Comments:
Have to say I spent hours trying to figure out what to write after that session. I wasn’t looking for drivel, and I don’t consider cutting edge techniques drivel. I just didn’t think you all discussed what the session was billed as.
I realize you all are experts—which is why I was disappointed.
As for who I speak for—myself. My job was to give my responses to the sessions I attended. And I did attend your session in good faith. I was honestly interested in learning about affiliate marketing.
As for the sponsor you mentioned—well, that was something I could have left out, but I felt that his reactions showed a different point of view that was worth mentioning.
BTW—If I noted the comment, which I won’t repeat here, that I attributed to you in error. I do apologize. My notes said that it came out of your mouth. I will go back and update the post to point out that there is controversy over who said it.
Jeff,
Ad someone who has also participated in the Ad:Tech Blog, I can assure you that Carlen Lea is independent and speaks for nobody but herself. Bloggers are recuited and qualified just like speakers at the conference, but they are not all experts in all areas. Bloggers are supposed to attend sessions and write about them. No agendas or sponsor stroking is requested or even mentioned.
Had I been at the Chicago show, I’m sure I would have covered your session and I also bet that my take would have been different. My suggestion would be to make sure that the write-up for the panel to be updated to say that the panel will discuss vital issues affecting the Affiliate Marketing industry such as the impacts of Search, Blogs, and recent developments. This might change the expectation of the audience and reviewers.
Brad’s comment is right on. I think the major issue was with setting expectations.