Kranz On Copy: Insights and answers on copywriting and writing copy

Today, I read the sad news that one of my heroes, Jane Jacobs, has died at the age of 89.

Jacobs was the author of The Death and Life of Great American Cities, an iconoclastic masterpiece that built its theories of urban life from the ground -- or better yet, the streets -- up.

Before Jacobs, almost all serious discussions about city life and city improvement began with the assumption that cities were bad things. That the ideal was, and should be, an attachment to the Jeffersonian vision of virtuous country life.

With a mighty sweep of her pen, Jacobs redirected enlightened thinking in exactly the opposite direction by articulating what was right about great cities: the constant mingling of persons, the multiple opportunities for meaningful chance encounters, the excitement of exploring unknown cultures and the cross-breeding of those cultures. And perhaps paramount of all, the rich complexity of city life that forces citizens to overcome cultural assumptions and THINK. Think about what they see. What they experience. And what they value or wish to share.

First and foremost, Jane Jacobs was a lover. Her secret garden was our cities. And she made us see and welcome our cities in a new and more appreciative way.

God bless Jane Jacobs.

We all know how important it is to correctly position or package our products and services. Still, it's good to be reminded of just how important the right spin can be.

Case in point: A new book about the first month of the Ford presidency called (naturally), 31 Days, by Barry Werth.

Now, when we think of exciting modern presidencies, we think of Kennedy and Johnson, or Nixon and Reagan. But Ford?

Here's the little inside nugget though: Key players in the current administration, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, cut their teeth in the Ford administration.

That nugget provides the foundation for the book's tagline and it's a great one: "The crisis that gave us the government we have today."

Hats off to the unattributed copywriter who came up with that one! It's going to sell a lot of books.

I just got an e-mail invitation to an event titled, Communicating Your Company's Values: How Corporate Social Responsibility Impacts the Bottom Line. The very first line of body copy is a quote attributed to a 2001, Cone/ Roper Corporate Citizenship Study which says this:

"81 percent (of consumers) said they'd likely switch brands on items of comparable quality and price to support a cause."

To me, the crucial word here is "said." Note that 81% of consumers did not actually switch brands to support a cause -- they just said they would.

Would I make an important marketing decision based on what consumers "say" they will do? Not on my life. Especially in this case, where there's a distinct motive for, well, bending the truth a bit -- people want to be seen as moral, ethical beings, not selfish creatures. So sure, I'll tell you I'll go out and buy a hybrid -- then I'll put money down on a gas-guzzling SUV.

C'mon, we've all learned this since we were toddlers: What people say they will do and what they actually do are two entirely different things with only a tentative relationship to each other -- kind of like distant cousins, twice removed, living on opposite coasts.

Yet marketers fall into this "consumers say" trap all the time, frequently as the result of bad research, poorly run focus groups and/or misinterpreted survey/interview data.

The research I value most measures behaviors and actions. That's why I love direct response so much. People respond or they don't respond. They buy or they don't buy. Hard and clear. Those are numbers I trust.

How about you?

Lately, I've received a number of voice messages that go something like this: "Hi, Jonathan. [Though I've never met these people before, they feel quite comfortable addressing me casually through my first name.] I've been on your website and I found it really interesting. I'd like to discuss a partnership opportunity with you. Please give me a call at etc."

"Partnership opportunity." That sounds like a business deal, right? In which we both work together for our mutual gain and benefit. On the same side.

But when I return the call, I don't find a business opportunity, but a sales pitch. The caller doesn't want a "partner," she wants a customer.

Let's cut the crap, shall we? With a nod to Tarzan: You -- vendor. Me -- customer. While you may think the "partner" schtick is a clever way to get a return call, it's dishonest. In fact, it's a lie, plain and simple. And when I realize that you've lied, do you really think I'm going to become your customer?

News flash to sales people: If you're going to leave a message, give me a benefit, a deal, an offer, a reason to be interested. But don't give me that "partnership" bullshit.

Here's the latest on my experiment with EzineArticles.com:

* I'm in a holding pattern with 16 published articles.
* Statistics continue to grow -- so far, 2,364 views and 20 "EzinePublisher" pick-ups.
* My web stats (visits, hits) are higher than when I began, but seem to be tapering off a little from its peak last week. That seems right: the biggest surge would come when the articles are fresh and are picked up by RSS feeds for distribution.
* Forgot to mention this last time around -- my book sales are up, judging from the numbers at Amazon.com. Among other things, article syndication may be a good way to promote a book (you can add the book URL to the signature line of the article).

Also, I have the featured blog post this morning on Marketing Profs Daily Fix, so I hope you'll take a look.