PR to Bloggers: You’re Ugly and You Dress Funny, You Idiots

About a week or two after you start a blawg, you start receiving emails from public relations people.  They announce important things, like the law firm of Smith & Smith has finally gotten a retained case, or just purchased a new scanner, and ask you to write about it because they are sure that your readers will be fascinated.  You delete the emails, but the PR people just keep sending them, often the same ones with a note attached that they didn’t see your post on this critical news to the legal community and you’re not doing your job.

There are plenty of permutations on this theme, from announcing the new movie on William Kunstler (but no offer to provide a copy for review) to a symposium on the fertile octogenarian rule (but no offer to attend).  What they want is simple: Promote their stuff.  They get paid by somebody to try to interest you in whatever they’re selling.  There’s nothing in it for you, but that’s what they do for a living.

It’s been interesting to follow the efforts of the PR gang in attempting to coax me into becoming a cog in their marketing wheel.  I marvel at the chutzpah, that my purpose (as far as they’re concerned) is to be their free advertiser.  What I neglected to give sufficient consideration to is how they feel about the subject.  Two posts from publicists have changed all that, and I now correct my misguided understanding.

At Social Media Explorer, Jason Falls posts about What Bloggers Should Know About PR and Advertising.

I was dumbfounded when I read a recent New York Times article about mommy bloggers that indicated a conference session topic at an event called Bloggy Bootcamp was how to let public relations firms know you don’t work for free. A few months ago, I reached out to a prominent mommy blogger on Twitter to let her know that I had a client whose products she might be interested in – not a pitch, just a light toss that indicated I may pitch her down the road. She responded by saying, “I’ll be happy to work with your client. My fee is $125 per hour.” I was stunned.

It seems that some bloggers (not just the mommy kind) have a vast misunderstanding of what public relations professionals are supposed to do or be used for. It also seems that some think receiving a pitch for a product somehow entitles them to call themselves consultants and charge hourly rates to someone else for writing content for their own website. Far be it from me to criticize a blogger’s ability to make money, but these attitudes deeply concern me. While the media landscape is evolving to account for new media roles, blogger ignorance to how traditional communications and marketing works may forever ruin the notion of an unbiased media.

Do you think that Jason, maybe, missed the point entirely?  Is it possible that the mommy blogger wasn’t really trying to get paid, as much as send a message that her blog doesn’t exist so that Jason can get his client, for which Jason is getting a fee, some free publicity?  Nah.  Bloggers are ignorant.  It can’t be the myopia of self-serving public relations people.  After all, they are professionals, and the mommy blogger is just, well, a mommy. 

He goes on to acknowledge that bloggers are under “no obligation” to go along with their pitches (very kind of him to say so), but they are obliged to treat public relations people like the “professionals” they are.  After all, what possible reason would a blogger, receiving an unsolicited pitch from an unknown flak seeking to get some free publicity for their paying client on some nonsense issue have in not owing the flak a duty of being nice to them?  Bloggers.  What a bunch of dolts.

And then we have Tamar Weinberg at Techipedia who has graciously provided a Miss Manners-type resource for blogger etiquette.  No, Tamar is not a blogger, but a public relations person who, no doubt as a public service, created rules for bloggers to be nicer to public relations people.  She explains the purpose of her rules, oh the pain of being a professional PR person forced to deal with those evil, nasty bloggers.

What if you were involved in the task of blogger outreach? Let’s say you worked with a client to give away a freebie to readers of specific blogs. The client approves the pitch, which you targeted to the blogger, and you send it off to the chosen bloggers.

Now let’s assume one of the bloggers responds with, “I have read your email carefully and it would appear that you have omitted the part where you request my advertising rate card.”

(Yes, forget about organic promotion. The money is where it’s at for some bloggers, and story tips or ideas are unwanted. I bet you’d wonder what the FTC would say, especially given that this particular blogger has a disclaimer stating that they will never post sponsored or content where money exchanges hands.)

