John Bejakovic

Stop reading this blog unless you want to march in my army

by

How do you overcome somebody’s confirmation bias?

That’s something I found out today in a provocative article titled the “Curation/Search Radicalization Spiral.”

The article tells the story of a 13-year-old Jewish kid from Washington D.C. who became a true-believing moderator of an alt-right subreddit.

The story itself is less interesting than it sounds. What is interesting is how Mike Caulfield, the author of the article, explains how this kind of “grooming” happens.

How could a Jewish kid from a liberal family be persuaded to join a far-right community, made up of people who are often hostile to Jews?

And more broadly, how is it possible to overcome somebody’s confirmation bias… and implant ideas that were once inconceivable?

I won’t repeat Caulfield’s entire argument here. But the gist is the idea of gradual curation. Here’s how it works:

1. A person (the mark, for short) goes to a subreddit or a Facebook group or somebody’s blog.

2. There he gets exposed to a curated claim. This is a claim that is carefully selected, provocative, but not threatening to his world view.

For example, the 13-year-old above was accused of sexual harassment by a classmate. So maybe he came across a claim on Reddit that said, “Study in Cambridge Law Journal reports up to 90% of rape allegations are false.”

3. At this point, the mark is intrigued but also a bit cautious. So he goes on to verify the claim for himself by doing a quick Google search. There it is, “Rumney, Philip N.S. (2006). ‘False Allegations of Rape’. Cambridge Law Journal. 65 (1): 128–158.”

4. Mind is blown. Now the mark is ready to repeat the process one level down… with another curated but more provocative claim, which gets him closer to the alternate reality.

None of this is news to marketers. Curating facts is what good direct response copy is all about, and Gene Schwartz wrote about “gradualization” back in 1966.

There are even copy tricks to simulate verifying something yourself. But maybe it’s a bit tasteless to give you a step-by-step here, since we started by talking about the radicalization of a 13-year-old.

So instead, let me tell you what I personally get out of this. It might be relevant to you also:

The upshot for me is to avoid curated content as much as possible. That means turning off social media… news sites… and I hate to say it, newsletters like mine.

Because everybody has an agenda. And if you give somebody a freeway into your mind that’s open 24 hours a day, every day, it gets harder to resist that agenda.

You start being groomed… and the next thing you know, you might be marching in somebody else’s army, fighting somebody else’s war, fully convinced it was your idea all along.

My prediction about the future of direct response hits

by

“The next Tesla may even hire creators to evangelize the company or at least, serve as a paid marketing channel. Creators are essentially media companies now, which means that the creators of tomorrow will operate a lot like the New York based publications of yesteryear.”
— David Perell

My email yesterday looked at some fancy science, and made a simple point:

A hit product is the result of chance. The first few raindrops of popularity determine which spots in the product landscape become lakes, and which ones deserts.

I think this leads to a few conclusions. One is that, just because a product (or an offer) was successful before, this doesn’t necessarily mean it is worth studying. It might have become successful due to chance more than any intrinsic quality or real demand. And vice versa. You clearly cannot count on the quality of your product as your only key to success.

So what can we do about this?

One option is simply to put out lots more offers. This will increase your chances of getting at least one big hit.

And then there’s the fact that early buzz seems to be crucial to long-term success. Which to me suggests that street teams.. astroturfing… or influencer marketing are really where much of your marketing efforts should go.

And that’s what David Perell is saying in the quote above. Media-savvy businessmen like Elon Musk are already using creators as their main marketing channel. And the “next Tesla” will probably do more of the same.

But hold on a second. Tesla? That’s a whole other country from the direct response businesses I normally talk about.

After all, if some guy in 1995 got a sales letter from Gary Halbert about a book on killer orgasms… he probably didn’t go down to the local bar to ask his buddies if they knew anything about this orgasms book, and if it’s worth the $39.95 Halbert was charging for it.

In other words, people chose traditional direct response offers in a more independent way than they choose cars or movies.

But as I’ve written before, I feel that’s changing. In the same way that traditional brand businesses are becoming more direct response savvy… traditional direct response businesses are discovering the power of having a brand. So the same reality of what makes a big hit matters for modern DR businesses too.

