I like to think of myself as an easy-going person, a live-and-let-live kind of guy. But like everyone, I’ve got my pet peeves, those seemingly petty annoyances that are guaranteed to start me on a rant.
One of those is writers whose command of the English language is questionable—people who, for instance, have become lazy enough to use “then” when they mean “than,” or who confuse “their,” “there” and “they’re.” But right behind them on my peeve-o-meter are PR people who employ a cute and/or familiar tone to try to interest me in their clients’ products or services.
I received an email Monday from one such PR person, who began her missive, “Hi Paul, A little bird told me you may want to feature (product listed here) for an upcoming holiday spread in Foodservice Director :). Am I right?” (And yes, the little smiley emoticon was part of the sentence.)
Now, three things bothered me about this email. First was the use of the familiar tone, even though the body of the email demonstrated that the person really had no idea what our magazine was all about. Second was that the email went to several people in our organization, and each email began the same way, which kind of negated that whole “this email was written just for you” tone the writer tried to set.
Third was the “cuteness” factor. I’m not sure what type of editor would find this opening endearing, but I definitely am not it. I am a serious person editing a serious business publication, and it actually offends me to receive an email that reads almost like it should be addressed to the editor of “Highlights For Children.”
This sort of thing happens on a rather frequent basis, especially the familiar tone. (In the interest of full disclosure, I must say that I almost never receive these types of press releases from people who represent our advertisers or who otherwise are familiar with this part of the industry.)
I admit that some PR people are so good at it that I sometimes find myself pausing in mid-sentence, asking myself when I might have met this person. However, the ruse fails when I realize that this person could not possibly have met me because the product or service he or she is pitching is not appropriate for our readers. It is at that point that I simply delete the email.
Does it really take up so much of a PR person’s time to investigate the potential recipients of pitches before sending them out? Is it really easier and more productive to fire off a canned email to any publication having anything to do with food than to tailor your message and target your campaign to the editors who might be most interested in your clients’ product?
I have a hard time imagining that this scatter-shot approach is anything but lazy. You readers understand the value of knowing who your customer is, and crafting menus, programs and promotions that will encourage the largest portion of your customer to visit your facilities. We also need to know who our readers are and what information is most valuable to them, so that we don’t waste their time—and ours—printing material that we hope will help at least a couple of readers.
Should it not be the same in public relations? Judging by the number of times a week I receive these types of emails, I guess not.