I received a couple of e-mails this week from a gentleman that, unintentionally, caused a bit of a ruckus within my quadrant/corner/big ol’ network-section thingie of the edusphere.
This gentleman created some content and, like most folks who create content, wanted other people to see it. So, he wrote to some people that he thought might be interested and told them about the content he created. Now, he might be trying to generate traffic, or to share a good thing, but either way, he’s basically created something that he wants to share.
Nothing wrong there.
Maybe it’s because I’ve worked in and around newsrooms for a while, but getting e-mail telling me about stuff is a very common occurrence. When we would get press release type e-mail in a newsroom, we’d check it out. If it sounds interesting or useful to ourselves or to our readers, we’d usually put a reporter on the story. That reporter would check out the release and the information and generate a story from both the release and the fresh information that he or she got from doing some actual reporting. (That’s pretty much just what Darren’s done. And the gentleman’s responded with some more helpful information.)
If it didn’t sound useful (and most press releases didn’t), we ignored the information. Usually, we ignored it while pushing the delete key. We certainly never admonished the sender for attempting to share something with us — that was their duty if they thought they had something good.
I get a lot of press release-type e-mails because of this blog. Most go unanswered and unfollowed up, because they don’t really sound all that interesting or useful to me or to my readers. Some go right up to the blog as a link, if I can verify that I trust the source or the information that I’m being pointed to. Some get a "Hi. Who are you?" response.
Such stuff comes with the gig. We need to read our e-mail very carefully and critically. Sure, maybe a blog post would be a better way to send me a message — but I think e-mail is a better way to target particular folks. Could people who want me to know stuff notify me that I’m being mass mailed to? Sure, but usually, I’m able to tell. When the resource is good, I don’t much care if I’m a target in a mass e-mailing campaign.
In this case, I’ll let you know that I’ve been listed on this gentleman’s organization’s list of Top 100 Edublogs . That’s cool — it’s always nice to be noticed. It’s also always nice to check out other edublogs — there’re a few new ones (to me) on that list. As for whether or not any wrong was committed by mass e-mailing people to let them know about that list or any other service the site provides, well, I’d say no.
E-mail away. #
PS: Why did the Infinite Thinking Machine blog make their post on the Top 100 list disappear? Curious. Update: Here’s the cache of the missing post. Seems innocuous. Why’d it go away? #
I saw this “controversy” today on several of the blogs I read. I’m glad you posted this, I thought maybe I was the only one who didn’t understand what that site did wrong? It appears they were somewhat self-promotional, but it didn’t seem like they did any ‘spamming’ or were dishonest? And when did emailing someone become an ethical issue?
In any case I thought the list was great, I originally found it on Delicious/Popular and after clicking on most of the blogs my Bloglines is considerably more bloated.
Transparency was lacking in this quid pro quo between the “gentleman” in question and the bloggers. If the bloggers had not spoken up that they had been listed on the 100 list AND been asked to blog favorably about the Ultimate article mentioned in a separate email, that would have been a controversy.
The email and list author isn’t being admonished because he was sharing, but because he placed blogs on a top 100 edu-blog list, then emailed some of them to write a favorable review about an article on the same site WITHOUT BEING FORTHCOMING (a.k.a. transparent) about the deal.
A blog would have allowed him to present the list, AND share the article with others. if he had done one or the other–article sharing email or top 100 edu-blogs list–then that would have not raised eyebrows.
In the end, who really cares? No money exchanged hands. But perhaps that’s why it’s so important that we get it straight…our only currency is honesty. Anything less leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth.
Thanks for sharing, Bud. Your “voice” came across powerfully well…it “read” like one of your podcasts you record in your car. Nice job!
Wishing you well,
Miguel Guhlin
Around the Corner-MGuhlin.net
http://www.mguhlin.net
I found this whole controversy VERY perplexing because I received NO e-mail, NO request to read an article, and NO request to mention anything favorable about any content on the web. In fact, If I hadn’t been reading other edublogs that ahve posted about the Top 100 list, I wouldn’t have known about it at all.
Go figure
And yea, I have received several press-release type e-mails, the same as you Bud. Most of them go the way yours do, in the e-mail trash bin, after relizing that they aren’t terribly interesting to me. If I do choose to write about any of those press releases, you can be sure that I would make it well known that it came from a press release, and that I had genuinely thought the resource or news was noteworthy. I would expect the same from any self-respecting edublogger
Miguel, the gentleman in question is probably trying to gain some Google juice, but it wasn’t a quid pro quo. I got both e-mails, and I wasn’t asked to promote the article because of the list. Nor was I offered a spot on the list if I wrote about the article. (I didn’t.) The sequence is wrong, too. I got the article e-mail two days before the list one, so he’s not even guilty of the order of events that you state above. Perhaps I’m splitting hairs, but it seems to me that the guy’s plenty transparent about some things — and not so much about others. Pretty much like the rest of us. I find it funny that I’m even coming close to defending the fellow.
You know I’m a big believer in transparency. But I also like accuracy. As I saw you state somewhere else, let’s give this gentleman the benefit of the doubt.
Actually I discovered my email in my spam folder….coincidence?
I too received an email. I’d already found it via popurls.com and then Jimmy emailed me to make me aware of ‘the content’. Although I still haven’t added a link to it from my site, I’d have no problems with doing so. As Bud says, it was only after a couple of days that I made the ‘Top 100′ list anyways…
I think this situation is a good lesson in information literacy. I agree receiving this sort of email can “come with the territory” when blogging. I appreciated Darren’s research, and think the discussions/buzz around this are good as they point to the abiding need we have to analyze and understand informational sources as well as perceived agendas. It is a compliment to be listed, I agree!
I don’t think there is anything wrong with making a list of your top 100 favourite blogs and publishing it for the world to see. When I received the email about the list it did not ask me to blog about it or promote it in any way. It did carry an undertone (not explicitly included in the email) that I had won some sort of award. Naturally curious about who it came from and why I got it I looked into the source. What I found was that I did not receive an award. Rather, I made the favourite blog list of an individual. It struck me that this fact was not obvious. It was opaque rather than transparent. Hence my post. I hold no ill will towards Jimmy. I would have preferred that he was a little more “up front” about the source of this “recognition.”
I also thought that publishing the way I learned this would be instructive for my students with whom I plan to share the story. They should know how to verify sources on the net. If it was instructive for any other bloggers as well, well, that’s a good thing too.
Hi Bud and Everyone,
Like all of you, I was a little surprised and honored at the same time. What I was interested in most was the fact that this list contains links to all of you — those who I consider prominent edubloggers — and then someone like myself who is new to the game. There are many, many other edubloggers that I would have thought should appeared there, but didn’t. Go figure.
Also, for what it’s worth, I exchanged a few emails with Jimmy and I think that the OEDb site is trying to emerge as a way to compare online educational opportunities – both totally online and with brick and mortar counterparts – and that is something I think that we desperately need, too: Transparency in online education.
Thanks for starting this conversation.
Troy