<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css" type="text/css" media="screen"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" --><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Marketing Conversation » Marketing Conversation - New Marketing and Social Media by Abraham Harrison LLC</title>
	<link>http://marketingconversation.com</link>
	<description>New Marketing and Social Media by Abraham Harrison LLC</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 08:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/marconcomm" type="application/rss+xml" /><item>
		<title>Comment on Ugly Americans Filmed Whopper Virgins by tedlow</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/503214397/</link>
		<dc:creator>tedlow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 06:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3911</guid>
		<description>There’s a funny blog on freedomhaters.org on the Whopper Virgins commercial.

It ties it into Noam Chomsky and how the indigenous people on the commercials will most likely be forced to move to big cities when the fast food chains move in, and have to work for Burger King for a tenth of what American’s make. 

Check it out here:

http://freedomhaters.org/content/what-would-noam-chomsky-say-about-burger-kings-whopper-virgin-ad-campaign</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->There’s a funny blog on freedomhaters.org on the Whopper Virgins commercial.</p>
<p>It ties it into Noam Chomsky and how the indigenous people on the commercials will most likely be forced to move to big cities when the fast food chains move in, and have to work for Burger King for a tenth of what American’s make. </p>
<p>Check it out here:</p>
<p><a href="http://freedomhaters.org/content/what-would-noam-chomsky-say-about-burger-kings-whopper-virgin-ad-campaign" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/freedomhaters.org');">http://freedomhaters.org/content/what-would-noam-chomsky-say-about-burger-kings-whopper-virgin-ad-campaign</a><!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3911</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Twitter Public Relations from the Financial Times by Bridget Wright</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/502377171/</link>
		<dc:creator>Bridget Wright</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 07:09:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2009/01/01/twitter-public-relations-from-the-financial-times/#comment-3908</guid>
		<description>The Twitter Phenomenon is catching on so very quickly. Obviously the large companies have it, but once the smaller ones start catching on to the impact that Twitter can have, what a day that will be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->The Twitter Phenomenon is catching on so very quickly. Obviously the large companies have it, but once the smaller ones start catching on to the impact that Twitter can have, what a day that will be.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2009/01/01/twitter-public-relations-from-the-financial-times/#comment-3908</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Predictions for 2009 by 2009 Virtual World Meta-Predictions « Caleb Booker</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/501849609/</link>
		<dc:creator>2009 Virtual World Meta-Predictions « Caleb Booker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 15:09:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/27/predictions-for-2009/#comment-3905</guid>
		<description>[...] Marketing Conversation (new marketing and social media) - It will no longer be quaint to play the role of the technoboob [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->[&#8230;] Marketing Conversation (new marketing and social media) - It will no longer be quaint to play the role of the technoboob [&#8230;]<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/27/predictions-for-2009/#comment-3905</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ugly Americans Filmed Whopper Virgins by irina</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/495933870/</link>
		<dc:creator>irina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 22:48:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3847</guid>
		<description>I completely agree with this post. These commercials are not only offensive to me as a Romanian but also as a person with a brain. I saw one yesterday that ended with a guy choosing a fish over a whopper and the commentary saying "oh well, you can't win them all". Like basically saying, who cares if this dumb foreign clod doesn't like our whopper? It's that kind of attitude that keeps getting us deeper and deeper in trouble on a global scale.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I completely agree with this post. These commercials are not only offensive to me as a Romanian but also as a person with a brain. I saw one yesterday that ended with a guy choosing a fish over a whopper and the commentary saying &#8220;oh well, you can&#8217;t win them all&#8221;. Like basically saying, who cares if this dumb foreign clod doesn&#8217;t like our whopper? It&#8217;s that kind of attitude that keeps getting us deeper and deeper in trouble on a global scale.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3847</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ugly Americans Filmed Whopper Virgins by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/492195484/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:39:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3811</guid>
		<description>Well, then -- if it was actually tongue-in-cheek then all of the crew should have been wearing cowboy costumes and big hats.  Or, maybe they should have been funny or at least ironic. Their "mockumentary" should maybe have spent more time in self-mock mode and less time mocking the local "villagers." Actually, the broke the most important cardinal rule:

It wasn't funny.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Well, then &#8212; if it was actually tongue-in-cheek then all of the crew should have been wearing cowboy costumes and big hats.  Or, maybe they should have been funny or at least ironic. Their &#8220;mockumentary&#8221; should maybe have spent more time in self-mock mode and less time mocking the local &#8220;villagers.&#8221; Actually, the broke the most important cardinal rule:</p>
<p>It wasn&#8217;t funny.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3811</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ugly Americans Filmed Whopper Virgins by Jeff</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/491853945/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 01:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3807</guid>
		<description>Calling it a 'documentary' is being pretty generous. I think 'mockumentary' is the genre they had in their sights. They were being intentionally and self-consciously absurd. The entire tone is 'tongue-firmly-in-cheek.' Sheesh; lighten up, people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Calling it a &#8216;documentary&#8217; is being pretty generous. I think &#8216;mockumentary&#8217; is the genre they had in their sights. They were being intentionally and self-consciously absurd. The entire tone is &#8216;tongue-firmly-in-cheek.&#8217; Sheesh; lighten up, people.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3807</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ugly Americans Filmed Whopper Virgins by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/491805104/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:55:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3806</guid>
		<description>How offensive, to dress up "villagers" as if it were photo day at school and you were their parents, if that is the case.
*Shudder* auch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->How offensive, to dress up &#8220;villagers&#8221; as if it were photo day at school and you were their parents, if that is the case.<br />
*Shudder* auch.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3806</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ugly Americans Filmed Whopper Virgins by Stever Robbins</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/491805105/</link>
		<dc:creator>Stever Robbins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Dec 2008 23:53:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3805</guid>
		<description>I think the folks in the beta-test studio were wearing costumes. Look carefully--not a spot on them, and they looked freshly pressed. Maybe one person would walk in wearing new clothes, but every one of them...? 

