Making an Open Source Project Press-Friendly
blackbearnh writes "Corporations know that part of launching a successful project is projecting the right image to the media. But a lot of open source projects seem to treat the press as an annoyance, if they think about it at all. For a reporter, even finding someone on a project who's willing to talk about it can be a challenge. Esther Schindler over at IT World has a summary of a roundtable discussion that was held at OSCON with pointers about how open source projects can be more reporter-accessible. 'Recognize that we are on deadline, which for most news journalists means posting the article within a couple of hours and for feature authors within a couple of days. If we ask for input, or a quote, or anything to which your project spokesperson (you do have one? yes? please say yes) might want to respond, it generally does mean, "Drop everything and answer us now." If the journalist doesn't give you a deadline ("I need to know by 2pm"), it's okay to ask how long you can take to reach the right developer in Poland, but err on the side of "emergency response." It's unreasonable, I know, but so are our deadlines.'"
The reason most open-source projects get no press is they have neither a story to tell nor a storyteller to tell it. Linux is a good example. There was a story to tell--the story of Linus Torvalds. Windows--always meant telling a story of Bill Gates. Likewise, the Mac story always equates to a Steve Jobs story. Then you have the case of a Gaving King, who never misses a chance to be rude on the forums, who is always irascible--he does his cause no good. If you want good press, you need a story and a messenger.
Can I get back to you in a few days when I've finished building?
Simply put, FOSS developers usually fall into one of two categories: hackers coding in their spare time and those who work on FOSS projects as part of their job. Those in the former category likely have day jobs, and are already short on time. They do this as a hobby, and if their spare time is spent coding, they don't necessarily have spare time to devote to commenting for reporters. The latter category is contributing code as part of their job. They likely don't have the authority to comment on the record regarding their work, or they have to get permission from the marketing trolls to do so. Either way, if you're getting a response, it's not likely to be quick.
The lesson here is plan ahead. As soon as you know you're going to be working on a story, start asking for comments. If you wait until the last second, you're likely to not get a reply. Yes, reporters can get short deadlines, but you can't expect volunteers contributing their spare time to jump at your say-so, and you have to allow time to get the corporate wheels rolling in the latter case.
I know from experience that some of the voices on the open source movement can be really difficult to deal with (yes, RMS, I'm looking at you). So, what to do in this case? Hide them under a rock?
What ? Me, worry ?
Then fix your deadlines. Use proper planning and communication. This "drop everything now and focus on me" attitude doesn't really work well inside of companies and certainly won't work well when you want something from some else outside of your company.
Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
it generally does mean, "Drop everything and answer us now."
...and reporters wonder why we're not delighted to hear from them. One of the nice features of the open-source world is that projects become popular because they're good at what they do, rather than by shouting louder than anyone else. In such a world, press attention is less important. Which is fortunate, given the low quality of so much IT reporting (just because you can copy-paste the press release, doesn't mean you should).
Another reason most open-source projects get no press is that they are very poorly communicated in every way. An example is LaTeX. It requires two paragraphs in the Wikipedia article to explain just the name.
Another example is GIMP. One of the meanings of gimp is "cripple".
Another example is UltraVNC. UltraVNC is excellent. The UltraVNC web site is a mess.
The open source experience is often "It's free, but you must spend a very frustrating week learning how to use it." Those who write for publication don't have a week to understand a project, and they don't want to write about something that would frustrate their readers.
The summarizer says:
But a lot of open source projects seem to treat the press as an annoyance...
And the press-person says:
'...it generally does mean, "Drop everything and answer us now." If the journalist doesn't give you a deadline ("I need to know by 2pm"), it's okay to ask how long you can take to reach the right developer in Poland, but err on the side of "emergency response." It's unreasonable, I know, but so are our deadlines.'
Wow, I can't imagine why volunteer developers consider the press an annoyance. Maybe the press should cut back on the 30-second deadline and take some time to actually get facts, instead of getting something out the door now, even if it isn't right. I think that journalists with this attitude are probably in the wrong business -- you should be doing research and finding the story, not demanding that a non-storyteller drops what they're doing to give you the story on a silver platter. Software only appears to move quickly...in reality, businesses are slow to adopt new software these days. Taking the time to do thorough research on an open source project will not kill the press, just like waiting a few weeks for a story on a software project will not kill the software project.
Me, I would prefer to read the right story than the first story. I wish that the press' job to make sure that the right story is the first story...but that shall continue to be my wish.
The Right Reverend K. Reid Wightman,
Is anyone else struggling to find the actual article? My CPU and fans went crazy on the actual article.
