Mediation Marketing and Direct Mail: A Note to Geoff Sharp
March 21, 2007 · Print This Article
Dear Geoff,
I’m up in the middle of the U.S. night with the sniffles and what better way to spend the time but musing, learning and reading. I saw your blog post inviting me to comment on direct mail as a mediation marketing tool and suddenly, Sleepless in Southern NH had the chance to be productive!
So thank you in three ways: For allowing me to spend the night with you (what will my sweet Rodney think when he reads this…that I’ve taken too much cold medicine?), for giving me the opportunity to get my thoughts in order about direct marketing, and for the chance to create fodder that my fellow mediation marketing bloggers can build on and/or disagree with!
I’m going to respond to your question (”Any lessons for mediators here?“) from the perspectives that I bring to the mediation marketing conversation: That some traditional marketing approaches feel uncomfortable for mediators and discomfort leads to inaction, and that cost-effective (which doesn’t always mean free or cheap, of course!) tools are what my readership seeks.
Here’s what’s potentially worthwhile about the direct marketing pieces you received:
- They got your attention because there was, assumedly, something these two did differently from all the other direct marketing campaigns sitting in your mailbox. Pretty stamps. Personalized sticky note. You found it remarkable enough to blog about it, right? Attention means you look at them for at least a few seconds longer than all the other junk mail and maybe, just maybe, like something you see. A lot of marketing these days seems to be about getting “eyeball time.”
- If they did their job right, they sent you information that was specifically targeted at your interests and not a vague fishing expedition. You might not have taken a second glance if the marketing piece tried to sell you, say, holiday ham distribution services for your employees.
- At least one of the pieces spoke to your ego in a subtle way. Who but a successful professional can choose to be measured for a tailor-made suit? The piece essentially says this: We know you’re successful, Geoff…don’t you want to convey that to everyone else, too?
Here’s what turns me off about bulk direct marketing postal mail in general:
- For new mediators starting out and for those on shoestring budget, direct mail can be a bit of an investment, particularly if you don’t yet have a well-developed mailing list and decide to buy from those mailing list-building services.
- And speaking of mailing list-building services, save your money. I haven’t found too many small service business owners in our world who’ve found them worthwhile investments. Build your list in other effective ways like those I outlined in #5 of this e-zine article and in this overview of permission marketing.
- For some mediators, direct mail feels too much like—ugh, prepare yourself—selling. Done right, I don’t think that’s necessarily true, but I can understand the sentiment because so much of what ends up on my doorstep goes straight to the recycling can with nary a glance.
- Even “personalized” direct mail, like “hand written” sticky notes are still bulk mail. I know machines produce it and it doesn’t quite give me that warm, fuzzy feeling it gave me 15 years ago when I first noticed that gimmick.
- I’m pretty disinterested in contributing to the paper production waste stream, not to mention all the scary things that go into glossy print products. I don’t know about you, Geoff, but a lot of my client base thinks similarly.
- I don’t like to be sold holiday hams…I’m a vegetarian and wonder just how good a job a marketing department has done when I get mail like that after 25 years of no meat. What a waste.
All that said, Geoff, there’s one thing that really stood out—in a good way—in the second sample (for readers who haven’t seen Geoff’s post yet, it’s the sample in the image above). But this post is sooo long already, I’m going to write about it in a second post which I’ll put up soon.
So, in closing, Geoff, I’m guessing you asked the question because you believe there are lessons here for mediators. What lessons do you see?
Warm regards and sniffles, my friend.

Copyright © 2007 by Tammy Lenski. All rights reserved.








Do Not Mail Opt-Out Law would be fair to everyone.
The proposed recent “Do not mail” is an Opt-Out law. Only those not desiring advertising mail need opt-out. Anyone desiring advertising mail can do nothing - and continue to receive it. Why deny those wishing to avoid advertising mail the power to do so?
I do not consider handling unwanted advertising placed against my will on my personal property to be a civic obligation!
The US Supreme Court said in the Rowan case in 1970, ““In today’s [1970] complex society we are inescapably captive audiences for many purposes, but a sufficient measure of individual autonomy must survive to permit every householder to exercise control over unwanted mail. To make the householder the exclusive and final judge of what will cross his threshold undoubtedly has the effect of impeding the flow of ideas, information, and arguments that, ideally, he should receive and consider. Today’s merchandising methods, the plethora of mass mailings subsidized by low postal rates, and the growth of the sale of large mailing lists as an industry in itself have changed the mailman from a carrier of primarily private communications, as he was in a more leisurely day, and have made him an adjunct of the mass mailer who sends unsolicited and often unwanted mail into every home. It places no strain on the doctrine of judicial notice to observe that whether measured by pieces or pounds, Everyman’s mail today is made up overwhelmingly of material he did not seek from persons he does not know. And all too often it is matter he finds offensive.”
Furthermore, the Supreme Court said, “the mailer’s right to communicate is circumscribed only by an affirmative act of the addressee giving notice that he wishes no further mailings from that mailer.
To hold less would tend to license a form of trespass and would make hardly more sense than to say that a radio or television viewer may not twist the dial to cut off an offensive or boring communication and thus bar its entering his home. Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit; we see no basis for according the printed word or pictures a different or more preferred status because they are sent by mail.”
We need a nationwide “Do Not Mail” law to create a one-stop, convenient place for homeowners to give senders the aforementioned affirmative notice that we do not want certain kinds of mail sent to our homes.
http://www.newdream.org/emails/ta19.html
Signed,
Ramsey A Fahel
Ramsey, thanks for raising one of the biggest problems of direct mail. I’m a Center for a New American Dream member too and opt out of everything I can. The waste and the pestering are two of the reasons I don’t use direct mail in my own marketing efforts.
Thanks for helping make Mediator Tech members aware of The Center for a New American Dream’s efforts to encourage responsible consumption to protect the environment, enhance quality of life, and promote social justice.
Tammy