We got rejected from a blog carnival!

Did you even know it was possible to get rejected from a blog carnival? I thought it would be pretty hard to get rejected. Yet, I was, and it is going to be entertaining for all the readers out there as to why. There was a misunderstanding in the post I submitted. I won't tell you the blog or even the carnival, just that it had to do with eating out. I submitted a recent article about the amount of unique visitors to McDonald's. So for your discernment and entertainment here is what was said. This is the email I received from the host of this carnival explaining why it won't be playing in the carnival:

Unfortunately, I did not use your submitted article for the Carnival of (something about eating out). I know that my listing said "Almost anything else (within reason) that deals with restaurants and dining out," but I felt that your topic was not newsworthy - rather just a viral marketing post designed to generate income rather than content. I do not begrudge anyone making a buck or two off of their web site, but yours was a blatant viral marketing post, and I did not feel that this was the appropriate venue for that.

I invite you to check out the first edition of the Carnival at (I'm not so nice to give it a link since I got rejected) to see what I had in mind for submissions and I would gladly welcome a re-submission next month if you have a relevant topic that you would like featured.

The blue text is what I added in place of the name of the blog and the carnival. So I decided to nicely tell him what my true intent of that McDonald's post in my reply:

I respect your decision to not accept my post about McDonald's but I did want to clear up one thing for you. My post was in no way designed to generate income for me. The thought about McDonald's signs and how many people they have served struck a funny note with me when I thought of my blogs. Blogs run on visitors and we like unique visitors, so how many of McDonald's billions of visitors were unique? Who knows? This thought was new and original for me. I have never taken the time to think in depth about the McDonald's sign, and my post about it was as sincere as they come. I do admit I have written a few posts that have been used to hopefully get some good ads on my site or to bring in a lot of traffic. This McDonald's post did neither. I thought as members of the blogosphere we could all relate and find humor in this concept that had just struck me. Perhaps the humor I was trying to convey didn't show itself to you.

As I write this letter my husband brings up a point I never thought of. That perhaps my using unique visitors as my relating to McDonald's I was directly talking about this carnival submission and all the unique visitors it would bring to my sight. That never occurred to me. I didn't write this post for the future (who might come to my site as a unique visitor) I wrote in regards to the past, who has been to my site as a unique visitor. I wasn't even really thinking about actual unique visitors, just the concept of them. If anything I thought I wouldn't be accepted in this carnival because you were looking for nicer restaurants than McDonald's.

You credit me with too much deceit. I love blog carnivals. I never have received so much traffic from them that it even makes a considerable difference in my blog earnings, I just think it is fun. I'm sorry for your misunderstanding of the post, and hopefully through this letter you can more better understand my goal in writing it and consider it for next months issue.

Thanks for contacting me and letting me know the situation.

I'd like to hear thoughts, comments, anything about this. My post was meant to be funny, this person took it as a marketing ploy. Apparently what I meant for it didn't come across. What do you the readers think?

If you like this post consider Subscribing to my full feed

Related Posts