the PR manager about one hour before the scheduled start time to say that Techtarget had canceled the interview.

   I am sure there are two sides to that story as well, but it certainly conveyed a message to me.

   This post did not start out with any intent from me to criticize your overall publication. I was prompted, actually, by an e-mail from a business partner who alerted me to your comment, which I had not yet seen. That partner informed me that he had contacted someone in sales at Techtarget about this whole migration white paper issue, and that person said it was an editorial, not a sales, issue (yes, I have seen the e-mail in question). As has now been pointed out several times, none of us really care whether it was sales or editorial, it just shouldn't have happened the way it did -- nor should it have happened three or four times, repeatedly inflaming those on your mailing list, especially since several people appear to have contacted SearchDomino to express their opinions.

   I want to give you the opportunity to reprove yourselves that you ask for in that last sentence. But I think the message in the comments here, on Greyhawk's site, and on others, is that you need to start with the basics of understanding what your (potential) customer wants, and deliver that.

   It's a lesson I am reminded of every single day.

1. 26  Duffbert http://www.duffbert.com | 2/21/2008 10:40:40 PM

   Hi, Christine... I'll start by saying I don't envy your job. As stated earlier, media is a tough sell these days. Be it magazines, websites, tech books, etc. The golden days are gone, and many are going by the wayside because the business model just isn't profitable any more. So when you don't have 64 pages of magazine anymore to fill with 20 to 30 pages of ads, you pretty much have to go with whoever will pay. In this case, for you it was Unify...

   The flip side here is that the Domino community will sniff out and comment on any group that appears to say one thing and do another. There are still many of us who will have little to do with Maysoft over the whole DominoFiles association. "Editorial" content and software awards given out by the site, and the winner just HAPPENS to be the group that runs the whole DominoFiles site... Maysoft. A bad mix of editorial content and ad revenue, to be sure.

   Unfortunately for you, you're in a position where many of the outspoken voices in the community have already turned on you. The points that Ed brings out shows either 1) someone's not telling the whole story, or 2) there's a *major* disconnect between what you honestly feel and what your company is doing. Neither one is a pleasant thought.

   Since I've supported many of the media sites for Domino over the years (writing for, visting, etc.), I would like to see you succeed. But when actions and words are in conflict, as many see from the SearchDomino site currently, I can pretty much figure that most people will choose to listen to the actions. And at that point, you're fighting a real uphill battle to recover.

1. 27  Richard Schwartz http://www.poweroftheschwartz.com | 2/21/2008 11:01:36 PM

   @24: I've been trying harder than most to be even-handed in my responses here and on Greyhawk's, but now you're losing me. The tone of your coverage was affected by the lack of a pre-show interview?

   Have pre-show interviews been standard operating procedure in prior years? Hard for me to imagine that IBM would do that, given how many press outlets send reporters to the conference and would want the same treatment, and given how closely orchestrated everything is for release at the start of the show. But if it's standard operating procedure for press, others got it, and you were snubbed this year, well... I guess could see your point. OTOH, if IBM did snub you and show preference to other press outlets, they might have had a reason.

   If it's not normal practice for IBM to give pre-show interviews, though, and/or if they played by the same rules with all press outlets this year, then allowing the tone of your coverage to be affected by this is just downright petty IMHO.

   As for Burton Group, I'm really wondering what's up with them right now. In the past, I've always felt that they were extremely accurate and well-balanced. This year, the one and only person I talked to at Lotusphere who was putting a negative spin on the conference overall, and on certain particular things was a Burton analyst. It almost seemed like this person was going out of the way to find negatives. It really surprised me.

1. 28  Timothy Briley  | 2/21/2008 11:21:04 PM

   @18 -

   Christine,

   You wrote "Matt is really good about responding to emails so I have no idea what happened."

   This isn't the first time searchdomino has pulled this stunt, and when I emailed searchdomino about it, searchdomino didn't reply then either.

