The Cluetrain Manifesto

Here's another doubleheader review, this time of The Cluetrain Manifesto, the four-author print extension of the Web site of the same name. Hemos and Jason Bennett here dissect the book and provide some insight into where the cluetrain is steaming. The Cluetrain Manifesto author Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger pages 190 publisher Perseus Books, 12/1999 rating Suits:9/ reviewer hemos, Jason Bennett ISBN 0738202444 summary The book based on the website, TCF is a radical vision of the impact of the Internet on business-as-usual. Review One: hemos It's not often that I actually read a book that's targeted at the business market. Such books often get sent to our offices here for review, and we usually hold a short ceremony in which we desecrate the books, then send them out to the vast CEO gulags we've started outside of town.

Scratch that last part. In any case, it is true that I usually manage to avoid "business" writing. I've mostly found that the point the authors attempt to make could have been said in 15 pages, versus the 150 they took to say it. Even the most beautiful graphs cannot disguise a lack of content.

However, when Doc Searls (one of the authors of The Cluetrain Manifesto) passed along several copies of the book, I was a bit taken aback. I'd heard it being talked up by quite a number of people, all of whom were (hurried intake of breath!) Manager-types! But the people writing it -- from Doc, to Christopher Locke, Rick Levine and David Weinberger -- are all folks I've either met, heard or read before and people I respect.

That left me with a bit of a conundrum. If this book was written by people I respected, but as a rule business books have been the closest to Harlequin romances in terms of worth, what the heck was going on? The answer, my dear Watson, is quite elementary: this is not a business book.

Or rather, it is. But not a book about how business today should run and operate, about "disintermediation" and other piles of drivel that I think should be apparent for what they are to anyone willing to think. Instead, Cluetrain gets at the heart of what's actually going with this whole "Internet Revolution" -- people talking to people. And I think that particular message has gotten lost in the haze of convenience, price-difference and all the other media hyped ideas about what's going on with the business side of the Internet. What the authors of the book argue is that what's actually happening, in many ways, is that we are ripping down the artifical walls between producers and sellers. I agree. Disintermediation by any other name, maybe, but their treatment is refreshing in that it focuses on the human side. Any book that includes the mantra: "I am not a business. I am a human being." is good by me. And they also mention "undead evil." I'm serious.

OK, here's my take on the book with some sembalance of mental order: Cluetrain does a great job of exploding much of the hype about the present revolution. Instead, the revolution we're creating is something that humanity had for a while, and lost. We're bringing back the conversation now, and we're taking it global. That's the book in a nutshell. But the folks writing it can actually make that message interesting enough to read for roughly two hundred pages -- enough that you want to read the author credits, and drop them a line, like I did. The book also gathers strength from its use of excellent quotes and examples.

Who should this book be read by? You, of course, but also passing the book along to bosses and friends who are afraid of the Internet. I'm serious -- this book has become my defacto primer for people who don't understand what the Internet is going to do -- and doing -- and are scared about it.

And even if you don't trust me, read the sample chapter. Review Two: Jason Bennet

Background

Greetings, all, and good to be back. After finishing some books in the past month, as well as finally getting some others written up, I'm ready to unleash a string of reviews on Slashdot. The first of these is one of the more talked-about books to come out recently, The Cluetrain Manifesto. I have to admit I didn't see the Web site until recently, and thus am a newcomer to the movement, but I must say the rhetoric is revolutionary, regardless of how much impact it eventually has. If nothing else, take a look at the site and read over the 95 theses. You may or may not agree with them, but they will make you think.

What's the book about?

