Motherhood Uncensored

One blogger's bad PR pitch is another blogger's treasure

I rarely write reviews on this site, well, unless you count my Diva Cup post as a review, but that doesn't mean I don't get a shit ton of pitches. There's no shortage of emails clogging all my accounts telling me KOURTNEY KARDASHIAN IS PREGNANT ARE YOU INTERESTED IN A BIB GIVEAWAY?, calling me "Mommy Blogger" or "Insert Name Here" or requesting I post about a dog food coupon that they are sure my readers would be excited about.

And while sometimes I roll my eyes at pitches, like the one about how Yankee Sod Grass Seed would make a fabulous mother's day gift (that one actually warranted a snarky email reply), I take no offense to the emails. I know that I'm on a bunch of lists, and better, I know that people are just doing their job.

It's easy enough for me to scan the subject, delete them, and go on my merry way. Or, in some cases, forward them along to someone that might have an interest in working with them.

See, I view the emails (save the ones sent by robots) as opportunities. And while I don't respond to most of them, when there is one that's well-written and well-intended, and might have some benefits for someone else, I don't get offended or dismiss them, I respond. Because you just never know what can happen.

Well, and because I'm not The Bloggess. I'd so love to send some of them a long crazy email with an attachment of Wil Wheaton collating paper but that's not my schtick.

So when an email from David at Zocalo Group for Philips Norelco popped into my inbox, I didn't reply snarkily that the only interest I had in sharing what "the key is to a guy looking his best -- from a clean shave to a good trim" -- would be me giving a clean shave and good trim to Ryan Reynolds with Philips Norelco products and sharing pictures with my blogging audience.

Oh I was tempted. Mightily.

Instead, I told him that it probably wasn't a great fit for us on Cool Mom Tech, but that I knew a few amazing, influential dad bloggers who were participating in Movember and would he like to be connected. I mean, they had just shaved but they'd most likely be shaving again, with, well, shavers, so perfect match.

He replied, thanking me for my email with great interest in speaking with the dad bloggers if they wanted to be connected with him.

And that was the last I heard, until I saw a tweet from Doug French (the chief amazing, influential dad blogger of which I spoke) saying that Philips Norelco (@shaveexperts) was doubling their fundraising money.

Then I saw his Facebook update:

$15,000!

My giddiness (and yes, I'm completely giddy over this) is not that so much money will be donated to such a good cause. Or that I won't have to see really scary photos of some of my favorite dad bloggers all over my computer screen after today.

{Sorry guys, there's a reason why you can't see the dude during a mustache ride}

It's because instead of this being yet another story where a blogger publicly bemoans PR folks for irrelevant pitches, this one had an awesomely fabulous ending. Perhaps even a new beginning for a fabulous working relationship.

And even better, a lesson for all of us to read and think before we react. Someone's really lame pitch could be another person's $15,000.

[Editor's note: Here's the final shaves and the cool Stache-tacular microsite for #NorelcoDads. The videos are worth a watch. Hilarious]

Cutting the social media fat

This weekend I did a massive overhaul of my Twitter followees and Facebook friends. My apologies if you happened to be part of the fat that I cut.

If I didn't recognize your name in my Facebook friend list, I removed you. No hard feelings.

And let me be honest. You're not missing much by not being able to see my page. No naked photos of my lopsided breastfeeding boobs.

Too bad, huh?

As of late, I've felt the overwhelming need to cull down the information seeping into my life because I just don't have any more room for it.

The age of social media has indeed made my life better. And as someone who is primarily in charge of it for my job, I live it every single day. Sometimes every single hour.

And that part I actually like.

But when social media is your job, the lines become blurred. Very very blurred.

On one hand, I'm intimately connected with people that I would have never met otherwise, like moms of four (or more) with whom I can commisserate.

I limit my personal Twitter followers to 300 or so of my closest friends or people that have truly interesting information to share which means when I go to events and see people who I follow on Twitter but I haven't seen in awhile, I know exactly what's going on with them.

Odd, perhaps, but thus is life in 2011.

But outside of that, I don't have the time or the eyesight, really, to take it all in. The twitter parties, cryptic tweets with five hashtags and "text" talk that I can barely understand, not to mention the multiple Facebook updates about how you went to the bathroom and "Look at my pretty pictures of the bathroom!" have become noise to me.