   In the newsletters searchdomino sent in June, July, & August of 2005, you featured "THREE CHALLENGES IN MIGRATING NOTES TO WEBSPHERE" because "As Java and Java-based application servers such as WebSphere become standard elements in most IT environments, the need to migrate Domino applications to Java increases."

   On July 27, 2005 I sent editor@searchdomino.com an email in protest: "...the sentence 'The need to migrate Domino applications to Java is increasing' is stated as a fact without supporting evidence. From my perspective, as new versions of Domino scale better and better, the need to rewrite a Notes application for WebSphere diminishes."

   Since searchdomino blew me off three years ago, I'd be lying if I said that watching this unfold now isn't sweet.

1. 29  Dave Madison  | 2/21/2008 11:32:11 PM

   Hmmm...let's see. I'm holding in my hands a copy of ESPN, The Magazine. A magazine published by ESPN, a company owned by ABC, which is owned by Disney. What do I see? An ad for a fight to be televised on HBO. A company owned by TimeWarner. What Ed seems to be suggesting is that ESPN magazine should only carry advertising for programs broadcast on ESPN or ABC or the Disney Channel. Nevermind the fact that ESPN readers are likely sports fans and may have an interest in watching a fight. HBO knows that, so they bought an ad. But, no where in the magazine do I see an article about HBO's boxing broadcasts. Oops..now what do I see? An ad for the show "Knightrider" broadcast on what network? NBC. Let's review: ESPN Magazine, published by ESPN, owned by ABC. But they are advertising a show on a competing network. Wait. Another ad...for an NBA game broadcast on TNT. Yet another Time Warner company. (Although I can't for the life of me explain why a Cisco ad is in the magazine)

   And talk about editorial conflict. A Time Magazine I am holding has a story about the MS-Yahoo buyout offer. (Let's recall, Time, owned by TimeWarner, which owns AOL..hmmmm. Conflict?)

   My point? Ed's examples are proven false in real life. The are plenty of examples of publications running advertising for possible competing or conflicting products or services. Ms. Herbert is right. Advertising is separate from the editorial content of a publication. That said, SearchDomino may, at some point, find it newsworthy to publish a story about a major Domino migration. And it could very well be from the "how hard it was" angle. SearchDomino's audience certainly are likely Domino users. But they are IT Pro's as well, and have interest in many technologies.

   Ms. Herbert is not in the wrong here.

1. 30  Rob McDonagh http://www.CaptainOblivious.com | 2/22/2008 12:20:54 AM

   @29 Wow, stretch much? Using your approach to this situation, we should be looking for cases where SearchDomino, owned by TechTarget, owned by some (mythical) other company, is running ads for products that compete with something owned by a competitor of that third company?

   A less tortured and more accurate comparison, using something like your ESPN, The Magazine, example would be this: in a publication dedicated to the coverage of the American football team known as the New England Patriots (it is called Patriots Football Weekly), the appearance of an ad saying, "Cheaters never prosper. Follow an honest football team for a change, why don't you? Join the fans of a legitimate football team, the New York Jets. Leave your video cameras at home. Losers. 18-1. Nyahh nyah..."

   See, the point is that PFW relies on Patriots fans specifically, not football fans in general, the same way SearchDomino relies on the Lotus community and not some broader community of IT professionals. Insulting Patriots fans is certainly not in PFW's long-term best interests, even though it might temporarily sell some ads. It doesn't matter if the people who own part of the Patriots happen to also own part of the company that owns the company that sells popcorn at Giants Stadium (for non-NFL fanatics, that sentence makes sense if you know that the Jets play their home games at Giants Stadium).

   Think that'd happen? Not a prayer.

1. 31  Bill Malchisky http://www.EffectiveSoftware.com | 2/22/2008 1:35:29 AM

   @29... @30 is correct. ESPN The Magazine is about all sports, not the channel. They are using their name to compete against Sports Illustrated. Thus, their periodical discussed sports, not just what they might broadcast.

