I had the most unusual experience of meeting one of this blog’s readers yesterday. As she prepared to tell me what she thought of it, I put on my best gee-thanks-modestly-flattered face. But it was the wrong choice: the word that she used to describe it was – I gave it away in the headline – “vitriolic.”
Modestly-flattered gave way to upset-and-surprised. Is it really “vitriolic”? OK, the odd blog can be just a tad critical in tone, but overall my sense is of a load of stuff which focuses on financial marketing issues of the moment and comments on them thought-provokingly and a touch laterally in a wry and amiable kind of way. Would I say that this blog aims to be more or less to financial services marketing what Alistair Cooke’s Letters were to America? Well, maybe not quite that wry and amiable (and a very great deal less eagerly awaited). But some way short of “vitriolic,” anyway.
Still, I’m the first to recognise that perception is reality, and if someone who probably represents something between 25 and 50% of the blog’s readership says it’s vitriolic, then it’s vitriolic. Watch out for a major ToV shift in forthcoming entries: I’m going to be working a whole lot harder on “wry” and “amiable.”