What's the point of this video? Propagating fast food hamburgers around the world doesn't seem like anything worth being proud of. *Shudder*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I think the folks in the beta-test studio were wearing costumes. Look carefully&#8211;not a spot on them, and they looked freshly pressed. Maybe one person would walk in wearing new clothes, but every one of them&#8230;? </p>
<p>What&#8217;s the point of this video? Propagating fast food hamburgers around the world doesn&#8217;t seem like anything worth being proud of. *Shudder*<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/21/ugly-americans-filmed-whopper-virgins/#comment-3805</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489672062/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 13:11:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3800</guid>
		<description>I think Anonymous is assuming I am being sneaky.  I'm not.  The only reason we use the domain and the brand of some of our clients is twofold:

1) &lt;b&gt;We are consultants&lt;/b&gt;. We're hired as social media PR consultants by organizations and companies and so we act on the company's behalf as the company -- and are brought on board to work intimately with their communications team as social media PR experts.  This is the company's choice.  When we negotiate the campaign we ask, "would you like us to do the outreach on behalf of you or would you like us to do the outreach as you?" Most companies prefer to be perceived as having their own SoMe team on-staff. And, obviously, it is important to keep all of the focus on the organization and none of it on us at Abraham Harrison -- we prefer to not compete for attention with the brand we are promoting. 

2) &lt;b&gt;KISS -- Keeping is Simple&lt;/b&gt; Most choose "as them" because there is less confusion as to who is communicating -- our client, not us -- and why and how and so forth. 

We have been invited on board as a temporary service, so for all intents and purposes we are communicating as the organization. Everyone in the organization knows who we are and what we're doing.  We have the sort of expertise that people within the organization do not posses so we act on their behalf. 

So, it certainly is not intentionally to be sneaky or to get around email blocks or anything else. It is just that we offer both: outreaches as the organization and outreaches on behalf of the organization and almost all choose the former. And, these organizations and companies sign off on everything all along the way. 

And, like I said, I am proud of the work we do because what we do is 100% earned media, which means each and every bloggers who posts about our clients do it out of the goodness of their own hearts.

And that makes me even prouder!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I think Anonymous is assuming I am being sneaky.  I&#8217;m not.  The only reason we use the domain and the brand of some of our clients is twofold:</p>
<p>1) <b>We are consultants</b>. We&#8217;re hired as social media PR consultants by organizations and companies and so we act on the company&#8217;s behalf as the company &#8212; and are brought on board to work intimately with their communications team as social media PR experts.  This is the company&#8217;s choice.  When we negotiate the campaign we ask, &#8220;would you like us to do the outreach on behalf of you or would you like us to do the outreach as you?&#8221; Most companies prefer to be perceived as having their own SoMe team on-staff. And, obviously, it is important to keep all of the focus on the organization and none of it on us at Abraham Harrison &#8212; we prefer to not compete for attention with the brand we are promoting. </p>
<p>2) <b>KISS &#8212; Keeping is Simple</b> Most choose &#8220;as them&#8221; because there is less confusion as to who is communicating &#8212; our client, not us &#8212; and why and how and so forth. </p>
<p>We have been invited on board as a temporary service, so for all intents and purposes we are communicating as the organization. Everyone in the organization knows who we are and what we&#8217;re doing.  We have the sort of expertise that people within the organization do not posses so we act on their behalf. </p>
<p>So, it certainly is not intentionally to be sneaky or to get around email blocks or anything else. It is just that we offer both: outreaches as the organization and outreaches on behalf of the organization and almost all choose the former. And, these organizations and companies sign off on everything all along the way. </p>
<p>And, like I said, I am proud of the work we do because what we do is 100% earned media, which means each and every bloggers who posts about our clients do it out of the goodness of their own hearts.</p>
<p>And that makes me even prouder!<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3800</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489317765/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3799</guid>
		<description>Does that help?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Does that help?<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3799</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489317767/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:14:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3798</guid>
		<description>Anonymous

I have to say, I love your passion.  I sort of wish I could meet you. I bet you're an original thinker and a true idealist.   But we're not in the same country and you're probably not much for any of us on this end.

See, what you did was make Chris Abraham super proud.  You've gone and made his day.  That wasn't your intention of course, but he's very happy now.  Talk about unintended consequences.

But you know what? You have a point.  We must be driving you crazy.  You get an email from dan@anamigo.com, then you block it, then you get an email from sara@freshair.org, then you block it, then you get an email from dsevilla@survivorcorps.org, then you block it, then you get an email from ckelley@imcworldwide.org, then you block it, then you get an email from, cabraham@abrahamharrison.com which you block but not before he sends you another one...this time about Sarah Palin.

