Then he does it. Actually, he leaves religious groups alone. His message to WAHMs is simple: it’s bad business to market yourself as a WAHM unless your prospective clients are other WAHMs. According to Stratten, the WAHM label may carry with it a negative connotation. At best, it is irrelevant to whether you can do the job for your prospective clients.

I suspect his intention with the post is to raise the ire (and gain the notice) of those who proudly embrace the moniker. And just so I’m not a total cynic, I’ll allow that he may truly want to do some good by warning mothers away from using a term that will diminish their marketing efforts.

Choose your words wisely and with intent. If your prospects value the WAHM title, use it. If they don’t, don’t. On the other hand, I don’t advocate trying to hide it. If you set up your website so that you appear to be a large agency in a high-rise office building, the first scream of “Mommy, I pooped!” while you’re on the phone with a client is going to give you away. And if I was the client, I would immediately feel uncertain about your honesty.

That doesn’t mean, however, that you have to advertise your WAHM status with cute buttons and links to coupon sites. In that, I completely agree with Stratten. A link to your “mommy blog” might be perfectly appropriate; it depends–as does everything else in your promotional materials–on whether it’s relevant to your market.

But take note: When huge companies like Wal-Mart and Frito-Lay enlist the services of moms because they are moms, it doesn’t do to dismiss out-of-hand the possible added value of your WAHM status.

BetterPhoto.com offers courses (for a fee), an online community, and loads and loads of user-submitted pictures at which you can gaze with longing, wishing yours were as good to learn from and be inspired by. (They also offer website packages with photo galleries, but these are not cheap.) The photos are worth a look; especially the Editor’s Picks.

Then there’s Darren Rowse’s (yes, you’ve heard of him! He’s ProBlogger.com) other site, Digital Photography School. Geared toward beginners, but full of interesting techniques and tidbits – and a forum too! I feel like I have not even yet begun to explore his site. I got sidetracked with 13 Lessons to Teach Your Children About Digital Photography (and learned a few things for myself). Next, on my TBR list is a short article answering the question, What Digital Camera Should I Buy My Child? (We have a birthday coming up in my house.)

Now, here’s something I think is kind of noteworthy: I found both of these sites through social networking. Not Google.

One of my Linked In contacts is an awesome photographer, and I noticed she belonged to a Linked In group called BetterPhoto, which led me to the corresponding website. SCORE!

I follow Darren Rowse on Twitter (like all the cool kids do), and he just happened to mention his Digital Photography School in a Tweet recently.

I’m a pretty good Googler, but entering a search string and holding your nose whilst clicking through the list does not even compare to finding sites like these through connections you know and trust.

Interesting. Last week, I posted a question about how social media was paying off for people in terms of money. I think I’m getting part of y answer. I haven’t laid down any cash at BetterPhoto yet, but I’m sure my clicks added some small amount of revenue to Darren Rowse’s site.

And it’s a pretty nice way to find good things on the Internet, whether you’re wearing your marketing hat or not.

Maybe I would join more social networking sites if the sign-up pages didn’t hit me with the hard questions right off the bat.

Like, “Name.”

I suppose if you’re Plurking or Tweeting for pleasure and not business, you could call yourself bikergirl93 or whatever. But for businesspeople this is a question of branding. If your network is designed to make you easy to find, recognizable, and to establish your online presence, it seems logical that you would call yourself the same thing on all the social networking sites.

But every time I start to enter my name, I get struck with a niggling of self-consciousness. What if, in an unguarded moment, I post something too personal, or too dorky, or worse — confuse “it’s” with “its”?

It’s probably too late. I’m sure I’ve already done it. But I wonder if you pause before naming yourself on a social networking site. If you’re building a brand on the Internet, what things do you take into consideration when using social networking sites? Do you mix personal friends with business contacts? Do you carefully censor yourself?

If not, how do you think this affects your brand? If you do… how do you do it?

I finally received a notice from Borders about their new website. And I received a ”valuable online coupon” with a link to a page that informs me, among other things, that I can now redeem my Borders’ Rewards online.

Good job. Now I’m going to “reward” Borders with some online shopping. Hmm. Who do I know with a new book out?

Ah-ha! I almost forgot, but Jen Singer of Momma Said has a new book called You’re a Good Mom, (and Your Kids Aren’t So Bad Either). Who can resist a title like that?

A while back I blogged about Borders possibly having missed an opportunity when they didn’t give their Rewards members notice about the launch of their website. A commenter (apparently an employee) said the “official” launch would happen later.

Okay.