Before addressing the various essays that make up the manifesto, I'll try to summarize the ideals and ideas behind the movement. Basically, commerce as we know it is a lie. For most of human history, trade has been about interacting with other people. Going to the market, seeing your friends, checking out the various stalls, conducting business, and generally doing the important things of life. Craftsmen proudly displayed their wares to all who would see, touch, and smell them. People discussed which merchants were fair, who had the best quality, and so on. The market was the center of human interaction, where politics, society and business merged (see the Greeks for an excellent example). The Industrial Revolution changed all that, however. With the advent of mass production and economies of scale, production and consumption became all important. Craftsmanship was discarded in favor of turning out as much interchangeable product as possible, using interchangeable workers in interchangeable factories. The marketplace ceased to be a conversation, and became a one-way street, aimed directly at the consumer. The rise of mass media completed the transformation from conversation to lecture. No longer did customers roam the marketplace, but instead consumers were lulled, bribed and manipulated into buying the latest and greatest, because TV told them so. The idea of the interchangeable consumer came to be the industrial ideal. Nothing was left to chance: You could get anyone to buy anything made by anyone, and all that mattered was the money. This ideal never totally came to pass, of course, but it was the driving force behind many decades of business.

The Internet has broken these chains, however. The market no longer stares exlusively at the great tube, but instead is engaged in the greatest conversation in human history. Customers now tell each other what is happening, and shoot down the grandiose marketing schemes of giant corporations. You can now talk to hundreds of people in your town about the latest restaurants, which car dealer is best, or what doctors give the best care. The bazaar has returned with a vengeance. The mass media assume we are stupid; the Internet makes us collectively smart. The Internet is a conversation.

Commensurate with the redemption of customers from the bondage of industry, workers are no longer cogs in a great production machine, but are now talking to each other in ways they never could before. Hierarchies are broken when you can e-mail anyone, anytime, to give or get help. It doesn't matter where you sit, or what your place is, everyone has access. Even worse, those employees (nee' resources) and those customers can now talk to each other easily. The two great conversations, inside the business and inside the market, are on a collision course. The only question is, will that collision propel your business to new heights, or destroy it?

Chapter 1 is more or less an overview of what is to come, and where I drew the above summary from. In short, because of the Internet, you, the customer, now have a voice, the ability to make yourself heard to others over the din of advertising and other stilted "business communication." You know what business-speak sounds like, you know what people sound like, and you know what you prefer and who you believe. Just as the customer is empowered, so is the worker, precisely because of the knowledge that a network allows to flow. These conversations threaten to completely overthrow business as we know it, and their merger will transform the market.

Chapter 2 quickly sums up why we so desperately want our voice back: because we sacrificed it, traded our souls, to be good professionals. The Web allows us to be ourselves again.

Chapter 3 discusses what's behind the Web: the unique voice of each person participating in the conversation. These voices are carried along various conduits: e-mail and mailing lists, newsgroups, chat rooms, and personal Web pages. The chapter details various ways that these modes of communication are already breaking down the barriers among customers, and between business and customers, including a very interesting newsgroup exchange about Saturn automobiles. Most of this will be old hat to Slashdot readers, but likely not to suits. Authenticity is the key here, along with spontaneity and a human touch. All of these things are conveyed by people in a conversation, and not conveyed by brochures or Powerpoint presentations. It doesn't matter so much that your company participates in all of these conversations, as it does that it is honest when is does participate. Some examples of honest, open organizations (United, Sun's Java team, at least at first) and closed organizations (Intel with the Pentium bug, Java later on) are analyzed, with clear results: those companies that try to talk succeed, while those that don't talk only hurt themselves. Someone will be talking, and it had better be you.

The anecdote which opens chapter 4 sums up the theme: even after hearing about markets as conversations for several hours to a group, some people still don't get it. The first few paragraphs basically repeat what has already been stated: markets stopped being conversations around the time mass production and mass marketing took over. What replaced this conversation was a one-way message, delivered from business to consumers. Unfortunately, no one really wants to listen to an overblown hype machine. The entire role of marketing is to make us want what we are supposed to want, but don't really want. This anti-conversation, however, is slowly but surely being pushed back by the rich tones of conversation on the Web. The knowledge contained in these conversations increases exponentially as more and more people join the party. Attempts to dominate this conversation with targeted message, i.e. push technology, have failed utterly. No one wants another television. In point of fact, conversation built the Web, manifested in the open source movement. Apache, Linux and the rest are all products of conversations. These are living examples of what can be accomplished when the market talks. The only way for marketing to survive is to work with the conversation, to give it what it wants. No more brochureware, but real information that the market recognizes as such. Work with the customer on price. Truely reposition, don't just spout different lines. Marketing sees the consumer as the enemy. The conversation is waiting for them to realize what's happening. All you have to do is talk honestly, and people will listen and talk back.

