Re: 9.5 Release press coverage

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > The rest of us (CMD, 2Q, OmniTI, etc...) are all just service providers.
> EDB
> > is the only "distribution" of PostgreSQL.
>
> From a technical point of view, it certainly isn't. There are
> certainly other companies distributing PostgreSQL, in source code, in
> RPM form, and maybe even in fat client installers, though I don't know
> of anyone else doing that last one at the moment.
>
> But from a PR point of view, I'm not sure how many other PostgreSQL
> companies have dedicated PR departments as EnterpriseDB does. I
> suspect, although I do not know, that a journalist who gets a press
> contact from PostgreSQL is much more likely to get that contact from
> an EnterpriseDB staff member than an employee of any other PostgreSQL
> company, because we pay multiple people to do that kind of thing. I
> can say categorically that it is the intention of EnterpriseDB
> management and of the people who work in our marketing department to
> promote both PostgreSQL and EnterpriseDB, not just EnterpriseDB. I
> can also say that the people who work in our marketing department, and
> particularly Renee Deger with whom I have worked a good deal, are
> people of integrity who sincerely intend to do the right thing not
> only for EnterpriseDB but also for PostgreSQL. That does not mean
> they always get it right, but they sincerely try, and implying
> otherwise is unfair.
>

While such an implication is certainly not fair, when a statement like "*Latest
version from EnterpriseDB includes a focus on big data and the enterprise
with row-level security and BRIN indexing*" is the opening line of an
article, good people who have done good work on the release but don't work
at EDB have all the right to be upset. The least EDB can do is get the
article redacted and issue an apology to the community assuring them that
this will not happen again. Explanations about how EDB pays PR and they are
just human isn't helping ...

>
> However, EnterpriseDB's PR staff is paid by EnterpriseDB. And that
> means that, while they talk about EnterpriseDB and PostgreSQL, they
> typically don't spend a lot of time talking about other PostgreSQL
> companies. Frankly, I think that's pretty fair. I suspect that when
> 2ndQuadrant or Dalibo or PGExperts or CommandPrompt or OmniTI puts out
> a PostgreSQL-related press release or does an interview for a trade
> rag about PostgreSQL, they don't typically say "now let me tell you
> about EnterpriseDB, who also contributes to the PostgreSQL community".
> And that's pretty fair too. There's nothing to prevent any company
> that wants from hiring just as many PR people as EnterpriseDB has, or
> even more, and giving just as many interviews to the press as we do.
> And I bet that, if they do, some of those interviews will come off
> sounding like that company is the only PostgreSQL company, too.
>
> In fact, here are a few other links where only a single PostgreSQL
> company is mentioned, found with a quick search of Google News:
>
>
> http://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/2347067/met-office-selects-2ndquadrant-to-help-with-data-migration-to-open-source
>
> http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ibm-unveils-linux-only-mainframe-builds-on-linux-success-300129060.html
>
> http://www.infodsi.com/articles/153522/dalibo-propose-formations-gratuites-postgresql.html
>
> Now, from any of those articles, you could easily conclude, if you
> didn't know better, that the PostgreSQL company mentioned in the
> article is the only one that exists. It's certainly the case, in each
> instance, that no other company is mentioned besides the one quoted,
> and there's no disclaimer, hey, we're just one company in the
> community. I don't think any PostgreSQL company is obliged to insert
> such a disclaimer into every interview. You couldn't get the
> journalists to take them anyway, certainly not in every case. And why
> should anybody even be obliged to try?
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
>