There are enough rude, annoying publicists in the marketing field to inspire the creation of the Bad Pitch Blog, which chronicles the field's ugly stories and worst practices. I'm not a formally trained publicist, but I've managed to use common courtesy to build my company's media list from 20 contacts to over 2,000 in about three years. Maybe not being formally trained isn't such a bad thing.
I was asked to provide a list of tips on building a media list through a contact at Peter Shankman's HARO and in the spirit of the season, I thought I'd share.
1. Learn who is interested in what. There are publications serving every interest. Spend a few months getting to know the space, the publications, and the writers. Read the masthead. Read the bylines.
2. Build trust by seeming harmless and offering value. First, seem harmless. It's best if you can get a trusted person to introduce you to your contact. Do nothing to cause a person to believe that, if they even so much as twitch at your bait, you will bombard them with sales-pitchy phone calls or emails. Do this by sending a brief email, 3-5 sentences max. Give a brief intro, and then add value: a brief summary of the benefits of your product to the publication's readers and an offer to send a sample or explain more if the contact is interested. If they don't reply, they probably aren't interested in that product; don't send it. Read their publication so you know what will interest them later.
3. Make a list and track what interests your contacts. Segregate your list into interests and make sure to only send communications appropriate to the publication. Don't stretch it: sending a product that's a little off target almost never works and it risks alienating your current or future relationship with your contact. Put yourself in their shoes, and if the pitch is a reach, shelve it. Track what they respond to, what you send them, and how they react. In their eyes, you'll become more on-target and therefore more trustworthy.
4. Become a journalist. Do as much of the work for the publication as you can. Pitch briefly, but be prepared to send materials that are ready to print within 24-48 hours after the contact replies. If you can consistently offer good, effortless content quickly, the publication will begin to think of you as a resource, as a regular contributor and not a PR person.
5. Respond quickly. Many journalists are under tight deadlines and quick, comprehensive responses will often get the mention. Being prepared makes this responsiveness easier.
6. Control the message by controlling the outlet. Not all publicity is good, but most of it can be. Carefully pick and choose which media outlets to pitch. Vet each media outlet, especially websites and blogs. Figure out how many readers you need to see a review of your product in order for it to be worth your time developing a relationship with that media outlet. Use services like Google Trends for Websites to check on traffic claims for websites and Technorati for blogs.
7. Pitch lightly. Once you have built trust with a journalist, you don't need to hammer them over the head with a salesy pitch. Give them the hook of the story and ask if they'd like to hear more. If they trust you, they will ask for more detail.
8. Prepare your sources. Journalists need sources they can quote. Make sure your sources are familiar with the publication and the context of a story before they are interviewed. Without rehearsing them, let them know the direction the story is going so they can help the journalist get the soundbites they need.
9. Don't call. Most of the wordsmiths I know would prefer to read and write than talk. Talking is for once-a-year tradeshows. In nearly four years of building a publicity program, maybe half our publicity hits came from just two or three emails: a brief pitch or press release and a brief follow up. Email lets journalists read, archive, delete, or respond on their own schedule, without having to tolerate an awkward phone pitch. Do you appreciate sales calls? Return the favor and keep the pressure off people whose trust you want to earn and keep (or else they'll just let you go to voicemail, like this dreadful publicist).
Monday, December 22, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
VeloNews Seeking Candidates for Tech Editor Position
AVAILABLE: THE BEST JOB IN THE BIKE INDUSTRYVeloNews tech editor position open to qualified candidate
Boulder, CO, USA - December 15, 2008 - Do you love working on bikes and know them inside and out? Do you appreciate staying on top of the latest tech trends? If you have the right stuff, VeloNews magazine has a career waiting for you.
VeloNews is growing its tech department, expanding on the huge body of work done by Lennard Zinn and Matt Pacocha, the most respected technical writers in cycling. VeloNews is seeking a tech editor to spearhead the department, producing their own work while collaborating with Zinn and Pacocha.
The position requires a thorough understanding of bicycle technology, management ability, professional writing and editing competency, and solid communication and interpersonal skills. The ideal candidate will have bike industry experience, preferably in a bike shop or R&D. Attention to detail, multi-tasking skills and the ability to work under tight deadlines are essential.
Interested candidates can send a résumé, cover letter and three writing samples to: Attn: HR, 1830 55th St., Boulder, CO 80301 or boulderjobs@competitorgroup.com. No phone calls, please.
