Chris Anderson (editor at Wired Magazine) recently posted this: http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2007/10/sorry-pr-people.html It explains how he is sick of receiving loads of irrelevant stuff from PR people and how he has put up all their email addresses for spam bots to find (might be breaking his own privacy policy there). I also get lots of this PR junk on some of my bigger websites and I have to say it is annoying.
Wow.. Why didn't he just create a filter with those emails in? I guess when you are writing for an international magazine you should expect to get hundreds of 'news' (yeah, i know..) items every day, especially in this age of information overflow. The problem with press releases now is that they are being used in mass volumes, created by low-cost-low-talent writers just trying to get backlinks. Its annoying to see all these low cost 'press release templates' crap sites that are trying to make any website newsworthy. Its never gonna happen by using a release template (unless your company name is listed on a major stock exchange). We pay our top writers hundreds of dollars or more per release since they have the talent to write stuff that is original and refreshing to read. These are people with masters degrees in screenwriting etc, many years at major copy agencies, newspapers and so on. Its just not in the same league as the $2-per-press-release-using-templates crowd.
The problem is that a lot of these Press Releases come from "professional" PR companies (often representing very big companies) that just add your email to their list (without you requesting it) and send you a new press release about everything and anything every day or so.
Agree and I totally understand why he was upset about it. It must be a pain researching news these days with so much noise everywhere.
There is a way he could stop this though... Not make his email public and put a form on his site. That time everytime PR companies want to contact him they have to use a form.
That's old news. It's been all over the PR blogosphere for quite some time now. I'd been meaning to talk about it on NakedPR, but I'll share a few thoughts here for now. A lot of it is also complete crap (knowing several people directly on the list and people with other firms on that list and some of the stories behind the pitching practices - remember... these aren't just lazy webmasters pitching crap that Wired couldn't care less about like some new site launch... these are major firms representing major companies). His stunt was hypocritical and a nice piece of linkbait at best... At worst, he's assembled a non-opt-in mailing list and published it publicly - again, on the hypocritical side (and should be on the illegal side - willfully enabling harvesting). And of course don't forget that Wired itself is well known enough for their sales spamming. It's not that I'm not sympathetic. I've been on both sides of the fence (receiving hoards of irrelevant press releases and working in PR where I sent releases on behalf of clients, although I try to teach them to find the most relevant editors and journalists). It's a fact of life. If you choose to work in the publishing industry where you cover news, and you encourage news tip submissions, you're going to receive them (relevant and irrelevant). That's life, and by being in that model where you encourage submissions, they're essentially solicited, and therefore not "spam." And who the hell is Chris anyway to think that he shouldn't have to manage his own inbox like the rest of us dealing with thousands of irrelevant messages weekly or even daily? If he can't take it, then he either shouldn't be in the biz, or he needs to talk to Wired about dishing out the dough for some poor intern or assistant to deal with his garbage. What's most amusing is that Wired really brought it on themselves. Not only does their site imply that they are interested in receiving news releases (putting a heavy burden on them to refer to it as spam), but their contact info on their site is completely half-assed. If they made the contacts easier to find (especially with how often publications like these bitch and moan if you call to find out), they wouldn't get so many mis-directed messages. If you finally wade through the clutter enough to find a mention of how to submit news tips / releases (you can find it on the FAQ page), you'll see this: Not a lot of instruction there, right? Well, go ahead... take a look at the contact us page. Now, it's a reasonable assumption that they want you to use the form on that page for a busy PR, since that's what they've now told you. If they got their heads out of their asses for a minute, maybe they'd update this to point to the actual news tip contact form, or even the letters to contributors form (although none is exactly adequate if you look at the copy on each of those contact pages - the first implies you may be writing about an existing article, which has nothing to do with news tips, and the second is about letters to a contributor - as in feedback generally - and again not news releases). It's no wonder all of these people were so damned confused. What I'm really curious about is who the general feedback form goes to, as I'd imagine quite a few people use it b/c of the reasons I listed above... I have to wonder if that's how he receives releases more than occasionally. If it weren't more of his own PR stunt here, the guy would have shot off a quick email to those who had been contacting him and nipped it at that. He didn't go this route on accident, and there's a lot more to it than just being pissed off. The hacks aren't any more "ethical" than the people they're trying to call out here (especially when lumping legitimate pitches where there were no highly targeted contacts available with actual newsletter servers and such from sold lists and their mass mailings).
Yes I agree with you. I have just read the post and I thought it was a bit harsh. As a PR person who subscribes to PR distribution lists, it is right to assume the people on the list wish to be emailed especially when you've just spent thousands of dollars on the list. I can see Chris's point about spamming but when you're a journo/mag editor, getting irrelevant press releases does come with the territory.
Agreed. Reminds me of some biblical wisdom. "Proverbs 14:4 - Where there are no oxen, the manger is empty, but from the strength of an ox comes an abundant harvest" This basically means that if you want an abundant harvest you will need to deal with the Ox dung in the stables!! Good luck!
if wired does not like receiving press releases then they should opt out instead of blaming others for their woes..