The way I see it, that means you’ve got two options:

One is to become a creator yourself, because businesses will need you more and more.

The other is to hire creators or influencers to promote your offers, so you can create enough initial buzz to make it a hit.

That raises the question of who to hire and when and what they should say… All interesting questions. I’ll talk about that another day. And if by some strange circumstance you want to hear what I have to say then, you can subscribe to my email newsletter.

Experts are baffled: The magic ingredient that makes a hit

by

Back when Jim Morrison and The Doors released their first album, they were a bunch of movie school bums whose biggest ambition was to become as big as the cult LA band Love.

Who remembers Love today? Not many. But hundreds of millions know Jim Morrison and Doors hits like “Light My Fire” and “Hello, I Love You.”

This global success might never have happened. But The Doors, bums that they were, spent weeks calling up the local LA radio station, requesting that cool new song, Light My Fire.

​​The song eventually became a local hit… then a national hit… then the album became a hit… and then The Doors became the next big thing.

Maybe you can do the same. At least that’s one conclusion I drew from a mind-opening article by Duncan Watts.

The article is titled “Is Justin Timberlake a Product of Cumulative Advantage?” You can find it on The New York Times Magazine site, and it’s worth reading from beginning to end. But if you’re pressed for time or attention, let me summarize it for you:

Conventional wisdom says the success of a book or a song or a movie is based on two things. One is the product itself. The other is what the market wants at that time.

And the conclusion, based on this conventional wisdom, is simple. If anybody fails to predict what will become successful, he is either too dumb or too lazy to read the writing on the wall.

Well, Watts had his doubts about this. So he set up a clever experiment to test it out. I won’t rehash the full details of how the experiment ran. The gist was it involved looking at which songs became popular among nine different segments of 14,000 people.

People in one segment had no information about how popular each song already was. People in the other eight segments knew how popular each song was, but only within their own segment.

This setup allowed Watts to test two ideas:

1. The most popular songs will be roughly as popular in the different segments.

2. The same songs will float to the top in the different segments.

Both of these hypotheses turned out to be very false.

First, in the eight “social influence” segments, the most popular songs became way more popular than in the “no social influence” segment. And the losers were more thorough losers.

​​Maybe that’s not so amazing. But get this:

In the different “social influence” segments, different songs became the most popular. And this wasn’t a minor reordering. A song could be no. 1 in one segment and no. 40 in another.

Watts explains this in a blindingly obvious way:

People do not make decisions independently of other people. The world is too complex… we usually don’t know what we want… and we often get more value out of a shared experience than out of the “best” experience.

All this means that small, random differences in initial popularity can have a massive impact in what becomes a hit and what doesn’t. That’s what Watts calls cumulative advantage. The rich get richer. And who gets rich initially? Well, that’s a coin toss.

This explains my Grinch story from yesterday. Chuck Jones had to pitch the Grinch 25 times, not because industry experts are too dumb or closed-minded to see the potential that was there… but because it’s genuinely impossible to predict what will succeed.

Randomness is the magic ingredient that determines a hit.

But what about The Doors? And what about direct response marketing, where decisions are more likely to be independent? And is there anything positive we can conclude from all this?

I believe so. But this post is running long already… so if you’re interested in more on this, I’ll finish it up tomorrow.

How the Grinch stole V-day

by

Every marketer in Whoville likes Valentine’s a lot.
But this marketer from Whoville for some reason does not.
So instead of an email that ties into V-day, too,
Here’s how Chuck Jones sold the Grinch, and why it matters to you.

Let’s set the stage:

The year is 1962. Our main character is Charles Martin Jones, better known as Chuck Jones.

If you’ve ever watched Saturday morning cartoons before Cartoon Network came out, you probably know this name. Because Chuck Jones directed a bunch of the most famous Warner Brothers cartoons of all time, the ones with Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck and Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner.

In fact, when 1000 professional animators were asked to rank the 50 greatest cartoons of all time, Chuck Jones’s cartoons came in 10 times among the top 50… 4 times out of the top 5… and one, What’s Opera Doc?, took the number one spot.

