Re Yahoo! it's not just a misstated question. My understanding is that the error appeared on his resume. Pretty sure you'd be fired if you misrepresented your education on your resume. ;-) Pretty sure the board isn't doing this to ferret out the truth - fairly certain they're fielding the investigation because they think it will show responsiveness to the public/investor outcry. Take control of the situation in an attempt to nip it in the bud, rather than let public opinion spin out of control (more than it is now). I can't remember the name of the company, but there is a pharma company (not one of the biggies - a mid-sized maker of generics) who hired a CEO who, it turned out, misrepresented her education on her resume. A reporter discovered this during a routine fact check for a simple "Company A hires new CEO" article and for month the vigilante watch dogs beat the crap out of the company. I'm guessing they think they're bringing some closure to the matter by "getting to the bottom of it".

The hoodie thing is pretty ridiculous - and is actually obscuring Pachter's second comment (that really nobody is focusing on) about whether Zuck's mission for connecting the world is compatible with his "new" mission as CEO of a publicly traded company: to create shareholder value through revenue growth. I don't necessarily believe the two are incompatible but that - not his choice of attire - is at least world discussion. The Yahoo! thing is a different matter though. I don't believe this has much - if anything - to do with whether or not he's qualified to run a tech company if he doesn't have formal training in tech. Of course he is - and, really, how much worse could Yahoo! get anyway? the issue is actually more substantial than that - is this a CEO who is prone to overlooking important details? Or is this a CEO who doesn't actually have a grasp on what matters for his business - e.g, he was willing to fudge a bit to pump up his technical cred because he actually believes it matters, even though it clearly doesn't? Or at worst, is this a CEO who may be inclined to unethical behavior. Misrepresenting your credentials is certainly unethical if you've done it intentionally (or condoned it in some way). \ Greg

Right on (so says a busy guy who hasn't blogged in ages).

Well ladies, I guess it's true what they say: you can put the publisher on the web but you can't put the web in the publisher. OK - nobody really says that... but I'll point this out to them. In the meantime, in case you didn't catch the link to the no-registration-required link in the first paragraph, try this: http://ow.ly/3qdZI

Micronetworks - imagine that. ;-)

Hey John - Thanks so much for taking part in the microREVIEW process. And thanks for buying your copy. But most of all thanks for your kind words. I think you nailed the key points in the chapter and your perspectives on the ideas are spot-on. Love it!

Thanks for all the kind words and really glad you enjoyed the book. After all, you taught me everything I know. ;-) See you at the launch party I hope.

I fixed the year. Thanks babez. :-)

D-man - somewhere around the middle I acknowledged that he was doing his job. It's really more about the how than the what.

.tv has been around for a couple of years but - you're right - they're not all that common yet. Good way to stand out if you're a video producer, which is exactly what we're hoping to communicate in our work with this client.

I think you might like today's post Scott. ;-)

Thanks everyone. We're all pretty excited over here - erm, I guess I mean down here in Austin. We're kicking this thing off right with some business planning (a some partying too.) G

Good to hear Tanner - I did hope veterans would also find some interesting or useful tidbits in it. And tried hard not to make it the same old boring stuff. G

Hey Rohit - You've nailed one of my pet peeves perfectly. I wrote a similar post a while back. Being an expert in a tool is tantamount to being, well, a tool. ;-) Here's a link to the post - just cuz your readers might find it relevant: http://bit.ly/2IQ1qw Greg

Great seeing you too. I feel like we didn't even get to say a proper goodbye as we were swept away amidst the throng of raving Armano fan boys. Sadly, my Fashion 2.0 get-up is likely to feature a Three Wolf Moon t-shirt.

Hmmmm... what rhymes with Nissan? ;-)

Hey Matt - Yup, what you said. BTW, I was at Blog World too (albeit for just a couple of hours surrounding my session) - wish we could have met in person. G

LOL. You break my heart, Dave - but I can't argue with you.

Hi Heather - Apologies for the delay in responding. Given that you're adding social media as part of your integrated marketing mix (as it should be vs a stand-alone silo) it's not necessarily a mistake to issue a release about your new initiatives. However, I'd be sure to make it a social media press release (the major wire services offer these as do services like PitchEngine) and be sure to include some bloggers in your media database if you do any outreach. Hope this helps. G

Thanks Gagan - fixed the error and found another typo that needed fixing too. :-)

Hey Lew - That's not the complete manuscript, just the *first* 5,000 words. 50,000 more to go. :-)

I have nothing against "wrong" - I'm all for it, and I'll often blog from a deliberately one-sided POV (and have sometimes been wrong) with the intention of sparking up conversation. But where is the line between wrong and being ignorant? And does it matter?

For clarity, CON nailed a point that maybe didn't come across as clearly as it might have - I'm not talking about fudging some crazy/pointless viral video for the purpose of a shallow quick hit. In fact, none of my five points suggest that marketers "create" a dancing man, while the first suggests that marketers "be" a dancing man. Which leads me to my next point... The dancing man is a *symbol*, a spark - of course, marketers probably shouldn't care about the actual man dancing. But his fearless nature, the network effect that began with a single, decisive action, etc are things that every marketer needs to consider.