More information on VeloNews magazine is available at VeloNews.com.
###
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Facebook Attracts Narcissists
The web has a long and sordid history of enabling narcissism.
From cheesy personal pages on Angelfire to blogging to Twitter's "what are you doing right now?' and its implied "and who cares?", the web is the world's most giant repository of useless personal content that nobody cares about (this blog included).
And now there's some scientific proof of the vanity of the web: "Shocking research: Narcissists drawn to Facebook".
From cheesy personal pages on Angelfire to blogging to Twitter's "what are you doing right now?' and its implied "and who cares?", the web is the world's most giant repository of useless personal content that nobody cares about (this blog included).
And now there's some scientific proof of the vanity of the web: "Shocking research: Narcissists drawn to Facebook".
Facebook: To Befriend or Not To Befriend?
Webware identifies five common Facebook friend request scenarios and how to react to them in an article, "Five types of Facebook trolls and what to do with them".
One interesting call: ignore people who are hitting you up with friend requests on more than one social network.
One interesting call: ignore people who are hitting you up with friend requests on more than one social network.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Marketing to the Fit vs. the Outdoorsy
Hanson Dodge Creative is a creative agency that serves manufacturers in both the fitness and outdoor industries. The company produces "white papers" (or, as they are known to marketers: advertorials) that highlight distinctions they see while working for their clients.
Their August 19, 2008 release, "Actively Different: Fitness vs. Outdoor Messaging" (http://research.hansondodge.com/), didn't teach me much since I'm familiar with both industries, but the company did leave me with a memorable quote:
[The outdoor-oriented person asks, "What could I do today?" The fitness-oriented person asks, "What should I do today?"]
I suppose that's an accurate description of the motives behind each market: outdoorsy people are in it for enjoyment. Fitness people are in it to compete.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Be a Renaissance Person, Not an Expert
Innovative Minds Don’t Think Alike
By JANET RAE-DUPREE
Published: December 30, 2007
"It's a pickle of a paradox: As our knowledge and expertise increase, our creativity and ability to innovate tend to taper off. Why? Because the walls of the proverbial box in which we think are thickening along with our experience."
The "curse of knowledge: In other words, it becomes nearly impossible to look beyond what you know and think outside the box you’ve built around yourself."
"Look for people with renaissance-thinker tendencies, who’ve done work in a related area but not in your specific field."
By JANET RAE-DUPREE
Published: December 30, 2007
"It's a pickle of a paradox: As our knowledge and expertise increase, our creativity and ability to innovate tend to taper off. Why? Because the walls of the proverbial box in which we think are thickening along with our experience."
The "curse of knowledge: In other words, it becomes nearly impossible to look beyond what you know and think outside the box you’ve built around yourself."
"Look for people with renaissance-thinker tendencies, who’ve done work in a related area but not in your specific field."
Give Readers What They Want
The New York Times' guest columnist Tim Egan provides weekend readers with a little proselytizing: people who routinely massacre the spoken word shouldn't write books.
I've got a few problems with opining that Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin shouldn't write a book because they speak poorly. First, speaking and writing are different. Maybe they can write. They certainly are not writing books because they think themselves capable of writing good books. They don't think they can write. Don't be ridiculous. They think they can get a big advance. (They won't write a page of those books anyway.)
Who is Egan to take someone to task for writing a book? Writing should be encouraged, at least morally. Writers are more valuable than readers. Writers read more, read better, and create better reading material than readers do.
What Egan is actually saying is that Joe's and Sarah's stories aren't worth reading. As his column is a guest op-ed, he's entitled to his soapbox.
Also too Egan should instead criticize publishers who agree to bring a Joe the Plumber book to market. Unless, of course, the publisher is correct in believing that people actually want to read that book. And these are my main points: the publishing industry should only judge a book by its sales and should focus on giving readers what they want. The publishing industry pumps out between 170K-205K books each year and most of those are never reprinted because readers don't want to read that many books...
...and because many of those books are not interesting to readers. The industry thinks about the product instead of the customer. Rather than producing what the customer wants, the industry produces the best possible version of the idea that book represents. In other words, the industry is focused on the romantic idea of "the book" rather than on the wants and needs of the customer. In a way, performance arts are similar. Orchestras and operas desire to achieve the highest quality of their art, yet very few people truly enjoy classical music.
