Author: Shawn K. Quinn

Sock(-puppet)ing it to Apple’s iPhone App Store

Sometimes Apple is not to blame for everything, though I would like to think there is a way they can put a sock in this problem.

Gagan Biyani writing for MobileCrunch reports on the latest problem to hit Apple’s iPhone App Store: completely fake reviews planted there by PR firms.

Reverb Communications is a PR firm retained by some of the companies which sell iPhone applications in the App Store. The firm touts “first party” and “personal” relationships with Apple. Those claims, of course, are spun so much, most of us mere mortals that don’t work in PR risk nausea from the resulting dizziness embodied therein. Because what Reverb actually means is that they have a bunch of fake identities that can log into the App Store and post fake reviews. Yeah, that’s not exactly what comes to mind when I hear of “first party” and “personal” relationships.

How did we finally find out that Reverb lacks scruples and decency? Through an anonymous developer referred to in the article as only “Developer Y” (assumably because “Publisher X” had just been used in the preceding paragraph). From a document sent from Reverb to Developer Y (quoted in the original article):

Reverb employs a small team of interns who are focused on managing online message boards, writing influential game reviews, and keeping a gauge on the online communities. Reverb uses the interns as a sounding board to understand the new mediums where consumers are learning about products, hearing about hot new games and listen to the thoughts of our targeted audience. Reverb will use these interns on Developer Y products to post game reviews (written by Reverb staff members) ensuring the majority of the reviews will have the key messaging and talking points developed by the Reverb PR/marketing team.

But it gets even better. Reverb actually works with Apple, having done at least one TV commercial for them. Further, at least one of Reverb’s referrals actually came from an Apple employee.

Reverb’s official statement when confronted with this? Hang on tight, because the Tilt-a-Whirl is starting up again. Doug Kennedy wrote back to MobileCrunch in essence fingering a “disgruntled former employee who is violating his confidentiality agreement.”

I’m pretty sure confidentiality agreements don’t cover illegal activity, and what Reverb is doing here at least borders on fraud. At the very least it’s patently devoid of any scruples, honesty, and ethics. And PR firms and the people that work for them wonder why they are sometimes viewed as less trustworthy.

Shame on Reverb. If you work in PR, please don’t do what they did. The world, and the reputation of your profession, will be much better off.

Games book publishers still play

Josh Catone writing for Mashable reports on the not-too-surprising pitfalls of digital textbooks and why they are not ready for prime-time for many students. The primary focus of the article appears to be college students where textbooks are purchased. (If I have any readers still in high school out there, yes, it’s true, senior year of high school is the last time you’ll get to borrow your textbooks for free.)

Indeed, very predictable it is that the third reason (of three) is “questions of ownership.” Cited are DRM (digital restrictions management) limiting time of use to 180 days in one example, after which the books are automatically deleted. The example cited is a biology textbook available via both hard copy and electronic textbook distributor CourseSmart. (The article refers to CourseSmart as a publisher, but it appears this is technically incorrect.) The hard copy version is available for US$50 used, US$80 new; CourseSmart charges US$70 for what is in effect a 180 day rental. Given the cost, and that this is never a concern with printed textbooks, this is simply unacceptable. US$70 for a non-DRM copy is more in line with what I’d consider fair. If Pearson (the publishing) company insisted upon a silly, odious, and obnoxious 180-day time limit, I honestly think US$20 is more realistic. Yes, one-fourth the cost of the print version.

The lack of standardization doesn’t help either, which in turn highlights just how bad of an idea DRM really is, as that is a large part of the reason for lack of standardization. It’s similar to the reason Microsoft’s “PlaysForSure” campaign looked pretty dumb when Microsoft then came out with the Zune, in essence saying “Thanks, hardware manufacturers, for supporting our patented Windows Media format and making it easy for PCs running Windows to use your players, we like you so much that we’re going to say, here’s our Zune, and here’s our middle finger.”

Most digital audio players prior to Apple’s iPod, Microsoft’s Zune, etc. used a standard, if patent-encumbered, format called MPEG Layer III Audio or MP3. Most understood Windows Media (WMA/WMV) files alongside MP3, but MP3 was still a fairly reliable “lowest common denominator” format.

In the world of digital print publishing, despite the clear winner being Adobe’s PDF format (which is as far as I know not patent encumbered, or the patents thus covering it have been made available under a royalty free license), many e-book readers do not support plain PDF, or do so in a manner that’s obnoxious and clumsy compared to grabbing the DRM-infested version.

