This is an oddity: I know four people running for non-local office this year–and three of them are from the publishing world.

Jeeni Criscenzo, self-publisher of a lovely novel about Mayan civilization, running for Congress in California

Sander Hicks, whom I interviewed several Book Expo Americas ago–and who courageously published a critical biography of Geroge W. Bush after St. Martin’s pulled it off the market under apparent pressure from the Bush family–running in New York on the Green Party for Senate against Hillary Clinton

Tony Trupiano, media trainer who moderates the teleseminar series from publicity firm Annie Jennings PR, and who is himself an author, running for Congress in Michigan

(The fourth is my cousin-in-law, Aaron Klein, running for a seat in the Maryland Legislature. https://www.kleinformaryland.com )

Isn’t that weird? Even weirder–I heard about all four of these campaigns from other people, and not directly from the candidates.

It will be interesting to see what happens when media figures become political figures. Let’s hope we have better results over here than the Italians got with Berlusconi. Of course, we’ve had media politicians before–but most of them have been move stars, like Ronald Reagan and Clint Eastwood. Small-press publishers and their consultants are a rather different animal.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

A group of US Military Academy alums formed a group called West Point Graduates Against The War.

These distinguished alums of West Point specifically cited the lessons they learned as students in the Academy and announced specifically that the new group’s purpose is (quoting form the press release)…

To convert the disgrace of governmental lies and evasions about the assault on Iraq into a force to redeem the honor of their country. At issue–which directly assaults the West Point honor code which forges the character of all graduates–are the falsehoods by administration officials, culminating in Secretary of State Colin Powell’s presentation to the United Nations on February 5, 2003, which catapulted the United States into a preventive war.

“This fraudulent war has done such enormous damage to the reputation and prestige of the United States and its military forces,” said co-founder James Ryan. “Unless remedied, this will prove catastrophic to our country’s interests over the longer term.”

“The West Point honor code, which mandates cadets will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do, defines honor and duty,” said Joseph Wojcik, co-founder of West Point Graduates Against the War. “And this provides us with a lifelong sense of duty, a shared responsibility for graduates to do the right thing, even if that means admonishing our country’s leadership.”

Can you believe this? West Point Graduates Against the War received a cease-and-desist letter directly from the Academy, demanding that they remove the term, “West Point”; the use of the terms…

“West Point”, “United States Military Academy”, “USMA”, and “U.S. Army” without the express permission of the Department of Army [sic] constitutes a violation of Title 17 of the United States Code…it is deeply important to protect the valuable trademarks that enhance the image and standing of the United States Military Academy in [sic] the national and world stage.”

The group, in its public response, points out that businesses such as West Point Pizza, West Point cleaners, and the West Point Motel all operate nearby. And that they, as legitimate grads of West Point, should have every right to use the name.

West Point is far more than some mere product or “valuable trademark” to us. What is deeply important to us is the “image and standing of the United States Military Academy.” This is precisely what we members of West Point Graduates Against The War are trying to uphold. Our organization’s opposition to the policies of the Bush administration promotes the very Constitutional First Amendment rights all military officers swear to protect and defend.

To these courageous veterans, I have only a one-word response: Bravo!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Of the five most profitable quarters in the world history of corporations, four have been ExxonMobil’s. ExxonMobil holds the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th places on the list. The number three spot goes to Royal Dutch Shell, another oil company.

And how much did you pay to fill up your tank this week?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

On the same day I wrote about how a certain electronics company actually threw away the money I already spent with them, I got a mailing from Verizon–a glitzy thing, custom paper size, elegantly designed, a self-mailer with two folds.

This mailing was properly targeted: the right issue, the right offer, to the right audience. It discusses changes in the way secure URLs are handled on the Web, and I (as the owner of several e-commerce websites) am exactly the person who should be receiving this. There’s an offer of a free White Paper, very good–and even a sweetener with some urgency: a free MP3 player for the first 100 respondents. That actually got it out of the low priority, do whenever pile and into the do right now, since I must be the last person in Massachusetts without an iPod.

So what’s the problem? This company spent some substantial chunk of money to bring me to the site, actually overcame my substantial sales resistance–and what happened when I got there? I entered the URL–and what did I get?

We’re sorry….
We are not able to process your request. To continue, please select
one of the following options:

* Return to the previous page.
* View the verizon.com site map.
* Go to the verizon.com home page

Sure am glad it’s not my money being squandered!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Yesterday, I went to the store and bought a new Internet router. And then I tried to set it up.

It said on the software CD that if you run a non-Windows computer (I use a Mac), double-click on a certain file. The file opened in my Internet (but from the CD). However, I tried three different browsers. All I got was a blank colored panel in Firefox, a complete blank in Internet Explorer, and a small question mark in the middle of my Safari page.