I can barely hear myself think let alone attempt to process and decipher the rapid fire messages of, let's face it, people I don't necessarily care about.

And really, my attention, focus, and few remnants of brain power are needed elsewhere, for people I *do* actually care a lot about.

I haven't read an actual book in years, yet here I am, reading this list of tweets about stuff I don't even really understand.

I'm the first to admit that I've neglected some of my own needs, as well as familial and friendly relationships. Not my immediate family that is, but others that I should spend more energy on but under the guise of "work" end up passing by.

I am busy, but the question I had to ask myself is exactly what am I busy doing.

So this weekend, I downloaded a book on my yet-to-be-used Kindle for iPhone, put on some metaphorical headphones, and turned up the beautiful music that is my life.

Too square for foursquare

I've been fashionably late to adopting most of the social media outlets. I was roped into Twitter. I reluctantly returned to Facebook.

But there's no chance in hell you'll ever see me on foursquare, a site that uses GPS and your smart phone to allow you to share your location, find your friends, and earn points and deals, in case you were wondering.

I imagine it was created for young hipster city dwelling types with lots of friends who might stumble into their favorite corner coffee shop in their holey, unlaced Chuck Taylors and fingerless gloves, order their chai latte, and then have a moment or 12 to check in to see if any of their other young hipster city dwelling types were near by so they could meet up and drink their chai lattes together.

And then because they go to that same corner coffee shop every day, they rack up points, and become "The Mayor," which affords them a complimentary almond biscotti with their next purchase.

HELLS YEAH!

But Joe Schmoe in East Bumblefuck USA telling people he's checked in at Jimmy Bob's BBQ Shack?

Or a suburban mom who goes to the same five boring places?

Probably not.

But that doesn't stop people like Joe S. or burby mom from using it. And even better, those people start checking in everywhere, with notifications sent directly to Twitter and Facebook telling me that they've just checked in at Target.

"You are the mayor of the Shell Station on 5th and Grant!"

Suh-weet!

I can barely get all my kids out of the car and safely into the store, let alone whip out my phone and check in to let everyone know this. And considering I have very few friends, chances are if they were at the store, I'd run into them.

But beyond annoying, I really wonder if it's safe. Do people really need to know where you are at all times? Is it smart to check into places where your kids are - like their school?

I'm just not sure it's worth the points, and badges, and fake government titles.

Besides, the only thing I'd be mayor of is my bathroom. And that just doesn't have a very nice ring to it.

If we're going to argue about something stupid, let's raise money for WhyMommy and breast cancer while we do

If you read my blog through a feed reader, then you make the decision to click through to the full post based on my snappy title and compelling first 100 words because I choose to publish partial feeds.  Lately, I've been made aware that this really pisses a lot of you off. Actually, I've known this for awhile, but given the continued back and forth between "Partials" and "Fulls," well, I figured I'd address the issue.

Here's what I have to say about that (but you're going to have to click through to see it).

OH WELL.

I never realized partial versus full feeds were such a big deal until Heather Armstrong linked me on her blog after we were on the same Today Show story about mom bloggers and one of her readers emailed me. She said something to the effect of that she liked my blog but she refused to read anyone who didn't publish full feeds so if I didn't change she wouldn't be reading my blog.

"Oh no!" I gasped. "Let me change it for you right away. I wouldn't want to inconvenience you!"

Please. Screw that.

Apparently she's not alone in her disdain for partial feeds. I hear from folks every now and then that they just can't read me anymore because I publish partial feeds.

And I've seen some pretty heated discussions on Twitter about it.

Personally, I don't care about the extra two cents (if that) that I would get from the extra view on my blog if you click over.

The only reason I publish partial feeds is because my work here has been scraped too damn many times.

And I like to piss you lazy full feed snobs off.

(Okay, not really).

It's never ever bothered me to have to click through on my feed reader to see a post. Never. I'm more than happy to give the blogger whose blog I'm reading for free a click. Maybe even a few. If I'm feeling generous, I might even click their google ads, even if I'm not looking for a sexy Asian wife.

Really?! A click is that much of a pain? Obviously so because I'm writing an entire post about it.

As a writer, I value my writing most. I actually use the partial feed as a means to challenge myself to choose better titles and really think about how I'm opening my posts.

But I won't be changing to a full feed anytime soon. No matter how many times you try to tell me you won't read my blog anymore.