It's like you're strapped to a seat and you're being forced to watch a bad movie.  Over and over again.  : (</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Anonymous</p>
<p>I have to say, I love your passion.  I sort of wish I could meet you. I bet you&#8217;re an original thinker and a true idealist.   But we&#8217;re not in the same country and you&#8217;re probably not much for any of us on this end.</p>
<p>See, what you did was make Chris Abraham super proud.  You&#8217;ve gone and made his day.  That wasn&#8217;t your intention of course, but he&#8217;s very happy now.  Talk about unintended consequences.</p>
<p>But you know what? You have a point.  We must be driving you crazy.  You get an email from <a href="mailto:dan@anamigo.com">dan@anamigo.com</a>, then you block it, then you get an email from <a href="mailto:sara@freshair.org">sara@freshair.org</a>, then you block it, then you get an email from <a href="mailto:dsevilla@survivorcorps.org">dsevilla@survivorcorps.org</a>, then you block it, then you get an email from <a href="mailto:ckelley@imcworldwide.org">ckelley@imcworldwide.org</a>, then you block it, then you get an email from, <a href="mailto:cabraham@abrahamharrison.com">cabraham@abrahamharrison.com</a> which you block but not before he sends you another one&#8230;this time about Sarah Palin.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s like you&#8217;re strapped to a seat and you&#8217;re being forced to watch a bad movie.  Over and over again.  : (<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3798</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489317770/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 01:06:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3792</guid>
		<description>I am totally open about the fact that we're doing this work:

http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-again-survivor-corps-bloggers

http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-fresh-air-fund-bloggers

http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-all-who-supported-international-medical-corps

Totally open and actually complete proud!

Thanks for sharing.  We have nothing to hide.

I actually spent a bunch of time searching for bloggers myself today and to be honest, if someone doesn't want to have their identity openly known and shared on their blog, then we just move on.

You have to be very open with your public email on your public site for us to ever engage you. If you publish your email and have a public persona, then we're happy to say hello and ask for your help.

So, I appreciate your engagement and I am happy to chat with you!  Happy holidays!

Chris

PS: Actually, I am super proud about Anamigo, too: http://twitter.com/chrisabraham/status/1061845401 — so cool!
PPS: Anonymous, why would you have your email or anything about you on your public site if you want to avoid contact? That is my question. Pray tell!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I am totally open about the fact that we&#8217;re doing this work:</p>
<p><a href="http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-again-survivor-corps-bloggers" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/ahllc.eu');">http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-again-survivor-corps-bloggers</a></p>
<p><a href="http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-fresh-air-fund-bloggers" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/ahllc.eu');">http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-fresh-air-fund-bloggers</a></p>
<p><a href="http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-all-who-supported-international-medical-corps" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/ahllc.eu');">http://ahllc.eu/thank-you-all-who-supported-international-medical-corps</a></p>
<p>Totally open and actually complete proud!</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing.  We have nothing to hide.</p>
<p>I actually spent a bunch of time searching for bloggers myself today and to be honest, if someone doesn&#8217;t want to have their identity openly known and shared on their blog, then we just move on.</p>
<p>You have to be very open with your public email on your public site for us to ever engage you. If you publish your email and have a public persona, then we&#8217;re happy to say hello and ask for your help.</p>
<p>So, I appreciate your engagement and I am happy to chat with you!  Happy holidays!</p>
<p>Chris</p>
<p>PS: Actually, I am super proud about Anamigo, too: <a href="http://twitter.com/chrisabraham/status/1061845401" rel="nofollow" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/twitter.com');">http://twitter.com/chrisabraham/status/1061845401</a> — so cool!<br />
PPS: Anonymous, why would you have your email or anything about you on your public site if you want to avoid contact? That is my question. Pray tell!<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3792</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489184170/</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 23:20:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3791</guid>
		<description>Well respect to you for engaging me, I'll give you that. But it doesn't alter the fact that you're in the business of sending out unsolicited emails. You don't know what I mean by multiple addresses? You really don't?

dan@anamigo.com
sara@freshair.org
dsevilla@survivorcorps.org
ckelley@imcworldwide.org
cabraham@abrahamharrison.com

All originating from your IP address, all your staff using client domain names. I don't know what you spin this as in your own mind, but believe me, these are multiple email addresses.

You think the attack on your business is unfair - and that just proves how far down the road you've gone. You're bothering people with multiple emails they never asked for or wanted, offering them no way of unsubscribing, and you think people don't have a right to be upset by that. I bet you don't even think it's spam, because to people like you, spam is what other people send, while you of course are distributing 'online public relations, publicity, and reputation management' emails. I know Chris Abraham likes his politics judging from the Sarah Palin email he sent to everybody on the mailing list, so I'm sure he'll appreciate the irony of this being your very own 'lipstick on a pig' moment. Just because you call your mass-distributed unsolicited emails 'PR', it doesn't stop them from being spam. Lipstick on a pig.

Maybe you'd argue that because you're only sending one email every few days, that isn't spam either. The Internet might be far from perfect as it is, but if every company behaved like yours, it would be chaos. Incidentally, at the very least by failing to provide a method of unsubscribing from your company's mailing list in your mass emails you are actually breaking the law in my country, not that this unfortunately matters because you're not based in it, but probably better not to come here for a visit, because you never know.

As far as the challenging the anonymity of my post, I feel you've missed the entire point of the Internet. People have the right to their anonymity - and what's more they're protective of it precisely because there are companies like yours running around the Internet trying to harvest their email addresses and other private details in order to push their own commercial interests. Why on Earth would I reveal my identity to a company which is spamming me? How do I know that's not going to lead to my address becoming even more abused? If the best you can do to defend your company's spamming practices is to attack one of your victim's anonymity then it just makes you look terribly weak I'm afraid.

