http://www.moneyning.com
Laura Kauffmann
“Seven Oceans Investments Club”

http://www.moneyning.com
Laura Kauffmann
“Seven Oceans Investments Club”

Here’s his email reply: (and apologies for doing this until I figure out what the plugin problem is)

————

Highly disingenuous Jen McClure!!

Here’s the situ & timeline as I see it – I first drew attention to the missing response on Feb 12, and now some 6 WEEKS later, it still aint fixed.

12 Feb – I posted a comment under Eliz’s review on your site (no reply; does New Comms Review respond to or ignore blog posts? Is that what you call ‘addressed immediately’?)

22 Feb – I emailed Elizabeth asking politely for the comments to be reinstated (she said she’d notify you)

6 Mar – I tried to email what I thought was the webmaster to get progress; zip!

13 Mar – received email from you thanking me for patience, saying you’d move to sort it.

25 Mar – I blogged about my concerns
http://www.prdisasters.com/?p=558

You’re kinda like the customer service rep who berates the disgruntled customer by telling them to fill out another form (which I guess I will have to). Also, you taking the opp to selectively restate Eliz’s main criticism of my book was an unnecessarily barbed low blow. I appreciate you team is very very busy, but the blogosphere aims to help sole stakeholders get their counter’voice’ heard – that’s all I’m trying to do.

Until the comments you lost are reinstated, here’re a few other reviews of ‘Public Relations Disasters’ – http://www.prdisasters.com/?page_id=10

I have also posted ‘em under Eliz’s review on your site, until I get time to readdress her points proper.

Thanks in anticipation of resolution.
Gerry

Here’s his email reply: (and apologies for doing this until I figure out what the plugin problem is)

————

Highly disingenuous Jen McClure!!

Here’s the situ & timeline as I see it – I first drew attention to the missing response on Feb 12, and now some 6 WEEKS later, it still aint fixed.

12 Feb – I posted a comment under Eliz’s review on your site (no reply; does New Comms Review respond to or ignore blog posts? Is that what you call ‘addressed immediately’?)

22 Feb – I emailed Elizabeth asking politely for the comments to be reinstated (she said she’d notify you)

6 Mar – I tried to email what I thought was the webmaster to get progress; zip!

13 Mar – received email from you thanking me for patience, saying you’d move to sort it.

25 Mar – I blogged about my concerns
http://www.prdisasters.com/?p=558

You’re kinda like the customer service rep who berates the disgruntled customer by telling them to fill out another form (which I guess I will have to). Also, you taking the opp to selectively restate Eliz’s main criticism of my book was an unnecessarily barbed low blow. I appreciate you team is very very busy, but the blogosphere aims to help sole stakeholders get their counter’voice’ heard – that’s all I’m trying to do.

Until the comments you lost are reinstated, here’re a few other reviews of ‘Public Relations Disasters’ – http://www.prdisasters.com/?page_id=10

I have also posted ‘em under Eliz’s review on your site, until I get time to readdress her points proper.

Thanks in anticipation of resolution.
Gerry

I quote:

Hi Lee,

I have been trying to post this comment on your post about the situation with Gerry McCusker (see below). But when I hit submit, I keep getting an error message saying that “not all mandatory parameters have been completed.” I’ve tried this from three different browsers, on both a PC and a Mac, but just can’t seem to get it to work. I apologize for any inconvenience in sending this comment to you directly, but wanted you to know that I am trying to comment on this situation.

Best wishes and many thanks -

Jen McClure

COMMENT:

Lee, Thank you for your concern about New Communications Review. I would like to clarify several points in Gerry’s post:

1. As Elizabeth Albrycht just stated, NewComm Review is not “Elizabeth’s blog” or “Jen’s blog” it is the online news site – using WordPress software – for the Society for New Communications Research.

Since its inception, we have published 1181 articles from nearly 100 contributors, and have posted 3,027 comments. Therefore, to suggest that the Review is a “one-way forum” is not only inaccurate, but unfair to the volunteers who work on this site.