Instead, you decide to clarify your specific role in this initiative. You say, “this is merely a story idea as there’s no advertising budget. Would you like to run with the story?”

The blogger responds with something that goes along the lines of, “they could pay you to email me, maybe they should pay me to blog about it.”

They then write two nasty tweets about a poor approach that they likely thought you never saw.
Tamar is so right.  I never thought about it that way.  They’re just trying to make a living, pitching their client’s promotional stories just in case we’ve got nothing else to write about.  Is that so bad?  Why do we take offense at their efforts to turn our blog into their promotion machine? 

Seriously, they are right to some extent.  Blog and you’re going to get pitched, for stories, products, whatever.  To the extent you have readers, other people want to get their message before them, and that’s how they roll.  If you’re not interested, there’s always the delete button.  The PR people know that it’s a shot in the dark that you’re going to take them up on their offer, and that’s the nature of their job.

But this, like most things, is a two-way street.  When some PR firm decides to target you, it may well result in a dozen emails a day for things that hold no interest whatsoever.  And the emails inform you that you are receiving them because you requested them, shifting the burden to you to “unsubscribe”.  A wee bit disingenuous?  Then there are the ones that want you to promote a product or the movie, but don’t want to let you use the product or see the movie.  A wee bit disingenuous?

Then there are the overly aggressive flaks, who email over and over because “you didn’t respond to my last email,” until you get the email telling you what a jerk you are for not showing them the respect of responding. 

The problem with PR people demanding respect in return is that nobody asked for them in the first place.   They assume, as one would expect from a job (no, it’s not a profession) demanding thick skin and facile rationales, that they are doing the blogger a favor.  As both Tamar and Jason argue, bloggers are going to need them one day.  Don’t be too sure of that.  You may be giving yourselves way too much credit.  Somehow, I suspect I’ll manage just fine without you.  When you show up unwanted and unneeded, you really don’t get to demand much of anything.

Bloggers don’t really expect you to pay them to promote your wares.  Jason said he was “stunned” by the mommy blogger.  He apparently stuns easily.  Rather, bloggers are trying to make it clear that they are not your freebie promoters, and they are not interested in being your freebie promoters.  It’s not that they might be against the idea of making a little pocket change on their blogs, and yes, we are all aware of the FTC rules and are happy to comply (do you really think nobody knows anything about anything except you?), but we similarly know that you’re trolling for free publicity.  For somebody who thinks they are a “professional” in sending messages, you’re not very good at receiving them.

I’m just trying to be friendly and helpful, in a Miss Manners type of way.

44 comments on “PR to Bloggers: You’re Ugly and You Dress Funny, You Idiots

  1. John Burgess

    I’m still trying to find a way–short of actually paying cash money–to have auto dealers remove their advertising and logos from cars they sell.

    I don’t wear clothing with designer labels visible; I don’t walk around with a sandwich board promoting everything I happened to have bought. Why do car dealers think I should advertise them for free?

  2. SHG

    While this issue is off-topic, it’s long been a pet peeve of mine as well.  In the old days, when they drilled holes into the truck to install their metal name/logo, I used to include in the contract that they wouldn’t do so or they would have to pay me an advertising fee equal to the cost of the car.  I actually went to war when a car I purchased (a 1982 Alfa Romeo Spider Quadrofoglio) had the name on it when I went to pick it up. I forced them to change the trunk lid for one without the name.

    Nowadawys, most tend to put a license plate cover on the cars with their name on them.  I just make them take it off.  Unless they are giving me the car for free, they don’t get to advertise on a car I purchased.

  3. Tamar Weinberg

    Scott, I appreciate your commentary, but you’re missing a few important points.

    “No, Tamar is not a blogger, but a public relations person who, no doubt as a public service, created rules for bloggers to be nicer to public relations people.”