If you ask me, open source projects need to do these to appeal to the outside world:
If you want support from everyday people, you have to sell them the idea.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
I think most "journalist" are so busy and have such tight deadlines, that they over rely on people that are paid to speak to the press. Open source, by its nature is a low-cost, high quality grass-roots effort. Even the most successful FOSS companies are tiny and have tighter margins than the for profits. Free software is customer driven (requested not sold) and doesn't have the money or staff to generate press releases or provide a pretty marketing type to spoon feed a story.
some journalists tend to write about certain corporations they have stocks in.
I don't doubt that what you say is true, but I'd like to point out for the people who will inevitably take your statement as gospel that this practice is generally regarded as a breach of journalistic ethics. The New York Times company, for example specifically prohibits journalists who cover business stories from playing the market.
The trade press is less stringent about such things, but good journalists everywhere are well aware of financial conflicts in their reporting and take steps to mitigate such. Some tech reporters I know choose not to invest in any technology stocks. I myself own no individual stocks in any tech companies, though I do hold some mutual funds which may or may not contain such stocks. I invest based solely on the performance of the fund and make no particular effort to find out what specific companies may be represented.
As with any field, there are always a few bad apples.
Breakfast served all day!
I wish I would have heard this advice before I named my FOSS project ARSE.
You just got troll'd!
Most open source projects get no press because most open source developers do not want arbitrary people to use their software.
Arbitrary people using your software means you will get demands for support from people who "Just Don't Get It".
People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.
This is a recurring theme and everybody likes to bitch about the names of open source projects. However, as a member of the press, I'd like to chime in -- just this once -- and say that if an open source project made enough of a difference to anybody, I wouldn't care if it was called the GIMP or KBoner, and neither would my editors.
If Megan Fox walked up to you and said, "Hi, my name is Yakspit Cox-Feces," would it make much of a difference to you? If anything, I figure it would make it an even better story...
Breakfast served all day!
If Megan Fox walked up to you and said, "Hi, my name is Yakspit Cox-Feces," would it make much of a difference to you? If anything, I figure it would make it an even better story...
But that's not her name. In fact, of all the pretty girls out there, she's the one we're talking about, and her name is "Fox".
Just sayin'.
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
1) Have a sane contact us page. Seriously. Not some web form with a pull down menu to select what this inquiry is related to. But an actual list of functions and associated contact data (email minimally, phone is more corporate and I wouldn't expect that of an open source project). Why email? So I have a record of what I sent, otherwise I have random emails showing up from half remembered projects/vendors. If you make it hard for me to contact you I won't. For many projects that are small having the head guys email address listed works well too.
2) Have a press@ email address, much like abuse@, security@, etc. this is a pretty sane default and leaves very little question as to whom to send email when you're looking for a press contact. It can be a redirect, I don't mind emailing press@ and getting a response from someguy@, if he quotes the subject line I won't have any trouble figuring it out. If you make it hard for me to contact you I won't. It bears repeating.
3) (to the mental image of a sweaty Steve Ballmer acting like a deranged gorilla) "Deadlines, Deadlines, Deadlines!". If it's a press article for a newspaper the author is lucky if they have 2-3 hours to research this time and get it in. You may want to consider having press@ be an alias to multiple people in different timezones. The quicker you respond the less likely I am to write you out of my article or downplay your role.
4) Don't treat me like a sales prospect or try to sell me stuff I'm not buying, I've got a deadline to meet. Be upfront and honest, most reporters/writers can smell bullshit a mile away (or at least they should be able to, I would say bullshit detection is a core competency for writers/reporters). Perfect example: interesting network traffic analysis product, I contact the vendor, they say it's Windows only I say thanks and move on (article is for Linux Magazine Pro). They don't get any press coverage, but they do get remembered for not wasting my time. The next time I'm writing about network traffic analysis on Windows I'll contact them first since I know they play well with others. Reporters/writers have long memories (we keep notes); if you jerk us around we will never, ever, ever write anything positive about you. Ever.
5) Don't be afraid to go beyond answering our questions a bit, if I was a complete expert in the topic I'm asking you about I wouldnâ(TM)t be emailing you now would I? Interesting back stories, info, related data, this is all golden ("What do you mean you're the only vendor that has a syscall proxy? What the heck is a syscall proxy? Oh.. Oh wow.").
6) I love love love covering projects that make cool/useful/nifty/clever software, especially if "staffed" (for lack of a better term to cover commercial and Open Source) by helpful people who are willing to spend 10 minutes helping me and educating me. You make my life easier, I will appreciate it for a very long time. Social capital is valuable, earning it isn't hard.