Chapter 5 details the other side of this sea change -- the change within business. In a "hyperlinked organization," people don't need the fancy office building or the top-down bureaucracy, they just want to be able to work with those people that best let them get a job done. Employees (or, dare I say it, resources) need no longer be bound by lines on an organizational chart. People go to who they need to get what they need. Centralized control is replaced by a web of people working with whoever they need. Groups form and collapse on an ad-hoc basis to meet the demands of the moment. All of the knowledge generated is managed through people telling each other stories. We already have tons of information; what we need is more knowledge, more understanding. Human communication generates this understanding. Because of all of this communication, and lack of hierarchy, it is inevitable that your customers will join in. Business intranets will expand to include customers along with employees, working together to make sure everyone gets what he needs. Business as a message is dead; Business as a conversation is beginning.

Chapter 6 summarizes the points made so far, then launches into a treatise on the future of the Web. Unfortunately, we're asking the wrong questions. We don't need to ask questions out of fear of the Web, but out of our desire to converse. The conversation we have will shape the Web the way it needs to be. There's no easy way to do this, just a journey into the unknown.

Chapter 7 concludes the Manifesto by stating that the revolution has already begun, and it's too far gone to stop. What we must do now is break our old habits, and start behaving in a new way. It's so tempting to keep an old, patched machine going even when everyone knows it needs to be replaced. Just remember, "I am not a company, I am a human being."

What's Good?

This book will blow your mind, all the more so if you're new to the Internet or unsure about what it means. It presents a radical new way to think about how we interact with commerce and with each other. To some extent or another, I think we all feel what is being communicated here. We're all tired of being cogs, of being consumers, of being resources. We want to be people, friendly customers, employees. As the conclusion says, it's already too late to stop this transformation. The Internet will only grow, and its fundamental nature means that the old is gone, and the new is come. If you are in business, you need to understand what is happening. You can either surf the wave, or drown in it.

What's Bad?

Any controversial book has its issues, and Cluetrain is no exception. The only reason I gave the book a Geek rating of 7 is because you already know what is being said. You know how people talk in newsgroups, and you probably don't want to read 50 pages telling you that. You don't need to hear this message repeated five times in the course of 200 pages. It's a good read, but know that you're likely to skip some parts, because you're tired of being beaten over the head with something you've already figured out.

Having said that, I do have quarrels with a few points that Weinberger makes when he discusses how the Internet came to be. I get the impression that he feels that the Internet sprung from chaos like Athena from Zeus, magically appearing out of the mist of conversation alone. He certainly believes that hierarchy is counterproductive in the Internet age. "[T]he most complex network ever imagined...[the WWW] has been implemented without any central control whatsoever," he writes on page 130. What exactly are the IETF and the W3C then? Didn't a small group of people design TCP/IP? There was a conversation, of course, but there was also control and hierarchy. No good open-source project lacks a leader, and every movement needs its inspiration. The Internet might not be the encrusted bureaucracy of a megacorporation, but authority is helpful in getting things done. I find the quote "[t]he Web succeeded where the Internet failed ..." (page 142) especially interesting. Although, as he says, the Web gave us the user-friendly browser, I'd rather think the Internet spawned the Web, since it is what transports the Web. Oh, and if someone can tell me what a "Unixlike language (145)" is, I'd appreciate it. I also find humorous the notion that e-mail has to be poorly written to be authentic. Finally, Chapter 6 is far too much of a political rant for my taste. Wanting to push pornography to the side does not make one a control freak. Control is not a bad thing. Anyway, I'm ranting now myself. It's a good book, despite these issues.

