Strumpette has finally irked me to the point that I have to say something. I’m finished commenting directly to her blog after she refused to publish a comment I made to one of her first posts. She resorted to e-mailing me instead, saying: “Flackette, Go away. Shoo.” I suppose I was too lowly on the blogging totem pole to merit her attention. Or maybe a few of the things I said in the comment were too close to home? E-mail me if you’d like to see the comment; I still have it saved. But on to more important matters.
Has anyone ever noticed that whenever a negative comment is made about Amanda, she posts an answer to it minutes later? Who’s the real nerd here? Those of us that have lives and blog when we have the time to do so, or Amanda, who seems to spend so much of her life on the Internet that she is able to provide up-to-the-minute retorts to every opinion made of her in the blogosphere?
Or, maybe she’s not on the Internet so much. Perhaps s/he is in fact a team of prepubescent ghostwriters secretly plotting to destroy the credibility of the PR field, one illogical and sexually charged post at a time. This could explain the disjointed and immature tone of Strumpette’s writing. The theory of Strumpette having an “editorial team” is not unlikely, especially since Gawker, which seems to be Strumpette’s template of choice, is very open about the fact that they have a full staff of writers to keep content running on a continuous basis.
Shel Holtz, one of my favorite bloggers and also an editor of the amazing podcast, For Immediate Release, published a great post yesterday defending his honor and the good of transparency. Amanda’s retorts lampooning Shel’s credentials and writing skills are juvenile, and were among the many things that have pushed me over into anti-Strumpette territory:
“30 years in the profession, accredited, an IABC Fellow, author of five PR books… so what?!”
“I will compare my writing and the issues I address with your incessant silly drone any day of the week.”
Aww, I think Amanda’s jealous! She knows that she will never have Shel’s credibility as a practitioner, and her writings, at their best, are illogical ramblings that happen to be peppered with good vocabulary. Poor thing. Her credibility is so shot that even if she wanted to attempt transparency now, it would backfire in her face.
In another of her comments to Shel’s post on the matter (yes, there really were that many!), she quotes the following from Edward Wasserman, the Knight Professor of Journalism Ethics at Washington and Lee University:
“Instead of ad hominem critiques, we’re better off focusing on what matters: subjecting reporting to the test of truthfulness, and argument to the test of persuasiveness. That’s the terrain we can fight and win on.”
Amanda, you really should take your own advice. Since when have your posts been anything but ad hominem critiques? I mean, come on, your first post was a direct stab at Steve Rubel. Don’t act as though you are a stranger to using this tactic. Truthfulness? I think any logical human being would agree that deciding not to reveal your identity on Strumpette was a first step in deceit, not truth. And as for persuasiveness, if you think that tying all of your arguments to sexual innuendos is persuasive, you have forgotten that the majority of the PR field is made up of women, who tend to think with their minds and not their sex drives. This would explain why 99% of your comments are from men that seem to focus more on your sexual commentary than on the merit of your arguments.
Let’s just face the facts Amanda. Although you claim that your blog is still getting trafficked like a prostitute in the Red Light District, your posts are only getting one to two comments per (sometimes more if you get in a discussion with the commenter, which shouldn’t really count in any case). I’m absolutely sickened by the sexual nature of the blog, which I think is completely irrelevant to the field of PR and even if there could be a connection, you fail to make it convincingly. There were a few posts that intrigued me because they actually had something to do with PR, but it is a tough call to say whether it is worth it to deal with the rest for a few gems of information. I’m sure there are others that feel the same way.
Why is transparency important, Amanda? Because it’s a check and balance on how you present yourself in the blogosphere. It is so easy for you to make your conniving accusations while you hide behind your lascivious stock photo and high school-ish team of ghostwriters.
I participate in blogging because I want to improve my writing and become the best I can be at my job. I enjoy learning from other seasoned PR practitioners that blog like Shel, Jeremy, Todd, and Phil, among others. They inspire me to rise to new levels of excellence in my everyday tasks and to dream big. Your blog is the antithesis of this. I feel like your aim is to embitter those in PR against their field and to turn outsiders against PR practitioners in general. What is your deal?
If you want to be taken seriously, Amanda, you’re gonna have to make some changes to your approach. I’m not the only one who’s getting tired of your antics.