But in 1962, that was all in the past. Because Jones was no longer at Warners, but was now at MGM. He was pushing to get a Christmas feature made, based on a book by his friend Ted Geisel, aka Dr. Seuss.

There are lots of interesting details about How the Grinch Stole Christmas went from a book to a cartoon. But there’s only one bit that’s relevant for us today:

Once Jones created the storyboard for the cartoon, he had to go and sell it. Because in those days, you didn’t pitch a show to a network. Instead you had to find sponsors first. So Jones went around town, giving presentation after presentation of his storyboard for How the Grinch Stole Christmas.

But nobody wanted it. The cereal people… the chocolate people… the sea monkey people. They all said no.

All in all, Chuck Jones had to pitch the Grinch 25 times before an unlikely group — The Foundation for Commercial Banks — finally agreed to finance it.

And then, as you probably know, the Grinch cartoon became a huge success. It’s been playing every Christmas season ever since it came out. And Dr. Seuss’s book, which sold 5,000 copies before the cartoon — not bad for a kid’s book — started selling 50,000 copies a year once the cartoon came out, and never let up.

By now this might sound like a typical story of a sleeper hit, and of the Elmer Fudds who were too dumb to recognize it. And you know what? That’s exactly what it is, and why I’m telling it to you.

Because there are too many stories like this. Star Wars… Harry Potter… The Beatles. Giant hits to which the industry experts said no, no, no.

Did you ever ask yourself why?

You might think it’s the sclerosis of industry insiders… but something else is going on. And if you’re in the business of creating offers and you want them to become big hits, then this is relevant to you too. I’ll tell you the explanation I’ve found for this mysterious phenomenon in my email tomorrow.

How to get free consulting from high-paid experts

by

I was just listening to January’s issue of Steal Our Winners, where Rich Schefren somehow gets top marketers to share what’s working for them right now.

So today I listened to a guy named Seth Greene, who is new to me but apparently has deep roots in the Internet marketing community.

Seth made a throwaway comment that I thought was very valuable. And since it was a throwaway comment, and not the main topic of the presentation Seth was making, I think it’s ok to share here.

In a nutshell, Seth revealed how he gets free consulting from high-paid experts.

High-paid? Like who?

Like Russell Brunson, the face and CEO of ClickFunnels. Russell charges $10,000 for lunch (“to pick his brain,” according to his site) and $1M if you’d like him to get up out of his La-Z-Boy and build a funnel for you.

Those rates might sound outrageous, but they make sense. Because Russell’s ClickFunnels did $100M+ in 2020, and is valued at over $1B. In other words, this guy’s time and expertise is valuable.

And yet, Seth got two separate consulting sessions with Russell for free. Seth got to ask all sorts of questions that were relevant to his own success… and had Russell thinking hard to come up with the best and most valuable answers.

And maybe I didn’t mention this enough, but this consulting was all free. So how did Seth do it?

Easy. He invited Russell onto his podcast.

This is a new spin on the value of a podcast I had never thought about. Maybe it’s new to you too, and maybe it’s something you can use starting today.

“Yeah right,” you might say. “Even if I had a podcast, which I don’t because who would listen to me, how would I possibly get Russell Brunson on my show?”

Well, that’s a part (just one part) of what Seth shared in his Steal Our Winners segment, which is titled, “How To Recruit A Cult Of 50 Evangelists To Promote Your Brand For Free.”

Make no mistake. Seth’s system will take work. And it will take time. But it’s doable for anybody, even if you don’t have authority, charisma, or a deep budget.

And I think that if you head over to Steal Our Winners now and sign up, you can still get the January issue, and Seth’s presentation inside it. In case you’re interested, here’s the link:

https://bejakovic.com/sow

You’re funny and smart, and I’ll tell you why

by

Here’s a personal story I think you will appreciate (I’ll explain why in a second):

Today I walked up the hill to the local tourist attraction. A couple was dragging behind me.

When I got to the entrance, a guard popped out, blocking my way.

