Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The suit is back.


That came to mind as soon as I read the headline.

For those who haven't read it:

http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html


I read this and thought of you.

I think you've said you bought PR for Viaweb. Any guidelines you can share? In short, what can founders do to best shape how they're covered?


I don't think most startups need to anymore.


Does YC prepare startups in any way in talking to the press? Or is that more informal?


To some extent, case by case.


Any tips or thoughts you could share publicly?


Since I can't bring my cellphone into work, I'd been considering buying a watch, but couldn't decide what kind. Now I realize it needs to be a Rolex Submariner. Or perhaps a novelty plastic watch shaped like a submarine.


Hmm. That thought never occurred to me.

I need to read more attentively.

Flag if this really is a bullshit post.

Edit: On re-reading I don't see this as a submarine, unless it's just for the general idea of selling watches. But I don't get that vibe.


The idea they're selling is that you need a new watch. It's something a major watch maker can push through a savvy PR firm especially to counter declining sales.


See, I didn't get that. Nothing in that article made me think getting a watch would be a good for me.


That's good PR. If it seemed that way, it would read as an advertisement.


That's good PR. If it seemed that way, it would read as an advertisement.

Or, you know, maybe it's just an article about people wearing watches.

Do you assume that every article that doesn't feel like an ad is really just a well-done ad? That would be a bit bizarre, like my magic charm that keeps dragons away; don't see any dragons? My magic charm must work.


It's a fine question. But now when I read these pieces on trends, I do wonder. It's almost too good as a piece by itself. Would a reporter really care enough about watches to do all the research? It seems more like something that was teed up for them.

Read pg's essay. Then read this piece again. What suggests that it's truly original reporting?


Read pg's essay. Then read this piece again.

I had already read Paul's essay, and still nothing set off my Secret Ad alert. Maybe I'm not cynical enough.

What suggests that it's truly original reporting?

What suggests that an article in the fashion section of the NY Times is going to be truly original reporting?

I read the article and it resonnated with me because I used to carry a watch (but never cared for wearing them). Now I have a phone to tell me the time but in practice it's sort of cumbersome. A dedicated time-telling device might actually be useful, and I was curious if other people on HN had been considering this. And in that context an article that's just an article in the NY Times seems pretty plausible; I bet a good number of people have considered that using phone to quickly check the time can be annoying.

Sure, this might be a really stealth ad or PR piece, but there might also be geek oneupmanship at play, with people eager to show off how quickly they can spot a stealth ad even where none exists.


ie 3 piece suit?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: