Blog

Entrepreneur and former Dragon's Den panellist Rachel Elnaugh makes some interesting points about blogging and its impact on her own blog here. Essentially she sees evidence that her blog rather than any press coverage has made an impact on public perceptions of her, and she suggests 'normal' press will get a wake-up call.

Well, yes and no. The Guardian's 'Comment is Free' site is ample evidence that the traditional media does indeed understand how important new media has become. What's going to be even more important, though, are three things about new media and blogs in particular.

1. Responsibility: Many blogs are written by people who are inexperienced writers and who have no training. This can be a good thing because you see their thoughts as unpolished, which can be more raw and genuine - but the laws of libel apply in Cyberspace as much as they do elsewhere. We haven't yet had a big test case in this country. The biggest, probably, in which Mumsnet upset Gina Ford, was settled out of court. But which amateur blogger knows just how far they can go without falling foul of the libel laws?

2. Quality: This brings us neatly to the second issue, which is quality control. There's a lot of dross out there in Blog-land but then there's a lot of dross in journalism too; but has anyone told the bloggers how carefully they need to check their facts before publishing them? Journalists, by training, are inveterate checkers and goodness knows we make enough mistakes. Bloggers, without that background, are prone to repeating anything they hear. Only this morning I saw a blog on the failure of the iPhone: thing is, I was there covering the story for BBC London's breakfast show in Regent Street on Friday morning and I'm telling you people were queueing. Maybe not as many as Apple would have liked but they were there. And has the blogger offered Apple its near-statutory right of reply? Has he hell.

3. Payment: i know, I know, the Internet and blogging in particular is supposed to appeal to the sort of hippie who wouldn't dream of demanding payment for his or her work. Nevertheless, after the initial blogging bubble has subsided you've got to ask what's going to be left. If this is going to continue and people are going to get it right, they've got to find a way to make it viable to continue. This means making it pay. This is likely to mean advertising, and that in turn will mean guaranteeing editorial quality (advertisers won't subsidise something that's unreadable).

It'll be almost like the traditional media all over again.

Let's be straight here, I'm not complaining that they shouldn't have said anything. Far from it; due to circumstances beyond my control the copy was a few days late as well so in view of both of these factors I knocked a few hundred quid off outstanding monies owing. I don't want dissatisfied customers any more than anyone else.

What I hate is that my system is supposed to check and alter the spelling of my documents automatically. It's one of those Word for the Mac things.

And what I really hate is that I've been using this set-up now for two years, give or take. And I've had the impression that it's been working properly. I'm now very grateful to the contact who told me things are coming through looking shoddy, but I can't help wondering: how many sub-standard pieces have I been sending out to people who're just too polite to say anything?

So I'm reviewing some IT kit for the Guardian - never mind what it is, I wouldn't tell you before publication anyway but it doesn't affect the story. And I need to get this equipment to my home.

So I fax - or rather scan in and e-mail - the loan form to the hire company to which several manufacturers outsource the management of their product loans. All is going well so far. The form asks for a registered address and a company registration number.

Thing is, I'm freelance. And by that I don't mean I've set up a company to take advantage of tax, I mean I'm freelance - legally a sole trader. So I don't have a registered address.

We can't send it without a registered address, they said. Well, I don't have one, I said. Can you put the address where you receive your business mail, they said. Not really, I said, because if I put that then it's technically fraud and for the money I get for these reviews I'm not prepared to risk prosecution, even on a technicality - and anyway, why should I pretend to be a registered company when I'm a perfectly respectable freelance?

in the end the PR company signed on my behalf. I couldn't help reflect that they must get this all the time. I do hope they feed this back to their clients; I wonder how much coverage actually gets lost because freelances can't be bothered to jump through all the hoops and source competitors' equipment from elsewhere?

Back from holiday and I find I'm suddenly moving in a direction I want. Longer-term readers will remember I went onto BBC London's breakfast show on Boxing Day; I was there again today, happily, commentating on technology once more. I'm hoping to do some more of this.

And then it was on to Olympia to record some interviews that will, hopefully, be integrated into the BBC World Service's "Digital Planet" programme.

Clearly I have no idea where all this is heading, but it's a load of fun and hopefully will produce some programmes of interest in the meantime.

As you'll have gathered from over a decade of hype, this is the information age, we're all tethered to the information superhighway and so on.

Well, sometimes. I've been looking at digital cameras and cameraphones just lately - or I would have. Unfortunately I have no fax. You remember faxes - we weren't going to need them once e-mail had set in, and more often than not I still don't. I have an Internet-based fax number on which I can receive the things if people insist, but the idea of sending one is simply antiquated.

Or so I thought, until I discovered once again the vagaries of the PR machine. Yes of course we'll lend you a camera to evaluate, they said. Just print this form, sign it and send it back and that'll be fine.

