Posts
Author and Wired editor Chris Anderson caved under the weight of endless PR spam -- more than 300 emails a day.So he published 328 email addresses – the latest batch of offenders – hoping the spam bots will teach these folks a lesson.
And you thought Slick was a pain in the arse.
Whether or not you agree with Anderson’s approach, I’m here to tell you the problem is JUST. THAT. BAD. Read his post and the comments. Read the other media blogging about this increasingly common reaction to bad pitches.
Follow the discussion this one post has created. Print out all of these posts. And the next time you are asked/told/encouraged/instructed to mass pitch, push this stack of vitriol across the table as just one reason you shouldn't mass pitch.
Via Jeremy Pepper’s Twitter stream
Ross Mayfield & Chris Anderson uploaded by Laughing Squidtags | public relations | PR | media relations | media | good pitch | bad pitch | bad pitch blog | social media | Chris Anderson | The Long Tail
11 comments:
I'm not out there every day pitching, Kevin, but I've prepared a lot of students who are. If they take my class in Media Relations, they learn the real meaning of "relations" and the importance of being a resource for gatekeepers.
But Shel Holtz makes a reasonable point in his post on this topic, saying Anderson went too far in publishing the actual emails of those who've sent him bad pitches. He applauds your blog's restraint and feels pity for the poor saps about to become spam magnets courtesy of The Long Tail.
Link to Shel: http://blog.holtz.com/index.php/weblog/two_wrongs_dont_make_a_right/
Me? I call it comeuppance. One good spam deserves another.
While I think that publishing the addresses was it bit harsh, the bottom line is that it's that action that really called attention to the post. I don't think that there would be as large a "stack of vitriol" if he hadn't--the question is, will this change behavior?
These daily black eyes on the profession are starting to depress me.
Jen
That really stings. It's interesting to see that the names come from the big 5 firms all the way down to independent practitioners. The problem is pervasive across the industry.
If PR folk are not willing to take the time to tailor a pitch to a high profile, national publication like Wired, what are they investing their time in? If we keep spamming reporters, we deserve the black eyes.
I think that just as there are more and more venues for practitioners to target to get their messages out, journalists and other gatekeepers have just as many outlets to "turn the tables" on a bad pitch.
Woe is the practitioner who neglects to research his/her target!
I find it interesting where the addresses come from.
Our buddy Ron at 5W has a respectable (if that's the right word) amount of folks on this list, and he claims to have the fastest growing PR firm in the country (or is it world now?).
What does that say about our industry? Are clients only happy if we're steamrolling our way through media lists and throwing an endless amount of shiz at the wall to see what sticks?
Maybe it's not the flacks that need education, but the clients.
This type of Blackwater-esque campaign may generate some results, but it's costing their company credibility with some very influential people!
ylsd,
You've hit on something that I've long suspected is a large part of the problem, and it does seem to be appearing in a number of posts on this issue--the clients.
While I am not an active practitioner right now, I do have friends who are, and some of the junk their clients are pushing them to get coverage on is astonishing. From my vantage point, the agencies don't want to lose the business so they are saying yes to stuff they should be talking the clients out of--shiz at the wall is an apt description.
Maybe the flacks can use this as a "teaching moment" for clients.
Jennifer, you're absolutely right. What concerns me as much as the reputation issue is our value... if our expertise and counsel is pushed aside by a client, it cheapens the work we do.
And, yes, firms that say yes to clients in the interest of having the client on the roster only make the problem worse. B/c a firm that refuses can always be replaced by a firm that will just do the work for the money, reputation of the profession be damned.
Here's the issue Jay and Jennifer. While it may be the clients bringing us junk stories, in the other hand is money.
Which is simply to say, it's never the client...it's the counsel. It is up to us to say no and instruct them how to reach their goals in some fashion other than the "story" at hand.
This is easy for me to say now that I'm client-side, right? Not completely true. I now instruct my internal clients that something the best thing to say is nothing at all. It might be easier on my side of the fence, but it is still necessary.
As far as the stack of vitriol changing the behavior, the more examples we can gather to show clients why we should NOT push a bad story forward the better.
While reviewing the long list of soon-to-be spam-ridden email addresses, I was shocked to find accounts such as Fleishman-Hillard, Webershandwick and Edelman among gmail.com and others. A journalism major in the U of O’s School of Journalism and Communication, I’ve had the opportunity to attend presentations and informally chat with representatives from each of these agencies. And guess what. They’ve all spoken about mass pitch no-nos. Easier said than done, I guess.
Do I feel Anderson’s email listing was a little harsh? Yes. But these practitioners need to practice what they preach – a major factor in maintaining credibility and avoiding the oh-so-endearing term “PR flack.”
As a PR student I have been taught to learn your target audiences before you do anything and that most defiantly includes the Media. I think the biggest problem here was the lack of research and isn’t that what PR is all about? I’m a bit discouraged to hear that the professionals out there are lacking this key factor. Our profession gets such a bad rep. and I’m starting to think it’s mostly self inflicted.
I don’t know if the list was really that harsh, maybe it was the wake up call needed. I know I’m still a student and fresh to the textbook lessons but professionals don’t forget the fundamentals and don’t forget your research.
As a side point, is a published email address still a big deal these days, with more advanced spam filters and blacklists available?
Post a Comment