NONE: ONLINE-ADS>>
ONLINE-ADS>>
(no name) ((no email))
(no date)
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:07:10 -0500 (EST)
From: "Eric R. Ward - NetPOST(tm) and URLwire(tm)" <netpost_at_netpost.com>
To: online-ads_at_mailserv.tenagra.com
Subject: ONLINE-ADS>> An experienced response on the futility of an
Internet Clipping Service (LONG)
I've watched the clipping service thread, and while I don't
post much, a comment in the below post really chapped my
ass.
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, *name deleted* wrote:
> >service is Bacon's Clipping Service in Chicago...have
> >*never* missed a clip in a piece of legitimate/recognized media.
So the only legitimate media is one that can watched by a
clipping service? How idiotic, and dead wrong. Completely
wrong. Totally wrong. Especially in this new medium. I've
been doing online awareness building for three years now,
and as a recognized expert in the field can tell you that
the Internet medium cannot be effectively clipped, and never
will be.
The net is too wide, too deep, and many of the truly
valuable outlets will never make it into a directory like
Bacons because Bacons (or anyone else) can never keep up
with all of it, even if they had a clue how to go about it.
<end rant>
Now, here's some clarification. If you are trying to build
awareness of a Web site or Web event, and your focus is on
the online media community (as it should be), then you
are talking about thousands of rapidly changing outlets,
none of which is older than 36 months. To track them all
would take more resources than could ever be assembled, and
nobody, repeat nobody, has a fix on all of them...
I do awareness building for Web events for many of the big
players, like VISA, IBM, USA Today, NYTimes, Virtual
Vineyards, Riddler and others. If I am doing my real job
right (which is making sure I reach the right people and
places, in 13 countries), no clipping service will be able
to keep up with me, myself included. I'd never be able to
clip all my outlets, for many reasons. The best way to
explain this is by including below an article that I wrote
on this subject.
--------------------------------------------------------
Invisible Ink:
Trying to keep up with coverage of Web related news and
events will drive you to an early grave...
(c) Eric Ward, The WardGroup/NetPOST
If you have ever tried to conduct a media awareness
campaign on behalf of a Web site launch or Web-based event,
you probably came face to PC screen with the hardest part of
all: trying to keep up with who covered your news, when, and
where. I tell clients every day that there are several
reasons why it is actually impossible to track, especially
if I am doing my primary job right: getting their news to
the right people and places, and outlets.
First, unlike regular print media, where you can know
exactly when an issue is out and thus check for coverage,
the sites I submit to are made of of MANY different types of
Internet related media, print being only one small part of
it. For example, I submit my clients news to many Web TV
and Radio shows that cover Web news and sites, like ZDTV,
MSNBC, C-Net TV, and the Discover Channels' Cyberlife
program. Many are in the US, but some were in Canada, the
U.K., even Australia. You'd have no way of knowing what is
being covered on Canadian or Australian TV and radio, or
when. I can also submit to over 70 *printed* Internet
magazines (NetGuide, IWORLD, and their ilk around the world)
that exist in nearly that many countries. It's not feasible
to try and subscribe and track all of them, and even if you
could, here's another rub: these magazines typically have an
online Web counterpart with content and editorial that's
very different from that of the print version. In fact I
submit to those editors too. Try tracking a rapidly
changing Web site 24 hours a day... It would be a full-time
job for several people just to try and keep up with who's
covering what.
Moving deeper into the online realm, it gets even harder.
Each special pick Web site would have to be checked on a
daily basis. Do-able, but not exactly cost-efficient. As
for Web-zines, like Netsurfer Digest or WEBster or the
hundreds of other, you'd have to know the pub date for each
one (some are weekly, some bi-weekly or monthly) and be able
to visit each and every one of them just hoping to spot a
mention somewhere.
Then their's the online news' sites, like C-Net news or
COWLES, or Net NewsCam or Newslinx. These can frequently
change daily, and even several times daily. Tracking these
would mean someone must sit watching that site all day, and
waiting to see if your story shows up. And these are just
the well known ones. Factor in the news' sites for your
particular industry (if they exist) and your by now you're
brain-dead. And yet there's more: the E-mail delivered Web
news briefs, like Interactive News Network or Surf's Up, as
well as the Web news newsletters put out by Media Cental or
C|Net, and the hundreds of lessor known companies. One
would have to subscribe to every one of those as well.
Based on the sheer numbers of outlets, and the fact that
that the possible news' outlets seem to multiply every week,
a better solution (and the one I use) exists.
I spend my time looking for new outlets, and making contact
with the principals at each one, so they know who I am and
what I'm about. And then I send them only news that's
on-topic, that they could cover if they wanted to. Bingo.
This is the best way to help your news get read and covered.
It also means that you may never never know who covered
what, where, and when.
The real question thus becomes apparent: Is it better to
offer the best possible chance for coverage by continually
looking for and evaluating all the best submission
resources, or to limit where you send your news just to
those you happen to be able to subscribe to or watch with
some regularity?
For me, and every single one of my clients, the answer is
simple: Get your news to as many *qualified* and *on-topic*
recipients as possible, and let your server and referrer
logs tell you what happened.
Don't limit yourself, or your client. Some of the best
coverage comes from unexpected places...
::end
---------------------------------------------------------
Best wishes,
- eric
Eric Ward <netpost_at_netpost.com>
-----------------------------------------
The WardGroup - Internet Press [Est.1994]
URLwire(tm)...Advance Web-event news service delivered
via Email to the Web media community
< http://www.urlwire.com >
NetPOST(tm)...Personalized new URL submission campaigns
that make sense for YOUR site
< http://www.netpost.com >
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsor:
ADSmart.net is the best way to buy or sell online advertising space.
ADSmart's TrueTargeting methodology accurately pinpoints target audiences,
matching campaigns to the most appropriate ad spaces on the Web.
http://www.adsmart.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
