Yesterday, I got an e-mail from the VP of Strategy and Planning of Trylon Communications. It was a mass e-mail with the subject "BDI Blog Event - Continuing the Conversation". Trylon co-sponsored this blogging conference that I went to a couple of weeks ago that I really didn't find particularly interesting. Then, on top of that, they sent me another mass e-mail today. Basically, they're touting their services, but if anything, they're making it blatently obvious that either a) they didn't actually attend the conference or b) they don't understand blogging at all. Here's the jist of the exchange:
Thank you for attending the BDI blog
event on May 3rd. I hope you found the presentation on “Blogs and
the Impact on Media Companies” to be worthwhile. On behalf of Trylon
Communications which co-sponsored the event, and our President/CEO Lloyd
Trufelman who spoke on the panel, we wanted to provide some follow-up since
there was so little time to answer everyone’s questions on the topic."
I didn't go to the panel. I signed up for it, but struck up an interesting conversation with a PR person from the American Foundation for the Blind and skipped out. Now there's a productive group. They just published quick tips on making blogs accessable to the visually impaired.
"Accordingly, I am forwarding links
to some recent articles that might be of interest. The first, by USA Today’s Kevin Maney, reports that
blogs might not be new, but rather a continuation of a press trend that began in
the 18th century! "
You don't say? Wow, that's really... um... interesting, I guess... if I was into bar trivia. The other links she sent? One from New York magazine and the State of the Media report. Nothing like passing links on blogging written by mainstream media to someone who not only blogs, but teaches an MBA course on blogging. But that's not even the best part! They link to a PDF press release (eek.. a press release! How non-bloglike!) and cite that blogs are...
"a PR opportunity that our firm noted back when Web logs emerged in 2002 and has been practicing on behalf of our clients ever since."
Hmm... So you've been at this for 3 years and you tell me by linking to a press release in a mass e-mail that I never opted-in for? Somewhere out there, Steve Rubel's "spidey-sense" is going off and he can't figure out where the trouble is. Its right here, Steve... in my inbox.
"Considering our firm’s
track record of delivering cost-effective, tangible editorial and corporate PR
results exclusively for many top trade and consumer publishing and media clients
nationwide since 1990 (all without strict billable hours or long-term
contracts), there may be a future match between our expertise and your
I highly doubt it.
So, I replied and gave them all the reasons why they should be blogging this, maybe politely informing me of their blog, and then never contacting me by e-mail again unless I ask for it, and simply letting me decide whether or not I want to subscribe to their blog. I also asked where the opt-out link was on their e-mail.
I get this awful thing in my inbox...
Now I'm on their "PR Ideas" HTML newsletter mailing list. Unsubscribe? I have to type in my name and my e-mail and then click a box and then click submit if I want out. So, you send me mail, then I have to type in the e-mail address you just sent me this mail at in order to stop getting it? I'm sketched out beyond words.
Pubsub presented at the conference. Let's see if they subscribe to their own Pubsub feed and find this. I can't wait to hear their response.
Lesson for the day: Don't spam a blogger.