In this case, Reese was promoting the Rich Jerk Playboy Mansion Party. A charity event for the "Urban Health Institute" (a none-profit organization that provide medical services and help to those in need after natural and man-made disasters). Typically, Rich Jerk pulled no stops with the marketing strategies and the sales letter page for the event was somewhat offensive. (The link is to the "much 'tamer' version", as Reese puts it. The first one had bunny pictures- if you missed it, it's your loss.) Apparently Reese got tons of angry mail, so he decided to lay it on thick in a long-scrolling apology letter:

1. First, a personal address: "Tali,"
2. Then, Reese makes sure you understand what he's apologizing for.
3. The second task a hand is disassociating himself from the Rich Jerk strategies.
4. Then he identifies, morally (and thus personally) with his target audience, by slily mentioning his distaste for the Playboy Mansion: "Half the event was being held at the Playboy Mansion. (The rest of the event was more formal networking in a hotel conference room.)".
5. At this point, Reese resorts to the "but everybody's doing it technique" and states: " …many GOOD PEOPLE I was friends with had already committed to attend the event AND I know of many others that have attended charity functions at the Playboy Mansion in the past…"
6. Now comes the part where Reese contradicts himself. Even though he stressed distaste for the Playboy Mansion and all it stands for, a couple paragraphs ago, he now condones it: "…people don't realize that the mansion property can't be used unless money is raised for charity." What Reese is actually doing, is quieting doubts, which may arise in your mind.
7. At this point Reese points out how responsible and on the right he was, by mentioning that he explained, upfront, that he "did not condone the offensive marketing tactics of that company (Rich Jerk)". He also reminds the reader of his "CONSISTENT ACTIONS over the course of the past FIVE years". Reese's point to all this is that in spite of his being responsible, his customers still bashed him in. (He later on uses this empathy-building technique, again.)
8. Then he clears the blame off of him and focuses it on the Rich Jerk, explaining it wasn't his linking e-mail that was to blame, but the actual sales letter, advertising the event. He explains he wasn't in on the finer details of this campaign and then apologizes for it. In other words, he keeps on shrugging of the responsibility and then says he "takes full responsibility." (What a saint...)
9. He rejects the contents of the letter and goes on to a full-out feminist rant (what is a man to do under these circumstances?..)
10. He evokes empathy by explaining what a "high price" he will pay for this mistake: "With many people I lost the respect and integrity that I had worked very hard to build during the past 5 years online as a teacher." (You'd think the guy was going broke.)
11. He protects his fellow associates and business partners-as long as they are "GOOD PEOPLE", he can still endorse their product and vise-versa.
12. He makes it very clear that he never made money from promoting this event and builds on this point, digresses to a long linked list of charity organizations, he endorses.
13. Goes off on a rant: Sony BMG Entertainment that endorses both rappers (and their immoral lyrics) and American Idol (the all-American family show). What Reese is counting on, is the fact that most of America watches American Idol, and thus vicariously endorses the rappers. Reese goes on to saying he is a fan of the show himself, but does not condone BMG's morals. Now you and John Reese are in the same moral swamp.
14. Nearing the end, Reese Sums up the apology. So you don't forget what you're reading this 7 pager for, to begin with.
15. In one last attempt at evoking empathy, Reese paints a solemn, samuraic portrait of himself: "I am a man of honor" and "For anyone that's on my list and thinks that I EVER do anything purposely deceitful or be dishonest, PLEASE remove yourself immediately. I don’t want to do business with you."
16. Thanks you, the reader.
17. The closing is touching and personal on one hand, and reminds you of what we're all here for in the first place: Money. "Yours, for online profits, John Reese"

The professional approach

I'll demonstrate the professional approach with an e-mail I got from Pandora.com. "Pandora is an automated music recommendation and internet radio service". (Wikipedia) Sadly, I reside out-side the US and because of licensing laws I am no longer permitted to use it's services. The Pandora apology e-mail can be found here and this is the analysis:

1. First, a non-personal address: "Dear Pandora Visitor,".
2. Then apologizing and making sure I understand what for.
3. Making sure you understand this is not the companies fault and heroizing their efforts to change the situation, evoking empathy: " We will continue to work diligently to realize the vision of truly global Pandora".
4. Showing empathy: "We are very sad to have to do this…"
5. Making sure that you are, in fact, the right recipient of the letter, pre-apologizing for any possible mistakes, and providing a link in case an actual mistake was made.
6. Being that I might be a paying customer, who has suddenly been cut off of service, you are provided with a contact link, and a promise for a refund.
7. At this point, all users are promised to have their bookmarks saved, so if the possibility of service is reopened, I will continue, with the services, where I left off.
8. Pandora assures me that listeners will be notified if the service is reissued, and if I would like to be notified personally, I can enter my name in the box, at the bottom of the letter.
9. Nearing the end, they make it clear that they have no idea, when the problem would be solved: "The pace of global licensing is hard to predict."
10. They remind me again of their cross-bearing crusade and their commitment: "…we have the ultimate goal of being able to offer our service anywhere."
11. The closing shows more empathy: "We share your disappointment and greatly appreciate you understanding."
12. They sign off in an official manner: "Sincerely, (hand-signature) Tim Westergren Founder".

Why I prefer the professional approach?

You'll probably notice a few similarities, but mostly, the differences are apparent. I found that Reese's apology was too long and if I wouldn't have covered it here, I wouldn't have ever read the whole thing. It seemed to me like a pathetic attempt to convince me of his trustworthiness and as you must have noticed from my sarcastic remarks, evoked a lot of… well… sarcasm. Also, the condescending probably didn't help much in getting my trust. But the most annoying was the gossipy attempts at proving he is morally clean.

The Pandora e-mail, however, made me smile. The letter made me feel respected as a customer and impressed me with the "with you till the end" approach. I also read the whole thing. Even though, Pandora most probably can't solve my problem, I'm still a huge advocate of the company and do my best to contribute to the fight to save internet radio. I actually find myself identifying with the company ethics. In Reese's case, not only does he not solve my problem, I am still questioning his ethics.

I haven't decided yet, which one of these apology strategies I prefer as a marketer, but I'm sure which one works for me, as a customer.
What do you think?




P.S.
I'd just like to note that Michel "The Success Doctor" Fortin has graced my blog with his presence this week. To show my appreciation, I link to a relevant article in his blog, about reciprocity in business.4 stars

* The Web Design Business Kit is not just for the web-designing business, it has a great business model plan and makes for informative reading. 5 stars

Tags: How to apologize, saying sorry, Apologizing to your customer, John Reese, Rich Jerk, Playboy Mansion Party, Apology letter, internet marketing review, internet marketer