Dear Amanda: It's over between us

Dear Amanda,

Writing to you is one way like writing to Santa Claus. Neither of you actually exists. But there, the similarities diverge. We think of Santa as a jovial elder, filled with goodwill and Amanda, that is just not you. If I write to Santa, I might expect to get gifts back.  Amanda, when I write to you I fear that I may receive hostility and venom in return.

Don't get me wrong Amanda.  You have been a good show. You are a talented writer and filled with the passion that the best bloggers seem to contain. The PR industry most certainly has its self-inflated members and poking holes in their bubbles can be fun to watch on occasion. In the beginning, Amanda, you were a surprise, even a shock, but not so much anymore.

Amanda, I don't know how to say this, but your act is getting stale, predictable... old. You no longer feel like a satirist, but more like a biting, angry hag, more like a divorcee angry about her settlement, than an observer of the foibles of an industry.

 

I must admit, I've always had my ambivalence about you. I have a love for blogging and  feel pride for the PR industry of which I was a member for 25 years. You are both a blogger and purport to be part of the PR industry.  You seem to hate both as much as I respect both. I am an advocate of honesty and humanity in business practice and  and Amanda, you practice deception and are not a human at all, but rather a fictitious character, and a pretty bitchy one at that.

Who are you, really Amanda? Is this diatribe of vitriol some form of self purge or self loathing? How can you call others out for not being transparent, when you are so transparent as to not really be there? How can you call for more ethical practices in PR when in your very first post, you boasted about sleeping with clients?

You stand on a virtual soapbox calling for transparency.  In fact, you are so transparent that you are but a shadow. You are not there. You are only a pigment of someone's imagination. You are a fantasy blogger, probably giving a strong voice to an essentially meek person.

Amanda, let's talk about truth for a minute, shall we? A few months back, your “webmaster” posted a phony AP wire release that claimed you were seriously injured in a car accident. This turned out to be a fictitious stunt.  The AP  Release was a phoney.  Worse, a photo of a crashed out  Porsche was embedded in the false release.  This was not your car, but rather one in which people had actually been killed.

Amanda, why did you cheapen yorself with such a stunt? this was not your usual nastiness in the name of satire.  This was something lower and I wondered why you had done this.  My guess was that you thought we bloggers would pick it up a relay it, then you would jump in and point out what fools we were, but that is not what happened. Bloggers went to work and showed the factual errors.  Within hours, the deception was revealed.  You whined a couple of times that the accident really happened then, miraculously cured, you just went back to doing whatever it is you think you are doing.

I also wonder about your obsession with the Edelman agency.  They certainly have been worth of criticism in recent times.  But so have just about all the other major agencies, or for that matter most large organizations. I have come to suspect that it's something personal between you and them, something that makes them your Moby Dick, a great  pale whale into which you obsessively wish to shove your harpoon.

I had to wonder about your response to my recent post on Edelman executive Phil Gomes, whom you recently addressed in what I thought was slanderous fashion. Now, I don’t know Phil very well. In fact, I've only met him briefly a couple of times before. The post I made was hardly lauditory, and in fact had a couple of gaffes that Phil saw fit to correct. But I thought he made a good point on the issue of captive and open online communities. I thoughtthat might interest some of my readers, so I posted a few paragraphs.

Thetwist was that I almost didn't write it, because the thought crossed my mind: “Shit, Amanda's going to come after me, if I say something neutral or favorable about Phil." But, Hell, we all have trolls, people who follow prominent bloggers around and say bad things about them wherever and whenever mentioned, and Amanda, you have become Phil's troll.

By the time my plane had landed in California, your Comment had been posted. You implied I had some secret agenda and that I lacked transparency. I do not, but the same back at you, Amanda. Why are you on an Edelman vendetta?  Did something happen between you and them?  C'mon you can tell us bloggers. And while we are at it, I don't seriously consider attacks on my transparency from people who hide anonymously behind fictional character masks.

Amanda, I suspect that you have multiple personalities because you are written by multiple people.  At one time detecting who you are interested me.  It no longer does. You are becoming predictable, too-often angry, too rarely funny. What you have to say is no longer fresh.

