VERTSOL READEr

A Vertical
Market
Solutions For
Retail
Reader
By
Angelia Nicole
Dela Cruz
1|Page
A Vertical Market Solutions For Retail Reader
Angelia Nicole Dela Cruz
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Dedication
Page 4
2. Preface
Page 5
3. The Cluetrain Manifesto:

The End of Business as Usual
Page 6
4. Selling on the Net:

The Complete Gu
Guide
ide
Page 31
5. The Long Tail: Why the Future of

Business is Selling Less or More
Page 39
2|Page
6. Web 2.0 Heroes: Interviews
with 20 Web 2.0 Influencers
Page 43
7. The Cluetrain Manifesto:

95 Theses
Page 62
8. Vertsol Project Paper

Page 151
9. Acknowlegem
Acknowlegement
ent
Page 155
155
10. Referrence
Page 156
3|Page
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this Reader to the following people:
To my VERTSOL Professor, Mr. Paul Pajo
To my parents and relatives.
To all of my friends inside and outside school.
To all of my classmates.
classmates.
Most especially, I dedicate this to God.
4|Page
PREFACE
Upon entering the VERTSOL course, I have learned the valuable lesson
of hard work and perseverance. At first, given all these
requirement, the book reviews, the reflections, the blog posts, I
did not see the point of it but as I made this requirements I have
seen that these books that we read have thought as so many things.
Making the book reviews and reflections were not that easy but in
the end, it was all worthed as I have learned a lot from
from these.
Having complained at first that all of these requirements are

impossible to do have introduced me to the reality that college life
is all about doing these requirements. College life is all about
hard work. Requirements this much are not impossible
impossible to finish,
everyone in fact from the VERTSOL course have finished this. All you
need is to work hard for it.
Finishing this requirement did not really require us sleepless

nights in fact all you needed was to continuously make these
requirement on a weekly
weekly basis, the technique which our VERTSOL
teacher has given us.
In the end, it is very much a relief knowing that I have

accomplished all of the requirements asked from me. It is also a
great accomplishment for me to learn a lot from the books I have
read
read and writing my very own book.
5|Page
Cluetrain
Manifesto:
The End of Business
as Usual
6|Page
Book Review: Chapter 1 (Internet Apocalypso)
Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual
Library Reference: None
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0738204315/thesearlsgroup
Quote: “Let us speak, though we show all our faults and weaknesses – for it
is a sign of strength to be weak, to know it, and out with it…”
-Herman Melville
Learning Expectation:
On the said chapter of the Cluetrain Manifesto, I expect to how the internet came to
existence in the business world and how it affects businesses.
Review:
Basically, the first chapter of the “Cluetrain Manifesto” is about how the internet
came to be in the business world and what its impact is in the business world. As discussed
by Christopher Locke, the person who wrote the first chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto entitled
“Internet Apocalyspo”, he started his discussion with something which he called a
“Premature Burial”, in this part he discussed that as people, we all die, something which we
would never hear in an advertisement. 0ur life is short and it changes fast and in many
ways, painfully. Despite this ironic truth, this fact becomes our source of longing for
something new reinforced by our experiences and for more connections. This longing is
what companies actually want not us humans. They use our longing as a source of idea
which they could use in order to make their products that could fulfill these longings or
better known as wants and even needs.
Personally, this part of the first chapter was quite hard to comprehend because there
is a big question hanging. What does it have to do with the internet? Further readings of the
first chapter actually explained that to me. At first, when internet was created, it was
populated by geeks, loners, and misfits and such. Although it was ignored at first, being
ignored was the reason why the internet grew and prospered very much although I think
that it is still a big question to me as to how that happened. It does not follow the rules of
business instead it follows its own rules. The internet was a place where people could talk to
each other without constraints, censorship or anything like that. In chapter one, it is also
mentioned that in the early days of the internet, it was exclusively used for government-
funded projects. In other words, in the earlier days, internet was used for work, work and of
course more works which personally seems extremely boring. But later on, the internet
became more than work for businesses and government-funded projects. It became a way
for different people all over the world to connect and communicate with each other.
7|Page
People found different ways to make use of the internet including commerce or
retailing which is known as E-commerce. Soon enough, people did not talk in the internet
they also used the internet to argue with each other which they liked a lot. Another big
question for me because why would people want to argue in the first place?
Aside from that, the internet is important for a market’s survival and success. It
allows markets to know what their customers and/or consumers want. The markets use it in
order to find out what works and what does not work for their customers. Without internet,
markets would not know why they should care. Another importance of the internet, net for
short, is that besides markets, companies need it as well. Companies use the net as a
source of innovation and idea in order to create something new.
At first, people were not choosy they would buy anything, any color they wanted as
long as it was black as Christopher Locke has mentioned. Soon enough, competition came
and more choices were provided to the customers. Thus, people became picky with what
they like. They wanted something more than black, they wanted something different.
Competition grew largely to the point that it was out of control. Through this large and
uncontrollable competition, various attempts at a solution were derived. Three of these
solutions are Concurrent Engineering, Artificial Intelligence (AI for short), and Total Quality
Management (or TQM). Concurrent Engineering is a solution wherein separate functions
talked to each other form the outset of a product cycle but it has been made to appear
unnecessary. On the other hand, Artificial Intelligence or AI is lending real people’s
knowledge to technology such as machines via automation. This solution is quite different
from TQM wherein the basic idea was to allow actual people to do the work instead of
machines.
The problem with companies is that they fear that people are getting smarter, they
start asking questions, suggest something much more and ask for more but these
companies refuse to listen. They only want to listen to themselves. A problem this complex
can be solved if only companies would be willing enough and open to listen to the ideas of
their workers and of their customers as well. After all, the customers know what they need
and want while workers know what lacks in what they do.
After reading the whole first chapter, I would have to agree to some of the points
discussed by Christopher Locke, the said author of this chapter. I would agree that markets
are all about conversations and people communicating with each other. Also, I would have
to agree that markets and companies use communication via internet as a source of
innovation and new ideas. Although there is something that I have noticed about the way
Christopher Locke discussed this topic, he is too amazed by the internet and kept on
praising internet. Though I am an IT person, I think he still should have discussed the
negative side of the internet because in reality, the internet is not at all perfect and it has a
downside to it.
Upon reading his discussion, I think that Christopher Locke is trying to insult
companies through his words and that impresses me quite well because he has
immortalized his words by publishing it. It impressed me so much as well because he was
not afraid to speak the truth instead he said how he felt towards companies. Despite this,
8|Page
his extreme amusement and idolization of the internet has hindered him to speak about the
downside truth about internet. I think he purposely refused to mention anything about the
downside of the internet because he does not want his readers to know the downside of
internet and because he is an IT person. As an IT person I think they would do anything to
make technology look good to everyone else’s eyes and never show any signs of negativity.
But for me, even though I am an IT person, it is a good practice to show even the
weaknesses of something. Just like the quote I have chosen, knowing our weakness,
admitting our faults, we can get over it and it is a sign of strength.
What I’ve learned:
Upon reading the whole chapter one of Cluetrain Manifesto which was sixteen pages
long for a quite while trying to comprehend everything that written in there, I think that I
have learned a few but important things from it. One is that companies don’t actually care
about human beings. Instead these companies care about the longing, wants and needs
that humans crave for.
I’ve also that the internet did not grow and prosper by being largely known
worldwide. Instead, it grew and prospered because it was mainly ignored. The third thing I
learned is that companies are actually afraid of people getting smarter (which are probably
caused by the net), they start asking question and suggest something more complex and
ask for something new. Companies refuse to listen to other people they do not want to open
up. They want to listen only to themselves, not even their own workers.
I believe what Christopher Locke when he said that, “There are just three conditions:
1) you have to let your people play for you, since there’s really nobody else at home; 2) you
have to play, not something more serious and goal-oriented; and 3) related to the previous,
you have to have at least some tenuous notion of what “headspace” might mean.” [Levine et al.
The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual. Perseus Publishing, 2001.]
After trying to find the definition for
the word headspace, I come out with nothing. I do not think it is something very common
and Christopher Locke has also said that it is not in the dictionary so I did not have any luck
finding it there.
9|Page
Book Review: Chapter 2 (The Longing)
Quote: “Having a voice doesn’t mean being able to sing in the shower. It means presenting
Oneself to others. The Web provides a place like we’ve never seen before.”
-David Weinberger
In the second chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto, my learning expection is that I would

learn about the real purpose of the internet.
Review:
The second chapter of the book The Cluetrain Manifesto is entitled “The Longing” and
is authored by, a different person, David Weinberger. In this chapter, David Weinberger
discusses “The Longing” in five sections or parts. The first talks about what the Web is for.
Basically, in this part of Mr. Weinberger’s discussion, he is asking readers what the real
purpose of the Web is. Let’s face the truth we have to agree with the author that we do not
really know what the purpose of the internet is. The internet has been around for quite
some time now and yet we do not really know what it is for. We know that Television is for
watching, radio is for listening and stoves are for cooking but when we are asked, what is
the Web actually for? There is no way we can give a definite answer to this because truth is
we do not have an answer to this. We have no idea what the real purpose of the internet is
and heck we use it. The ironic truth is this: we use the internet because it allows us to
communicate with one another, keep in touch with the latest technology there is and learn
new things. But, the big but is we have no idea of what the real purpose of it is.
The second part of Mr. David Weinberger’s article or discussion is called “Being
Managed”. Being “managed”, as the author calls it, is so twentieth century and American.
The author stated, “We believe, in fact, that to be a business is to be managed.” But being
“managed” is not only within the business context, in our households, our environment, we
manage things. Weinberger, based on what I have understood on his writing, is trying to
say that being “managed” is good. Being under someone’s control or being someone in
control is a good thing. I think mainly because this keeps everything in order.
The author have also mentioned the advantages or so-called benefits of being
“managed” which are: risk avoidance, smoothness (since everything is in order), fairness
and discretionary attention. What I would say that I admired about David Weinberger the
most when he wrote this part of the second chapter is that aside from discussing the
benefits and advantages of being “managed”, he did not regret or hesitate to speak about
the downside or disadvantage of being “managed”.
10 | P a g e
I think he liked the idea of being managed since he discussed it so well and in a good
manner. I liked the fact that aside from being able to mention the different advantages of
being managed, he never hesitated to mention that even though risk avoidance is part of
being managed, there is still a lot of risk in being managed. Aside from risks being present,
injustices are present as well and whenever things like this occur, we feel violated and
cheated.
“How to Hate Your Job”… How to hate your job is the third part of David
Weinberger’s part of the book. Though it is entitled “How to Hate Your Job”, I don’t really
think that this part of the second chapter actually tells us ways of how to hate our jobs.
Instead, this part of the second chapter, we are brought to the realization of professionalism
and our jobs. Weinberger made his readers realize, through this part, that as professionals,
there are a lot of things that we follow even though we really are against it. We follow a lot
of rules and some are even quite funny when you think about it. We dress up formally like
wear a tie and something like that because it is part of professionalism, because we are told
to dress up that way in our jobs. We have to follow funny rules like, “don’t undermine the
authority”, in other words do not show your bosses or superiors that you are smarter than
them.
You have to make your superiors think that they are the smartest people. Another
rule we follow, because professionalism tells us to do so is that we should only talk about
“safe” topics. We are not allowed to swear, to mention God (I personally think that
Weinberger is trying to say that in an office, we are not allowed to talk about religion) and
we are not allowed to talk about something sexual in the office. The only people allowed to
do so, as Weinberger puts it, are the male executives. Despite this somewhat funny truth,
we do not really complain about this kind of thing, we even enjoy it to some extent. A
question again lurks within this topic, what does it have to do with the Web? Well I think the
answer to this is the whole point of this topic. As professionals and workers of our superior,
we are being managed. We follow them, abide by their rules. Though we do not complain
about this, we still long to look for someone who likes being managed, in other words, we
feel resentment. We use the internet to “cure” this resentment. Through the Web, we find
someone willing to be managed. Someone we could take charge of, someone who is under
our control. I think this is Weinberger’s point when he discussed this topic. In other words,
we use the Web to release our hatred for our jobs. As Weinberger puts it, “However much
we long for the Web is how much we hate our job.”
The next topic is our voices. Here, Weinberger tells readers that because of being
managed by businesses, we have lost our voice. We have lost our ability to speak up. We
refuse to speak in front of the people who manage us and only have the guts to speak
behind their backs. But why exactly do we do this? I think that it is because these people
who manage or control us do not allow us to speak up. They only hear what they want to
hear. They do not allow us to say something that is against what they want or believe in.
Thus, we try to pretend to follow them, maybe even idolize them because that is what they
want us to do. Despite this, whenever they turn their backs on us, we make faces and
sometimes rude expressions. We lose our voice because we are forced to shut up.
11 | P a g e
I really liked David Weinberger’s statement, “Management is a powerful force, part
of a larger life-scheme that promises us health, peace, prosperity, calm, and no surprises in
every aspect of our lives, from health to wealth to good weather and moderately heated
coffee from McDonald’s. We are all victims of this assault on voice, the attempt to get us to
shut up and listen to the narrowest range of ideas imaginable.” I liked this statement of
Weinberger’s very much because for me, it tells us that because in work and even in our
lives, we are managed too much. We are very much controlled by someone else, which
forces us to just shut up and listen to them.
The last part of chapter two comes back with the topic of the real purpose of
internet. In this part, we are told that internet is a public place which allows us to
communicate with other people freely. I think that the whole point of this part is that when
we lose interest in hearing ourselves speak, we begin to build a new world, which is
probably a virtual one because Weinberger said that that what the Web is for.
As a whole, I found David Weinberger’s writings in chapter two very interesting. It

speaks a lot about something that most of us are not aware of. We try to follow the norms,
follow what our superiors say even if we are against it unaware. We lose our voices because
we let other people control and in turn, we find someone else whom we can manage or
control.
Though this chapter is extremely short, being only three pages, it has covered a lot
of topics which are useful in the real world. Weinberger discussed a lot about reality
whether it is good or bad. In the whole chapter, I found five statements and paragraphs
that caught my interest so much. Through these statements and paragraphs that I have
marked, I learned that the only reason why we are being managed or controlled is because
we let other people do so. Though it may be good to be controlled or managed since it
keeps order, it should not be overdone. In turn, for this to stop, we should also avoid
looking for other people whom we could control.
I think that it is actually a cycle, we are being managed by someone and in turn, due
to resentment, we find someone else we could manage. I also learned that because we let
ourselves be managed too much, we lose our voices and our ability to speak up. We just let
these people who manage or control us to keep on following their rules and just shut up. In
this chapter, I learned that the purpose of the internet is to build a “new world” for us.
I learned that its purpose is that because we go to the internet not only to
communicate with other people and learn new things, we go to the Web in order to find
someone whom we can manage or control because we have lost our voice, our ability to
speak up in the real world.
12 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 3 (Talk Is Cheap)
Quote: “The voice emerges literally from the body as a representation of our inner world.
It carries our experience from the past, our hopes and fears for the future, and the
emotional resonance of the moment. If it carries none of these, it must be a masked voice,
and having muted the voice, anyone listening knows intuitively we are not all there.”
-David Whyte, The Heart Aroused
In the third chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto, I expect to learn more about

communications through the web. I assume that since the title of this chapter is Talk Is
Cheap, it has something to do with communication.
Review:
The third chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto is entitled “Talk Is Cheap” and was authored
by Rick Levine. The first thing I have noticed with regards to what he wrote is this: “Iίm a
potterίs kid.” I noticed this so much not only because it was the first statement that the
author, Rick Levine has said but mainly because I did not get it. I read it as Iim a potteris
kid which sounded extremely weird to me. I have tried to read it again but I still did not get
what it meant so I decided to read further and learned that whenever Levine used “ί”, it
meant an apostrophe which up to now I still find weird. But I had to leave it, there is so
much more to write about and I would just assume that he has a different way of writing.
Levine started out by saying that he was a potter’s kid. He shared his experiences
and fond memories as a child of a potter’s kid. It sounded no relevance at all but as I
progressed and furthered my reading, he actually made some sense. He used his
experiences as a kid as a way to start his discussion. He described craftsmen as creative
artists and they can visualize the outcome or output of their works even before they finish
it. I would have to agree with Levine with regards to this. This is an ability that I also
believe all artists have. Now, what does this have to do with business and the Internet? It is
quite simple actually. In the business world, businesses rely on those who take pride on
their own work and artists are people who take pride of their own work. I think that this
means that in the business, it is important to be creative and businesses give importance to
the worth of their work. They take pride on what they can make and do, on the work of
their own hands and heads. This is the same with the Internet, owners and creator’s of a
Web Page always puts something that distinguishes them from others. They take pride of
their work as well. I also think that Levine has discussed creativity because in the business
world and of course in the internet, creativity is an important factor.
13 | P a g e
Creativity allows us to be innovative that for me, is a very good thing especially for
businesses. Creativity allows us to create something new, something different. Rick Levine
is trying to tell us that our creativity differentiates and distinguishes us from others because
we have different ways in which we use our creativity.
Next to creativity and being artists, Rick Levine talks about wired connections. He
tells us that there are different ways to communicate electronically via the Web. One of
which is E-mail, a fast way of sending receiving mails. Instead of the long time waiting for
someone to deliver our mail in some place else, through e-mail, all we have to do is type
our message add an address and press the “send” button. Not only can I send the e-mail
much quicker than snail mail but the person I’ve sent it to can reply soon. I would have to
agree with Mr. Levine, that even though e-mailing is a good thing, it could screen out as
viruses and such, something that could destroy our data. Sometimes we also receive
“spam” messages which make no sense at all and most of the time is the virus-carrying e-
mails or useless junk mails though he never mentioned anything about spam messages on
the part about e-mailing and junk mail. I just thought I would mention it because these are
usually the e-mails that contain the viruses he is talking about. Levine also pointed out on
this part that all you need to send an e-mail is an address and of course, I agree to that.
Another wired conversation is called Mailing List which is probably like group
mailing. Here, Levine mentions spam messages which are useless messages that keeps on
coming to our e-mails. They try to convince us with something or link us to another website.
Under the mailing list there are the one-way and two-way. A mailing list called a webzine or
more known as e-zine is a one-way kind of mailing list. An e-zine is an online magazine that
people receive in their e-mails. Of course, they still have to subscribe for it (pay for it
monthly, yearly and such). On the other hand, an example of a two-way mailing list a
forum, in forums we are allowed to respond to messages and everybody else sees these
messages and responses.
The next wired conversation that Rick Levine has mentioned is the Newsgroups
which are pretty much alike with mailing lists. Newsgroups are also used within companies
and are close to the public and can be moderated or not moderated but there are also
newsgroups that are open to the public called Usenets. I think that newsgroups are pretty
much like forums as well. Someone posts a message, a question or something of that sorts
and people would reply. I really liked Rick Levine’s example because it was very realistic
and it happens in real life. I also liked it very much because he pointed out the main idea of
chapter three which is talk is cheap. He pointed out that if companies would allow their
employees to speak up in a caring manner it does not really require salary increase.
Companies would pay only a little but get a lot. This is how Levine pointed out that talk is
indeed cheap.
Another wired conversation he mentioned is Chat which is probably the fastest way
to communicate in the Web. We connect to the Internet, enter a chatroom and there we
are! We could find someone we could talk to and get answers in just a matter of seconds. I
personally think that chats are quite handy to use most especially with business related
matters. According to Levine, chats can be used as some kind of technical support. You go
14 | P a g e
chat with an employee of the business or an expert with regards to your concern and you
can immediately get a reply.
The last wired conversation that Levine has discussed is Web Pages. At first, I was
somewhat doubting Levine’s stand with this. But he made a point, web pages, aside from a
place where we find information, is a means of communication. It is a form of
communication because whenever we go to a web page, we are asked for feedbacks,
comments and suggestions and according to Rick Levine, the owners of these web pages
use feedbacks, comments and suggestions by visitors to improve their web pages for the
better.
I really liked the way Rick Levine gave so much importance to honesty. For me it is
an important factor to business success and not only in business but in real life. Through
letting employees speak up honestly instead of creating lies, companies earn more and get
something more back while still not spending much. Thus, the concept of talk is cheap.
The things I have learned with regards to the third chapter are the importance of
creativity and honesty and the different way to communicate electronically via the web. I
learned that creativity is important because it allows us to be different and be innovative.
I also learned that as creative people, we should be able to take pride of our own
works. I’ve really liked a lot of what Rick Levine has said in this chapter like, “Talk is cheap.
The value of our voice is beyond mere words.
The human voice reaches directly into our beings and touches our spirits.” I liked this
statement from the author because it tells us that our voice is more than just words. It is a
reflection of who we are deep inside.
15 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 4 (Markets Are Conversations)
Quote: “The thing about the Internet is you can’t coerce people over a T-1 line, so power
relationships don’t work… So the only game left to play is pure craftsmanship and
reputation among peers. If you can offer people the chance to do good work and be
seen doing good work by their peers, that’s a really powerful motivator.”
-Eric Raymond
In this chapter of the book, Cluetrain Manifesto, I expect to learn more about
conversations. Based on the title of the said chapter, I expect a further explanation and
deeper meaning to the first statement of the 95 theses stating, “Markets are conversations.”
Also in this chapter, I expect to learn more about the importance of conversing or
communicating with others in a market.
Review:
The title of the fourth chapter, “Markets Are Conversations”, is written by two
authors namely Doc Searls and David Weinberger (The person who also wrote chapter 2
entitled the longing). The title of this chapter which is “Markets Are Conversations” was
already discussed in the first chapter of the Cluetrain Manifesto. The difference of the two,
based on what I have read is that during the first chapter, it was discussed in general
whereas in this chapter, it has been discussed in a deeper and more detailed sense. The
first thing that caught my attention on this chapter is this: “That’s the awful truth about
marketing. It broadcasts messages to people who don’t want to listen.” which refers to
corporations that release so many advertisements, publicity stunt and such. It caught my
attention because it made so much sense. In the real world, though it is quite ironic,
corporations keep on releasing different ways to let the world know about them but then,
we, the ordinary citizens A.K.A. the customers, the consumers, the public, don’t really care
about this. We don’t really pay attention to their advertisements, publicity stunts, etc.
Because of this, business people learned to disguise their messages in the form of
entertainment mainly commercials.
16 | P a g e
It is very agreeable that people do pay more attention to the commercials they see
on the television rather than read some advertisement in the newspaper or fliers or
brochures given to us somewhere.
Searls and Weinberger also told their readers this: “Consider the distance we’ve
come. Markets once were places where producers and customers met face-to-face and
engaged in conversations based on shared interests. Now business-as-usual is engaged in a
grinding war of attrition with its markets.” Based on what I have understood, this statement
from the two authors mean that markets have become more than it used to be and more
than what it was originally intended for, a place where people met to converse with shared
interest. Today, it has become a place where people can talk openly with one another not
only about shared interests but also with shared concerns as I would call it. Today, people
in markets talk about their concerns such as asking whether this certain product is really
good as it’s makers says or not and asking for comments about products that you are
interested in. By the way, just so you know, attrition refers to slow destruction, abrasion or
erosion, in other words, decline.
Next on my agenda on this chapter is their topic “The Axe in Our Heads”. In the
earlier part of the fourth chapter, Weinberger and Searls said that corporations or business
broadcast messages to people who do not want to listen and because of this they learned to
disguise their messages in the form of entertainment namely commercials. These
commercials are “the axe in our heads”. Why you may ask? It is the axe in our heads
because these commercials are repeatedly shown and/or heard in order to put it inside our
heads, to make sure that we don’t forget about what they are advertising and the upside of
this is that it starts to get stuck in our heads like axes without us noticing it. We start
memorizing their jingles and slogans because it has already been stuck in our heads like an
axe only without us noticing it. I would have to agree with Searls and Weinberger on this
one as well.
The purpose of marketing is to make sure that the messages they want to tell us
gets stuck in our heads unnoticeably. The term, “the axe in our heads” does not literally
mean an axe in our head but a metaphor which actually means making sure that the
messages broadcasted by corporations are insinuated in our heads unlike their old way of
broadcasting messages to us. These days, we go to the new market to ask for the opinions
of others who have an experience with regards to our concerns such as is this product as
good as it is described by it’s makers, is it really worth spending my money on that service,
etc. The new market by the way refers to the Internet.
17 | P a g e
Weinberger and Searls have also said that the building of the Internet is unmanaged
and there was nobody who controlled it. It was simply built by different people out of
enthusiasm. I like what the two authors said, “The process of building the Internet was a
little like building a bridge: start with a thin wire spanning a chasm, then spin that single
wire into a thick cable capable of supporting heavy girders and the rest of the structure.
Incredibly, no one directed this effort. No one controlled it. The people who
incrementally built the Internet – literally, one bit at a time – participated solely
out of enthusiasm, an enthusiasm driven by shared and growing vision of what
this strange thing they were building might ultimately become.” I like that whole
statement especially the part I typed in bold. I liked it very much because it says tells us
that the Internet was built out of enthusiasm and willingness not by force or by being told
by someone to make it. For me, it is a proof that the internet is not owned by anybody but
is owned by everyone because we share it with one another and we have freedom when
using it, in other words, there are no constraints.
Weinberger and Seals also mentioned something that proved that Internet grew and
expanded because it was widely ignored. They said that even Microsoft’s Bill Gates ignored
it because he never thought it would earn money. I just could not imagine how the Internet
would be like if someone actually controlled and managed the building of it. The Internet
will be owned by only a certain someone and it might not be accessible to everyone even if
they have a computer or we’ll have to pay a big amount of money just to be able to browse
the Web.
Another point made by the two authors is “crafting messages”. This refers to the
marketing strategies of corporations. They advertise their business, services, products, but
only the good parts and most are even lies. In their marketing strategy, you would never
hear them mention about negative things about their businesses. It’s all always good and
they make sure that they appear perfect to the public but then again, their messages are
always on the good side of the company because they craft their messages. They stretch
the truth, another metaphor (not mentioned on the book), they make lies in order to attract
and win the public.
I think that the whole point of the fourth chapter is that a company needs to be
engaged in conversations in the new market (Internet) but since conversations occur in
human voice that would be a problem for companies. It does not have its own voice, heck it
does not have even a mouth it can use to speak. But the people who work in these
companies, the employees, do have their own voices. They are the ones who have the
ability to speak for their companies. It’s just a matter of whether they will tell the truth or
not but most of the time, if their voices are controlled by management, they will have to lie
and would refuse to tell the downside of their companies.
18 | P a g e
In this chapter, I have further understood the statement “Markets are