Why do reporters think they're better than everyone else? No-one else has access to a high-ranking developer just to hold their hands and walk them through a project when that information is already out there (the other users seem to get along fine, or you wouldn't have heard of the project). Just because you're the modern equivalent of the loud-mouthed town gossip, doesn't make you special. Regardless of what journalist screed (the number of articles I've seen of journalists portraying themselves as fantastic heroes and the amount of journalistic fraternity/nepotism makes me sick) and corporate PR departments (they're using you, duh) say, you're not special. No-one gives a flying fuck about your "deadline". Deadlines are your problem and you should take it up with your boss if it's unworkable. There are millions of bored schoolkids with blogs chomping at the bit to take your place. If you're to stand a chance of staying afloat you have to offer something they won't - quality research (which takes time and effort). Remember that you're here to serve us, and you have more to gain than us*, not the other way around. [/rant]
* You may think that reporters are vital for "The Year Of The Linux Desktop", but I'm not buying it. Firstly, large F/OSS projects like mainstream distros do have many, many press avenues, and yet 2009 still isn't YOTLD. Secondly, YOTLD is an utopia us *nixers want where we get all of the good stuff associated with popularity (better hardware vendor support, mainstream acceptance of F/OSS principles, increased interoperability, richer software library, more developers/code contributors/bug fixers) without any of the bad stuff (malware, brainless users, bigger stakes on the developer Ego Wars, more hardware/software support nightmares, more pressure, more "boring bits" and less coding fun, etc). If YOTLD is delivered by reporters (instead of by technical merit and word-of-mouth), it will be because they dumbed it down, and we'd get mostly disadvantage and only a few of the advantages. Basically, YOTLD is a wet dream where society changes to be more computer literate, and most/all of our current IT nightmares die because everyone's using their brain. This is not as unlikely as you think - nowadays everyone's kid is a techno-wiz. Even if "techno-wiz" only means "I can work the myspace and the msn", the perception of ability alone might be enough to overcome their trepidation of computing, and allow them to try new things (ie, Linux).
Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
Sorry, I don't mean to be rude. But, as has been stated above, Open-source is largely done by volunteers. So, thinking that you can get a response, any response, within a couple hours is profoundly naive/stupid. It's likely that while you send your email to the spokesman while doing your day job, (s)he is at his/her day job working and won't get around to check his/her PERSONAL account for several hours. It's the nature of the beast and ignoring that is... well... naive/stupid.
Honestly, what you're attempting is to get "us" to bend over backwards to solve your problem. And I rather take offense to that. "We" are not your monkeys.
But, tell me, why can't you just say to your boss something like, "The guys that develop this are volunteers and won't be able to get back to us in time because they are at there day jobs right now. How about I figure out who to talk to and send off an email while you get me something else to work on for right now?"
"What the hell is going on at the Oracle website, for example?"
Here is a guess: The technically knowledgeable people are paid to develop products. Management considers them too expensive to document what they do.
Instead, Oracle management hires marketing people to supervise the development of the web site and documentation. The marketing people have no interest in technology -- none. They are bored with their jobs. They secretly think that technically knowledgeable people are inferior. They do, however, learn some buzz-words so that they can pretend that they understand.
The marketing people don't believe technical communication is important. They have seen numerous examples of people being able to use Oracle products even though the documentation is poor. The web site and product manuals are either almost useless or written for people who already understand the products. Editing for clarity is very limited.
The writers are hired as consultants. When a writer doesn't understand something, he or she just doesn't document it, or gives a limited explanation.
Oracle web site page chosen completely at random: Oracle Database Management Packs.
Quote (Title): "Get Maximum Performance With ROI of 100%" Translation: Meaningless.
Quote (First sentence): "Oracle provides an integrated management solution for managing Oracle database with a unique top-down application management approach." Translation: Meaningless. A "management solution for managing a management approach"? But... It's "integrated"! And, notice the grammatical error. It should be "managing Oracle databases".
When I see trash like that I feel sad. I sometimes think I should contact the board of directors and ask to be CEO, so that the company will have adult supervision. I'm being sarcastic, but I really do feel genuinely sad about corporate self-defeat.
More sarcasm: Will the combination of Oracle and Sun be called "Snoracle"?
Seriously: Will PostgreSQL eventually be the world's most popular database software? To me, those two quotes from the Oracle web site are a very effective ad for PostgreSQL.