Kibbe on Marketing: No Books or Bloody Axes

I remember years ago when I was shopping my novel to literary agents (like who hasn’t?) and hearing all sorts of stories of gimmicks to get an agent’s attention: a crime writer who sent a bloody axe, someone who sent a bottle of champagne “pre-toasting” to their mutual success, money (aka a bribe)…

While as an editor I never received anything quite so interesting as one of these, I did get my fair share of marketing trinkets which were supposedly to catch my eye and inspire me to write a story. Unfortunately, I don’t think they ever worked. They were the wrong topic, wrong audience, wrong coverage area or a combination of all three.

I received plenty of unsolicited press kits. Most included logo tchotchkes, CDs, DVDs, even a few thumb drives. Now, not only did I have to deal with junk, and I’m risking a computer virus.

The most vexing of material pitches were unsolicited books or manuscripts. Sending a book isn’t cheap. I knew someone out there spent a good deal of money to pique my curiosity. More often than not, the work was just a bad fit for the publication. I had no choice but to toss the book into the recycle bin.

The sad thing is most of the marketers or authors simply never did their homework to find out if the paper I worked for was the right vehicle for their message. Usually it was flat wrong. Moreover, we almost never printed book reviews, even when it was on-topic. We couldn’t sell advertising around it. And if you can’t monetize the page an article is printed on, it’s not going to happen.

The books were often some business subject, so they got that much right, but the topic was way off (e.g. a get-rich-quick scheme), not specific to the coverage area or – more times than not – were a vanity work that was poorly executed. (I could write several columns on vanity press projects but I won’t. Simply said, unless you’ve hired a bona fide editor and production staff to make your book a professional work, don’t go the self-published route.)

I really felt so sorry for those that spent a lot of time and money sending me something I didn’t ask for and couldn’t use. Perhaps the only way I would have considered writing an article about the book was if the author was based in the publication's coverage area AND was getting some notoriety because of who he/she was or because the work was really taking off. Was the author a well-known local business owner? Were people really talking about the topic or the book itself? Was there something really unique and helpful to our readership?

The lesson here once again is target, target, target. Press kits are great, and I liked them – when the topic or message was spot on. Books, I feel, are a no-no unless they’ve been requested. Few editors have the time to read them anyway. A press kit about a book is fine, but again, the topic must match the publication.

So before marketers or business owners go through the time and expense of shipping big packages of goodies to editors, they should do some research or simply ask first to see if what they’re selling editors are buying. Write an email (please no “Press Release” subject lines) or pick up the phone.

Remember editors want news, so we are eager to find the next Big Story. But we seldom publish stories just because somebody sent us a book -- or a bloody axe.

Cindy Kibbe, an editor for a New England business publication for nearly a decade, can be reached at cindykibbe@comcast.net.

Kibbe on Marketing: Gimme Something, Mister

Working for a well-known media company in New England, we were often approached for sponsorships, only what the organization really wanted was a flat-out donation in the guise of a business deal. Unfortunately, more times than not, the answer was a polite “No.”

There actually is a big difference between sponsorships and donations, and often new organizations – and new marketers – confuse the two.

Sponsorships are really business arrangements, plain and simple. They typically involve putting up some form of compensation, either money or in services, for an event. The big catch is the event or whatever the project is has to be appropriate for the media firm. It sounds obvious, but many miss this point entirely.

Say you are a marketer looking for sponsorships for an area business expo. A business pub will likely want a piece of the action and will often insert ads in upcoming issues for no or little cost to the hosting firm. If it’s really spot-on, it may pony up and be a title sponsor, even co-branding the event.

Now, if a marketer is looking for donations to a ham-and-bean supper, a business pub is running far afield. (It seems bloody obvious, but I would get some of these pitches, honest to God.)

What’s key here is the audience. The publication is looking for advertisers. What better way to reach a targeted audience that is looking to increase business themselves by virtue of the fact that they’re partaking in the expo? It’s a win-win-win: The hosting company gets free ads and support, the pub gets exposure, and the attendees might find a partner in their own marketing efforts.

Donations are just that – giving out of the good and kindness of the company’s heart. More or less. Typically, the name of the donating company will be printed someplace. There’s still a big hope that the good will and notoriety that will turn into revenue at some point as potential customers will make note. Corporate donations are good and they work. They can also be strategic as the audience can be more general, thereby giving exposure to folks the publication might not normally market to.

In my point of view, some sponsorships are much closer to donations. You know the ones -- a big financial firm sponsors a concert series and the like. This, too, is good for everyone involved. The difference here is more subtle. The donating company gets its name out there, increasing exposure, but, again, the audience is much less targeted. The result hoped for is closer to a donation – being nice will result in profit as opposed to having much more skin in the game like a sponsorship.

Whatever form of corporate giving marketers and their companies consider, know that it almost always reflects well. Almost always. Being title sponsor of an event that goes horribly wrong can have disastrous results that may take a long time to correct. We've probably all been on at least one side of this calamity at some point. It's not pretty for anyone.

So marketers need to consider a couple of things when approaching a publication for giving:
•    What is your intended audience?
•    What is the audience of the publication?
•    Is the audience a match for you?
•    What form of giving are you seeking?

Well-matched sponsorships are some of the best ways to do business and they can bring success to all involved if done right.


Cindy Kibbe, an editor for a New England business publication for nearly a decade, can be reached at cindykibbe@comcast.net.

Kibbe on Marketing: Go Fetch

There’s no doubt that Web marketing and social media have made marketing and public relations far more targeted and intimate. Unfortunately it’s also made people just plain lazy.

