How To Woo Me

No, this is not a post about my love life--sorry if I misled you.

So, today I get home and check the mail, and there's a solicitation letter from Harper's Magazine. Normally I just throw junk mail like that away, but I do like Harper's, and I used to have a subscription, so I thought I'd check out what they were offering. And I have to say, someone put some thought into this marketing campaign . . . but with mixed results.

The letter they included is chatty with a conspiratorial tone, and it starts out by stroking my ego, warming me up to the pitch:

"Dear Heather,
You thrive on independent thinking. You're intrigued by events and ideas. And you read as much as you have time for."

So far so good! Harper's knows me so well! (But how do they know . . . ?)

The next part, however, proceeds to semi-insult me:

"But there is far too much information to cope with these days. Too much disinformation. Too much misinformation. The more you read, the more you wonder what it means."

O.K., so I read a lot, but I'm not so great with discernment, I guess? In fact, I even have trouble piecing together the meaning of what I read? Thanks a lot, Harper's. What's more, I'm left to wonder what the difference is between "misinformation" and "disinformation." (I'm guessing "misinformation" is unintentional, while "disinformation" is put out there on purpose? Of course, now I'm questioning my reasoning abilities in general, so who knows?)

Then I am reassured:

"Our mission is not to add to the information explosion but to help you defend yourself against it . . . to rout the propoganda peddlers . . . to make sense of a nonsensical world." [ellipses theirs]

Wow. I hadn't even realized that the entire world was nonsensical, let alone that a mere magazine could clear everything up for me! Oh, happy day! The letter then goes on and on in a rather patronizing tone, extolling the virtues of everything Harper's, occasionally tossing out some rather dubious claims:

"Harper's doesn't presume to tell you what to think. We simply tell you what people are thinking. Nor do we preach a particular brand of politics. We'll gladly ruffle feathers on both the left and right wings."

Oh, come on now. Like I said, I used to subscribe to Harper's, and it's definitely left-wing (as most magazines with actual thought behind them tend to be). Not that that bothers me--but don't pretend to be something you're not.

The best thing they did, though, was to include a complete version of the Harper's List, as well as a listing of recently published articles . . . and that is what eventually sucked me in. So, I'm going to resubscribe, but not because of anything they put in this really long letter that someone obviously took a long time to draft. Maybe I should let them know that.

[Despite their missteps, Harper's still knows me better than Ticketmaster, who today sent me an e-mail urging, "Don't Miss Poison!" Oh Ticketmaster, it is so over between us. You're pathetic. Really.]