Persuasion is still persuasion
I noticed a new report online tonight to download about 19 “new” rules of “social media” copywriting.
With “web 2.0″ all the buzz, this list promised a lot about being engaging and memorable … and persuasive … using social media.
To get the report, I had to sign up to a mailing list first. That was not part of the original “promise” — I was expecting to download a report, not have to add myself a mailing list to do so. Anyway, I downloaded the report and unsubscribed from the list. That’s a thought stream for another day.
I’ve got to say the report wasn’t what I was expecting.
Of the 19 “new” rules — only five of them were “new” and were directly related to social media (”Make your message viral”, “Start the conversation”, “Create discussion topics”, “Generate buzz” and “Include your keywords”). Even some of those are just online adaptions of ways to generate publicity — the method suits the vehicle, but the objective really hasn’t changed.
The other 14 “new” rules are not new at all — they’ve been around long before they were applied in a social media environment.
Sure, social media has changed how you connect, engage and persuade your market — but the way the message is crafted is still based on long-proven copywriting principles.
Some aspects of the process have changed, but the underlying techniques of copy are still as relevant in the social media sphere as elsewhere.
Persuasion is still persuasion.
Comments
3 Responses to “Persuasion is still persuasion”
Leave a Reply
Dean - Interesting pints. Just thought I would address some of them.
- You will note the word “New” throughout my report is enclosed with quotes as “new’ or in capitals as in NEW. That is deliberate. Also throughout the report I emphasise that these “new” rules are based on proven direct response copywriting rules. Which means they have been around for some time. I believe you echo that point in your post.
The whole point is that they can be applied to Social Media Marketing as an alternative to “traditional” marketing which tends to be overtly controlled marketing content - among other things.
My report is primarily directed at marketers, who are in many cases having to completely change their approach and mindset in order to effectively write for and use Social Media. While it may seem that several points may seem “obvious” to you and I they are often not as obvious to others as you might think.
Feedback so far is that The “New” Rules are a good place to start and a helpful guide, for which I’m pleased.
As for having to add yourself to a mailing list to get my report…the download instructions everybody followed are the same as for any FREE report download. Even Clayton Makepeace’s The Total Package asks you to sign up before downloading anything from their site - each time.
There is certainly no compulsion to add yourself to a mailing list… anyone is free to unsubscribe whenever they wish via the supplied unsubscribe link - which of course you did.
Oh, and “pints” should of course be “points…”
Thanks Nicky — yes, I guess in some ways we are saying the same thing … albeit in a different way. I’m not saying you delivered bad content: based on the title, my expectations were different than how I interpreted the report … but I’m probably not your primary audience.
I’m still not sure a reader would notice any difference in meaning between New, “New” and NEW!
And you’re right of course about the mailing list approach — you’re far from alone in compelling someone to add themselves to a mailing list first before downloading free content — although I still think in many cases the value of handing over my email address isn’t warranted for what’s offered in return (not that I’m implying it’s the case for you!).
I’m less and less willing these days to jump onto a new list just to evaluate one download (as you noticed!) … especially when I haven’t even had the chance to read it yet!
My mailbox is already overflowing with subscribed lists and they’re heavily filtered into folders, rather than filling my main inbox. Half the time, I don’t even remember the relationship I have with the author of the email, or what they’re specialty is … they assume that I’ll remember who they are, and why I’ve let them in my inbox, and it’s simply not so! I think that is a bigger source of unsubscribes than many marketers realise.
Anyway, that is another thought stream altogether and not to be taken personally!
I’m glad people are finding your guide helpful!