In the last couple of years, there has been an increasing trend of just throwing some URL into a press release instead of including the actual release. I kid you not. Not only are releases becoming less and less specific to media folks in some sad, wasted effort of “marketing by pin the tail on the donkey,” now some marketers aren’t even bothering to include a release. There’s no lead, no pitch, just a Web link.

Want to piss off the media? Make them do the work. Seriously, do you think I have that kind of time to go hunting for a release? Not only do I have to figure out if the pitch is worth coverage for my publication, I have to go find the darn thing to begin with. And don’t get me started on how many of these non-pitches have broken links! (You just know the subject says “Press Release,” too.)

Simply copy and paste the press release into the body of the email. What’s the logic behind making me “fetch” it?

I do want, and even expect, links to the company’s Web site, the marketer’s site and email, and even possibly links to other important information.

Here’s an example of a good use of URLs:

A publicly traded company is announcing stellar quarterly results. The release is included in the body of the email, containing the CEO’s analysis and comments, and there is a link to the full release that includes the financials. There are also links to the company website, perhaps links to previous quarters’ results, and email addresses of the PR folks.

This is a very simple pointer – it’s just as easy to copy and paste a release into an email as it is to copy a URL. Please don’t make me fetch the bone that’s being tossed. Like all disinterested dogs, I’m not going for it.


Cindy Kibbe, an editor for a New England business publication for nearly a decade, can be reached at cindykibbe@comcast.net.

Kibbe on Marketing: Jargon, Shmargon

What do you make of this?:

“…leading provider of voice and data infrastructure solutions, including softswitch and session border control products …”

Or this?”

“…enables customers to virtualize and migrate file data to support initiatives such as technology refresh, tiering, consolidation, capacity balancing, optimization and archiving – locally or to the cloud…”

I’m sure they mean something to somebody, but deep, technical phraseology won’t help most of us run-of-the-mill editors in trying to decide whether to use the release.

Here’s a very simple truth of how to capture the interest of an editor: Don’t use jargon. At best, it’s confusing, and at worst, it’s pompous.

Granted, while I culled these examples from press release blast sites, they are indicative of many of the releases I received as an editor. These really aren’t so bad, but they do contain a quite a bit of jargon. Over the years, I received a few releases that were so loaded with industry buzz words, I couldn’t even figure out what they were about. Naturally, I rejected them.

Certainly, some marketers of very specialized companies are working specifically in a niche trade and their releases aren’t really meant for mass consumption. Fine. Jargon away, but don’t send that release to a general publication. One size -- or in this case, release -- doesn’t fit all. Remember your audience and rewrite the release as necessary.

Compare the above to these:

“…a technology leader in the discovery of fully human antibodies…”

“…has just introduced A Really Neat Product, an intuitive new tool that empowers end-users to test their own files…”

These examples are from two companies with highly complex technologies, but their marketers made quite clear who they are and what they do.

When writing a pitch, marketers should have one of their grandparents read it. If they understand it, it’s probably good to go. OK, so I’m being a bit facetious on the knowledge of marketers and editors (and grandparents for that matter), but you get my point.

If sending a release to a more general publication, even one focused solely on business, ease up or eliminate jargon. Unnecessary obfuscation will deem the release worthy material for obsolescence management.



Cindy Kibbe, an editor for a New England business publication for nearly a decade, can be reached at cindykibbe@comcast.net.

Kibbe on Marketing: Make it a Date

One of the most underutilized resources at every publication is its editorial calendar. This is the best insight into a publication marketers could ever hope to have, yet in my experience, so many fail to use it.

Editorial calendars list the major topics a publication is expecting to cover, planned features, special sections, and regularly occurring sections. What’s more, deadline dates for copy and ads and publication dates are all spelled out in black and white. Only a face-to-face conversation will let marketers know more about a publication.

At the very least, editorial calendars present a great snapshot about the publication and the topics it covers, serving as a great tool when exploring new sources of exposure for clients. At best – and this is key – marketers will learn precisely what the publication is going to be covering AND just when to time a pitch about a client who’s a spot-on fit.

While I would receive some calls from marketing folks regarding the calendar, I’d get more calls pitching a topic that was just covered. That’s like looking to catch the football after the touchdown. More times than not, the topic of a feature will not be repeated in a publication for at least a year. Of course there are perennial favorites like the economy that are always covered, but you get my point.

And a quick word to the publications themselves – put the bloody edit calendar where people can find it! Publishers so often hide the darn thing when it should be one of the easiest things to find. It’s a publication’s calling card for heaven’s sake.

Two other bits of information that many marketers do not pay enough attention to on editorial calendars are the deadlines and publication dates.

The newspaper I worked for published every two weeks. Not weekly. Not monthly. Every two weeks. While the funky deadlines were specific to that paper, all publications have them, which mean all publications work in a bizzarro future timeframe. Most magazines, for example, work several months ahead, often three months or more (yes, as you’re reading this, some mags are putting together their holiday issues), so if a marketer is thinking she’s got a great Halloween feature, she may have been tricked, not treated.

For calendar sections, it’s almost impossible to send event items too far in advance. In fact, the earlier the better, and you will almost be guaranteed print coverage.  When I edited the calendar, the online version was mostly comprised of those items that missed deadline.

Another issue that frequently occurs is confusing publication dates for deadline dates, two very different things. Deadlines are there for a reason. They are not arbitrary. It takes time to put a publication together. Nasty things can and do happen if briefs, ads or what-have-you come in at the last minute. The item will be buried in the well of paper, and that’s IF there’s space available. There’s little time to troubleshoot problems. And it’s just a mean thing to do to the production and proofreading staff.

Editorial calendars provide a wealth of free information for marketers about a publication. Use them well and client coverage will be a timely success.

Cindy Kibbe, an editor for a New England business publication for nearly a decade, can be reached at cindykibbe@comcast.net.