An open letter to executives in the luxury watch sector

This story is from an episode of In the magnifying glassour weekly insider newsletter about the best from the watch world. Register here.

Not long ago, I received an email from the founder of a used watch start-up alerting me to his new company. There’s nothing remarkable about that in itself. Over the course of my 20+ years of work, I have been writing about watches – for Robb reportThe New York Times, and other publications – I have received countless emails touting all kinds of timepieces and watch-related products and services, from AI-powered analysis tools to unique timepieces equipped with functional planetariums and roulette wheels.

However, as I read this particular message, I felt a sense of annoyance that quickly turned to disbelief.

“I read some of your articles on watches in the NY Times and wanted to contact you to see if you would be interested in collaborating on an article,” he wrote.

Let’s pause for a moment. Can we all agree to remove the word “collaborate” from our lexicon? Let’s at least agree that it doesn’t belong in a pitch to an editor. Collaborations between brands, designers, artists and other individuals are ubiquitous in the watch industry and beyond and have existed for years, primarily because everyone involved has something to gain – e.g. E.g. attention, traffic, sales. Journalists, on the other hand, are not collaborators. We do not “create” stories together with our subjects. If we did, they would be called advertorials and would be published in dedicated advertising sections to alert readers to the fact that they are consuming blatantly promotional content that is usually quite expensive.

Now let’s go back to the founder of the watch start-up, who recently sent me an email. I read his message all the way through and then my jaw dropped to the floor.

“Please let me know if you are interested,” he concluded. “I could have a first try at a draft.”

Virtually every day someone I interview asks me if they can check my story before publishing: “You know, just to make sure you got the facts right.” I can’t emphasize enough how ignorant that is – that Answer is always and forever NO. But no one has ever offered to actually write my story for me. The fact that this guy thought I could accept his deeply offensive proposal made me doubt his intelligence, his business acumen, and his ethics. I decided not to respond, but six weeks later I’m still annoyed by his ignorance.

I wouldn’t complain if the email didn’t indicate a systemic problem. Far too many people in the watch industry fundamentally misunderstand the role that journalists and editors play in the ecosystem: just because we cover their products doesn’t mean we are extensions of their marketing teams.

Although my articles often highlight worthy brands and manufacturers, they are not intended to be promotional. If you spend an hour sharing your story with me and the article I publish only conveys a snippet of that conversation, it is because, see above, we are not employees. In exchange for free advertising, you agree to let me do my work without interfering in my business.

You’d be surprised how few people on the brand side understand this dynamic.

Here’s a relatively innocuous example: I recently had contact with a PR manager for a boutique brand owned by one of the largest luxury conglomerates in the industry. She wanted to know if I could confirm that a picture of the brand’s newest watch would run with one New York Times story I wrote. I told her I couldn’t confirm this, but I would provide the image to the photo editor; Whether she would use it or not was beyond my control.

“Is there a way to get confirmation for the photo using the image editing program?” the PR replied. “Our headquarters is asking, so I just want to make sure I double check.”

“No unfortunately NYT “It doesn’t work that way,” I replied. “I’ll share the photo with the photo editor and provide your contact information, but that’s all I can do.”

Less than an hour later came this: “I’ll be in touch quickly – could you give me the photo editor’s contact?” Maybe I can contact them personally as it’s really important that an image is included. Let me know if possible!”

I don’t blame the PR specialist. They’re clearly under a lot of pressure from their manager, who I can only assume is based in Europe, where the separation between editorial and advertising seems to be much more unclear than here in the US. But this exchange made clear that the larger the group, the more they feel entitled to dictate the terms of their insurance coverage. The arrogance and complacency are obvious.

Similarly, almost every time I submit a request to interview a watch executive for a story, I’m asked to provide the names of the other executives and brands I’m citing – in my experience, if the brand is part of a company Luxury group cannot process the interview request without this information. For a long time I gave in without any (public) complaint.

But then the question occurred to me: Why do they need to know who else is being quoted? Are they worried that their brands will be compared to lesser-known names? Is their brand so sensitive and vulnerable? I’m really confused.

What baffles me even more is that so many supposedly smart and successful people don’t understand the value of an independent press. Don’t get me wrong – the majority of PR professionals I work with here in the US and abroad are well aware of how editorial departments work and respect the difference between journalism and advertising garbage (as I post an edited version of the statements of the startup guy). Email to my Instagram Stories, my friends in PR were equally horrified). I just wish luxury execs would get the hint.

As for my advice to the startup founder, may I suggest he hire a publicist and spend the next few weeks undoing the damage he has done to his reputation? Now there is a collaboration that I could support.