Commercial prose is so open to dragging in the deadwood to the center of your living room and just forgetting it there...
One such oddity I've heard this morning on the radio was the phrase "near impossibility."
People (in America) don't talk like that. They say something is "almost impossible" -- not "it is a near impossibility."
Even worse -- have you ever heard anybody saying "honey, don't forget to take your umbrella against a precipitation activity" (which might very well be a "near possibility"!).
Listen to any weather report and you can perhaps hear them issue an alert against "precipitation activity."
Sometimes even the traffic reporters get in the mood and start talking about an "accident activity on the right shoulder on I-95"... ugh!
Read aloud what you write and ask yourself if normal people talk like that. If they do, you've got great prose. Congratulations. If not, burn what you've written and don't tell anyone about it. We'll all be better for it.
Friday, July 13, 2007
Shuttle's Name Misspelled On NASA Launch Pad Sign
(What an incredible story!)
local6.com
Shuttle's Name Misspelled On NASA Launch Pad Sign
Someone Called Kennedy Space Center NASA To Fix Typo
POSTED: 7:38 am EDT July 13, 2007
UPDATED: 9:25 am EDT July 13, 2007
The first NASA sign at launch pad 39A encouraging the next launch of space shuttle Endeavour at Kennedy Space Center was misspelled and noticed by someone looking at the craft.
When the shuttle rolled out from the Vehicle Assembly Building Wednesday, a giant "Go Endeavour" sign was put on a fence in front of the craft.
However, one item was missing from the sign: the "u" in Endeavour.
Someone spotted the mistake and called KSC to fix it, WKMG-TV reported.
NASA scrambled someone out to pad 39A with a new sign that has orbiter Endeavour's name spelled correctly.
A photo with the correct spelling was also posted on the Kennedy Space Center's Web site.
The orbiter is named after HM Bark Endeavour, the ship commanded by 18th century explorer James Cook; the name also honored Endeavour, the Command Module of Apollo 15. This is why the name is spelled in the British English manner, according to Answers.com.
Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.
local6.com
Shuttle's Name Misspelled On NASA Launch Pad Sign
Someone Called Kennedy Space Center NASA To Fix Typo
POSTED: 7:38 am EDT July 13, 2007
UPDATED: 9:25 am EDT July 13, 2007
The first NASA sign at launch pad 39A encouraging the next launch of space shuttle Endeavour at Kennedy Space Center was misspelled and noticed by someone looking at the craft.
When the shuttle rolled out from the Vehicle Assembly Building Wednesday, a giant "Go Endeavour" sign was put on a fence in front of the craft.
However, one item was missing from the sign: the "u" in Endeavour.
Someone spotted the mistake and called KSC to fix it, WKMG-TV reported.
NASA scrambled someone out to pad 39A with a new sign that has orbiter Endeavour's name spelled correctly.
A photo with the correct spelling was also posted on the Kennedy Space Center's Web site.
The orbiter is named after HM Bark Endeavour, the ship commanded by 18th century explorer James Cook; the name also honored Endeavour, the Command Module of Apollo 15. This is why the name is spelled in the British English manner, according to Answers.com.
Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Importance of Keeping Your Work Close to Your Vest
It happens all the time...
A writer working on his or her first script, first novel, thinks it would a "great" idea to "share" it with a spouse, lover, child, friend, parent, co-worker or neighbor...
And the result is an unintended punch to the gut. The work stops right there. Enthusiasm and joy is replaced by doubts, second thoughts and eventually depression.
Why? Do our loved ones mean to harm us? Of course not.
Do they have an "ulterior motive" or a "sinister agenda"? Absolutely not.
But this is their problem -- they are NOT writers.
So they have no idea about the sensitive "mental and spiritual soup" in which our ideas and most precious creations ferment, multiply, and take shape as stories, scripts, articles and novels. It is a mysterious process, part "science" but mostly magic. That soup can be soured very easily by criticism while we are still adding crucial ingredients to it.
A lot of people think to give a "feedback" is to point out to the things that are missing. We all have that impulse to come across as "thoughtful" and usually the way we try to come across as thoughtful is to point out at what's "missing" or "wrong" with a project.
Even a casual and well-meaning comment like "I think that's been done before" is usually enough to dampen the spirits of a writer and mortgage her determination to press onward.
That's why I strongly recommend all my writer brothers and sisters not to show their hands too early, and not to ask their loved ones to read their stuff until it is 100% DONE. Only then they can read it if they please and enrich our work with their thoughful insights and learned suggestions.
But until then you have to protect your work just like a mother hen protects her chickens or a banker protects his vault.
A writer working on his or her first script, first novel, thinks it would a "great" idea to "share" it with a spouse, lover, child, friend, parent, co-worker or neighbor...
And the result is an unintended punch to the gut. The work stops right there. Enthusiasm and joy is replaced by doubts, second thoughts and eventually depression.
Why? Do our loved ones mean to harm us? Of course not.
Do they have an "ulterior motive" or a "sinister agenda"? Absolutely not.
But this is their problem -- they are NOT writers.