   Otherwise, they would miss-out on what MSG, YES, TNT, NBC, FOX, CBS, and HBO, plus local networks would put on TV for sports. Finally, how effective would SportsCenter be if it just covered sports that ESPN aired?

   Two completely different scenarios, and inapplicable to the situation Ed discussed.

1. 32  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/22/2008 7:10:37 AM

   @29 when I see how far you're willing to stretch, I feel so happy that you're back at Microsoft.

   The editorial content in your examples is not Time running a story saying "migrate to Yahoo". The ad for the boxing fight doesn't say "watch all your sports on HBO". My examples weren't perfect either, but the point is, there is a huge difference between a case study or truly news-oriented story, and what we are describing here, which is a solicitation.

1. 33  Ian Scott  | 2/22/2008 8:58:20 AM

   In my reading of things Christine offered the apology I was seeking. It was the suggestion that Notes/Domino is not 'modern' that stuck in my craw but the fact it was emailed to me (for a second time) with that in the subject that had me howling.

   I think it is acceptable to carry advertisements for competitor products but that some level of decency should prevail and the suggestion that Notes/Domino is not modern is not only indecent it is a lie and one which had the slant of betrayal about it.

   An ad on Disney Channel recommending viewers switch to a more 'adult' channel would also be offensive and would betray the Disney viewers.

   @29 - You are spending too much time in your head and making things up again.

1. 34  Nathan T. Freeman http://nathan.lotus911.com | 2/22/2008 11:17:47 AM

   Why is anyone still talking about this? If you don't like searchdomino's attitude, unsubscribe.

   My god, the best resource for Notes/Domino these days is GOOGLE anyway. Does anybody even read these consolidated sites anymore?

   What a waste of time. TechTarget is irrelevant. They were irrelevant before this conversation started. Why else do you think they were so desperate for ad dollars that they sent out the email in question? Why do you think they took the editorial stance of "bad news sells" at 'sphere?

   Hell, this blog post has probably generated more site hits for them than anything they've introduced in the last 2 years.

   They're buggy whip makers. Let 'em fade.

1. 35  George Paglia  | 2/22/2008 11:44:01 AM

   @34, you may be right, but some of us customers do find some of the articles very interesting and at times, helpful. As a customer from a small shop, how do you know what question to ask if you don't know something even exists?

   You know what thoug? In the end, it's all about the customer, correct? The cusotmers of Lotus/IBM, SearchDomino, all of SeachDomino's advertisers, all the Lotus BPs, and yes, even Microsoft.

   So you want to hear a REAL customer's reaction? The moment that I saw that email, I felt SICK. I then went from sick to very angry. First with SearchDomino and their advertisers. Then with Microsoft, because regardless of who owned the ad, in my view, it pointed right back at Microsoft. So whoever was responsible for letting that ad go, congratulations, from my point of view, you just did a negative PR job aimed right back at Redmond.

   As a customer of SearchDomino, I don't want to see smear tactics of any kind. I get enough of that on the nightly news. I want to see REAL worth and TRUTH IN ADVERTISING from a publication and their advertisers or I will drop it.PERIOD. It makes no difference to me if someone advertises for a competing product or not. I'll make my own decision on what I buy and what I recommend that we buy.

   So Christine (if you're still listening), I may be a very small fish in a very big pond, but if you want MY continued interest and want me to ever respond nicely to your advertisers again, I suggest that your "apology" go way beyond what you've done. Publish it on SearchDomino and send a link to all SearchDomino subscribers before it gets any more out of hand. Better to "fess up" to what happened and apologize to the masses, because, as you can see, some of us here are REALLY TICKED OFF with your product regardless of who, why, when or how it happened. This is your chance to really put it right; don't blow it.

   Have a nice weekend......

1. 36  Jamie Jenkins  | 2/22/2008 11:56:55 AM

   Okay, let all agree to disagree on this one.

   We all have to get back to writing great new info on Notes 8.0.1 and Ed would like his vacation back I'm sure!

   ;-)

1. 37  Kerr  | 2/22/2008 12:08:03 PM

   @34, took the words right out of my mouth.

