Marketing Lessons From My Bosses, Part 3


Today’s les­son is another from my boss in 1976, Jim Hag­gerty, Jr. of the Woburn Daily Times, where I was a young reporter and he was the man­ag­ing editor.

In a daily news­pa­per in a small city, there appears each day a lot of names — hun­dreds of names — of local peo­ple. And for each of these peo­ple, hav­ing their name in the paper is a kind of thrill, a minor serv­ing of fame. It’s very impor­tant to them. Jim taught me that mis­spelling a person’s name was the worst kind of hurt (you have spoiled their moment of fame) and insult (they aren’t impor­tant enough to have their names prop­erly spelled). You also risk some racial or eth­nic insen­si­tiv­ity. An Italian-American reader will sense quickly that the writ­ers on the news­pa­per can spell John­son with no prob­lem, but can’t man­age Pis­catelli. An Indian-American will get the mes­sage when you can’t be both­ered to spell Ramesh Sharma correctly.

But there was an even greater dan­ger. “The entire premise upon which the news­pa­per busi­ness rests is that peo­ple can believe what they read,” Hag­gerty told me. “If they can’t trust you to get the names right in a foot­ball game or in a report of a three-car acci­dent on Route 128, then why should they have con­fi­dence in any other thing you write, or any other thing that appears in this newspaper?”

Jim taught that if you weren’t sure how to spell a person’s name, you asked them to spell it out for you. If you still weren’t clear, you asked them to print it in your reporter’s note­book. If they weren’t able to tell you (because they were dead, for exam­ple) you got it off the police report and cross-checked it with the phone book.

This was all before the Inter­net, of course, and com­puter spell-check pro­grams, and the many other meth­ods we have today. But that just means that one of the best safe­guards against error — the edi­tor — has gone, along with the rest of the news­pa­per trade, the way of the dodo.

Nonethe­less the les­son has stayed with me, and is equally rel­e­vant in mar­ket­ing. A say­ing mostly attrib­uted to Flaubert is “God is in the details.” I believe this. A fanat­i­cal devo­tion to pre­ci­sion, to cor­rect details, is often what marks the dif­fer­ence between medi­oc­rity and greatness.

English: An image of Major League Baseball hal...

Eng­lish: An image of Major League Base­ball hall of famer Ted Williams. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In John Updike’s famous New Yorker essay about Ted Williams’s last game, Hub Fans Bid Kid Adieu, he writes, “For me, Williams is the clas­sic ballplayer of the game on a hot August week­day, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin dif­fer­ence between a thing done well and a thing done ill.”

Yes, that’s it. The tissue-thin dif­fer­ence between a thing done well and a thing done ill.

God and the Devil are both in the details.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>