2. Far from being ignored or given the run-around, the two communications from Gerry were addressed immediately and politely. In fact, I responded to him the same day, and then immediately forwarded the email to appropriate person and called her to look into it. In the email exchange I had with Gerry, I apologized and told him that we would look into this, and we began to do so immediately.

Our volunteer web services person, (who is a woman, not a “web guy” as Gerry stated, thank you) has searched our entire database and SQL database, and we can find no such comment. But we are still looking into this issue to ensure that any content that may have disappeared during our recent redesign can be restored. Many comments posted prior to the redesign are still there, so we continue to look into this.

3. In addition to trying to locate and restore this one comment on this one article, our small, mostly volunteer team has also been busy planning our annual conference, working on four large-scale research projects, publishing the Journal of New Communications Research, serving our members and supporting our Fellows.

I understand and respect the fact that Gerry would like the opportunity to respond to Elizabeth’s review, especially given the fact that she summarized the book as “junk food for PR professionals: Lots of gossip and stories, but of little substance.” We encourage discussion and debate on the Review. But, I am confused as to why, if Gerry felt so strongly about having the ability to comment on Elizabeth’s review, that he did not simply add a new comment. This certainly would have taken less time than drafting this accusatory post, which is, unfortunately, full of so many inaccuracies.

In the meantime, as stated above, we are continuing to look into the situation.

NewComm Review encourages discussion and commentary, and will post all comments that are relevant and that move the conversation forward. I encourage Gery and all others to comment on any article we publish.

Thank you.

Jen McClure
Executive Director, SNCR

Managing Editor, NewComm Review

phone: +1 650-331-0083

I quote:

Hi Lee,

I have been trying to post this comment on your post about the situation with Gerry McCusker (see below). But when I hit submit, I keep getting an error message saying that “not all mandatory parameters have been completed.” I’ve tried this from three different browsers, on both a PC and a Mac, but just can’t seem to get it to work. I apologize for any inconvenience in sending this comment to you directly, but wanted you to know that I am trying to comment on this situation.

Best wishes and many thanks -

Jen McClure

COMMENT:

Lee, Thank you for your concern about New Communications Review. I would like to clarify several points in Gerry’s post:

1. As Elizabeth Albrycht just stated, NewComm Review is not “Elizabeth’s blog” or “Jen’s blog” it is the online news site – using WordPress software – for the Society for New Communications Research.

Since its inception, we have published 1181 articles from nearly 100 contributors, and have posted 3,027 comments. Therefore, to suggest that the Review is a “one-way forum” is not only inaccurate, but unfair to the volunteers who work on this site.

2. Far from being ignored or given the run-around, the two communications from Gerry were addressed immediately and politely. In fact, I responded to him the same day, and then immediately forwarded the email to appropriate person and called her to look into it. In the email exchange I had with Gerry, I apologized and told him that we would look into this, and we began to do so immediately.

Our volunteer web services person, (who is a woman, not a “web guy” as Gerry stated, thank you) has searched our entire database and SQL database, and we can find no such comment. But we are still looking into this issue to ensure that any content that may have disappeared during our recent redesign can be restored. Many comments posted prior to the redesign are still there, so we continue to look into this.

3. In addition to trying to locate and restore this one comment on this one article, our small, mostly volunteer team has also been busy planning our annual conference, working on four large-scale research projects, publishing the Journal of New Communications Research, serving our members and supporting our Fellows.

I understand and respect the fact that Gerry would like the opportunity to respond to Elizabeth’s review, especially given the fact that she summarized the book as “junk food for PR professionals: Lots of gossip and stories, but of little substance.” We encourage discussion and debate on the Review. But, I am confused as to why, if Gerry felt so strongly about having the ability to comment on Elizabeth’s review, that he did not simply add a new comment. This certainly would have taken less time than drafting this accusatory post, which is, unfortunately, full of so many inaccuracies.

In the meantime, as stated above, we are continuing to look into the situation.

NewComm Review encourages discussion and commentary, and will post all comments that are relevant and that move the conversation forward. I encourage Gery and all others to comment on any article we publish.

Thank you.

Jen McClure
Executive Director, SNCR

Managing Editor, NewComm Review

phone: +1 650-331-0083

Cheers,
Lee

Cheers,
Lee