I appreciate you stopping by to leave a comment. Your services are some of the most respected in the industry as everyone knows. As for the term “appearance” in the last of your comment, you know as well as I do that this pushed the line. We cover the PR industry too, and I have yet to run across any Cision news that outweighed correlative news we have done. The PR spectrum is pretty broad when you get down to it, and between you and me, someone would have to “want to find” white papers as old and outdated (however partially relevant) in order to link to them. I could personally write and or find more updated information just from the desktop in a short time.

We are not here to “insinuate” anything, but rather to help make the industry a little better each day. Sure, our methods and philosophy are different, without doubt, but we are never that far from wrong. As Al Pacino said in the movie Scent of A Woman; “I been around, you know?” So, having been around, I know that this lady and your company likely have no attachment. On the other hand, I also know that these “appearances” point (however pitifully) to another situation. With all the stuff I have seen perpetrated on this Web in the last several years, not many people can tell me much of anything about where appearances lead. I will go no further.

We admire your efforts as one of the best companies working for PR businesses in the world. But, please do not come here professing pitiful “lamb like” innocence, when any Web expert out there knows that “appearances” can be everything. I hope we “appear” very clear in our effort (though it may not seem like it) to protect your company, and this fine writer from the kind of scrutiny no one can hold up under. Just so you know, if I was sure there was something fishy going on here, I would just say it. This is the Internet you know.

Always,
Phil Butler – signed in as admin – I am not near that pretty.

I in no way intended to insinuate (any more than any other reader would) that you had any affiliation with Cision. The point, which apparently was missed, is that you made a common mistake in doing so many posts about Cision in a short time, and in the case of all the links in one post, reflected an inordinate number of “opportunities” for readers to “jump” to the Cision site. If you read the entire article at all, which apparently you did, you would also note that profession “up to date and cutting edge” content on the one hand, and sending people to outdated content on the other, was another error.

It was not my intent, as it never has been, to do anything more than reflect these “inappropriate” instances so that any editor or author might do better the next time. Whether or not you (or anyone else for that matter) is in collusion with businesses, is outside our scope of operation or intent. What we try to do is start discussion that will lead to a better Web for all of us. I understand your defensiveness, I have made these mistakes before myself. But, given the upcoming FTC sanctions or legislation towards blogs, I suggest that everyone pay more attention to their methods and “appearances”, especially when writing for someone else’s publication.

We all make mistakes, and sometimes in righteous indignation, we lose the gist of what others have tried to convey. I actually did this exact same thing once, and thought the other party completely wrong in chastising me. As it turned out, after a heated argument, that she was right and I was wrong. In part, this is why you are, so to speak; “on the hot seat” in this situation. Anyone looking at your posts in the way I did, would rightfully assume one of two things. You are a person who uses the Cision tools religiously, and you are just enamored with them. Or, there is some relationship going on that is not seen. Whether either of these situations is wrong or right is irrelevant for the seasoned PR person. The perception in itself is enough to cause great damage.

I am sorry if you have taken this as an affront, rather than a helpful “nudge” Anna. When the FTC and other authorities figure out just how much “bling” is being given out, just how much money is being spent, and the kinds of actions that people not as dedicated to ethics as you are doing, well – the end will not be pretty I assure you. After about 50,000 hours on this Web, no telling how many articles, and an unbelievable novel to write about Web 2.0, perhaps one gets on a high horse. I am sorry if I offended you overly. Offense is sometimes necessary in order to get the subject of a situation to pay attention. You are a superb writer, and deserving of a lot more than my evaluative efforts. But to get even better, there has to be a critique.

Our soul purpose in these critiques is to get people to move forward, to make ourselves move forward. You would not believe the number of opportunities I have personally had to “paint the right picture” for money. I the end, I hope we were right not to fall into this trap, or to appear overly promotional. There is a line there between enthusiasm and down right advertising. We all have to find it and stay away from the wrong end. I know this is a long winded version of; “Hey, I was just trying to help”, but there it is.

Please let us know if we can be of any help to you at all, as this is our intent. Criticism is difficult sometimes as you know, but if you think about this you will probably see our point. Thanks for coming and telling us your view, and as Mihaela said in her answer, the links are another matter that could do with some absorptive thinking as well.

Always,
Phil

The articles on my Examiner page are dedicated to small business owners and the like who have minimal PR expertise and need quick and easy resources with which to apply to their business (especially during this down economy).
See: http://www.examiner.com/x-2136-NY-Marketing-and-PR-Examiner~y2009m5d24-Managing-your-brand-beyond-Google-alerts
http://www.examiner.com/x-2136-NY-Marketing-and-PR-Examiner~y2009m1d20-Capitalize-on-press-for-your-business-with-free-online-tools
http://www.examiner.com/x-2136-NY-Marketing-and-PR-Examiner~y2009m4d9-Tips-to-Earn-Links-and-Tweets-to-Your-Blog-Post
http://www.examiner.com/x-2136-NY-Marketing-and-PR-Examiner~y2009m2d21-Looking-for-a-book-publicist
http://www.examiner.com/x-2136-NY-Marketing-and-PR-Examiner~y2009m1d27-TIP-OF-THE-WEEK-Finding-PR-Contacts

This particular post will be part of a series of columns which address different industries. My next article, slated for next week, will focus on the resources offered by a restaurant PR agency that offers tips on that industry. Next will be another industry heavy-hitter that is offering free resources such as webinars and white papers to no cost for those willing to tune in and read (possibly at the cost of some advertising on the site and occasional references as to how their platform may serve to solve a particular PR challenge).

I do not work for Cision, nor do I believe they would pay for such coverage from an online blogger or journalist of any sort. To assume that I do not adhere to the ethics of journalistic integrity is a malicious blow to my professional image, especially when it’s completely wrong. Your article as well points to this – the first part met with this inflammatory and accusatory blow, but then that stance rescinded in your Author’s Note.