    This is part of the problem. Bloggers (like you, Scott) make the assumption that I’m not a blogger. Excuse me, but did you bother to read the portfolio on my blog (one of the widgets in the footer)? [links to various posts deleted] The bottom line: Actually, yes, I really am a blogger. I actually engage in blogger outreach because I’d like to think I have a pretty good idea how bloggers think.

    Furthermore, you acknowledge that there’s two sides of the coin. Yes, I agree on that point as well. The blog post that you so eloquently wrote about is a follow up to this post which talks about the two way street that you brought up. This was part two, the follow up. I’m going to bet you didn’t read part one.

    I appreciate your comments, Scott. I do. But like “PR pros” are required to do due diligence about the blogger to see if the pitch is of interest to the blogger, so too should bloggers make sure to look the whole picture. That post which you quoted linked out to my other post which pretty much nods in agreement on your comments. Yet you have made this specific commentary entirely one sided, indicating that you didn’t look at the other point of view.

    It might be in your best interest to read a little more about me, update the comment you made which doesn’t accurately depict who I am, and then reassess whether we’re really working against each other here or actually fighting for the same goals (for the most part).

  4. SHG
    There are few things I more enjoy than a shameless self-promoter who assumes that everyone else is a blithering idiot.  No, Tamar, you are not a blogger. You are self-described social media marketer who uses blogs to promote yourself.  I’m sure the nuance is lost on you, but I’ll just have to live with that.  I was well aware of your “blogging” and your assumption to the contrary is the sort of foolishness I would expect of you. From one of your posts, ironically about how to “spot” internet snake oil salemen:

    For me, Internet Marketing is not just a profession but it’s a passion. I read books and blog posts on the subject not only to further my career but because I love what I’m doing and I want to feel empowered personally and professionally.

    Fascinating.  Tell us more about you.

    You are not a blogger. You will never be a blogger. You are promoter, whether or yourself or others. You wouldn’t get the difference if it bit you in the butt.  There entirety of the links in your comment was directed at self-promotion.  As much as I admire tenacity, even shameless tenacity, your insertion of your “all about me” links was utterly needless. You need only say that you’ve written on many blogs to make your point, and I need only reply that you’ve done so as part of your massive promotional effort to distinguish what you do from what bloggers do.  See how easy that could be?

    As for the “first part” of your story, I did indeed read it, and found it wanting.  But it was hardly about it being a two way street.  Rather, it was how PR people can be more effective in getting bloggers to bite on their pitch.  While it did have some criticism of poor reactions from PR folks, it was a how-to guide for blogger outreach.

    That said, it has no bearing on your deigning yourself Miss Manners and telling bloggers how we must behave toward unsolicited PR pitches.  Did I miss anything?  I’m sure you’ll let me know if I’ve not done my due diligence to your satisfaction, since you’ve elected yourself the voice of the blogosphere.

  5. Tamar Weinberg

    Scott, you clearly already seem to know everything about me. I can’t even disagree with you because you think you already know the answers. An intellectual discussion instead has translated to what I see somewhat as a personal attack. The truth of the matter is: you’re wrong. I started blogging long before I did anything remotely close to social media marketing. I started doing social media marketing because of an understanding of what worked online and didn’t. Somehow through this all, though, you forgot that real people are behind monitors, something that I haven’t lost sight of.

    I understand your attack on the PR industry, but you’re missing the point. Some PR people might actually know what they’re doing. Would you ever fancy that? (You didn’t read the comments on the post either, did you?)

    Go ahead, consider me an egregious self-promoter just because I’ve elected to explain to you that I actually AM a blogger. And good for you that you removed the links to all the blogs I contributed to! By your criteria, that was obviously me self-promoting again, even though my intentions were purely to let you know that if I was really not a blogger (and if I was only a self promoter), I wouldn’t be involved with such publications. I guess the justification and even the chronology still falls on deaf ears. You’re convinced that I’m here with an agenda and you’re sorely wrong. Keep at it. You’d still be wrong.