Still, the fact that you engaged me gives me some hope that you might have some decency left in you, but don't you see that what you're doing is wrong? Your emails are becoming more frequent and God forbid you should get more clients because then I can only imagine it will get worse. I only have basic spam filters on my email - so I can block one address at a time, but you keep using new ones. Do I have to resort to going through SpamCop and other systems to get your servers blacklisted? Do I have to contact your clients and complain?

If you consider that a threat to your business then I'm sorry, but you're bothering me and you won't go away. You can act the victim if you like, but believe it or not, most reasonable people seem to take the view that when commercial enterprises send out successive unsolicted emails to private individuals, it's the private individual that is the victim, not the company which insists on sending them.

If you're not spammers, provide a method of unsubscribing from your mailing list - and preferably one in which recipients' email addresses don't get reused every time you set up a new campaign with a different email address.

You say you're not 'a nasty bunch of individuals raping anything'. No, of course you're a great bunch of people - model citizens - harvesting personal email addresses from the Internet which you then send multiple emails to from multiple addresses which the recipient has no method of stopping. How could anyone possibly have concluded this was a nasty thing to be doing? Go on, take a guess.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Well respect to you for engaging me, I&#8217;ll give you that. But it doesn&#8217;t alter the fact that you&#8217;re in the business of sending out unsolicited emails. You don&#8217;t know what I mean by multiple addresses? You really don&#8217;t?</p>
<p><a href="mailto:dan@anamigo.com">dan@anamigo.com</a><br />
<a href="mailto:sara@freshair.org">sara@freshair.org</a><br />
<a href="mailto:dsevilla@survivorcorps.org">dsevilla@survivorcorps.org</a><br />
<a href="mailto:ckelley@imcworldwide.org">ckelley@imcworldwide.org</a><br />
<a href="mailto:cabraham@abrahamharrison.com">cabraham@abrahamharrison.com</a></p>
<p>All originating from your IP address, all your staff using client domain names. I don&#8217;t know what you spin this as in your own mind, but believe me, these are multiple email addresses.</p>
<p>You think the attack on your business is unfair - and that just proves how far down the road you&#8217;ve gone. You&#8217;re bothering people with multiple emails they never asked for or wanted, offering them no way of unsubscribing, and you think people don&#8217;t have a right to be upset by that. I bet you don&#8217;t even think it&#8217;s spam, because to people like you, spam is what other people send, while you of course are distributing &#8216;online public relations, publicity, and reputation management&#8217; emails. I know Chris Abraham likes his politics judging from the Sarah Palin email he sent to everybody on the mailing list, so I&#8217;m sure he&#8217;ll appreciate the irony of this being your very own &#8216;lipstick on a pig&#8217; moment. Just because you call your mass-distributed unsolicited emails &#8216;PR&#8217;, it doesn&#8217;t stop them from being spam. Lipstick on a pig.</p>
<p>Maybe you&#8217;d argue that because you&#8217;re only sending one email every few days, that isn&#8217;t spam either. The Internet might be far from perfect as it is, but if every company behaved like yours, it would be chaos. Incidentally, at the very least by failing to provide a method of unsubscribing from your company&#8217;s mailing list in your mass emails you are actually breaking the law in my country, not that this unfortunately matters because you&#8217;re not based in it, but probably better not to come here for a visit, because you never know.</p>
<p>As far as the challenging the anonymity of my post, I feel you&#8217;ve missed the entire point of the Internet. People have the right to their anonymity - and what&#8217;s more they&#8217;re protective of it precisely because there are companies like yours running around the Internet trying to harvest their email addresses and other private details in order to push their own commercial interests. Why on Earth would I reveal my identity to a company which is spamming me? How do I know that&#8217;s not going to lead to my address becoming even more abused? If the best you can do to defend your company&#8217;s spamming practices is to attack one of your victim&#8217;s anonymity then it just makes you look terribly weak I&#8217;m afraid.</p>
<p>Still, the fact that you engaged me gives me some hope that you might have some decency left in you, but don&#8217;t you see that what you&#8217;re doing is wrong? Your emails are becoming more frequent and God forbid you should get more clients because then I can only imagine it will get worse. I only have basic spam filters on my email - so I can block one address at a time, but you keep using new ones. Do I have to resort to going through SpamCop and other systems to get your servers blacklisted? Do I have to contact your clients and complain?</p>
<p>If you consider that a threat to your business then I&#8217;m sorry, but you&#8217;re bothering me and you won&#8217;t go away. You can act the victim if you like, but believe it or not, most reasonable people seem to take the view that when commercial enterprises send out successive unsolicted emails to private individuals, it&#8217;s the private individual that is the victim, not the company which insists on sending them.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re not spammers, provide a method of unsubscribing from your mailing list - and preferably one in which recipients&#8217; email addresses don&#8217;t get reused every time you set up a new campaign with a different email address.</p>
<p>You say you&#8217;re not &#8216;a nasty bunch of individuals raping anything&#8217;. No, of course you&#8217;re a great bunch of people - model citizens - harvesting personal email addresses from the Internet which you then send multiple emails to from multiple addresses which the recipient has no method of stopping. How could anyone possibly have concluded this was a nasty thing to be doing? Go on, take a guess.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3791</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489091834/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 20:19:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3790</guid>
		<description>Anonymous

It's 4:00 P.M. here and I have to head out for a few hours.  Hope to hear from you.  Hope you reveal yourself...transparency.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Anonymous</p>
<p>It&#8217;s 4:00 P.M. here and I have to head out for a few hours.  Hope to hear from you.  Hope you reveal yourself&#8230;transparency.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3790</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/489091835/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3789</guid>
		<description>Anonymous

There.  It is published.

