It is a wonder than any business can get done anymore, especially in California where the legal system has protected the needs of the one against
the needs of the many. It is a little like the Catholic premise of guilt before redemption, and certainly when it comes to any commerce, guilt is assumed, reputations are tarnished and consequences levied all in the name of justice and fair play.
There are so many protections in place for consumers and the public that the only one missing is protection agains their own stupidity.
As a boy, the world knack then seemed saner. It was, after all based on handshakes and accountability/responsibility. If you made a mistake you apologized and fixed it. You were not hounded, sued, slandered by people who seem now to have a deep seated need for finding some aspect of their life they have control over, namely making others miserable where possible. And although I guess there is some satisfaction in that it is the wrong thing to do.
No specific examples to back this up (since I would rather not be sued over them) other than the fact that I have always found this to be the case, whether in teaching or in publishing. Strangely I always act fairly. I always go way beyond any contract and I still do operate on a handshake knowing that it may come back to bite me.
I run lots of material at no charge in my paper. I am not a non-profit (although by the bottom line of the industry I may as well files as one and gain that benefit.) People who should be paying for priming their for-profit content, often get in for free. I call it goodwill and naively expect that responsible people would consider advertising at some point in thanks for all the freebies that come their way.
No, this rarely ever happens. What does happen, however, are scathing emails about how the material was cut down to size, or not run at all (when we exceed space allotments) leaving me feeling more unhappy rather than angry as I do subscribe to the "what goes around comes around" premise, which of course makes me a lousy businessman.
I have found that doing business in California is akin to Russian Roulette. Aside from the maze of legislation, the need for an HR department to sort out the can do and cannot do list, but also a PR department to field the many complaints from people who could not find their FREE newspaper and for some reason felt it better to complain about it rather than just get the list of locations and try someplace else.
And then there are the thousands of "I love your paper" comments that come in, all from people who have enjoyed the content for years but never sent the paper to a business they frequent, knowing that the paper lives on ad revenue. That's okay, though, it is not their job to do my job and I do not hold that against them, after all the reason I started the paper was not to sell ads - I wanted a writing career with a product I could feel proud of that did not cheat people. And I don't cheat people. Sadly ad sales are needed and in this economy that is a difficult art form.
I had one local politician tell me that my paper was "fluff" and not serious like the Contra Costa Times (uh-huh, no comment needed there.) Same politician is good about sending in political plugs as convenient, "for the good of the community" you know.
I chose this topic today for several reasons. I am opinionated and when something starts my day the wrong way, especially before the morning coffee, I like to get it off my chest before it ruins the whole day. I was accused of spamming someone. Twice. Now as someone who gets in excess of 600 emails a day of which 550 are spam (thank you GMail for such a great filter), I do not like the idea of spamming people. To gather email addresses, people have signed up over the years for contests and such, always with a disclaimer that they agree and can unsubscribe at any time by sending an email with the word UNSUBSCRIBE and they get an INSTANT confirmation. I also do make use of companies with sworn opt-in lists, people who have agreed to receive email and they get the same disclaimer and prompt handling.
Somehow the list provider had a dud. It was the only dud out of quite a large number of emails. Nonetheless the person did UNSUBSCRIBE and added a comment about how I should be ashamed of myself. An immediate confirmation was sent that the name was removed (and not just removed - I blacklist the names so there is no chance it gets added again). The person, however, unsatisfied, decided to notify a larger advertiser of that fact and setting into motion the need for me to spend unnecessary time explaining and documenting why it was not spam.
I certainly understand that on the part of the advertiser and have no issue explaining as I do here. It was the fact that one irate individual felt the need to pursue the point (and I am not sure whether others were contacted) that annoys me because a simple email to me would have brought a slew of apologies that the error occurred. That is just my way.
A few years back a gentleman called to complain about the term "gay marriage" that had been used with regard to the County's City Clerk's same sex marriage during that open window period that gay Californians are still battling for. He objected. He was angry that we used the word. We had a phone conversation for thirty minutes during which time he calmed down. Since we are a community paper and I want community views, I offered him (as I do any reader) the chance to write a rebuttal. I even old him that aside from spelling corrections, I would not edit it. He seemed satisfied. I felt satisfied. The fact that it was a responsible communication had more value to me than ridiculous threats to advertisers which seems more like a knee-jerk reaction to gain power, and one where the advertisers, always fearful of lawsuits with or without merit, often relent. In this case, the rebuttal never arrived. The offer is still open.
