Cisco Spin Part II
I know. I’ve been on a censorship blitz lately. If you’re sick of it I suggest skipping this post.
I wrote about Cisco’s corporate blog and lack of transparency a while ago, and every now and then, just out of curiosity, check back to see whether or not they are publishing comments made on one of their posts after January 12, 2007 or not. (I’d be interested to hear from others in the comments as to whether or not you see comments falling after Jan 12 on the post or not.)
Well, it being June and all, I decided to write a little comment on their blog after seeing that post Jan 12 comments still were not appearing and asking them in my comment why they even bothered with a comment function if they weren’t going to publish people’s comments anymore. And lo and behold, after posting the comment I was suddenly able to see post Jan 12 comments. Wow. Maybe it was just a technical glitch with Movable Type, or perhaps something to do with the GFW or even my ISP. Just to double check that it wasn’t a technical glitch with my computer I tried opening it up on a different computer to see whether or not post Jan 12 comments appeared. Nope, still censored, though whether on purpose or due to technical difficulties is unclear. I suspect the latter. I wonder whether or not they will use this opportunity to attack my intelligence, or at the very least technical competence, given that they have now directly responded twice to comments I have made on the post in question, and in one comment accused me of being a bad listener. Actually, I think they’re on to something with that. My first grade teacher said the same thing.
Anyway, here are my two comments that are currently “censored”, at least for one of my computers:
Apple settles iPhone spat with Cisco
http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/02/21/apple.gets.iphone.mark/“This is a suit about trademark infringement.”
It is now apparent that this suit was about using the iPhone trademark to persuade Apple to make products that interoperate with Cisco products.
“Cisco owns the iPhone trademark.”
It is now apparent that the above statement isn’t as black and white as it seems.
“Do you think Apple would allow someone to blatantly infringe on their rights?”
It is now apparent that Cisco did not have the rights they thought they had.
It’s a shame people won’t come back here in droves like they did in support of Cisco when the lawsuit was first announced and reread this piece of spin. People like you can and will tell half-truths to the public for the rest of your careers for personal gain, but one thing you won’t gain is the respect of those who can read through the lines.
Note: Cisco has never dealt in half-truths to the public or anyone and never will. We stand by our statements and are glad that we were able to reach a mutually beneficial agreement with Apple.
“Cisco has never dealt in half-truths to the public or anyone and never will. We stand by our statements and are glad that we were able to reach a mutually beneficial agreement with Apple.”
Cisco doesn’t spin?
Fortunately, there is a public record of half-truths to back up the claim that Cisco does indeed engage in manipulating public opinion through half-truths. Go ahead and allow this comment and let the public decide.
From the RConversation blog:
Chinese censorship: Cisco responds
Cisco’s Mark Chandler starts by clarifying what Cisco does and doesn’t do:
The Committee is exploring the question of Chinese government censorship of the Internet. In this regard:
- Cisco does not customize, or develop specialized or unique filtering capabilities, in order to enable different regimes to block access to information
- Cisco sells the same equipment in China as it sells worldwide
- Cisco is not a service or content provider, or network manager
- Cisco has no access to information about individual users of the Internet
A PDF of the whole statement is here. They don’t confirm or deny whether they do or don’t provide instruction, training and/or service which helps customers use the routers for censorship purposes, or whether they market their technology to Chinese corporate and government customers with this function as a selling point.
He also does not address the fact that Cisco sells surveillance equipment to the Chinese Public Security Bureau, an institution with a well-documented track-record of human rights abuses. Although previously one Cisco spokesman told me that’s not a problem because it’s not illegal.
———-Do people really believe that there is any large company that doesn’t tell half-truths? Cisco really insults the intelligence of the readership of this blog by claiming Cisco never does this.
Note: It is tough to argue a point with someone who is too busy talking to listen. People are entitled to their opinion, but those with informed opinions generally are more effective in espousing their positions. Citing the blog that you do to support your claims is fair game, but citing it as true and accurate is just one opinion.
I love their second little note. I defend my claim that Cisco spins by citing public records of their statements and telling them to let the public decide for themselves based on that record and Cisco counters by accusing me of not listening (Not listening to what? I’m just supposed to take them on their word that they don’t engage in half-truths? Why didn’t they take the trouble of rebutting my points?) and by stating that I claim that the blog I cited was true and accurate. Uh huh, where did I say that, exactly? I am certainly of the opinion that it is true and accurate, but I did not claim this as fact. Out of curiosity, if it is not true and accurate, which part? In other words, they respond to my claim that they spin with … spin. The mind boggles.
And what’s this about PR guys talking about informed opinions? Man oh man oh man. PR guys are in the business of forming peoples’ opinions, not informing them. These guys just reek of hypocrisy.
Anyway, if a PR hack at Cisco is reading this, as I told the WordPress.com guys recently, whom I actually happen to greatly admire (though I do not admire Cisco), don’t take this rant personally. I write about censorship (and more broadly speaking, spin, as censorship is really just one kind of spin) all the time on this blog — censorship in China. As Cisco is most likely providing technical expertise to aid China in their internet censorship, I bet you guys know all about it.
Tags Cisco, PR, Corporate Censorship, Spin
