Microsoft study said most consumers are concerned about coutnerfeit data.

Two things in today's news struck me as particularly harsh regarding Microsoft. The first was a slew of reports regarding the ousting of Steve Ballmer, and then the other was the Twitter storm blaming Microsoft for today's Skype outage. It's all because Microsoft's past reputation for sketchy business dealings and unethical practices is coming home to roost.

In the olden days, these sort of negative publicity messes were dealt with fast and furiously by attentive PR people, who would immediately be calling or finding out what they could do to remedy your "flawed" thinking. Over the past decade, I've noticed that the PR folks who work within Microsoft and its contractors have developed a cavalier attitude towards the company and things in general. This phenomenon is not only pertains to Microsoft; it's reflected all over the place.

Some of the non-circumspect comments I've heard from the various contractors are amazing. I honestly believe this is because of the recent consolidation of all the large public relations firms worldwide. Most of the big brand names have been consolidated into large megalith companies.

For example, the mega firms, such as Bursen-Masteller, Hill and Knowlton, Ogilvy and Mather, and Young and Rubicam, are all combined with probably another 20 boutique firms, like Blanc and Otus, to form a huge operation, WPP. The other huge consolidated group is under the umbrella of the Omnicom Group, where you'll find Fleishman-Hillard, Ketchum, Brodeur, Porter Novelli, etc.

WPP and the Omnicom Group now control most of the world's publicity and initiatives. And they know it and act accordingly. It's astonishing.

One of these days, someone is going to realize that this situation is rife for all sorts of conflicts of interest. What I've noticed, though, is lackluster services. It's no coincidence that the recent gaffe by Bursen-Masteller—when it targeted Google for its client Facebook—would happen during this era of consolidation. The way I see it, nobody really has to compete any more, so their best work is behind them.

It's like the world of PR has become a huge welfare state, and this is reflected across the board in all the agencies, whether they are in WPP or Omnicom or not.

I will say that, yes, there are small firms and individuals who still maintain high standards. But for the most part, finding them is not easy, and they tend to be busy.

The waning Microsoft corporate image is the best example of lackluster services, because at one point, Microsoft was so good at PR that the difference between then and now is more noticeable.

As another aside, I know what all these folks are thinking as they read this: Today's PR companies are more about strategy and the finer points of marketing. This is partially true, but I find it curious that they've lost their ability to do basic clean-up work—the blocking and tackling of the game. I guess it's beneath everyone.

Microsoft has always had decent internal PR folks (if you could ever figure out who they were), and they used their outside agencies, primarily Waggener Edstrom, for clean-up work. The last time I called Waggener Edstrom, they no longer had me in their database (at least according to the account rep who I was talking to). Either they blew up the old database, which used to document a lot of details about media folks, or I wasn't an important "blogger." Who knows? I thought it was weird, because it wasn't not like the old Waggener Edstrom, but was a lot like everyone else: cavalier.

I don't mention all this because I think we need more onerous PR. I mention it because you need to understand why Microsoft is getting a lot of bad ink. We can probably expect more anti-Microsoft news cropping up here and there.

At least you'd think Ballmer would do something to boost his image, but I don't see it.

Ask yourself why the PR folks do not have a team working 24/7 on taking down the humiliating "Monkey-boy" videos that are maintained on YouTube. When a demand letter is issued, YouTube will take down anything. I would guess the monthly PR bill for Microsoft is at least $200,000, and yet these videos persist. I'm baffled by it.

Now today we have a series of articles asking to remove Ballmer from the top spot at Microsoft. And replace him with who? The fact is that Ballmer has been a great caretaker for the company and has only failed at getting the stock price to do much of anything. This is a PR responsibility more than it is Ballmer's job. His job is to manage the company and make money. He seems to be doing that, but he's being made to look like a loser.

Oh, and as for the Skype outage, Microsoft doesn't even own Skype yet. Jeez

You can Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter @therealdvorak.

More John C. Dvorak:

Go off-topic with John C. Dvorak.