Your personal attack on the people of Abraham Harrison is unfair.  We're not a nasty bunch of individuals raping anything.

In our outreach efforts we are instructed to write that we are contacting "on behalf of".

I don't know what you mean by "multiple addresses".

Follow ups are follow ups. It is commonly done in PR.  In the offline world it is often done within 24 hours.  We give people an entire week (as you pointed out).  Sometimes people receive hundreds of emails a day.  They may have missed the original message.  So we try recontacting them on behalf of our clients.

I don't view one extra email as being spam.

You've threatened us.  Or at least the business started by Chris Abraham and Mark Harrison.  And you did it anonymously.  How about some transparency?

Now, I'm engaging you.  That's the true spirit of social media, don't you think?  I'm wondering if you would be wiling to reveal yourself (you probably won't) and further engage.  

I had the guts to publish this.  I challenge you to have the guts to reveal yourself and develop a dialogue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Anonymous</p>
<p>There.  It is published.</p>
<p>Your personal attack on the people of Abraham Harrison is unfair.  We&#8217;re not a nasty bunch of individuals raping anything.</p>
<p>In our outreach efforts we are instructed to write that we are contacting &#8220;on behalf of&#8221;.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know what you mean by &#8220;multiple addresses&#8221;.</p>
<p>Follow ups are follow ups. It is commonly done in PR.  In the offline world it is often done within 24 hours.  We give people an entire week (as you pointed out).  Sometimes people receive hundreds of emails a day.  They may have missed the original message.  So we try recontacting them on behalf of our clients.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t view one extra email as being spam.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ve threatened us.  Or at least the business started by Chris Abraham and Mark Harrison.  And you did it anonymously.  How about some transparency?</p>
<p>Now, I&#8217;m engaging you.  That&#8217;s the true spirit of social media, don&#8217;t you think?  I&#8217;m wondering if you would be wiling to reveal yourself (you probably won&#8217;t) and further engage.  </p>
<p>I had the guts to publish this.  I challenge you to have the guts to reveal yourself and develop a dialogue.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3789</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/488951229/</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 18:42:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3788</guid>
		<description>But does Abraham Harrison understand social media? Judging by your methods, no. Behind the facade of legitimacy, you are spamming blog authors from multiple email addresses on behalf of the clients you represent. You claim to be in the business of reputation management. What does it do to the reputation of charities such as The Fresh Air Fund to be seen to be employing spammers to push their message?

Multiple identities, no opt-outs, and the inevitable follow-up one week later on the premise that you were worried your original message didn't get through or that you were re-sending because your servers were 'acting kind of funky'. Your methods and style might be a little more sophisticated that the viagra pushers, and some might regard your company as a legitimate one, but you're still a nasty bunch of individuals raping the blogosphere for email addresses to spam.

This blog proudly states it's blocked over 39,000 spam comments. How ironic, you don't like receiving spam, you're only happy to create and send it to other people.

You won't publish this comment, but just so you know, there are going to be consequences.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->But does Abraham Harrison understand social media? Judging by your methods, no. Behind the facade of legitimacy, you are spamming blog authors from multiple email addresses on behalf of the clients you represent. You claim to be in the business of reputation management. What does it do to the reputation of charities such as The Fresh Air Fund to be seen to be employing spammers to push their message?</p>
<p>Multiple identities, no opt-outs, and the inevitable follow-up one week later on the premise that you were worried your original message didn&#8217;t get through or that you were re-sending because your servers were &#8216;acting kind of funky&#8217;. Your methods and style might be a little more sophisticated that the viagra pushers, and some might regard your company as a legitimate one, but you&#8217;re still a nasty bunch of individuals raping the blogosphere for email addresses to spam.</p>
<p>This blog proudly states it&#8217;s blocked over 39,000 spam comments. How ironic, you don&#8217;t like receiving spam, you&#8217;re only happy to create and send it to other people.</p>
<p>You won&#8217;t publish this comment, but just so you know, there are going to be consequences.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3788</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/481929931/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:26:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3767</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the contribution here Sean!

Are you saying (or does this go along with your thinking) that many strategist push the concept of a corporate blog on a client and don't instruct/insist their client on the right way to do it.  That's because they want their fee not matter what.  So now they've helped XYZ Corp. establish their corporate blog...enabling them to get more clients (read: more cash) where they'll be doing a similar lousy job...and keep on getting paid to do so?

That's a long question, but I think you bring up a great point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Thanks for the contribution here Sean!</p>
<p>Are you saying (or does this go along with your thinking) that many strategist push the concept of a corporate blog on a client and don&#8217;t instruct/insist their client on the right way to do it.  That&#8217;s because they want their fee not matter what.  So now they&#8217;ve helped XYZ Corp. establish their corporate blog&#8230;enabling them to get more clients (read: more cash) where they&#8217;ll be doing a similar lousy job&#8230;and keep on getting paid to do so?</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a long question, but I think you bring up a great point.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3767</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Corporate blogging isn’t trusted; it’s up to us to fight back NOW by Sean Bohan</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/481929932/</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean Bohan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3766</guid>
		<description>Part of the problem is some of these "strategists" either don't actually believe in this stuff - they see it as another way to separate the client from their $$$ - or they are true believers who don't understand how business works, the needs of the enterprise or how to educate a client on why this is different. 