conversations.” It means that markets revolve around people talking to one another. In this
chapter, Searls and Weinberger have proven that commercials are much more effective
than some advertisement or publicity stunt.
I also learned even further as to how the Internet was built, by different people’s
enthusiasm driven by curiosity of how it will turn out someday. This has proven to me that
the internet is really owned by everyone and not just one person or a company. I have also
learned how thankful I am that the building of the Internet was not controlled by someone
or else I might not even be able to use it.
Also, I have learned in this chapter how much of a liar most companies are because
all they tell is their good side and no bad sides at all to make themselves appear perfect to
the public’s eyes.
I have also learned in here how much important conversation is, without it there
would not even be markets, marketing and even Internet. A lot of Searls and Weinberger’s
words in this chapter stuck in my head especially this: “If you’ve been claiming to be the
Time Company for two years but the market still thinks of you as the Overpriced Executive
Trophy Watchmaker, then, sorry, but that’s your position. If you don’t like what you’re
hearing, the marketing task is not to change the market’s idea of who you are but to
actually change who you are.” [Levine et al. The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual. Perseus Publishing,
2001]
This has stuck in my head because I really agree to this, you have to change yourself if
you want people’s views about you to change because even if you change your strategy but
you don’t change yourself, you would end up staying the same in people’s eyes.
19 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 5 (The Hyperlinked Organization)
Quote: “You can only have a conversation if you’re not afraid to be wrong. Otherwise,
you’re not conversing you’rejust declaiming, speechifying, or reading what’s on the
PowerPoints. To converse, you have to be willing tobe wrong in front of another person.”
-David Weinberger
The fifth chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto is entitled The Hyperlinked Organizations,

thus in thyuis chapter, I expect to find a deeper mean and a much better way for me to
understand the seventh of the 95 Theses, “Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy.” Also I expect to
learn in this chapter more about organization hierarchy.
Review:
The fifth chapter entitled “The Hyperlinked Organization” is once again authored by
David Weinberger. On this chapter, I finally realized how good an author David Weinberger
really is. He writes in an honest, brave, doubtless and confident manner even blatantly
which I think is a good quality a writer to have because it drives them to write about the
truth. Also, I have noticed based on the previous chapters and the current chapter is that
aside from making so much sense is that he makes funny and even sarcastic comments.
The first thing I noticed in this chapter is this, “The most amazing thing: you can tell who’s
talking by listening to the voice.” It caught my attention because it was an interesting
statement. I will have to agree with Weinberger on this one because people’s voices sound
different from each other. Moreover, people speak in different tones, different ways or
manners such as rough, husky, soft and weak.
In this chapter, we are reminded that the Internet is not owned by anybody but for
me, I personally think that everybody owns it in some way though not literally. I think that
everybody owns the Internet because most of us have our own websites, a small piece or
small part of the Internet that we can call ours which causes me to believe that the Internet
is owned by everyone in someway. Weinberger kept on pointing out that the truth is spoken
in the human voice in the whole chapter and even in the previous one. Because of the Web,
people in an organization expect to have direct connections to information and they also
expect to find what they need without having to find a person who can help them.
20 | P a g e
According to Weinberger, companies tend to think that they are doing what they are
intended for but actually accomplishing the opposite of it. He gave a very clear example for
this like a company organizational chart is used to make their employees know who’s in
charge of this and who’s in charge of that. He actually thinks that it is a red tape, a way for
employees to know whom they should avoid. Based on this chapter and on the previous
chapter, I have noticed Weinberger’s and his co-authors’ hatred for companies, the top
management or the people in control in particular. Weinberger and his co-authors are
targeting the higher and narrower part of the organizational hierarchy (the people in
charge). I personally think that their hatred towards people in control is quite funny but I
would have to disagree with them. Despite all the negative stuff about these people, there
is still something good or positive about them.
Anyway, going back to chapter five, Weinberger calls offices as “forts” with thick
walls closed to the outside world. I do not really know if I would agree with Weinberger on
this one or not because I have not yet worked in my entire life. But the one thing I would
agree with him about is that when people are in their “forts” they become different people,
very different in fact. I know this because I have tagged along with my mother in her office
for a few times already and I always notice it. From a mother who always has time to listen
to their children and who keeps on asking their children whether they are okay or not, they
become very busy. They barely notice you, sometimes even ignoring their children. Though
this is very ironic, this is the reality about working, when people get to their offices and
start working, they become different people to extreme measures because their
management says so, I think.
Weinberger mentioned that the opposite of these thick-walled forts are not the open
field, the unwalled city but conversations. I don’t really get the real idea of this statement
but I think that it means that the greatest adversary of companies is the public, the human
voice because the human voice speaks of the truth and of pure honesty. Conversation is the
real adversary of companies because conversation is something out of their control, it is
uncontrollable. Unlike their employees, they cannot control what people outside their
business would say.
“Hyperlinks Subvert Hierarchy.” During the first time I have seen this statement, as
the seventh statement of the 95 Theses, it made me think. What does it really mean? What
is it trying to say? Reading this chapter further explains that a hyperlink is something that
connects people together.
A hyperlink is a part of the Internet that connects us with different people and huge
masses of data or information in just one click. Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy because
21 | P a g e
hyperlinks are equal to one another. No hyperlink is higher than the other because there is
no hierarchy at all.
A hyperlink is just something that connects different things together. That the whole
point why it is called a hyperlink in the first place. They serve as bridges and paths between
places, people, information and such.
The hierarchies that this statement is referring to are business hierarchies or

organizational charts. These hierarchies are subverted by hyperlinks mainly because they
are based on fear, fear of the human unreliability and fear of being exposed as frightened
people. Weinberger said, “To be human is to be imperfect. We die. We make mistakes.” It
feels very good to hear this. It feels good because we accept ourselves as human beings.
We accept our own faults and flaws. It feels incredibly great because it helps us open up in
new ideas. Making a mistake is not really a bad thing, in a deeper sense, making a mistake
is a way of experiencing something out of the norm, the best way to learn.
According to Weinberger, “To have a conversation, you have to be comfortable being

human – acknowledging you don’t have all the answers, being eager to learn from someone
else and to build new ideas together.” I think that what he was trying to say when he said
that is that being open and willing to listen to other people is a way of conversing with
them, in fact it builds new ideas. If you talk with someone but you refuse to listen to them,
you are not conversing at all.
The author said that the Web has seven basic themes namely hyperlinked (any
page can be linked with a different one even without permission from the owner),
decentralized (nobody is in charge of it), hyper time (Internet time is way faster than
ordinary time), open direct access (you have direct access to almost anybody and any
kind of information), rich data (Internet’s money is not the green paper money but the
information it contains), broken (the Net is large and complex but nobody owns or controls
it so nobody is responsible for it, nobody is responsible for fixing it) and Borderless (a
hyperlink leads to a different link which leads to another, the boundaries of the Internet is
hard to identify).
“No, families and businesses are open-ended commitments.” In here, Weinberger

explains that businesses are more like families and not wars. If it was more like a war, then
after they reach their goal, their victory, they would demobilize and close down their
business so that their employees can go back to their families already. But that would never
happen, even if the business has reached its goal, its victory, they would not stop their
operations and will keep going just like families and I agree to it. Businesses are indeed
open-ended commitments it will keep going even if it has already won its battle.
22 | P a g e
The fifth chapter is perhaps the longest chapter of the Cluetrain Manifesto. In this
chapter, I first realized how good of a writer David Weinberger is and I realized how slow
my mind has been running because of this. He made great sense not only in this chapter
but in the other chapters he has authored as well and he makes funny and sarcastic
comments about businesses.
Now seriously, I have learned in this chapter that a real conversation only happens
upon the acceptance of a person about his being human, about his flaws, faults and
imperfection. This made me realize that are imperfection is a good thing because through
this, we can come up with great ideas with the help of other people.
I also learned in this chapter that a useful expert is not someone who knows all the
answers but knows where to find answers which I believe in as well because a person is not
always right. A human being makes mistakes so it is better to consult different people,
different answers than getting a concrete and definite answer from only one person.
23 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 6 (EZ Answers)
Quote: “So, our hearts ask questions, with dread as well as excited curiosity, about the new
public world and its relation to the private. What is the relation of our night selves
and our day selves, our self behind the company walls and outside of them? Why do
we think of our private selves as our real selves? What would privacy be like if it
weren’t connected to shame? What is the fierce price to pay for every desire, every
whim, every idea we stamp “Secret”? To what degree are shame and embarrassment
the expression of the will to control it? If we abandon the illusion of controlling
private behavior, what type of public-ness will we have? How is the control we yearn
to exert over the behavior of others – at work and beyond – identical with the white-
knuckle control we need to preserve our selves?”
-Christopher Locke and David Weinberger
Seriously, reading the title of this chapter, I have no idea what it is all about or what
“EZ Answers” mean so I’ll have to guess to extreme measures. So in this chapter, I expect
to learn more about markets and businesses, E-commerce and electronic retailing as well in
particular. I also expect to learn more about real conversations, the real human voice and
the Internet.
Review:
For the third time in a row, David Weinberger is responsible for this chapter as well
this time with Christopher Locke. In this chapter, Weinberger and Locke discuss
conversation and the human voice once again but in a different way just like the previous
chapter. According to the two authors, an org chart is a breakthrough concept that lets us
know who got to speak at all. Through an organizational chart, we determine who the only
people are allowed to speak. These people are the people who are in the top of the org
chart and the narrowest part of the hierarchy, the people in high position in the
organization. Weinberger and Locke mentioned the fancy words “robber barons”.
24 | P a g e
I personally think that these words are referring to the people in top management.
They are called barons because they are the big men in the organization or company and
robber because they rob their employees of their freedom, freedom of speech in particular.
In this chapter, we, the readers, are awakened to the fact that in most, if not all companies,
employees have become robots. They have become robots because they do everything that
their bosses do and at the same told to shut up. In other words, workers are not allowed to
talk (I think it might sound something like this, “Good morning workers, kindly deposit your
voices and mouths together with your stuff in the baggage counter before you start
working. All workers are obliged to follow if you do not wish to get fired”) only the “big men”
or the executives or the top management of the organization.
While all the bossing around is happening and as time progressed, the top of the
food chain A.K.A. the top management continued to get a lot better with bossing other
people around but unlike their workers, they have no idea at all of how things in their
company are actually made or done. As the two authors have said it, companies have slowly
come to this realization so they started allowing their workers to speak (thank God) but of
course, some are still in “summer school”, in other words, the management with slow
running minds. These workers were finally given the privilege to talk because it helped give
organizations a clue as to how things are made in their company.
Weinberger and Locke said, “By its nature, Internet technology encourages open
distributed speech, a fancy way of “tellin’ it like it is.” The human voice is the primary
attractor, both to the medium and within it. Markets and workers are once again crafting
their conversations, and these conversations are also about craft – things we do that we
actually care about.” I agree to this statement from the two authors because in relation to
the paragraphs before this one which is that companies have come to a realization,
something that they should have realized for a long time now, which is to allow their
workers to talk and regain their human voices. Ordering and bossing people around is not a
conversation but listening to what others have to say and answering to that in a comfortable
way is.
According to Locke and Weinberger, “The simple, if painful, prognosis: organizations

must encourage and engage in genuine conversation with workers and markets – or go
belly up.” I would agree to this. Not only because it is a way for them to get a clue but
because in order to establish a good relationship with workers and markets, they have to
engages themselves in a real and genuine conversation. Not in the bossy, close-minded
way. In this chapter, they have also mentioned the “mystery of voice” which is that we
connect with other people and ourselves in the same way.
25 | P a g e
Since the beginning of time, we are already conversing with each other and we
connect ourselves with different people from different places and culture. I believe that this
mystery of the voice that they are talking about is a magical and wondrous gift to all of us
which means, we should use it instead of letting other people tell us around. Now they go
back to the Web, inherently and intrinsically free. It is free because nobody owns it and
nobody controls it.
“Continents drifting across the oceans have trends. Bullets have directions.
Cannonballs have trajectories. The future is the intersection of choice and interruptions. The
Web – what a surprise! – is more like the future than a cannonball. It will be what we make
of it.” True, very true indeed. The future consists of the decisions and choice we make and
the interruptions along the way such as the mistakes we make and what we become in the
future is based on the decision and mistakes we make before getting there. Just like that,
the Web will become what it is because of what we make of it, of what we do with it. In
relation to this, comes in pornography. They have mentioned this as a way some people
would use the Web. Pornography has indeed scattered in the Internet, even if you are trying
to do some decent browsing on the Web, sometimes, sites full of this pop out of nowhere.
Finally, a downside to the internet! This pornography, I mean. It is a downside to the
Internet because it is something that makes the Net look bad. People learned how to misuse
the Web. Too bad, but that is reality!
Another thing they said that caught me is “There may not be twelve or five or twenty
things you can do, but there are ten thousand. The trick is, you have to figure out what they
are. They have to come from you. They have to be your words, your moves, your authentic
voice.” This paragraph has struck me because it encourages us to speak up, be creative and
use our own ideas, based on how I understood that statement, of course.
On the sixth chapter, I have learned how slow businesses’ and organizations’ minds
are. It took them a long time before they finally realized that conversation is an extremely
important thing and essential.
Also, I have learned that the Internet is more like the future and not of a cannonball.
It will become only what we want it to be. Just like the future, we become who we are in the
future based on what we intend to be, on the decisions we make and on the mistakes along
the way.
26 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 7 (Post-Apocalypso)
Quote: “We will strive to listen in new ways – to violence of quiet anguish, to voices that
speak without words, the voices of the heart, to the injured voices, and the anxious voices,
and the voices that have despaired of being heard.”
-Richard M. Nixon, first inaugural address, 1969
In the final chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto, I expect to learn something different from
the things that I have learned from the previous chapter. On this chapter, I am expecting to
have a change of view towards the book itself. I also expect to learn on this chapter more
about voices and markets which I have been learning about since the beginning of this
book.
Review:
I guess we could say first in last out since the author of the very first chapter and
this chapter, the last chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto is the same person, Christopher Locke.
Christopher Locke what former US President Nixon said during his first inaugural address in
the year 1969, “We will strive to listen in new ways – to violence of quiet anguish, to voices
that speak without words, the voices of the heart, to the injured voices, and the anxious
voices, and the voices that have despaired of being heard.” This quote is quite an
interesting thing to say but what came into my mind at first was what the heck does it have
to do with what Locke is going to talk about? The answer is actually already there, voices.
Voices, voices and of course, voices which was something that all the authors of Cluetrain
have discussed in common.
According to Locke, invisibility and ignorance are powerful weapons which confuse
me a lot. I personally think that invisibility and ignorance are liabilities and something that
people should avoid. Of course, the invisibility and ignorance that Locke was referring to
was in the point of view of the Internet. According to Christopher Locke, ignorance and
invisibility, these two things are actually advantageous to the Internet. It still confuses me
but then Locke said that ignorance is power while invisibility is freedom. Internet, in its
early days, was completely ignored by business and according to Locke this was something
mutual because business, in turn, completely ignored the Internet because they did not see
its true potential immediately.
27 | P a g e
On the other hand, invisibility was freedom. If you carefully analyze the logic of this,
you would have to agree with it just like I agree with it. I agree with Locke when he said
that invisibility is freedom because if you were invisible, you would be able to do a lot of
things and you would not be blamed when you do something wrong. But to become
invisible, you must be first ignored which is most probably why Christopher Locke said that
these two are powerful weapons.
The relation of ignorance and invisibility to the Internet based on what Christopher
Locke has said, I think is that the Internet is a very powerful ‘weapon’ and it is ignorant and
invisible. The Internet is ignorant because it has ignored business and in my personal
opinion, up to this day, they still ignore business and its norms. The Internet is invisible
because once we get to the virtual world we are freed from a lot of things that holds us
back. Through the Internet, we are able to say and express whatever we want to say and
whatever we feel. You can tell someone that you are mad at them or in love with them
without them knowing that it’s you who said that. I think that in the Internet, almost at all
times, your identity is safe. I think that it is only almost and not all the time because you
can never be sure because we sometimes give out (post) information about ourselves on
the Internet.
Christopher Locke has said that, “Business always wants there to be a point, a goal,
an objective, a plan.” I agree to this statement that Locke has said. I do think that business
always want there to be a point, a goal, an objective, a plan, etc. because it is part of being
organized and being able to manage. I think that business’s mentality is something like this:
if we don’t have a plan or an objective, there’s no way we can get through this phase and
that phase. If this is pointless, then we have no use of it and just forget about it. While this
is something true about business, I think that in the Internet, these things are not all that
important. It was unmanaged when it was created, there were no plans as to how it would
end up and it just became what it is now. Up to this day, the Internet is still unmanaged
and yet it is still very popular and successful.
Another thing that Christopher Locke has quoted was something from a Polish
journalist named Ryszard Kapuscinski. According to the Polish journalist, we have toppled
the system and yet we still have its genes. I think that this means that we have toppled the
system of businesses or management and yet we still follow its norms. Sure, we have
toppled their system but we still shut up whenever management has told us to shut up. I
think that Locke was trying to tell us that even though we were able to free our selves from
the “volunteer slavery” that management has entitled us to, we still have not yet learned
our lesson. We still follow them telling us that we are not yet fully free. Locke has also said
that they keep on searching for canonical business type or the ideal consumer but neither
seems to exist. I think he said this because there is no business person who would be
honest enough to say bad things about his own products and services nor would there a
consumer blunt enough to answer them back, if there are, maybe only a few. I think I also
agree to Locke on this one because it is indeed hard to find a business person who is honest
or a consumer who is blunt enough.
28 | P a g e
The next thing that I have read on the final chapter is the arrival of two things into
the world, first was “the job” which has forced people to work more than they can manage
everyday until they die. Along the introduction of this invention came management who
knew everything and told their workers to shut up and work because they knew nothing.
Luckily, after a few hundred years, a new invention was born and it was called “knowledge
work” wherein workers were allowed to know something (but I think not everything because
only management knows everything). Again, I agree with Locke on this because a few years
ago, workers were simply slaves who did not have freedom. They work and work without
talking because their master won’t let them, take the Egyptians slaves for example. Even
when knowledge work came to be, I still think that workers are still not treated well and are
still not allowed to know everything.
I agree that death is static while life moves on. No matter what we do, we die, it is
something constant and nobody lives forever. Life, on the other hand, keeps on moving, we
continue to move forward in life and only death stops us. Another thing I liked on this
chapter was when Christopher Locke said that to get a human voice, you should first get a
life and that life is free. It is anti-institutional and cannot be shrink-wrapped (whatever that
means), caged, dissected, analyzed or owned. Life is something very special and cannot be
controlled. It continues if it has to and stops if stops, that’s just how it is. We can’t do
anything about that. Going back to voices, unlike real human beings, corporations don’t
have a human voice but management, the people who are in these corporations do. If they
learn to speak the human voice again and to converse with other people once more,
corporations would be able to have their own voice. Markets are conversations.
The last thing that Locke has said is this: “Imagine a world where everyone was
constantly learning, a world where what you wondered was more interesting that what you
knew, and curiosity counted more that certain knowledge. Imagine a world where what you
gave away was more valuable than what you held back, where joy was not a dirty word,
where play was not forbidden after your eleventh birthday. Imagine a world in which the
business of business was to imagine worlds people might actually want to live in someday.
Imagine a world created by the people for the people not perishing from the earth forever.”
I really like this because for me it meant, dreaming and imagining a much different world. A
much better place far from the cruel world we have. We do give people something, out of
charity, generosity and such but we always give less than what we have. We always keep
more than what we give but it is more ideal if we could actually give more than what we
keep. Also, as we grow older, we have to stop playing because it is no longer the proper
way for someone old to act that way but for me I don’t want to stop playing. I even know of
a saying, “We don’t stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop
playing.” I believe in this because playing is a key for our creativity. If we stop playing, we
stop being creative and we grow old.
Upon finishing the Cluetrain Manifesto, all I can feel is a lot of disappointment. I was
disappointed because before reading the final chapter, I was expecting to learn something
new and different all the while but then in the end, it was the same. I learned the
importance of the human voice.
29 | P a g e
I learned that markets are indeed conversations. Then again, maybe there are a few
things in the final chapter which I have learned that the previous chapter does not have
which was ignorance and invisibility are both powerful weapons and I think that they come
hand in hand because in order for one to be invisible he must be ignored. I also learned that
although we are free of the system management has bound as in, we are still trapped
because we continue to follow and them shut up and whenever they told us to do so. The
most important thing
I have learned in the whole book of Cluetrain Manifesto is that markets are
conversations and that to have a human voice you have to get a life. Markets are
conversations because we go to a market to talk with other people and tell stories and such.
We use our human voice in conversing and by human I mean in a natural, honest and
comfortable way because that is the only time you are actually in a conversation.
30 | P a g e
Selling
on the Net:
The Complete Guide
31 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 1 (What is the Internet, Anyway?)
Book: Selling on the Net: The Complete Guide
Library Reference: HF 5415.1265 L485 1997
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Selling-Net-Herschell-Gordon-Lewis/dp/0844232343/
ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223263517&sr=8-4
Quote: “The internet has one huge technological advantage over the Information
Superhighway (also called the I-way and Infobahn). It exists. It works. You can do real
useful things on it right now. So far, its academic masters have been able to adapt it to an
extraordinarily wide range of uses.”
-Herschell Gordon Lewis and Robert D. Lewis
Upon starting a new book, I expect to learn what the Internet really is. I expect to
learn that in this chapter, I would be able to know more and understand more the uses of
the Internet and how we can make use of the Internet in selling and doing business.
Review:
Upon starting on a new book and reading the first chapter, I think that the authors,
Herschell Gordon and Robert D. Lewis’ ideas and concepts about the Internet are quite
confusing. I really like their ideas and their method of writing although it confuses me a lot.
Comparing the things I have read on the first chapter with Cluetrain Manifesto, I think that
the idea of the authors of this book are extremely different from the ideas of authors of
Cluetrain Manifesto. Selling on the Net is a lot more serious than Cluetrain Manifesto and for
me, it seems that this book has more respect on businesses that the other book has very
much made fun of.
According to the two authors, the term cyberspace was coined (invented) by William
Gibson through his science-fiction novel Neuromancer. Though this book is a lot more
serious, I thought that the idea they have said that computer scientists and network
vendors wanted to use a different terminology, something that dry and forgettable. I find it
funny because it causes me to wonder why these people would prefer to use dry and
unforgettable acronyms instead of something that will help people remember a lot easier. In
my personal experience, I am familiar with a lot of acronyms whose meanings I am not
aware of. For example, TNT, I know that it is a bomb and back in high school, I was told
what it meant but just after a few months of knowing what TNT stands for, I have already
forgotten it but I still know that it is a bomb.
A part of the first chapter that confuses me up to know is this: “The Internet, by
modern standards, uses seriously outmoded technology held together by ingenious
electronic patches, improvisations, chewing gum and Band-Aids, with the occasional bent
paperclip thrown in when nothing else will do.” I really do not understand the idea of this
32 | P a g e
phrase although on my perspective, based on how I understood it, it is trying to tell us that
the Internet was made with people’s hard work and perseverance. I think that this means
that when the Internet was made, it was created out of the perseverance and hard work.
Then, the Internet expanded due to the eagerness of its developers. They are
looking forward to know how the Internet will be in the future since there is no plan, no
framework while it was being created because of the fact that the Internet was created not
for some organization. Then there it is again, the two Lewises, the authors of this book,
have said that nobody owns the Internet which I would very much agree with.
Few of the things that I have found very useful in the first chapter are the
suggestions that the two authors have written as to how to take the best advantage of the
Internet to good use when it comes to running a business and selling products via the
Internet. The first one that they have discussed is the Electronic Mail. They have said that
through the electronic mail (e-mail), you could build a good relationship with your
customers. According to the two authors, when you make use of this technology which is
cheap at the same time, you have already opened the opportunity of having a good
relationship with your customers. Of course, they also have given tips that we should
always include an instruction as to how to subscribe and cancel subscriptions. This way, we
are more open to the possibility of attracting more customers. Aside from that, you should
include contact information for them and send something that will attract customers not
drive them away.
The second on is the Usenet better known as News Groups. The Usenet, according
to the first chapter of this book is used for interactive discussion groups and comes in two
flavors namely the refereed and unrefereed. I actually do not understand what this two
really means up to now and I am still trying to find out what it means. The one thing about
Usenet that stuck in my head is that the authors said that it is not for the faint hearted.
They have said that it contained imaginable and unimaginable discussions and are profound
to banal to scatological, in other words, boring.
The third one is the File Transfer Protocol or FTP, for short. It was set up for the
purpose of distributing information within authorized individuals only. The problem with it is
that you, like Internet, it is unpredictable as to when you are going to open a virus filled file.
A concept in the first chapter that confuses me is the part about secure transactions
on the World Wide Web. Honestly, I cannot think of an instance in the Internet where
transactions are really secured. There are the so-called hackers and crackers (the
uncommon one) who have the ability and find the joy in bypassing secured data or
information. In my personal, I do not think that there is a real secure way of making
transactions on the Internet because anybody can use it.
33 | P a g e
In this chapter, I have learned that the term cyberspace came from an author of a
book and not from some computer science expert which brings me to the realization that no
wonder that it was not called some weird acronym or name that we always tend to forget
what it stands for.
Another thing I have learned on the first chapter of the said book are the different
ways to best take advantage of the Internet in selling your products and services and even
running your business. On the other hand, though I have learned so many things, I think I
have also learned something weird which is the real meaning of PING and its real purpose. I
found out that it is an acronym whose meaning doesn’t matter and its name is its actual
function.
I have also learned encryption which is the process of translating messages into
ciphertext and decryption which transforms ciphertext back to readable messages. I think it
is pretty much like an encoder and a decoder and I think this is useful for the so-called
secure internet transactions and of course, not forgetting the hackers and the crackers. I
have learned that hackers and crackers are two different people. I found out that the people
whom I call hackers are quite different than which these people really are. Hackers are
actually programmers who have the skill to disassemble complex programs to figure out
what’s in them. And the crackers are the ones I once called hackers, they are the ones who
try to open someone’s account, steal and put money on their own account and such.
34 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 2 (Your Internet Communications Goals)
Book: Selling on the Net: The Complete Guide
Library Reference: HF 5415.1265 L485 1997
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Selling-Net-Herschell-Gordon-Lewis/dp/0844232343/
Quote: “Don’t assume for a minute we need new technology to greet surfers… potential
customers…on a one-to-one level. That technology is simple. Don’t assume for a minute we
can’t acknowledge that rarity on the Internet—an actual order!—with personalized
enthusiasm. This has nothing to do with technology. It’s the basic blend of courtesy and
psychology absent from the psyches of cold-blooded technicians who control so much
Internet communication.”
-Herschell Gordon Lewis and Robert D. Lewis
Based on the second chapter’s title: Your Internet Communications Goals, on this
chapter, I expect to learn how to identify what goals we should obtain in our business
because the title already says it all. I expect to learn what goals I should try to take into
consideration and try to achieve when it comes to internet communications. In all honesty, I
really cannot think of anything else to expect on this chapter except for the title itself
because I have no idea what it will be talking about.
Review:
At the beginning of this chapter, I did not really understood immediately what it was
talking about. I had to read it again and again just to understand what it was trying to tell
me. According to the two authors of the said book, the Web should the home of creative
marketing. I understood this part quite well and I very much agree to it. Via the Web, we
are encouraged to come up with different ways of marketing and we learn to think outside
the box. I did understand this quite well, what I did not really understand at the beginning
was that the reason as to why companies decide and why they should decide is to establish
a presence on the Web. I do understand the basic meaning of this. Of course, they want to
establish their presence and let themselves be known to the world with the use of the Web
but I really cannot see the deep meaning of this. In my personal opinion, this is a downside
of the said chapter because of the simple reason that I was not able to understand the
deeper sense of it.
On the other hand, I really liked it when the two authors, the two Lewises, have
discussed Web strategies. I liked it very much because it gives us very much useful
information about Web strategies. “Customer Service Stronger Relationships
Customer Retention and Upselling” this is the first strategy that they have mentioned. I
really agree on this one. Just like them, I think that customer service is one of the widest
used service or product of a company.
35 | P a g e
If the company can provide excellent customer service, they are able to build a very
strong relationship with their customers and through this they can keep their current
customers, gain more and earn more. They can use the Web to help improve their customer
services because it will give customers more accessibility and convenience from asking for
help from one of your employees. They are just probably a few clicks away from getting
customer service which of course would be something that customers would want because
they spend less.
The second strategy is, “Useful Information Increased Consumption More