And in fiction, no one can predict what will sell. Unless they are fortunate enough to have proven authors, fiction publishers are almost literally guessing at new books. The book's quality is not necessarily relevant (e.g. the Twilight series). To compensate, fiction publishers must toss a lot of product at the market to see what sells. Once something sells, they scramble back to press.
So who cares if Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin write books? The real story is that someone might actually want to read them. Let's focus our attention on those people, the readers, because they are the ones who decide what books to read, not Joe, not Sarah, and not publishers.
I've got a few problems with opining that Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin shouldn't write a book because they speak poorly. First, speaking and writing are different. Maybe they can write. They certainly are not writing books because they think themselves capable of writing good books. They don't think they can write. Don't be ridiculous. They think they can get a big advance. (They won't write a page of those books anyway.)
Who is Egan to take someone to task for writing a book? Writing should be encouraged, at least morally. Writers are more valuable than readers. Writers read more, read better, and create better reading material than readers do.
What Egan is actually saying is that Joe's and Sarah's stories aren't worth reading. As his column is a guest op-ed, he's entitled to his soapbox.
Also too Egan should instead criticize publishers who agree to bring a Joe the Plumber book to market. Unless, of course, the publisher is correct in believing that people actually want to read that book. And these are my main points: the publishing industry should only judge a book by its sales and should focus on giving readers what they want. The publishing industry pumps out between 170K-205K books each year and most of those are never reprinted because readers don't want to read that many books...
...and because many of those books are not interesting to readers. The industry thinks about the product instead of the customer. Rather than producing what the customer wants, the industry produces the best possible version of the idea that book represents. In other words, the industry is focused on the romantic idea of "the book" rather than on the wants and needs of the customer. In a way, performance arts are similar. Orchestras and operas desire to achieve the highest quality of their art, yet very few people truly enjoy classical music.
And in fiction, no one can predict what will sell. Unless they are fortunate enough to have proven authors, fiction publishers are almost literally guessing at new books. The book's quality is not necessarily relevant (e.g. the Twilight series). To compensate, fiction publishers must toss a lot of product at the market to see what sells. Once something sells, they scramble back to press.
So who cares if Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin write books? The real story is that someone might actually want to read them. Let's focus our attention on those people, the readers, because they are the ones who decide what books to read, not Joe, not Sarah, and not publishers.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
A Guide to Lowering Your Phone Costs with VOIP
We switched from a traditional land phone line to Vonage VOIP in January 2005 because Vonage is 1/3 the cost and offers better features. Vonage costs us $19 per month and the call quality is pretty good; worse than a landline but better than a cell phone.
Since then, we've had a few months where the call quality got frustratingly bad, most recently in September and October. Frustrated and suspecting that the VOIP industry had matured enough in three years to offer a better deal elsewhere, we began shopping around.
Here are some options:
1. Go cellular. Ditch the landline completely and use a cell phone for all your calls. Cons: Cell phone subscription plans are almost as pricey as a landline. You're irradiating your noggin. Still, maybe a prepaid plan like T-Mobile's (about $8-10/month) is cheap enough to compensate for the copay on your future brain surgery.
2. Use Skype. It used to be the case that Skype could only call other computers. Now you can buy a "normal" phone number and make and receive calls from traditional phones. And it used to be the case that you needed to have a computer on to use Skype. There are now several phone + router combos that have Skype embedded and which don't require a computer to make and take calls. But they cost at least $160, plus roughly $36/year for a Skype phone number.
3. Use Gizmo5. It's basically Skype, but with less expensive hardware. The call quality is noticeable worse than other VOIP services.
We just discovered a new option through a paid product placement on Amazon. Ooma, a VOIP startup launched in 2007, is offering totally free phone calls. The catch? You have to pay up front for the Ooma device, which is not cheap.
As with all startups, there's a risk to getting involved. Though Michael Arrington has been using Ooma since 2007 and said its call quality is better than Vonage, he's also concerned about the company's future. The company has a few problems:
1. When it first launched, the Ooma device was $400. This price was too high and consumers didn't bite (despite the fact that consumers will wait in line to buy an iPhone and then pay exorbitant monthly fees for the data plan that makes the thing useful). The bottom line is that consumers don't understand marginal cost: subscription plans are always overpriced for all but the heaviest users. For fixed-price goods, costs decline over time, especially if they replace a subscription fee. Ooma responded by reducing its price to $250.