So What's In It For Me?

I think I've already said that. :-) This is an important book. You might love it. You might hate it. You'll likely feel threatened by it. Nevertheless, you owe it to yourself to at least read the 95 Theses. They will make you think. If you're a business type, read this. You need to, especially if you're still learning this Internet thing. If you've been around, read it if you want. There'll be some full parts, but it will mean a lot. The revolution has already begun.

Purchase this book at ThinkGeek.

• Table of Contents
• Foreward
• The Cluetrain Manifesto
• Introduction
  1. Internet Apocalypso
  2. The Longing
  3. Talk is Cheap
  4. Markets are Conversations
  5. The Hyperlinked Organization
  6. EZ Answers
  7. Post-Apocalypso
• Acknowledgements
• About the Authors

Comments

This book sucked

[Anonymous Coward]

IMHO, this heavily hyped book was a total waste of money. The book basically takes a few central themes and repeats them over and over again, finding about 100 different ways to say the same thing. To make things worse, most of its points are obvious to anybody who has been on the internet for a while and they do come to some fundamentally wrong conclusions.

They seem to approach the subject as if they had just discovered the wonders of computing, and seem to forget about all of the scientists and engineers that have spent over 3 decades bringing their visions of the information age to reality. Also, they seem naive about issues of control over infrastructure and information. Unfortunately, this is the kind of book that will appeal more to a socialogist than an engineeer/geek.

The only explanation why Hemos could possibly give it a good review is that he is a friend of some of the authors. To me, it was a fluff piece.

I'm fed up with being told what to think

[Anonymous Coward]

Whilst I'm sure this is an interesting book and that /.ers will all find it a great read, I'm sick and tired of the constant pressure for people who use the internet to "conform" to some kind of behavioural pattern. And I'm even more tired of being told that the net is bringing about some kind of radical "paradigm shift" in the way individuals and organisations interact.

All of this is just a dressing up of the naive political ideals of the majority of /. readers - that things are changing for the better, that world peace is possible and even round the corner and that technology will make the world a fundamentally better place to live. These ideals, while all very noble, don't seem to correspond to any kind of reality experianced by people living on the Earth today.

And yeah, I'm sure I'm going to be told I "don't get it" or some other platitude, but what people seem to forget here is that we all have our own views of life, and that these views are all valid in their own ways. But holding idealistic, head in the cloud views is just foolish - the only way you'll change the world is by looking at it and not some "manifesto" claiming to contain all the answers to the world's problems.

When people stop trying to control the thoughts of net users then things might change, but until then communist ideals of everyone being alike (or "getting it") will hold these changes back.

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[SgtPepper]

I'd just like to comment on some of the comments :)

I'm sick and tired of the constant pressure for people who use the internet to "conform" to some kind of behavioural pattern

I'm pretty sure that by now the number of people using the internet has increased so much that to even try to "conform" or suggest that any kind of "conforming" is possible is laughable, by now the internet is a good cross-section of the world population in general. Now maybe suggesting that most of the Slashdot readership is very similiar in thoughts and ideals is a lot closer. After all it bills itself has "News for Nerds" and is a well known Linux site, therefore you would expect "nerds" and Linux users to frequent it.

All of this is just a dressing up of the naive political ideals of the majority of /. readers - that things are changing for the better, that world peace is possible and even round the corner and that technology will make the world a fundamentally better place to live. These ideals, while all very noble, don't seem to correspond to any kind of reality experianced by people living on the Earth today.

Well, I must say that I at once agree and disagree. Yes, sometimes some ideals expressed here are a little...unrealistic, but for the MOST part things really ARE better. Look back a couple of hundred years....hell look back fifty...and tell me what time period YOU rather live in. I feel extremely lucky to be growing up and experiencing the time we're living in NOW, we have had great medical, scientific, and technological advances, the likes of which could not have even been DREAMT of 100 years ago. Yes suffering and proverty exist, and they probably always WILL, but we can minimize it. And that is the best we can do.

