PC4Media: Weblog Invasion Tour Changes

Unfortunately, Our first WIT victim, Steve Rubel, has declined our invitation to join us on our Journey across foreign weblogs. Not gonna lie here, we are disappointed 1) that we won't be gaining Steve's insight for our journey and 2) we got rejected.

But, we aren't quitters and I am used to rejection (I hope you're not taking it to too hard, Matt.), and he wasn't totally disparaging in his rejection. He wished us Luck. Thanks Steve! And we got some excellent encouragement from Scott Allen.

But I think what's compelling about the tour is that, contrary to Steve's change of heart comments, this is totally a win-win. So long as the comments and cross-posts remain valuable, relevant posts (which they undoubtedly will), and not just "hey, you've been invaded" messages, then everybody benefits.

In some email exchanges, Steve said that WIT was a brilliant PR stunt. (That's quite a complement from A PR Veteran) and he suggested that we change our tactics a bit.

Matthew Welty and I thought about that for a bit and given Steve's Response...

It's a clever idea, but it's just not meant for me. While many of their comments are good reads, I don't believe in allowing anyone to litter this site with comments just to grab the attention of people who come here to learn about the changes that are taking place in the PR industry.

...We've decided to modify our tactics to be a bit less intrusive, a bit less graffiti/litter like. If only Hitler were this accomodating.

Here is the original 'How WIT works post'

Here is the revised procedure:

Announcing the Victims
1. At the beginning of each week, we (Matt or I) announce 5 victims for the week. (We may work up to five as our numbers grow. Don't want to spread the troops too thin.)

What the Invasion Looks Like
2. We'll link to and and comment the ~~hell~~ heck out of each weblog over a week. We may or may not tell people what we are doing. (The intensity of the commenting will vary depending upon whether the people respond kindly to the comments.) Or Warn people that we are coming. (We aren't sure about this. Telling people you are coming ruins the invasion-like surprise. But, getting people's permission might be a good idea.) We will try to cross comment across the 5 weblogs as well as ours. (This is a new dimension.)

Recruiting Members and Getting Their Suggestions/Picks for The Next Victims
3. By invading someone, we hope to persuade said person(s) to join the tour. So, by the end of the week, we'll have had email/blog conversations with that person to invite them to join us. And, we will request that they pick the next weblog. We will always announce the next stop on one of our weblogs (Matt or me), in order to avoid people trying to co-opt the invasion clan for themselves.

Feedback Appreciated!

I have asked Matt to pick the next five. We are also open to suggestions. We are hoping to stick to blogs that are more business than personal, but we are open to all sorts.

Waiting on you, Matthew!

Comments

Blogs are a social phenomenon. The tour is a social phenomenon that simply spikes normal blog activity. I'm all for "common courtesy", but so long as the nature of the posts is valuable and relevant, not graffiti-like, the idea that one would need, or even ask, permission seems anathema to the very nature of blogs as a social phenomenon.

It's not like you're launching a DOS attack.

Posted by: Scott Allen | May 21, 2004 at 02:54 PM

I agree Scott. I guess it is just the Sethaholist in me that thinks that seeking permission. is the best way. Thanks for the feedback. I am thinking that seeking permission beforehand is unnecesary too.

And if we upset someone, so be it. Our intentions are good. If people don't want to engage, then that is their loss.

Besides, a little blog controversy is a good way to get some attention.

Posted by: Peter Caputa | May 21, 2004 at 03:49 PM