Leading "Buzz Marketer" shows how NOT to do it

The other day, I received a request from a well-known "buzz marketer" (who shall remain nameless) to plug an organisation (which shall also remain nameless) on Blog Friends and/or on my personal blog. However, I politely declined. The organisation sounds like it's doing great and philanthropic things, but I'm not personally involved or engaged with it. And as all good bloggers know, blogging (and Blog Friends) is, at heart, about being transparent about one's personal passions.

The difficulty that this reknowned consultant seems to be experiencing is that of making clear distinction between (a) being paid for expressing his opinions in the context of an explicit, contracted mandate and (b) informal chats over coffee that touch on his subject of expertise, but where the value exchange actually goes both ways. He knows that he "knows it all", so his voice is surely the only one worth listening to. (Naturally, he will carefully explain to his anyone who will listen that marketing is a conversation. ; )

To get to the point, I believe the above phenomenon may explain this excerpt from Mr Buzz Marketer's part of my exchange with him:



Readers, please excuse his profanity, but poisonous boils are best lanced. This is the season of goodwill, and I bless this poor fellow and everyone else suffering with negativity.

UPDATE: I would like to point out that I am not referring in this post to my good friend James Cherkoff of Collaborate Marketing and Modern Marketing blog. By contrast to my correspondent quoted above, James doesn't just talk about respectful and authentic relationships but also engages in them online and offline.