I believe it was James Higham who once said that it is the post you least expect that generates the most heat. Or something like that anyway.
My post on the spammy email I received recently generated much more heat than I expected. I mildly thought that I’d get one or two comments along the line of “me, too” and that would be it. What I got was some pretty intensive defence of the practice – and, consistently, when the assertions made were challenged or the questions answered with perfectly reasonable answers with real life examples, I was subjected to imperious, pompous pronouncements along the lines of I don’t understand (when I understand all too well) and denigrating, patronising and insulting retorts. All of which took me a little by surprise as even the most robust political debates have not generated such defensive behaviour so quickly.
I have seen this behaviour once before. A long time ago, when I first started my own business I was deluged by sleazy sales types trying to sell me advertising and they used the same sales pitch that was used in this discussion; I wouldn’t sell sweet FA unless… At that time (the mid-eighties) it was a large advertisement in the Yellow Pages. These days it is a page 1 rank in Google. Different product, but the same pitch. This statement is demonstrably false.
Here’s a little experiment for you. Type rail pts training (PTS = personal track safety) into Google. Then go to page 3 (page 2 is mostly agencies, so we can ignore them). On page 3 you will find Bridgen Rail, a company that is doing rather well in its field. You will also see MTR, a leader in track safety training. On page 4 you will find Halcrow and Vital, both trading perfectly well in this sector. On page 5 you will find Malla, again, a healthy training provider. All of these companies are selling rather more than “Sweet FA”. I visit all of these companies and all are managing to sell their wares without appearing on page 1 of a Google search. My comment, therefore, that this sales pitch is mere hyperbole stands. When I made much that point to the sleazy sales types, they tended to react in exactly the same patronising, pompous and defensive manner that my two commenters did here.
Interesting…
—————————————-
Update: As I started to suspect early on yesterday, “Dave” and “Charcoal” are one and the same. And there was me thinking that there was more than one person prepared to defend spammers.
I did love your retort to the annoying ‘Dave’:“If anyone calls you a wit, you can at least let them know they are half right.”
🙂
.-= ´s last blog ..Great Marketing Ploy! =-.
The annoying Dave or should that be “Charcoal” has been back with a little trolling overnight, despite stating that he was going on more than one occasion.
I do not delete comments that disagree with me; I have no patience with idiots and trolls who think that insulting behaviour is somehow acceptable. Still, it makes no difference, delete is a simple enough button to press.
It’s amusing in a detached way, the behaviour is typical of a particular personality. When claiming that “everyone” indulges in unethical practice, what they mean is that “they” do. And, when these generalisations and false assertions are challenged they become all defensive and patronising. Entirely predictable.
One way of looking at it, I suppose… I have a troll. Does this mean that I have arrived? 🙂
Too true longrider. If you look at Amazon, it sells the same stuff but on a different platform. Google is no different, but as you’ve said, it is now so cluttered with companies that have paid to have their status upgraded but with little relevance to the search itself.
Advertising companies pride themselves on having a cutting edge and creative approach to sales. So for chocolate that would be a woman orgasming over a bar on a TV/poster ad. And banner adverts on relevant(ish) websites. Same stuff, just different platforms for delivery. And totally irrelevant to many companies who use their skill and expertise in specialised fields to earn their sales.