The dumbest Public Relations person in the world?

Readers of this blog know that I get hundreds of unsolicited press releases and PR pitches every week. I'm on a bunch of lists because of this blog, my books, and the magazines I write for. Ugh.

I've said before that almost all the crap I get from PR agencies is spam: A broadcast email message sent to a huge number of journalists with the hope that some poor sucker on deadline and will give in and write.

- No, I do not want to buy Viag*ra.

- No, I do not care one bit about the press release announcing version 3.1 (beta) of your flexible, scalable, mission-critical, next generation product.

- No I do not want to share in the $20,000,000 (twenty million US dollars only) that your now dead husband, the former oil minister of Nigeria, had stashed away.

- No, I will not talk to the CEO of your client who has graciously made time next Thursday to speak to reporters about the company’s new initiatives in the dog food business.

[Editorial note: If you have something to say to me personally, great. Please send it. My email is public. You can also reach me on Facebook or Twitter. I do write about things sent to me in my books and on this blog. But it needs to be an idea that you send just to me. Please don’t spam me.]

OK, so let's get to what may be the dumbest PR person in the world...

Yesterday I get a press release sent via email. It's typical – some technology product that is so obscure and inconsequential that nobody, not even Geekster Weekly News would care about.

1. The subject line of the email reads: "News Release: [XYZ Company] enhances line of [blah blah]"

2. The email starts out: "[XYZ Company] is pleased to announce…"

3. Then there is a bunch of jargon-laden, hype-driven nonsense.

4. The sender then says: "Feel free to contact me if you would like more information or images to supplement this story."

5. Then the entire poorly written, gobbledygook-filled press release is pasted into the email.

So far, the release follows the standard (but ineffective) old-school PR agency playbook.

But then this is at the end of the email:

"PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL- WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Confidentiality Message. This e-mail message is confidential, may be privileged and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. Any other person is strictly prohibited from disclosing, distributing or reproducing it. If the addressee cannot be reached or is unknown to you, please inform the sender by return e-mail immediately and delete this e-mail message and destroy all copies. Thank you."

Holy cow!!

Here's some PR spam that has obviously been sent to thousands of journalists (because I got it and I have never once written about this stuff I know it is spam). But the sender says that the recipient of the spam email cannot disclose it. Huh?

You invade my email box with your crap.

You send an identical message to thousands of others.

You want me to write about your stuff.

Then you say that I cannot disclose the information because it is confidential and sent just to me?

WTF?

Comments

[David Wescott]

yeah, that's sad. Susan Getgood just wrote about this same issue a while back. The disclaimer at the bottom is common now.

I think the problem is you're actually thinking about the stuff people send you. Think less and this isn't much of an issue... ;)

[Paul Dettman]

Do you need a glass of water? This is one of the reasons I try to keep my email out of the public domain, and I do pretty well for low spam levels. In reading my daily channels (of which this is one) I am reminded that 'free' never means free. You have paid to receive this crap, and if you even glance at it, you have lost a few minutes doing that. This is bandwidth and time you could have put to better use. Even maintaining one's filters and mail rules can take hours, and that's just for dealing with my non-spam input!

My idea is that we are entering a post-email world. I can reach you on Twitter (not on Pownce yet?!) in a flash, and the character limit forces me to be clear about my message. I know for a fact that my email will have all my low-interest communications in it, whereas my Twitter/Gtalk/voicemail will have my high priority stuff to do. If I can figure out how to get companies to move to this kind of platform, all of us will be more productive.

[Frymaster]

I can't believe you read all the way to the end. I think I've read zero words on the NR's I get.

[Rachel Clarke]

That's because people rarely receive external emails from their own systems and never understand what gets tagged onto the bottom of them as a result of Corporate Comms/Legal/HR etc.
This is all outwith their control. To get rid of it, they'd most likely have to raise a huge change request, build a new system and therefore spend money. The answer is likely to be no.