“Where are you from?” he asked with a scowl.

I told him — a neighboring country.

“And where are they from?” He nodded towards the couple.

“Russians, I guess.”

“All right,” he said, “hold on a moment.”

The upshot is, the Russians got in first, paying 5 euro each for the privilege. I had to wait a minute while the guard talked to me about the political and economic crisis in his country. And then he let me in for free.

I was chuffed by this experience. I kept replaying it as I climbed up to the fortress at top of the hill… and then all the way back down.

“I got in for free,” I chuckled to myself, “while the Russians had to pay!”

Maybe you see where I’m going with this.

It’s not just that I managed to save 5 euro. That part is nice, but the fact is, I can afford 5 euro. Instead, I was pleased because I was somehow chosen, selected, and approved.

Jay Abraham and Tony Robbins do this in their programs.

“You are very special,” they effectively say. “How do I know? Because you bought this course… which tells me you care more about success than most of your peers. Because you listened this far… which shows you’ve got the determination to improve and succeed.”

You can use this same approach in your sales copy as well. And I’m not just talking about the lazy argument you’ll often hear at the end of a VSL. (“You’ve watched this far, so you must want this product… so click the Buy Now button.”)

No, I’m talking about everything you can conclude about your prospect. Bring these things up, and use them to explicitly compliment or flatter. Make your prospect feel special, as though these reasons are what make him or her perfect for your offer.

For example, what do I know about you?

I know you’re not satisfied with surface-level ideas, and you want something deeper. Otherwise you wouldn’t have done the research needed to dig up my blog.

I also know you’re a reader. This gives you a big advantage in today’s world, where most everyone needs information served up in fluffy, less dense formats.

Finally, I imagine you resonate with the stories and examples I use to illustrate these marketing lessons. This tells me you’ve got a great sense of humor and a refined taste.

And for all of these reasons, I think maybe you will like to subscribe to my email newsletter. It’s where I talk about marketing and persuasion, and sometimes even give demonstrations of the techniques I talk about. In case you are interested, here’s where to go.

Offer flu

by

Today, I want to quickly warn you about a dangerous pandemic that’s cutting down hundreds or even thousands of bright and eager entrepreneurs. It’s called offer flu, and it was first discovered by marketer Travis Sago.

According to Travis, offer flu starts with the following warning symptoms:

1. You think your whole sales success depends on your reputation (or you think you cannot be successful without a reputation)

2. You can’t make any of your ads work, or you need high-tech webinars, segmentation, or funnels, just to barely turn a profit

3. If you replace your product or your company’s name with your competitor’s, you find your marketplace doesn’t notice or doesn’t “give a crap” (Travis’s words)

The concerning thing is that offer flu is highly contagious. The more people you are exposed to who have offer flu… the more likely you are to contract it yourself. And that’s a terrible thing.

Because in the final, deadly stages of offer flu, you become incapable of saying anything unique. You start spouting out gibberish power words — 7-figure! Blueprint! Inner circle! — and yet you can’t stir any kind of response from the marketplace.

That’s the bad news. The good news is that, for those lucky few who are naturally immune to offer flu, or the even rarer birds who have received both shots of the exclusive offer flu vaccine, life is pleasant and easy.

Travis says that, if you don’t have offer flu, you can even put your offer in a simple Word doc… send this to the right people… and get back an enthusiastic “Hell yeah, I want this!” along with free money in your PayPal account.

If, that is, you don’t have offer flu. So how can you protect yourself from this crippling disease?

The cure, in two words, is “specificity” and “problems.” But if you want the full 2-shot vaccine, I suggest you listen to Travis’s “Natural Offer Flu Cures” course. It’s free, and it’s available in the “Videos” section of his Facebook group, right here:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/milliondollaroffermojo

Verdict in for Agora

by

The verdict is in. The background is this:

In October 2019, before any of us had heard of such an animal as a pangolin, the FTC went after direct response behemoth Agora. Specifically, the FTC said Agora deceived customers with two products.

The first of these was “The Doctor’s Guide to Reversing Diabetes in 28 Days.” No diet changes… no drugs… no exercise required.