So they have no idea about the sensitive "mental and spiritual soup" in which our ideas and most precious creations ferment, multiply, and take shape as stories, scripts, articles and novels. It is a mysterious process, part "science" but mostly magic. That soup can be soured very easily by criticism while we are still adding crucial ingredients to it.
A lot of people think to give a "feedback" is to point out to the things that are missing. We all have that impulse to come across as "thoughtful" and usually the way we try to come across as thoughtful is to point out at what's "missing" or "wrong" with a project.
Even a casual and well-meaning comment like "I think that's been done before" is usually enough to dampen the spirits of a writer and mortgage her determination to press onward.
That's why I strongly recommend all my writer brothers and sisters not to show their hands too early, and not to ask their loved ones to read their stuff until it is 100% DONE. Only then they can read it if they please and enrich our work with their thoughful insights and learned suggestions.
But until then you have to protect your work just like a mother hen protects her chickens or a banker protects his vault.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Value of a Web Site ~ "Page Views" or "Time Spent"?
Nielsen rating company has shifted from the traditional “number of page views” to “time spent viewing a page” to measure a web site’s commercial worth.
This is a decision that will have a serious impact on all advertising companies that determine their web advertisement rates on the basis of such "objective" metrics.
The new Ajax technology seems to be the main culprit why Nielsen felt the need to adopt this new criterion. Ajax allows refreshing the web content without refreshing the page view. You must have noticed the way a new mail appears in your email window without re-loading the page, as we all used to do in the past.
Another reason why the traditional “page view” is considered losing its relevance is the streaming video sites like YouTube where visitors spend a lot of time on a single page watching one video clip after another.
On the basis of this new measuring stick, Nielsen has announced AOL as the winner of May’s “most popular” web site, with a total viewing time of 25 billion minutes, followed by Yahoo at 20 billion minutes. But by page view alone, AOL would have ranked sixth.
Google, although ranks 3rd by page views, dropped to fifth in terms of time spent since people leave Google screen quickly after a search is completed.
But I believe this new criterion has a serious flaw in this day and age of tabbed browsers.
What if you visit a site on one tab, then open another tab and go to another site, then do it for a third or fourth time? I find myself doing precisely that all the time.
What happens to the site left open for 20 hours on a forgotten tab? Does that mean that I have spent 20 hours on that site? Of course not.
How come Nielsen missed such a simple point is beyond me. I’m sure major advertisers are already grappling with this real issue.
This is a decision that will have a serious impact on all advertising companies that determine their web advertisement rates on the basis of such "objective" metrics.
The new Ajax technology seems to be the main culprit why Nielsen felt the need to adopt this new criterion. Ajax allows refreshing the web content without refreshing the page view. You must have noticed the way a new mail appears in your email window without re-loading the page, as we all used to do in the past.
Another reason why the traditional “page view” is considered losing its relevance is the streaming video sites like YouTube where visitors spend a lot of time on a single page watching one video clip after another.
On the basis of this new measuring stick, Nielsen has announced AOL as the winner of May’s “most popular” web site, with a total viewing time of 25 billion minutes, followed by Yahoo at 20 billion minutes. But by page view alone, AOL would have ranked sixth.
Google, although ranks 3rd by page views, dropped to fifth in terms of time spent since people leave Google screen quickly after a search is completed.
But I believe this new criterion has a serious flaw in this day and age of tabbed browsers.
What if you visit a site on one tab, then open another tab and go to another site, then do it for a third or fourth time? I find myself doing precisely that all the time.
What happens to the site left open for 20 hours on a forgotten tab? Does that mean that I have spent 20 hours on that site? Of course not.
How come Nielsen missed such a simple point is beyond me. I’m sure major advertisers are already grappling with this real issue.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Ambiguous Envelope Teaser
Envelope teasers are very crucial in direct mail since the prospective customer has about 3 or 5 seconds to decide whether to open your envelope or chuck it into the trash bin.
Here is a weak and rather annoying envelope teaser that would've directly gone to the trash basket if I weren't a professional copywriter who likes to meditate on these things and tries to learn something new everyday about this fascinating business of direct mail:
"Is This Little-Known Energy Company America's Next Major Uranium Producer?"
My first reaction is:
"You are asking ME? How the heck would I know? YOU are supposed to be the expert and yet you don't know whether THIS [whatever it is] little-known company is the next big thing on the horizon or not?"
As I read the envelope teaser I'm wondering if THIS is a way for me to make money OR provide free information to someone who doesn't quite has the skinny on this "little known company" yet...
Who knows, perhaps this "little known company" is little known for a very good reason indeed!
This teaser has already lost me with its indecisiveness.
Then comes the next line:
"Time-Sensitive Report. Open Immediately."
No. Sorry. I won't. Because who ever wrote the copy is not sure of this company at all. If the publisher is not sure of his/her facts, how can I trust him/her to lead me?
Why didn't this teaser really teased the heck out of me and did its job with no holds barred by saying something like:
"Little known company... about to explode (guaranteed!) as America's next major uranium producer. Limited-time opportunity to get in on the action before the little known company is not so anymore..."