I have seen on multiple occasions the evil and the clueless "using" social media for their clients. Without a profound appreciation for the user and a "pay it forward" attitude, these efforts are doomed to disintegrate on the users' shields - and hurt other efforts because the users see it as "yet another way to market at us".

Its time we start talking about this. SoMe is moving out of its infancy and experiment phase. Clients know they need it. Agencies need to do the right thing or stay out of the way.  Fighting against ghostblogging, campaign thinking, crappy execution and lack of committment isn't good, its critical. 

Social Media, like anything done well, takes time, and effort and love. 

Thanks for this post. It's important.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Part of the problem is some of these &#8220;strategists&#8221; either don&#8217;t actually believe in this stuff - they see it as another way to separate the client from their $$$ - or they are true believers who don&#8217;t understand how business works, the needs of the enterprise or how to educate a client on why this is different. </p>
<p>I have seen on multiple occasions the evil and the clueless &#8220;using&#8221; social media for their clients. Without a profound appreciation for the user and a &#8220;pay it forward&#8221; attitude, these efforts are doomed to disintegrate on the users&#8217; shields - and hurt other efforts because the users see it as &#8220;yet another way to market at us&#8221;.</p>
<p>Its time we start talking about this. SoMe is moving out of its infancy and experiment phase. Clients know they need it. Agencies need to do the right thing or stay out of the way.  Fighting against ghostblogging, campaign thinking, crappy execution and lack of committment isn&#8217;t good, its critical. </p>
<p>Social Media, like anything done well, takes time, and effort and love. </p>
<p>Thanks for this post. It&#8217;s important.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/11/corporate-blogging-isnt-trusted-its-up-to-us-to-fight-back-now/#comment-3766</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How to become an overnight social media sensation by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/479746473/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:12:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/07/how-to-become-an-overnight-social-media-sensation/#comment-3736</guid>
		<description>@eric I am back.  With Twitter, one can have as many profiles as possible.  I run @abrahamharrison @marcon @robotchris and, of course, @chrisabraham -- I also "retweet" all the stuff I find good, which means someone I follow who has only 40 followers could have access to my 2500 followers if I "repeat" his or her message through mine.

I made a decision long ago that I needed a bigger sample size -- a larger collection of people -- in my network. I am a natural connector and a bit of a maven.

It is my particular personality type and it isn't for everyone.

If you have 2500 or so followers, you really need to pay in, pay back, and give some serious Value-Added, that's for sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->@eric I am back.  With Twitter, one can have as many profiles as possible.  I run @abrahamharrison @marcon @robotchris and, of course, @chrisabraham &#8212; I also &#8220;retweet&#8221; all the stuff I find good, which means someone I follow who has only 40 followers could have access to my 2500 followers if I &#8220;repeat&#8221; his or her message through mine.</p>
<p>I made a decision long ago that I needed a bigger sample size &#8212; a larger collection of people &#8212; in my network. I am a natural connector and a bit of a maven.</p>
<p>It is my particular personality type and it isn&#8217;t for everyone.</p>
<p>If you have 2500 or so followers, you really need to pay in, pay back, and give some serious Value-Added, that&#8217;s for sure.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/07/how-to-become-an-overnight-social-media-sensation/#comment-3736</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How to become an overnight social media sensation by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/479468777/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:16:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/07/how-to-become-an-overnight-social-media-sensation/#comment-3735</guid>
		<description>@eric I guess you have to make a personal decision when you come to these crossroads: are you going to use these networks as a vehicle for sharing, leading, and generating or are you going to use them for intimate, personal, connection and discourse?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->@eric I guess you have to make a personal decision when you come to these crossroads: are you going to use these networks as a vehicle for sharing, leading, and generating or are you going to use them for intimate, personal, connection and discourse?<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/07/how-to-become-an-overnight-social-media-sensation/#comment-3735</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How to become an overnight social media sensation by Eric</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/478881298/</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/07/how-to-become-an-overnight-social-media-sensation/#comment-3725</guid>
		<description>Informative, practical, and persuasive.  I'm still, however, a bit uncertain how open to be total strangers about essentially personal tastes. Isn't there a downside to the devaluing of the word "friend" on Facebook and other social networking sites? Isn't this a fundamental confusion of "friendship" with "potential ally" or "customer", "co-worker" or "person who I once shook hands with"? 

Don't get me wrong. I believe in friendship. As the great Spanish philosopher Baltasar Gracian advised, "Have friends. It's a second existence." I just don't know if following somebody on Facebook or Twitter or Gather makes them real friends. 

