Image via Wikipedia
The all out war between Jeremy Schoemaker and Dennis Yu continues, with Markus Frind jumping in to defend himself.
Most of the drama is insider baseball stuff - Yu claims Schoemaker used unethical marketing techniques for Facebook, and Schoemaker claims Yu is a scum bag.
Both allegations could be true, false or somewhere in between.
There is, however, an interesting due diligence angle here. Dennis Yu and Jeremy Schoemaker were scheduled to appear on a panel at the Affiliate Summit in January.
Danny Sullivan, a very well known speaker, wrote about Yu's appearance at the Affiliate Summit:
"I think it's worth reminding everyone that just because someone speaks, that's not an endorsement that you should hire them. Certainly that's true for SMX, and I think it's good advice for any show."
One of the commentators responded by saying:
"I disagree. I think that people spend $2000 to get into these shows (myself included) because you can have a reasonable expectation that the speakers are not extortionists.
Speaking at an esteemed event is an implicit endorsement, regardless of fine print.
Due diligence and reference checks are a good idea as well obviously, but if the speakers aren't safe to hire, or worth hiring, why are they there?"
This is an excellent demonstration of the limitation of the consumer warning: buyer beware. Mr. Sullivan recommends that one "check out the references" of anyone whom you hear speak, no matter how prestigious the conference. But checking references simply means asking what other people are saying: and conference organizers are lending their authority to their speakers.
It is amusing to hear Mr. Sullivan complain that "we can vet material to some degree, but conference organizers are not the Better Business Bureau in terms of investigating business operations." The BBB never investigates a business; it investigates complaints about a business.
On the other hand, the commentator asks for too much - essentially a blank check for reputation from the conference organizers. Oh, this person appeared as a speaker - he or she must be worth and able for my particular purposes.
There is no magic trick to due diligence - Yu might be a slimeball who nonetheless can teach you something; Schoemaker might be a dubious Facebook marketers who nonetheless can teach you something. But, their appearance at a conference only signals that they had something of interest for the conference organizers. Heck, in this case the organizers might only be interested in the all out war between Jeremy Schoemaker and Dennis Yu!
I am born this way, but what is your excuse?
Well, while everyone's been guessing at stuff, I've actually been analyzing real data and will post it soon.
Well, the big thing they've succeeded in doing is to "take the eye of the ball" - meaning less and less people seem to be thinking about any of the substance of the shady tactics Dennis Yu initially spoke about - or even thinking about. I have to congratulate both Dennis and Shoe on successfully doing that. It couldn't have succeed better even if they had planned the whole thing out.
A great example of nobody checking credentials, btw, is the movie The Yes Men