Marketing Roadmaps

Susan Getgood

Feeding the trolls

by

This week, events in two blog circles in which I travel drew the trolls out from under their bridges: the League of Maternal Justice’s BreastFest and the "retirement" of a PR blog character whose public face was attractive but who was best known for its ill-spirited, trollish attacks on other bloggers.

When a topic is controversial, even if only mildly so, the trolls are inevitable.  What do you do when they show up in your place or in your face?

The safest and sanest approach is to ignore them.

That’s why I don’t feed the trolls. Sure, I’ve had them here from time to time, but  lack of sustenance leads them to go elsewhere for their jollies. I don’t respond here, and if they attack in the comments on other blogs or Web sites, I ignore them there.  It’s hard, especially when they get personal, as they always do. But the child’s nursery rhyme is true: sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.

Dealing with the trolls was particularly hard for some of the women actively engaged in the breastfeeding debate. The act and the decision itself are so highly personal, and  it didn’t take long for the trolls to get offensive.  But remember: the troll is the one with the problem. Not you.

If a troll or two turns up here as a result of this post, I’ll ignore them. But unless a comment  is obscene or libelous, I won’t delete it. I stand by my words. Let them stand by theirs.

Some folks take a different approach. They bait the troll, on the theory that a troll’s arguments are so ridiculous, the troll will end up proving the initial point it is attacking. This can be successful, but you have to have a really strong stomach. Because a troll is not rational. No matter how logical your argument, it will never penetrate the troll’s generally thick skull. You will never convince him. Or her.

But maybe, just maybe, proponents of this approach argue,  if you can stay the course, the weird non-logic, personal attacks and ramblings of the troll, as compared to your logical, reasoned arguments, will convert a few folks on the fence. And of course, initially there is an adrenaline rush from building your argument to beat the troll.

The rush doesn’t last, the troll will get ugly, and the chances of changing anyone’s mind this way are pretty slim. So, think hard before troll-baiting. Because it is going to hurt.

As for the late, not lamented blog character, Robert French’s "eulogy" for the not-so-dearly departed says it best. 

Tags: , , ,

In Support of the League of Maternal Justice

by

Tomorrow we will return to our regularly scheduled marketing topics. Today, however, I post in support of the League of Maternal Justice. And I remind you, this is from a woman who chose to not breastfeed for my own personal reasons, but will defend to the end another woman’s right to do so, wherever and whenever her child is hungry. (YouTube video embedded below)

Tags: , , ,

Sexual Politics

by

"A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." – Gloria Steinem

I grew up with these words. My mom had made a handpainted shirt, for herself, with the sentiment. It was a green long-sleeved T with a scoop neck, and she had done some really cute illustrations for the fish and the bike. I liberated it from her at the age of 10 and wore it until it fell apart.

I have been a feminist all my life. In the straw poll held at my elementary school in a fairly conservative town in liberal Massachusetts, I voted for George McGovern.

When I was in college, I campaigned hard for the Equal Rights Amendment. I canvassed for NOW and NARAL. I volunteered for a rape crisis hotline.A large part of my undergraduate work was in women’s studies.

I hit my head hard against the glass ceiling, more than once, but still found a way to achieve "traditional" career success in the Internet software industry.

I did not change my name when I got married, and not just for professional reasons, although I readily admit "Getgood" is not a bad name for a marketing professional. I do wish it didn’t map to the Treo provisioning software, but that’s another story. 

I discuss gender here on this blog. Often. Everything from the gender imbalance of the so-called A-list and the speaker rosters of high profile tech conferences to an anonymous blog  supposedly written by a woman that just rings false. From harassment  to the wonderful W-list meme.

I sit here today at 45, what I fervently hope is indeed the middle of my life, and I wonder. While women have indeed come a long way, we haven’t gone all the way toward equality, not by a long shot.

And god damn it, I want to know why.

I want to know why politicial observers think it is okay to analyze Hillary Clinton’s hairstyle, make-up, and fashion sense, but not Rudy Giuliani’s, assuming he had any. Hair I mean.

I want to know why Facebook continues to get glowing press in USA Today when it seems to have a frat boy mentality that shows  little respect for women. Banning photos of women breastfeeding, and then running a personals ad on the Facebook page for the group protesting the ban?

I want to know why women, even politically active women,  feel that a man’s voice carries farther than theirs, even when the issue is theirs. And please don’t misunderstand — I appreciate it when a politically aware man steps up to the plate and stands up for women’s issues. But his voice shouldn’t carry farther than hers.

