Comments on: How to pitch bloggers so they’ll post about you

By: @StaciMktg

@StaciMktg — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:57:51 +0000

Just came across this post and believe you hit the nail on the head when explaining the value of mass mailing when it's targeted and is followed up with a personalized response. I've worked campaigns in multiple sectors and across all of them I've found that even if I “blast” a large group of bloggers – as long as I've properly researched my list and contact them with a short email that clearly states my client's message, then I have great success and surprisingly little complaint from the bloggers contacted. As Craig mentioned in his last reply, if the message fits the needs of that blogger then it works for everyone. Also if I've conducted my research well, even if the blogger doesn't feel the need to post my information at the time at least they don't feel as though I've insulted them with irrelevant, spam worthy content and this means my client is on their radar and there's a possibility of reaching out at another time.

By: cabraham

cabraham — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:24:24 +0000

Thanks you so much, Jade, and I am sorry about the delay!

By: Craig Kessler

Craig Kessler — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 16:16:24 +0000

It does and as someone in Digital PR myself I always question the morality of blasting a large group of targeted bloggers and personalizing responses. Who sends out the initial blast? As time is much needed, I have found myself needing more time when going one hand by hand with mixed results. I do think it has helped me in many cases and I have developed personal relationships with some people because of it. Typically I try a more personalized approach on the pitch, and send more generic information in the response. Of course this approach can maybe meet the needs of reaching out to hundreds, not thousands.

To be honest, this is why I agree with the mass pitch for a lot of reasons, because the truth is, if a promotion or information sticks, the blogger/journalist, etc doesn't care that it is generic. A lot to think about and to discuss with others.

By: cabraham

cabraham — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:29:42 +0000

Charleen, even just saying “bowing and scraping” is dangerous. It is that sort of “who the heck do they think they are expecting me to bow and scrape” sort of innuendo useful? If both members in the conversation assume that the other person's being a total dick, then there's a standoff of severe disrespect and that is never productive. Yes, you actually NEED to buy someone dinner and drinks and get to know them before you can get in their pants. This is dating, this is courting, this isn't prostitution! IZEA is prostitution and so are most mainstream media magazines and even quite a few “in the pocket” a-list bloggers who have long-term relationships with PR shops, but this isn't true amongst the true bloggers, not the “using a blog as a shilling platform” bloggers and you need to come to them as generous, as loving, as if you have all the time in the world (unlike the experience most people have with their doctor who pops in for 5), and you have to stop looking over their shoulders when you're in conversation as though you're just spending time with them until you catch the eye of someone “more important.”

See what I mean? Both sides are thinking to themselves, “who is this bozo” and “does this bozo know who the heck I am.” Until both sides actually spend the time to rebuild bridges, it will always be a hostile territory.

By: cabraham

cabraham — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:23:23 +0000

I thought I had already posted this, but this is what I wrote before… I hate it when comments disappear… It is not a contradiction if you hold both things in your mind at the same time. We so collect thousands of targeted blogs without care for clout or caste but the we sic 5+ operatives on the responses so that each of the hundreds and hundreds of bloggers who do reply ALL get a bespoke response. We also prohibit any copy-and-paste responses at all. We have 12 researchers to discover the relevant bloggers and then we have 5 responders per-campaign. We win by throwing people at the task instead of tech. And while we do “cheat” by blasting the email and using a single message model, we choose to do that for the impact. You cannot build steam doing each one by hand. You need to really push to better 100/day. However, once the hounds are released, we take all the time in the world to convert in the inbox. Does that make sense?

By: Jade

Jade — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 08:26:01 +0000

Great, informative post chris.

By: Charleen Larson

Charleen Larson — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:34:33 +0000

I had to smile about “walking into a drama that's already in progress.” I can't tell you how many angry rants I have read from bloggers keying off some poor sod who had the audacity to contact them without the requisite bowing and scraping first. It's as if their honor was impugned or at the very least, someone insulted their hair color.

Great article, much to ponder here.

By: Craig Kessler

Craig Kessler — Wed, 28 Sep 2011 21:10:39 +0000

I commented on your previous post and am glad to see a follow up. It almost sounds like this post contradicts what you said last time, and that you mass pitch a list of bloggers and have a team of analysts begin to weed the responses after and communicate accordingly.

Reaching out to 100 bloggers takes a lot of time (especially when you have loads of other initiatives to work on) much less 2000. Maybe I misread the post but this strategy seems a bit difference. Although I don't think there is anything wrong with sometimes playing the numbers game, because in PR it really comes down to it sometimes.