Facttactic’s core business is writing for other businesses. We spend a lot of time doing it — writing, that is — and a lot of time thinking about how to make it better and how to give our clients the best writing service they could get.

So …  we always enjoy finding out what other accomplished writers have to say on the craft of writing. This Guardian article is a good read. It asks a bunch of established, British, fiction writers for tips on the dos and don’ts of writing.

While we don’t write fiction here at Facttactic, there’s a number of tips in the article we think are worth keeping in mind — Jeanette Winterson, for example: “Turn up for work. Discipline allows creative freedom. No discipline equals no freedom”, and Colm Tóibín: “Get on with it”. Consider it done!

I’ve found a pen that records and remembers what it writes and also records sounds and then links the recordings to the words that were being written at the time … when I first read about it I was blown away by the concept.

We don’t generally use this blog for product promotion, but as a writer and a regular interviewer who needs to record conversations, the Livescribe pen is one very cool piece of high-tech equipment.

But at $500 I won’t be buying one. Why? Well, when I can buy a full-spec computer for less than twice the price and a good quality digital voice recorder for well under half the price, I can’t see the value in that price point. If I could I would snap one up because it’s a neat toy, but unless the price drops a bit below its new-technology price, I’ll be sticking to my trusty blue biros and my hard-working, hard-wearing voice recorder.

“I need the sound of the keys, the keys of a manual typewriter. The hammers striking the page. I like to see the words, the sentences, as they take shape. It’s an aesthetic issue.”  Not many people will have as sensory and physical a relationship with their keyboard as one of our favourite writers Don DeLillo.

He’s quoted in this Guardian article that looks at the future of publishing, e-books and reading and the blurring of lines between our ‘real’ lives and our digital ones.

The article is oddly apocalyptic in its view of the future of good writing but it raises some interesting questions to think over … I don’t know if I prefer reading from paper pages to reading from a screen, but there is something to be said for standing in front a shelf of familiar books, running your eyes aross the titles and authors on the spines and letting the fonts and colours and design of the cover help shape your memories and emotions as you work out what to read next.

A common query we get is how we get clients in to the media, and then how can we trust that the media won’t distort or twist our clients’ messages.

We think it’s simple: our clients that get into the media do so because they have a good story to tell, a story that’s worth hearing and worth airing. Our job is to help present the story to the media in a way that is clear, attractive and easily understood by a busy newsroom. The media in New Zealand are, by and large, responsive and responsible towards a good story honestly told; and our ongoing experience is that our clients are well-served by targeted media attention.

That is not to say they don’t get it wrong on occasion … and here’s a good read, a Canadian blogger’s list of media mistakes and corrections for 2009: The Year in Media Errors and Corrections.

Earlier this month we had Friday the 13th. Did it make you worried? You might have paraskevidekatriaphobia, apparently!

Now that’s a far more interesting word than unfriend, recently named Word of the Year. It means the act of removing someone as a friend on social networking sites such as Facebook.

Facebook might be phenomenon of the year but, heck, that word is lifeless.

Luckily, the search is on for Word of the Decade! So get in quick and vote for “chur bro” or “Google” or something; anything other, please, than unfriend.

When I first got the internet at home 12 or so years back, I remember the Actrix ISP guy telling me to make the most of it because, sooner rather than later, we’d all have to pay to view anything on the web.

Today, thankfully, I’m still waiting for that, and savvy businesses are making more and more online stuff free - many getting rich doing it.

Wired editor Chris Anderson for one firmly believes things are only going to get freer on the internet. In his new book, Free: the Future of a Radical Price, Anderson says, “In the digital realm you can try to keep Free at bay with laws and locks, but eventually the force of economic gravity will win.”

Tomorrow, though, the National Business Review starts to charge for ‘premium’ content on its website. The move comes as Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation also ponders widespread charges for reading its news websites. So far, reportedly, it has more than one million paid up subscribers to its Wall St Journal online service. Which way, if at all, things will tip is still pretty unclear.

And will this trend extend beyond the grumpy old  men of newspapers? It appears unlikely. The free internet has been a huge tool for smart PR campaigns (think the best job on the world) using free content and, of course, for the free spread of ideas and thought, in general.

UPDATE: I visited the NBR site Friday morning. Most of the top stories have Subscriber content next to them, and you must sign-on and pay to access them. Did I do this? No. Do I miss not getting the content? Yes. Is the content crucial for my work or life? No. Has the website now become a bit unhelpful for me? Yes. Does it make the site less worth visiting? Yes. Will the site lose a visitor and NBR advertisers a potential customer? Looks like it.

Newspapers moan that Google steals their content and displays it for free. Google points to the fact that it sends a billion clicks a month to newspaper websites and pays newspaper billions of dollars annually for hosting Google advertising.

Google says newpapers would do well in the new world if they learnt from sites such as such as video site YouTube and the online shopping site Amazon that build their content so there is always more to buy or more to watch.

Google says linking to more information, engaging readers in dialogue and making the content more interactive are “web fundamentals” that could be used to build a product much different from news online today.

Find out more here.

Former, high-profile, newspaper gossip columnist Bridget Saunders appeared on a TV current affairs show recently expressing surprise that comments she had made earlier to other journos, off-the-record she thought, were broadcast - putting her in a pretty unflattering light.

So, if a hard-bitten and experienced hack can’t sort out what’s on- or off-the-record, then maybe it’s not as simple as it seems. But, really, it is: If you don’t want the media to publish/broadcast something - don’t tell them it! Easy.

Having said that if you are not generally in the media glare, journos will likely give you a bit of leeway, if the issue is not major.  But if you are regularly in the media commenting on stuff, you’re ‘fair game’. Reporters are talking to you to get a story not to make friends!

Last night’s Media 7 show had four senior journalists on the panel discussing what is off- and on-the-record. It’s invaluable watching for all people and companies wanting to understand the nuances of dealing with reporters. Find the Media 7 show here.