Grr. I can assure everyone I am not a thief. If I tell you I'm borrowing a camera and I'll send it back, that's what I'll do. Indeed I'm not sure that signing a physical bit of paper would be any more binding than an e-mailed exchange in an instance like that; I'm either a crook or I'm not, and a signature's not going to get in my way if I am.

And yet everyone with loan kit insists on sticking with old technology. Baffling...

The title gives you a strong idea of where the content's going - it's all about the sort of technology designed to make life simpler for all of us, but which so often doesn't quite get there (I should add that the telly I won from the prize draw in the Currys Digital Christmas launch is the exception to this). But unlike, say, Stuff, you might notice something about the cover. And the contents.

To put it bluntly, it's titty-free. Even bikini-clad ones.

I like that. I've been married 14 years last week and honestly, folks, I know what breasts look like. And if I wanted to see some more I'm not shy of buying a suitable publication.

But if I want to read about technology for my home I don't want a mag that's going to get my daughter (6) asking why the lady working the iPod isn't wearing many clothes. I want something that addresses me with common sense as an intelligent adult, within reason. I want something which, like this publication, takes into account that all these gadgets and stuff have to go into the living room and be made to fit into it whilst looking reasonable.

And at long last someone's published something for me. And I'm in it. And I'm delighted.

Here's something you don't see every day - an offer of a credit card. I'm being ironic of course, but this one, from Tesco, appears to have something to recommend it in that it's aimed at sole trader/freelances who want to keep their business and personal spending apart.

Well, yes, good idea, and as a freelance of 13 years' standing I'd certainly recommend that as good practice. The thing is that's all I'd say about it - indulge in good practice and you'll save some money, most likely. Is it then necessary to go and get a special credit card for which you need to be VAT registered? I'd suggest not. In fact if anyone is starting up as a sole trader I'd advise against getting an extra credit card, cash flow can be unreliable (says the man sitting on people owing him tens of thousands) and borrowing at high interest is probably the most expensive way of sorting it out.

There's a lot in what the Tesco man says in the attached piece. Take Tesco and the new card out of the equation and I'd really recommend following his advice.

OK, I'm excited about this one. It's been that frantically busy 'not-many-blog-entries-here' time of the month in which I've hardly touched this site, but one of the reasons has been that I've become a podcaster for the Guardian. You can listen to the two shows here.

Where this leads, if anywhere, I don't know. But I thoroughly enjoyed doing the programmes, and am really grateful to the people who helped put the contacts together - and of course the producer, Laurence Leonard, who makes me sound a hell of a lot more confident than I felt during my first stab at presenting.

So I did a piece in the Observer on Sunday, about going green and saving money. Not a bad little piece, hardly front-page stuff but useful enough. It made the point, among other things, that there isn't much point in using energy-efficient lightbulbs, you're better off using ordinary ones and switching them off when they're not in use.

And on Monday I get the weekly e-mail from the financial writers' group rounding up what's been in the weekend papers. "Guy Clapperton on going green," it said. "Telling us to buy energy-efficient lightbulbs and the like." Or words to that effect.

I mean, come on, guys. You could at least read the thing before summarising.

Interesting stuff is happening over at the Freelance e-mail list, to which you can sign up at www.journalism.co.uk if you're a journalist. Someone pitched an article, it was agreed, the editor has decided it wasn't what the mag was looking for and now doesn't feel obliged to pay after sitting on it for a while.

I've had that, in the distant past - people thinking that once they've commissioned something, if they don't feel like using it in the end they don't have to pay. If I've missed the brief, fair enough, it's still a commission so we can negotiate. If I haven't, as happened a couple of years ago, but there's been a space problem or something, I've never understood why some of these amateurs don't think the bill is due. Please invoice for 50 per cent as we didn't actually use it in the end, although it was perfectly OK, said one editor.

That's fine as long as he doesn't mind when his proprietor says OK, we didn't use all of your edits so here's half your salary in spite of your having done all the work.

If any freelances are reading please, please don't put up with this stuff. If we let them do it once they'll think it's normal - and if they do it more than once it'll become standard practice.

No, really, it's glorious. Just click on it and try not to think what the consequences could have been if the bloke had been less benign.

http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/2697

There's an interesting discussion kicking off at Object Marketing's blog - someone has asked whether they should go freelance in order to earn £60K per annum and take massive holidays.

I'd make a couple of points about that from the journalist side of the fence. Having been freelance some 13 years now I find it very difficult to believe in this 20 weeks per year holiday. It can't, really it can't, be right - a freelance works by himself or herself, and if you're not there 20 weeks a year the clients will go away. It would be the same if I had an editor asking me for a regular column - he/she might be happy for me to have up to five weeks off per year but 20? Get real.

