Noticing a trend happening more and more.<\/p>\n
And that trend is, people are prematurely replying without reading or edu-macating themselves on what they\u2019re replying to, or purposely warping facts around to the point where it\u2019s just impossible to take them seriously (as if they\u2019re just looking for attention).<\/p>\n
It\u2019s always happened.<\/p>\n
(And will happen to you if you use my system, you can bank on it.)<\/p>\n
But, I\u2019ve been noticing it getting especially bad over the past year or so.<\/p>\n
Example:<\/p>\n
In my private flakebook group, one of my subscribers started a discussion about how a particular bullet point (“The surprising “water” miracle that could make your blood REPEL cancer cells and shrink tumors down to nothing”) he had read from an Agora ad was unethical.<\/p>\n
I disagreed and defended the bullet.<\/p>\n
(I think it\u2019s brilliant, for a variety of reasons).<\/p>\n
Then, to take it a step further, I talked about how thoroughly Agora and other big mailer copywriters research these things. They have to, not only do they have internal lawyers, but from what the great A list copywriter Jim Punkre told Daniel Levis in an interview once, sometimes copywriters can be held liable for claims, too. And Chase Revel, founder of Entrepreneur Magazine, once got nailed for making a 100% true and documented claim in his ad \u2014 even with a solid \u201cno fault\u201d clause in his contract. Anyway, to illustrate how much research goes into these ads, I told the story about how when Brian Kurtz was diagnosed with prostate cancer, he said the first person he went to for advice on various options, etc was copywriter Parris Lampropoulos.<\/p>\n
Why?<\/p>\n
Because Parris had researched that topic (for all the direct mail packages he\u2019s written over the years on the subject) better than any doctor Brian knew (well, I will take a chance and assume that’s the case, otherwise why wouldn’t he have went to whoever knew more…)<\/p>\n
So what happens?<\/p>\n
A response that says my assertion that Parris is the guy to turn to over a DOCTOR (he even capitalized doctor, so he must have been serious) specializing in cancer is absurd.<\/p>\n
Ooh.<\/p>\n
Guess I should have not said that.<\/p>\n
Except, for one little problem:<\/p>\n
I didn\u2019t say it.<\/p>\n
Nor did I \u201cassert\u201d (or even suggest) people should go to Parris over their doctor. The subject was copywriters and research, not who someone should go to for medical advice. I simply told the story to illustrate how thoroughly copywriters at that level research their topics, and how one man thought so highly of a particular copywriter, he asked for his advice first.<\/p>\n
Anyway, the point?<\/p>\n
More and more people are either just skimming and then prematurely replying or they\u2019re just being trolls.<\/p>\n
And you know what?<\/p>\n
If you\u2019re going to say anything the mainstream (in any industry) doesn\u2019t like (in an email, blog post, video, social media comment, etc), you can expect it to happen to you, too.<\/p>\n
Maybe not today.<\/p>\n
Maybe not tomorrow.<\/p>\n
But it will happen and is just a matter of time, my little fledgling.<\/p>\n
So be ready.<\/p>\n
Be prepared.<\/p>\n
And, don\u2019t be shy about calling trolls or premature repliers out.<\/p>\n
(Which, as you can see, makes for great email \u201cfodder\u201d anyway.)<\/p>\n
Yes, those are not-a-DOCTOR elBenbo\u2019s orders.<\/p>\n
One last thing:<\/p>\n
If you\u2019re going to subscribe to my \u201cEmail Players\u201d newsletter, make sure you read, carefully, the ad for it before subscribing. It\u2019s astonishing how many people subscribe without realizing (1) it\u2019s a print (paper and ink) publication not digital (2) it ships the first week of each month (3) the back issues are not free and (4) they are not really qualified to be subscribing at all, even if they can afford it.<\/p>\n
Anyway, that\u2019s it for today.<\/p>\n
To read (carefully) more about \u201cEmail Players\u201d go here:<\/p>\n