And yeah, I'm sure I'm going to be told I "don't get it" or some other platitude, but what people seem to forget here is that we all have our own views of life, and that these views are all valid in their own ways. But holding idealistic, head in the cloud views is just foolish - the only way you'll change the world is by looking at it and not some "manifesto" claiming to contain all the answers to the world's problems.

Believe it or not, I actually agree with you somewhat. However, try and build a house without blueprints. A "manifesto" has it's place, and I for one say if you can make your manifesto a reality, then go for it! The "Cluetrain Manifesto" may be idealistic, but that doesn't mean we don't WANT it ( hell, if we didn't want it then it would be idealistic would it? :) )

When people stop trying to control the thoughts of net users then things might change, but until then communist ideals of everyone being alike (or "getting it") will hold these changes back.

Eh, I agree with that, somewhat hypocritically too I'm afraid. As much as we geeks like diversity, we also crave sameness. For as much as we preach choice, we want everyone to use the same thing. It's naturally human I suppose, but still, wouldn't it be nice if everyone ( including ME ), live up to our ideals?

Ah well...

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[Bearpaw]

And yeah, I'm sure I'm going to be told I "don't get it" or some other platitude, but what people seem to forget here is that we all have our own views of life, and that these views are all valid in their own ways.

You're right. You don't get it.

But holding idealistic, head in the cloud views is just foolish - the only way you'll change the world is by looking at it and not some "manifesto" claiming to contain all the answers to the world's problems.

I took "manifesto" as tongue-in-cheek. Perhaps the authors hadn't counted on some people irrationally assuming that all manifestos claim "to contain all the answers, and somehow linking the word with those darn commies.

The "manifesto" seems to me to be about looking at the world, treating people as people, instead of continuing with the all-too-prevalent corporate "let's pretend" that usually treats both employees and customers as identical, interchangeable parts in a clockwork fantasy land.

But hey, I'm not gonna force anything on you. It's a more-or-less free society. But the conversation will continue, with or without you.

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[Wah]

When people stop trying to control the thoughts of net users then things might change, but until then communist ideals of everyone being alike (or "getting it") will hold these changes back.

You are in need of the platitude. When the message people are trying to get across is "Think for yourself, dammit!", how exactly does "getting it" become some type of conformity to a behavioural pattern?

what people seem to forget here is that we all have our own views of life, and that these views are all valid in their own ways

Then you DO get it, now try and pass it on.

I, for one, am looking forward to purchasing the book, not to read, but to pass along and spread the meme. Think for youself, dammit!
--

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[Mr. Slippery]

When people stop trying to control the thoughts of net users then things might change, but until then communist ideals of everyone being alike (or "getting it") will hold these changes back.

Funny, I thought the whole idea of the manifesto was that it was time to get away from the capitalist ideal of everyone being alike (or "keeping up with the Joneses", being good little consumer-units and worker-drones) and letting salesmen tell us how to think; that by engaging in conversations rather than sitting through lectures, we might find out that "we all have our own views of life, and that these views are all valid in their own ways," as opposed to the pre-digested single-POV content of the mass media.

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[Mr. Slippery]

Funny, I thought the whole idea of the manifesto was that it was time to get away from the capitalist ideal of everyone being alike (or "keeping up with the Joneses", being good little consumer-units and worker-drones)

Well you're a pretty freaking stupid individual aren't you? That has nothing to do with capitalism, either in theory or in practice.

It has everything to do with capitalism. Capitalism - at least as practiced in today's corporate industrial economy - is dependant on the continual growth of production. If the GDP doesn't rise every year, everyone goes into a tizzy. Production can only rise if consumption rises as well, and there are only two ways that consumption can rise: more consumers, or more consumption per capita.

We obvously can't have an endless number of consumers. (Though globalism is trying to maximize the possibilities.) So our capitalist society applies cultural pressure to get the consumer to consume more - "keeping up with the Joneses", as I said. Partially it's unconscious, partially it's a deliberate collusion between government and industry to keep profits flowing. (The competition for shiny baubles also serves to keep the citizens distracted from just how badly government and industry are fscking them over.)