The other thing is that although I don't know the PR industry in depth, or at least not its earning capacity, I'd query whether a great many independent PRs get that figure in gross profit rather than in turnover. If it's turnover, OK, but you've got all your costs to come out of it.

In fact my best advice to people thinking of freelancing is always to watch the money. Never mistake an outstanding invoice for cash; it can go wrong, a client can go bust and not get paid and if you've bought a new car on the strength of the posited income you're suddenly in debt. Second, never mistake turnover for your own income. You do need a computer, premises, all those things, and they cost money. By the end you might find your actual income a bit depressing, but whoever said it was all going to be easy..?

Another day, another freelance opens a blog. This one's rather good and can be found here - I have reservations about soeone using a pseudonym for something as personal as a freelance's blog, but the content is difficult to disagree with in places. The one about freelances being advised not to bank cheques when they have to sign their rights away on the back of them has a particularly familiar ring to it - the difference being I'll put my hand up and say so.

Anyone who knows who Les actually is, if indeed he's only one person, is of course welcome to get in touch...

There's a lot happening in the world at the moment (that statement copyright Trite Openings R Us). There was a massive robbery last week. Saddam is on trial and David Irving has been imprisoned. And yet on Saturday the Independent's front page lead was that Apple's music store downloads had topped the 1 billion mark.

Well, ten out of ten to Apple for its marketing prowess - but was this really a story? I have a few problems with it. One is that it was a corporate press release-led story hitting the top slot on one of the Nationals. I believe the papers ought to be finding things out for themselves.

My main issue, however, is that the Indie has missed the important point that the 1 billion figure is completely without significance. There are two reasons for this. First, if numbers were growing it's inevitable, not surprising or noteworthy, that the 1 billion 'watermark' would be reached eventually. Second, this isn't about 1 billion downloads, it's about 1 billion downloads for one particular company. As a mark of changing popular culture, the 1 billion figure will have been reached a while back because you'd have to factor in downloads from Wippit, Napster and all the rest.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an Apple user and a happy one, and I like my iPod - I'm thinking of getting one for my wife too. If I were an Apple shareholder I'd clearly be over the moon about this figure. But front page lead? I know the Independent likes to stand out from the rest and run something different, but come on you guys, this is PR.

It's that time of year again. Yesterday was 31 January, the great 'exodus from the bank account to the tax man's coffers' day. The Federation of Small Business is calling for more flexibility on how self-employed people pay tax.

To my mind, the problem for us isn't the inflexibility of the tax regime, that's easy - you know the bill is coming and you have time to save (although why we have to pay in advance when everyone else gets to pay after they've been paid is beyond me). The weakness relates back to the topic of a piece I did for the Guardian last week - late payment, or clients who think an invoice with 30 days written on it - the legal default - may be paid 30 days after their next cheque run, 60 days afterwards because that's what they do, or just when the freelance complains. Or they tell you they pay on publication and never mind the legal niceties.

It happens more than you'd want to admit. Normally it's just about OK but this time of year I can't help but reflect that the coffers are empty but if I had every payment that's more than 30 days old I'd be thinking about changing the car. Anyone with any thoughts on how you enforce this stuff without alienating clients is more than welcome to comment.

Occasionally you find an example of how not to do something that's so good, you have to share it with absolutely everybody. I've just got off the phone to a PR of a major retail chain and had to share this.

I can't name the chain as the story is as yet unpublished and therefore under wraps. However, they were accused of doing something vaguely newsworthy a short while ago, and it's strong enough to use as a hook for a feature. Naturally I wanted to get their input, if only to close the specific issue down in the intro so I could talk more generally in the body of the piece.

So I put the call in. And the PR from hell calls. Sniffy Attitudes R Us, we could call him, or Sniffy for short. What's all this about this old story, he says. I don't think it's that old, I say, well, it is by my standards, he says.

Mistake. Never put a journalist's back up. You can never, ever, win. It's not a bad rule for most business transactions actually.

OK, he says, what do you want to know. Given that I'd already sent a detailed e-mail so he could prepare, that was an odd one. But I ploughed through the e-mail nonetheless. Oh, says Sniffy, we wouldn't comment on that in the press. (As a side note, the client themselves gave me Sniffy's e-mail address but had trouble finding it because they're only using him for the one issue. Which he says they don't talk about to the press.) No comment at all. But I would say we employ thousands of people.

Hang on, I say, that's not strictly relevant.

Yes it is, he says, oh hang on...he goes silent. Anyway, we don't comment to the press. And the other organisation in question is saying ridiculous and untrue things, like [he specifies an allegation that will be in the story]. They're after publicity.

That's a hell of a lot of no-comments. It's made me much more interested in the client and more than ever convinced that I'm onto a good story about them. They'll probably feature more prominently in the published piece now than they would before - if, say, he'd been at least polite and not hinted that I didn't know my job.

Keep it up, Sniffy...