So, I get my monthly cell phone bill from Verizon (yeah, I’m naming names; maybe someone will forward this to them and they’ll get their act together…). So, in it were a few of these slick little inserts. One of them had this headline: “Get Mobile Broadband on the Nation’s Largest 3G Network!”
The copy went on to explain how I could get “lightning-fast Internet access” which would allow me to check email virtually anywhere. Hmmmm. Interesting. Sounds like something worth having. Let me go check it out…
So, they give a web link: www.verizonwireless.com/upgrade (yes, feel free to follow along in this exercise in futility just so you know I’m not making it up). OK, so while I’m a good commercial copywriter, I don’t exactly consider myself some “Landing Page Copywriting Guru” by any stretch. But, I know this much:
If you provide a link on a mail piece, email blast, or ad that purports to offer more detail on Widget A described on said mail piece, email blast, or ad, then make sure the link provided indeed takes them directly to a landing page providing more detail on Widget A.
Is this complicated?
So, click on over to the above link, and see what happens. Not a word about “Mobile Broadband.” They make me log into my account (first chance for me to lose interest). But, I’ll play along. I log in, and at next screen? STILL nary a peep about “Mobile Broadband.” Now, they’re asking me irrelevant questions about upgrading my phone.
It’s clear to me at this point that if I want to find any more information on Mobile Broadband, I’m going to have to go searching their site, which I have no interest in doing.
But get this: even if I was sooooo interested I was willing to do a site search for “Mobile Broadband,” you still basically get nowhere. One link takes you to a more detailed description (finally), but still doesn’t tell you how much it costs, nor provide further links to find out that info.
Who in the world is minding the store over there, for crying out loud? Just because there’s a big name on the door doesn’t mean they know what they’re doing. Examples like this are everywhere. Corporate marketing communications departments are often good at the big picture and are great at cranking out pretty stuff, but they’re often under such pressure (and I’m sure more so now than ever before) that a lot of the crucial “execution” details fall through the cracks.
It just underscores two things: 1) don’t put big companies on a pedestal as having it all figured out; and 2) there are a vast number of opportunities out there for commercial freelancers like us to help them clean up their act.
Why do you think so many companies get this stuff wrong so much of the time?
Have you come across similar examples like this? If so, can you share?
Have you been intimidated by big companies in the past, only to discover that they’re mighty flawed and human after all?
A reader recently sent me a link to an interesting piece in The Week, entitled “Is Writing for the Rich?” It was written by the editor himself, Francis Wilkinson, who concluded that the future of freelance writing is mighty bleak, and that, given the unfortunate current financial calculus of the craft, it’s become a field only for those who don’t have to make their living from it – trust-fund babies, those living on Daddy’s money, heirs, etc.
I just LOVE reading stuff like this. Makes me laugh out loud. I mean, when the editor of a prominent national publication is saying this, it’s clear that the commercial writing field, by and large, is flying completely under the radar. I should have left well enough alone and let him spread his “Abandon-all-hope-ye-who-enter-here” message unimpeded. But I was torn.
On the one (greedy) hand, the less people who know about our field, the less competition we’ll have (though, that said, you do have to work hard to get established in commercial writing, and that’ll weed out most people right there…). On the other hand, I firmly believe there’s enough to go around for all of us. And I DO have a few books to peddle…
So, I wrote him a note (email me if you want a copy), essentially cluing him in about our field, which can be a most refreshing financial oasis from the otherwise sad and sorry freelancing paradigm. Addressing some of the inane “talk” about the commercial copywriting field, I wrote: “I’ve heard it all (‘sellout,’ ‘going over to the dark side,’ and other assorted and sundry head-scratchers – as if the only ‘writing’ that’s pure and acceptable is that which provides the writer with neither pay nor respect. Sure seems that way sometimes.
Never heard a word back. Big surprise. And that’s fine. I went on record. Meanwhile, the carnage continues out there. All I hear these days is about how tough it is in “freelance writing” right now – magazines paying nothing, asking for assignments on spec, $10 articles for web sites, all the “how-can-a-writer-make-a-living” talk. Meanwhile, many of us in the commercial field are doing just fine, thank you very much.
Part of the problem – and what I say to anyone who asks what the answer is – is that straight articles (especially for the web) are a “commoditized” project type – meaning there are zillions of writers who can write a decent article. As such, it’s a buyer’s market, and rates fall to nothing. It’s when you get good at project types NOT everyone can do (that’d be us…), and hence, are competing with far fewer people, that you’ll start making more money. As long as you’re in a BIG pool of interchangeable skills, it’s tough to make a living.
What do you think when you read articles like the one in The Week?
What would you have said to Mr. Wilkinson?
Are you hearing a lot of wailing and caterwauling coming from straight freelancers these days?