Would you unsubscribe from a marketers list because he or she promotes something that conflicts with your personal beliefs?
I just read a post from a well know and respected marketer I’ve worked with in the past. In his article, he was calling into question the morality of those of us who are promoting the Rich Jerk Playboy Party.
Apparently, people are removing themselves from the lists of anyone who would dare promote the party at the mansion. I can’t say I’m surprised… (sigh).
POST EDITED on June 29th
Maybe Paul has a point, why don’t you read his post here and decide for yourself. Though I don’t agree with Paul on a few points (as you will see in my emotionally charged comment) perhaps there’s a lesson to be learned.
Humility… it’s a virtue that’s quite unnatural with most marketers. This is certainly true in my case, and I confess there was some resistance at the thought of publicly admitting a mistake. It’s human nature to defend a position you take, even if logic and reason later proves it erroneous.
Yes, I’m still going to the Playboy party and I’m darned excited about it. Personally, I have no moral objections whatsoever, but perhaps I should have evaluated the possibilities of backlash and repercussions before promoting something as controversial as a party at the Playboy Mansion.
Sure, I could continue to take the stance that many of my colleagues have taken by either defending my position or attacking my critics, but what purpose would that serve? The fact is, as marketers we are 100% dependent upon relationships with our subscribers, and it’s a risky thing to discuss politics, religion or anything else that people identify with very strongly.
The Lesson: Never let your ego get in the way of making good business decisions. When your customers speak, listen. Even if you don’t agree, at least appreciate where they are coming from. Sometimes it takes a healthy dose of “humility invoking criticism” to evaluate decisions with objectivity and honesty.
Lesson learned, damage done, and now I think it’s time to move on.
I definitely agree with all you’ve said Tim. I think there is a major difference between those going to the party and those not attending.
First, I AM a family man with 3 small children and a wonderful wife.
This party could be held in the sewers and I’d still be there.
I value my business and know from personal experience that networking has exploded my personal business into the stratosphere.
The attendees (from what I’ve seen so far) are those that are extremely serious about this business and refuse to fail.
Those not attending see an opportunity to hype up the fact that they won’t be there and that RJ is a jerk. That very well may be, but I refuse to let an opportunity like this pass without my personal presence.
Let’s rock this party out and have a ball, bro!
I had something similar happen to me when I started promoting a small amount of gambling products. People are funny that way and I guess nothing says decadence more than playboy bunnies, right?
Tim,
I’ve been a subscriber of yours for at least 4 years (3 on your personal site). I’ve seen excellent results using what you and Jesse teach, especially last year when we spoke and you helped me out with the collar site.
You are a great guy and you seem to have high integrity, but I just can’t believe you would endorse this event. It’s degrading to women and I’m very disappointed.
I was close to unsubscribing altogether, but I haven’t forgotten what you did to help me. I’ll bet there are many women on your list who are not as forgiving as I.
Anyway, I thought you should know how I felt.
Jane
Im not suprised you lost subscribers. Your stuff is usually marketing related – then you post not once but 2x about the playboy party? Let’s just move on already.
Rob
Tim,
I’m a big believer in catching people doing something right and acknowledging it. I am one of the people who has been working very hard to help some of the marketers who promoted this party realize why this is a big deal.
I was surprised to see you had edited your post to reflect the fact that you have considered how promoting (not attending, mind you, promoting) the party might have been a mistake and I want to publically acknowledge it and let you know that it takes a great deal of courage to admit a mistake.
The people who have been against the marketing of this party are not your enemies, just concerned marketers and I think that you realize that. We also don’t think that people who have been caught up in this are bad people, just people who made an error in judgment.
Unfortunately, some of your more vocal colleagues are attacking rather than listening, and I applaud you for having the conviction and bravery to say what you have said in your updated post. Thank you!
And I have publically acknowledged you on my Squidoo lens about this issue, because I think that reasonable people can come to an agreement on something as controversial as this if both sides are able to communicate with one another reasonably.
Jennifer Knox
http://www.squidoo.com/marketingandwomen
Tim, I have a lot of respect for you as a marketer. I was very impressed by your presentations on the MLM Traffic Formula, in particular.
I also am encouraged to see you say that you respect some of your customers’ concerns even though you disagree with them.
I would like you to consider going even further though: Stop promoting the event and stay home.
Why? Because
1) The Rich Jerk’s advertising for the event has been blatantly sexist and anti-gay in character. For example, he ends his June 1st blog post with “P.S. No gays allowed.” What if he had written, “No blacks allowed” or “No Jews allowed?” Would that have been acceptable to you? If not, why would “No gays allowed” be acceptable? (If so, I would want to understand why you see a difference?)
Or, an example of sexism, from his “uncensored” sales letter: "Plus, everyone in attendance will have to sign a non- disclosure document. Therefore, you can be sure your wife, girlfriend, or whoever will NOT find out what happens when you are hanging around a couple of super hot, slutty models in the grotto or a sex room."