How?

The pitch was that diabetes is caused by “Non-Ionizing Radiation,” which the FTC says is based on no known scientific fact.

The second deceptive product was a book titled, “Congress’ Secret $1.17 Trillion Giveaway.”

The advertising for this book claimed you are entitled to get “Republican checks.” And if you don’t collect yours, somebody else will.

Really?

According to the FTC, it turned out to be the old play of “transubstantiating” dividend-paying stocks into free money.

So two days ago, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Northern Division, announced the verdict for this anti-Agora action.

​​From what I understand:

Agora has to stop making misleading, unsubstantiated claims, as with the two products above. (For example, they have to drop the “Non-Ionizing Radiation” shtick I mentioned upstairs.) They also have to pay a fine of $2M.

I’m just reporting this as industry news. I don’t have a single specific point to draw out of this. But here are a few thoughts circling in my head:

1. The $2M fine seems easy to manage for a billion-dollar company.

2. I’m no lawyer or blind supporter of the Bill of Rights. But to me, banning books (and consequent advertising) that promote unproven medical theories sure sounds like a violation of the 1st Amendment.

3. Overall, this decision seems fairly limited and uninteresting. At least it’s nothing comparable to the Raging Bull action currently in progress, which I wrote about before Christmas.

But fear not. When that verdict comes out, I’ll send you another update… and you can then decide whether it’s time to look for a new job.

Do copywriters have to be funny?

by

“That’s the face of every married guy ever.”

Sam Kinison was a former Pentecostal preacher turned standup comic. He was a stout man, with girlish shoulder-length hair, and in the video I watched of him today, he wore a black trench coat on stage. He started off his set in a sweet and quiet tone:

“I’ve been going around the country trying to get as many people as I can not to get married. I’ve been married and I’m just trying to help. Anyone here never been married?”

A guy in the front row raised his head.

“You never been married?” Sam said, his eyebrows rising up innocently. He walked over to the unmarried guy. “Ok, just promise me this.”

“If you ever think about getting married,” Sam said, “remember this face.”

And he started screaming — AAAAAAARRRH AAAAAAARRRH AAAAAAARRRH — the patended Sam Kinison “I’m in hell” scream, right into the poor unmarried guy’s face.

“That’s the face of every married guy ever,” Sam concluded, back in his normal sweet voice.

In my email self-critique yesterday, I criticized myself for missing an opportunity to be funny.

But do you have to be funny if you write copy?

As Dan Kennedy likes to say, you only have to be funny if you want to get paid. Dan even wrote a book all about it, “Make ’em laugh and take their money.”

From what I’ve seen, a few rare individuals can be funny just by being who they are. By being unfiltered or obnoxious or polarizing. Sam Kinison was apparently one of these. According to his brother:

“With Sam, what you saw was what was there. He didn’t exaggerate for the stage.”

But what if you don’t have such an unfiltered personality?

Well, here’s what humor writer SJ Perelman once said. Perelman was asked what it takes to be a comic writer. He responded:

“It takes audacity and exuberance and gaiety, and the most important one is audacity. The reader has to feel that the writer is feeling good. Even if he isn’t.”

In other words, you can fake it. Fake it till you make it… or at least fake it until you’ve finished writing that email or VSL lead or seminar stump speech that’s been sitting and looking at you for days.

And if faking it isn’t working, then go on YouTube and watch some Sam Kinison screaming… or Bill Burr ranting… or Eddie Murphy grinning.

​​These guys will make you feel good for a few minutes. They might even give you some audacity. Just remember this face — AAAAAAARRRH AAAAAAARRRH AAAAAAARRRH

My unflattering email critique to my earlier self

by

[I gave myself a harsh email critique recently. It’s for an email I wrote exactly two years ago, which gets a “C” at best. If you want to see why, here’s the original email in bold, along with my comments in brackets:]

SUBJECT: The email that broke the camel’s back

[I’ve found that “play on a popular phrase” rarely works as a subject line, at least to my personal newsletter list. So I would say, force yourself to come up with 10 new subject lines, and use the best of those. But if you insist on the subject line above, then make it more specific and intriguing. Something like, “The sticky sweet email that broke this camel’s back.”]