2. This is very likely the first you've heard of Ooma. Few people know about this thing. In fact, few people under 40 know about Skype, either, despite that Skype has over 8 million people online at any given moment.
3. Consumers aren't spending money right now (except us, apparently!). That's bad news for startups struggling to reach critical mass with an expensive product because of a botched launch.
So I can't believe we just coughed up $193.51 at Costco.com, which is offering $50 off the device through December 7. I hope Arrington's right about the call quality, and I hope Ooma can stay in business for just 10 more months, which is how long it will take for our device to pay for itself relative to Vonage.
Since then, we've had a few months where the call quality got frustratingly bad, most recently in September and October. Frustrated and suspecting that the VOIP industry had matured enough in three years to offer a better deal elsewhere, we began shopping around.
Here are some options:
1. Go cellular. Ditch the landline completely and use a cell phone for all your calls. Cons: Cell phone subscription plans are almost as pricey as a landline. You're irradiating your noggin. Still, maybe a prepaid plan like T-Mobile's (about $8-10/month) is cheap enough to compensate for the copay on your future brain surgery.
2. Use Skype. It used to be the case that Skype could only call other computers. Now you can buy a "normal" phone number and make and receive calls from traditional phones. And it used to be the case that you needed to have a computer on to use Skype. There are now several phone + router combos that have Skype embedded and which don't require a computer to make and take calls. But they cost at least $160, plus roughly $36/year for a Skype phone number.
3. Use Gizmo5. It's basically Skype, but with less expensive hardware. The call quality is noticeable worse than other VOIP services.
We just discovered a new option through a paid product placement on Amazon. Ooma, a VOIP startup launched in 2007, is offering totally free phone calls. The catch? You have to pay up front for the Ooma device, which is not cheap.
As with all startups, there's a risk to getting involved. Though Michael Arrington has been using Ooma since 2007 and said its call quality is better than Vonage, he's also concerned about the company's future. The company has a few problems:
1. When it first launched, the Ooma device was $400. This price was too high and consumers didn't bite (despite the fact that consumers will wait in line to buy an iPhone and then pay exorbitant monthly fees for the data plan that makes the thing useful). The bottom line is that consumers don't understand marginal cost: subscription plans are always overpriced for all but the heaviest users. For fixed-price goods, costs decline over time, especially if they replace a subscription fee. Ooma responded by reducing its price to $250.
2. This is very likely the first you've heard of Ooma. Few people know about this thing. In fact, few people under 40 know about Skype, either, despite that Skype has over 8 million people online at any given moment.
3. Consumers aren't spending money right now (except us, apparently!). That's bad news for startups struggling to reach critical mass with an expensive product because of a botched launch.
So I can't believe we just coughed up $193.51 at Costco.com, which is offering $50 off the device through December 7. I hope Arrington's right about the call quality, and I hope Ooma can stay in business for just 10 more months, which is how long it will take for our device to pay for itself relative to Vonage.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Atlantic Records Portends the Future of the Ebook?
From the old gray lady:
"Atlantic, a unit of Warner Music Group, says it has reached a milestone that no other major record label has hit: more than half of its music sales in the United States are now from digital products, like downloads on iTunes and ring tones for cellphones."
Also noted in the article is that, overall, less music is being sold. Chris Anderson is right, everything that becomes digital becomes free, legitimately or not.
"As a result, the hope that digital revenue will eventually compensate for declining sales of CDs — and usher in overall growth — have largely been dashed." This means that Chris Anderson is also wrong: the web is not spurring sales by making obscure content more findable.
I like Jeff Zucker's quote, the media industry is "trading analog dollars for digital pennies".
To counteract the effect of low pricing on digital products, the music industry is focusing on the "experience" of music: concerts, etc. Where mp3s distance the consumer as far as possible from the musician, concerts bring them as close as the stagehands allow.
Perhaps publishing can learn from this concept of proximity as added-value. If consumers embrace the digital book, maybe the author tour will become more critical.
There's another lesson, too. Atlantic Records is replacing CD sales with "small bits of revenue from many sources: Atlantic Records’ digital sales include ring tones, ringbacks, satellite radio, iTunes sales and subscription services.". Maybe Nolo is ahead of the curve with its repurposing of non-fiction books into ebooks, books on tape/podcasts, and software.