This cultural pressure - the constant drumbeat of "Buy! Buy! Buy!" - is the backbeat of the one-way communication that we've been discussing. The most dangerous threat to our modern economic system is people deciding that they'd rather communicate with each other, and form human relationships, than follow the consumption parade.

Thus, perhaps it's no surprise that the forces of commercialization are at work, trying to turn the net into nothing more than one giant Sears & Robuck catalog. Blinking evidence of that can be found above this message. (Unless you're running Justbuster or have images off.)

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[G27 Radio]

When people stop trying to control the thoughts of net users then things might change, but until then communist ideals of everyone being alike (or "getting it") will hold these changes back.

Yeah those damn commies again...

Cluetrain Thesis #79: We want you to drop your trip, come out of your neurotic self-involvement, join the party.

Apparrently they're not just commies, but dirty drug-addled hippies as well.

numb

Re:I'm fed up with being told what to think

[canny]

So, what do you advocate? Not sharing your ideas? This person simply has some ideas to share! You aren't being told to join his secret cult or something, you just read, interpret, think and decide... maybe some of his ideas will strike you as something worthwhile and maybe not... you can't think of everything for yourself. If you think about semantics, it's best to have all viewpoints on a decision before making it so reading as many viewpoints on this perticular subject will just allow you to make better decisions. Nobody is making you buy this book!

Re:Individuality and egocentricism

[SgtPepper]

What an egocentric viewpoint. Yeah, sure maybe your life is great and full of all these wonderful advances, but try living in say, the Taliban-controlled parts of Afganistan and see how "wonderful" this period of time is. The 20th century has been the home of some of the worst violence and atrocities in history, and it is only people like you who are secure in your luxury that have the gall to say that.

Eh, I wish my life was great and wonderful, and to many people I'm sure it is, but I have my own problems, as I'm sure everyone does. And yes, as i stated, the world will always have suffering, but I wonder what the population/suffering ratio is nowadays, I'm willing to bet it's lower now then it ever has been. And do not forget the atrocities of the past...what about the crusades? Or the Spanish Inquisition ( ob "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition" )

You say you want individuality, and then go and say this rubbish. A manifesto is a tool for pushing conformity, even if, as it is in this case, an illusionary tolerance of "individuality". True individuality doesn't come from being brainwashed into false beliefs, it comes from within a person. But then again, I wouldn't expect the average /.er to be capable of that level of introspection.

A manifesto is NO such thing, the dictionary defination is: manifesto (mn-fst)
n., pl. manifestoes or manifestos.

A public declaration of principles, policies, or intentions, especially of a political nature.

Cleary states that it is simply stating what you believe, nobody says YOU have to believe it has well, it is simply what THEY think. And think about the word idealistic for that matter...in order to call it idealistic you must share their ideals, or else it ISN'T idealistic? *sigh* Not that I would expect you to understand the concept.

My $0.02

[Byteme]

In my spare time, I work for a large corporation in a stuffy and typically conservative line of business (as a system analyst). We had an outlook several years ago where we could go with the kind of outline that is discussed in Cluetrain (before it was published). This made us very attractive to customers and the first in the industry to make many of the steps that we did. Now that this text has achieved the level of popularity that it has now, it has become a buzzword in such circles. I do believe that this text will become a path for many to follow, and instead of trying to emulate the 'big players', startups and existing companies alike will look to Cluetrain for insight.