Purchases”. Through the help of the Internet, we could share useful information about our
products. We could inform our customers about improved, upgraded products and even new
products much faster via Web. Through sharing useful information on the Net, we gain more
attention from our customers and we can easily attract them with it. This would increase the
sales and profit of the company because more people would buy the product through the
help of the useful information you shared on the Web. In my personal experience, through
the useful information I see on the Internet about different kinds of products, I am
immediately attracted to it although I do not really buy it because it’s too expensive or
something alike.
“Convenient Buying + Discounts + Direct Sales + Reduced Overhead” is the

third strategy that they have named on the second chapter of their book. Based on how I
understood this, this is direct selling through the use of the Web. I think that this is perhaps
the best use of the Internet in terms of business. Nowadays, people would prefer to buy
something via the Web rather than go out to store just to buy something they want. In fact,
people are more likely to find what they want and need on the Internet much easier.
Fourth, “New Entertainment/Information Dimension Increased Product

Involvement Repeat Business or Enhanced Perceived Value”. I think the main idea
of this strategy is to get people outside your company involved. Make them feel like they
belong to your company. Not literally like work but like they are important to the company
by making the more involved. The best way to do this is by giving them information that
matters most especially to them. Information that you think will keep their interest on your
products and services. The best way to get people involved is through the Web because
most people go there all the time.
“Brand Enhancement Customer Loyalty + Improved Margins” is the fifth

strategy that has been identified on this chapter. I think the basic idea of this Web strategy
is that okay… Honestly, I did not get the idea of this one. Although I think that it might
mean that if companies show their customers that they are improving and enhancing the
quality of their products and services through the Web, they would be able to keep their
current customers and gain more. Thus, allowing you to earn more money. According to the
two authors of this book, in order to choose the best strategy you can use for your
company, you first need to know why potential customers would come and visit your Web
site. I would agree to this because that is how we would know the best strategy. By
assuming what will attract your customers and potential customers to come and return to
your site. One of the things in this chapter which I liked very much was when they said this:
“When they’re casually browsing the Net, they’re surfers. When you’ve stopped them long
enough to make a sales pitch, they’re potential customers. When they’ve chosen your home
36 | P a g e
page because they regularly buy from you now, they’re current customers.” I don’t really
sense a deep meaning to this I actually think that it means what it states literally but
somehow, I feel at ease with this statement for some strange reason. Maybe it’s because it
explains to us the difference of the people who visit your website.
The next thing that the two authors wrote about is the Types of Cybernaut. Seriously
speaking, I do not see any difference between the Directed and Undirected Information
Seekers. The only thing I am quite sure about the two is that they are people who go to the
Internet to seek information, which the Internet is full of. Next up are the Bargain Hunters
which are people who are always on the lookout for something free on the Web (I am one of
these people, as far as I know after all who wouldn’t want free cool stuff?). Then there are
the Entertainment Seekers. Obviously, most of us are aware of Internet as a medium of
Internet. But of course, not all of us use it in this way that why there are people who are
categorized as Entertainment Seekers.
Based on personal experience, my aunts would use the Internet to do some online
transactions like book a flight or seek information while my cousins are usually on the
Internet to play games like Cabal, Barbie and stuff like that and watch videos from Youtube
and meet new friends on Multiply and Friendster to pass boredom. The last one was
Directed Buyers, who are the shoppers of the Internet. This is probably the only Cybernaut
type that I do not belong to. I prefer shopping in person than online. Of course, a lot of
people prefer to shop online because of its convenience and it is much easier to look for the
item you need on a catalog instead of walking around a store.
I completely agree that a lot of people go into the Internet because of its
searchableness and convenience. In all honesty, even though I agree with the concept of
the Internet very much and I like it, I think that the Internet is for lazy people and is
actually producing more lazy people.
The Internet is searchable because you can find almost anything you want on it and
the Internet will actually do the searching for you and it is convenient because you no
longer have to leave the convenience of the house, get tired looking for something, in fact,
only the muscles and bones on your fingers are the ones you need to move and the
occasional change of position while sitting down. They have used Delta Airlines as an
example and I completely disagree with them. The writing in Delta Dream Vacation, I think
is their motto. You can’t blame the airlines for writing something seriously. Sure, it’s not all
that perfect but it is a way for to show the quality of their services.
At the end of the second chapter of this book, I learned the different Web strategies
you can use when doing business on the Internet. Strategies which I have put in bold in my
review. Another thing I learned at the end of this chapter is the different types of people on
the Internet.
37 | P a g e
There are five types, Directed Information Seekers, Directed Information Seekers,
Bargain Hunters, Entertainment Seekers and Directed Buyers. Among this five, I belong to
all except the Directed Buyers because I have never bought something on the Internet in
my whole life by far.
Another thing I have learned is the reason why people go to the Internet which is
searchableness and convenience. The further I read the chapter, the more I thought that
Internet is the place where lazy people are born.
38 | P a g e
The Long Tail:
Why the Future of
Business is Selling
Less of More
39 | P a g e
Book Review: The Long Tail
Book: The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More
Library Reference None
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Long-Tail-Revised-Updated-Business/dp/1401309666/
Quote: “Forget squeezing millions from a few megahits at the top of the charts. The future
of entertainment is in the millions of niche markets at the shallow end of the bitstream.”
-Chris Anderson
In all honesty and pure heart, the only thing I think I would expect to learn on this
book by Chris Anderson is about the niche market and about the niche culture. Also I think I
would expect to learn what Long Tail really means and what it is for. Aside from these, I
cannot think of any other things to learn expectantly as I am not really sure about the
context of this book.
Review:
Seriously speaking, I did not understand the idea of this book very much but I am
still going to try to make a review about it the best way I can. Most of the points on the said
book that caught my attention particularly are the one highlighted in pink (not because I
like pink but because anybody who’s gone through this book will immediately notice it since
almost everything’s in yellow) and the ones which are written in pink and of course the ones
that are written in big letters. The first thing that caught me is this: “If the 20th century
entertainment industry was about hits, the 21st will be equally about misses.” Honestly, I do
not understand what this means, I don’t know what it is trying to imply. I think that is
actually one of the main reasons why it caught my attention. Even though I’ve tried to read
further on the other pages, I always returned to this statement in pink because it’s stuck in
my head.
My own interpretation of this is that the entertainment industry of the 20th century is
very much different from the entertainment of today. Before, people would watch television
and go to the movies this is the hits that it is referring to. On the other hand, the
entertainment industry nowadays is about misses because they continue to live in the
previous century. Most people nowadays would prefer to watch via the Web which means
that they are missing a lot. “In the tyranny of physical space, an audience too thinly spread
is the same as no audience at all.”
40 | P a g e
Another statement highlighted in pink, I think that this means that in the real world
scenario, there is no difference between having a very small range and variety of audiences
with having no audience at all. If this is the case, if this is what it really means, I do not
think that I would agree with them. I don’t think that I would agree with them because for
me, it still is a different thing.
Even if you only have a small variety and range of audience you can still survive the
entertainment industry. Then again, based on the earlier part, Chris Anderson said that a
movie theater would not show a film if it does not attract at least 1,500 people over a two-
week run. If that’s the case, well of course having a small number of audiences is no
different with having no audience at all.
“We’re obsessed with hits, but “misses” make money, too.” This is one of the pink
statements written in large letters that caught my attention. I very much agree to this
because businesses always focus on making money through hits and actually do not realize
that they can make money through other means as well. This other mean is what Chris
Anderson is referring to, we focus too much on making money through hits that we miss out
a lot on other opportunities which we can actually use to make money.
The next thing a read about in this about is about the so-called new rules for the new
entertainment economy. The first rule is “Make everything available”. I totally agree with
this because nowadays, in the 21st century, people would prefer it when everything
available. They are more attracted to something if they have access to it, if it is available to
them. I think the best way to make everything available is through the use of the Web.
Under this rule, I have read something again highlighted in pink that caught me,
“children today will grow up never knowing the meaning of out of print.” I very much agree
to this, even I just before I started reading this, never new what it meant. I have never
even heard of it, I only found out about it through this book. The second rule that Chris
Anderson named is “Cut the price in half. Now lower it.” I think based on what I read the
main idea of this is that when you sell something on the Internet is sell it at a lower price. A
good example of this is the music being sold on the Internet. People would not really buy
the whole album if they are not a big fan of the artist. They are most likely to buy only a
song of this artist. This is a good bargain for the people who buy these songs and through
this you can also earn more money.
“You can compete with free”, this is not the third rule Chris Anderson has mentioned.
It is a part of the second rule which I like very much. Before reading this, I never thought
that you can actually compete with free but he made sense. Chris Anderson made so much
sense because by producing products and services of high quality and of reasonable prices,
you can compete with free.
41 | P a g e
According to an article I have read on the Web, there are a lot of people who would
pay huge amounts of money if they think it is worth it and of high quality. If they see it as a
reasonable price, they would buy it. It is pretty much the concept of practicality, I think.
Rule three is “Help me find it” I think the basic idea of this is to make your products and
services accessible and easy to find. People would be much more attracted to buy
something which they can easily find.
Upon reading Long Tail I was able to learn that by trying so hard to make money
through hits, we can also earn money through misses. This misses are actually the things
that we miss out a lot because we focus too much on one thing.
Another thing I learned on Long Tail are the three rules for the new entertainment
which are Make everything available, Cut the price in half. Now lower it. and Help
me find it. One of the best things I learned on this book which I think I like very much is
that a business can actually compete with free through reasonable prices and high quality
products.
42 | P a g e
Web 2.0 Heroes:
Interviews with 20
Web 2.0 Influencers
43 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 1 (Max Mancini: eBay)
Book: Web 2.0 Heroes: Interviews with 20 Web 2.0 Influencers
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Web-2-0-Heroes-Interviews-Influencers/dp/
0470241993/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224512977&sr=8-1
Quote: “You blur the lines between a desktop experience and a Web experience, and that’s
really where everything is headed.”
-Max Mancini
On the first chapter of this book, I expect to learn more about eBay from someone
who has an expertise on the said topic. I also expect to know more about the different uses
of eBay aside from auctioning and the importance of eBay to everyone who uses it.
Review:
I agree with Max Mancini, typically, when we hear the word eBay, we always think
about online shopping. For most us, eBay is a website purely for selling. But in reality, eBay
is more that selling or auctioning. The main focus of eBay is actually transactions and
auctioning is their most famous transaction is the selling part. Despite being able to agree
with this, I do not fully understand what more eBay does. Yes, I know it’s transactions but
transactions in what way? Surprisingly, although I am aware that there are different people
who put stuff up for sale on eBay I didn’t really think of how eBay earns money for itself
because the money that the people earn by selling their items on eBay is theirs. I always
thought that eBay earns by taking some money from what the people who sell in there earn
or the money they pay for the ‘space’ they are given in eBay. Then, I read this chapter, I
found out that eBay earns not by any of this but by connecting two or more people together
namely the sellers and consumers which is the so-called transaction that Mancini has
mentioned earlier.
“Disruptive Innovation’s role is to inspire innovation through experimentation.” I

quoted this, one of the important things that Mancini mentioned because I found it very
remarkable. I think it’s funny to put those two words together, disruptive and innovation
which became the reason why it caught my attention. When I first saw those two words
together, I thought that it was like a team that controls troubles and problems with eBay
then I find out that it’s actual purpose is to promote innovation through different means. In
other words, they are promoting people namely developers and such to become innovative.
“What needs to evolve is the monetization models… Otherwise a lot of companies will go out
of business.”
44 | P a g e
Anybody who has read this book would easily understand why I quoted this, because
it’s easy to find being very distinct. Although at first reading you may think that the said
statement is quite confusing and it doesn’t seem to make sense you may add. In actuality,
this statement makes a lot of sense. You have to agree with this because it means that
companies need to learn to change their strategies in earning money.
Nowadays, with the help of Web pages such as eBay, people can earn money in
different ways. They can now earn money using Web 2.0 even. I can’t think of an exact
word but based on how I understood what Mancini said, if companies want to survive, they
must become creative and think of news ways to earn money even through things that
other people think that wouldn’t earn them money.
Another one of the things Mancini said I like because of what it meant and its
distinctions is this: “The bigger the target, the more attention you get from the bad guys.”
This is very true not only in your personal life but in business. The bad guys mentioned on
the statement is not literally bad guys who’d hurt you, we’re talking about business. The
bad guys mentioned in this statement are the competitors and other factors that could bring
down your business.
Obviously, if you try to target more markets in a wider range, more companies would
compete with you. “I believe in enabling your business to operate no matter what the next
big thing is, and letting other people catch up.” I think this is a way to make your business
distinctive from other. When something new comes in, when the next big thing arrives,
most businesses will struggle to catch up with that big thing that they tend to end up being
similar to each other which I find pretty much boring if you ask me. In my point of view,
even businesses need to learn to become individuals of their own and be different from
everybody else. If most people are following the latest trend, try doing it the other way
around because I think that this attracts more attention and more consumers. Let’s face it,
even though most people like to follow the latest trend, they still prefer looking differently
from the person sitting next to them. In addition to this, if businesses always want to be in
control, they could close down because they would lose their markets. People hate being
controlled especially too much.
“Stop worrying about having to manage your infrastructure; start worrying about
your products and your innovation.” People worry too much about the infrastructure of their
business when in actuality they have to think about their products and innovation as well.
They need to worry of about those two because people nowadays become too choosy. They
start demanding more and more from businesses. If businesses don’t focus on their
products and innovations people will get tired and bored of them and look for different
places to buy.
Basically, this is an interview of Max Mancini, the person who runs the Platform and
Disruptive Innovation team of eBay. Despite being an interview, Mancini was able to talk
about Web 2.0 and eBay very well.
45 | P a g e
On this chapter, I thought that it was all about eBay because I totally spaced out on
Web 2.0. It skipped my mind that the said book is about Web 2.0. I learned that there is
more to eBay than just selling and auctions. EBay is all about transactions, connecting to
people namely the buyer and the seller. Mancini had a great point of view and was able to
explain Web 2.0 very well.
I also leaned from him that following the big thing is not always the best thing.
Sometimes, it’s good to let others catch up and be different from everybody else. I think I
could call it individuality.
46 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 2 (Alan Meckler: Internet.com)
Quote: “Going back into the 1990s, I believe that there really were Web 2.0 properties; it’s
just that nobody knew to call them that. In fact, they were mocked.”
-Alan Meckler
I don’t really know what to expect on this chapter because I am not familiar with
Internet.com. Despite this, I guess that I would just expect to learn the relation of the
Internet.com with the Web 2.0. I also expect to learn more about Alan Meckler. I also
expect to learn more about Internet.com and what’s it for.
Review:
According to what I’ve read, Internet.com is more than a typical site. It is a channel
into some of the parts of Jupitermedia. I already do not know what Internet.com is all about
then they add another term or place or whatever that I do not understand: Jupitermedia.
Honestly, I don’t think that a lot of people know about this or maybe I’m just very outdated.
Based on what I’ve read, Jupitermedia is a self-proclaimed leading provider of images and
information for creative, business and information-technology professionals. I do not know if
I could agree with this a hundred percent because if it is a leading provider of images and
information, I think that I would be aware of it. Then again, right now, I’m still a student
and not yet an information technology professional. I’m still on my way there so maybe that
the reason why I haven’t heard of Jupitermedia or Internet.com either.
Just a brief introduction of Alan Meckler, he is the CEO in charge of the Internet.com.
“The Internet was going to have a greater impact, perhaps, than the computer and it was
going to be all-encompassing.” This was a statement mentioned by Alan Meckler. He had a
great view of the Internet and predicted it right, when the computer was first created,
people were very interested in it and amused and amazed with the computer but I don’t
think that it has lasted that long. Then the Internet came, the Internet caught the interest
of people much more and it amused them even more. Up to now, people still find the
Internet fascinating and due to its continuous improvements and now it is large-scaled. It is
worldwide and it has become a necessity to everyone. I think that it’s what you can call as
the latest trend or the next big thing. “What was really needed was a web site that would be
very, very specific or vertical that would cover a topic really well.” I agree with Meckler very
much on this one. A good web site contains a proper and clear set of information. It is
specific but in a sense that they can still be understood and comprehended even by ordinary
non-information technology professionals and non-professionals.
47 | P a g e
I think that Alan Meckler is in contrast with Max Mancini who thinks highly of the
Web 2.0. Unlike Mancini, Meckler doesn’t see that much potential in Web 2.0 and doesn’t
see people earning much money from it. Based on what I have read, Meckler is not in favor
of Web 2.0, he is pretty much against it. Honestly, even if we are against or agree with him
(I don’t really agree with him at all), we can’t do anything about his point of view of the
Web 2.0. It’s his personal opinion and we have our own opinions and point of view when it
comes to different things and that doesn’t exclude Web 2.0. Despite what I’ve noticed,
Meckler isn’t totally against Web 2.0 he just doesn’t see it as a good source of money. In
other words, he doesn’t think that there’s “gold” that can be found when you use Web 2.0.
In Meckler’s opinion, he views the Web 2.0 as an extension of what already exists. Of
course it is, Web 2.0 in my view is an improved version of what was already there and I
think that that’s the one of its purposes, to serve as an improved version of what’s already
there.
I agree with Meckler that through voice recognition via mobile devices, will lead
businesses to greater heights. People need to communicate with each other. It is one of
their needs and through mobile devices they can do it practically anywhere and anytime. In
my point of view, mobile devices are one of the big things when it comes to technology, of
course right after the Internet. “The Internet over the next 20 to 30 years…is still going to
be incredibly revolutionary, in terms of what’s going to happen.” I think the same way too
which means that I agree with him. The Internet is a phenomenal technology that has
become a part of our everyday lives and you could even say that it has become a necessity
to most people. Incredibly, I found one of the things he believes in to be extremely amusing
but I don’t thing that it can happen soon. Maybe in the long run it will but not soon. The
view I’m talking about is about having barcodes on a billboard sign and all you have to do is
point your mobile device in the direction of the billboard and voila! You get more
information about the advertisement and buy it.
“The big point is that we tend to think that we’ve seen it all, when in fact we haven’t
seen anything yet.” This is my favorite statement from Meckler. I really adore this
statement because of what it means. It means that we tent to think we’ve seen everything
like we know everything (a know-it-all type of person) but when it comes to the real deal,
we have no idea what to do. We always tend to think we know everything when in actuality
we don’t. I think that if we realize this and admit it to ourselves we can improve ourselves
to become better people.
Through this chapter, I learned more about Web 2.0 and that not all people are
amazed by it. I also learned what Jupitermedia is it is a self-proclaimed image and
information provider for information technology professionals and businesses.
Aside from that, I also learned that Web 2.0 is an extension of what already exists
and it is an improvement of what we already have. Upon reading this chapter and Alan
Meckler’s point of view with regards to Web 2.0, I have learned more about him.
48 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 3 (Eric Engleman: Bloglines)
Quote: “Web 2.0 brought the learning curve down to a really low level so you didn’t need to
be a computer engineer to be able to run your own blog site.”
-Eric Engleman, general manager, Bloglines
Again I do not really know what to expect on this chapter. I think that the best
things I can expect to learn from this chapter are the insights of Eric Engleman towards Web
2.0 and who Eric Engleman is aside from being the General Manager of Bloglines.
Review:
Based on what I’ve read, Bloglines is a very young Web page being only created on
the year 2003 by a man named Mark Fletcher. Bloglines is a free online service for
newsfeeds, blogs (obviously just by reading its name) and rich content. Anyway, aside from
being the general manager for Bloglines, Eric Engleman also worked in other companies
such as Yahoo! and Earthlink. He also had an old-media background which sounds
interesting to me. You might wonder why that sounded interesting to me. Well it sounded
interesting because working in companies as big as Yahoo! and being the General Manager
of a Web site as young as Bloglines (approximately five years old) he must be a very good
Information Technology professional. In my opinion, a person who becomes a General
Manager must be either the owner, someone close to the owner or must be really very
good. In Engleman’s case, I think he’s good based on his description.
“People need to be constantly talking to their customer base, constantly innovating

