[Discuss] BLU's SEO (Martin Owens)

[richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)]

markw at mohawksoft.com wrote:
> This is the real problem in this discussion, and probably on much larger
> fronts as well.

Rather than a problem, I assert that this is the ultimate fine point of 
the discussion. Fact and truth are not synonymous. Related, yes, but not 
identical.

Facts are things that exist. They're neither right nor wrong; they 
simply are. "Orange juice has sugar in it." This is a fact. You can 
examine the chemical composition of the juice in a bottle of OJ and sure 
enough you'll find sugar. The pedant in me can suppose removing the 
sugar from the juice but then the pedant in me will point out that it's 
no longer orange juice since it's had essential chemicals removed.

Truths are a little (sometimes a lot) subjective. They're things that 
are believed to exist. "Orange juice is good for you". This is true for 
certain quantities for most people. Excessive quantities of OJ aren't 
good for anyone and there are a few for whom even smallish quantities 
can be toxic.

I see the difference between advocacy and marketing to be specific cases 
of the difference between fact and truth. They may at times seem to be 
the same thing but there's always that subtle (or not) difference.

For example, say that you've recently deployed a hybrid server farm, 
half Windows and half RHEL. You work up a chart detailing the various 
costs: computers, racks, switches, climate control, power circuits, 
software licensing and support contracts, etc., along with the man-hours 
required to deploy each side of the farm and whatever else, good or bad, 
that you care to list.

Advocacy is presenting the chart -- the facts -- and allowing the 
numbers to demonstrate the superiority of one side or the other.

Marketing is claiming that one side is superior to the other -- what you 
want me to believe -- and using the chart to substantiate the claim.

-- 
Rich P.