I passed the CT manifesto around at my work

[katchomko]

and the PHB, sales and marketing people all loved it. That site opened a dialogue I'd been trying to have with them for weeks, but wasn't able to get started. Perhaps because it carried the authority of being a nicely done page, or it had the presentation of being another revolutionary dotcom manifesto, I don't know. But I sent the link to the head of Marketing, and he read it and sent to everyone, with a "required reading" subject line.
Things have gotten better at our site and in our company. No longer is there a battle between the sales/marketing people and IT. We're on the same page, and we develop our site for the customer's experience. I like my job better, because I'm building technologies that make the web a nicer place for users. Marketing/sales likes their job better, because they understand what it's about now. And we all work together to make it happen. I haven't said, "There's no way any of my servers are going to do that, I'm not wasting cycles on that project" since that link went around.
And that is what the manifesto is, it's a translation of everything us webheads take for granted into business-speak so it's palatable to the phb's. Is it dumbed down in some places, and full of self-evident truisms? Sure, from our perspective. But anything that can help us show the rest of our companies what we do and where we need to go is ok by me.

Tech Support and the Cluetrain Manifesto

[phoneboy]

I have to take issue with this statement of the Cluetrain Manifesto:

People in networked markets have figured out that they get far better information and support from one another than from vendors. So much for corporate rhetoric about adding value to commoditized products.

For the vast majority of companies, this is quite correct. Companies are restrained by a variety of different forces. However, I disagree that a vendor is incapable of providng quality support that rivals support given by "one another."

As someone who works both sides of the fence so to speak (I have a vast resource of Check Point FireWall-1 related material on phoneboy.com and I work for a Check Point partner who works very closely with Check Point), I think both types of support have their place. With all the voices out there that are now heard loud and clear on the Internet, someone has to listen to them and sort out which is bullshit and which is the gospel. A vendor on the cluetrain is actively listening to what customers are doing and actually reacting in a positive manner.

I think what's happening in a lot of companies is that there are people who are taking it upon themselves to interact with the public and provide discourse in this conversation called the Internet. There is no "corporate directive" saying to do this. In fact, in some companies, it is actively discouraged because they feel the individuals can't be trusted to "speak the corporate speak." That may be true. The fact of the matter is the smart companies are allowing their employees to participate, even encouraging it. The dumb ones (most are) have tyrannical policies discouraging people from participating.

However, since I actually get paid to support people, I personally have a very fine line to walk. Obviously, for paying customers, my job is to solve their problem. For customers who have problems and say so in a public forum, I make sure they don't or they get where they need to for proper help. For those who aren't paying for support but need help, I do my best, but obviously paying customers get priority. Actually, my needs get priority. After all, I'm human, right, and isn't that what this is about, treating everyone as a human being?

-- PhoneBoy

why is this damn thing so popular?

[jkottke]

I think one of the reasons this book (and the Web site) is resonating with so many people is that it's telling people what they already know...but they didn't know that they knew it (confused yet?).

I mean, this is all stuff wired folks have known for ages, having had 5+ years experience with e-mail, Usenet, and the Web, interacting in the "new economy". What Chris and Co. did was to write the whole thing down, so that everyone could get a sense of how things are playing out.

And this isn't just preaching to the choir, as some critics have said. It's evident from reading the book that it is, like Hemos said, a business book aimed at business people...people who don't know who their audience is and need to relearn how to be people and businessmen and businesswomen at the same time.

Re:Yes, but...

[Dredd13]

... and fatbrain and bn.com?

Alternatively, consider the Glue Train...

[stx23]

The Glue Train Manifesto

In the words of Homer J,

[Pope]

We're gonna take this horse to the Glue Factory!
And he won't be allowed on the tour.

Pope

Christopher Locke

[turg]

If you enjoy reading articles where companies get royally trashed for internet-related-stupidity, subscribe to Entropy Gradient Reversals, an email newsletter from Chris Locke (one of the co-authors of this book), and his alter-ego, Rageboy.

========

Re:Individuality and egocentricism

[0xdeadbeef]

advances, but try living in say, the Taliban-controlled parts of Afganistan and see how "wonderful" this period of time is. The 20th century has been the home of some of the worst violence and atrocities in history, and it is only people like you who are secure in your luxury that have the gall to say that.

