If writers are not unimportant, they are certainly LESS important than they used to be, argues author Michael Malice in an interview with the New York Post (8/20/08, p. 57).

“Being a writer is less of an accomplishment today than it used to be,” says Malice.

He mostly blames the Internet, noting that “there is so much more media that it’s easier to become a writer.”

Malice also warns writers that there are more writers competing with one another for projects today.

“There is this tenacity to try to do everything right,” says Malice, “because you know there are so many people waiting to replace you if you mess up.”

Is it true? Are writers less important than they used to be? Will the writing profession continue to diminish in status?

And lastly, is the floodtide of new writers — professional and amateur — making it tougher to earn a good living as a writer?

It has been observed many times that blogging, Web 2.0, and social media are effective because today’s consumers are more intersted in the opinions and recommendations of their peers than those of professional reviewers, critics, and experts.

Certainly the success of the reader reviews on Amazon.com is a great example of this.

But the dominance of Citizen Journalism over professional journalists is not universal. A case in point: the restaurant industry.

Even in this era of social networking, professional restaurante reviewers remain a powerful force in the business.

Restaurants keep extensive files on food critics. So when a food critics enters a restaurant, the staff is alerted to his presence — and can pull out all stops to ensure a good review.

Restaurant reviews carry so much weight with the dining public that “a bad write-up can land a restaurant on life support, crippling its business,” writes Adam Goldman in The Record (8/15/08, p. 30).

Successful NJ restaurant entrepreneur Drew Nierporent says seeing a bad review of your restaurant in the morning paper is “to wake up and read your own obituary.”

We are living in an era where consumers, not marketers, have the power.

And where readers, not the media, are increasingly communicating the voice of public opinion.

But not totally.

Not yet, anyway.

My colleague Dean Rieck, a veteran copywriter, thinks today’s new copywriters use too much hype in their writing (example: www.thecopygod.com).

“These days, more writers seek freelance work, spurred on by promises of big paychecks in myriad get-rich-quick e-books sold online,” writes Dean in DM News (8/11/08, p. 10).

“The result is a flood of inexperienced, poorly qualified writers. I’ve seen increasingly club-fisted writing showing up in sales letters online and offline. Are copywriters today so tone-deaf, so mired in over-the-top hard sell patter that they can’t hear how ridiculous they sound?”

My questions to you for today:

>> Do you agree there’s too much hype in copy in general — and online in particular?

>> Does hard-sell long copy turn you off, repulse you, or do you enjoy writing and reading it?

>> Does the hype-filled style of copy work in your experience or opinion? Or are today’s readers too sophisticated to be persuaded by it?

According to an article in B-to-B, the average Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) earned $1.5 million last year.

Let’s say you are a copywriter or marketing consultant, and you earn $100,000 a year.

The average CMO earns 15X more than you do.

What do they know about marketing that you and I don’t?

What makes the average CMO worth 15X more in the marketplace than the average copywriter or marketing consultant?

Any thoughts?

When you are imprecise with language in copywriting, it conveys an impression of sloppy thinking and can also undermine your credibility.

A case in point: the new commercial from Subway for their hot beef sandwich that says: “everybody wants to try Subway’s hot beef sandwich.”

The problem is that word “everybody” — which is so transparently an exaggeration that it defies believability.

Do people on low carb diets who are avoiding bread want this sandwich — which comes, of course, on bread?

What about vegetarians? Do they really want to try this new beef sub?

How about people that don’t like subs … people who don’t eat fast food … people who prefer ham or chicken to beef?

A better approach: “Beef lovers nationwide can’t wait to sink their teeth into Subway’s new Hot Beef Special Sandwich.”

This identifies the audience (meat eaters) and conveys the image of desirability and popularity while avoiding the obvious lie of “everybody.”

Is this guy, as he claims, the greatest living copywriter?

www.thecopygod.com

Read his web site and decide for yourself:

www.thecopygod.com

He certainly is good looking!

Is there a copywriting lesson we can learn from his site?

Is he truly a step above all other copywriters and marketing gurus out there today? Are we mere dust motes beneath the shining light of his copywriting genius?

I have the greatest respect and admiration for David Meerman Scott.

But the advice he gives on his www.webinknow.com blog on viral e-book marketing is diametrically opposed to mine.

David advises: “Make the content totally free with no registration requirement at all so people are more likely to download it and share with colleagues.”

As a result, his latest free viral e-book was downloaded 250,000 times.

I advise my readers to require the user to submit his e-mail address … and opt into my e-list … in exchange for getting my free viral e-books like my latest on selling to the “GOM” market — men age 50 and older.

You can see the landing page — and get the free report — at www.marketing2goms.com.

I understand David’s thinking: he wants his e-book, name, and ideas to spread as quickly and widely online as they can.

I don’t care about that: my purpose is to build a large opt-in e-list of qualified prospects for my paid information products.

Why? Because with an e-list, I can consistently and reliably monetize my online promotions — and measure the results to the penny in real time.

If you are an Internet marketing entrepreneur, your e-list is your most valuable asset — the key to building a successful online business.

Everything you do should be aimed at either making a sale or getting the visitor to opt into your e-list.

Obviously in David’s world — mainly corporate B2B marcom — the goals are quite different, though I am not fully convinced they should be.

What about you? Do you currently give away free content online as part of a viral marketing campaign (if not, you probably should)?

Do you let people download it without capturing their e-mail addresses, as David does — or use free content offers to build a large and profitable e-list, like I have?

Does David know something I don’t? Or vice versa?

New media gurus these days rave about getting tens of thousands — or millions — of page views on MySpace and YouTube.

But any idiot can put up a video that gets a ton of traffic. The easiest way: just use sex.

As Steve Hall writes at www.adgabber.com: “Anytime you stick a stunningly beautiful, hot looking, busty girl in a video, wide viewership is not far behind.”

When I took my first marcom job in the late 1970s at Westinghouse Defense, a product manager told me: “Forget all that marcom crap you guys do; HERE’S how to sell defense systems.”

He opened a thick binder with 8 X 10″ color photos of bikini models straddling missiles and control panels.

What the social media/online video crowd seems to be missing is that getting attention is easy — always has been. Just use sex, violence, or weirdness.

However, getting the kind of attention that draws qualified prospects who are interested in your product — and ultimately buy — is another story.

And relatively few marketers — new media or old — are masters of that skill.

Anyone can post a video of a hard body girl in a bikini doing jumping jacks.

But how do you monetize that if you are not selling relevant, related offers like beauty, health, travel, or fashion?