Or is this far too old-fashioned?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Informative, practical, and persuasive.  I&#8217;m still, however, a bit uncertain how open to be total strangers about essentially personal tastes. Isn&#8217;t there a downside to the devaluing of the word &#8220;friend&#8221; on Facebook and other social networking sites? Isn&#8217;t this a fundamental confusion of &#8220;friendship&#8221; with &#8220;potential ally&#8221; or &#8220;customer&#8221;, &#8220;co-worker&#8221; or &#8220;person who I once shook hands with&#8221;? </p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong. I believe in friendship. As the great Spanish philosopher Baltasar Gracian advised, &#8220;Have friends. It&#8217;s a second existence.&#8221; I just don&#8217;t know if following somebody on Facebook or Twitter or Gather makes them real friends. </p>
<p>Or is this far too old-fashioned?<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/07/how-to-become-an-overnight-social-media-sensation/#comment-3725</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A coming problem of diversity by Raafi Rivero</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/475028515/</link>
		<dc:creator>Raafi Rivero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:26:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2007/12/20/a-coming-problem-of-diversity/#comment-3693</guid>
		<description>Johnathan, I think you're right that diverse social patterns in the offline world translate to different uses of social media. One of the results is that the ways different demographic groups engage with social media create new opportunities for those who are paying attention. Any business that thrives on new and interesting ideas -- such as advertising and marketing -- suffers when the broadest amount of ideas aren't being considered.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Johnathan, I think you&#8217;re right that diverse social patterns in the offline world translate to different uses of social media. One of the results is that the ways different demographic groups engage with social media create new opportunities for those who are paying attention. Any business that thrives on new and interesting ideas &#8212; such as advertising and marketing &#8212; suffers when the broadest amount of ideas aren&#8217;t being considered.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2007/12/20/a-coming-problem-of-diversity/#comment-3693</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama’s social media strategy made the difference… by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/473905852/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 16:37:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/19/obamas-social-media-strategy-made-the-difference/#comment-3687</guid>
		<description>The Republicans have a tendency to nominate an "elder statesman" type of figure for their nominees when available.  Reagan, Bush 1, Dole, McCain.  It's then reflected in their strategies.  Sometimes it works - and sometimes that's what we need - and sometimes it fails.

I wrote this back in August regarding McCain's lack of understanding of the digital arena:

http://marketingconversation.com/2008/08/06/the-next-president-should-seek-to-understand-digital-media/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->The Republicans have a tendency to nominate an &#8220;elder statesman&#8221; type of figure for their nominees when available.  Reagan, Bush 1, Dole, McCain.  It&#8217;s then reflected in their strategies.  Sometimes it works - and sometimes that&#8217;s what we need - and sometimes it fails.</p>
<p>I wrote this back in August regarding McCain&#8217;s lack of understanding of the digital arena:</p>
<p><a href="http://marketingconversation.com/2008/08/06/the-next-president-should-seek-to-understand-digital-media/" rel="nofollow">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/08/06/the-next-president-should-seek-to-understand-digital-media/</a><!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/19/obamas-social-media-strategy-made-the-difference/#comment-3687</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Blogger outreach earned media for SEO and profit by laurent</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/473905853/</link>
		<dc:creator>laurent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 15:57:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/02/blogger-outreach-earned-media-for-seo-and-profit/#comment-3686</guid>
		<description>Yes it does take time. And time is the most precious element in business, probably before money (well may not be true nowadays). I saw from a previous post you've done a amazing job for survivor corps, and I do believe there was a lot of hours behind it. That was my point, companies compete for people's attention, social media won't escape that though it changes the rule of the game because it's more a 'people to people' one than 'system to system' like other marketing techniques.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Yes it does take time. And time is the most precious element in business, probably before money (well may not be true nowadays). I saw from a previous post you&#8217;ve done a amazing job for survivor corps, and I do believe there was a lot of hours behind it. That was my point, companies compete for people&#8217;s attention, social media won&#8217;t escape that though it changes the rule of the game because it&#8217;s more a &#8216;people to people&#8217; one than &#8217;system to system&#8217; like other marketing techniques.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/02/blogger-outreach-earned-media-for-seo-and-profit/#comment-3686</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama’s social media strategy made the difference… by Rcjh08</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/473350195/</link>
		<dc:creator>Rcjh08</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:04:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/19/obamas-social-media-strategy-made-the-difference/#comment-3682</guid>
		<description>I completely agree that McCain's advertising campaign reflected his age and campaign structure.  Although he tried to use social media strategies through Facebook, on Twitter and YouTube, Obama was more effective.  Obama's "change" motto was congruent with his ad campaign.  People were able to go online and view his TV political ads and online-only political ads.  Obama had an advantage over McCain in that his social media strategy was especially effective in appealing to younger, internet-using voters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I completely agree that McCain&#8217;s advertising campaign reflected his age and campaign structure.  Although he tried to use social media strategies through Facebook, on Twitter and YouTube, Obama was more effective.  Obama&#8217;s &#8220;change&#8221; motto was congruent with his ad campaign.  People were able to go online and view his TV political ads and online-only political ads.  Obama had an advantage over McCain in that his social media strategy was especially effective in appealing to younger, internet-using voters.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/19/obamas-social-media-strategy-made-the-difference/#comment-3682</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Blogger outreach earned media for SEO and profit by Chris Abraham</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/473002268/</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:27:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/02/blogger-outreach-earned-media-for-seo-and-profit/#comment-3679</guid>
		<description>But Laurent, all of that takes a lot of time, right? It seems to me that people might be more willing to spend the money required rather than investing the time.  Well, either way, there are companies like Abraham Harrison that can turn all of this work unto money -- and we'll do it.  Anyway, we're not the only one, but you're right.  People come into this place of "build it and they will come" is completely wrong.  Also, it usually takes longer than immediately for all of the work to start bearing fruit.