    And by golly, I’ve clearly elected myself the voice of the blogosphere! I speak for myself. I speak from experience. Go ahead, rip that apart if you must.

    Oh, and for the record, I rarely ever do blogger outreach. In fact, I haven’t done it for awhile now. But I do think that I have enough experience to comment on some poorly misguided bloggers. It’s not only the PR people who screw up (though that happens a lot more often, and that’s a fact that I have acknowledged). THAT was the point. If you look at it any other way, you’ve misjudged me again.

  6. SHG

    Spare me. You want to tell us all about the wonderful you, then whine about a personal attack?  You’re obviously not stupid, so I’m left to conclude that you’re merely disingenuous.  It’s not flattering.

  7. Jason Falls

    Thanks for the continued discussion Scott. I agree that your assessment of Tamar and me is a bit misinformed. Can’t we all agree that it’s okay for a PR person to also blog and a blogger to also want to make money from their blog? None of those points are really at issue.

    Tamar and I walk both lines. We get irrelevant pitches just like you. We try to pitch bloggers but only with relevant information that their audiences might find useful. Whether it is or it isn’t is certainly in the eye of the beholder. Good PR delivers relevant information to a blogger who can then decide how or if to use it.

    Yes, there are bad PR people out there. If you look at the body of our work, Tamar and I are really trying to help PR folks understand bloggers, not the other way around. But the posts you reference (thank you for the reference and links, by the way) are meant to also inform some bloggers as to why PR people might reach out the way they do. And, at least in my post, why they might also have a strange reaction when you ask them for money.

    We all agree that PR needs to get better as an industry. The only way we do is through discussions like these. Our hope, though is that bloggers can perhaps meet us halfway for now.

    Or at least politely say “no thanks” if they don’t want the pitch.


  8. Windypundit

    There are bloggers who spend many hours a day updating a dozen or more blogs, posting heavily keyworded content on every one. Their only goal is to draw in search engine hits so people will click their ads. To bloggers like that, PR folks who will pre-write stories are a useful source of content.

    Case in point, someone named Mitzi D Florentino keeps sending me email offering to “sponsor” my website. To me, sponsoring my site means paying me money. But that’s not what Mitzi has in mind:

    Here’s the information on our sponsorship deal:

    Every day, we write in-depth articles on a number of topics. We will be happy to let you use our articles for free either:

    1. “as is”
    2. You can change them as much (or as little) as you wish and you will own the copyright
    3. As a starting point for your own writing

    Furthermore, anytime you use our content, we will promote your site across our network of 2,000+ blogs.
    The only thing we ask in return is a single link to our sponsor, because that’s what pays for our efforts.

    There’s a whole ‘nother blogosphere out there that folks like us would hardly recognize.

  9. SHG
    First, thank you for not trying to sell me that you’re the PR version of Mother Theresa.  That said, this is the part of your comment that is curious:

    Our hope, though is that bloggers can perhaps meet us halfway for now.

    Why?  You’re making a living off it. We’re minding our own business.  We ask nothing of you. We don’t bother you. We don’t harass you. We’re just doing our thing, minding our own business, having some fun.  We should we be expected to meet you halfway, quarterway, anyway?  You’re making money off of us, or at least trying to. And that’s not enough?

  10. Tamar Weinberg

    Did I ever say I’m wonderful? I said I’m a blogger. I listed the blogs I wrote for, which you so kindly decided to edit out to further YOUR agenda/messaging. It’s your platform and you’re entitled, but it only goes to show that you are continually misjudging me and you don’t know anything about me.

    This should be an intelligent discussion, not a platform for attack. But again, it is your own platform, so you can do what you want. I’ll continue to say, though, that you’re wrong.

    Also, I’m sure you knew this since you read all my posts, but I never considered anyone an idiot either. I do consider some people impolite and their responses inappropriate, like the person who was the subject of my story which you quoted.

    Stop reading between the lines when there’s nothing else to be read. And stop making character judgments that are completely off the mark.

