So I got some comment spam from a Canadian law firm. It was typically incoherent but unusually open about pimping the firm in question.
Rather than write about them immediately in an uncomplimentary way, I decided to write them and ask for a comment.
I write regarding comment spam apparently directed by your firm.
I am a lawyer and blogger in Los Angeles. Like other lawbloggers in my circle, one of my favored topics is bad marketing by lawyers. One example of bad marketing is comment spam: the use of computer programs to send thousands of irrelevant and often incoherent spam comments onto blogs across the internet in an attempt to promote a website.
I recently received comment spam promoting your firm at my site. The comment said: [deleted out of misplaced sense of mercy so you won't Google it.] Yes, it was like that in the original.
Would you like to make any comment before I write about this, as I have written about other comment spammers? (See, e.g., http://www.popehat.com/2011/10/10/too-seldom-is-the-question-asked-who-are-be-defensing-our-criminals/)
In particular, I would like a comment on (1) whether anyone with [Canuk, Snowy & Censorious LLP] authorized this comment spam campaign, and (2) if not, the identity of the marketing firm that conducted it on your behalf.
Shortly I got a reply.
Hello Mr. White;
I thank you very much for your considerate feedback.
Yes we had been using someone to do some website promotion
for us. Although they assured us that they were not automating
anything, this is the second complaint we have received and
will proceed to terminate their services.
I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience to you and your
Why, I do believe that fellow had a tone.
Anyway, remember: outsource your marketing, outsource your reputation and ethics.