Even the lovely and talented Alice of Finslippy who was rallying for full feeds a week or so ago on Twitter can't make me change, damnit.

So since I know this post will incite one heck of an awesome yet pretty trite discussion about feed readers, let's make something good come out of it. I really hesitated to post on something like "feeds" given that my dear friend WhyMommy has been diagnosed with cancer again (that's 4 times in 4 years).

But then I thought, let's channel our strong feelings about feeds into something that's actually worthwhile.

So, I will personally donate $1 for every comment up to 500 comments to Crickett's Answer, one of the many causes that Susan has helped support over the last four years. This charity provides women with free Lymphedema sleeves, something that helps ease the pain of those undergoing chemo treatment but surprise! is not covered by insurance.

If I raise $500 with 500 comments, then 5 women can get these sleeves that they might not otherwise be able to afford very easily if at all.

[Comments will remain open until Tuesday 12am EST. One comment per person per day. Feel free to say whatever you want. You can't insult me but feel free to insult those who hate people who use full feeds! *KIDDING* Better, insult cancer. Because it deserves to be insulted]

The confusing etiquette of Facebook

I had no qualms about ditching my Facebook account a few years ago when they started banning breastfeeding photos and verrrrrry reluctantly returned last year for Cool Mom Picks and Mominatrix.

It's still so weird, and often times very hard to explain, that social media platforms are now job requirements.

Indeed, I've had my fair share of issues with Facebook, not just due to my husband's whole friending debacle, but also that it's like a big incestuous pool of your entire life for everyone to swim around in.

Babysitters, mothers-in-law, your ex-boyfriend from college that you gave one too many blow jobs to all in one virtual place, reading about all your business at liberty. I realize that I make my living on the internet, often times sharing very personal information, but it's actually pretty well edited, especially compared to the often uncomfortable Facebook sharing of every single morsel of every single day including location, save where your took my last shit.

It's a little disturbing.

Besides, isn't that what Twitter is for?

Now when I hopped back on the Facebook bandwagon, I did the whole "search for everyone I ever knew in my life" rite of passage when I rejoined, which is always a fun time killer, especially when you get to see how all those assholes in high school and college did not age so gracefully.

And it can be pretty cool to connect with people that you would have otherwise never seen or talked to again. 

But then you get down to the whole friending thing, which is more like "acquaintancing" or "notBibicallyknowing" or "formerlyBibicallyknowing." 

Whatever. It's confusing.

Now I could really care less if someone friends me or not. Maybe it's because Facebook is work for me, or because I don't give it that much weight in the long scheme of my life, but I just don't care.

If someone pings me to friend them, and I know who they are or we happen to have some mutual friends, then I'll probably reciprocate.

Sure, it can be a little awkward when a friend's husband or people that I think I know but I'm not sure how I know them requests to friend me, but then I just let them sit in my inbox until I decide what the heck to do.

Are my other friends friends with them? Are these potential friends' mutual friends interacting with them? Can I really waste this much time deciding whether to be friends with someone on the internet?

Can I use the word "friend" any more times in a sentence?

Of course, it always depends on how they use Facebook, which you won't actually know until you friend them.

Do they just update cute little anecdotes about their kids, interesting links, funny photos, that sort of thing? Or are they the type to update every 14 seconds, tag you in GOD AWFUL pictures from 1994, or, worst of all, send you "gifts" or as I call them "gifts that are so not gifts and shall therefore be deleted?"

And then, do I really want them to know any more of my business?

So, friend me or not, I'll live.

Too bad that's not always the case with everyone else.

Facebook blocking is now being used to spite and backstab.

"Oh please, please! Don't take away my access to your interesting updates about your garden!"

Whether it's because you refuse to friend them or you did something to piss them off in real life, the way to really get people back apparently is to block them on Facebook.

I much prefer the old awkward avoidance myself.

And apparently if you don't wish to friend them on Facebook (which I have actually done, especially with certain family members), then they take this as an offense of epic proportions.

It's this whole "I know you, or I knew you once, or I know people who know you sort of and so you must give me access to your business, damnit!" that's a little confusing.

Shit people, that's why I write a blog.

What's your Facebook etiquette policy?

{This post is syndicated at Blogher.com - got more thoughts about Facebook as part of your job, please share them!}