  11. SHG

    Had you listed the blogs you wrote for, they wouldn’t have been edited out.  But that’s not what you did, is it?  You linked to yourself all over the place. That’s what I edited out.  Yup, it’s my “platform” (bloggers call them blogs, not platforms, by the way) and I don’t allow commenters to insert links to themselves.  I didn’t before you got here, and the rules don’t change for you.

    You are right this should be an intelligent discussion.  Notice how Jason’s approach differed from yours.  See anything different?

  12. Tamar Weinberg

    Very good point, Windypundit. As someone who has been involved with dozens of blogs, including several high profile ones, there actually IS blog fodder from press releases. Most of them downright suck, but there are some rare gems that really resonate with me and would absolutely resonate with my audience.

    I’d never send a press release, though. In the blogger’s day and age, traditional tactics like that are tired.

    I’ve seen those Mitzi emails — gotta love what they come up with. 🙂

  13. Tamar Weinberg

    I don’t need to get link value and I apologize if you thought I was adding links for the traffic or the self-promo or clickthroughs. I did it to make it easier for you to find out a little more about my blogging background.

    Also, thanks for the telling me that “bloggers call them blogs.” I used the word “platform” to vary my word usage. Someone reading this blog post about blogging might get sick of reading the B word.

    Jason’s approach differed from mine because he didn’t feel the need to defend himself about inaccurate character assessments. If you hadn’t made that comment about me having zero blogging experience, my first response to you would have been much different.

  14. SHG

    I think if you look up a bit that you’ll find I wrote that “Tamar is not a blawger,” not that Tamer has zero blogging experience.  As I’ve already explained, you’re not.  The mommy blogger is a blogger. I’m a blogger. Windy is a blogger. You, Tamar, are not a blogger, even though you have written many posts that appear on blogs.

  15. Tamar Weinberg

    Look at me reading between the lines there. Of course you didn’t say that and I shouldn’t have assumed you thought that of me.

    But I don’t understand, then, what would make me a blogger by your standards. If I didn’t do anything at all related to Internet Marketing, what would I be? Would I fulfill your minimum criteria to be a blogger then?

    Little do you know that I have my own mommy blog too. And a few other blogs. [No links, of course.]

    So what do I need to do in order to fit your definition of blogger? Is it simply because I do internet marketing that I cannot be a blogger? Do the two titles have no way of coexisting?

  16. Jason Falls

    Why? So we don’t have to hate each other? Blogging is a new medium. There really aren’t rules or traditions. PR folks are going by admittedly old-fashioned standards. Some are getting hammered for it (some for good reason). Others are re-learning what relationship building is about.

    And if that’s not good enough, I’d offer that PR folks are helpful to bloggers if they do their homework, know the blog’s audience and blogger and make the pitches relevant. I get pitched a lot. Most of them are crap and I delete them. But every now and then I get a pitch (even from PR folks I don’t know) that interests me. I respond, ask for more info and build a good piece of content for my readers.

    The PR person helps facilitate good content for my audience. So I’m willing to tolerate a little crap to get some good stuff. My hope is, with intelligent discussions, we all understand the environment better and can help one another when it’s appropriate, leave one another alone (or perhaps just be friendly acquaintances) when it’s not.

    And I see that you and Tamar have gotten into a bit of a spat. She is a blogger. In fact, I’d consider Tamar more of a blogger than a PR (or promoter as you indicate) person. But she’s spent a lot of time bridging that gap between the two. I hope you can see both of us are trying to do that, not pick fights.

    Honestly, I appreciate your take on the matter. I know there are some bloggers who will never see the value in PR folks or see them as helpful. I just hope to show there are good ones out there if you’re willing to see them.

    Appreciate the continued discussion, Scott.

  17. SHG

    I accept your proposition that there are good PR folks out there.  Where I’m stuck is why I owe them anything. I didn’t ask for their help.  I don’t use what they’re offering. So how do I end up owing them anything?

