The Hobson and Holtz Report – Podcast #38: June 2, 2005

Content summary: Listeners’ comments (on how to track podcast listeners); fighting email spam – an open source PR project; US government PR gaffe; blogging as a corporate job; more podcasting developments; Boeing’s test pilots’ blog; stealing RSS content.

Show notes for June 2, 2005

download mp3 podcast

Welcome to For Immediate Release: The Hobson & Holtz Report, a 66-minute conversation recorded live from Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Washington, DC, USA.

Download the file here (MP3, 26.5MB), or sign up for the RSS feed to get it and future shows automatically. (For automatic synchronization with your iPod or other digital player, you’ll also need software such as the FeedDemon RSS aggregator, or the free ipodder or DopplerRadio).

In this edition:


  • 00:29 Neville introduces the show; what’s in this edition; how to give your feedback; show notes

Discussion on listeners’ comments:

  • 02:02 Robin Capper on tracking podcast listeners – how do we do it? Some comments on download stats; it’s becoming more important for podcasters to know how people get a show and who listens to it


  • 05:22 Domain blacklisting and email spam – the conversation evolves into how PR can create a broad awareness within the business community of what volunteer groups do in the war on spam; a candidate for an open source PR project
  • 17:24 A PR failure by the US government – rehabilitating the US image abroad already hits hurdles
  • 26:15 WSJ: Blogging becomes a corporate job – the ability to express oneself and writing skills are key, not so much blogging skills

Short Takes:

  • 38:44 More podcasting developments – 5 reasons why podcasting matters to business; giving iPods to the sales force; how the pros will use podcasting to make content time-shaft available
  • 46:32 Boeing 777 blog – the test pilots start a conversation; the personal touch and motivating an employee; policies and guidelines
  • 53:50 ‘Theft’ of content from RSS feeds – how do you protect your rights in your RSS feed?


  • 60:19 Shel outros the show; how to give your feedback; show notes
  • 61:11 Neville intros the music and the band; outro music

Links for the blogs, individuals, companies and organizations we discussed or mentioned in the show:

Listeners’ comments discussion – Robin Capper, LibSyn, SWAG, Behind The Scenes.

Features – Shel’s post on email blacklisting, RBL, IAOC, Steve Rubel, Constantin Basturea, The New PR Wiki, Chris Santerre, Jeff Chan, Dave Sifry, Technorati, Intelliseek, Edelman, TrustMEdia report (PDF), President Bush, Karen Hughes, 9/11, ‘public diplomacy’ definition, Amnesty International, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, Nutrasweet, Newsweek, EU constitution, Wall Street Journal story on corporate blogging, Heather Hamilton, Microsoft, eMarketer,, AP, Dale & Thomas Popcorn, Ziff Davis Media,, Flycell, Kevin Dugan, Fast Company Now, Elisa Camahort, Stonyfield Farm, The Tinbasher Blog, GM FastLane Blog.

Short Takes –, Lee Hopkins, Dan York, Blogspotting, Paradyne, Rocketboom, Nokia, TV Guide, Michael Gartenberg, Brian Oberkirch, Apple, iTunes, Boeing, Flight Test Journal, Randy’s Journal, Financial Times, Road Weary, Suzanna Darcy-Hennermann, Adam Phillabaum, Sun, Allan Jenkins, ionRSS, PR Web, Don Crowther, Creative Commons, Expression Engine, TypePad, FeedBurner, NewsGator, Web Pro News.

Outro – PodcastNYC,, PodcastNYC terms of use, Dfactor, Dfactor blog, Ashley’s Lament, For Immediate Release, A Shel of My Former Self, NevOn.

If you have comments or questions about this show, or suggestions for our future shows, email us at, or call the Comment Line at +1 206 984 0931. You can email your comments, questions and suggestions as MP3 file attachments, if you wish (max. 5Mb attachment, please!). We’ll be happy to see how we can include your audio contribution in a show.

So, until Monday June 6…

(Cross-posted from For Immediate Release, Shel’s and my podcast blog.)

5 thoughts on “The Hobson and Holtz Report – Podcast #38: June 2, 2005

  1. Next time leave your political view points out of your story. The PR viewpoint was valid, but your other comments were not. Stick to technology or develop an even smaller niche by isolating people with opposite political views.
    “Two weeks ago, the White House was thrown on the defensive by a *now-retracted* Newsweek report alleging that U.S. interrogators at the detention center for alleged terrorists in Cuba had flushed a Quran down a toilet.”
    Not a great story overall, but taking a shot at the administration for a retracted story is unfair. Beyond that even if it happened the administration did not condone the action. In fact the military themselves is disclosing those details as they’re punishing those responsible. You take a cheap shot at them there, and ignore that they used proper PR to convey that it was not an approved method.
    Feel free to have differing political views, but keep the comments off the show or lose this listener. It’s even more annoying when you say it’s not about your political views, and then you make comments like that..

  2. Thanks for those views, Anonymous. I hear what you say. But did you really listen to what Shel and I talked about in the show about that story? I don’t hear any political views or commentary.
    Your comments would have some real credibilty if you weren’t hiding behind an anonynmous moniker. So, who are you?

  3. I did hear, and I don’t think it was intended as a political piece. It did definitely show political leanings, and that’s not what I come here to hear.
    Feel free to delete my comments if you would like. I simply wanted an anonymous way to give you my two cents. My ID doesn’t matter as you don’t know who I am. Consider it two cents of feedback, technology before politics if you want to keep your listeners.

  4. Anonymous, I think you’d be surprised by my political leanings, particularly if you believe you gleaned them from the report. I’m happy to criticize any institution — business, non-profit, academic, and government — if I think they’ve engaged in bad PR practices, even if I’m ideologically aligned (or partially aligned) with their positions and views. Such was the case with the report you reference. I was critical of their PR but remained neutral (for the purpose of the podcast) on my political views. As I say, I think you’re making assumptions about my political views — irrelevant to the podcast — based on my criticism of the PR. And our podcast is primarily about PR, with a technological bent, but we’ve talked about IABC and PRSA’s role as representatives of the profession and the role of video new releases without incurring such feedback (focus on technology and not the role of professional associations or you’ll lose listeners). FWIW…

Comments are closed.