Why do we read e-mails marked as LOW PRIORITY first?
Is it that the blue down-arrow is so uncommon it stands out?
Is it because we know that it's non-urgent, probably personal, and fun? It, therefore, deserves to be opened immediately?
I have found that I get faster responses from a recipient when I select the LOW PRIORITY option... Faster than a NORMAL e-mail... and often times, faster than an URGENT red exclamation point message.
Interesting.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bf89d53ef00d83424929e53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference LOW PRIORITY: Read Later:
» Low-Priority Email. Worth Testing? from TSMI's Trade Show Marketing Report
I found this post from Brand Autopsy on [Read More]
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
I'm just glad all that proprietary stuff doesn't affect us Mac users. Marking e-mails for priority never was meant to be and it surely haven't done any good, you just prove that :-)
Posted by: Jacob Bøtter | May 31, 2005 at 07:24 PM
I've never received a low-priority email. I do receive high-priority ones -- and delete them without reading them.
Posted by: Chuck Nyren | June 01, 2005 at 11:51 AM
Very interesting catch. You're spot on.
Came here via http://sambharmafia.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Aye Kay | June 02, 2005 at 04:56 AM
Priority is in the eye of the beholder - I never look at the symbol usually until I'm deleting the e-mail! (And I didn't even know what the low priority symbol looked like - so I guess I've never received one. Or just wasn't looking at the symbol, as usual.)
Posted by: Shawn Lea | June 04, 2005 at 10:15 AM
Simple,
Low priority tells me the sender has some consideration for my time and energy. I don't always read them first. BUT, I always read them.
Posted by: Jason Kerr | June 06, 2005 at 02:23 PM