So off I went to the website to see if I could download the driver. I identified the product I’d bought and hunted unsuccessfully for the Mac driver. I did find a note that the Mac operating system is in fact supported, so that’s good.

Since I couldn’t find it, I tried to contact support. the contact page had no phone number or e-address, only a webform. So I filled in all my requested information, laboriously typed in the serial number, and tried to register–and got told to enter a valid serial number.

Worse, the page had reverted to blank; I was able to retrieve my filled out form only by hitting the Back button several times. Otherwise, I would have had to select the product and add all the data again.

My number had characters that could have been either zero or the letter O, so I tried switching one of the Os to a zero. No dice.

Guess what product I’ll be returning on my next trip to town. And guess what company has been permanently crossed off my vendor list (OK, so I’m not naming them here.)

Keep in mind, this was a completed sale. They had my money. All they had to do was make themselves available to give me a two minute explanation of how to set up the product and they’d have had a very happy customer. Instead, they’re toast in my mind.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: user experience counts far more toward the customer’s perception of the brand than all the logos, ads, and slogans in the world.

Want examples of companies that do it right? My book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First, offers several chapters that explore this idea.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

I just posted,

Within 12 hours, I read two newsletters with deeply disturbing stories–one about the media, and the other in the retail world. Both of them made me want to jump out with a big protest sign that says “Ethics are Important…Ethics are Profitable!”–but in both cases, I’d have rather too many targets to picket effectively.

So what’s the other story? Roy H. Williams, in his Monday Morning Memo (another favorite of mine despite its weak title–consistently provocative and visionary) talks about “the cashier con,” where offers turn out not to be as they were presented.

His examples include a computer clerk who offered a cheap software upgrade–without disclosing that it involved filing for a manufacturer’s rebate…and an oil change franchise that flat-out lied when Roy started the interaction by asking if they do state inspections.

I agree wholeheartedly with Roy that these are short-sighted and stupid, as well as unethical. He says…

In the short run, these cashier cons are likely to elevate profits. But can you think of a faster way to grind away brand image and erode brand loyalty? I traded with these companies because I believed in them. And now I don’t anymore. I let them keep my money. But I did not let them keep my heart.

I share these stories with you only to alert you to the dangers of shallow, short-sighted marketing. Quicky-tricky profits often come at a terrible long-term price.

Personally, on the inspection sticker con, I would have demanded an immediate refund and filed a complaint with the state Attorney General. The outfit wasted half an hour of his time, did not deliver what was promised, and could have caused him to get an expensive ticket for an outdated sticker.

If your business delivers what it promises, gain the marketing advantage by signing the Business Ethics Pledge.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

First of Two Disturbing Trends: Paid News Placement

Within 12 hours, I read two newsletters with deeply disturbing stories–one about the media, and the other in the retail world. Both of them made me want to jump out with a big protest sign that says “Ethics are Important…Ethics are Profitable!”–but in both cases, I’d have rather too many targets to picket effectively.

Joan Stewart, in her excellent weekly e-zine, The Publicity Hound, writes that more and more media are taking the old concept of paid product placement (to which I’m not particularly opposed on the entertainment side) and extending it…to news stories. Unfortunately, I can’t find it on her site or on her blog.

Whoa, pardner! If people have to pay in order to get covered in the news, it’s not news anymore. And it means that what is news may be bounced in favor of the advertorial stuff. Not good! And yet it’s happening, and not just in small markets. her article cites examples of TV stations in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

KRON-TV Channel 4 in San Francisco, for example, once a well-respected
news operation, now offers “product integration fees” to people who want
to be included in news stories. In February, the station broadcast an
11-part “Spa Spectacular,” in which each featured spa paid a fee and
bought advertising. Anchors offered viewers a chance to buy half-price spa
certificates at the end of each segment.

Of course, this ties in with the related bad idea of airing Video News Releases (VNRs) and pretending they are the original work of the station. And the other important story about consolidation of print media, dismissal of long-time and highly competent reporters, etc., all around the country.

Time to get the bean counters out of media management, I say! Yes, a true news department is expensive–but it can be subsidized by the highly profitable mindless fluff that’s cheap to produce–or perhaps by small cuts in the outrageous compensation of media execs and on-air personalities. We don’t need personalities; we need news. News–do I really have to verbalize this?…

  • Keeps the politicians and corporations honest
  • Creates an informed citizenry that can bring public pressure for change
  • Generates a historical record that will show future historians a contemporaneous account of earth-shaking events as they unfold

    It’s bad enough that the news has been so dumbed down that for the most part, it’s doing a very poor job. Switching to a paid model will be the nail in the coffin, and we’ll have to get all our news from bloggers. Don’t get me wrong–bloggers are great. But there’s also an important, even crucial, role for the professional journalist. (See the post I just made on the Pulitzers.)