and coming up with great ideas.” I liked this statement from Eric Engleman very much. I
liked it because it makes great sense and for me, it’s very much true. People do need to
communicate with other people very much. In the business sense, they need to talk to their
customers constantly in order to know what their customers really want and need in order
to know what they expect of the businesses. Through this, businesses would be able to give
what their customers want and need and even meet their demands and expectations
because they have an idea of what those are and they become more innovative. In my
opinion, this is a great advantage for them and it gives them great opportunities to entice
their customers. According to what I’ve read despite Bloglines being one of the big things of
today, tomorrow, something else could surpass it and shut down the business. The thing is,
things that happen in the Web 2.0 is very unpredictable and we don’t know exactly what will
happen tomorrow and the next and anytime in the future. For me this means that the
Internet is full of interesting things and surprises.
49 | P a g e
“The users are now in control, whereas in the past they were not in control.” True. I
agree with this because during the past, businesses are very close-minded and you can say
that even up to now, some still are and they always want to take control. These businesses
don’t give their users opportunity to try to be in control because they didn’t see the sense of
it. Now, companies are able to open their eyes and finally allowed their users to take
control. Again, just like in the previous chapters, they have also asked Engleman about their
view on Web 3.0.
According to him, it needs to get more user interaction. Based on this, I think that
their lack of user interaction is the downside of Web 3.0 and if it’s indeed true, they really
need to learn to make more interaction with their users and get them involved. Similar to
what I’ve said earlier, “One of the things I think is really great about Web 2.0 is that it is a
lot of constant delight and surprise.” Engleman said this, and I already said something
similar to this earlier on which means that I agree with him. Web 2.0 is unpredictable, we
don’t know what the next thing that will happen to it is and because of this we become
more curious and more interested in it, in expecting what happens next. Moreover, since it’s
unpredictable, it is full of surprises we always get surprises whenever we find out something
new on the Web 2.0.
Again, just like Meckler, Engleman doesn’t think that you could actually earn money
in most of what you can do on Web 2.0 which I don’t think I would agree to. In my opinion,
a lot of things we can do on Web 2.0 are monetizable. Then again, it’s his opinion as well so
I can’t possibly do anything about that. It’s quite funny though that as an IT professional,
he doesn’t find most of the things we can do on the Web monetizable. No offense to him or
to Meckler but I think that a person who cannot be able to make a lot of things he does on
Web 2.0 monetizable is pretty stupid. A smart and innovative person would be able to find a
good and profitable use to it.
“A lot of people were saying [Web 1.0] was a fad and was going to go away like the
CB radio.” Sure, it did go away but not because it was just some kind of fad, but because an
improvement came to existence. An improvement we could call the Web 2.0, literally
speaking Web 1.0 is indeed gone but analytically and sensibly, it’s just gone because it has
been improved to a better one which was the Web 2.0. For me, 1.0 and 2.0 are just version
of the same thing, the Web so technically for me, Web 1.0 hasn’t totally died out but merely
improved to a much better version.
At the end of this chapter, I was able to finally understand what these Web sites
have to do with Web 2.0. The Web sites used in this book are actually Web sites that run on
the Web 2.0. I think that Engleman is very similar to Meckler, both stating that most of the
things on Web 2.0 are not monetizable. Despite this, I am still not convinced that most of
Web 2.0 are not monetizable, I think that they just need to learn to be clever, practical-
wise, sensible and innovative.
50 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 4 (Gina Bianchini: Ning)
Quote: “I think the freedom that is enabled by the Internet and what people are doing with
it today is just really profound.”
-Gina Bianchini
In this chapter of the book, I expect to learn more about Web 2.0 but this time from
someone with a different perspective about the Web 2.0 because by far, the three previous
chapters in my opinion have the same perspective about the said topic.
Review:
Traditionally, perhaps the best way to start a book review is to tell something about
Gina Bianchini and Ning as these are the main focus on the said chapter. Ning is a social
networking website. In this part of the context, it is funny to here the author say that Ning
is one of the social networking sites on the web then they took it back when they are trying
to differentiate the said web site to other websites. According to the author, the web site is
a platform that creates a social network and is not necessarily a social network. In my point
of view, this helps a lot if the author is trying to confuse their readers. Anyway, going back
to the book, Ning was started by Gina Bianchini and a certain Mr. Marc Andreessen.
I would agree with Gina Bianchini that Web 2.0 means a lot of different things to a
lot of different people. Actually, the way that a person views Web 2.0 is dependent on the
way that they think. Each people have a different way of thinking from each other. In my
opinion, if you mention Web 2.0, someone might answer “That’s easy. Web 2.0 is the
Internet.” Then someone might answer “It is the latest browser that is provided today” and
in some cases, very rare cases, someone might even say “Web 2.0 refers to a spider web
that is about 2.0 inches thick” and something like that. It may sound funny but it is true.
You just have to take some time to think about it and reflect on it for you to realize that we
cannot really define something in a fixed manner because people have different
perspectives and opinions.
For one person, something may mean this while for another it means that. The point
is, we have to face the reality that there are just some actually many things around us that
is hard to define. Just like Bianchini, I believe that there are just some things in life that
cannot be defined. It is actually a sickness that is very common in a lot of us. We tend
always try to find a definition, a meaning for everything.
51 | P a g e
I admire how much Gina Bianchini respects the creativity of everyone. I how she
says that what inspires and motivates Ning is giving people the freedom to create. In my
perspective, this shows a lot of respect for someone’s abilities and respect for the people
freewill. Honestly, I think that Gina Bianchini has the mind of an artist because I think that
the saying, “express yourself” is actually very well suited to her.
Quoting Bianchini, “The best, most innovative ideas, we haven’t even come close to
seeing yet.” I agree with this statement from her for the simple reason that I believe that is
true. Nowadays, not that I’m trying to insult anybody but most people have stopped coming
up with innovative ideas, the creative juices of a person’s brain have mostly become
dormant as people as much as possible have become too comfortable of not having to think
anymore because everything is provided to them by the Internet. You can say anything you
want but it’s just my point of view and how I see the current situation. For me, the creative
side of our brains have become dormant, we have become more logical thus though we
think that we have come up with the best idea, there is actually a better idea just hiding in
the dormant side of our brains.
For me, Gina Bianchini is actually the kind of person who would refuse to do
something when she doesn’t see the point why she should be doing it. My basis for this is
the way that she doesn’t define Web 2.0 unlike the previous three chapters. I think that for
Bianchini, the Web 2.0 is not really something you should be focusing about too much. Web
2.0, in my opinion, for Bianchini is something that you cannot really define. You know that it
is a something but it is something that has not definition at all. Bianchini, based on my
observation of how she answered the questions for her is a person that sees things both in
the big picture and in the detailed manner thus she is more of a logical person.
Finally! There’s someone whom I can consider to have a different insight and
perspective about the book’s topic, Web 2.0. In this chapter, I have learned to accept that
there are just a lot of things that cannot be given a fixed definition.
I learned that Web 2.0 can be defined differently by different people depending on
the way that they think. This chapter have woken me up to the realization that most of us
have become too lazy to come up with creative and best ideas and we have become too
contented with simple ideas we have even to the point of considering it as the best idea
when we can actually come up with a much better one.
52 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 5 (Dorion Carroll: Technorati)
Quote: “For Technorati, a lot of Web 2.0 is about authenticity, accountability, interaction,
and this idea of the people-powered or the social web.”
-Dorion Carroll
For the said chapter of the book, my learning expectations include a perspective
about what Web 2.0 really is for Technorati, brief information about Dorion Carroll and more
knowledge about Technorati and in the end, I hope that I will achieve all this learning
expectations.
Review:
Technorati, based on my readings on this chapter of the book, is a website that

focuses in tracking blogs and tagged social contents. They have even given a few facts or
statistics about how many new blogs appear in a day (more than 175,000 according to
them). According to the said chapter, Web 2.0 is all about people and blogs and that
Technorati is more into Web 2.0 because of this. In my opinion, I would agree to what they
have written if since that is how I plan to view Web 2.0 for the said chapter. They track the
blogs of a lot of people, they are socially networked and maybe they are even reading this
blogs. I think that this is how you can actually define Web 2.0 based on the description that
has been mentioned on this chapter. It was started by David Sifry and some other people
whom he has invited, too bad their actual names weren’t mention but I would still
acknowledge them for being co-starters of the said website.
Dorion Carroll is the vice president of engineering for Technorati. Aside from that big
detail about him, he has also worked in Electronic Arts and Oracle. In my opinion, if you
read a person’s resume, without being the vice president for Technorati of course, just
seeing that you worked for Electronic Arts and Oracle, you’re an interesting person because
you are really good in your field of work. Thus, I would agree to what the book has said
about Dorion Carroll that he is an expert in his field of work. Frankly, when I first saw
Dorion Carroll’s name on the book I thought that he was a girl because of his name. I have
never really heard the name Dorion before so I guess that it is typical to misinterpret his
gender. Luckily, before starting my review, I have searched additional information about
him on the Internet.
53 | P a g e
’Blogging,’ back in 2004, was not a common word.” This is a lovely statement
coming from Technorati’s vice president of engineering, Dorion Carroll. I find this statement
from him fascinating because it is something very realistic. True enough that a lot of people
would say something that are more fascinating and interesting than the one I quoted. The
real reason why I liked this is because of the simplicity of it. In that year, 2004, I was one
of the people who have caused Dorion Carroll to say that, I did not even have the slightest
idea of what blogging is back then. I did not even know that such a word has existed back
then.
The great thing about blogging is that is gets people connected with each other, they
are the foundations of social networks if you ask me because just look at what blogging is
today. There are very few people who are not aware of what blogging is. Blogging is now a
real worldwide phenomenon if you ask me because one thing you know, only a few people
are aware about it then the next thing happens that almost nobody is unaware of blogging.
I think that this is the best time to quote what my professor has said, “Blogging is the next
big thing.” Now, I can say that I agree with this statement wholeheartedly because blogging
is really the next big thing. It has become the foundation of most social networks and it
connects everyone hence, blogging has been playing a very important role in social
communities that are networked.
Another statement from Dorion Carroll that I like very much is this: “One person can
now communicate with a mass audience, most of whom they’ll never encounter.” Reading
about this makes me see that this is how he views Web 2.0. For him, Web 2.0 is a place in
which you would be able to communicate with a lot of people, your audience, but there is a
high probability that you would never meet a lot of this people whom you communicate with
because let’s just face the reality that there are a lot of people in the world, no matter how
many times we travel the whole world in our lives, there will always be a lot of people whom
we will not meet.
Then Dorion Carroll mentioned about how many people were there in their startup
team (30) and even comparing them to google. At first glance at the textbox, you would
think that he is bragging when he really isn’t. He is just happy to share it because by far,
they are that one company who is able to keep up and survive along with google. In my
point of view, he has high respect towards google despite being compared with them. He
mentioned that some people would say that google is better while some would say
technorati is. The fact is that it really would differ depending on the point of view of the
person being asked. I really like how Dorion Carroll accepted this but did not get paranoid
about it. Just think about it, most companies today, if you compare them with other
companies and they hear that people think that other companies are better than them, they
would panic and start getting paranoid. It’s very funny but it’s a cycle and it’s the truth.
“You need to be transparent, you need to be open.” This is Dorion Carroll’s best
statement yet! This is something that companies should read, something that they should
see. I think that if companies hear such a statement from a company as well, they would
actually listen and learn. I think that a statement like this would be a great way to wake up
companies to the reality that they need to be open and transparent.
54 | P a g e
Carroll has said a numerous fascinating and interesting statements on the said
chapter and I would like to quote another one: “It’s a good time to be industry, but it’s also
a challenging time.” This is true. Right now, just like nursing, IT is in demand. Information
Technology has become a part of companies and they even have a department specifically
for IT. The problem about this is information technology advances everyday. Change is
continuous for the IT industry hence it is challenging on the part of people in the said
industry. Each day, people tend to come up with a better technology than the previous day
and the next day the same thing happens. As days pass, technology gets better and better
and coming up with a better one gets harder as well. If you are the type of person who
cannot continuously come up with different, unique and creative ways to improve
technology, you might not be able to live out there if you ask me.
On the said chapter, one of the lessons I have learned is that there is actually an
ideal company that exists, in my opinion of course. I consider a company ideal when they
are able to be calm in any situations, even when some people would think that the other
company is better than them and would just continue doing what they do best.
A great company for me would be a company that respects the opinion of the public
and are open and willing to listen. Aside from that, I have finally come to the realization
that blogging is indeed the next big thing. It is all about people expressing themselves and
communicating with other people.
I have realized and learned that blogging is the best way to get to people to listen to
what you have to say but of course, that is if people are open minded about the ideas on
your blog.
55 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 6 (Raju Vegesna: Zoho)
Quote: “Enterprises have some complex work flows, and I don’t think online
applications…are ready to really fit into the complex workflows in enterprises yet.
They’ll get there someday though.”
-Raju Vegesna
Just like what I have expected to learn on the previous chapters, I expect to gain
more knowledge about the concept of Web 2.0. Also, I expect to know more about this Raju
Vegesna person. Of course, I would be expecting to know more about Zoho on this chapter
too.
Review:
Based on my understanding, Zoho is like an online Microsoft office. On what I have

read, it is an online productivity suite from AdventNet which provides tools similar to the
applications and tools of Microsoft office and Lotus Notes. What makes it different from
other office is that it has CRM tools, database tools, wiki tools and chat. For me, something
that has features like this would be the big deal. Then I read that Zoho is just a small
company, one of those companies that a lot of people tend to leave unnoticed. The problem
with many people in my opinion is that we sometimes tend to overlook these small
companies because we pay more attention to the big companies. The thing is sometimes we
have the thinking that the big companies are always better than the small companies, that’s
why they have become big companies.
Actually, we have overlooked the thought that these big companies were once small
companies. I guess some of us might just have trust issues. Raju Vegesna, according to the
book has worked with Zoho and AdventNet for seven years and that it is the second
company he has worked in, his own company in India being the first. Reading this, it makes
me interested in finding out what he thinks of Web 2.0 and Zoho. Zoho according to Raju
Vegesna is not really a company instead it is a division in AdventNet. I think that it’s good
that he first cleared out what most people misinterpret. In fact, I’m one of the people who
have misinterpreted Zoho as a separate, sister company of AdventNet. AdventNet itself is
focused in making software in general (offline and online) while Zoho, a division of
AdventNet is focusing on the online software alone.
56 | P a g e
“Wikis are going to die and merge with online word processors.” This is a statement
coming from Raju Vegesna which makes me think of how confident he is. In my point of
view, he said this in full confidence as if he’s sure that this is indeed going to happen.
Maybe it would or maybe it wouldn’t. It really is just his opinion right now because the way
that I’m seeing it, wikis are widely used right now, just look at Wikipedia. I’m a student so I
should know that a lot of students find Wikipedia useful and use it as a reference to our
assignments and projects. There are people who say that some information that you get
from Wikipedia is very inaccurate then again, sometimes we tend to just answer them, who
cares or so what? The point I see as to why a lot of people refer to a wiki when they need to
find information for something is for the convenience that a wiki provides the public. With all
due respect to Raju Vegesna, I do agree that much with what he said because he sounds
very sure of himself when he said that for me. Well not really sound but the way I felt when
I read this statement from him, that’s how I felt. On the upside, I think that it is very
interesting to see wikis merge with online word processors. Maybe I’m wrong but aren’t
wikis able to do the things you can do in a word processor? I’m not really an expert to wikis
but I know that I refer to it for information.
I have learned on this chapter that wikis and online word processors are two
separate things. Before I thought that wikis had an online word processor. Wikis, for me are
very useful and so Raju Vegesna made me realize this by stating that he thinks that wikis
are going to die. I think that when said that, he contradicted himself when he said that wikis
are going to merge with online word processors.
On this chapter, I have also learned that Zoho is a division of AdventNet and it is a
division which focuses on online softwares while its mother, AdventNet focuses on software
in general.
57 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 7 (Richard MacManus: Read/WriteWeb & Web 2.0 Workgroup)
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Web-2-0-Heroes-InterviewsInfluencers/dp/0470241993
/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224512977&sr=8-1
Quote: “Whereas the last era of the Web was people publishing things and you went onto
the Web to read it, with the current era anyone can contribute, can write content, or launch
applicatons on the Web.”
-Richard MacManus
For the said chapter of the book, my learning expectations include a perspective of
what Web 2.0 has come to be for Richard MacManus of Read/WriteWeb then I also hope to
gain brief knowledge about Richard MacManus and more knowledge about Read/WriteWeb
and in the end, I hope that I will achieve all these learning expectations I have written
down.
Review:
According to what I have read, Richard MacManus is some kind of technology writer
because he writes. I guess he is somewhat a technology blogger the thing is he did not
state his exact job. He just kept saying and saying that he writes about technology. In my
personal opinion, this sounds a bit like boastfulness because he seems like he is rubbing it
in our faces but in actuality, he is not being braggy or boastful. He was asked to describe
himself and that’s how he described himself, as a technology writer. I think he is one of the
pioneers of Web2 2.0 because in the title it said that he was also in the Web 2.0 Workgroup.
Read/WriteWeb as its name implies, is a blog about Web technology. You can write
your insights about the latest Web technologies and share it with other people. You can also
read the works of other people about the Web technology. In general, I could say that
based on my understanding of Read/WriteWeb, it is a networked community where people
interested in Web technology come together and talk about the Web technology.
I would agree with Richard MacManus that the Web 2.0 is very difficult to define
because it has no proper definition. People have their own perspectives and point of view
with regards to Web 2.0. Anyway, according to Richard MacManus, since everyone can
contribute to the Web 2.0, it is very hard to identify which stands out the most. I agree with
him on this one. I agree with him because we all know that when there are so many choices
it is hard to choose one. Everyday, more and more people contribute to the Web 2.0 and as
more people contribute, more choices appear and that makes it even harder to distinguish
58 | P a g e
whoever stands out the most among all of these contributions. I think that it is also a
matter of opinion as to which of these stands out the most.
According to MacManus, Web 2.0 has actually become a marketing term. I guess this
is because a lot of people and companies have used it already to advertise and market their
goods and services. I guess the fact that companies use the Web as a means to advertise
and market their products and goods have made Web 2.0 become a marketing term
because almost everybody uses it to market their goods.
When Richard MacManus said that the Web becomes more intelligent, it made me
even more interested and I would agree with him. Like I said earlier, a lot o people
contribute to the Web because anybody can just join in on the party. Each day, the Web
gains more information, more “knowledge” thanks to the people who contribute to the Web.
It is not impossible that someday the Web will become the smartest, not human of course,
entity around the world. I actually think that right now it has already become the smartest
technology there is and it continues to become more intelligent everyday. As the Web is
becoming more intelligent, people gain more advantage and become smarter too because
people have access to all the information and knowledge that everybody puts on the Web to
share for everyone.
I have learned on this chapter that the Web has become a marketing term because
almost everybody uses it for the purpose of advertisement. I also learned that before, there
are very limited number of people who can write on the Web but everybody can access it
and read it.
For me, if up to now, that is the situation of the Web, it may have already died down
because since only a few people can write, it becomes very predictable and boring to read.
Nowadays, however, the Web has improved a lot and anybody can now write and read on
the Web. This has made the Web become much bigger and smarter. In my point of view, if
the Web dies down while on its current and future state, it would be a great loss for
everyone and it would be a very big deal because the Web has become a part of us.
59 | P a g e
Book Review: Chapter 8 (TJ Kang: ThinkFree)
Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Web-2-0-Heroes-InterviewsInfluencers/dp/0470241993
/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224512977&sr=8-1
Quote: “We were about to change the way the software was used and distributed. We were
going up against this 800 lb. gorilla in Redmond, Washington”
-TJ Kang
In this chapter of the book, I want to know who TJ Kang is and what ThinkFree is. As
a general learning expectation for me on the whole book, I expect to learn the different
perspectives of different people towards the main topic of the book, Web 2.0. I hope
though, that in this chapter the perspective of TJ Kang with regards to Web 2.0 is
something a lot more interesting and different altogether with the others’ point of view and
hopefully, that by the end of this chapter, I will be able to satisfy all my learning
expectation.
Review:
TJ Kang has introduced himself as a person living in Canada but grew up in Korea.
According to him he started ThinkFree (I presume) at his last year in college. That seems so
cool because early on even before he graduated in college he was already able to prove to
himself that he indeed learned a lot things and have applied it already in real life, hence the
starting up of his business. As I have noticed, his work is very much in line with Korea. He is
actually the co-founder of the very first Korean word processing software which they built in
1983. I guess this is all because of the fact that he grew up in Korea that much of his work
is in line with the said country.
TJ Kang has stated, “Competing against Microsoft, which…I’ve been doing all my life,
was becoming more and more difficult.” I would agree with him that it would indeed be very
difficult to compete with Microsoft of today compared to yesterday and even more difficult
tomorrow. As we all know, companies always do their best to improve, and all those long
running and surviving companies can now be considered as veterans and yet they still
continue to improve. Change is constant in the Internet world and we all know that and so it
should be expected that companies become better and better. When TJ Kang has stated the
statement I quoted, the fact that he is trying to compete with Microsoft already proves that
his ThinkFree is already a very difficult company to compete with today and it would be
even more difficult when tomorrow comes. It just all comes down to perseverance in my
opinion.
60 | P a g e
“These guys are not very good right now, but if they keep trying…” I liked this
statement from ThinkFree’s TJ Kang because this statement from him tells us that
perseverance and hard work improve people. It is trying to tell us, right now these people
are not very good but if they keep trying they will get better. I really like it very much and
this statement for me does no insult to anybody because it speaks the truth and sometimes
the truth just hurts.
Anyway, at first people are indeed not good at something at all but as they keep
trying, they learn and start to get better at that something. That in my point of view is one
of the things I like the most about being human, even though we are not good at something
when we try hard enough, we get better at it and maybe we even become great at it. The
thing is we are able to learn through the things we experience, if we are not that good at a
certain thing, say for example drawing, nobody is good at drawing in the beginning, but
through the mistakes that we make while drawing and through practicing it, we actually get
better and learn from the experiences we gained while trying to get better at drawing. Like I
said earlier, it all comes down to perseverance and how we are going to face and approach
the said situation.
Another statement of TJ Kang that stuck on my head is this, “I don’t think there’s
any one, correct definition of Web 2.0”. I agree with him again on this one because Web 2.0
as far as I know has no fixed or true definition. The definition of Web 2.0 depends on how
the people asked views Web 2.0. The definition of Web 2.0 depends on the perspective each
person and so it will vary. There is no wrong definition, their definitions of Web 2.0 are all
correct and there is not a fixed single definition for the said term.
I have learned on this chapter that there are two main issues that hinder people to
switch from Desktop to Web. These two are the security and offline issue. I did not really
get what’s up with the offline issue thing but the security issue I am very sure of.
Security has always been an issue when we talk about shifting from Desktop to Web
because we are concerned with how it will affect us. As we all know, today there are
hundreds of viruses, worms, spyware, malwares and all those harmful technology that could
destroy all our data online.
Aside from that, we want to be assured that our personal information, our bank
accounts would be kept private but the doubt comes in knowing that the Internet is a public
place.
61 | P a g e
Cluetrain
Manifesto:
95 Theses
62 | P a g e
“Markets are conversations.”
Based on what I understood with regards to the statement, “Markets are

conversations” when I read it, I think what it is trying to say is that a market is all about
conversations. In other words, people talk. They communicate with each other. For me,
without conversation, there would be no markets at all because without conversation,
people would not understand each other. I personally think that the key factor of a market
is the communication going on between sellers, buyers and/or consumers. I also think that
the above statement which is “Markets are conversations” is trying to say that in a market,
conversation or communication is very important. It is important because of the reason that
it a means for people to understand each other.
I think another explanation to the said statement is that the reason why markets are
considered as conversations is, based on what I have read on the “Cluetrain Manifesto”, in
the early times, before internet came to be, people would go to places called markets in
order to talk to each other. People would go to markets in order to communicate or talk
with each other. I think that what I said earlier is what the first statement of the 95 Theses
is talking about. I think that this is what the statement is actually trying to say and I believe
in it because I personally think that in order to establish a market, whether an actual
marketplace or online, communication is vital. I also think that the markets that were
mentioned on the statement are the real or actual people and not literally the place.
63 | P a g e
“Markets consist of human beings, not demographic sectors.”
Upon reading the second statement of the 95 Theses, I think that it means that
markets are not literally the place where people talk to each other, instead, markets are
composed of the people who go to the place we call “marketplace” in order to talk to one
another. I think that the statement, “Markets consist of human beings, not demographic
sectors” is trying to tell people that in a market, there is no such thing as a demographic
sector which is probably the government, a group of people, or somebody who is used for
research. Instead, I think that the statement is trying to tell us that a market is composed
of ordinary human beings, just humans like you and me and nothing more than that. For
me, I think that this just means that in a marketplace, there is no hierarchy or in other
words, we are all equal.
There is nobody higher than the other. The sellers and buyers and/or consumers are
all the same, human beings, and equal. I think that this is somehow very true because I
don’t think that in marketplace, it would matter whether you are a government official, a
beggar or a middleclass lawyer, sellers or merchants would sell and communicate with you
in the same way. In a rarer case and even worst, I don’t think that you would actually see
an animal trying to sell something to a human being, or a human being trying to sell
something to an animal so I do believe that markets consist of human beings not some kind
of demographic sector and especially not of animals.
64 | P a g e
“Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in human
voice.”
I think that the statement above and also based on what my professor has
explained, the main idea of “Conversations among human beings sound human. They are
conducted in human voice” is that in a conversation, the people involved should be speaking
clearly. In human voice, as the statement says it. Not in some kind of gibberish manner. In
a conversation people should be talking clearly and properly in a way that the person they
are talking to can understand it. As a good example, imagine a teenager who speaks slang
talking to his grandmother. Of course they would never understand each other because the
grandmother would think that the teenager speaks some kind of gibberish or rubbish. It
might even lead to a point wherein the grandmother and the teenager would fight because
they don’t understand one another.
I think that the statement, is saying that we should speak in a clear and proper
manner and in a way that we could be understood. We should speak in a proper manner,
and if we know different ways to talk like slang and/or a different language like French, we
should know when to use it. You can not use slang when you talk to someone who cannot
understand slang. You also cannot use French when you are talking to someone who does
not understand French. For me, I think that the above statement makes a lot of sense. It
makes a lot of sense for me because if we don’t speak clearly, in a language or way another
human being could understand, it could be a source of a fight.
65 | P a g e
“Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments or
humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, uncontrived.”
The fourth statement of the 95 theses I think means that in conversing with other
people, we should always be open and natural. Natural which means we say what we mean
and do not stretch our own web of lies. It should be the same way when we are the
receiver, we should be open-minded and sincere when we accept what others try to tell us.
Whether it is an opinion, a fact, a comment, a suggestion, an argument, a joke or whatever,
we should be able to be open with them.
I think it is also trying to tell us to keep conversations very simple as to not