The Taliban is overtly hostile to technology and Western ideals, so how can you blame technological progress for the condition of Afganistan? The county is controled by a bunch of crazy fundamentalist militants. They are about as far from the "cluetrain" as one can get. People like the leaders of the Taliban are directly responsible for the atrocities you speak of, and guess what, they've been around since the beginning of history! The Greeks, the Romans, the Vandals, the Aztecs, the Vikings, the Manchurians, etc. etc., they all slaughtered millions. There was no Golden Age, there was no primeval perfection, so get off your elitist moral high horse.

True individuality doesn't come from being brainwashed into false beliefs, it comes from within a person. But then again, I wouldn't expect the average /.er to be capable of that level of introspection.

I suppose your entire worldview was constructed in isolation, in some godlike feat of deduction? Oh tell us, great one, what wonderous insights you have divined in your solipsitic introspection!

MPAA lurkers...

[Trickster Coyote]

...are you listening? We know you read Slashdot. Or do you only read the DeDSS threads? The stuff applies to you in spades.

" Marketing sees the consumer as the enemy."

Imagine trying to jail your own customers, who have paid good money to buy your product, simply because they want to access their purchases in ways you don't approve. If this isn't treating your customers as enemies, I don't know what is.

And as you may have notice from reading Slashdot, there is a conversation going on. Your customers are talking to each other. Among other things, they are talking about how you are treating them like enemies. And Slashdot isn't the only place this conversation is happening.

Also, its not just about DeCSS anymore. Its also about things like region coding. Notice how sales of models of DVD players that can bypass the region codes are booming? Your customers know what they want and they are all talking to each other.

While you and your battalions of lawyers work feverishly in your vain attempt to stick your finger into the leaks in the CSS dyke, the conversation grows louder. And there is nothing, NOTHING you can do to quiet it.

Unless you listen, and particate, honestly.

Maybe we should send Jack Valenti and the heads of the major studios some complimentary copies of The Cluetrain Manifesto.

Send a copy to the RIAA

[theonetruekeebler]

I think the RIAA--and the MPAA, for that matter--need to have this book read to them in a big way. The problem that I have with these fascists is not that they are trying to "protect" the interests of artists, but that they are trying to perpetuate an obsolete business model by interfering with the evolution of the new one. The old model of producers ramming products down the throats of consumers, regardless of what the consumers actually want--is being replaced with one in which consumers and producers discuss products--what is possible, what can and should be created and used.

To put the RIAA's actions in Industrial Revolution terms, what they are doing is tantamount to buggy whip manufacturers filing injunctions against Ford Motor Company over the Model T.

And that's my bad analogy for the day.

--

An interesting quote from the review

[dsplat]

Marketing sees the consumer as the enemy.

That perception is completely correct, but it must be understood as well. The consumer, from the point he recognizes the hype of marketting, is its enemy. He doesn't want to be targetted. But he is the enemy of the process that has been marketting in mass media. He is not necessarily the enemy of marketters or the companies they work for. The marketters don't have to continue to fight for that side. They have to option of working to transform their side into a participant in the conversation.

Community size homogenizes content

[Cplus]

As we all think so often when reading slashdot, signal to noise becomes a larger and larger issue as the Internet/web community grows. The Cluetrain Manifesto has many good points as it pertains to smaller communities, but to my mind loses its luster I try to reconcile it to a larger community.

Using the example of Slashdot, as we are all familiar with it and its tremendous growth, we can see that outside points-of-view are for the most part moderated down or ignored. It is thought that the cream rises to the top, but I think that this gives too much credit to the average Joe who doesn't necessarily grasp all of the issues surrounding a subject. I'm not saying that there is no forwarding movement in the collective thoughts of Slashdot and I do feel that I'm better for reading it constantly, but the nuggets of goodness have to be searched for at this point.

Not to poke holes in the great American ideal of democracy, but I don't take comfort in knowing that it is the "everyman" who is for the most part making the decisions.

When you can observe everyone's point of view how do you determine what to see?

Hello, Excuse Me

[Greyfox]

If you all nonconform, won't you all just be the same?