   I was a subscriber to SearchDomino for years, but I can't remember the last time I actually bothered to read it. It stopped being a useful resource a long time ago. This whole debate was just the prompt I needed to go and unsubscribe.

   Bye bye now, bye bye.

1. 38  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/22/2008 12:33:11 PM

   Hello all. It sounds like there are several of you here who will never be satisfied with anything I say, and that's fine. I do want to address a couple of things though:

   @28 Tim, Matt did respond to you. You sent your email on 1/9/08 at 1:59 p.m. He responded the same day at 4:06 p.m. I have asked him to forward you his original response, so you can see for yourself.

   As for your comments on the WebSphere article ({ Link } that entire piece is quotes from readers -- Notes/Domino IT professionals -- not us. And for that matter, they are only a few of several comments we received related to confusion or concerns about WebSphere.

   As an independent publication, our job is to provide technical advice and perspectives that help Notes/Domino IT professionals do their jobs. Not everything we publish is going to evangelize Lotus Notes Domino and other IBM products.

   Most of our content *is* positive and useful. In our Lotusphere coverage, there were six stories/podcasts. Only two of those stories mention anything negative and the Burton one is an analyst's opinion, which he has a right to. The ultimate point though is that there is more positive coverage than not.

   I have apologized and asked to have the ad copy changed to stop insulting my readership. With all of the insults being thrown at me and the hostility and anger, I am not convinced anything additional I do or say will really make a difference with a certain number of you.

   I am going back to doing my job now and I hope in time you will all see that this was a mistake, we tried to fix it, we've apologized, and at this point you're trying to squeeze blood from a rock. I'm going to go back to SearchDomino.com and deliver good content for my current readers and that's the best I can do.

   I'm tired of defending myself and the work that Matt and I do on the site. I care about your opinions, I respect them, and I understand your anger. But I think we're just starting to go around in circles now.

   I wish the best to all of you who will no longer be using SearchDomino.com as resource. I'm sorry to see you go, but that's certainly your right. See you around the blogosphere. Thanks for the lively conversation and exchange of opinions.

1. 39  Charles Robinson http://cubert-codepoet.blogspot.com | 2/22/2008 1:25:00 PM

   Ms. Herbert, I genuinely feel sorry for you. Unfortunately the lack of editorial oversight of the advertising has brought down the wrath of your own readers. Your response, which was to change the ad copy, is not acceptable. You did that thinking it was enough, but you left yourself no options when we rejected it. Had you removed the ads I think you might have some people on your side, but that isn't the choice you made. You have your point of view, we each have our own. We all mostly agree with each other, which tells me that SearchDomino is out of tune with their audience.

1. 40  Timothy Briley  | 2/22/2008 2:11:08 PM

   @38- You've probably figured out that I don't delete much when it comes to email. I've got searchdomino newsletter emails going back to December 2000. So I believe you when you say you sent a reply, but since I didn't hear back in 2005 and since I'm pretty anal about email, I have to wonder just where you sent that reply to.

   But the problem isn't that I didn't get your reply, the problem is that you did it again seven days later.

   The final thing I want to pass on to you is this. I gave you a heads up on 1/08/2008 and from what I can tell, you guys took about SIX WEEKS to publicly do something about it. Unfortunately, you only had six days.

1. 41  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/22/2008 4:09:31 PM

   @38 "I hope in time you will all see that this was a mistake, we tried to fix it, we've apologized, and at this point you're trying to squeeze blood from a rock".

   As far as I can tell, you've apologized to edbrill.com and greyhawk68.com readers. What are your plans for searchdomino.com readers and those who received the various e-mails in the first place?

1. 42  Duffbert http://www.duffbert.com | 2/22/2008 9:34:44 PM

   @38... while you won't technically see this as you've moved on, I'll summarize my points before I do the same...

