Ad Campaign Leaves Pie on Microsoft’s Face By DAVID POGUE

People accuse Microsoft of devious tactics all the time. Flanked by the best lawyers that money can buy, Microsoft generally denies the accusations, and that’s that.

This week, though, Microsoft gave itself a big, goopy pie in the face. On October 9, the company posted a testimonial on its Web site called “Confessions of a Mac to PC Convert.” It was a first-person account by a “freelance writer” about how she had fallen in love with Windows XP, which she compared to a Lexus. “I was up and running in less than one day, Girl Scout's honor,” burbled the attractive, 20-something brunette in the photo.

There was only one problem: She doesn’t exist.

A with-it member of Slashdot.org, the popular hangout for articulate nerds, happened to notice that the woman’s picture actually came from GettyImages.com, a stock-photo agency. Ted Bridis, and Associated Press reporter, took it from there. Amazingly, he tracked authorship of the article to Valerie Mallinson, a public-relations woman hired by Microsoft to write the story.

I was dying to find out how this public-relations fiasco came to pass, but Microsoft spokesman Tom Pilla would speak only in Officialese. “The article was mistakenly posted to the Microsoft Web Site,” is all he would tell me. “Once we realized that it wasn’t part of the Windows XP marketing activities, we pulled it. It’s an unfortunate situation, and we take responsibility.”

No wonder Microsoft became a laughingstock online. “Once we realized…?” Hello? Exactly how disconnected are the right and left hands of Microsoft’s marketing organization?

And then there’s the feebleness of the ad itself. Not only is it a childish attempt to mimic Apple’s “Switch” campaign, but Microsoft’s bogus customer is hopelessly misinformed. “AppleWorks pales in comparison to Microsoft Office XP. There’s no equivalent for the versatility of Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint,” she writes, evidently never having heard of Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint for Macintosh.

Then she makes it worse: “Internet Explorer 6 does more for me than Netscape Navigator ever did...I can name and organize my Favorites any way I want.” First of all, Internet Explorer is on the Mac, too. Second, had Ms. Fictitious ever, in fact, used Netscape Navigator, she might have realized that it, too, permits naming and organizing bookmarks.

To be sure, the online community is wasting no time in rubbing these gaffes in Microsoft’s face. But nobody’s mentioning the most disturbing part of all this: That it’s part of a longer string of fraudulent Microsoft marketing efforts.

In 1998, The Los Angeles Times reported that during its antitrust trials, Microsoft hired PR firms to flood newspapers with fake letters of support, bearing ordinary individuals' names but actually written by Microsoft PR staff. Payments were funneled through Microsoft's main PR agency so that the checks couldn't be traced.

Later, during the antitrust trial, Microsoft attempted to prove the inseparability of Windows and Internet Explorer by showing the judge a video. There was only one problem: The government's lawyer noticed that as the tape rolled on, the number of icons on the desktop kept changing. Microsoft sheepishly admitted to having spliced together footage from different computers to make its point.

And now this: a phony testimonial illustrated by a photo bought from a stock-art agency.

What does all of this say about a company’s corporate psyche that it feels the need to fabricate evidence of the public’s love?

Maybe Microsoft is jealous of the genuine affection Mac fans seem to exhibit for their machines. Maybe, improbably, the company actually feels rejected by the quirky (and, as far as anyone can tell, real) people in Apple’s “Switch” ads.

But more likely, Microsoft’s latest blunder demonstrates is neither jealousy nor wounded pride; it’s pure arrogance. The company thinks it can get away with anything. This time, at least, it’s wrong.

(Google cached a copy of the original Microsoft advertisement. It can be viewed at this web address: makeashorterlink.com)

Visit David Pogue on the Web at: davidpogue.com

hier noch einer:

seattletimes.nwsource.com

ich verstehe nicht den gedankengang, der vor der entscheidung stand, diese kampagne zu machen! welchen logischen grund gibt es zu glauben, den konkurenten mit der eigenen kampagne schlagen zu können, wenn man sie nur extrem viel schlechter macht?!

das soll mir mal einer erklären.