Ramblings-n-Writings

Archive for July 25th, 2008

Here’s an excerpt from a letter I received today…

“Dear Kara,

You were recently appointed as a biographical candidate to represent xxx,WV in the 2008/2009 online Cambridge Who’s Who Registry Among Executive and Professional Women.
We are pleased to inform you that on July 9, 2008, your candidacy was approved…..The office of the Managing Director appoints individuals based upon a candidate’s current position, and usually with information obtained from researched executive and professional listings. The Director thinks that you may make an interesting biographical subject…”

I was happy to read the letter and take a look at the information they wanted to know. I remember being in a Who’s Who book in high school and college. They asked all sorts of information on the biography form, included a photo, and wrote a great little summary piece about me.

However, this letter and response card struck me as a little odd. (Guess that was my gut reaction kicking in.)

First, the response card asked for all of the pertinent information that I assumed they already had – business name, address, phone, industry, type of business – considering that they obtained my name from a professional listing.

Second, the card was two-sided, postage paid with no privacy at all. Of course, an online option exists for those of us concerned with privacy and the USPS.

Oh, and there’s that phrase “interesting biographical subject.” Makes me think of some laboratory experiment gone bad! “Yes, Kara, you are definitely a most interesting biographical subject,” stated the Mad Scientist. “What can we learn from you today as we mix a little of this with a little of that?” =)

Fourth, the phrase at the bottom of the letter and the bottom of the reply card says, “Cambridge Who’s Who is proudly not associated or affiliated with any other Who’s Who Publication or Organization.” Proudly not associated? Sounds a little odd to me. And what’s with the weird capitalization of Publication and Organization?

So being the savvy person that I am, I googled Cambridge Who’s Who. First up was their own website where I learned that my “free” inclusion was only in the online registry and no one but members could see my entry. This told me that I would receive no benefit from being included. If it was a searchable database made available to all the world, I would consider it.

The next few entries on Google were enlightening. I particularly liked Victoria Strauss’s entry at Writer Beware even though I never finished reading it. The first few paragraphs alone will warn you to beware of Cambridge as well as other Who’s Who!

Needless to say, I won’t be sending in my reply card. How about you?