   I'm surprised that you completely ignored the points that Rich made, as well as not acknowledging the interview situation that Ed clarified. The whole "if IBM had been responsive" statement just sort of died there. Did the reporter cancel the interview? If so, why? And then why would she claim that no one at IBM would give her the time of day?

   And while your apology includes changing ad copy to not insult your readers, you still point them to the white paper, hosted by techtarget, and found here:

   { Link }

   "Lotus Notes, in particular, is quickly becoming viewed as a legacy platform that is difficult to shed as part of a move to modern, scalable, and non-proprietary architectures."

   Changing ad copy and then pointing them to a location where the original wording is still in place is pretty blurry in terms of being a genuine attempt at rectification.

   You're right in that we're going in circles. It's too bad that there wasn't more success in either side understanding or accepting what the other side was convinced of. Good luck with your publication, as I'm sure we'll all still pass one another in the virtual Domino community.

1. 43  Bill Malchisky http://www.EffectiveSoftware.com | 2/23/2008 1:10:01 PM

   I am really surprised by the searchdomino response. Her replies ignored the @42 cited points, but also my issue on censorship being bogus (@23, which I think was hardly hostile or insulting). She also ignored the line about their company tagline being focused on Lotus Notes, but she then cites in @38 about being independent and not all about Domino. From her words, they are really confused about who they are and what they want to be going forward.

   The final response presented her as being, IMHO, in over-her-head on this matter--unfortunately. She's in a tough spot, but valid points on repeating the faux pas and waiting six weeks to respond provide insight into their perceived initial apathy or unawareness (i.e. internal communication issues); and points still unaddressed.

   Have a good weekend everyone.

1. 44  Christine Herbert http://www.searchdomino.com | 2/24/2008 2:01:27 PM

   Hello again.

   @42) My news writer told me that IBM cancelled. Ed says that Tina did. I really don't know who to believe.

   @42) I have informed my publisher that the ad copy on the main white paper landing page was not changed to match the new ad copy and it will be changed asap.

   @40) Now we're being accused of lying and forging emails. This is incredibly insulting. We were responsive to people who emailed us directly with concerns. We replied the same day to your email. I don't know why you didn't get it, but we sent it.

   @40) When I say independent, that means we are not like developerWorks, for example, which has content that is from the vendor of the products discussed there. It means that we try to present a balanced view of the Domino market on the editorial side without undue influence from vendors.

   And, Bill, while your tone may not have been insulting, the overall tone is. Matt and I work hard to deliver good technical content to our SearchDomino.com readers on quite a modest editorial budget. We get no credit for that here. Not only have we been attacked for the Unify ad campaign, we've been attacked on every level at this point.

   If I thought it would make any difference, I would continue the discussion. But nothing I say or do seems to make a darn difference.

   I do appreciate all the feedback and I care about everyone's thoughts and feelings here. But at this point, this has become very unproductive. Thanks again for your opinions.

1. 45  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/25/2008 1:49:42 AM

   Christine,

   For sure, I did not cancel the interview... and I had plenty of other time open on Monday to reschedule. If there was a disconnect, I apologize, but the information I have indicates that it wasn't IBM at our own event cancelling a press interview.

   The lack of comment as far as any communication or apology to SearchDomino readers seems to answer (or non-answer) the question I have been asking all along. No apology to your readers for insulting the technology they use is forthcoming.

   That's all I need to know.

1. 46  Karl-Henry Martinsson  | 2/27/2008 12:28:56 PM

   @44: Yesterday I got another newsletter from SearchDomino.com. No excuse in that one. When will you send an apology to the readers, not to just the readers on two blogs? Either you agree it was wrong, and you send the apology to everyone, or you don't think you did anything wrong, and admit it here.

   Seems like you are just trying to deflect some critics here, but are not really interested in an apology to the readers. I may be wrong, though. Interested to read the next newsletter...

1. 47  Ed Brill http://www.edbrill.com | 2/27/2008 1:42:07 PM

   @46, it's clear that SearchDomino is approaching this with a damage control mindset. There is likely only one way to be able to communicate your disappointment, and it's not by posting here.