A few weeks ago we were ranting about how good was the Barack Obama campaign staff at collecting emails. I was also stating that it matters a lot what they do with those emails. So, how good did they do?
From the money point of view, according to their statements, it seems they did pretty well. A few million dollars raised. So short term results, checked. From the relation with the subscribers point of view, well, let’s just hear what Jon Stewart has to say about it:
OK, Jon Stewart is overreacting a bit, but that’s his job and he’s pretty good at it. I actually shared one of those emails (the one from Michelle) with my team here as a good example. It sounded good to me. About the other emails though, especially the ones I was getting each day or even more often towards the end of their campaign, I think they were getting very close to the spam line.
The reasons spam is overused is that it brings results on short term. That doesn’t mean people should do it, especially if they care for more than the day after tomorrow.
People don’t expect from a president to be friendly as they don’t expect from a corporation to be intimate. With email marketing, and any other form of marketing for that fact, a good message is a message that sounds like the people are expecting it to sound.
What do you think?