It seems like print’s slow transition to digital may be the last frontier for DRM elimination. College textbooks are just the tip of the iceberg, though I think students not being able to sell their books at the end of a semester anymore will be quite annoyed. Or, they may just shell out the money again for what’s in reality an expensive rental. Hopefully, the kids smart enough to get into college will be smart enough to see the shell game being played before them.

Silly statistical shenanigans in the drive-thru

As a close friend and former roommate of a QSR (quick service restaurant or “fast food”) crew member and manager, this one strikes a special chord with me.

Consumerist.com reports on a really stupid pet trick being pulled by some QSR drive-thru workers. They are asking customers to back up and pull forward to restart the speed of service timer. A very low-tech and suspicious method of gaming the system.

The article does mention the prospect of in turn gaming the drive-thru jockeys out of free fries or similar such things. I find it difficult to take a real stance on the ethics of such a manuever. Hopefully, it will not matter soon; I am aware that at least Taco Bell, and possibly all other Yum! Brands QSRs (KFC, Pizza Hut, Long John Silver’s, A&W) have an amount display set up below the drive-thru window, which assumably cycles through to the next customer when “cheated” in such a fashion. I’m wondering why Burger King et al don’t adopt similar technology to squash this type of statistical shenanigans.

If the numbers are to matter, if the management of a QSR actually gives a damn about real speed of service and not just making the numbers look good to the next higher manager, this type of cheating needs to be dealt with by termination, first time, no exceptions.

And to the workers resorting to this in a vain attempt to save their jobs: If you can’t stay up to speed, stay out of the kitchen.

[Edit 2024-03-23: Dead link replaced with archive.org copy]

Backwards in Afghanistan

A very unpleasant reminder of just how backwards some societies are in 2009.

The Guardian reports on a law made in Afghanistan permitting men to starve their wives if sexual demands are not met. Yes, check your calendar, it really is 2009 and this kind of law really did get passed.

Another truly outrageous and sexist portion of this law is that women must get permission from their husbands to work.

Quoting the article:

“These kinds of barbaric laws were supposed to have been relegated to the past with the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001, yet [President] Karzai has revived them and given them his official stamp of approval.”

As a US resident, I supported our military aid towards the overthrow of the Taliban, the same group that blew up the Buddha statues standing for the majority of two millenia. I would like to think overthrowing the Taliban was not work our soldiers did in vain. The passing of laws like this, that would even be backwards for the 18th century much less the 21st, does nothing to add to my confidence.

Mean, thoughtless, and tasteless: PETA crosses the line

Momlogic.com reports on what may well be the single biggest lapse in good judgment ever to come out of the infamous “animal rights” organization PETA: a billboard with an obviously overweight woman in a swimsuit (depicted from behind, neck to small of back) and the tagline “Save the Whales. Lose the Blubber: Go Vegetarian. PETA.”

I can’t believe even PETA would stoop this low. This is flagrantly sexist; I don’t know how CBS Outdoor (formerly Viacom) allowed this to go up, or who PETA bribed to get this out there in this medium. That alone costs PETA much of the credibility they might have otherwise had.

PETA assumes plenty of facts about the majority of cases of obesity that have simply not been proven. There are many cases of obesity out there that changes in diet alone will not solve. I, personally, believe exercise plays a far greater role in losing weight than diet. I dismissed the Atkins diet as the fad that it is (was?).

As some evidence of this, people may think it ludicrous that professional sports franchises gave such high allowances for meals on road games–the NFL’s allowances from 2007 were $17, $25, and $43 for breakfast, lunch, and dinner respectively, probably a bit higher in 2009 due to inflation. Few consider the possibility that the activity levels of many professional athletes actually justify $17 for breakfast, etc. Yet that is probably the reason for the meal allowances being as high as they are! (In the particular case of the NFL, weight is actually an advantage for some positions and so players would need to maintain their weight, specifically eating enough to lose as little as possible. I wouldn’t exactly expect baseball, basketball, soccer, or hockey players to eat like birds, however.)

Until there is hard evidence that a vegetarian or vegan diet alone will result in weight loss with no other changes in lifestyle, the responsible thing to do is for PETA to remove their billboard. Of course, this is the same PETA that has no problem with splashing red paint on fur coats just to advance their ridiculous extremist view. So I’m not sure PETA will ever do the responsible thing. I retain my optimism, however.