While all my clients are my customers and I treat them all equally the same, my original "rant," for lack of better terms, was basically that be careful with marketing hype. You basically have two types of hype, honest or misleading.
When this hype is misleading, in the case in point originally, then it's someone making you think certain customers are clients while that someone is using this same hype in hopes you'll become a customer. It's like comparing "true" watt-seconds to "effective" watt seconds. One is real, one is not and the average person will not "see" the difference with marketing hype.
When in doubt, simply ask, did
Maxim, Stuff, FHM, and all those other lad magazines people hype to be published in pay you or did you get an image printed without compensation, without a by-line? I seriously doubt a free image in a
lad magazine without compensation means those magazines are trying to cultivate you from a customer to a client or vice a versa.
My shot of Lisa Klypas comes out tomorrow, 225,000 hard-cover copies in book stores of her new book
Sugar Daddy--this was an assignment for my client St. Martins Press. Images from this shoot start this week in the
New York Times and
People, while I'll have by-line credits in these full-page ads, my client is St. Martins Press and I only become a customer of
People or the N
ew York Times if I purchase their magazine--which I will do, my name is in there and I have to get something to show my family. Thanks, rg sends!
professionlism and credability...