complicate things and confuse whoever we are talking to. If we don’t talk openly, in a
natural and simple way or as the statements calls it, uncontrived, we would confuse
whoever we are talking to even to the point of complicating matters and misunderstanding.
I personally think that we should speak what we mean very clearly especially when it
comes to delivering important messages so that there would be no misunderstanding and
there would be no trouble at all. Aside from that, I think that being open and natural
whenever we talk with other people is very important because this way, we could improve
on whatever we are talking about. Say for example, if a businessman is talking to a
consultant, and the said businessman is open to whatever the consultant tells him, he could
become even more successful with his business. In other words, being open, natural and
simple in the way we converse with other people, could help us a lot and avoid
misunderstandings and even fights.
66 | P a g e
“People recognize each other as such from the sound of this voice.”
The fifth of the 95 Theses states that “People recognize each other as such from the
sound of this voice.” Based on this statement and on the chapter of the Cluetrain Manifesto
that I have already managed to read, six out of seven chapters, this means that the human
voice can be recognized easily. You can tell who is talking just by listening to them talk, as
David Weinberger, on of the authors of Cluetrain Manifesto says. I think that this is true
because of the simple reason that it is indeed easy to recognize someone just by listening to
the sound of their voice. I also think that it is true because when people talk, they sound
different from each other.
When people talk, they may sound like a little girl, an old lady, a masculine guy or a
gay guy. The point is, people sound different from one another and aside from that, people
speak in different manners. What I mean when I say that people speak in different manners
is something like this, an old lady would sound very polite and weak, a little girl would
speak in a polite and innocent manner and a guy would speak in a street-like manner
(slang).
Another thing that helps us recognize people from each other just by hearing them
talk is the language they use. Of course, someone speaking in Latin would be distinguished
and recognized as Latin, not Chinese. Also people can be distinguished with other people
based on the culture they grew up. Even if two people grew up in the same country and
same place, they can still speak differently because their families can have different cultures
from each other. In a much simpler sense, we recognize each other just by hearing each
other’s voices because we are different from each other.
67 | P a g e
“Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not
possible in the era of mass media.”
In the earlier times, whenever we wanted to communicate with each other, it took as
a long time just to receive a message from a friend from a different town. Then along came
mass media although the conversations that mass media provide are very minimal and full
of constraints. The mass media was mainly used for the purpose of advertising and
broadcasting a message for everyone. The mass media was mainly used for businesses and
corporations. Now, the Internet came and it made a lot of things possible for us. Because of
Internet we are able to initiate communication or conversation with one another even in
great distances, in a short period of time. Aside from this, conversations through the
Internet have no constraints unlike mass media which is full of those.
Conversations running on the Internet are much more honest than conversations
through mass media. The Internet has made lots of things that mass media could not do
possible. The Internet has allowed us to communicate in a wider area, with a lot more
people. It does not tell us what we can and cannot say unlike mass media. The Internet
gives us absolute freedom when with conversing with other on the Web. Aside from that,
the Internet has made it possible to share a much wider or larger amount of information
that mass media cannot do. For me, I think that the Internet is much more useful than
mass media when it comes to gathering data or information that we need. Also, another
thing that Internet is capable of that mass media is not, is that in the Internet people can
easily find an expert or even a group of experts who can help them with their concerns.
68 | P a g e
“Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy.”
Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy. What does this exactly mean? But first, what is a
hyperlink? A hyperlink is something that serves as a path or a bridge that connects one
place to another. In other words, a hyperlink is something that connects information to
another, one person to another and one place to another. A hyperlink always leads to
another link. There is no dead-end, unless the link is broken of course. Now, hierarchies are
subverted by hyperlink for the reason that hyperlinks and the things it connects together
are equal. There is no one or nothing higher than the others, they are all the same.
Hyperlinks are not organized, it is actually random.
In a hierarchy, you have to pass through everything while in hyperlinks, you can
choose where you only want to go. Another is that hierarchies, as it goes up narrows down
and the people and information at the top level are very minimal. On the other hand,
hyperlinks, since they are not hierarchic, do not narrow down as it goes further and remains
the same. A perfect example, I think, is passing through a highway, as you further, the
roads don’t narrow down and more paths open up. As you go further, you have more
choices of where to go whether right or left, forward or backward.
Also, I agree that hyperlinks subvert hierarchy because, going back to my example,
when you travel in that highway and as you end up with many choices of which path to
take, you can always go back to take a different route if you want to or you can always
come back and go to the other direction some other time (bookmarking a Webpage).
Another thing is that hyperlinks don’t have anybody to control them, nobody to restrict
them which mean that we can get access to these hyperlinks even without the owner’s
permission or blessings unlike in an organization. Since the organization is hierarchic in
nature, someone will always boss around others.
69 | P a g e
“In both internetworked markets and among intranetwork employees, people are
speaking to each other in a powerful new way.”
The statement above, based on how I understood it, means that people talk in a
much more powerful new way nowadays conversation in a much more powerful way, in a
sense that people can talk to each other in different ways now. Because of the Internet, we
are given the ability and privilege of conversing with each other even if we came from
different and faraway places and culture.
Through the power conversation that Internet engages us in, we are able to learn
more. We gain more information because once we go to the Internet we are already starting
a conversation with other people anywhere around the world. A good example of this
powerful way of conversing through the Internet is a chat room. In a chat room we can
easily find a lot of people to talk to or converse with. In a chat room, we are able to find
people who have the same interests as us and we become acquainted with them.
Also, the Internet is a new powerful way of conversing with others because the
Internet has no constraints and no boundaries. People can say whatever they want to say
and because people are way more honest when speaking in the Internet because I think
that even if they say something on the Internet, they can disguise their selves to protect
their identity if they do not want other people to find out who they are. The Internet is also
a powerful way of conversing with other people because through the Internet, we can
converse with others from different places, no matter how far, easily and fast. We do not
have to wait hours, days, week, months and years just to get a reply from them all we need
to do is wait for a few seconds or minutes to get a reply from them.
70 | P a g e
“These networked conversations are enabling powerful new forms of social
organization and knowledge exchange to emerge.”
Networked conversations refer to conversations through the Internet. The ninth

statement or thesis of the 95 Theses is this: “These networked conversations are enabling
powerful new forms of social organization and knowledge exchange to emerge.” Based on
how I understood this statement, I think that it means that the Internet enables us to
exchange ideas and form new and powerful ones with other people from other places.
Through the internet, we are able to exchange and retrieve a wide variety of information.
The Internet allows us to learn and gain a lot of knowledge and useful data or information. I
would very much agree to this because as an IT student, I actually refer to the Internet
most of the time in order to find useful information for my studies. Actually, even non-IT
people use the Internet to find and retrieve information. What more, is that we can get
information which other people own and posted on the Internet even without having to ask
for their permission. This alone, shows us how easy it is to gain information and knowledge
from the Internet.
On the other hand, we are able to gain new and powerful ideas by talking and
conversing with other people as well simply because we talk with each other. We ask
questions on the Internet, someone answers it then someone asks us a question and we
answer it. It is actually a cycle. Since we are conversing in the Internet, it is only natural
that we form a social organization. We gain and meet friends, enemies, colleagues, loved
ones and even lovers. There is just no way of predicting what could happen in the Internet,
the only thing we are sure about is that through conversations or talking to other people,
we gain information, knowledge and meet new people. We cannot avoid the formation of
social organizations in the Internet because we converse with each other, more importantly,
we talk using our human voice, our real voice.
71 | P a g e
“As a result, markets are getting smarter, more informed, more organized.
Participation in a networked market changes people fundamentally.”
Markets are getting smarter, more organized, more informed. I think that this would
be the shortened version of the tenth statement or thesis from the 95 Theses, “As a result,
markets are getting smarter, more informed, more organized. Participation in a networked
market changes people fundamentally.” This statement, I think means that as the Internet
boomed and as time progressed, people have gotten smarter, people have become more
organized and people have become more informed.
The Internet changes people because as we browse the Web, visit this page and that
page and interact with other people via the Web, we gain something. We learned something
new and we are awakened to the truth that the Internet shows us because everyday new
and honest information comes to the Internet. Heck maybe not just everyday, every hour,
minute or second. People are getting smarter because they gain knowledge by conversing
with other people and because we always find new pieces of information from the Internet.
People become more informed because they use the Internet as a place to consult
other people. Instead of going through the trouble of leaving the house or calling technical
support (that would, most of the time, put you on hold for quite some time) and paying
someone just to ask something like “how do I install this game?” and stuff like that, people
would rather go and surf the Web, read forums, go to chat rooms, and ask someone. They
save time and they save their money. Another good example of people getting more
informed through the Internet is sometimes, people are too busy to watch the television for
new, sometimes, people are busy working in front of their trusty computers, so they just
surf the Web to check out on the latest news.
72 | P a g e
“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.”
The eleventh statement of the 95 Theses, I think, means that people would rather go
to the Internet and ask for the opinions of other rather than ask from vendors. I believe
that this is very true because vendors would always lie about their products and services.
You would never hear a vendor say something like, “The cameras we sell produce low-
quality photos because even the slightest amount of shock destroys the photo that’s why
it’s cheap.” Instead, you would hear them say something like this, “Our cameras are cheap
but of high quality. It is 3.0 megapixels and shock proof.” Because of this, people are more
likely to refer with other people especially those who already have experience with the
products and services you are interested in. That is the whole point or use of the forums
and FAQs, to answer our concerns and questions. We go to one of these forums and say
something like “I’m interested in buying this camera. Does anyone know if it really produces
high quality images?” then someone answers us in different ways like “It is a does produce
good quality images but not as good as they say on their advertisements.” I think that
people would rather refer to other people than to vendors because they know that the other
people give a more honest answer and because the people who usually answer these
questions already have experience with these products and services.
On the other hand, we, as buyers, customers and consumers, are aware of the fact
that vendors would most likely to lie about their products and services and only tell positive
and good things.
73 | P a g e
“There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do
about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, the tell
everyone.”
On the Internet there are no secrets because we can find information easily. On the
other hand, in companies, there are really no secrets. The only problem with the “big men”,
the top management is that they are way too busy to actually know how their products are
done. Because companies are too busy being bossy and officious, they don’t know what to
do with their products. While these people have no idea of what to with their products and
how these products are done, their workers, those people that they have shunned and
forced to do only the things they wanted are fully aware of how these products are made
and what to do with them. People in the networked market or the new market (the
Internet) are more aware of what to do with products than companies are because they are
more informed.
The workers that management has shunned and forced to do their biddings are the
ones who inform customers. They are the ones who speak of the truth about their products,
whether it is good information or a bad one, they tell everyone. They are the ones who
really introduce the products of their hard labor to the public via the Internet of course. The
workers of these companies go to the Internet to introduce this product (how they are used)
to the public and sometimes these hardworking workers are the ones who serve as technical
support for their products even without pay and without the concern of the management.
There is the word that the company is missing! CONCERN! Management is not concerned
with their customers’ conditions and well-being. They are just concerned about earning
money unlike their workers who use sometimes use their free time to assist customers.
74 | P a g e
“What’s happening to markets is also happening among employees. Metaphysical
construct called “the company” is the only thing standing between the two.”
“What’s happening to markets is also happening among employees. A metaphysical

construct called “the company” is the only thing standing between the two.” This is the
thirteenth statement of the 95 Theses of Cluetrain Manifesto. The different situations,
events and such that happen in markets are the same thing that happens among
employees. This means that the people, also known as markets and the so-called
employees who work are the same people.
This statement has said that the metaphysical construct known as “the company” is
the only thing standing between the two because it really is. Just as discussed in one of the
chapters of Cluetrain Manifesto, a person becomes two different people when the situation
calls it. These two different people that a person becomes occur when he is outside work
and during at work. For example, when outside work, a person is very funny and talkative
because it is in his nature to act that way but as soon as he steps inside their “fort”, they
become a different person. They are always serious and they barely talk because they are
busy doing what they are told to do so by the so-called metaphysical construct.
The company stands between markets and employees because companies have
closed their ‘windows’ and ‘doors’ to the outside world. What I mean about this is that top
management has shunned their employees, what happens inside their company must stay
inside the company and if it comes out, you are fired. A company is the only thing that
stands between markets and employees not because employees have been shunned but
also because the company serves as the ‘boundary’ between the two. There are things that
employees can do inside that they cannot do outside as markets.
75 | P a g e
“Corporations do not speak in the same voice as these new networked
conversations. To their intended online audiences, companies sound hallow, flat,
literally inhuman.”
Corporations do not sound like networked conversations because they lie. They
sound inhuman because they don’t speak of the truth if not all of them, most of them. They
sound literally inhuman because corporations make sure that they look perfect in the eyes
of their market, in the eyes of the public. Unlike networked conversations (Internet
conversations, the real kind of conversation) which are honest and would speak of both
good and bad sides of something or of themselves, corporations make sure they sound
hallow or sacred. They make sure that people would see them as perfect, maybe even god-
like to some extent. They make sure that we do not see any of their downside. Corporations
sound flat because they do not tell us anything bad about themselves. They make sure that
they are on our list of good people and not on our black list. They only speak about
everything good about them and they also stretch the truth (lie, on simpler terms).
The way that corporations speak literally sound inhuman because we do not hear
anything bad about them from them (in short, they praise themselves too much). On the
other hand, in networked conversations, real conversations occur. It does not sound hallow,
flat and inhuman. Networked conversations are genuine and natural. In networked
conversations, we are not afraid to speak of both good and bad things about something, we
are more concerned about making sure that people know the truth than making sure that
something or someone look good and perfect at all times (something which is supposed to
be impossible).
76 | P a g e
“In just a few more years, the current homogenized “voice” of business - the
sound of mission statements and brochures – will seem as contrived and artificial
as the language of the 18th century French court.”
I think that the above statement is trying to tell us that today, the mission
statements and brochures of companies are still realistic and honest but someday, it will
become artificial and unrealistic. The once human voices that delivered the messages of
mission statements and brochures become inhuman and far from reality. I think it means
that someday, in just a few years, the human voices that delivered the messages of these
two will become unstable or in other words, very different from each other. A mission
statement could say one thing while the brochure will say something else. In other words,
for me, if this happens, mission statements and brochures of the same company would no
longer be alike and instead are very different from each other.
In my personal opinion, when this happens, either one is a lie or both the mission
statement and the brochure are lies. It is not impossible and could really happen.
Personally, for me, you do not have to wait for a few more years for this to happen because
it has already happened. This is already happening right now, I don’t know for how long
already but I think that it is already happening right now. But of course, the 95 Theses was
written a few years back and now might be the few more years that this statement has
been talking about. I honestly think and am hoping that this artificial and unrealistic voice is
still fixable and someday become homogenized again like it used to a few years ago.
77 | P a g e
“Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony
show, are no longer speaking to anyone.”
After trying to read the sixteenth thesis repeatedly and even to the point of asking
someone to “translate” it for me, I was finally able to formulate my thoughts and ideas
about this. What the statement above is trying to tell us is that since companies do not
speak in the human voice, they are talking to nobody because nobody is listening to them
anymore. Nowadays, people have become smarter and connected to one another, thus they
already know that most companies tell lies. It is on rare occasions that we would know of a
company extremely honest. So far, in my personal experiences, I have not yet encountered
one. Companies up to this day, well most of them if not all, still sound hollow, contrived and
flat, in a more common term, one-sided if you may. Companies continue to think that they
are fooling everybody around them. They still think that they are able to make their
markets believe everything that they say although, in the real world, they are only fooling
themselves and their markets are already laughing at them.
Thanks to the new market, better known as the Internet, these companies’ so-called
markets, have become networked and connected to one another. This made all of us
smarter and aware of the lies that companies try to stuff in our heads through the
experiences that our new friends share with us via the Internet. Since becoming smarter
through the virtual world, most people have stopped listening to the garbage that
companies stuff in our heads.
78 | P a g e
“Companies that assume online markets are the same markets that used to watch
their ads on television are kidding themselves.”
Companies that assume online markets are the same markets that used to watch
their ads on television are kidding themselves. Say what? Seriously speaking, if you try to
read the seventeenth thesis, you will surely say the same thing. It is quite hard to
understand, as you go further down the 95 Theses, well it gets harder to understand.
Anyway, seriously speaking (again), after trying to have someone translate it for me once
again, I think that what it is trying to tell us is that companies that think they are still able
to fool their markets are only making a fool out of themselves. In my personal opinion, the
reason why companies that continue to live in the nineteenth century (or earlier, to some
extent), let’s just say, companies that continue to run in the old days, are making a fool of
themselves because while they continue become stupider, in a blunt way of course, their
markets continue becoming smarter. Thanks to the Internet once again. Cluetrain Manifesto
has brainwashed me half-way, I guess because I make the Internet sound so wonderful and
businesses stench so bad.
Anyway, I think that if companies would not learn to move on and keep on living in
the past century, they would no longer make sense. What I am trying to say is that
whatever they are saying is already useless. People finally discovered the wonders of the
Internet. If companies really think that they can continuously attract their markets with the
same advertisements and marketing strategies they show us on television, they are wrong.
Their markets are now smart enough to ask experienced users before buying the
“interesting” product they have seen on advertisements and of course, the experienced
users are always the bringer of bad news, too bad for companies.
79 | P a g e
“Companies that don’t realize their markets are now networked person-to-person,
getting smarter as a result and deeply joined in conversation are missing their
best opportunities.
I think that the above statement is trying to tell us that today, the mission
statements and brochures of companies are still realistic and honest but someday, it will
become artificial and unrealistic. The once human voices that delivered the messages of
mission statements and brochures become inhuman and far from reality. I think it means
that someday, in just a few years, the human voices that delivered the messages of these
two will become unstable or in other words, very different from each other. A mission
statement could say one thing while the brochure will say something else. In other words,
for me, if this happens, mission statements and brochures of the same company would no
longer be alike and instead are very different from each other. In my personal opinion,
when this happens, either one is a lie or both the mission statement and the brochure are
lies. It is not impossible and could really happen.
Personally, for me, you do not have to wait for a few more years for this to happen
because it has already happened. This is already happening right now, I don’t know for how
long already but I think that it is already happening right now. But of course, the 95 Theses
was written a few years back and now might be the few more years that this statement has
been talking about. I honestly think and am hoping that this artificial and unrealistic voice is
still fixable and someday become homogenized again like it used to a few years ago.
80 | P a g e
“Companies can now communicate with their markets directly. If they blew it, it
could be their last chance.”
Since markets are now networked through the Internet, companies can now
communicate with their markets directly. They can now talk to their markets directly via the
Internet but the communication that the nineteenth thesis of the 95 Theses is talking about
is the real thing, real conversation and not just plain talk. Just because companies now have
a way to communicate with their markets directly thanks to the Internet, it does not mean
that they would be very successful already. Yes, being able to communicate with your
markets is the key to success but upon this, you also take on a great risk which is failure. In
order for companies to successfully communicate with their markets, they should converse
with them. Not talk but converse with their markets. Based on what I have read and how I
understood what I have read, talking and conversing are two different things. When talking,
you could say things that you do not mean, things that you are not comfortable saying on
the other hand, conversing with their markets mean conversing with them in a realistic way
and realistic, in a way that they are honest, convincing and in a way that they are saying
what they mean.
In my point of view when we are conversing, it means that we are talking in the
human voice and whatever we say comes from out mouth, mind and heart not from our
butts and noses (rhetorically of course). If companies start to communicate with their
markets by conversing with them in a comfortable way, I think that is the only time that
they are using their opportunity to communicate directly with their markets correctly and
wisely.
81 | P a g e
“Companies need to realize their markets are often laughing. At them.”
Upon reading the twentieth thesis of the 95 Theses, I think that on simpler terms it
means that companies should get a clue and that companies are very much clueless of what
is happening around them outside their own worlds. For me, companies have their own ideal
worlds named offices and work and they are stuck in their ideal world but they should be
able to step out of this ideal world and return to reality. They should know more about their
markets instead of just focusing of what is going on inside their own ideal world. Markets
are laughing at companies because they are stuck in their own little world that only involves
them and their money.
People who are their markets are laughing at companies because companies are very
close and detached to the reality. If these companies stop living in their own little world that
is close, they would start living in the real world they become more involved with other
people. They will be able to communicate with their markets and their markets would stop
laughing at them because just like the markets, companies would become smarter as well. I
think that people are laughing at companies also because companies think that up to this
day they can still fool their markets with their cheap advertisements and marketing
strategies. If companies continue to be clueless about what they really need to do and focus
on, on what they really should be doing, their markets will continue on laughing at them
and not with them.
82 | P a g e
“Companies need to lighten up and take themselves less seriously. They need to
get a sense of humor.”
Companies need to lighten up and take themselves seriously. Seriously, they really
need to loosen up a few of their screws because it is too tight. Being very serious even
about matters that you should not take too seriously can make you miss out on a lot of
important things. Aside from that, these companies do not have a sense of humor they
would not be able to build a good relationship with their markets. The problem with
companies in the old days and even up to now is that they take themselves too seriously.
They keep on making themselves busy and detached from the real world thinking that they
are not missing out on anything important.
Personally, for me, the mentality of companies is always on the serious side on the
extremes. They think that if they are serious enough, they keep track of things and they do
not miss out on anything. They think that they should be organized, proper and perfect at
all times. But in reality, they are missing out a lot. Companies that are too uptight should
know how to balance the two. They should not be too serious but of course, they should not
also take things too lightly. Not taking anything seriously will lead you to nothing and the
same thing happens when you take things too seriously. Take a relationship for example, if
you are not at all serious, you end up with nobody believing you and not being able to rely
on you because they think that you would not take it seriously.
On the other hand, if you are too serious, they would not want to be with you when
unwinding and relaxing, not even when working because you do not know how to loosen up.
On a simpler manner, I think that this is trying to tell us that we should be able to balance
being serious and being happy-go-lucky.
83 | P a g e
“Getting a sense of humor does not mean putting some jokes on the corporate
web site. Rather, it requires big values, a little humility, straight talk, and a
genuine point of view.
The twenty second thesis, based on the way I have understood it means literally just
like what it stated. Companies should indeed get a sense of humor. Although the sense of
humor that the said statement has implied is not literally the sense of humor meaning funny
and making fun of yourself in front of other people, the kind of humor that seems to be the
one that other people enjoy. In my personal opinion, there are plenty of people who take
joy and pleasure over the mistakes and misery of someone else. Instead, the sense of
humor that the twenty second statement is talking about is something like practicality.
Being more realistic and human is what this statement is trying companies should start
becoming.
This statement is very much related to the first twenty theses. Companies should
start becoming more realistic and practical. Sure, it is natural to aim of becoming the best
in the business but the biggest problem that businesses are encountering due to this goal is
that they have become very much unrealistic. They lie and they do everything to make sure
that people would see them as perfect and want to buy and use their products and services.
Now, the statement above wants companies to start becoming more realistic by getting a
sense of humor. They should start having humility in what they do and be themselves.
Companies need to be more realistic by showing more value and care about their customers
instead of their money alone.
84 | P a g e
“Companies attempting to “position” themselves need to take a position.
Optimally, it should relate to something their market actually cares about.”
The twenty third statement of the 95 Theses I think, means that companies should
be more aware of what their customers truly care about. Companies right now, based on
my own opinion, cares only about making money. They do not even know what their
customers care about. For me, in full concurrence with the above statement, companies
have got to start knowing their customers’ concerns and what their customers truly care
about.
Aside from that, companies should learn to make their world revolve around the real
world, with their customers in it and not only money in there. On the other hand, companies
need to take position literally, I think. If they really want to be the best in the business
world, they should work hard for it. They have to actually reach that position not just say
that they will gain that position someday. Although gaining the position that they would like
to have by doing everything you can, it does not literally mean literally. Instead, it means
that the company should work hard enough to gain the position the said company desires
and wants to have and earn it.
I am not really sure but I think that there are a few companies that actually do some
kind of “magic” just to gain the position they have. The some kind of magic I am talking
about is doing some kind of dirty work, in other words, illegal way of earning it. If
companies starts being more aware of what customers truly care about, they would finally
gain a position, position that everybody else would care about just as much as you care
about it.
85 | P a g e
“Bombastic boasts – “We are positioned to become the preeminent provider of
XYZ”—do not constitute a position.”
The next statement in the 95 Theses, the statement above, is very much related to
the one before this. According to the previous statement and the current one, companies
should take a position. They should take the position they desire through hard work and
perseverance. Sure, a company could gain the title best company of the year or number one
producer of this product and that service but actually, those titles are just names. They are
names not positions.
Companies keep boasting about this but what is the point if they do not actually get
a position. These companies would not really be fully recognized. Once they lose their title,
the name given to them, people would probably start forgetting them which is something
that companies would not want at all. Actually, nobody would want that do happen to them
and it could be avoided. In order to avoid being forgotten once the name and title given to
you is gone, you have to really take a position. Gain and take a position by gaining it and
stop boasting about the title and name given to your company. What is the point of
boasting about your title if time will come that people will get tired of hearing that and
forget about you when a new company comes into play.
As the saying goes, you have to talk the talk and walk the walk which is the same
thing with companies. Companies that are boasting are just talking they are not really doing
anything to gain a position. Instead of boasting, companies should just find a way to gain a
position. They should take a position by earning it through hard work and perseverance.
86 | P a g e
“Companies need to come down from their Ivory Towers and talk to the people
with whom they hope to create relationships.”
Based on how I understood the above statement, it means that companies should
stop being stuck in their own walls. They should learn to come out once in a while. Well, this
does not literally mean that they have to come out of their offices. It simply means that
companies need to start being more involved with their markets. They should find different
ways to communicate with them. In other words which I think would best say what I mean
companies should learn how to talk with their markets in any way. They should start
building a very good and strong relationship with their customers in order to know them
more. Also, upon cementing a relationship with customers, companies will be able to keep
them.
The Ivory Towers, the walls of their offices and their fear of their markets are
hindering companies to build a relationship with their markets. The problem with companies
is that they are closed minded because of their fear of being seen as a ‘weak’ company but
in reality, they need to be open-minded and start communicating with their customers.
Aside from that if companies learn to become closer to their customers and are able to build
good relationship with them, they would gain a competitive advantage. If they have a good
relationship with their customers, they would know what their customers really want and
care about and companies would stop guessing.
Seriously speaking, I am in full agreement with this statement because I also believe
that the closed mindedness of companies is the causes why they have a poor or none at all
relationship with their customers.
87 | P a g e
“Public Relations does not relate to the public. Companies are deeply afraid of
their markets.”
Honestly, I do not understand the concept of the above statement very much but
based on how I understood the said statement, companies, as much as possible avoid
contact with their customers. The only kind of contact that they want with their customers is
when they buy the company’s products and/or services. The reason why this is the only
kind of contact that they want with their customers is because of the companies’ fear of
their own markets. I think that the “public relations” that the above statement is referring
to are the kind of limited involvement of companies with their customers or markets. I think
that as much as possible, companies would want to have only a very limited relationship
with their customers because they want to distance themselves to them. That is the whole
point why companies have their own world, and are trapped behind a thick wall. They do
not want to do have a very strong attachment because of the company’s fear of their
markets. Not just because they have Public Relations, it does not mean that they are no
longer afraid of their markets.
Companies are afraid of their markets because they are their weak points. Just think
of it this way, we could say that a company is a type of dish. The outcome or taste and
edibility of the dish depend on the person cooking it. There are times that it would be
delicious, edible and people would it eat. But when these people do not like the dish, they
do not eat it, they would ignore it and throw it away. The fish rots and decays. This is a
good example of a company because I company depends on their markets. If their markets
like them and trust them, they would both be happy. Meanwhile if their markets are against
or do not like your products, you could lose them, be forgotten and close down. This
happens when companies are close to the public. The public would know more about them
and through this, people will discover the true them.
88 | P a g e
“By speaking in language that is distant, uninviting, arrogant, they build walls to
keep markets at bay.”
Companies have distanced themselves from their markets because of the reason that
they are unrealistic. Companies do not sound human, they sound flat and hollow and they
do not speak in the human voice. Markets speak in the genuine human voice while
companies speak inhumanly because they want to be perfect so their markets could not
understand them. By acting like gods, acting like they are perfect, and not speaking in the
genuine human voice, companies are driving their markets away. They do not understand
each other so they continuously go farther from each other. Since companies want to be
perfect in their markets’ eyes and they want to make sure that their products are services
will be bought, they lie themselves and boast about whatever title they have, in relation to
the earlier statements, in other words, they are very arrogant.
In my point of view, the reason why companies are doing this, building a wall
between them and their markets aside from wanting to be perfect, it is also because they
are afraid of their markets which was also mentioned in one of the previous theses. I think
that if companies realize this while it is still early and they have not yet driven their markets
a whole planet apart, not literally, they could still be able to fix this problem. Companies
have to learn to talk in the human voice, they need to learn even a little amount of humility
and they should be open towards building relationships with their markets.
89 | P a g e
“Most marketing programs are based on the fear that the market might see what’s
really going on inside the company.”
“Most marketing programs are based on the fear that the market might see what’s
really going on inside the company.” I think that what this statement is trying to tell us is
that companies are very much careful as to what kind of marketing programs they will use.
Based on how I understood the said statement, it is based on the company’s fear of their
markets because their markets are the life span of their business. Companies make sure
that their markets believe that they are indeed perfect. If they do not based their marketing
programs on their fear of their market, it would be easy for markets to discover the real
them.
Companies are very careful on the marketing programs they are going to use and
always base it on their fear of their markets. If they are not careful with the marketing
programs they use, people would know the real deal of the company. The market would
know find out about the company’s flaws and downsides. Sometimes, discovering this fact
makes companies lose their markets and if they lose their customers, clients and
consumers, their business would go down and on some point, will close down. Although this
is quite fair for the company’s side I think I would rather have them use a more realistic and
believable marketing program. This does not literally mean that they will include all their
flaws in their marketing program. Instead, they will show something natural. It does not
have to show your flaws but it will make you more realistic.
Companies should stop being afraid of their markets, loosen up and open their minds
into building a good a strong relationship with their markets.
90 | P a g e
“Elvis said it best: “We can’t go on together with suspicious minds.””
Seriously speaking, before reading this on the 95 Theses, I did not know that Elvis
Presley said something like this. This statement from Elvis *Presley* I assume, I think is a
very bold statement though I like it very much and agree with it a lot. In all honesty, I think
that a relationship with no trust is no better than having no relationship at all. A relationship
without trust is something that is pretty much useless and has no direction. This kind of
relationship, for me is dormant or static because of the lack of trust and the presence of
doubt and suspicion. In order for two people or two entities to agree with one another, they
need to learn how to trust each other.
Companies need to learn how to trust their markets and their markets need to learn
to trust the said companies. If both parties are able to set aside or better yet forget their
doubts and suspicions, they would be able to establish a strong relationship with each other
that will last for a long time. If companies want their relationship with their markets to be
strong and deep, they have to learn to trust their markets and forget their fears toward
these people. I think that the problem why a person finds it hard to cast away his or her
doubts and suspicions is because of fear for the other person. I believe that a strong
relationship that will last for a long time need to be dynamic, dynamic in a sense that both
parties, the company and the customer, change in harmony with each other and without
suspicion or doubt towards each other.
91 | P a g e
“Brand loyalty is the corporate version of going steady, but the breakup is
inevitable – and coming fast. Because they are networked, smart markets are able
to renegotiate relationships with blinding speed.”
Brand loyalty on the statement above, I think, refers to the customer’s loyalty to the
company. In my point of view, brand loyalty is one of the big things you need to survive in
the business world. What I mean with being one of the big things is being one of the
important things or essentials for a company. Just like a person who needs a steady
relationship with another person, a company needs brand loyalty from or the so called
steady relationship with their markets. I think the message that the statement above is
trying to tell us is that with the wonders of the Internet, companies are able to
communicate with their markets much easier and faster.
Brand loyalty, being an important factor for the company, should remain but just like
what the statement itself said, brand loyalty just like going steady has an end. The end of
this relationship is inevitable, or on much simpler terms, unavoidable. I agree with this very
much because no matter how hard we try to make sure our markets buy our products and
services, even with the help of the Internet, there will be a time that it will end. I think that
all the Internet can do is to prolong the lifespan of the so-called brand loyalty. By being able
to access the Internet and given the opportunity to easily communicate with our markets,
we can prolong their loyalty to our company.
I think that best way to do this is when we give them access to information about
our company, how they can contact us and updates about our services and products. I think
that the Internet prolongs the lifespan of the so-called brand loyalty because it is a way to
reach the people easily and faster and because we can attract more customers through the
Internet.
92 | P a g e
“Networked markets can change suppliers overnight. Networked knowledge
workers can change employers over lunch. Your own “downsizing initiatives”
taught us to ask the question: “Loyalty? What’s that?””
Upon reading the statement above and reflecting on it, I honestly did not understand
it quite well particularly the “downsizing initiatives”. Anyway, I think that the said statement
is trying to tell us that due to markets that constantly change their suppliers and employees
who constantly transfer to different jobs, we have lost the real sense and meaning of the
word “loyalty”. I think that this means that the lack of contentment and the presence of not
being satisfied and hunger for getting the best have given us a great negative consequence.
The negative consequence I am talking about is loyalty, not loyalty in a good way but the
one which the statement above says, due to the things I mentioned on my statement we
have forgotten what loyalty really means. We have abandoned the real essence of loyalty
because we are hungry for the best things, for perfection if you may. I think markets keep
changing their suppliers because they want to the best there is when it comes to the
products and services that they want and need. I think markets like this because they do
not want to spend their money on wasteful and useless products and/or services that are
not of high quality.
For me, as a market, I do not want that to happen. As much as possible, I look for
perfection or the best offers when it comes to products and services because I do not want
to waste money. Let us face it, money is hard to earn and so being able to find products
and services that are of high quality lets us spend our money happily, satisfied and
practicality. In other words, I guess we can say that it is for practicality. Thanks to the
Internet, we are able to get information about products and services from fellow markets
that have experience with it.
On the other hand, I think that employees keeps transferring from one job to
another because they are unsatisfied possibly because of low salary, bosses that they
cannot stand and things alike. In a worse case scenario I can think of, a reason for an
employee to change jobs constantly is because he thinks too highly of himself that he is
overqualified for his current job and thus, he wants a job which gives higher salary and
possibly will give him a higher position. This is a great fault for employees because they
need to realize that it is not how much qualification you have but it is how long you have
stayed in a company to work.
93 | P a g e
“Smart markets will find suppliers who speak their own language.”
The statement, “Smart markets will find suppliers who speak their own language.” is
something which I find very interesting. In some way, when I read it a few times, I actually
found it funny. The very shallow definition of this for me is that these so-called smart
markets speak in a language that everybody understands very well because smart markets
are part of the community and because of this, they easily find suppliers who ‘speak their
own language’. But when I studied this statement carefully, I was able to see through it and
find the deeper sense of it.
The said statement, based on my understanding of it, tells us that a smart market
will find a supplier whom he can agree with. I think I could call this practicality. I can call it
that because being smart, you would know better and you would know that it is hard to
work with somebody whom you cannot agree with. This does not literally mean like
someone who speaks a different language, in my point of view, it means being able to agree
on something. I agree to this statement because I think that only a nitwit would choose a
supplier whom they cannot agree with and a supplier that does not know what the nitwit
really wants and need. If you were a smart market, you should know that you need to find a
supplier that will be willing to help you. Someone who would agree with you and would
understand what you really want and need. I think that the language that the statement is
referring to is a form of agreement for the market and their supplier. It is like a proof that
the two accept and understand each other well and are willing to help one another.
94 | P a g e
“Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. It can’t be “picked up”
at some tony conference.”
Based on how I understood the statement above, in order for a company to be able
to speak in the human voice, the company should learn to do so. What I meant by this is for
companies to communicate with their markets realistically. They cannot learn to speak in
the human voice just by adding hot water to noodles, going to a seminar or conference or
knitting a sweater. They have to stop dreaming that they can speak using the human voice
and are able to connect with their markets. Instead, they should wake up and actually do it.
I think in order for a company to speak using the human voice, the company needs to have
guts and set aside their fear of their markets.
I think that this is somehow related to the previous statement from the 95 Theses
that were about businesses being afraid of their markets. The thing about this is they do not
have anything to be afraid about. If they continue being afraid of their markets, then the
ability to speak in the human voice will stay as dream and never become a reality.
Companies need to have guts to speak with their markets and more importantly, they
should be willing to talk to them and not by force or with regrets. In my opinion, companies
are very much similar to real people. How, you ask? Well companies and some real people
have the same fear. Admit it or not, sometimes we are afraid to show other people who we
really are. Just like us, companies fear to show their markets for who they are and the
reason why we are afraid is because we think that they will not accept the real us. This
could actually happen but there is still a chance that some people still accept us. There is a
saying, you can’t please everyone and the same goes for companies, they can’t please all
people in the market but they will surely still be able to please some of them.
95 | P a g e
“To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their
communities.”
In order for companies to speak in the human voice they have to learn to be
considerate about their markets. For me, the statement above means that companies need
to be more involved with their markets. In order for them to learn to speak in the human
voice, they need to learn to listen to their markets. Companies need to listen to the voices
of their markets for them to learn to speak in the human voice. I think that in order for you
to speak up making sense, you have to listen to the person you are talking to. You may
think that what I just said does not make sense or is not related to the statement above, in
fact in might not be but I believe in that and the reason why I wrote it in relation to the
statement above is that I think that companies need to listen to their markets first before
they could learn to speak. I think that you can compare a business’s ability to speak to a
baby’s.
I think you could compare the two because for me, companies will need to listen first
to their markets in order to learn to speak in the human voice just like a baby would listen
to grown ups and eventually learn to speak by imitating what the grown ups are saying.
Furthermore, I think that companies need to be listen to their markets so that they will find
out more about their market’s needs, wants and concerns which can be useful information
for them and advantage. Listening to their markets will give them advantage because they
will know what they need to improve on, what they need to change and what they need to
make in order to make their markets happy.
96 | P a g e
“But first, they must belong to a community.”
In relation to the previous thesis, what is the point of trying to speak in the human
voice if you do not have a community or in other words, someone to talk to? If companies
want their dream of being able to speak in the human voice, they have to again, have guts
else, their dream will remain a dream. I watched a movie which I forgot the title that said a
dream can become a reality if you do something to make it come true. Of course,
companies dream of being able to speak with their markets because they know that it will
be of their advantage and in order for them to do so they have to talk the talk and walk the
walk. Seriously speaking, they companies would not be able to speak in the human voice if
they keep on talking and not be willing to listen to their markets. They have to speak and in
turn listen to their markets, engaging themselves in conversations, in order for them to be
able to speak in the human voice.
Of course, in order for them to speak in the human voice, they also need to listen to
the person they are talking to so that they would understand them because companies need
to understand how to speak in the human voice and not just talk in the human voice.
Honestly speaking, I do not really see the difference of the above statement to the previous
one and I think that they are purely related. For me, its like one statement divided in two in
order to elaborate importance of both statements.
97 | P a g e
“Companies must ask themselves where their corporate cultures end.”
Companies should know their limitations. They should be able to admit that just like
everything else they also have their own limitation. The company should be aware of its
limitation so that they would know when to stop or when to keep going. All things in this
world have a boundary and that does not exclude companies. No matter how big a company
is or how influential it is, it will always have a boundary and that would never change. Being
aware of their limitations alone is not enough. Companies also need to accept this fact and
learn to live with it. If they are able to identify and accept the limitations and boundaries of
their company, they would gain more success.
You may ask, how would they gain more success through this? Well, in my opinion
they would become more successful once these companies learn to know and accept their
limitations because they would understand more about their customers and clients.
Companies become more humanistic through accepting their limitations. They would know
more about their customers and would understand much better the wants and needs that
their customers are asking them. On the other hand, they would also be able to know when
to stop because obviously, they know their limitation. If a company knows its limitation, it
would stop when it thinks that customers are already annoyed or worse, hurt by them. This
once again, hints companies of becoming more human and more realistic. On my opinion, a
company that knows its limitations is a good and successful company.
98 | P a g e
“If their cultures end before the community begins, they will have no market.”
In relation to the statement before this one, despite knowing the company’s
limitation, they should make sure that this limitation or end of their culture should be able
to reach their markets. This means that their culture and their market’s culture should be
able to interact or meet each other. Despite having a limitation, companies should still
interact with their markets. Even though they have a limitation, this limitation should not be
bounded within the company itself only. Within the company’s culture, their markets should
exist. In a much simpler manner, they would know who their markets really are, what their
markets really want and what their markets really need. The company’s culture should be
within the culture of their market, not the other way around.
In my opinion, the company’s culture should be within their market’s culture because
their market belongs to a much bigger culture and there are a lot of factors that affect the
market’s culture. In actuality, I think that the market’s culture is only one of the factors that
affect the company. It is the biggest factor that affects the company, if the company has no
market, the company dies and if the company has a big market, they become successful.
They should know their markets very well because their market is their life. Without a
market, they die and the best thing to do in order to know your markets very well is for a
company to be part of the community and interact with their actual markets.
99 | P a g e
“Human communities are based on discourse-on human speech about human
concerns.”
Honestly, I do not think that I understood this statement correctly because based on
how I understand it the said statement means that the human community is all about
communication. I think that a community cannot be called a community if there is no
conversation or communication, a community needs to have a conversation to become a
human community. A human community needs conversation to be called human community
because people who belong to this so-called community have a need to converse with each
other. Communication is a necessity among humans, thus, it is part of the human
community. If a community lacks communication, there is no way that all members of the
community would understand each other. Communication is all about expressing someone’s
emotions and what they want to let other people know. I think that without communication,
people would explode or something of that sort, well go crazy, in a more realistic manner
because they would not be able to express their feelings. In my point of view, the human
community is all about people communicating and conversing with each other through the
human voice that they possess.
Businesses need to be aware of this fact because this is the key for them to achieve
their success. In my point of view, it is essential for the company to be aware of where the
human community begins and ends. Companies should know where the human community
begins because it helps them determine where they should focus. On the other hand, they
should know where the human community ends to know where they should stop or up to
where they should be going. This helps companies know their limitations and how they are
going to serve their markets.
100 | P a g e
“The community of discourse is the market.”
I think the in the said statement, the first thing I need to know before fully
understanding it is the definition of the word discourse. Discourse is also the same as
conversation, dialogue and communication. Based on these synonyms of the word, I would
have to fully agree on the statement. I agree because just like I said on the statement
before this one, the human community is all about conversations. I think if I were to
translate the said statement, it would be the community of dialogue is the people. It may
sound funny but that is how I understand it. Aside from that, I agree with this because
without people, there would not be any communication at all and if there is no
communication, nobody would understand anybody.
People are the most important component of conversations. Obviously, no people

