 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Tinnitus / January 2004Solicitation?
In one of the threads a participant referred to solicitation of the readership here by professionals. I have been posting on this newsgroup for some eight years now - first as a tinnitus sufferer who happened to be a doc, then as the director of a tinnitus clinic, and now as a doc involved in research and education. During all that time I have never been aware of any professional soliciting any participant here to become his or her patient. By that I mean I am unaware of any professional initiating e-mail or telephone contact with a participant for the purpose of offering his or her professional services. Now I must say that over the five years that I ran a tinnitus clinic and also posted on this (and other) interactive Internet sites, I have been approached via e-mail or telephone by folks who read my posts and wanted to know more about something I said - or wanted my opinion about something. And a few of those individuals did, indeed, express a desire to know more about my practice. In fact, I believe that over those five years I had a total of seven or eight patients who first heard of me through my participation on interactive Internet sites (in my clinic we always asked how our patients first heard about us), three or four of whom were treated at no charge. Now that is a total of maybe five paying patients in five years who came to me via this and other interactive Internet sites. But NONE of these was solicited - it was they who initiated the contact and the inquiry. I would be interested in knowing if *anybody* on this newsgroup has ever actually solicited by a professional here. smn Not I. Like you, I've been called/emailed because of my participation here or because of my practice web site. But I've never initiated a call to solicit someone coming to see me. HNG > In one of the threads a participant referred to solicitation of the > readership here by professionals. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > smn > In one of the threads a participant referred to solicitation of the > readership here by professionals. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > smn Stephen, My post fits YOUR definition of a solicitation. The professional called me, recommended his/her services and stated a price. Expanding on your discussion of solicitation let me say this: When a tinnitus professional such as you (in the past tense) posts a reply to a newbie who has not specifically addressed that professional, the reply itself MIGHT constitute a solicitation if it contains links to that professional's services, depending on the material presented by executing that link. To understand what I mean, read http://www.dsba.org/oct01et.htm. It is possible to link to material which does not meet the dictionary definition of solicitation (the definition is also at the link above) and avoid punishment but doing so casts a shadow on the professional. Consider this excerpt from the document found at the link above: [Whatever theoretical appeal the "dictionary definition" approach has, however, falls apart when put into practice and balanced against First Amendment interests. For example, suppose a lawyer learns that an individual has been sued, and sends to that individual a letter advising that individual that he or she has been sued, and what the claim is. The lawyer, however, does not offer to defend the individual in the lawsuit. Is that a solicitation? In this example, there is no request, no entreaty, no pleading - merely a recitation of truthful facts. Of course, it does not take a great leap to conclude that the lawyer's motive in sending the letter was not to be a good Samaritan, but to get the individual to contact the lawyer with an eye toward hiring him or her. But the letter does not meet the dictionary definition of a "solicitation." Thus, any attempt to punish the lawyer would be premised on the lawyer's thoughts, and not his or her deeds, something which I hope we all find abhorrent.] A sig line with only academic credentials would not be solicitous and might even be useful. In our case, for example, ENT or audiologist credentials would enhance the post's credibility while Cardiology credentials would not. >My post fits YOUR definition of a solicitation. The professional called me, >recommended his/her services and stated a price. ............. Then to me that is absolutely disgusting - and you have every right to be upset about it. I thank you for bringing it to the attention of one and all. ................. > Expanding on your discussion of solicitation let me say this: When a >tinnitus professional such as you (in the past tense) posts a reply to a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >that link. To understand what I mean, read >http://www.dsba.org/oct01et.htm. ................. It's an interesting link; thank you for it. I can only say that - speaking only for myself - I put a tremendous amount of effort into my web site. And if I can supplement my resopnse to a question appearing on this newsgroup with a link to an appropriate area of my website that will give more information, then I do it. I never considered that to be solicitation - even when I ran a clinic. My invading YOUR space - now that's solicitation in my book. And your first example above fits that definition to a "T" - no pun. smn www.tinn.com :-) >I can only say that - speaking only for myself - I put a tremendous >amount of effort into my web site. And if I can supplement my >resopnse to a question appearing on this newsgroup with a link to an >appropriate area of my website that will give more information, then I >do it. I never considered that to be solicitation - even when I ran a >clinic. My invading YOUR space - now that's solicitation in my book. Then your past charge that Chung uses his Internet/Usenet presence to "solicit" patients was a lie? http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap991014.html Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long. >>I can only say that - speaking only for myself - I put a tremendous >>amount of effort into my web site. And if I can supplement my [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Then your past charge that Chung uses his Internet/Usenet presence to >"solicit" patients was a lie? ........................ Where did I say that Dr. Chung uses his Internet/Usenet presence to "solicit" patients? I just did a Google Groups search on the words "smn" and "solicit" on sci.med.cardiology. The only hit I got referred to Dr. Chung specifically *not* soliciting patients through his presence on Usenet. smn >Where did I say that Dr. Chung uses his Internet/Usenet presence to >"solicit" patients? I don't know if you did or didn't. I just wanted to see if you would break your promise to ignore potential flaming threads. lol You've been Mu_ed. http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap991014.html Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long. Admits he solicited the remainder of the 7 or 8 patients and charged money from his internet presence then denies it below. I guess when you make your own definitions it is OK. I'll let the audience determine which statement was a lie from his own post. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL History repeats itself. > In fact, I believe that over > those five years I had a total of seven or eight patients who first > heard of me through my participation on interactive Internet sites (in > my clinic we always asked how our patients first heard about us), > three or four of whom were treated at no charge. > But NONE of these was solicited > - it was they who initiated the contact and the inquiry. > > smn |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.