By the way, that uncensored letter has been pulled from the Internet but can be viewed by searching on Google for: richjerkplayboyparty.com/release/ and then clicking the “Cached” link
2) His videos on YouTube provide further evidence of his misogynic and homophobic beliefs. Particularly the one where he (played by an actor) "brands" "his" women as a rancher would brand cattle. At the end of that video a stereotypic flouncy gay guy pleads to be branded too.
3) Before it was deleted, a thread on the Warrior Forum raised important questions about the charity aspect of the event. Do you know how much will be given to charity? Do the charities have legal not-for-profit status? What percentage of the funds donated to the charity actual go to helping the homeless, for example, as opposed to administrative costs?
A marketer who demeans women and gay citizens in order to make money does not deserve the support of businessmen like yourself who respects others and practices sound business ethics. Thank you for considering my request.
Sincerely,
Mark Worthen, Psy.D.
Charlotte, NC
Thanks for the comment Jennifer.
Mark, I appreciate your compliment. Kelly (AKA Rich Jerk) doesn’t think or talk that way in real life. RJ is a fictional character created to polarize people and get them emotionally charged… and it’s obviously worked.
Do you really think Kelly believes the stuff you’ve seen in those sales letters?
The goal is to get a reaction from his readers. Shock, entertainment, anger and envy to be precise… all very powerful emotions.
Controversy was a big part of his success, and I applaud him for it. It’s brilliant marketing. Bold, daring and outrageous, but brilliant. Some people find it offensive, but I find it humorous because I don’t take it personally (or seriously).
Why let the beliefs of a fictional character disturb your peace of mind?
Lighten up, it’s only life.
Tim
P.S. Looks like the warrior forum has allowed the details of the charity to remain intact. They can be found here
Tim,
As I mentioned in my previous comment, I was encouraged to see what you had written. I even mentioned it specifically on my Squidoo lens. However, Mark has brought up some valid points about aligning oneself with a person, whether “fictional” or not, who says and does the things that Kelly does.
Note that I said, “Kelly” not the “Rich Jerk” because however you want to slice it, there is a real person, sitting at a computer, writing these hateful thoughts. Where does that kind of venom come from? Never in a million years, would I feel the need to create a “character” that is so compeletely vile in order to make money. I’m sorry, but there is a line which I have drawn at which I won’t do anything just to make a buck.
Now I understand that many people use the excuse that this is a “character” and stand behind that as though it is some sort of shield, but you have to remember something important: Every person, male or female, young or old (yes, I said young because there were many kids that received a link to this letter from their “mentors”, people they have chosen to follow in IM as young entrepreneurs) read this.
The kid aspect is something that I know hasn’t been talked about much, but it’s something VERY important. How would you feel if you found out that your child had received a seemingly innocent marketing email only to find a link inside that led to a page that was nothing short of soft-core porn and profanity? Would that be ok with you? Is that part of the opt-in agreement, that if someone signs up for innocent marketing education, that the sender is then allowed to also send something that clearly is beyond the bounds of decency just because it’s “cool” or “edgy” or will get them something?
So Tim, I sincerely appreciate what you have said, and have acknowledged it publically both here and on my site, but there are so many aspects to why people are upset about this, that I just felt it was important to outline some of the other concerns.
As for the charitable aspect, the info that is posted tells absolutely nothing about the organization. In fact, several well-respected members of that forum have tried in vain to find information that specifically indicates that this organization is what it says it is. That is why, miraculously, another charity has suddenly been mentioned. In fact, someone who was promoting the party had to seek out who the charity was because apparently nobody ever thought to ask before sending out their promotions, and the question of what amount is going to charity of the $2000 ticket is still in question. The charitable aspect of it is dubious at best at this point, and the lack of due diligence on the part of the endorsees is troubling.
So Tim, my comment on commending you for being able to see the other side still stands, but I think that “lighten up, it’s just life” stings a bit for this commenter who had given you credit where credit was due.
Thanks,
Jennifer Knox
[...] be promoting immorality or …I’m not entirely clear why they’re against it. [Read Tim Erway and Ross Goldberg’s posts]. I can understand what their detractors are saying, but I [...]
Tim,
In response to my previous comment you stated, in part,
“Why let the beliefs of a fictional character disturb your peace of mind?
Lighten up, it’s only life.”
Please review the following page and let me know if you truly believe that fictional characters employed by advertisers to market their wares have no influence on people:
http://markworthen.com/rich-jerk-supporters-claim.htm
Here are a couple of books on the subject, should you desire a more thorough review of the effects of advertising on people’s perceptions and attitudes:
Deadly Persuasion: Why Women And Girls Must Fight The Addictive Power Of Advertising
by Jean Kilbourne
Can’t Buy My Love: How Advertising Changes the Way We Think and Feel
by Jean Kilbourne
Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, and Rastus: Blacks in Advertising, Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow (Contributions in Afro-American and African Studies)
by Marilyn Kern-Foxworth
I hope you will reconsider your position and join other leading marketers in opposing Mr. Felix’s sexist, homophobic advertising campaigns.
Sincerely,
Mark
–
Mark Worthen, Psy.D.
877-349-1726
I think this event did more damage than good. I hope something good eventually comes from it because this kind of marketing can kill a person’s reputation.