mean that conversation is not present at all. In my point of view, communication or
conversation and people come hand in hand. Sure, even plants and animals communicate
with each other but the human conversation is still different from the conversation of plants
or animals. The human conversation is the highest form of communication if you ask me.
Well, next to prayer for me at least. Another thing, in my own opinion, the core of
communication is the people. People are the most important component of a community.
Also, the community of discourse is the market because conversation among humans
is very important to everyone. I think that if people do not communicate with each other,
they would go crazy and of course, wouldn’t understand each other at all.
101 | P a g e
“Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die.
Obviously this statement is very agreeable. The only people who would not agree
with this statement are those who are close minded. Just like on the previous statements, I
said that communication is very important to everyone, even to plants and animals. Also,
the first statement of the 95 Theses stated that markets are conversations. This means that
almost everything revolves around conversation. This does not exclude companies. Even
companies should be a part of the community that revolves around communication. If
companies exclude themselves to the communication going on between their markets,
competition and suppliers, they would not have a chance to survive.
Companies who exclude themselves from the community of discourse will definitely
fail and shut down. They would not survive at all because they would not know and fully
understand the wants and needs of their markets. They also need to become part of the
community of discourse because through it, they would know more of their competition and
gain advantage. Then, they should be able to understand their suppliers well enough and be
able to make good and long term deals with them. Being part of the community of discourse
is a great advantage to companies.
Even when you are in the most private business say you’re business is a detective
agency. If you don’t know how to communicate with others, how else would you be able to
get clients, get clues and important information and solve cases assigned to you? The point
is, all type of companies needs to be part of the community of discourse.
102 | P a g e
“Companies make a religion of security, but this is largely a red herring. Most are
protecting less against competitors than against their own market and workforce.”
I seriously do not understand this statement that much. I do not really know if I am
the only person who could not understand this statement very well but I am just being
honest and true to myself. Anyway, on my view, I think that this means that even though
companies try so hard to secure themselves against their competitors, they tend to end up
securing themselves against their markets and themselves.
I think that companies are very paranoid about being perfect and very afraid that
they might be left out that they are actually closing themselves from their markets and
worst, from themselves while they are becoming weaker that their competitors. The thing
about this I think is that company focus too much on protecting themselves from their
competitors that they do not notice that they are doing the other way around. Protecting
themselves against their competitors does not literally mean protecting themselves but
making sure that they are always one step ahead of their competitors. Despite this, their
competitors are more probably able to keep up while their markets are not able to do so. I
think that companies that have the mindset that if they are always one step ahead of their
competitors are actually losing their markets and not gaining more.
In my point of view, being one step ahead of others does not give you the assurance
that you would always be the best. The best example of this belief of mine is the story of
the hare and the tortoise. It may sound weird inserting them here but this is really the best
example I can think of. The hare started ahead of the tortoise because he was way faster
than the tortoise but was too confident that just because he was a few steps ahead of
tortoise he would pick the win. In the end, the tortoise won which proves that patience and
hard work is much better that always being one step ahead of others.
103 | P a g e
“As with networked markets, people are also talking to each other directly inside
the company-and not just about rules and regulations, boardroom directives,
bottom lines.
This statement based on how I comprehended it, means that people within a
company are also involved in networked conversation. This may sound funny but based on
the statement itself, it meant gossip. If I have understood it correctly, gossiping is the only
way people within a company become networked aside from talking about rules and
regulations and all those office stuff which I think are useless and a bunch of baloney. By
the way, baloney means nonsense and not that food that sounds like it.
Anyway, going back to the statement, I think that because people within a company
are very restricted to talk with each other freely and only talk about office stuff, these
people learn how to gossip. Like I keep repeating on previous statements, conversation is
important to everyone even to those within a company. If these people do not gossip with
each other, they would perhaps get bored of continuously talking about nonsensical office
stuff and all those bunch of baloney. Even though it is funny to admit it, the conversations
that people within a company are involved in aside from those baloneys they are allowed to
talk about are gossiping.
I have to admit to this, the only reason why there is such a thing as gossip, on my
opinion, is that people are not allowed and not able to converse with each other very much.
These people within a company are not given enough freedom to express themselves and
converse with other people which are a necessity for all people.
104 | P a g e
“Such conversations are taking place today on corporate intranets. But only when
the conditions are right.”
Again, just like a lot of the previous statements, I did not understand this statement
very much. On my understanding, this means that conversations are allowed within a
company only when the management allows it. Of course, the company’s management have
conditions that they set upon their employees. I think that these said conditions are talking
only about office stuff, saying only good things about the company itself and not talk about
the management. In other words, companies allow conversations, talking to be more
appropriate, within the company if the employees talk the way they are told to. It is like the
company sets everything that their employees are going to say and talk about like they are
a bunch of robots. I do not agree with this way of talking.
Companies can set up a few rules like using proper words when conversing and no
vulgar or insulting words. Companies should not fully control the way their employees
converse with one another. In my opinion, the way companies allow their employees to talk
is not agreeable and likeable. All people feel the need to converse with one another and
conversing with other people is supposed to be free for all. This means that everyone has
the right to talk to whoever person he or she wants to talk to and to express himself freely
whenever he feels like it but of course without the use of improper words that one can think
of. In my opinion, the fact that this is the way management allows their employees to talk
to each other is the whole reason why there is such a thing as gossiping within a company.
105 | P a g e
“Companies typically install intranets top-down to distribute HR policies and other
corporate information that workers are doing their best to ignore.”
Companies tend to use the intranet to set down their rules. They have the mindset
that if they do this, their employees would be best reminded and would know about these
much faster and easier. In reality, that so-called mindset of theirs is wrong. Employees
would rather ignore these rules and all the other baloney put up on the intranet and instead
they surf the web using the intranet. They usually check their mail, chat with other people,
downloading movies and things alike.
In my opinion, if I were in the position of the employees, I would be tempted to do

the same thing. I mean, I am an employee who would rather ignore what the management
says with an access to the web via the intranet provided by the company. That would be
like jackpot to me especially if I do not have an Internet access at home. The thing is, given
the knowledge that we can access the web alone is already very tempting and there are a
lot of things we can do on the web which makes it even more tempting. Thus, they would
rather ignore the rules set up on the intranet by the management.
Another possible reason I could think of as to why employees try their best to ignore
the rules set down upon them is that they see these rules as senseless stuff. Of course, if
they treat these rules as nonsense, they would not see the point as to why they should not
ignore it what more not follow it.
106 | P a g e
“Intranets naturally tend to route around boredom. The best are built bottom-up
by engaged individuals cooperating to construct something far more valuable: an
intranetworked corporate conversation.”
Unlike what companies expect, the intranet is usually used by employees to pass out
boredom. For most employees, based on the way I comprehended the said statement, the
company intranet is best used to pass out boredom for them. In my understanding of the
said statement, employees see most of their time at work to be the best opportunity to
access the Web thanks to the company intranet of course. Obviously this just tells us that
most of the things that employees tend to do while at work are mostly useless stuff. In my
point of view, instead of producing something that has something to do with their work,
employees tend to produce something far more important which is known as a networked
conversation. They are able to become networked with other employees through the
corporate intranet and they are able communicate “freely”. I have quoted the word freely
because you cannot really say that they communicate freely as they want because they are
restricted to a lot of things by the management.
Aside from that, even if they try and communicate, you cannot also fully say freely
because they sometimes converse with others “illegally” in the eyes of management
depending on what kind of conditions and rules they have set upon their employees. In
conclusion, I think that this statement is simply trying to tell us that employees would
rather use the corporate intranet to connect with their fellow employees and together form
an intranetworked corporate community in which they converse with each other freely.
107 | P a g e
“A healthy intranet organizes workers in many meanings of the word. Its effect is
more radical than the agenda of any union.”
On how I understood this statement, it simply means that a proper or “healthy”

intranet is used in proper ways by everyone within the company and everyone within the
company is able to utilize the intranet in many different ways possible to its capacity. I think
that by proper usage of the corporate intranet, it meant that the management is using it
properly and efficiently reaching out to their employees and not just setting down the rules
on it and then close their doors.
I think that if they are able to use the intranet in a healthy way, they would keep
their doors open and be willing to communicate with their employees via the intranet. More
importantly, I think that you could actually only say that management is able to efficiently
and correctly use the intranet if they are able to influence their employees to do their work
using the intranet not just dilly-dally with it.
On the employees’ side, in my opinion, you could actually only say that they are able
to utilize the intranet in a healthy way if they are able to cooperate with their management.
I think that the main point is that the best way for both sides of the company to be able to
use the intranet in a healthy way and make the best use out of it is if they are able to agree
with each other and if they are able to gain more respect for one another. In my opinion,
the main reason why they just cannot fully get along is their lack of respect for each
regardless of their position in the company.
108 | P a g e
“While this scares companies witless, they also depend heavily on open intranets
to generate and share critical knowledge. They need to resist the urge to
"improve" or control these networked conversations.”
I think that despite the fact that companies are scared of an open intranet they still
desperately need it and they still rely on it. Irony is that even though they are scared of it,
they know that they need an open intranet to share information with and gain information
from their employees and because of this fear companies have become extremely
controlling and strict. They have restricted a lot of things on the corporate intranet to cast
away their fears but in actuality, that is the real problem.
The so called open intranet can no longer be called an open intranet because of the
many restrictions given to it. They have controlled the way that the corporate intranet runs
that it has become a closed intranet, something that does not really do any good for them. I
do not think that it does any good for them because I do not really think that they are
actually gaining any useful information through this very restricted community. Companies
need to learn to fight their fears and stop being very controlling. Companies have to learn
that the only way that they could share useful information and gain useful information is by
being less controlling and being open.
I think that like the company relies on the intranet, the intranet itself relies on the
company the openness of the intranet depends on what the company would want and what
they would say. Therefore, I think that need to stand up on their fears, cast those aside, be
open and be one with their employees through their corporate intranet.
109 | P a g e
“When corporate intranets are not constrained by fear and legalistic rules, the
type of conversation they encourage sounds remarkably like the conversation of
the networked marketplace.”
Reflecting on the statement above, I have come to the realization that right now,
most corporate intranets if not all though networked do not sound anything close to the
realistic world. Conversations within the corporate intranet are a world apart from the
conversations of the outside and realistic world. The said corporate intranet, in my opinion if
way different from a realistic networked conversation because of all the company’s fears,
insecurities and all the rules they set up the corporate intranet and their employees. Just
like what the statement implies, I agree that you can only say that a company is engaged in
a “networked community” if they are able to become open and they are able to cast out
their fears.
In my opinion, they should also lessen the rules they set upon their corporate intranet
because this chokes the openness of the intranet and kills the realistic conversation and the
realistic community they should be building together with their employees before they
actually build it. I think the only way that a company would belong to a realistic community
is if they are willing to be open towards other. If they are willing to communicate with
people outside of their companies and talk to these people on a humanistic, humanistic and
humble approach. Also, through opening to the outside world, they may be able to foresee
more threats to the company but they are also given the chance to foresee a lot of
opportunities opening up for them making their company even more successful.
110 | P a g e
“Org charts worked in an older economy where plans could be fully understood
from atop steep management pyramids and detailed work orders could be handed
down from on high.”
The organizational chart of a company is a visual representation of who is in