Twenty-five years ago, actor Alan Alda spoke at an ERA fundraiser at my college which (small brag) I organized and managed — everything from selling the tickets to dealing with the press, and this was BI – before Internet! We were lucky enough to get him because one of his daughters was in my class.

He told us then that women have every right to expect, to demand the same rights and respect as men.

We’ve earned it. We continue to earn it. 

Why don’t we get it? RESPECT.

I really want to know. Because we don’t. Not across the board. And it just doesn’t make sense.

Women still have to be better, smarter, brighter, faster, meaner, leaner than their male counterparts to get as far. Often for less pay.

Society in general still devalues the work of the stay-at-home mom while putting ever increasing pressures on the working mother. It’s not right, but it is. Sure, there are glowing exceptions to this generalization, and there are wonderful companies doing wonderful things for the parents of both genders  in their employ.

But they are exceptions.

Young welfare mothers still often have to stay at home, and on welfare, even if they don’t wish to because they cannot afford childcare. And of course, they’re looked down upon because they aren’t "contributing."

People still suggest that a mother should breastfeed her child under a blanket or in the bathroom. Come on — do you want to eat YOUR dinner in the bathroom? Sure, seeing a woman breast feeding in public may be uncomfortable for some people, but if it is, you just have to get over it. Because it is her right. Her legal right.

And so is giving a child a bottle instead. Personally, I’d like to see a little more tolerance for women’s choices, on all sides. We cannot, should not, forget that the baby bottle was one of the things that made it possible for women to stay in the workforce after having children. Mother’s milk may be best, and I applaud women who make that choice, with all that it entails. But formula ain’t that bad, and it is important to understand that it is every woman’s choice. Respect it.

A woman’s choice. Her right to decide. I won’t get into reproductive rights in this post, but let’s face it, those are under assault too. All the time.

Why?

Why does our society have such a hard time with successful women? With women making public choices, for themselves, for their families?

With appreciating women’s sexuality without objectifying it?

Why do we continue to define success by masculine measures? Morality too.

I really want to know. 

Why?

Tags: , , , , ,

Contests. Sweepstakes. Prizes. Liability? Oh my!

by

Contests on blogs. Everybody loves them. The blogger loves them because they often bring new readers. Readers love them because they might get free stuff and a mention on a popular blog. Companies who donate prizes love them because their products are mentioned on the blogs.

It’s a win for everyone.

Except, what if someone has an issue with the contest? What’s the liability of the blogger if someone complains about how the contest was run? It seems so odd to ask this question, given the overwhelmingly positive spirit of most contests on blogs.

I’ve done a contest with some friends through my personal blog Snapshot Chronicles, and it was nothing but fun – for me, for my friends and for the people who entered.

Then again, the prizes, while cool, weren’t of excessively high value. Camera cases, photo frames, pens and ball caps [thank you again Photojojo and HP], not trips to Europe and TVs. This is generally the case with most blog contests; the prizes are desirable but nothing to sue over.

Well, maybe not. Remember, there are folks who enter contests as a revenue stream, not just as a fun activity. For them, it is serious business. And the value of the prizes continues to rise.

What happens if someone decides it wasn’t fair, and decides to raise a stink? What is the liability of the blogger? How can she protect herself? Does the company donating the prize have any liability?

Companies who run contests, large and small, spend a lot of time and money reviewing terms and conditions. Bloggers cannot do the same, but my blogging colleague David Wescott and I decided to do a little research and offer some guidance.

I spoke with Donna DeClemente, a marketer who specializes in helping companies with contest promotions, and David spoke with Stephanie Himel-Nelson, who blogs at Lawyer Mama among other places. Read on for my post and go to David’s blog It’s Not A Lecture for his post.

My interest was both professional and personal. Let’s cover the professional first. If you have a product that is relevant and exciting for the blogger, and you can give him something to give away on his blog, do it! Makes everybody happy, and I love making everybody happy. I recommend this to clients that have appropriate products, and am in the middle of such a project right now – more soon – which is one of the reasons I started thinking about this issue.

Personally. While I do not do contests on this blog, I have done one on Snapshot Chronicles, and absolutely intend to do more. And I like my house, so I’d prefer to keep it. Do I have any liability when I run a contest?

