November 6th, 2006 by 
brett
You know the ad.
The one with the powerful red headline.
The “pile of money” wealth shot. The “From the Desk Of:” header. The red, white and blue formatting with exclamation points and yellow highlighting. The bold promises of riches and amazing benefits. The cheapo graphic design and typography.
Whenever I see this kind of message, a huge red flag goes off. I automatically disregard the integrity of the message and cast a very skeptical eye on it. Pretty much the only way I’ll keep reading - if at all - is for entertainment value.
Back when I was a kid, catalog marketers and direct mail professionals did the writing. The quality control was better and the products were actual, tangible goods. But since the advent of online advertising, the sheer number of sketchy e-book hustlers and squeeze page pimps – ALL USING THE SAME FORMAT - has exploded. It’s out of control.
I am aware the sales letter is a classic, time-tested marketing format. A product of scientific split-tests and billions of dollars swindled made and lost. And I know that a small but statistically-significant percentage of people DO fall for it.
But how much longer can this approach keep working? How long will it take before average Joe surfer becomes jaded? Look at the Nigerian 419 letter , or Viagra Spam du jour… they don’t have much fizzle anymore.
But maybe it doesn’t matter how many people get a clue, because “a sucker is born every minute.”
The copywriters who crank this stuff out defend it by saying “All the scams might have long copy sales letters, but not all long copy sales letters are scams.”
Either way, the whole style seems about as modern as a 1968 comic book ad. It’s the uncensored, low-budget, late night infomercial of the web.
Can we not move on to a sophisticated method of direct-response copywriting? A more modern, Web 2.0 paradigm of written persuasion?
November 10th, 2006 at 12:38 am
While I agree with your post in principle, you threw me off when you said “the copywriters who crank this stuff out defend it saying…”
You seem to be interpreting that as a defense. It might be, but it’s not to defend real scams and snake oils who use, overuse and abuse a proven strategy, which is what your post implies.
My take? They’re defending the universal statement you make. (On the flip side, some of them do the same thing, which I also don’t agree with. They scoff at genuine, more professional attempts to market by “calling out” anti-marketers who, in turn and in their view, try to defend their turf by going too far with their near-fascist views.)
Bottom line, I actually agree with you. In fact, you’re proving the point: that you’re not the market for these types of products or services.
Just as much as you’re proving that, in this new Web 2.0, where people can interact more and are more susceptible to be more vocal about abusive marketing strategies, there’s not only a need for new types of marketing but that both camps can stop, breathe for a moment and take some time to learn from one another.
In my opinion, the problem is not the use of salesletters. It’s their pervasiveness. The overuse, in other words. (And I believe you did a great job at pointing that fact out.) Why does every bloody direct marketing website have to use clumsy-looking, red-headline, long copy salesletter?
And this, without thought or creativity or strategy or effort.
It’s laziness, pure and simple.
And it’s not the copywriter. It’s the business owner. In fact, people copy what they see work online, but don’t understand that what sells a million bucks in a day for John Reese in one market may not be the right approach for every situation.
And vice versa.
(And that’s the same kind of universal paradigm that can hurt either side.)
Salesletters are salesletters. But there are “scammy-looking,” lackluster, “me-too” salesletters with bold red headlines and such, and there are hard-to-navigate, fancy-looking, left-brain bonanzas that require geek 501 to learn how to buy from.
The former bashes the latter, and vice versa.
I believe there’s a happy medium. Personally, I’m against the copycats — not the copywriters — who don’t take more time and money to invest in their presentation.
And by the same token, I’m also against the Web 2.0 early-adopting purist clique who are against any kind of salesletter, whether it’s a clean website or a long-scrolling web page, simply because it — aw, shucks — makes money.
My take? Take the time to learn how about direct marketing but all the while use you cranium (and your resources, including your ingenuity) to be more professional, cleaner and usable, with a strategic presentation that fits their specific market and time.
So, “bravo” for an excellent post. I think it’s about time people start seeing this for what it really is. Which is a need to evolve to fit new or shifting markets, without having to copy every joe-blow website thinking that a successful approach is universally applicable.
November 10th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
Wow, Michael!
Thanks for the honest and well-written post. I really do respect and appreciate your insight.
I think the sales letter is a good tool that people are getting clubbed to death with. Most people will eventually develop an immunity to it, just like I have.
Maybe some folks have an eternal attention span and will read ten pages of hype down to the end and follow the instructions - but I know that a lot of people won’t read more than a few lines of text before they click away.
All kinds of pseudomarketing schemes that USED to work in the print world, like Scientology, MLM and chain letters, are being cracked open and washed away because people now have the ability freely communicate online, do research and criticize things.
I have nothing against web sites that make money. I am a marketer, not a critical purist. I just believe that a certain segment of savvy online consumer will grow to appreciate and respond to a less-manipulative, more straightforward approach. And I am going to blaze some trails towards a new online copywriting paradigm - or die trying. Copywriting 2.0 is going to happen. Look at AdWords - the format is forcing marketers into using zen brevity, creativity and reverse psychology like never before! Human psychology may have some hard wired emotions and desires that can always be stimulated with the classic methods, but I think the book on copywriting is far from already written.
There’s so much more to come. We are witnessing the dawn of NEW tested advertising methods that the cigar-smoking mail order mavericks could never have imagined in their wildest dreams.
P.S. Money or not, I much prefer dealing with sharp people as my customers and clients. It’s more of a challenge, but it’s significantly more satisfying to me than working with the gullible, the desperate and the easily persuaded.
That’s the reason why I decided to get out of social work and into interactive marketing!
November 10th, 2006 at 4:17 pm
[...] While some people have chimed in on the salesletter debate about whether long-copy salesletters are scammy, I believe we need to stop and take a closer look at what this whole thing teaches us. [...]
November 14th, 2006 at 4:22 am
[...] Are sales letters dead? Or, less apocalyptically, are we at the stage where bold red headlines will be disappearing soon? I mentioned in a previous post that Maria Velosa strongly advocates that don’t make the page look like a sales letter, and I agree - or at least my left brain agrees. But the only way to find out what works for your audience is by testing. [...]
January 12th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
I’m new to this… What is Copywriting 2.0 exactly? I’m all ears! (Am I doing copywriting 2.0 on my blog I wonder?)
?
Thanks
Halina
January 15th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
Halina,
I think that as information technology enables consumers to receive more and more offers, all competing for their attention, they will get increasingly savvy. New design styles and persuasion tactics will be required to sustain good response rates.
Something more subtle, sincere, and sophisticated than the lurid red headlines and benefits intensive bullets of yesteryear.
-brett
May 2nd, 2007 at 8:44 am
Thanks Brett,
Did you see the new John Reese report (and my humble comments to it :-). It’s so in tune with what you’re saying.
And I just realize I should use your word “sincerety” rather than honesty. Will go back and do that in a sec… http://www.halinagold.net/marketing/?p=56
Best wishes
Halina
June 18th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
YVHsjGIaUBPCXinLg
July 25th, 2007 at 5:31 am
Thank you!
July 25th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Your are Great. And so is your site! Awesome content. Good job guys!
October 29th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
das what i tole my gf she thinks she da bomb with all her sales deais
February 2nd, 2008 at 12:31 am
pos yourgirls
August 3rd, 2008 at 10:44 am
You don’t need to be a whiz internet marketer to know that you need traffic for your website to be successful. It doesn’t matter what your site looks like, it doesn’t matter what your sales pitch is, if people aren’t coming to your site then all that stuff we spend hours anguishing over doesn’t make a lick of difference!