command in the company, who does this and that work and what each function do in the
company. But mainly, it is to show who is in command within the company. With the help of
the organizational chart, people within the company would be able to know to whom they
need to report. That is the upside of an organizational chart in my opinion which means that
I also think that there is a downside to it. The downside I think an org chart has is that it
serves as a warning to the company employees whom they need to pay respect to namely
the management and who they need to watch out for so that they would not get fired.
Anyway, the organizational chart is an aid for the people within the organization to
accomplish their goals. It is also a way for the top management to know to whom they can
pass down one task and another in order to accomplish more goals in a much faster time.
Also, the said tasks that is passed down from one person to another from top to bottom is
clarified well because it is handed down from the first person who is fully aware of the task
then he carefully passes it unto someone else making sure that the person he is passing it
to understands him. In my opinion, the reason why these said tasks are passed down from
one person to another very clearly is that they are afraid to make a mistake and start over.
111 | P a g e
“Today, the org chart is hyperlinked, not hierarchical. Respect for hands-on
knowledge wins over respect for abstract authority.”
Nowadays, people within an organization have gained more respect for one another.
The organizational chart has become hyperlinked which means that it no longer has a
narrow end but a vast one. Now that the org chart has become hyperlinked, it means that
the organizational structure is no longer hierarchical. People within the company because of
this, not only gained more respect for one another instead, they also gained more value for
themselves. Everyone in the company has been given importance to and everyone has their
own little piece of work that they share for the benefit of the whole company. In my opinion,
having this kind of organizational structure is fair for everyone within the company and
shows no discrimination.
On my point of view, an organizational chart such as this one encourages teamwork

to everyone within the company. It encourages teamwork each member of the organization
is treated equally and importantly. Employees tend to feel more important for the company
and would be encouraged to keep working in the company and continuously try their best to
produce outstanding outputs for their given tasks.
I think that if the company wants their employees to give them outstanding outputs,
they have to make their employees love them via the management caring for their
employees as well, in other words they must ensure a caring atmosphere within the
company. This caring atmosphere, on my opinion can be achieved if everyone in the
company has great respect for one another and by treating other fairly.
112 | P a g e
“Command-and-control management styles both derive from and reinforce
bureaucracy, power tripping and an overall culture of paranoia.”
Based on how I understood the said statement, it means that a company that has a
command and control type of management is nothing more than chaos and a culture of
paranoia. Paranoia is the same with fears and suspicions and based on how I understood
this statement and on the previous statements, this is very agreeable. Companies that loves
to be in control and in command, does not do any good for them. This actually imposes
negativity on their part if you ask me.
In my opinion, it invites hatred towards the company because employees are against
management that are too much to handle. This means employees are easily annoyed by
management who would treat them like robots and does not give them enough freedom to
do what they want. If you ask me, employees tend to become more loyal to companies that
are able to treat them well allow them to do what they want as long as they are capable of
doing their tasks well. I think that the culture of paranoia is a reason for a command and
control type of management. It is a cause of the said kind of management since the
management is very afraid of a lot of things inside and outside their company. The fears
that companies have within the company is what their employees might have to say about
them negatively, what their employees might tell people outside their company.
The fears that they have outside the company are their competitors, the opinions of
their markets and possibly the government itself. Obviously competitors are a fear to the
company because they can cause the downfall of the company and the same thing for both
their markets and the government. They fear the opinions of their markets because it
makes the markets in control instead of the company itself.
113 | P a g e
“Paranoia kills conversation. That's its point. But lack of open conversation kills
companies.”
On the statement above, we come across the word paranoia once more. Based on
the said statement, I would very much agree to it because paranoia is indeed a threat not
only to the companies but to everyone. Paranoia literally kills conversation because it
restricts people to speak freely, to speak their own minds and speak what they feel. When
we are paranoid, we are scared, very scared but do you know for what reason? Well, for
nothing. We get scared for nothing, we just think that we do or say this, a bad thing
happens. That is how paranoia actually works.
When our imagination heads for the downside or goes to the negative side of our
heads. This is how companies think and imagine, their imagination runs on the negativity of
their heads. They think that they let their markets talk to them directly or if they would
converse with their markets freely, they would lose everything they are keeping. They think
that they would waste their time and would waste their money just by conversing with their
markets. There’s the word I am looking for, time. Companies are always on a rush trying to
keep ahead but they never let it happen that they have time to listen to what their markets
have to say to them which is caused by the so called paranoia they have. And now, we have
returned to the word paranoia. It is not really surprising for me to see the word paranoia on
the 95 Theses a lot and I think that it is a very common disease to all companies and even
to all people.
114 | P a g e
“There are two conversations going on. One inside the company. One with the
market.”
I really did not get this statement quite well. In fact, there are a lot of points in the
95 Theses that I think contradict with one another. At some point, it seems to me like they
are telling us that companies have changed while at some point, they still tell us that
companies have remained the same. It confuses me a lot but I do not think I question what
they wrote in here because this is how they see the companies.
Going back to the statement, it tells us that aside from the talking with one another
happening within the company, there is another conversations happening at the same time
somewhere else in a place that companies would call the outside world. The two are
categorizes as two different kinds of conversations because it actually is. The conversations
within a company are a very limited and close conversation. In fact, I do not think that you
can even call it a conversation because of the limitedness and closeness of the so called
conversations going on between people within the company.
I think that the limitations of these so called conversations within the company is
caused by, again, paranoia. In other words, I would say that this statement is somehow
related to the previous one. The second type of conversation is the one going on in the
outside world, in the real world. This conversation is the conversation that all people outside
a company are involved in. It is different from that one that is happening within the
company because it is more free and humanistic. Everyone can converse in any way they
want and there is less paranoia.
115 | P a g e
“In most cases, neither conversation is going very well. Almost invariably, the
cause of failure can be traced to obsolete notions of command and control.”
Honestly, I do not think that I can agree with this statement a hundred percent. In
conversations within a company, it obviously becomes a failure due to the command and
control management thing going on. Companies tend to control what their employees would
say and strip them off of their freedom to converse the way they want to. They restrict what
their employees say and even restrict their movements. Companies even tend to control the
movements of their employees. Employees are not allowed to do what they want unless the
management tells them that they could which bring us the command part of their
management.
On the other hand, the part of the said statement that I could not accept and agree
with is the part about conversations in the real world as being a failure because of command
and control. I do not think that the conversations of the realistic world become a failure
because of command and control. I mean, who would control the conversations of the
people? I think you get the point.
Anyway, if the conversation in the real world actually becomes a failure, it is usually
because of paranoia. Paranoia causes some people to prefer to be isolated and not
communicate with other people. Then again, if you carefully think about maybe the
command and control that causes the failure of conversations in the real world is caused by
the government. Maybe that is actually what this statement tells us but on my observation,
the government does not control and command the way people speak or move unless it is
under martial law.
116 | P a g e
“As policy, these notions are poisonous. As tools, they are broken. Command and
control are met with hostility by intranetworked knowledge workers and generate
distrust in internetworked markets.”
I do not really understand this statement. I have noticed that as I go further into the
95 Theses, the more things I get confused with and the more things that I do not
understand. Then again, I think it is typical to get confused and not understand a lot of
things because that is how our brain works. Well actually, I understand this statement a
little bit. I would agree that as a notion, command and control is indeed poisonous but as a
tool that is broken, I do not really understand it. I very much agree that it is a poisonous
notion because command and control, just like paranoia, can kill conversations within a
company with their employees and outside the company with their markets and as well all
know, companies that do not converse with their employees and most especially their
markets are dying fast.
As a tool, I do not really get it. Maybe it means that it is a broken kind of managing
things within the company and if that is the case then I would say that I agree with it as
well. I liked the second statement of this part of the 95 Theses because it is very much
agreeable in my opinion. Command and control is initiated within a company with hostility
while it generates distrust in the market. Hostility is present when command and control
and initiated within the company because who would actually want to be commanded and
controlled almost at everything we do right? It is not like we are criminals or psychopaths
that need to be controlled and watched over all the time. On the other hand, it generates
distrust in the market because like I said, who would want to be controlled like puppets
right? The thing is conversing with other people is free and is a privilege given to all so I am
quite sure that neither employees nor the company’s markets are happy about the idea of
command and control.
117 | P a g e
“These two conversations want to talk to each other. They are speaking the same
language. They recognize each other's voices.”
This statement based on how I understood it, goes back to a previous statement
about the two kinds of conversations which are within the company and outside the
company. If I have understood it correctly, then I would agree to this statement very much.
In fact, based on how I understood it, I actually like the main idea of the said statement.
I think that it is true that both conversations going on inside and outside a company
are trying to talk to one another. In other words, these so called conversations are trying to
link with each other. In actuality, these two conversations can easily link with each other
because they are both speaking the same language and both sound the same. In my
opinion, since the two both sound the same and they speak the same language, these two
conversations would understand each other very well if only companies allowed it to
happen.
The main problem, I think which causes the two to find it hard to connect with each
other is the company itself. The company serves as a barrier, a wall that prevents
employees to communicate with their markets. This leads back again to companies being
very afraid of their markets and being very selfish and overprotective towards themselves.
Obviously, you might think that I am very much against companies but I am really not
against companies. What I am against is the way that most companies think and the way
they fear almost everything that is outside their control.
118 | P a g e
“Smart companies will get out of the way and help the inevitable to happen
sooner.”
Honestly speaking, in the way that I have understood this statement, I would agree
with it and I even think that I like this statement very much. Funny you may say that I am
unsure if I like it or not but my point is that our minds work differently with each other. You
can think this way while I think that way, in simpler we have different ways in
understanding something. Anyway, like I said, I think I like this statement very much
because I find it funny.
I think it is very funny that they mentioned smart companies. The word smart made
me laugh because it made me realize that even companies are categorized and the thought
of having dumb companies is really a funny thing. Anyway, a smart company would indeed
be very willing to get out of their usual ways if they had to. I think that this means that if
they think that they need to know what their markets want even though they fear their
markets they would still start to engage themselves with the conversations that their
markets are involved in.
I think this will to get out of their ways can also be called bravery because they are
able to confront their fears without hesitating. Then these smart companies also have the
will to help things that are predictable to happen sooner. In my point of view, this means
that they are trying their best to be prepared for this predicted occurrence to happen. This
means that they would prepare themselves to face the inevitable and make it happen
sooner to get it over with, I think.
119 | P a g e
“If willingness to get out of the way is taken as a measure of IQ, then very few
companies have yet wised up.”
This statement is very agreeable. It tries to tell us that if we try to measure the
Intelligence Quotient, IQ for short of companies basing it on their willingness to get out of
their usual ways, only a few would be called wise or as the previous statement named them,
smart companies. I even think that it would be a great privilege and great honor to be
called a smart company. I seriously think that, really I do. At any rate, you could say that
only a few companies would be called smart if the basis of measuring the IQ is their
willingness to get out of their ways and willingness to change because most companies, up
to this day still cannot face their own fears.
A lot of companies are still afraid and not brave enough to forget about their fears
and worries and just go with the flow and agree to change. I think that a company would
only be called a smart company if they are always ready to welcome changes which are
always happening, if they are always willing to get out of their ways, if they can just stay
put and if they are always ready to converse with their markets and hear from their
markets.
I think that in order to be called a smart company they need to have those qualities I
have just mentioned. What I meant with being able to stay put is that they have the ability
to stop trying so hard pretending to be so perfect and always being ahead of everyone else
not following the pace of their markets and just follow the trend.
120 | P a g e
“However subliminally at the moment, millions of people now online perceive
companies as little more than quaint legal fictions that are actively preventing
these conversations from intersecting.”
Here is another statement that I do not understand very well. It confuses me so

much just like a few previous ones. This makes me wonder why they have made a lot of
statements that is quite very hard to understand. Still, there are some parts of the said
statement that I have understood but of course, not very deeply. People nowadays, who are
engaged in a networked community thinks that companies are not that much different from
a fiction that prevents the two types of conversations mentioned in an earlier statement to
intersect with each other. In other words, I think that people in a networked community
thinks of companies as a big hindrance for the company itself and the real world. In my
opinion, people do not see the real hindrance that prevents the conversations within a
company and outside the company to coincide.
For me, the real hindrance for the two to collide is the fear of companies, the
paranoia that revolves around all of us, the company’s lack of openness especially to change
and mainly the way that companies think. In my point of view, in order to make the two
conversations meet with each other, we first need to change how companies think especially
towards their markets. They need to know that there is nothing they have to fear about
when it comes to the outside world. In fact, I think that they need to learn to step out of
their own forts and join in on the crowd.
121 | P a g e
“This is suicidal. Markets want to talk to companies.”
This is a statement that I very much understand and would laugh at. I am not sure
though, if like me, you would find this statement funny. From focusing too much on the
flaws of the company, they have shifted to discussing the needs of their markets more in
this statement in my opinion.
Seriously anyway, it is very much agreeable that markets would really want to talk
to the companies. The problem is, companies do not want to talk to or listen to their
markets. Companies just want to get the money of their markets by selling their products
and services to them and nothing more to do with their markets. What they do not
understand is that their markets really want to talk to them. They want companies to hear
what they have to say. The problem is that companies think that they should not let their
markets speak to them because they might lose control. Companies always want to be in
control so they are afraid that if they let their markets in, they would lose control and their
markets would dictate them. The point is, companies need to know that if they engage
themselves in a conversation that their markets belong to and if they are willing to listen to
what their markets have to say to them, it would actually become their greatest advantage
among others.
Also, in my point of view, if they talk to their markets like their markets would want
companies to talk to them, these companies would be able to improve a lot and become
more successful. All they need to do is talk to their markets and listen to what their markets
have to say to them because sometimes, you come up with the best ideas by listening to
what other people has to say other than those who are around you.
122 | P a g e
“Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is usually
hidden behind a smokescreen of hucksterism, of language that rings false—and
often is.”
This statement maybe an addition to the statements that I do not understand and
am confused with but like always, I am trying my best to understand what this statement
really meant. In my understanding and my opinion, the said statement means that there is
still a part of a company that is willing to talk to their markets. This is part of the company
which is deeply hidden in a thick layer of lies that they make up in order to have the perfect
image that they want to have and want people to see them as.
In my point of view, this extremely hidden part of the company actually represents
the members of the company who are willing to talk to their markets. They are the ones
who want to communicate with their markets just as their markets want to communicate
with them. The big problem now is that the part of the company which refuses to accept
change and to communicate with their markets is more dominant than the part that wants
to burst out and communicate with their markets. I think the main reason that this happens
is because most of the people willing to communicate with their markets are ordinary
employees and it is rare to find people from the management who would agree with them.
This means that most members of the management is usually against the idea of opening
up towards their markets and as we all know, the top management is the boss and the boss
always get what they want.
123 | P a g e
“Markets do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want to participate in
the conversations going on behind the corporate firewall.”
The statement above means that it is true that markets want to talk to companies.
Although markets want to talk to companies, it does not mean that they want to talk to the
liars and pretenders of the company. These liars and pretenders of the company are the
exterior parts of the company, the people that the management allow to talk to their
markets in a condition that they would only say good things about the company. This part of
the company is what the markets are avoiding. They do not want anything to do with the
liars of the company and they want to know what is really happening. Markets want to be
involved with companies. They want to know what is really going on inside the company,
they want to know and see the truth and markets. In my opinion, companies should allow
their markets to talk to the real them. They should be able to get their markets involved in
what they do. I think that companies should let their markets talk to the real them because
they deserve it. They are the life of the company and without them the company is nothing.
I think that it is actually a right for the markets while it is a privilege to the
companies. It is a right for the markets because just like I said, they are the life of
companies and without them, the company is nothing and would not gain profit. On the
other hand, I think that it is a privilege to a company because honestly, not all markets
want to be involves with companies. Most of the time, these people who get involve with
companies are people who have problems with them.
124 | P a g e
“De-cloaking, getting personal: We are those markets. We want to talk to you.”
I do not really understand what the de-cloaking and the getting personal part of the
statement means but I know what the rest means. Based on my understanding, the
markets are trying to open the eyes of companies. They are making a point they want to
show companies that they want to talk to them, personally.
I think that companies should wake up and listen to this statement from markets.
The said statement may be too short but it is a very important statement that could help
companies. If companies are able to listen to this and understand this, they would be more
successful and you could actually categorize them as a smart company. I think that what
they meant when they said that they want to talk to companies, correct me if I am wrong,
we want to talk to companies because we are tired of their lies.
We want to know more about what is really going on in the company and we also
want to know the truth about these companies. I used the word WE and I am emphasizing
WE because this markets are actually us. It really is and it is a funny thing for me to realize.
I keep on addressing these markets as them when I am actually a part of the market. What
makes it funnier for me is that I really do not want to talk to companies. I am tired of
listening to the lies of companies so I refuse to talk to them. On the other hand, I want to
get involved with what they do just for the sake of knowing it and just so that I would not
look very clueless and stupid.
125 | P a g e
“We want access to your corporate information, to your plans and strategies, your
best thinking, your genuine knowledge. We will not settle for the 4-color brochure,
for web sites chock-a-block with eye candy but lacking any substance.”
The said statement based on my understanding is coming from the companies’

markets. This is very similar to previous statements which tell companies that their markets
want to get involved with what they really do. Markets want to know the real “identity” of
the companies. They want to know what the companies are really doing and not just what
they said and what they have written that they do. Markets do not think that the brochures
and the web sites that these companies set up are enough to give them what they want. In
think that in other words, the markets simply want to become part of the company, not as
literally working in the company but as partners of the company, people who would name
what they should be making in the company and stuff like that.
Not that I’m against the market, I am not against the companies either but in my
point of view, the more that I see statements like this, the more that I laugh. I really do not
see the markets’ point anymore. I think that from sensible they have reached the point of
absurdity. You may think that I am not making any sense but my point is markets are
already asking for too much. Reflecting on the said statements and to the very similar
statements repeatedly made me realize that their markets, from being sensible people who
knew what they want reached the point of being absurd. You may ask me why I consider
them absurd. For simple reasons actually, there are just some things that is better kept a
secret. Where would the privacy of the company go, I mean even celebrities have their
private lives, so what more non-celebrity companies?
In my opinion, if you translate the statement into simpler terms, would be the
markets saying something like this: hey you, company. Lose your privacy and share
everything to the world.
126 | P a g e
“We're also the workers who make your companies go. We want to talk to
customers directly in our own voices, not in platitudes written into a script.”
The said statement this time, based on how I understood it, is coming from the
employees or workers of the company this time. I think that just as the statement says,
these workers do deserve to communicate with the market in their own voice personally.
These workers deserve to be given the opportunity to talk to the company’s markets.
Actually, in my opinion, the best way to know what their markets want is by talking to them
in person.
The best people to talk to their markets are the workers who work hard to produce
the products and services that the company offers to the public. I would agree with these
workers. They have more right to talk to the company’s markets than the company itself. In
my opinion, the reason why they are telling the management this because they are not
given enough freedom, in fact, even no freedom at all to communicate with the markets,
with the people that they make their products and services for. These workers, in my point
view should not be shunned and forbidden to talk to the company’s markets since they are
the ones who make the products and services. If companies would allow their workers to be
able to talk to their markets directly, it would be of great advantage to them since these
people would know better about what the markets are expecting from the company. They
should be allowed to talk freely and not in any scripted way. By scripted, I mean under all
the conditions that companies have set that makes them become “perfect”.
127 | P a g e
“As markets, as workers, both of us are sick to death of getting our information by
remote control. Why do we need faceless annual reports and third-hand market
research studies to introduce us to each other?”
I think that this time, this statement comes from a worker who also considers
himself as a market of the company. This statement anyway, makes a lot of sense for me.
It is really a big question as to why do companies need to make use of a lot of means to
introduce themselves and their workers to the public when they can just introduce them in
the simple manner of talking to their markets. It is really funny that they keep on using a
lot of baloney or nonsense just to do this so that they can cover up for themselves.
In my point of view, companies, though they are willing to communicate with their
markets, are limiting themselves into giving away the truth about them. This truth that I am
talking about is that just like everything else, they are not perfect. The truth that they also
have flaws just like everybody else. This, in my opinion, is the greatest reality that
companies are trying to cover up. You cannot blame them either though because who would
trust a company that has flaws right? Just think about it this way, in commercials and
advertisements for fast food restaurants, have you noticed that they show big burgers?
Those which have lettuce, onions, tomatoes, cheese and a whole bunch of other stuff? Then
when you buy the actual burger, it is not as big as they showed it in the advertisement and
it has some lettuce that looks like it has been used to wash some dirty clothing because it
looks soggy. Well, that is one way for them to cover up their flaw and of course to entice
the people. But in other cases, they just try to keep the truth from their markets for the
simple reason of their fear, their paranoia.
128 | P a g e
“As markets, as workers, we wonder why you're not listening. You seem to be
speaking a different language.”
This statement, in my opinion and not that I am bragging about is quite very easy to
understand and simple to explain. After reflecting upon the said statement, it means that
the markets and the workers of the company thinks that companies only listen to what they
want to hear and they only talk to those that they want to talk to them. If you ask me, in
my opinion, I would agree to the market and the workers because even up to this day, most
companies are still close minded. In fact, only a few of these companies can be called smart
companies. Most companies still live in fear and in paranoia.
The company’s markets and their workers are trying hard to reach out and they are
willing to listen and to talk their companies. The problem is that companies have sunken
deep in paranoia and in fear that they are having a hard time to realize this. In my point of
view, companies still think that they should not let their markets in, and even their workers.
I think that though workers have become part of the company itself, the management still
refuses to fully accept them. Maybe they have only accepted their workers halfway through.
Again, this all leads to the fear and paranoia that revolves in companies.
Funny thing to say but I think that companies live around fear and paranoia. If you
reflect on what I just said very carefully, you would realize that I am right. In the conditions
of companies today, this is very much true that they live in a world of fear and paranoia.
129 | P a g e
“The inflated self-important jargon you sling around—in the press, at your
conferences—what's that got to do with us?”
In all honesty, I did not understand this statement very well at all. I really cannot
understand it as much as I have understood the other statements. I think that this is telling
companies that their markets are looking and asking for their point, for their reason. I think
that markets cannot see the point as to everything that the companies say in the press and
the conferences they are involved in. I think this means that they do not care about what
the companies say in the press and in conferences. In my opinion, I think that the reason
for this is that most of the things that companies say to the press and in their conferences
are lies.
Companies have continuously lied about who they really are, about being perfect and
better than other companies if not the best in the world that everyone has become very
aware of it and everybody have started getting tired of listening to all the lies that they,
correction, we, hear from these companies. I think that it just shows companies that people
are getting tired of them, of listening to what they say because of all the lies that they tell.
It is just like the story called “The boy who cried wolf” wherein the boy continuously lied and
people believed him but it reached the point that people got tired of listening to him and in
believing him. In my opinion, companies have reached this part of the book, the part
wherein almost everyone if not everyone has gotten tired of listening to their lies and
almost nobody listens to them anymore. I think that this statement also serves as a
warning to companies that if they continue talking this way, they would die down.
130 | P a g e
“Maybe you're impressing your investors. Maybe you're impressing Wall Street.
You're not impressing us.”
In relation to the earlier statement, these are the probable reasons that markets can
think of as to why companies lie. If you are me, they may be correct and I agree with them.
Companies tend to say only good things about them and tend to spice up their statements
to impress possible investors and the Wall Street Journal, after all, this would be a lot of
good for the company. The problem is, these companies only see the big picture and they
do not realize that instead of impressing their investors and the ever famous Wall Street,
they should impress their markets more than this two.
I think that companies are so busy impressing the Wall Street and their investors
that they are actually forgetting everything about their markets. I just can imagine what
would happen to the company if they have forgotten about their workers as well and their
workers would stop caring. If this happens the company would die and there would be no
more investors and no more Wall Street for them. Actually, this might happen to companies
and in my opinion, these companies are closing in on this situation and if they continue to
focus on impressing their investors and the Wall Street alone, they would arrive at this
point.
As days go by, people are becoming numb and uncaring towards companies, if this
goes on, sooner or later, people would no longer care about the companies and workers
would no longer care about management and the market. Maybe even to the point that
each person would make his own business or company to provide everything that the owner
wants and needs for himself. I can just imagine how scary that would be.
131 | P a g e
“If you don't impress us, your investors are going to take a bath. Don't they
understand this? If they did, they wouldn't let you talk that way.”
All I can say about this statement hmmm, okay. Seriously, when I first read the said
statement that is the first thing that came out of my head. Usually, when I read a
statement, the first thing that pops out of my head is the explanation I can think of about
the statement. I especially got confused with the bath thing. What is up with that and what
is it trying to say? I really cannot understand it. Anyway, I think that it may be a threat
coming from both the company’s markets and the workers although it is not a harmful
threat. In my point of view it is a threat that if companies do not learn to impress their
markets and their workers, they would lose them, they would lose both their workers and
their markets. I guess this is another of those statements wherein markets and workers
want the companies to start listening to them.
I think you cannot blame them about this either because the markets and the
workers have been trying to tell companies again and again that they want to be heard,
they want the companies to learn how to communicate and to listen to them. I think that
markets and workers want companies to be willing to listen to them and to want to
communicate and converse with them realistically just the same way that the markets and
the workers are willing to listen to them and want to communicate or converse with them in
a realistic and humanistic manner.
132 | P a g e
“Your tired notions of "the market" make our eyes glaze over. We don't recognize
ourselves in your projections—perhaps because we know we're already
elsewhere.”
I do not really understand the said statement. In fact, I cannot see the point of the
statement itself. Maybe the main reason for this is that I do not understand it that much but
I am just being honest, that I do not know everything and I am not the brightest person
there is. The way I see it, the sentence actually means that markets feel excluded when it
comes to the company’s plans. If I have guessed correctly, then I guess that is quite true. It
is very typical and expected for markets to feel this way since they want to be involved with
the company and they want to be part of it.
I think that the said statement is one of the statements that try to rip out someone
else’s conscience to get what they want. Not literally rip out, what I meant by that is that in
my opinion, the said statement is one of those statements that would make you feel bad
just so that you would be able to get whatever it is that you want. If that is the case, I
would say that the further that I go into the 95 Theses, the more that I find the statements
as statements full of nonsense or my favourite term, baloney and that these statements
become funnier and funnier. It is not that I am disrespecting the authors of the 95 Theses
but I can no longer see the point of the statements that they have written.
133 | P a g e
“We like this new marketplace much better. In fact, we are creating it.”
The statement above is very clear to me. The marketplace that they are referring to
is the social network that we have created thanks to the powers of the Internet. I am very
sure that the reason why they like this so called new marketplace better is because they
have more freedom in the Internet and they are very sure that they are conversing with
real people and people, even those whom they do not know are listening to them or will
listen to them.
The words converse and listen are, in my opinion, the key motivation for people to
like the new marketplace better than the traditional marketplace that companies set up. The
thing is that markets or customers want to talk to companies but companies are afraid to
talk to them out of fear and paranoia. The customers want to be heard by the companies,
they want their cries to be heard but the ears of companies are closed. Companies refuse to
listen to the customer or markets because they always want to be in control. In my point of
view, these companies think that if they let their markets become involved with them, if
they let their markets talk to them and if they listen to their markets, they would no longer
be in control.
I think that companies see openness as a weakness for companies so they try to
avoid it thinking is being wise but what they do not know is that it is actually stupidity that
they have chosen to do.
134 | P a g e
“You're invited, but it's our world. Take your shoes off at the door. If you want to
barter with us, get down off that camel!”
Thank goodness this is one of those statements in the 95 Theses that I understand.
In my understanding and comprehension, the statement says that markets or customers
are trying to get back on the companies. They are trying to teach them a lesson in my point
of view about humility and simplicity. This statement tells us how markets or customers
view companies, boisterous and floating in the air. I think that markets want companies to
get back at their feet, lessen the air on their heads and learn. If that is the case, I would
like the same thing to happen to companies, I really think that they should get back on their
feet because they are not birds or aircrafts or any flying object or even God at that matter.
In my opinion, the boastfulness of the companies can be compared to a head bigger than
the size of earth because it is full of air. This sounds funny but it is true, companies have
become very boisterous to the point of being unrealistic. Sure, a little boasting does good
but a lot of boasting can drive away people.
I think that if the statement is to be translated, it would be something like this: sure,
you are welcome to join us as long as you learn to be humble, show us some respect and
treat us as equals. I really think that companies have to be thought that they should stop
treating themselves like they are a higher form of human being or whatever thing and be
more friendly towards their markets because their markets are willing to be friends with
them.
135 | P a g e
“We are immune to advertising. Just forget it.”
Not that I am trying to brag but the said statement is quite easy to understand and
explain. It is a statement that tells companies that their markets are no longer the clueless
people they can lie to and that their said markets have gotten smarter and wiser than them.
Their markets are telling the companies that the lies that they put on their advertisements
are no longer working and that they should start looking for a different approach to entice
their markets. The companies are being told by their markets that they no longer believe in
the ugly, useless lies companies say in their advertisements that their markets once saw as
cute and enticing.
In my opinion, I am one of the people who no longer get enticed and interested in a
product or service just by seeing it in an advertisement. There is this product which is
widely known that I am quite sure you also know, it says on the advertisements that it has
no sugar at all but when I actually drank it, it was even sweeter than the ordinary one. How
would you actually prove that it has no sugar when it way sweeter than the ordinary one.
Another one of these commercials that I do not think would really entice anybody is that
commercial about the toothpaste, rabbits and mermaids. I mean, what do they think of us?
Sure, little children would be enticed by this but how about adults they would not because it
is so unrealistic. It is funny to say but thinking about it, if I was a little girl watching that ad,
I would never go swimming again nor would I go to a dentist. Having a rabbit as a dentist
would be very weird and if I see toothpastes swimming under the sea like fishes would
totally freak me out because it would be too creepy. My point is, sometimes the
advertisements that companies show to their markets are over exaggerated that there
would be only rare cases that somebody would actually believe them.
136 | P a g e
“If you want us to talk to you, tell us something. Make it something interesting for
a change.”
The said statement tells companies that their markets, again, are willing to listen to
them given the condition that they would tell their markets something that their markets
would actually be interested with and listen to. Companies’ markets tell companies that if
they want to talk to them, they have to speak up in their own real voice. I think that what
they meant by the companies saying something that is interesting to them is the companies
saying things that are not a bunch of nonsense and lies.
Markets, in my opinion, consider the companies telling the truth as something

