Comments on: Clueless At Conde Nast

By: Bacchus

Bacchus — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 06:09:16 +0000

I love print magazines. Sadly, the industry is dying for a number of reasons — it’s unclear whether they will survive.

The hate in this thread is not for print magazines, it’s for clueless publishing industry people who don’t understand the internet, who are not sex-positive, and who send insulting spammy PR emails to bloggers in an attempt to get internet attention for their particular substandard offerings.

By: Whatever

Whatever — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 05:57:06 +0000

I don’t understand everyone’s dislike of print magazines, I would much rather read a quality magazine like mental floss or something than click through a blog or website. No offense.

By: Bacchus

Bacchus — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 02:49:45 +0000

I do, but only in my great-grandfather’s generation that I know of. Glad you found this funny! I do try to make my rants amusing. ;-)

By: Louise

Louise — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:43:11 +0000

Maybe it’s my English sense of humour but I found this not only informative but absolutely hilarious. Bacchus – do you have English ancestors?

By: Pal

Pal — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 23:28:29 +0000

@tony et al.
this thread is making me think of a book title I perused by at the local uni library. It was something about using applied anthropology among PR and advertising groups to nullify that above factor of star struckedness, or groupthink or whatever. I never picked it up, but it seemed like a good idea. The principle seems to be that you use someone to force a shift in perception, you back it up using things your audience is comfortable with, while forcing them out of their comfort zone. I may be inferring too much from just scanning it, but I geeked on the social science.

By: Tony Comstock

Tony Comstock — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:33:14 +0000

In a odd way, bad PR efforts make my job both harder and easier. Harder because the overall signal to noise ratio is worse, and that makes cutting through harder, especially by e-mail. Easier, because if you can cut through and if you’ve done your home work (i.e. figuring out what’s in it for the person you’re asking for a favor) you easily separate yourself from the noise.

One of the problems with places like Conde Nast is they’re staffed (both inside the company and their agents) with people who are somewhat (to put it mildly) star-struck by the profile of the company they work for, and presume that everyone else will be as well.

In fact, there is a pretty easily ID’d, New York centric media echo chamber, made up largely of young, profile obsessed people. If “exposure” is what you seek, it’s a good circle to break into. But exposure is not the same thing as commerce. Most of these folks figure this out in their mid-thirties and move on to less glamourous but better paying jobs.

By: Bacchus

Bacchus — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:17:36 +0000

Tony, you’ve always done excellent PR, with never a hint of spam.

It’s funny you should mention the consultant angle; for as long as I have been in this business, I’ve caught myself writing extremely detailed things (from rants to helpful emails) in connection with people who “don’t get it” about the internets. And a fair few of those times, I’ve thought to myself “I should be getting paid for this — this is essentially what a consultant does, only he’s getting paid for it and has to be more professional.” But yeah, I’d probably have to put on a suit, and I’d definitely have to re-learn how to smile and nod while listening to arrant nonsense. I spent six or seven years wearing a tie, I know how it’s done, but “not eager to go there” doesn’t fully characterize my sentiments in that regard.