    Addendum: Let me put this to you another way. You get a cold call on the land line (I’m very retro) during dinner for replacement windows.  You don’t need replacement windows. You can:

    1. listen and politely decline. 
    2. hang up.
    3. say no thank you and hang up.
    4. listen and impolitely decline.
    5. interrupt and tell them to go fly a kite (or worse).

    Do you, as the recipient of the cold call, owe the caller responses 1, 2 or 3, or are you equally entitled to employ 4 and 5, rude though they may be?  Must you get along with the cold caller?

  18. SHG

    Calling your website a blog when it’s used as a marketing vehicle doesn’t make it a blog. 

  19. Ken

    I’ve observed that people in marketing tend to view any content they put up as a “blog.” Bloggers, on the other hand, tend to view marketing content on a contiuum with spam, spam blog comments (“Hey good post I will visit again”), splogs, content-scrapers, and other means that approach the internet as an instrumentality to make money.

    Scott (and I) fall into the category of bloggers who are patently not in it to make money or promote our practices. That’s true of me because I blog semi-anonymously, and of Scott because he tends to act like such a misanthrope here that it’s impossible his blog would score clients. Except, I suppose, masochistic clients.

  20. Angel Djambazov

    Hi Scott,

    A bit like Mark Twain you have a nice edge to your wit. Excellent point that PR folks are indeed paid to distribute information and at times quite shamelessly.
    At times I think of PR similar to the way I think of paparazzi. The relationship between bloggers and pr can be likened to celebs and paparazzi. Often those who are in the limelight hate the paparazzi but it can be argued the very same pictures they hate are what sell the magazines that build their fan base. PR is similar. Often the PR announcements being churned out faster than McDonalds can serve happy meals are annoying. But occasionally they provide insight to news that allow bloggers to get a scoop for their readers, provide offers that allow bloggers to provide unique benefits to their audience (don’t forget the new FTC regs), and they provide inspiration for all sorts of posts…including threads like this.


  21. Tamar Weinberg

    And before I created this website and still wrote for blogs, what was I then? A blogger with no home base?

    That might be a fair assessment of my website, but most people would call it a “marketing blog.”

    What would you say of Jason’s website? Is that not a blog?

  22. SHG

    Your analogy falls a bit flat, since being in the public spotlight is that makes someone a celebrity.  On the other hand, if you look beyond this one post, you may see that I’ve posted a couple of others having nothing to do with PR or Marketing, and don’t rely on PR or Marketing as the source of my writing or inspiration.  Had this post never happened, no sleep would be lost.

  23. Jason Falls

    Wow. Gotta good laugh out of that. Kudos to Scott for posting it. I assume you know each other.

    He can come across as pretty harsh, but everyone deserves a voice, I guess. And I’m bettin’ he’s notched a client or two in his day from it. I’ve learned that some folks like a straight shooter, even if they piss off a few from time to time.

  24. Jason Falls

    Do I get $2 for that since it was a question? (Kidding)

    I normally do 1 or 3 because I think it’s important to be polite to people. I don’t owe them that. But it sure keeps everyone involved from being mad, stressed or worse.

  25. SHG

    This being your eighth comment, my guess is that we were done about three comments ago.  If you can’t make your point in five, the cause is lost.

  26. SHG

    Exactly.  You make the choice to be polite, but you don’t owe it to them.  And do you take paypal? (Kidding too)

  27. Amy Derby

    I don’t think bloggers, in general, have any duty or reason to play nice with the PR people if they have no use for them. You come to my house uninvited and try to sell me a car, I will tell you I don’t drive. No matter how pretty you paint the package, I don’t need a relationship with a car salesman. But some of these bloggers complain that they want the car, and then slap the salesman in the face when he tries to offer a free one.

