I’d love your comments on my blog, if you have time and interest. You can find it here: http://www.reidwegs.com/2007/11/please-dont-go-chris-anderson-on-me.html

I respect Anderson’s story, but not so much the man himself from past dealings with him.

PR firms need to wake up.

It is time to scale back and to consider quality message design in all aspects of communication, be it a press release or an entire campaign. Like you said, we need to “build relationships, not lists” and “humanize the process.”

As stated above, an important point to take away from this incident is the need to re-evaluate how we measure success in the public relations industry. It should not be about the number of placements. I agree with Rich: we need to get back to the basics.

Very glad to see real professionals, like my friend Brian, holding up the light to help guide other PR practitioners – great post…

Thank you for stirring the pot, and for your frank insight on this topic.
You’ve had my subscribe for a long time now.
One question, did you create those LOL cats, or are you friends with icanhazcheeseburger?
Either way, they’re great.

Lisa

Bottom line: irrelevant pitching has to stop. The list at the Long Tail, as extensive as it is, is only a fraction of the problem. And it’s not going to stop unless there’s an appropriate deterrent.

Maybe it’s easy for me since my email isn’t on that list. Nobody from my company made that list. I’d like to think it’s because we take the time to do it right, and we take efforts to be relevant and respectful. Maybe it’s just because we knew not to send irrelevant emails to Chris there.

When you’re in PR and you’re pitching, you’re sending a communication that is intended to enter the public domain. You can’t be shocked if someone publishes your email address or message verbatim. Don’t like it? You’re in the wrong business.

As for those who complain that they have resource restraints coupled with demanding clients, you need to manage client expectations better. You have to spend some time teaching. And that might mean you don’t do as much of this work. So be it.

One final thing – it seems to me that people are treating this list as if it were some kind of death sentence. It’s not. It means that the people on this list made a mistake, and this one time they got burned. It doesn’t mean their careers in social media are over. Hopefully all it means is they won’t do this again.

Maybe Chris has a HUGE ego – but so what? He’s the guy you want to pitch, you have to manage that. He’s not the first and won’t be the last.

It keeps us on our toes and reminds us the Net is the great equalizer.

I did write Chris and tell him many of us were actually taught in school to first pitch editors, as it’s their job to assign stories to their teams.

So I agree with you: Many who were outed were likely just doing their jobs as directed, and instructed.

Still, it’s Anderson’s right to use the Net and express frustration, as we continue to (hopefully)use the Net to best do our jobs.

I really appreciated your authenticity on the subject.

We were discussing some of your ideas at lunch on how to get back what e-mailed news releases took away (the subject for yet another post). I think the best advice for most public relations is to get back to the basics…

Number of placements was never what public relations was really supposed to be about. That is probably the number one misconception that tied the hands of public relations professionals. Break that measure and the rest will follow.

At least, that is what I think.

Best,
Rich

Which brings me to the point of my comment … time. The lack of it. For everyone, including all my former journo colleagues who have their backs against the wall and don’t respond to emails (selectively, carefully directed to them according to their beats) and/or who use voice-mail to screen all incoming calls.

And, time … the lack of it, for all those PR account executives driven to produce the same results (placements, god I hate that word) in an-ever shrinking traditional media universe. Sure, there are the lazy ones who just spam, always will be. And I won’t let them off the hook — or let myself off the hook from the times that I’ve sent out the odd blast — by saying they’re driven to it by a lack of time in the face of an ever more difficult task of securing, er, coverage for their clients’ news. But, certainly, time and a shrinking media universe tempt them/us to use the odd blast when faced with a deadline and the need to produce results.

Ultimately, and here’s the irony, I think, it’s the technology we all love and tout and work with to our advantage every day that’s also driving us bonkers, journalists and PR folk alike, helping to speed up our deadlines, cut our margins and encouraging us to behave in ways that normally civilized individuals might think twice about.

Like spamming … or like publishing a list of all the spammers. Shame on PR as a profession for doing way too much spamming of releases, but shame on Chris as well for going to the extreme of outing the perpetrators. Since he had to open those emails to see what was in them, he might have just had a macro-keyed insert warning response letting them know they were being deep-sixed and their email address banned. Even threatening a public outing if they didn’t desist.

An easy, common-sense approach that would have resolved the situation, though perhaps not quite so anger-quenching or ego-satisfying as a good old-fashioned public outing in the blogosphere town square.

And, speaking of time, look how long this comment of mine has been … and it’s not even 4 in the morning!

Bottom line: To either rely on compiled media lists or to expect expert pitches are both veiled suggestions of, “I’m too good for this.” To that, I say, okay. I canceled my subscription to Wired after reading his post, and I sent my pitch to his publisher. I can get the news and features elsewhere.

At the end of the day, it’s the ego that pisses me off. No one in this game has the market cornered on social media and communications, period.