Amanda, I was 19 years between wives. I had many stormy relationships during those days. Like you, some of my partners were provocative as Hell, but over time, one of us would come to realize the relationship had died of atrophy.  That is what is happening for you and the blogosphere Amanda.  If we know what it is you have to say, then it is not all that interesting and fewer of us will read or talk about you.

Frankly, Amanda, I’m bored with our relationship. I refer the virtual company of real people. If you want to come back as whoever you are, you may find it liberating.  But if you continue down the well worn path you are on, you may find yourself hollering when no one is listening.

Yours truly,

Shel

Comments

[Amanda Chapel]

Shel,

In order of appearance, sorta:

1. Let’s first understand what has inspired your reaction Shel. You empathize with Gomes. We merely underscored a key phrase in your characterization of his/Edelman's work: “Gomes gives a case study of how Edelman used MySpace. It got word of mouth going and it was transparent in the effort.” We asked two essential questions: Did the people being manipulated by Edelman think they were being transparent? And, why aren’t you (Shel) asking that question?

2: People that are satirized never find satire humorous. Sorry. That said, the majority of our audience finds our commentary compelling, poignant and amusing.

That said, other than blatant boosterism, what value does your journal bring?

3. As to "stale," I certainly understand and partially agree. The subject matter, PR, is quite limited; As such, so is our repertoire for poking fun. You can only toss a midget so many times.

4. With regard to cheapening ourselves with any "stunt," excuse me but... we ARE PR! We do stunts! Now, ask yourself the same question.

5. As to me being in the shadow... PR practices in the shadows by definition. Think about it.

6. And an obsession with Edelman? Hardly. We wish they'd shut up. Edelman and their Me2Revolution farce have staked their claim as "leaders" in all things Web-PR 2.0. As such, they're an easy target. Frankly, they are our most prolific contributors ironically. As to our negative characterizations of that firm, see KD Paines' analysis: "PR's Reputation Continues to Suffer in the Blogosphere" (http://www.themeasurementstandard.com/issues/1-2-07/paineblogrep1-2-07.asp ). Edelman leads the dubious band by a long shot.

7. With regard to transparency, WE ARE NOT SELLING ANYTHING! We are only asking our audience to think and question. We have NO obligation to be "transparent." You do.

8. Relationship? With you? Funny. Someone asked the other day if I'd entertain a relationship with older man. I responded that I love older men. Ones well established sitting on at least 5 boards with country estates with no kids and a history of heart disease. :)

Sincerely,

- Amanda

[/pd]

oh Gosh Shel, you spent so much of time on an open letter to a Strumpette ?? Shame on you !!

[Adam Zand]

Shel,
I know we're blogging here, but you do come off a bit holier than thou in this post. Seems like plenty of people enjoy the content at Strumpette and probably don't take it as seriously as you. Why don't you just stop reading (and responding to) it?

I don't really care about the identity of Strumpette - I go to the site for interesting posts that alert me to the hypocrisies and humor in our sometimes sordid business.

You seem a little too hung up on transparency (again, it's a bloggers choice to identify themselves/employer/client/favorite baseball team - Go Red Sox!) so understand that I post comments at Strumpette and did a (some might say) "fun" post on the site about the New Comm Forum, Las Vegas - all in my real name.

If you would prefer to wait weeks until Edelman acknowledges huge gaffes and ethical landmines (at the same time they share their thought leadership), then the standard corporate and PR expert sites (who determined the A list anyhow?) would seem to fit your reading needs.

I'd rather get a laugh in the morning at Strumpette. Each to their own, but I do agree you should end your infactuation with the still "hot" Strumpette.

[Perry P. Perkins]

Shel (et al),

I think what I find most disconcerting about Amanda's response was that she didn't even deny any of the accusations! It seemed like the bottom line was...

"We're in PR, PR lies, get over it!"

Well...um...I'M in PR (among other things) and I take some measure of pride in the fact that I DON'T lie. If I had to be dishonest to do my job, I'd find something else.

Here's a thought: maybe people wouldn't assume that everyone in marketing and PR are lying gas-bags, if more PR folks refused to subscribe to an "ends justifies the mean" philosophy.

Sadly, they are just making their jobs (and ours) harder.

