Since this is after all a blog (ugh) I think this is moderately relevant. This guy Robert Scoble works for Microsoft doing PR (actually he is called a "Tech Evangelist"), and he keeps a blog. What is interesting about Scoble is that he manages to give Microsoft somewhat of a human face (and does a good job of it considering), and he thinks that one of the best way to do that these days is through blogs. He believes strongly in the benefits of blogs for companies - both I think as a form of public relations as a technical communication (he says that you have to listen to what people says, which implies that, at least in his field, you better be prepared to receive technical input; also, lots of MS employees blog all kinds of technical instructions, techniques, and bug workarounds, etc.).
The thing is, I think he is in part right. When you blog, if you do it right, you are going to get input, and if anyone is going to take you seriously, you are going to have to listen. Scoble often solicits input from readers about Microsoft products. If anyone there is actually listening (frequently they are not, but sometimes they are), it means that intelligent readers may actually have an impact in prodcuts (note that this effect is already visible in open source projects). This is not really a significant change; after all, good companies already listen to input, though, indeed, probably the closest we got to this before were all kinds of surveys, but they weren't necessariy getting to the people they needed to. What is new is that this exchange is so visible, so much more widespread (much easier to post a comment on a blog than to actually write a letter to the company), and actively solicited by the company. People may actually get the funny idea the company is working for them. Many companies try to pretend that they already are, but very rarely is that true.
The thing is, if you are working for your customers, not your shareholders - ah, there is the rub - you may find your old business model harder to keep up with. The contemporary capitalist approach may become harder to use. One can only hope of course. If companies were about being useful and not about being rich, how much better a place would the world be.
(Now having said all that, the chances that any of this will take place are sadly rather low, but one can always hope.)
