The book is cute, and resists the trend among marketers-turned-authors of stacking one-liner on top of one-liner on top of simple sentence, but Larsen is obviously off the mark in his efforts to publicize it. Here's a link to the withering New Yorker piece (sub. req. -- but the first hit on Google for "don't marco larsen") and the eye-rolling Observer piece, which begins, "There were no famous people at a book party held for Marco Larsen..."
Below is an excerpt from "Don't: The Essential Guide to Publicity in New York City and Any Other City That Matters."
DON'T confusing publicity with marketing ...People who think they understand the value of publicity may treat it as merely another appendage of advertising or marketing. In fact, the two are completely distinct; even with an already-existing marketing or advertising strategy, publicity requires a separate, yet parallel, strategy altogether. ...Appearing in an ad means simply that you have enough money to gain access to a certain club (Vogue, Forbes, etc.) to court customers. Successful publicity, by contrast, means that the club has chosen you. This perceived third-party endorsement makes all the difference... As different as the effects of these two approaches are, so too are the strategies that make each successful... A media placement, on the other hand, must provide information of such intrinsic value that the consumer not only a) becomes aware of the brand but b) personally identifies with it and c) accepts it as quintessential.No doubt Larsen hopes these two write-ups of his little party aren't accepted as "quintessential." Truly there is such a thing as bad publicity, especially when your negative image is placed prominently in a high-brow magazine AND general audience newspaper.
-Adrianne (@msfener)