Thanks,

-Perry

[Kate]

Shel, I'm with ya...wipe the dust and move on. While Amanda's humorous...occasionally...and informative...occasionally...she reminds me of the everything-protestors that used to yell things from the square on my college campus: in place of productive conversation, she seems to want to pick fights, have the absolute last word and be a general pain in the ass. Good choice...the less attention you pay to the annyoing, trying-to-hard girl at the party...the quiter she'll become. Ignore her...or challenge her to Thunderdome, that seems to be more her style.

[shel israel]

Thanks Kate, but what's Thunderdome?

[Kate]

Anger management:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060102/news_mz1c02roller.html

[David Parmet]

Amanda jumped the shark months ago. Now it's like 'Waterworld." Awful to watch but you just can't turn away.

[The Movie Guy]

"Two men enter. One man leaves" - Mad Max 3: Beyond Thunderdome. Mel Gibson, Tina Turner. Great post apocalyptic movie! A good rent.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089530/

Seriously Shel, agree with everyone one of your points, but it's just not worth writing about it. The best way is to prove them wrong without even mentioning them!

It drives attention seekers like Strumpette batty!

[shel israel]

Hey Adam. Don't you get your laugh in the morningf at Amanda's because you are one if the writers. Are there two Adam Zands, or are you not part of the Amanda collective? What does a Strumpette wear to work?

[Amanda Chapel]

David, “The Movie Guy,” Shel,

First off, we didn’t jump any shark. Our readership continues to grow and understand our MO. Excuse me but our jabs at hypocrisy are more mainstream today than the charade that is the basis of your little Social Media Blog Club.

To your point of “just ignore it,” indeed that seems to be the cornerstone to your approach to this business. Is what it is. Frankly, we greatly appreciate your contribution to Strumpette.

:)

Ciao,

- Amanda

[Adam Zand]

Shel,
I thought I was pretty clear (transparent is such a strange word for us working class PR Heroes - NBC-TV reference) that I've done one hilarious postcard from Vegas and left comments on the site. I'm considering an offer to be a commentator with a friend at another agency. But don't worry, I'll ID myself on all posts with link back to the coolest social media-friendly PR agency, Topaz Partners.

In regards to seeing what Amanda wears to work, I've only had that honor in Second Life (and she looks smashing in Silk Kimono Wrap Top by Vera Wang, Black Wool Pants by Armani Collezioni, Gray Leather Mules with buckle by Manolo Blahnik and Cleo Push-Up Bra and Panty set by Roberto Cavalli).

Shel, you sexy guy, what are you wearing right now, hot stuff?

Rhetorical question - when in your 25-year PR career did you become such a boring, serious guy?

[shel israel]

Adam,
You do a really fine job of representing yourself and Topaz Partners with integrity. I'm sure this unique style will attract to your agency precisely the clients you deserve.

[Chris Clarke]

I've said pretty much the same thing, Shel, and the sentiments are echoed repeatedly by many PR professionals. I don't know who enjoys Amanda these days, or ever did for that matter, but I don't bother anymore. I've had my 15 minutes of fury from Strumpette, and now you've had yours. My lesson learned was that there's no winning a fight against someone who has nothing to lose - no integrity, no respect, not even a real person - so it's probably best to just ignore her completely.

[Amanda Chapel]

Chris,

By a few weak professionals. Your perception of "many" is a product of your limited experience, all in proximity to the little Social Media Blog Club. PR Weakness runs in packs junior. It's a Sorority of Dunces.

- Amanda

[antonis hontzeas]

Hot Dang guys 'n gals. Keep it up, I'm enjoying this (I am afterall trying to quit smoking...)

[Mark Rose]

Antonis: I agree. This is better than the emails between Julie Roehm and Sean Womack -oh, I love your face when you kiss me. Amanda and Shel - could be a book here. I never knew the PR business could be so entertaining until all the huffing and puffing about Strumpette.

[Adam Zand]

Shel,
In case you want to complain to my employer, clients (or poach them Mr. Integrity), here's a list of accounts I direct:

Computerworld magazine
Podcast Ready
Booyah Networks
Sagentia (aren't you near Cambridge UK - they'd be perfect for you)
Nallatech (aren't you near Cumbernauld, Scotland - they'd be perfect for you)

Last time I checked, they're all pretty happy with their representation.