When Doing PR For Anti-Spam Firm... Don't Spam

netbuzz writes "Rule #1 when doing PR for an antispam vendor: Don't spam. This isn't exactly brain surgery, yet the fellow at a PR agency called Rocket Science managed to violate Rule #1 while attempting to drum up publicity for Singlefin, which provides e-mail, IM and Web filtering services to the likes of Juno and NetZero. He also violated Rules #2 and #3." Given the hundreds of press releases I get in my inbox on a weekly basis, PR folks in general need to learn that lesson regardless of their clients.

Comments

Perfect Marketing

[PylonHead]

Actually if you have an anti-spam product, then advertising it by spamming is the perfect strategy.

You'll only reach the customers that need your product.

Re:Perfect Marketing

[andrewman327]

"So by that rationale, if I am a personal injury attorney I should start ramming my car into random vehicles?"

If you are a personal injury lawyer, please drive said car off of a cliff.

Re:Perfect Marketing

[ciscoguy01]

I think Network World's complaint is completely overblown. They guy sent 11 messages to various writers at a publication that is completely on-target.
OK, maybe he could have done some research as to whom at that publication might write about their product, but heck, it's completely related to their business.

And 11 messages is completely different than sending out 4.8 million ads for V1agrka.

FWIW, I read about Singlefin.com some time ago, I signed up (free, forever, up to 10 mailboxes) to test it for clients, (but never did).

One thing interesting: On signing up on their site, I clicked submit for my registration, and almost immediately the phone rang. Allan from Singlefin. I have to say they are right on top of their business, and even though I haven't yet tried it I think it's very nice of them offering free service for a small number of mailboxes. The way it works is you redirect your MX to them, they filter the mail and send it on to your mailserver. Pretty nice. If you have the guts to let someone else be your MX, that is.

Screw ups

[linvir]

By the looks of things, only 116 actual mails were sent. In fact... the whole thing is actually just a big chain of fuckups.

1. 1. Someone at Rocket Science somehow didn't know who they were meant to email, so they just sent it to all the addresses they could find.
   2. They didn't think to BCC, so all the To: addresses were visible.
   3. Obviously, with a big single mail like this, they couldn't address it properly
   4. They forgot to stroke the ego of the nobody editor of some website
2. Mr. Egomaniac Editor then wrote a very sensationalised blog entry about the incident, incorrectly referring to it as 'spam'.
3. And submitted it to Slashdot
4. Taco accepted the submission

When will someone step up and be the hero in this story?

Re:Screw ups

[tomhudson]

If the guy was some "nobody editor" then why was his email on the list in the first place?

Pls read TFA - the "nobody editor" was bitching because his name WASN'T on the list of people it was emailed to.

All of which I might have let slide without remark if not for this final indignity: Nowhere among those 11 Network World addressees, three former employees, and 102 other journalists could I find the name that matters most: mine.

So he's bitching because ... wait for it ... he wasn't spammed!

This has got to be the WTF for the day!

*hangs head*

[blinder]

while i do not work in pr, my degree *clears throat* is in public relations... and if there's one thing our school taught is... learn to question your bosses/managers/clients. i mean, to be an effective pr person, you have to be able to ask questions like "well, gee, sending a spam might not be the best for our reputation."

now, in the case of this particular story -- the pr person who prepared this is just, i believe, a moron. the other thing we were taught in pr is that every news organization has something akin to a "wall of shame." these are places where stupid/poorly written/misdirected/etc. releases get posted for all (in the newsroom) to laugh at. this fact is always a motivator for a pr person to get it right (at least one who wants to do a good job).

included with this is the knowledge that just about every journalst/editor you come across will, of course, have a superior attitude (which i always found funny - because without pr people, journalists would either not get a story or have to do a significant amount of leg work to get it, and well, journalists, also, by and large, are lazy.)

so, with all that in mind, every release has a lot riding on it, and an effective pr person knows this and just doesn't do a half-assed cluster-fuck of a job in writing or distributing releases. pr people are targets. easy targets. highly mis-understood targets, and therefor its up to the pr people to make damn sure they don't make it any easier.