    Let’s reverse this trend!

    PS: If you believe as I do that ethics are not only important but contribute to profitabillity, I invite you to sign the Business Ethics Pledge.

  • Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    I first learned of the Pulitzers going to New Orleans and Biloxi’s newspapers for Katrina coverage (and heroism)from the blog on journalism published by Poynter.org. Some very human reportage of how the newspapers covered the floods.

    Nice to see something that makes me proud of my rather troubled profession–unlike the post I’m about to make.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    1. My friend and colleague Denise O’Berry, down in Floria, was born to blog. She’s a natural-born connector and networker. I stopped counting the times I got mentioned in some relatively obscure publication and got a clip of the article postally mailed to me with a personal note and Denise’s business card–and this was loooong before I met her in person two years ago. So it shouldn’t surprise me that Denise has put together a wonderful directory of business blogs. Now I just need her to set up an ethics category so I don’t have to try to shoehorn my own blog into one of the existing categories, none of which are quite right for this hybrid beast I’ve created.

    2. More and more bloggers are functioning as journalists–but unlike professional journos, we are self-directed, in most cases have no direct supervision (e.g., a boss), and aren’t necessarily schooled in getting the story behind the story, knowing what’s true and what’s rumor, and how to behave responsibly. (Of course many bloggers do have journalism training and experience, including me–but many do not, and there have been consequences).

    Cyberjournalist.net has jumped into the breach with a Blogger’s Code of Ethics. I quote it in full here:

    Be Honest and Fair
    Bloggers should be honest and fair in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
    Bloggers should:
    • Never plagiarize.
    • Identify and link to sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.
    • Make certain that Weblog entries, quotations, headlines, photos and all other content do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
    • Never distort the content of photos without disclosing what has been changed. Image enhancement is only acceptable for for technical clarity. Label montages and photo illustrations.
    • Never publish information they know is inaccurate — and if publishing questionable information, make it clear it’s in doubt.
    • Distinguish between advocacy, commentary and factual information. Even advocacy writing and commentary should not misrepresent fact or context.
    • Distinguish factual information and commentary from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.

    Minimize Harm
    Ethical bloggers treat sources and subjects as human beings deserving of respect.
    Bloggers should:
    • Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by Weblog content. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
    • Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
    • Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of information is not a license for arrogance.
    • Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
    • Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
    Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects, victims of sex crimes and criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.

    Be Accountable
    Bloggers should:
    • Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
    • Explain each Weblog’s mission and invite dialogue with the public over its content and the bloggers’ conduct.
    • Disclose conflicts of interest, affiliations, activities and personal agendas.
    • Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence content. When exceptions are made, disclose them fully to readers.
    • Be wary of sources offering information for favors. When accepting such information, disclose the favors.
    • Expose unethical practices of other bloggers.
    • Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

    As the moving force behind the Business Ethics Pledge, I welcome this, of course. Maybe some of the ethical bloggers will find their way to the Pledge.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    A few quotes from Robert J. Shillman, Chairman and CEO of a phenomenally successful company, Cognex Corp. of Natick, Massachusetts–as interviewed in the April 10 Wall Street Journal by Joann S. Lublin.

    We never paid starting bonuses. It’s morally corrupt.

    The most important thing the package includes is a great place to work. [And] I am going to give you a bonus and options package that will hopefully make you a multimillionaire someday. If you are coming for the short term, I don’t want you here.

    The 15-year perseverance award is a trip for you and your spouse to one of the wonders of the world, like the Great Wall of China. All you do is show up. You get $1,000 in spending money and an extra week vacation.

    For 25 years’ service, we set up a charitable-gift account and make the employee the trustee. We put $25,000 in, and they can contribute it to any IRS-approved charity anytime in any amount. I want them to feel the joy of giving…How many people get to be a philanthropist? Most people never give away $25,000 in a lifetime. I care more about morale below the top.

    Remarkable from anyone. Particularly remarkable from the CEO of a very profitable technology company. The whole article is full of wonderful stuff about his attitude toward employee and executive compensation, and how his goal in starting the company was to make a difference in the world. It’s not just rhetoric, either. When he felt he had enough “toys” in his life–“So I’ve been able to go out and buy a big house, fast cars and some pieces of art. I also have donated more than $17.5 million worth of shares to charitable causes”–he stopped taking compensation and has his substantial package donated to charity.

    All I can say is “Wow!” and “Bravo!” Somehow I don’t think we’ll see him in court facing ethics violations changes any time soon.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail