Wall Street Journal Coverage of RIM

Research in Motion has had tough sledding recently as a result of an attempt to make needed changes. The first of THE BLAIR RULES, A Presence of Change, was overlooked by RIM managers for several years. The co-founders/co-CEOs had varied views of the route the company should take for their next steps toward change. And the reticence, from all reports, caused the company to go far more slowly rather than spurting ahead as had been their practice. RIM has held an impressive edge in the smartphone market for many years and is still the predominant preference among US Government officials (for its secure messaging) as well as, globally, in emerging markets. What is puzzling in an era of change for the company is the lack of sympathy they have garnered from the Wall Street Journal. In fact, the Journalhas gone out of its way to slam the company at each of the touch points during its change process – and the headlines selected reflect this standard attitude of animosity: “RIM’s NEW PATCHWORK PHONE” (June 7, 2012); “PROSPECTS DIM FOR BLACKBERRY MAKER,” (May 30, 2012), “RIM WEIGHS BLEAK OPTIONS,” April 1, 2012 – etc etc. All of the headlines were written as RIM was attempting to fix its problems. Why point out in such a blatant fashion, for example, that the new phone (BlackBerry 10) is the result of a number of providers collaborating and contributing their efforts to the development (ONX Software Systems, Ltd, Canada; Scalado AB, Sweden; TouchType Ltd, UK, TomTom International, Holland – and so on). One suspects that if Apple or Microsoft were experiencing rough times and had managed to put together a collaborative effort for their latest phone, they would have been touted for bringing off the high degree of teamwork. I’ve followed the unprecedented slamming of RIM in the Journal for months now with the high degree of interest that basically amounts to continued and heightened puzzlement – and, more recently, of concern. I’m concerned about why the Journal would want to go out of its way to make investors – current and potential – think the worst about the company. And why they would [seem to] try their best to assist in the company’s downfall through use of language in of the reporting. I haven’t noticed any other company receive such a drubbing in the Journal – a publication that I respect. It’s curious as to why this is so for RIM. At any rate – here’s to RIM and its current change efforts – a little late in getting started, but hopefully JIT. And, for my sake (a vehement BlackBerry user) as well as for the many other users – we’re rooting for RIM’s success in bringing it off. THE BLAIR RULES’ second rule of change is: A Presence of Chaos – something that RIM is definitely experiencing at the present time. Hang in there RIM! And, I should add that I also have an iPhone – just so I could see what all the fuss was about – it doesn’t come close to comparing to the BlackBerry Bold for effectiveness in the conduct of business!

Leave a Reply