Systeme D

15 June 2007

Annoyed bunny stops spraying releases, starts spraying bullets

Wow. Humble specialist magazine editor in the provinces makes blog post, gets noticed by proper London media types, kicks up (admittedly fairly minor) shitstorm. See Getting Ink (great 'massacre' title, by the way) and the Spud Gun.

Spud's posting is enjoyable and challenging yet, I think, misses the point a little. But do read it. Chances are that, like me, you might have to Google for 'AE' halfway through. The AEs are the guys who, Spud believes, stand the risk of being "ripped to bits by a director" because of my posting.

I now know it stands for 'account executive'. Specialist magazines, though they take up a vast swathe of shelf space at WHS, are the unglamorous end of journalism. We don't really come into contact with these AEs or agencies. Press Gazette and MediaGuardian don't write about us: their definition of 'magazine' starts with Arena and ends with Woman's Own, passing through FHM and Grazia but definitely not Dogs Today or Railway Modeller. But, despite Spud's crack about our "positively addictive" subject matter, between us we sell a lot of copies to really dedicated readers.

We don't need PR agencies, and truth be told, they probably don't need us.

Spud writes: "Those who send badly aimed releases don't do it for fun - no honest they don't - they aren’t just trying to annoy you for a laugh. They’re doing it because they can't afford to miss you."

But the truth is, they can. Their releases are never relevant. Never. There is 0% chance of anything they send making it into Waterways World - never mind whether it's a scattergun e-mail or if it's personally addressed to me and delivered in a pink, ribbon-adorned envelope. We are a magazine about canals. We don't write about extreme sports or flight comparison websites.

In the Getting Ink comments, Spud asks why I don't just block all press releases:

Richard - How many "Waterways World" relevant releases do you get that you aren't a subscriber to...? Thought so... so set up a rule that puts anything with press release in the subject into the bin, stick with your RSS feeds and stop getting wound up.

But that's a really London agency-centric view (and the thought that waterway companies might set up RSS feeds for their news is something that Andrew over at Granny Buttons has been advocating for ages, but ain't gonna happen this site of 2025). I like press releases. I don't like irrelevant press releases where no thought has gone into selecting the recipients. It happens that, for us and for other specialist magazines I've worked on, the irrelevant ones always come from 'real' PR agencies: the relevant ones almost never do.

Here's what I get in a typical day.

  • Navigation authorities/IWA. We get a good supply of releases from British Waterways, the Environment Agency, and the Inland Waterways Association. All three have excellent in-house press functions, eager to send out a statement about the latest controversy and respond to our questions with little sign of exasperation. The EA, in particular, makes a real effort to target specialist media with relevant releases hand-picked from the vast number they issue - and it pays off in coverage. Of course, not all the releases from these three are stuff we'll use, but we appreciate the effort and duly open every attachment. And dare I say it? Some of my best friends are (or used to be) navigation authority press officers.
  • Marine industry. The general marine industry is reasonably active in sending us stuff. The majority of these, frankly, are sea-going stuff and pretty irrelevant to us (and the three other inland waterway magazines). But they've clearly been targeted towards the more general 'marine media', which is perfectly understandable, and I don't mind receiving these at all. (I think the only time I've ever objected was when the Volvo Ocean Race or some such started sending out hourly updates about their progress across the Pacific.) These generally either come from an in-house PR function, or from a specialist marine PR agency such as Saltwater.
  • Government releases. Generally from DEFRA, DfT, or various NDPBs (the MCGA, the Lottery funds, etc.). By and large these are lists I've subscribed to. Most aren't relevant, but there are occasionally some really important ones (e.g. the drink-boating announcement the other day), and again, they come from in-house press offices. Don't object to these at all.
  • Inland waterway businesses. A small but important number. Most waterway businesses are decidedly on the S side of SME, and would no sooner send out a press release than tow a banner around the sky from an aeroplane. So when they do, often at the instigation of the proprietor's wife or son, we really appreciate it - whether it's a new marina opening, a new product, an interesting boat, or whatever. The more canal businesses who send us releases, the better.
  • Big corporate agency stuff. Ok. This is what the posting was about. This is the one category, of the five, that I really do have a problem with - the only one which I don't actively welcome. It's clearly distinct from the previous four: it's the only one which is spraymailed not even to one particular sector, but seemingly to everyone; it's one which I have never requested to receive; and it's never relevant. At all.

If a chap in America sends me an e-mail about Viagra or Cialis which I've never asked for and will never act upon, it's spam. If a chap in London sends me one about price comparison websites, it's also spam. They both earn a living from sending out these irrelevant e-mails, true, but I don't see how that makes either of them justifiable.

(Incidentally, for reasons completely unconnected with WW or press releases, the funniest thing of all was Charles "why let facts get in the way of a good story" Arthur completely missing the technological point in the Getting Ink comments. OpenStreetMap co-conspirators may be permitted a wry chuckle at this point.)

Comments

Comments are closed for this item.