interesting and something that they would listen to. In my perspective, this is indeed
something that would interest me as a market. It would be very interesting to hear
companies speaking of the truth and speaking with a lot of sense but in all honesty, I think
that companies that speak the truth and are full of sense are very rare to find. It is a good
thing though that today and as days go by, companies slowly change and learn.
Everyday in my opinion, more and more companies become better “people” or

entities as they are, although slow, learning from their employees and their markets which
is a good thing and a sign that companies are indeed improving and exerts effort to change
in a good way. In my point of view, if this goes on, companies would become much more
successful and would earn more profit and attract more markets to support them.
137 | P a g e
“We've got some ideas for you too: some new tools we need, some better service.
Stuff we'd be willing to pay for. Got a minute?”
This is a funny statement in my point of view because it is a very sarcastic

statement. I think that markets or customers are trying to irritate and make fun of the
companies. Even though it is a very funny and sarcastic statement that tries to get back at
companies, it is very true and makes a lot of sense. How so you may ask? Well it is simply
because there are still plenty of companies that would not listen to their markets. Markets,
clients, customers, money (as Mr. Krabbs from Spongebob Squarepants calls them) and
whatever you would call them are full of great ideas for the products and services provided
by companies.
If you are not yet aware of it, it is obvious that markets would have the best ideas of
what products and services companies should sell because they are the ones buying and
availing the company’s products and services. In my opinion and I think that a lot of people
would agree with me, the best way to getting to your customer’s money is by knowing
exactly what they want, what they need, knowing the things that customers would actually
be interested in and be attracted to buy. Markets are not really selfish with their ideas heck
they are even willing to share it to companies and if you ask me this would be a bargain on
both sides. The markets would get the exact products and services that they need and want
while companies would improve and earn more money. The problem with companies aside
from refusing to listen to their markets is that they are too busy trying so hard to get to the
top that they have no time to listen to what their markets have to say.
138 | P a g e
“You're too busy "doing business" to answer our email? Oh gosh, sorry, gee, we'll
come back later. Maybe.”
I am very glad that this is another statement that I can understand and explain very
easily. According to the statement, companies are always busy to answer the emails of
markets. I agree with this, the companies always refuse to answer the markets when they
are trying to contact the companies and always reason out that they do not have time to
answer their emails because they are very busy. If you ask me, it is pretty stupid of
companies to give out their contact details to their markets but they would refuse to answer
the messages of their markets in the end.
Aside from being stupid, it is very funny of them and it is another reason for us to
laugh at companies. What I mean is that it is a big question as to why would these
companies be willing to give out different ways for companies to contact them but in the
end they would refuse to answer their markets’ messages and reason out that they are very
busy doing business. If companies continue to do this, their markets would become less and
less interested in talking to them and of course they would be less and less suggestive to
the companies.
There might even be a point in which the companies markets would no longer avail
or buy the products and services of these companies because these companies have no idea
of what their markets really want and need and refuse to listen to their markets. If you ask
me, in my opinion, companies that never answer the messages of their markets and always
reason out that they do not have time to answer because they are busy are very poor, weak
and stupid, no offense to these companies though. These companies need to know that if
they do have no intentions of answering their markets’ messages then they should not give
out any contact details.
139 | P a g e
“When we have questions we turn to each other for answers. If you didn't have
such a tight rein on "your people" maybe they'd be among the people we'd turn
to.”
The said statement tries to tell companies that because they are very close minded
and uptight, their markets have gotten tired of talking to them instead they just refer to
their fellow markets when they have question about a certain product or service. Aside from
this, markets now prefer to ask their fellow markets instead of someone from the company
because markets are very sure that markets just like them are honest and would not lie to
them. Another thing in my point of view that causes markets to prefer to ask their fellow
markets instead of someone from the company is because they know so much better than
the company does.
In my point of view, this is very much true because the company may have made
the product and provides the service but the market has the experience, they are the ones
gaining an experience from the products and services they avail or provide. In my opinion,
the best people that can be asked about a certain product or service are the markets or the
customers who have used the products already and have already availed of the service you
want to ask about. Another thing, in my point of view, if companies learn to become less
uptight and more open minded about things maybe even have a change in their
perspectives maybe their markets would be willing to open up to them and listen to them
again. This is related to the previous statement which states that companies tend to be very
preoccupied with trying to be the best and being one step ahead. They should learn to give
even a small piece of their time to listen to what their customers have to say or better yet,
assign someone who would be listening and talking to their customers.
140 | P a g e
“When we're not busy being your "target market," many of us are your people.
We'd rather be talking to friends online than watching the clock. That would get
your name around better than your entire million dollar web site. But you tell us
speaking to the market is Marketing's job.”
This statement simply tells us that some of the markets of the company are also
working for them (in other words their employees or workers). Despite this, I actually think
that companies are unaware of this fact. Well, maybe they are but not fully aware of it
because I don’t think that companies recognize their markets if they see them. Honestly
speaking, it is not a surprise that the company’s markets and their workers or employees
can be the same people and in my point of view, these people who are both your worker
and your market (on different times of course), are the first ones to try out the newly
released products and services of the company after all, how would people know about that
product or service is they do not see it being used by other people right?
In my perspective, no matter how good your advertisement is if people do not see

that someone is actually buying and using the products and services in real life, the
advertisement is useless. This is because, in my opinion, if I come across an advertisement
for a newly released product, say toothpaste and it says that if I use that product my
breathe would stay fresh for up to 24 hours and it whitens the teeth within a week, I would
not see it as credible because it is advertised by someone paid. But if I actually see
someone buying the product that is the only time that I may try it. While at work, the
employees would rather converse with other people than just do all the boring stuff and
wait for their shift to end. By the way that they converse with their friends they are already
doing marketing, conversing (word of mouth) is the best way to let people know about your
products and services by the way. However, the company does not allow their workers to do
so, they say that only people from the marketing department can advertise the products but
what they do not see is that it does not necessarily have to be someone from marketing
that would advertise their products and services.
141 | P a g e
“We'd like it if you got what's going on here. That'd be real nice. But it would be a
big mistake to think we're holding our breath.”
It took me quite a while before I was able to understand what this statement really
meant. In my understanding, the said statement tells us that markets are hoping that
companies knew what they really wanted and needed. Markets find this as a good thing if
the companies know what they want and need and it would make them really happy. On my
part as a customer as well, I would be very happy if the companies knew what I really want
and needed.
This, in my opinion, increases the trust of markets toward the companies and
strengthens the relationship of the two with each other. This is the ideal company that all
markets are dreaming of but the sad part of it is that companies or rather most companies
are unaware of what their markets really want and need. The reason for this in my point of
view is that these companies do not listen to their markets and nor do they converse with
them. This is very saddening in my point of view because as a customer or a market, I hope
for companies to talk to me and to hear me out about my concerns and I hope for them as
well to know what I really want and need that they could give me. It is very annoying
though that the companies, instead of just trying to communicate with their markets keeps
on guessing what their customers or markets want and need.
I honestly think that companies view this as innovation because innovation by

definition is coming up with products and services that are unique but the problem is that
they have not considered the current situation, they did not consider if it would be
something that customers want and need.
142 | P a g e
“We have better things to do than worry about whether you'll change in time to
get our business. Business is only a part of our lives. It seems to be all of yours.
Think about it: who needs whom?”
In all honesty, I had to read the statement above thrice just to understand what it
meant. The statement shows that markets are trying to make a point. They are telling the
companies that companies should start considering and trying to find out what their
customers or markets really want because in actuality, it is not the markets that need the
company, it is the company who needs the markets which is true. There are perhaps more
than a million companies competing with each other to earn money so even if the current
company where the markets usually buy abandons them, these people can still find
replacements easily because if they just look closely, there is already a different company
nearby.
On the other hand, if the markets abandon the companies, the companies would no
longer have source of income and shut down. This means that the companies would die
without their markets and I agree with it very much. Companies, in my point of view,
should start being more sensitive about the concerns of their markets. I think that if they
try to give even only half an hour of their valuable time to their markets who want to talk to
them, it already makes a great difference. If they, the companies are able to spend even a
small amount of their time with their markets, they are already opening up doors to new
opportunities, to more knowledge and to tons of information which the top management can
use in order to improve and get better with what they do.
143 | P a g e
“We have real power and we know it. If you don't quite see the light, some other
outfit will come along that's more attentive, more interesting, more fun to play
with.”
The real power that the said statement is talking about is the fact alone that markets
is the company’s life. Without their markets, companies go bye bye because they do not
have any source of income anymore. Losing their markets is a big loss to the company and
it is a threat to them but this does not affect the customers as much as the companies.
While companies face the danger of shutting down because of losing a customer, the
customer’s only trouble is trying to decide which of the two companies beside the one
grieving over the loss will they choose to buy from. To explain this more clearly example
there is a person who is a customer of company 1. After a while the customer felt that
company 1 does not satisfy his wants and his needs so he decides to forget about company
1. Due to this, company 1 would suffer because their source of income has lessened and
what makes it a worse scenario is the customer is thinking which of company 2 and 3 he
would choose and both companies happen to be located right next to company 1. That, in
my point of view is what we call adding insult to injury. Honestly speaking, I kind of pity
these companies that are very stupid not to realize that they have to think about their
markets’ concerns and being considerate towards their markets’ concerns because they are
really very stupid.
I am quite sure that they know that a lot of companies have already shut down
because of losing their markets but I just cannot get it as to why can’t they just learn from
these companies that died.
144 | P a g e
“Even at its worst, our newfound conversation is more interesting than most trade
shows, more entertaining than any TV sitcom, and certainly more true-to-life than
the corporate web sites we've been seeing.”
To simply put what the statement is trying to tell us, conversation is a very powerful
tool. No matter how many times a marketing manager sales talk us, no matter how many
times we see interesting advertisements they are worth nothing compared to conversation.
The thing is conversation is very powerful and is the most convincing way to get to
someone. These advertisements, these shows they do not convince all their markets very
much as they used to back in the old days or maybe they no longer convince them at all. In
any case, what convinces markets easily to buy or not to buy a certain product or service is
through the so called networked conversation.
The company’s markets would usually refer to the Internet to see how this product
and service really works and what the real quality of this product and service is via what we
call a product review. Thanks to these product reviews that come from other markets who
have experienced using the product and service, we have become smarter and we have
lessened the possibility of making mistakes in choosing the right product and service. In all
honesty but with due respect to the companies, I really think that they have not yet read a
product review before.
I think that they have not yet read product reviews before because of fear bringing
us back to paranoia. Maybe companies are afraid to read a product review because of what
they may read and find out from the review. A product review is composed of honest
thoughts from a customer who wants to help his fellow market.
145 | P a g e
“Our allegiance is to ourselves—our friends, our new allies and acquaintances,
even our sparring partners. Companies that have no part in this world, also have
no future.”
This is in relation to the previous statement that said markets have real power. The
company’s markets would usually refer to the Internet to see how this product and service
really works and what the real quality of this product and service is via what we call a
product review. Thanks to these product reviews that come from other markets who have
experienced using the product and service, we have become smarter and we have lessened
the possibility of making mistakes in choosing the right product and service. In all honesty
but with due respect to the companies, I really think that they have not yet read a product
review before.
Companies, in my point of view, should start being more sensitive about the
concerns of their markets because that as markets see it, if these companies want to stay
for a long time, they have to be more involved with their markets. I think that if they try to
give even only half an hour of their valuable time to their markets who want to talk to them,
it already makes a great difference. If they, the companies are able to spend even a small
amount of their time with their markets, they are already opening up doors to new
opportunities, to more knowledge and to tons of information which the top management can
use in order to improve and get better with what they do.
146 | P a g e
“Companies are spending billions of dollars on Y2K. Why can't they hear this
market timebomb ticking? The stakes are even higher.”
This is again related to one of the previous statements of the 95 Theses. Companies
need to become more sensitive about the concerns of their markets because that as
markets see it, if these companies want to stay for a long time, they have to be more
involved with their markets. I think that if they try to give even only half an hour of their
valuable time to their markets who want to talk to them, it already makes a great
difference. If they, the companies are able to spend even a small amount of their time with
their markets, they are already opening up doors to new opportunities, to more knowledge
and to tons of information which the top management can use in order to improve and get
better with what they do.
It simply means that companies need to start being more involved with their
markets. They should find different ways to communicate with them. In other words which I
think would best say what I mean companies should learn how to talk with their markets in
any way. They should start building a very good and strong relationship with their
customers in order to know them more. Also, upon cementing a relationship with
customers, companies will be able to keep them.
I think that companies should start acting as smart as they look. They need to be
always ready to welcome changes which are always happening and they should always be
willing to get out of their ways, if they can just stay put and if they are always ready to
converse with their markets and hear from their markets
147 | P a g e
“We're both inside companies and outside them. The boundaries that separate our
conversations look like the Berlin Wall today, but they're really just an annoyance.
We know they're coming down. We're going to work from both sides to take them
down.”
In my perspective, no matter how good your advertisement is if people do not see

that someone is actually buying and using the products and services in real life, the
advertisement is useless. This is because, in my opinion, if I come across an advertisement
for a newly released product, say toothpaste and it says that if I use that product my
breathe would stay fresh for up to 24 hours and it whitens the teeth within a week, I would
not see it as credible because it is advertised by someone paid. But if I actually see
someone buying the product that is the only time that I may try it. While at work, the
employees would rather converse with other people than just do all the boring stuff and
wait for their shift to end. By the way that they converse with their friends they are already
doing marketing, conversing (word of mouth) is the best way to let people know about your
products and services by the way. However, the company does not allow their workers to do
so, they say that only people from the marketing department can advertise the products but
what they do not see is that it does not necessarily have to be someone from marketing
that would advertise their products and services.
Companies set up these walls because they are afraid of their markets and their
employees. Companies are afraid of their markets because they are their weak points. Just
think of it this way, we could say that a company is a type of dish. The outcome or taste
and edibility of the dish depend on the person cooking it. There are times that it would be
delicious, edible and people would it eat. But when these people do not like the dish, they
do not eat it they would ignore it and throw it away. The fish rots and decays. This is a good
example of a company because I company depends on their markets. If their markets like
them and trust them, they would both be happy. Meanwhile if their markets are against or
do not like your products, you could lose them, be forgotten and close down. This happens
when companies are close to the public. The public would know more about them and
through this, people will discover the true them.
148 | P a g e
“To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may
sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools,
more new ideas, no rules to slow us down.”
Based on this statement, this means that the human voice can be recognized easily.
Networked markets can tell who is talking just by listening to them talk, as the authors of
Cluetrain Manifesto says. I think that this is true because of the simple reason that it is
indeed easy to recognize someone just by listening to the sound of their voice. I also think
that it is true because when people talk, they sound different from each other. When people
talk, they may sound like a little girl, an old lady, a masculine guy or a gay guy. The point
is, people sound different from one another and aside from that, people speak in different
manners. What I mean when I say that people speak in different manners is something like
this, an old lady would sound very polite and weak, a little girl would speak in a polite and
innocent manner and a guy would speak in a street-like manner. Sadly, traditional
corporations do not understand them because they have no idea what their markets are
talking about.
The statement above, based on how I understood it, means that traditional
companies find it hard to understand people talking because these people talk in a much
more powerful new way nowadays This has been made possible because of the Internet and
we are given the ability and privilege of conversing with each other even if we came from
different and faraway places and culture. Through the power conversation that Internet
engages us in, we are able to learn more. We gain more information because once we go to
the Internet we are already starting a conversation with other people anywhere around the
world. A good example of this powerful way of conversing through the Internet is a chat
room. In a chat room we can easily find a lot of people to talk to or converse with. In a chat
room, we are able to find people who have the same interests as us and we become
acquainted with them.
149 | P a g e
“We are waking up and linking to each other. We are watching. But we are not
waiting.”
The Internet is a new powerful way of conversing with others because the Internet
has no constraints and no boundaries. People can say whatever they want to say and
because people are way more honest when speaking in the Internet because I think that
even if they say something on the Internet, they can disguise their selves to protect their
identity if they do not want other people to find out who they are. The Internet is also a
powerful way of conversing with other people because through the Internet, we can
converse with others from different places, no matter how far, easily and fast. We do not
have to wait hours, days, week, months and years just to get a reply from them all we need
to do is wait for a few seconds or minutes to get a reply from them.
We are able to gain new and powerful ideas by talking and conversing with other
people as well simply because we talk with each other. We ask questions on the Internet,
someone answers it then someone asks us a question and we answer it. It is actually a
cycle. Since we are conversing in the Internet, it is only natural that we form a social
organization. We gain and meet friends, enemies, colleagues, loved ones and even lovers.
There is just no way of predicting what could happen in the Internet, the only thing we are
sure about is that through conversations or talking to other people, we gain information,
knowledge and meet new people. We cannot avoid the formation of social organizations in
the Internet because we converse with each other, more importantly, we talk using our
human voice, our real voice
150 | P a g e
VERTSOL Project
Paper
151 | P a g e
152 | P a g e
“Steps in deploying the Spree Cart to
Heroku.”
1. Clone the git repo
git clone git://github.com/schof/spree.git

git://github.com/schof/spree.git spree
2. Create the necessary config/database.yml file. Go to

Spree/config/database.yml.example, erase the “.example”, right click, open
with notepad(or any text editor) erase everything, key in:
development:
adapter: postgresql
host: localhost
localhost
port: 5432
database: (database_name)
username: (Your Username)
password: (Your Password)
3. Install the gem dependencies(if the version had changed, look for the gem
depencies version)
gem install activemerchant

gem install has_many_polymorphs
gem install highline
gem install mini_magick
gem install tlsmail
4. Copy them one by one. From (C:\

(C:\Ruby\
Ruby\lib\
lib\ruby\
ruby\gems\
gems\1.8\
1.8\gems) to vendor/gems
NOTE: You have to change the RAILS_GEM_VERSION = "2.1.2" unless defined?

RAILS_GEM_VERSION to the version that heroku
heroku required.
gem install postgres-

postgres-pr
5. Key in rake db:bootstrap press enter 3 times
153 | P a g e
6. script/plugin install git://github.com/adamwiggins/yaml_db.git
rake db:data:dump
gem install heroku
ssh-
ssh-keygen -t rsa
git init
git add .
git commit -m "init"
heroku create existingapp-
existingapp-deploy
git remote add heroku git@heroku.com:existingapp-
git@heroku.com:existingapp-deploy.git
git push -f heroku
7. Click gear, click rake

8. Key in rake db:data:load
9. That’s it.
154 | P a g e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank the following people:
My VERTSOL
VERTSOL Professor Nr. Paul Pajo who has given us this requirement
and guided us in doing this
My Parents and relatives who have supported me while I was making

this requirement
My friends who have helped me accomplish my VERTSOL requirements and

for helping me understand some of the things I didn’t understand
My classmates who have spent sleepless nights doing all our

requirements not only in VERTSOL
The authors of the books I have used for my reviews and the 95
Theses
Most especially, to God who has guided

guided me while I was doing this
project and helped me.
155 | P a g e
REFERENCES
Internet:
http://vertsol.pbwiki.com/
http://vertsol.pbwiki.com/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0738204315/thesearlsgroup
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0738204315/thesearlsgroup
http://www.amazon.com/Selling
http://www.amazon.com/Selling-
azon.com/Selling-Net-
Net-Herschell-
Herschell-Gordon-
Gordon-
Lewis/dp/0844232343/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223263517&sr=8
Lewis/dp/0844232343/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223263517&sr=8-
http://www.amazon.com/Web
http://www.amazon.com/Web-
//www.amazon.com/Web-2-0-Heroes-
Heroes-
InterviewsInfluencers/dp/0470241993
/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224512977&sr=8
/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224512977&sr=8-
f=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224512977&sr=8-1
Library:
HF 5415.1265 L485 1997
156 | P a g e

VERTSOL READEr

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

VERTSOL READEr

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Vertical

3. The Cluetrain Manifesto:

4. Selling on the Net:

5. The Long Tail: Why the Future of

7. The Cluetrain Manifesto:

8. Vertsol Project Paper

To my VERTSOL Professor, Mr. Paul Pajo

To my parents and relatives.

To all of my friends inside and outside school.

Most especially, I dedicate this to God.

Having complained at first that all of these requirements are

Finishing this requirement did not really require us sleepless

In the end, it is very much a relief knowing that I have

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

What I’ve learned:

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

In the second chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto, my learning expection is that I would

As a whole, I found David Weinberger’s writings in chapter two very interesting. It

What I’ve learned:

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

In the third chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto, I expect to learn more about

What I’ve learned:

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

In this chapter, I have further understood the statement “Markets are

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

The fifth chapter of Cluetrain Manifesto is entitled The Hyperlinked Organizations,

The hierarchies that this statement is referring to are business hierarchies or

According to Weinberger, “To have a conversation, you have to be comfortable being

“No, families and businesses are open-ended commitments.” In here, Weinberger

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

According to Locke and Weinberger, “The simple, if painful, prognosis: organizations

What I’ve learned:

Book: The Cluetrain Manifesto: The End of Business as Usual

Library Reference: None

What I’ve learned:

Book: Selling on the Net: The Complete Guide

Library Reference: HF 5415.1265 L485 1997

Book: Selling on the Net: The Complete Guide

Library Reference: HF 5415.1265 L485 1997

The second strategy is, “Useful Information Increased Consumption More

“Convenient Buying + Discounts + Direct Sales + Reduced Overhead” is the

Fourth, “New Entertainment/Information Dimension Increased Product

“Brand Enhancement Customer Loyalty + Improved Margins” is the fifth

What I’ve learned:

Library Reference None

What I’ve learned:

Book: Web 2.0 Heroes: Interviews with 20 Web 2.0 Influencers

Library Reference: None

“Disruptive Innovation’s role is to inspire innovation through experimentation.” I

Book: Web 2.0 Heroes: Interviews with 20 Web 2.0 Influencers

Library Reference: None

What I’ve learned:

Book: Web 2.0 Heroes: Interviews with 20 Web 2.0 Influencers

Library Reference: None

“People need to be constantly talking to their customer base, constantly innovating

What I’ve learned:

Book: Web 2.0 Heroes: Interviews with 20 Web 2.0 Influencers