    In non-lawblog-land, there are plenty of “bloggers” who started out writing about their kids’ most embarrassing moments and what kind of movies go best with bad beer. They wrote as a hobby, out of a love for their topic, and eventually learned they could make money doing things I personally find to be unethical. One example is the sleazy type of “pay me to write about your stuff” propositions common among mommybloggers. Yes, some of them do charge $125 per hour to blog about a brand. And yes, some companies do pay them to. I’ve been watching it with disgust for years, and it’s only getting worse. I believe in a separation between content and ads, because tearing down those boundaries corrupts the marketplace. No one was happier about the FTC stepping in than I was.

    The few PR folks I know and respect do their jobs in ways which reflect that they know what they’re doing, and they respect boundaries. Unfortunately, the internet has made it so that any joker can now call himself a PR 2.0 guru guy. That’s where things take yet another bad turn.

    This post is kind of funny to me, because I know Jason. He is one of the few PR people I’ve never wanted to set fire to. I don’t always agree with him — which is probably irrelevant, since I’m not in PR nor am I in a position to be pitched to blog about a corporate brand — but I think I understand what he’s getting at in this particular post. I didn’t take it as being targeted at bloggers like you, Scott. I thought he was talking about the types who really do want to monetize their blogs, but are going about it in ways most of us find unethical. Apples, oranges, and perhaps a rutabaga.

    P.S. I do dress funny.

  28. Angel Djambazov

    But isn’t that the allure of blogging and social media. Everyone can share the spotlight. Of course you could be just writing for yourself but chances are if a PR team found your site they found it through sharing mechanisms. Much like I found you through Twitter.

    But as you say, either way no sleep would have been lost.

  29. SHG

    But isn’t that the allure of blogging and social media. Everyone can share the spotlight.

    Only for the narcissist, chronically unemployed, Munchausen syndrome sufferer, Ned Beatty wannabe and the Slackoise.

  30. Angel Djambazov

    “You forgot ugly, lazy and disrespectful.” You seem to be a paladin who despises the shallow vapid spotlight. Fine. But without it you’d be just posting to the void. SXSWi just happened, most folks wanted to know how their content (film, music, and blog posts) could be found. Someone should elucidate them on their wannabe tendencies. Better yet, put out a press release about it.

  31. SHG

    You’re still trying to make sense of it within your own paradigm.  Hard as it is to imagine, some of us just like to write.  There are a handful of other criminal defense lawyers out there who also have blawgs, and we go around in circle ripping each others’ heads off, have a few laughs and, occasionally, learn stuff or produce something useful.  As for the other people who drop by here, I can’t explain them at all.  Maybe Ken is right and they’re just masochists?

  32. NotoriousROB

    I’m really loving this post, and thinking about what the implication is about “bloggers” — people who write and blog without much regard to financial gain.

    I’m curious what you think of political bloggers — they’re not in it for the money, but they’re obviously trying to push a particular agenda.

    You could argue, I think, that political bloggers are a type of “marketing-blogger”. But it doesn’t seem to me that they can be painted with a broad brush as a self-promotional, self-marketing wannabe blogger.

    Just curious about how you draw the line between “blogging-as-marketing” and “real blogging” if you will.


  33. SHG

    Most people, particularly bloggers, have an agenda.  I don’t see why political bloggers aren’t as legitimate as any other bloggers whose purpose is sincere rather than pecuniary.

  34. Curt Sampson

    I agree that it’s important to, within reason, try to avoid making other people mad or stressed. You can do that for me (and apparently others) by not trying to advertise to or through me.

    So why do you persist in this rude behaviour?

  35. Curt Sampson

    Actually, I wouldn’t be able to say whether Scott’s in it to promote his practice or not. It certainly does so, in that he demonstrates his skill and sense here on a continuous basis.

    I find it hard to believe it wouldn’t get him clients. Were I in need of a criminal defense attorney in New York, he’d certainly be on the list, based on this blog.

    And I very much doubt that a reputation for being a bit, uh, “aggressive” can hurt when you’re an attorney.

  36. Pingback: Just Between Us Whores | Simple Justice

Comments are closed.