The following is part one of a multi-part series on “The Naughty Words of Email Marketing.” Feel free to chime in through comments or through Twitter.

Blast is the naughtiest word in email marketing.

I don’t think I’ll have many in the email marketing space who would disagree with me on this point. In fact, “blast” has been the subject of many a blog post about its general evilness and lack of thought about the recipients. I’m not really treading new ground except maybe to finally come out and say that first sentence.

The discussion around the naughtiness of the word “Blast” (as prefaced in last night’s entry) began on Twitter. I’m putting it down now.

Here are my reasons why “Blast” is naughty:

Blast is naughty because as I said, email marketing is about communication. It’s also about creating and nurturing a relationship with your customer. Ideally, it’s one-to-one communication. Therefore, language is everything. What does blast connote to me?

• Removing the human elements of an email message
• Not caring about what you send a customer (NO relevance)
• Not caring about the time and intellect of your customers (NO respect for your subscriber)

Let’s face it. There’s nothing in my mind that’s positive about saying you’re going to send an email blast. There’s nothing personal about it, either. So why does the word still have relevance? Why do some of the so-called “experts” in email marketing still use the word–heck, even promote it?

Here are what some of the other “Email Snobs” in the world think of the word “Blast”:

DJ Waldow, in his “Petition to Ban the Phrase ‘Email Blast,’” wrote:

It pains me every time I hear, read, or even think about the word “blast” following email. Who cares, it’s just a phrase, right? Wrong.

“Email Blast” sends the wrong message about email marketing. It is impersonal and cold. I envision a robot sitting at a laptop counting down – 3….2…1… (Email) Blast! It implies a message that is sent to the entire house file — no segmentation, no targeting, with no thought if subscribers actually want to read your message.

Loren McDonald, in his “Attack of the Killer Bs,” had this to say:

Blast: I frequently hear otherwise intelligent marketers refer to “sending out an email blast” — as if email marketing required no strategy or thinking. Just “get the blast out.” A blast has a lot of power behind it, and the message goes far and wide, but the target is vague and undefined.

Mathew Patterson, in “Email as conversation, not invasion,” wrote:

Have you heard your clients talk about “email blasts” and “mail shots”? Sounds less like we are emailing our subscribers, and more like we are declaring war on them! The more we see our audience as passive receivers of a mass message, the less likely we are to think about what works best for them instead of us. Email is such a personal medium, at least on the receiving end, and it’s a dreadful waste of that intimacy to just throw out the same message to everyone.

Justin Premick, with “Email Marketing: Not Such a Blast,” gave his opinion as well:

Terms like “blast” are dangerous, not only because they make you sound like a spammer, but also because their repeated use can influence how you view your subscribers and campaigns. Words like “email blast” to describe campaigns suggest the sender doesn’t see subscribers as people, but rather as targets to shoot offers at unit they score a hit.

What are your opinions on the matter?

Chime in. Join the discussion. Nothing gets changed unless we all acknowledge that “Blast” is an evil, sadistic, awful in the email marketing dictionary.

Tagged as: bad words of email marketing, email, email blast, Email Marketing, naughty words of email marketing