Now, THAT would have perked my attention because of the firmness of the voice and the strength of the promise.
If you want me to open that envelope DO NOT ASK ME PUZZLES and DO NOT MAKE ME THINK.
If you are trying to write a teaser don't be halfhearted or shy about it. Make sure you are really TEASING instead of posing intellectual puzzles with no answers.
Here is a weak and rather annoying envelope teaser that would've directly gone to the trash basket if I weren't a professional copywriter who likes to meditate on these things and tries to learn something new everyday about this fascinating business of direct mail:
"Is This Little-Known Energy Company America's Next Major Uranium Producer?"
My first reaction is:
"You are asking ME? How the heck would I know? YOU are supposed to be the expert and yet you don't know whether THIS [whatever it is] little-known company is the next big thing on the horizon or not?"
As I read the envelope teaser I'm wondering if THIS is a way for me to make money OR provide free information to someone who doesn't quite has the skinny on this "little known company" yet...
Who knows, perhaps this "little known company" is little known for a very good reason indeed!
This teaser has already lost me with its indecisiveness.
Then comes the next line:
"Time-Sensitive Report. Open Immediately."
No. Sorry. I won't. Because who ever wrote the copy is not sure of this company at all. If the publisher is not sure of his/her facts, how can I trust him/her to lead me?
Why didn't this teaser really teased the heck out of me and did its job with no holds barred by saying something like:
"Little known company... about to explode (guaranteed!) as America's next major uranium producer. Limited-time opportunity to get in on the action before the little known company is not so anymore..."
Now, THAT would have perked my attention because of the firmness of the voice and the strength of the promise.
If you want me to open that envelope DO NOT ASK ME PUZZLES and DO NOT MAKE ME THINK.
If you are trying to write a teaser don't be halfhearted or shy about it. Make sure you are really TEASING instead of posing intellectual puzzles with no answers.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
No Copy is Better Than Lazy Copy
I have received this auto insurance offer by mail from a very well known wholesale merchandise company that reads:
"Save up to 20%..."
"As a XXXXX Member, you are now eligible for Money-Saving Auto Insurance RATES OF UP TO 20% OFF..."
My heart sank. Because XXXXX is a good company and they usually know what they are doing.
So how come they approved this lazy piece of copy that will not work for most of their prospective customers?
20% off OF WHAT for God's sake?
What is the base line here? What is our frame of reference?
How can the XXXXX officials know they are saving me "up to" 20% if they have no idea what my CURRENT rate is?
How do they know that their rate is not actually 20% MORE than what I have now?
What they are REALLY saying is "call us now and we will talk about it."
No sir, I will not call you now or later because your copy does not make sense and it also insults my intelligence. And if I were you I would hire a new copywriter right away.
If, however, they did quote a real person with real savings, then, who knows, I might've given them a shot.
A much better copy that read something like...
Then I might very well have given them a call. But not like this.
When consumers are treated like idiots they recoil. The only ones who won't will probably be the ones in desperate credit or financial problem. But are those the kind of customers that big corporations are trying to attract? I don't think so.
Good customers deserve good copy.
That's why I think "no copy" is much better than lazy and unintelligent copy.
Why?
Because when you do not send out any tired old mail pieces like this, you at least do not create question marks about the quality of the decisions made within your company. Your profits might remain level but your reputation and brand image would be intact.
"Save up to 20%..."
"As a XXXXX Member, you are now eligible for Money-Saving Auto Insurance RATES OF UP TO 20% OFF..."
My heart sank. Because XXXXX is a good company and they usually know what they are doing.
So how come they approved this lazy piece of copy that will not work for most of their prospective customers?
20% off OF WHAT for God's sake?
What is the base line here? What is our frame of reference?
How can the XXXXX officials know they are saving me "up to" 20% if they have no idea what my CURRENT rate is?
How do they know that their rate is not actually 20% MORE than what I have now?
What they are REALLY saying is "call us now and we will talk about it."
No sir, I will not call you now or later because your copy does not make sense and it also insults my intelligence. And if I were you I would hire a new copywriter right away.
If, however, they did quote a real person with real savings, then, who knows, I might've given them a shot.
A much better copy that read something like...
"THEY SAVED...
Our Member No. 123456 John Smith has saved 19.7% from his car insurance. And so did Jane Doe -- she couldn't believe it when we proved to her that she could save 18.5% over her existing rate.
How about YOU?
Wouldn't you like to find it out with a single toll-free phone call?"
Then I might very well have given them a call. But not like this.
When consumers are treated like idiots they recoil. The only ones who won't will probably be the ones in desperate credit or financial problem. But are those the kind of customers that big corporations are trying to attract? I don't think so.
Good customers deserve good copy.
That's why I think "no copy" is much better than lazy and unintelligent copy.
Why?
Because when you do not send out any tired old mail pieces like this, you at least do not create question marks about the quality of the decisions made within your company. Your profits might remain level but your reputation and brand image would be intact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