Let’s hear from an expert. I met Donna DeClemente, who blogs at Donna’s Promo Talk, at BlogHer. She attends the promotional marketing law conference sponsored by the Promotional Marketing Association every year to stay up to speed with the regulations, and helps companies and bloggers like my friend Yvonne DiVita create contests and draft Official Rules.

I asked her about the different types of contests.

Donna: A sweepstakes is a random drawing that anyone who meets the eligibility requirements as written in the “Official Rules” may enter. Contests are different from sweepstakes. They are not just games of chance. The winner of a contest must provide a degree of individual skill or uniqueness. A contest also takes more work since all entries must be judged and/or evaluated. A raffle is a type of lottery in which prizes are awarded to people who pay for a chance to win. They are strictly to be used only as a fundraising tool by a non-profit organization. The rules vary greatly from state to state and should be reviewed carefully. A qualifying organization usually must complete an application. Raffles also are not allowed to be conducted or advertised over the Internet. (See David’s interview with Lawyer Mama for more on lotteries-SG)

Give me some general guidelines for holding a contest or random drawing.

Donna: The sponsor of a contest or sweepstakes, whether a company or an individual, assumes full responsibility for the contest. It is very important that a set of “Official Rules” be drafted and everyone who is eligible to enter have access to the rules. Once you have a set of Official Rules, you must follow these rules and not change them during the course of the contest. If you stick by them, then you should be clear of any liability if someone claims fraud or misrepresentation. For example, see the Lipsticking.com sweepstakes.

The key elements that must be included in the rules include the official sponsor, eligibility requirements, the start and end date and time of the promotion, description of the prize(s) and their value, and how to enter. (For example, as Lawyer Mama found when she dug into the issue, some states have very strict disclosure and eligibility requirements and you either have to meet them, or exclude residents of those states from your sweepstakes or contest. Explains why sometimes you see a national contest with various state exclusions or differing terms for different states – SG)

What about the company donating the prizes? Does it have any liability?

Donna: If a company is donating a prize(s) for the promotion and is not the sponsor, than they are not liable. However, it is up to them to provide a detailed description of the prize and the true ARV (average retail value). For anyone that receives a prize worth $600 or more, you must create a 1099 and the winner is liable for taxes.

Should a blogger seek legal advice about her sweepstakes or drawing?

Donna: If you are worried about the potential consequences or your program is really complex or unique, you should absolutely seek advice. But you really need to make sure that any lawyer you retain is up to speed on promotional law, and most small business and personal lawyers are not. They can do the research, but you are probably better off consulting a specialist. I’d recommend that people start by consulting a promotional specialist like me, because we can also help with other aspects of the sweepstakes like fulfillment and contest structure. Typically, I can handle most issues that come up, but if we do need a lawyer, I work with two expert promotional lawyers on a regular basis.

—

Check out Donna’s blog and Web site for more information on running a contest on your blog or Web site. And if you have any doubts or questions about a contest you’d like to conduct on your blog, especially if you have a very high value prize, get advice. A specialist like Donna can help, but at the end of the day, if you are doing something very unique, it is probably worth the call to a lawyer. The legal fee pales in comparison to the nuisance of a lawsuit if you have to deal with, in the words of Fake Steve, a “frigtard.”

Some additional resources, courtesy of Lawyer Mama:
http://www.wcsr.com/default.asp?id=534&objId=31
http://promomagazine.com/legal/marketing_staking_states/
http://www.gambling-law-us.com/State-Laws/California/
http://www.ct.gov/AG/cwp/view.asp?A=1772&Q=282452
http://www.dwt.com/practc/advertising/bulletins/09-05_FloridaSweepstakes.htm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3629/is_199408/ai_n8713060

SUSAN IS NOT A LAWYER
This information is meant to bring awareness to the topic and is not intended to be used as legal advice. If you have questions about any of the information above or related matters, please contact an attorney licensed in your state.(Thanks, Lawyer Mama, for the disclaimer language)

Tags: , ,

PR 2.0 at the PRSA Northeast Conference

by

I’ll be in Rochester NY at the PRSA Northeast Conference this coming Thursday October 4th. I’m on a panel with Aaron Urmacher from Text 100 and Chip Griffin of Custom Scoop. The panel is called PR for Web 2.0 – Blogs, RSS feeds, WIKIs, Widgets and more and we’ll be doing it twice, at 1:45 pm and 3 pm.

In good 2.0 style, we’re planning on having a conversation WITH the audience about PR 2.0, not a presentation TO you, so come with questions and comments.

Hope to see you there.

Tags: , , , , ,