When you search for "Survivor Corps" or just Survivor+Corps on Google Live.com, AOL, or Yahoo!, you'll see that just about the entire reputation of Survivor Corps online is PWND by Survivor Corps and all of those mentions and most of those links are thanks to the hard work of my team on behalf of Survivor Corps.  It might look organic, but it is surely well-earned media.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->But Laurent, all of that takes a lot of time, right? It seems to me that people might be more willing to spend the money required rather than investing the time.  Well, either way, there are companies like Abraham Harrison that can turn all of this work unto money &#8212; and we&#8217;ll do it.  Anyway, we&#8217;re not the only one, but you&#8217;re right.  People come into this place of &#8220;build it and they will come&#8221; is completely wrong.  Also, it usually takes longer than immediately for all of the work to start bearing fruit.</p>
<p>When you search for &#8220;Survivor Corps&#8221; or just Survivor+Corps on Google Live.com, AOL, or Yahoo!, you&#8217;ll see that just about the entire reputation of Survivor Corps online is PWND by Survivor Corps and all of those mentions and most of those links are thanks to the hard work of my team on behalf of Survivor Corps.  It might look organic, but it is surely well-earned media.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/02/blogger-outreach-earned-media-for-seo-and-profit/#comment-3679</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Blogger outreach earned media for SEO and profit by laurent</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/472838621/</link>
		<dc:creator>laurent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:29:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/02/blogger-outreach-earned-media-for-seo-and-profit/#comment-3676</guid>
		<description>Also, contrary to advertising, social media enables the building of relationships and trust. Those don't go away easily either. The key as Lee said is publish and promote.....i see so many corporate blogs that just don't do the promote part. I think there're solutions for content creation all other the place (blogging platform, youtube, myspace/facebook and so on) but not many for content engagement  (i.e promotion) and it's a real challenge to do it well especially when more than 1 person is involved like in a typical marketing team.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Also, contrary to advertising, social media enables the building of relationships and trust. Those don&#8217;t go away easily either. The key as Lee said is publish and promote&#8230;..i see so many corporate blogs that just don&#8217;t do the promote part. I think there&#8217;re solutions for content creation all other the place (blogging platform, youtube, myspace/facebook and so on) but not many for content engagement  (i.e promotion) and it&#8217;s a real challenge to do it well especially when more than 1 person is involved like in a typical marketing team.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/12/02/blogger-outreach-earned-media-for-seo-and-profit/#comment-3676</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What an ice cream sundae can teach you about marketing by Washington City Paper: Young &amp; Hungry - Marketer Explains Why Free Sundaes for Kids Won’t Increase Business</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/472838622/</link>
		<dc:creator>Washington City Paper: Young &amp; Hungry - Marketer Explains Why Free Sundaes for Kids Won’t Increase Business</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:04:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/29/what-an-ice-cream-sundae-can-teach-you-about-marketing/#comment-3673</guid>
		<description>[...] an unnamed D.C. restaurant group, explains on the Marketing Conversation blog why the group’s previous tactics have failed to increase diners at its four restaurants. “They’re inherently flawed and, thus, were [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->[&#8230;] an unnamed D.C. restaurant group, explains on the Marketing Conversation blog why the group&#8217;s previous tactics have failed to increase diners at its four restaurants. &#8220;They’re inherently flawed and, thus, were [&#8230;]<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/29/what-an-ice-cream-sundae-can-teach-you-about-marketing/#comment-3673</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Online ad revenue for 2008 doesn’t bode well for 2009 by Rcjh08</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/472079763/</link>
		<dc:creator>Rcjh08</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 04:01:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/23/online-ad-revenue-for-2008-doesnt-bode-well-for-2009/#comment-3664</guid>
		<description>Due to the economy, I would think companies would be more inclined to increase their advertising online and improve the interactivity and stickiness of their web sites than increase advertising using traditional mediums.  I heard 80% of online retails had huge markdowns today, and many of those companies are offering free shipping.  I wonder if these word-of-mouth discounts are more powerful than any advertising compaign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->Due to the economy, I would think companies would be more inclined to increase their advertising online and improve the interactivity and stickiness of their web sites than increase advertising using traditional mediums.  I heard 80% of online retails had huge markdowns today, and many of those companies are offering free shipping.  I wonder if these word-of-mouth discounts are more powerful than any advertising compaign.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/23/online-ad-revenue-for-2008-doesnt-bode-well-for-2009/#comment-3664</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bob Garfield’s “Chaos Scenario” may start locally by Jonathan Trenn</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/marconcomm/~3/471676852/</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Trenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 13:58:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/30/bob-garfields-chaos-scenario-may-start-locally/#comment-3656</guid>
		<description>@Rcjh08

You're quite correct.  A few days ago, I went to Google and put in "Brunch  Northern Virginia" and there wasn't anyone advertising.  None at all.  What a missed opportunity for hundreds of restaurants.  

@Mike Keliher

First off, good to see you again.  Secondly, you're right. Larger companies will be taking the lead I think.  They're the ones that understand.  Many of the local businesses still view advertising as either putting fliers on cars or by blowing the entire ad budget by advertising the local prestigious publication.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->@Rcjh08</p>
<p>You&#8217;re quite correct.  A few days ago, I went to Google and put in &#8220;Brunch  Northern Virginia&#8221; and there wasn&#8217;t anyone advertising.  None at all.  What a missed opportunity for hundreds of restaurants.  </p>
<p>@Mike Keliher</p>
<p>First off, good to see you again.  Secondly, you&#8217;re right. Larger companies will be taking the lead I think.  They&#8217;re the ones that understand.  Many of the local businesses still view advertising as either putting fliers on cars or by blowing the entire ad budget by advertising the local prestigious publication.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://marketingconversation.com/2008/11/30/bob-garfields-chaos-scenario-may-start-locally/#comment-3656</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss><!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.832 seconds -->