[Dr. Wright]

People are using old outdated info and do not questions how effective it is or even if it makes any sense~

Dr. Wright
www.twitter.com/drwright1

[David Daniels]

I got so disgusted with poor news releases I wrote about this one: Press Releases that Suck - http://launchclinic.com/blog/2008/04/23/press-releases-that-suck/. Are they really that stupid or are they getting help? Seriously.

--D

[David Murray]

Wow! Great post with some excellent insight. Very timely as our company is about to announce a new web site... good to know there are some things we need to address. Thank you!

[mike ashworth]

I dont think that paragaph of legalise means you cant disclose it. here's my reasoning. You were the addressee, and also intended (even though part of a big list), therefore it is for use by you.

It states any other person cannot disclose its contents i.e. if you were to forward the email to me, I couldn't use its contents, which i'm sure will give me sleepless nights as it sounds fantastic ;-)

Mike Ashworth

[Barbara Ling]

I just came across your site via Twitter and was reminded of the brou-haha that erupted regarding this during the past few days. I figure, one way to have decent pitch contacts (for bloggers, that is) is to have blatant link "How To Pitch Me"! located next your contact information.

Every little bit helps.

Data points,

Barbara

[Michael Ray Hopkin]

People who send unsolicited spam do not understand their customers. They bank on getting enough hits from enough of the mindless masses to make their easy bucks on "free Internet marketing."

They can't get past the old rules. Whether it's TV, radio or the Internet, they can't move beyond traditional marketing and PR. I think people who run these types of PR campaigns are lazy. They don't want to put in the time and effort to really know their customers; to understand the true buyer persona. I feel sorry for them. Sadly they're missing out on a great opportunity. -Michael

[Beth Harte]

Either this person goes to work every thinking "I hate my job, I work with idiots, I must get a new job." Or they haven't looked at the Internet in like...never. Either way, it's a shame. Not just because of the spam aspect and the ridiculous legalese ('duh, they make me put that on my e-mails!'), but because it just makes people who work in PR look unintelligent and worse, outdated. I'd love to mentor that poor person and get them into 2008. Colleges don't even teach those tactics any more. The only people who think that’s "PR" are PR/Marketing folks who have risen to their highest level of incompetency and teach/force underlings to use those tactics (seen it first hand, got a new job).

[Scott Hepburn]

I just love that you end your post with "WTF?"

If that's not an example of The New Rules of Marketing & PR, I don't know what is. Classic!

[Janet Schwappach]

LMAO, that's rich! I just left corporate where that fascinating piece of legalese was etched from above onto the end of all email messages. I, too, read it once. Translated, I believe it means: "We're terrified and we're covering up our paranoia with official-looking crap so don't even think about screwing with us." How'd this practice start? Some lawsuit over an email that got into the wrong hands???

[Laura]

Ha! Yeah I think they are trying to trick you or initiate some type of response from you. I think the response they wanted was "Wow I must be on a super privileged list for a super cool product!" Whatever, people are so stupid. Who would really think that? But then again who actually buys the damn Viagra from the bulk emails that go out? I read somewhere a couple of years ago that people were actually answering and buying Viagra from those emails. I forgot how high the percentage was, maybe 5%? But higher then 0% would surprise me. So you never know. They just wanted a reaction from you.. and they got it.. not the way they probably wanted, but it was something!

[David Gordon Schmidt]

Rote News releases astound me in their lack of creativity. I recently looked at four releases from my client's colleagues about their respective partnerships - three of the four had the CEO's rote quote beginning with "We're excited to..." It's like their is a standard collection of CEO-speak sentences - just plug in one or two.

Note to David: RE: my full name Taken your advice.

[Jacqueline Staph @ Redpig]

D-
Wow, I was simultaneously laughing at the email sent to you, while feeling your pain in having to deal with gawd-knows-how-many of those emails a day. To some of us newbies, it is frightening, however, to see how easy it is to fall into blah PR-Speak. Thanks for reminding us how annoying it can be.

[dd]

where r the rules

[Kamagra Discount]

i really like the info at this post... thanks!!