Mostly valid, but why not just advertise Dell and Intel rather than doing a product placement? I like and use both their products, but the article would have more validity if it were reporting on the topic and not trying to advertise a product.
This article reflects a problem with all our "news" reporting. The reporter doesn't seem to know the difference between reporting news and producing an opinion piece.
Good job being honest. You are wise to check your conscience.
As the Bard said "To thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man."
So, yes you did cross the line, but relax! There's hope.
Here are some easy "copywriter checks" to help you discern your integrity in this matter in future blog posts. Ask yourself;
1. What was your motivation for mentioning a particular brand? Was it internal or external. i.e., Did you receive a check to crank out an endorsement? Or, are you pushing a particular mfg. because you really are a hardcore fanboy (or is it "fangirl"?)
2. Would you still work to mention a particular mfg. even if they weren't buying advertising in your space, because as an engineer you KNOW that their product is superior?
3.Are you including particular mfg. product brands and brand identification (i.e. "Xeon") for engineering clarity, or to conform to their corporate marketing wonk directives? (see #1)
4. Would you come back in six months or a year on a new blog post and promote another competing product with equal fervor if there were a market shift which elevated said competing product? e.g. "When I promoted Super-X's Megatron processor back in January, I had no idea that Acme Industry's Ultrasnark processor was about to be released. It's now clear that the Ultrasnark outperforms the Megatron in five key ways". Or, would you simply remain quiet or ignore the engineering advance? (again, see #1)
5. Are you so convinced it is the best product that you would recommend or install product "X" in a machine upon which your own mother's life depended?
Just some tools to help you show those DN sponsors some tough love. :-)
Kirsten, I am amazed at the proliferation of computer hardware and software specifically designed to facilitate the "blue-collar" engineer and the company he or she works for. My company uses Solid Works and COMSOL for design and testing purposes and remains quite pleased with both. We are launching new software called DART. This is an "MRP"-type software that enhances the order/entry process and provides load-level scheduling for manufacturing companies. You are absolutely correct when you say we need to leverage technology. I feel that is a must in upcoming years for the US to stay on the cutting edge. Good post.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.