I may be a lousy businessman because I have to deal this way. It is not the bottom line; it is the honesty of the product. I wont accept ads that run one time unless it is an event like a fair because single run ads do not work. I tell then customer to save their money. It is the truth. More often than not they ignore it and run with someone else, someone willing to take their money and offer nothing in return. I guess that is human nature.
I do get tired of getting slapped for it, though. I have, for three years, produced a quality product that is far more visually pleasing than its competitors, covers a wide range of topics and have even gone so far as to give free ads to companies that were struggling in the hope that they would survive. Many have survived, but none have paid for advertising after that. Oh well. It is still the decent thing to do if you are a community paper. Otherwise, what is the point.
It would not be fair to say all this without also adding that most writers for this publication are not paid. I do not have the funds to do so. Before the economy hit writers were paid. Now I try to promote them where I can, suggest they set up blogs to showcase their work and get freelance assignments where they can be paid. At the least I am happy to set up their blogs for them since I know how to do that. It is a compliment to the paper and, I hope, to our relationship, that they continue to do so and I thank them for it.
We teach kids in elementary school to always do the right thing and then promptly abandon that lesson. Politicians teach them that the ends justify the means. Lawyers teach them that you go for the jugular and, after the 30% contingency fee, you might walk away with some cash. Businesses teach them that they are not important because each employee is a potential lawsuit or liability issue and to have an emotional connection seems redundant. Parents teach them that divorce is an answer over 50% of the time, if not more. And suppliers teach them that the product is only as good as how much they can gouge you for it.
The old 1950s way of dealing with customers like they were the lifeblood of the business has been killed. Large chains like BestBuy, Fry's to name a few have taken the Disneyland approach to business; cattle march you through lines, attractions, pricey food, as you meander towards the checkout line where you buy some overpriced photos of you that someone shot without your permission. That is now called "fun."
The Concordian and Digital Concordian has existed since March 2008, not a long time in the length of the city, but long enough to have made an impact on the readers who choose to read it. ABC News Anchor Dan Ashley missed one issue due to a family emergency prompting many people concerned that he had left the paper. That kind of reader loyalty is great.
For the past two months we have been promoting the Digital Concordian, what I cal the answer to the bad economy. Do you know you can get the equivalent to what is an eighth page ad in the printed paper, in the Digital Concordian, in full color for $58. That includes design and, if you choose, the addition of video.
My sales manager thought I was losing it when I suggested it. My response, "Every business can afford $58 month." Chances are they spend more than that at Starbucks (or for my Idaho readers, Moxie Java). Your ad jumps out, is read by thousands of e-subscribers (with one or two who want out for whatever reason) and the compliments about the paper pour in. I just wish that they would use the email link on the publication and send it to some business they know because as great as it is, without growth we will not survive in the long run. The publishing business is on life-support.
Maybe I am just getting too old to be an idealist who believes in the handshake and the fair deal. I don't much like the other way of business with telephone directory sized legal contracts signed in quadruplicate just in case you were lying the first time. An I still cross out the lines on release forms I do not like, especially when ity comes to climbing an tumbling birthday party invitations for my kids. No, you do not absolve yourself of liability especially when it is your fault. That is a slap in the face. Like PayPal inviting me to opt-in to electronic disclosures but threatening to ban me if i don't. That is not called an invitation; that is blackmail. Change the policy for all I care, just don't slap me in the face when you do it.
I miss the old way. You know, "the tie before the empire."
- Posted by MisterWriter
Actors who make a living pretending to be someone else, traveling often to exotic locations with no end to mindless fools drooling to breathe the same air, for which they are paid an obscene amount of money and lavished with special treatment, and then they turn around and BLOW this gift of life – amazing.
There are two remaining steps for this new Communications Protocol to become fully operative. First, this new treaty must be approved by the United Nations General Assembly. This is a foregone conclusion. Second, ten nations must become parties to this new treaty by signing and then ratifying under whatever process is followed in their own nation. In the United States this would mean the President (or his representative) would have to sign the treaty and the U.S. Senate would have to vote to ratify.
Non-Bible quote: “Beware the righteous for they shall condemn the Earth.” Yep, I said it! In the last 30 years I have seen so much righteous bullshit usually wrapped in some religious cloak. There were those nutjobs that went around shooting abortion doctors. I have no doubt that God did not tell them to do that. Then there are those nutjobs like the Baptist lot who protest at the funerals of virtually anyone claiming that they died because of their sins, and God hates "(fill in the blank). No, God truly hates morons, especially morons that use his name.