A while back, I subscribed to the Farnam Street email newsletter.

I’d seen a headline in the New York Times about Shane Parrish, the guy who writes Farnam Street. The headline read:

“How a Former Canadian Spy Helps Wall Street Mavens Think Smarter”

Interesting.

So I subscribed, without knowing too much about what the content I would be getting.

[Only people who really love you will read past this opening. Everybody else will leave. As James Altucher says, you have to bleed in the first line. Options:

– “How a Former Canadian Spy Helps Wall Street Mavens Think Smarter.” Lead off with this and then explain what it’s all about.

– “And that’s when I unsubscribed.” Lead off with the end of the story (below) and then work your way back to explain how it all went wrong.

– Make it into a metaphor. “I only dated the Farnam Street newsletter for a few weeks. In that short time, we had several nasty fights…”]

The first email arrived with a ton of links to important, helpful articles on the Farnam Street blog. I scanned through, but I didn’t read anything.

A second email hit me a few days later, with more helpful content.

Then a third.

And a fourth.

There was nothing wrong with any of these emails. And the content was apparently good — after all, Shane Parrish got a feature written about him in the New York Times.

But none of it clicked with me. It was too earnest, too virtuous, too positive.

[Ideally, make this section more concrete. Give examples of specific emails, and make each example funny or stupid. If you can’t do that for any reason… then make this section shorter. Your copy should never be both abstract and long, which is what’s happening here.]

Finally, I got an email with the headline “Introducing your new favorite holiday tradition” (it was around Christmastime).

I opened it up. It was about a “charming Icelandic holiday tradition” to exchange books and then spend the evening reading them together with friends and family.

That’s when I unsubscribed.

Don’t get me wrong. I’ve got no beef with Farnam Street or their email newsletter. I personally didn’t find the content interesting. On the other hand, a lot of other people obviously get a lot out of the same emails that I unsubscribed from.

[This is a missed opportunity to be a bit funny. You can make fun of the Icelanders and their nerdy tradition… of Shane Parrish and his virtue signalling… or of yourself and your cold Grinch heart, two sizes too small.]

I only bring up my experience with Farnam Street emails to illustrate a point:

It wasn’t that last email that made me unsubscribe.

That was just the straw, or the email, that broke the camel’s back.

All the previous emails had already primed me to open up the “charming Icelandic holiday tradition” email and say to myself, “Oh, hell no.”

This is something to remember in case you do a lot of email marketing.

It’s very hard to assign blame (or praise) to an individual email.

Odds are, it’s the entire email sequence that’s driving readers away — or winning them over.

[This point is worthwhile. But it could be developed further. An easy way to do this would be with another, positive example. “I was on Ben Settle’s list in two separate bursts, for 3 years in total, before I subscribed to his paid newsletter. The last email I read before I subscribed had the subject, “The Myth of Security”… but you can be sure it wasn’t that email alone that made me subscribe. It was those 3 years of cumulative reading.”]

Of course, there are things (unvirtuous and unearnest things) you can do to stack things in your favor early on in the relationship, while you still have your reader’s attention and good will.

If you’d like to find out what some of those unvirtuous ways are, you might be interested in my upcoming book on email marketing for the health space. For more info or to sign up to get a free copy (once it’s out), here’s where to go:

[A couple of points to wrap this up for you and for myself both:

1. Even though this email is weak from a copywriting standpoint, that’s ok. Sometimes these daily emails come out a little undercooked, other times they are dry and flavorless. But the more you write, the more of them turn out fine.

But even if not, so what? A weak daily email still has value. It strengthens your relationship with your list… it cements the central idea in your mind… and it can form fodder for your future emails, two years down the line. So keep writing, or if you haven’t started yet, then start.

2. When you tease something at the end of your email, make sure you write down what you had in mind for the payoff. I’d like to know now what info I was teasing back then… but two years later, I have no idea any more. Time to head over to Farnam Street and see what advice Shane has about improving my failing memory.]