I’m still waiting to hear about it from them. I’m still waiting for that email with the subject line that says “Use your Rewards at Border’s NEW Website.”

But that isn’t my point. I didn’t come here to harp on Borders.

My point is that … oh darn. Now you made me forget. See how short my attention span is? That’s why you want to make any bennies you have for your customers GLARINGLY obvious.

They aren’t the only ones who miss it in this category. I recently spent several minutes searching for one company’s promised mulitmedia content. I know they have it, but I can’t find it.

I’ll bet it’s really cool, too. If only I could find it.

When you have something New and Improved, that’s a great time to advertise it front and center on your website, in your promotional materials, in the signature line of your emails – everywhere. (Except spam. That’s not cool, but you know that.)

Make a promise. Communicate the promise. Deliver on it. Then help your customers find it. (Hint: Make it really easy.) It’s common sense, but it’s also easy to overlook.

The Associated Press (AP) has allegedly threatened legal action against Drudge Retort – not to be confused with the site it parodies, called Drudge Report – for quoting passages of AP articles with as few as 33 words.

I’m all about not stealing someone’s copyrighted work. I’m a writer who can sell and resell articles – provided they aren’t plastered illegally all over the Net. Because what publication would want to buy them if they were available for free on some jerk’s website? That makes sense, right?

But these apparently were not stolen articles; they were excerpts from articles, properly attributed, and included links back to the AP source.

Of course, you would know a lot more about this matter (and so would I) if I could quote and link a few stories but, you know, I don’t want to get sued for it.

Oh, okay. You talked me into it, especially since Poynteronline gave me this convenient tech option called “Quick Link” for, um, linking back to their story. See AP v. Bloggers: Hurting Journalism? by Amy Gahran.

What I don’t understand is what the AP thinks it stands to gain by being ignored, which is surely what will happen – at least in the Blogosphere – if bloggers fear the legal wrath of a big news organization like the AP. We’ll simply link to other outlets, like Poynteronline for instance. (It’s called link love, you AP people.)

I’m guessing here, but I believe the number of non-journalists who regularly check the AP website is smaller than the number who read blogs. AP can only stand to benefit from increased readership by being quoted, linked and attributed on millions of blogs. Do I have that right? Or am I missing something here? Let me know what you think.

(I just Googled “Associate Press” and actually went directly to the site without following someone else’s link for the first time in I don’t know how long. And on the front page is a link to a story I find fairly ironic, called “AP and Freedom of Information.” In a bold move characteristic of renegade bloggers everywhere, I am going to link you to it. )

THIS JUST IN:

Oh well, it may be a moot point anyway. See the link at the top of Drudge Retort to “AP rethinks Drudge Retort Takedowns.”

Well, good. But the AP shouldn’t have been so short-sighted in the first place, in my little, tiny, inconsequential blogger’s opinion.

I’m not a news journalist or news blogger, even. I don’t love Drudge Retort (although the name is admirably clever and well-suited for the site’s purpose). I’m not an angry, rabid fan of the site. But that’s not the point. The point is that this issue affects me as a blogger because whether I’m providing a linked, short, properly-attributed excerpt to an AP story or Martha Stewart’s latest spicy pumpkin bread, I just don’t want to have to go to court over it.

Here’s another good article on the subject by Drudge Retort’s founder, Rogers Cadenhead.

I couldn’t be happier. The AP News story reports that as a Borders Rewards Club member, I will now be able to use my rewards and coupons at the online store, which I previously couldnot do when Borders was partnered with Amazon.

But my question to Borders executives: Why am I hearing this from the AP? If I were you, I would have been splashing this across the top of the Borders Rewards e-newsletter, announcing this juicy tidbit directly to those customers who are most likely to be downright excited about the prospect. (I was always slightly annoyed with the previous arrangement. How many books didn’t I buy because I had to visit the bricks-and-mortar store, or found myself there by impulse, but couponless?)

If you did this, I missed it. Let us know: “You can now use your Borders Rewards online! And here’s a special coupon just for valued customers like you! Yada yada yada.” (The rest of the message will not be seen, because we will have already clicked the link.)

According to the AP article, analysts think the new Borders website has a long uphill climb, and that the move was somewhat risky. Even more reason, in my opinion, to target the audience that loves you best.

To read the story yourself, click here (Yahoo News) or here (Google News), whichever you prefer.

To see the new site, which by the way can finally be reached at the borders.com url – another new and smart move – click here.

 Borders, I like you. You’re the only major bookstore within 10 miles of my home. Take every advantage you can get. I promise you, it will be rewarding!