"Atlantic, a unit of Warner Music Group, says it has reached a milestone that no other major record label has hit: more than half of its music sales in the United States are now from digital products, like downloads on iTunes and ring tones for cellphones."
Also noted in the article is that, overall, less music is being sold. Chris Anderson is right, everything that becomes digital becomes free, legitimately or not.
"As a result, the hope that digital revenue will eventually compensate for declining sales of CDs — and usher in overall growth — have largely been dashed." This means that Chris Anderson is also wrong: the web is not spurring sales by making obscure content more findable.
I like Jeff Zucker's quote, the media industry is "trading analog dollars for digital pennies".
To counteract the effect of low pricing on digital products, the music industry is focusing on the "experience" of music: concerts, etc. Where mp3s distance the consumer as far as possible from the musician, concerts bring them as close as the stagehands allow.
Perhaps publishing can learn from this concept of proximity as added-value. If consumers embrace the digital book, maybe the author tour will become more critical.
There's another lesson, too. Atlantic Records is replacing CD sales with "small bits of revenue from many sources: Atlantic Records’ digital sales include ring tones, ringbacks, satellite radio, iTunes sales and subscription services.". Maybe Nolo is ahead of the curve with its repurposing of non-fiction books into ebooks, books on tape/podcasts, and software.
News for Nerds Roundup
Smart phones are becoming scary-smart. Thanks to Amazon's new "Amazon Mobile" iPhone app, an iPhone user can snap a photo of any product and Amazon will identify it and find the best price available on Amazon.com. Check it out here. The "Google phone" identify and even search book text and also shop your local area for the best prices on a product using its barcode scanner application, but to identify a photo of any old object? That's amazing. Advantage: iPhone.
For Thanksgiving, Lifehacker published a list of free software its editors are most thankful for. I'm happy to say I've used 8 of the top 10 and 24 of all 46, mostly thanks to Lifehacker's useful reviews.
Mozilla's Thunderbird email software is sporting a new add-on "Google Contacts" will sync your Google contacts list with your Thunderbird address book. Jeez, why keep using Outlook 2000?
In other Mozilla news, Songbird is a free, open-source jukebox application. Check it out: it looks a ton like iTunes (which I hate). However, it is open-source and extensible which means it must be better than iTunes. Better yet, the QuickTime Playback add-on lets you play iTunes-formatted songs. After you ditch Outlook for Thunderbird, consider ditching iTunes for Songbird.
I just learned that Google has bought 20 million newspapers. That's a lot of classifieds and car and real estate ads. Google will scan them for posterity and feed them into their search engine, which is good because we'll need something to remember what newspapers looked like once they're gone.
I created a social network over the weekend using Ning.com. Ning lets you create your own social networks, a la Facebook. It took me about 2-3 hours, but only because I was being picky about the color scheme. Ning is intuitive, easy to set up, and pretty full featured, and I think the layout is much more user friendly than Facebook, which I find to be an atrocious mess. Ning might be an upcoming "next big thing"; who wouldn't find it cool to create their own social network? Here's a screenshot:
For Thanksgiving, Lifehacker published a list of free software its editors are most thankful for. I'm happy to say I've used 8 of the top 10 and 24 of all 46, mostly thanks to Lifehacker's useful reviews.
Mozilla's Thunderbird email software is sporting a new add-on "Google Contacts" will sync your Google contacts list with your Thunderbird address book. Jeez, why keep using Outlook 2000?
In other Mozilla news, Songbird is a free, open-source jukebox application. Check it out: it looks a ton like iTunes (which I hate). However, it is open-source and extensible which means it must be better than iTunes. Better yet, the QuickTime Playback add-on lets you play iTunes-formatted songs. After you ditch Outlook for Thunderbird, consider ditching iTunes for Songbird.
I just learned that Google has bought 20 million newspapers. That's a lot of classifieds and car and real estate ads. Google will scan them for posterity and feed them into their search engine, which is good because we'll need something to remember what newspapers looked like once they're gone.
I created a social network over the weekend using Ning.com. Ning lets you create your own social networks, a la Facebook. It took me about 2-3 hours, but only because I was being picky about the color scheme. Ning is intuitive, easy to set up, and pretty full featured, and I think the layout is much more user friendly than Facebook, which I find to be an atrocious mess. Ning might be an upcoming "next big thing"; who wouldn't find it cool to create their own social network? Here's a screenshot:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)