“Consumer groups have long objected to sites like FreeCreditReport.com. Consumers may obtain a free credit report each year from the three major agencies, as mandated by an act that Congress passed in 2003. The only authorized site for that is AnnualCreditReport.com.” (NY Times)

Consumer reaction is pretty predictable. This Lifehacker post gives you a peek at some of the negative feedback.

It’s like I always say: Be straight with people, especially prospective customers. The truth always gets out, no what your marketing might claim.

My mouth literally fell open at the news today that Tim Russert had died suddenly. It felt like a death in the family, although I never knew him except from his television appearances and books.

Tim was one of the good guys: passionate about politics, a master of his craft, a hard working, decent man who adored his family and never forgot his working class roots in his (and my) hometown of Buffalo, NY. In fact, Tim and I went to the same high school at the same time. I regret never getting to know him then. Now, I guess, I never will.

My thoughts are with you, Tim — and of course, with Big Russ, too.

Take the TV ads for FreeCreditReport.com. A young guy dressed like a pirate, singing (OK, lip-syncing) a catchy little tune about he’s stuck in this nowhere job because his credit was whacked. If only he’d taken advantage of the sponsor’s free credit reporting service.

Except the free service isn’t really free. First you have to enroll in their (paid) Triple Advantage program. But that fact is kept hidden until (literally) the very last line of each spot. The net effect is to admit that everything you’ve said up to this point has been a lie. The truth is, you have to pay $15 per month for X before you get the free Y. Which means Y isn’t really free.

Clever, I admit. They build the ads around the “free” offer, the bonus, even though what they’re really pushing is the paid service. FreeCreditReport is from Experian, the big credit reporting agency, not some fly-by-night. So I assume they honor their promise to cancel your membership within four days after you come to your senses cancel.

But it’s understandable why you might be hesitant. Any company that’s deceptive about a supposedly “free” service might also be the kind of company that makes it really difficult (read: nearly impossible) to cancel once you’ve handed over your credit card information. After all, why would a company like that suddenly play it straight when it comes to letting you out of your contract?

My purpose is not to knock Experian, but to caution against this kind of “gotcha” marketing tactic. They can backfire and cause grave harm to your brand. Think about that next time your marketing guru suggests making pie-in-the-sky promises. If you deliver real value to your customers, there’s no need to be deceptive or sneaky.

And in the Internet age, you will be found out.

Other companies are trying a similar approach. “Companies are increasingly using simple pictures to distill complicated concepts into easily shared, easily remembered nuggets,” says Fast Company in a piece called The Napkin Sketch. FC quotes Tuft’s Neil Cohn, a researcher in cognitive psychology and linguistics at Tufts University:

“Graphic expression and visual thinking are a central part of human cognition… These ideas are spreading from how companies sell what they do — as in UPS’s “Whiteboard” ad campaign — to plotting strategy.”

Just for laughs, my wife, who’s a talented artist, did a quick sketch of me when I first hung out my shingle as a freelance copywriter in March, 2001. I was amazed. It was quick and funny — the T-shirt reads “Will Write for $.” It’s also probably closer to the “real me” than anything a brand artist could come up with.

I’ve never shown it publicly before, but if quick and simple sketches are the latest thing in branding, maybe now it’s time.

What do you think? Is it too silly and frivolous for an (ahem) “professional” like myself? Or should I start using it as part of my identity and brand? Tell me in the comments. I really would appreciate your input.

[Aside: Dan Rather was all wrong, too, imho. Too edgy and twitchy for an anchor. But he was awesome getting in Nixon’s face at news conferences. A news anchor used to require an authoritative, avuncular presence. That’s why “Uncle” Walter Cronkite was so perfect in the ’60s and ’70s. Of course, those halcyon television days are long gone, with the Internet (and the Daily Show) now the primary news source for people like me. And the most important qualification for a news anchor today is blonde hair, long legs and short skirts. ]

But I digress.

As I mentioned yesterday, I’m seeking revenge on Time Magazine for passing over me for their Top 25 blogs. So far I haven’t been able to sink my fangs into Time. But I HAVE nudged Katie Couric closer to the ledge, sparked a blow up at Howard Stern’s show, and gotten Michael Johns kicked off of America Idol.

Yeah, that was all me, folks. Heh heh.

Time — consider yourself warned.