Sprint has begun promoting its new camera phone weblog, Photobility (see below). You might be surprised how much it does not promote Sprint products.
For more than two years I've been talking to Sprint about ways to publicize the world of camera phones. Photobility actually has been live since August 2006, when a Sprint employee and I (as a paid consultant, not a Sprint employee) began writing articles.
However, it has been a soft launch as we've worked out policies. For example, every article has to be reviewed by Sprint lawyers, so the weblog doesn't feature breaking news. (I have never had an article not approved because of the editorial content.)
Time for publicity
There still are a few issues to work out. I haven't written about Photobility and only one person -- James Kendrick -- wrote about it because I had to ask him for permission to use a graphic that was posted on the great jkOnTheRun weblog for a Photobility article.
However, Sprint has just placed a large ad on its Picture Mail home page for Photobility (see above left), so I feel free to finally write about it in this weblog.
Photobility "outed"....but wrong
In late August there was some blogger chatter about Photobility! MoCoNews posted an item about Sprint trademarking the name "Photobility," and I wrote about that.
The articles about the trademarking application was correct. But some bloggers suggested it was the name for a new Sprint weblog service. Nope.
I posted the MoCoNews item in this weblog, but I couldn't discuss what I knew because Photobility was just starting and Sprint didn't want any publicity.
Not an advertisement
As I mentioned in the lead, I think you'll be surprised that Photobility doesn't feature Sprint's camera phones and services. Sprint recently began offering a monthly e-mail newsletter that is designed for marketing, but Photobility is designed as an editorial product.
Frankly, I think some marketing-related items -- that would provide useful information -- could be included in Photobility, but that's not the case now.
Yeah, yeah, I know that the very fact it's from Sprint makes it part of marketing. But read it for yourself. I'm a fan of camera phones, as all of you readers know, and that does come through in my writing.
Examining good and bad of camera phones
But as for the weblog being an advertisement for Sprint's offerings -- no, it's not. I've written dozens of articles and none of them have been advertisements for Sprint's offerings.
I've tried to cover important issues, such as camera phone privacy and security and taking risks in dangerous situations. Some of the articles discuss the "dark side" of camera phones.
It's not all sweetness and light. Check out the Safety & Security section.
On a less somber note <g>, I've also posted tips for how to take better photos. Check out the Taking Great Pictures section.
Other writers, your comments
I'm certainly not the only person writing Photobility. Tony Henning, an imaging expert who really knows his stuff at the consulting firm of Future Image, has begun to write for the weblog, too.
So far, I don't think there are any reader comments on Photobility but that's because there hasn't been any publicity about it. But Sprint (and I!) really want to know what you think.
What would you -- as consumers -- want to see us write? What do you think about the articles? What's useful and important for you to read about camera phones -- still photos, videos, etc.?
Comments criteria
It will be very interesting to see how Sprint handles user comments. Constructive criticism about camera phones is, as far as I'm concerned, fine. Bad-mouthing Sprint service without any relevance to camera phones, is not fine.
(Sprint certainly has the final word on comments. I'll just put in my $.02.)
I'm not sure how we'll handle customer support-type of questions. For example, "I have a Samsung XXXX model phone and I don't know how to send a photo" or "how do I upload videos to YouTube."
Anyway, please take a look and tell me what you think.
Comments