CopyCopy

Stylishness

Should your direct marketing copywriter be an expert in AP style (or some other style)?

Well, it won't hurt. And it's a sign that the writer subscribes to at least some kind of code, and that's a good thing.

But please, please don't universally enforce style guidelines -- whether they're AP, Chicago, Strunk & White, or your own corporate guidelines -- on direct marketing copy. In some cases, following those rules will diminish readability, undermine clarity, and sabotage your campaigns.

Case in point: Every. Period. Makes. Every. Reader. At. Least. Pause. And pausing (or, dread the throught, stopping reading altogether) is the LAST thing we want to happen. But some style guides demand that we place a period after every bullet in a series of bullets; others insist on semicolons.

Sorry, but stop action is the opposite of what we want in copy that's supposed to drive action. End the last bullet in a series with a period if you must, but leave the others alone. If you MUST include something, use an ellipsis (these keep the reader's eyes moving).

Here's another one: omitting the serial comma before a conjunction. My personal belief is that this is Just Wrong Anyway, but that's beside the point. Omitting that last comma saves column space in newspapers and magazines but it also reduces clarity except in the simplist of sentences. And when we're trying to educate and evoke action in one shot, we can't afford to sacrifice clarity.

It may be stylish to follow this or that code, but we must never forget: in direct marketing, it's not about style. It's about response rates. Save the style guide for your annual report and corporate brochure, and get your money's worth on your DM campaigns.

"We PROMISE this is the last change."

Change is good, except when it's change to already-approved creative. Those changes can cost a bundle and generate too much stomach acid. They're still necessary, of course, if there's a real problem, but costly nonetheless. Any way to keep this to a minimum? Some thoughts:

• Plan the review process. Will the CEO have to see the final creative after everything is layed out? Will copy reviewers really take the copy seriously before they see it in layout? Does Legal have to put its stamp of approval on everything at the last minute? All of these mean more rounds of creative review. Build them into your schedule so there are no surprises -- and, if the resulting schedule has you launching your campaign two months too late, get agreement all 'round to shortcut some reviews.
• Give reviewers a job aid. This is easier than you think -- simply make a lists of every copy, design, or layout issue that comes up. Then turn them into checklists for everyone's use in reviewing creative.
• Designate a dictator. Some changes aren't worth the cost of making them. Figure out who in your team should have the power to say "we're not making that change" and honor his or her decisions.
• Pass on the true cost of changes. Every change has immediate costs -- more work and time for creatives, coordinators, proofers, and reviewers -- plus there are indirect costs associated with delays, some of them quite large. Let all the stakeholders in a project know what those costs are, then publish the changes and costs incurred. Do this regularly and people will start reviewing things more carefully earlier in the cycle.

Okay, that's what I can think of. Any other ideas?

Last-minute messaging changes.

Just when you thought everyone had approved the creative, someone puts the brakes on.

"We just heard from a customer/partner/analyst/weblog/sales rep/whoever came out of the woodwork lately that our message has to include 'AQUAMARINE'" (or whatever). So "we have to rework the email/directmail/banner/e-newsletter ad to say AQUAMARINE."

Before you add more delay and expense to your campaign, consider these points:

• Unless you're selling low-cost items involving 30-second sales cycles, your campaign is supposed to be promoting the offer, not necessarily the product. Does AQUAMARINE have anything to do with the offer? And even if it does, will it make the offer more attractive? Really?
  
• Your campaign has been deemed to have a solid offer and message before Aquawhatever came along. Does the fact that Aqua might resonate with SOME audience members mean you need a do-over? Would the added cost of making the change pay for itself in higher response rates?
  
• Even if AQUAMARINE is an ideal message, what will it take to incorporate it in existing creative? Make the change quickly and you could end up with awkward language and flawed logic -- either of which can kill response rates. Or, take a long time, completely redevelop the creative, and ... well, okay, you just decided to start over. Worth it? You decide.

Finally, look carefully at the source of the AQUAMARINE imperative. Focus group? Anecdotal? One-off? How seriously should you even take the idea?

Of course, when the idea comes from the CEO, it may not be possible to say "no." But you can test -- and you should.