@johnozbay Hey John thanks for commenting! You're right user privacy is really important here. I'm going to get started on a privacy policy and publish that asap. Also in the case of sensitive user messages, we don't actually store any user data––we simply display contact info (email, phone, social), then you send messages through those clients. Additionally, there are unsubscribe links in every email 👍 Thanks again John!

@juhaszhenderson In order to give a journalist's (Alice) contact info to a source (Bob), you need to check whether if the source (Bob) is a paid PR Requests member. This is your business model correct? Which means, Alice the journalist posted an inquiry like: "lοοking fοr gаy, bi аnd quееr mеn fοr аn аrticlе аbοut hοοk-ups." (a real example from your product) Then Bob, the source, clicks contact after seeing this specific inquiry. So now you know which source clicked on which inquiry by which journalist. So you know Bob -> Clicked on : "lοοking fοr gаy, bi аnd quееr mеn fοr аn аrticlе аbοut hοοk-ups." -> to respond to Alice's inquiry. Meaning that, you know (and can know) journalist's sources. In this context, you can also infer / know that Bob, the source, fits into the category of "gay/bi/queer men". So here's what you know about Bob, the source, just based on this example : First & Last Name (from the payment information) Zip Code (from the payment information) Email (from the signup) Bob's gender identity (based on the inquiry), Bob's sexual preferences (also based on the inquiry) These are very sensitive pieces of information, especially when combined together. So whether if you store this or not, you have the capability to learn so much about the sources from the context alone. Therefore, you need to have a proper privacy policy, and show your users how much you can learn about their personal lives simply by observing the articles they click on. (Or how much of their personal information would be leaked if your company gets hacked) –– Finally, you need terms and conditions. During signup, I didn't agree to anything like "I won't be scraping all journalists' posts & contact information from your website" – So a single paying user can scrape all your journalist's posts and contact information, use it, sell it, release for free, and you wouldn't have a legal leg to stand on without proper terms.

@johnozbay Come on dude. The guy is doing a startup. Don't be such a stickler for rules. He will sort shit out when he gets the time. Until then, it is a great product. Matt – a tip is to copy the GDPR terms and conditions doc from another website and adapt it to your startup.

@gavri_birnbaum Those “rules” are written in law in EU under GDPR, and CCPA in US. + All tax paying businesses have to have company information on the website if they accept payments online. Otherwise people could get scammed, companies could avoid tax etc. Being a startup doesn’t exempt anyone from obeying laws, and disrespecting others’ legal rights.

@johnozbay written by a bunch of octogenarian bureaucrats in Belgium. Generating huge legal fees for startups just getting started. Doing next to nothing to really protect user data. This product creates value. There is nothing the EU, GDPR or anyone can do about that. Value first. Stupid legal compliance later.

@bluetidepro Hey Zach thanks for commenting! We built the UI, aggregate the sources, enrich & host the data, provide support etc. Why would we not charge for our work? We do have a free tier where you can get a newsletter of our active requests and search through them. That might be the best place for you to start!

@juhaszhenderson I understand charging if I wanted to do the search stuff, I was more so confused why I'd be charged to just go on and provide people info through the requests. Like as a fun thing to do on the side to help people out looking for info. I'm going to guess that's not a use case that's normal? haha I may have missed the point of the service.

@bluetidepro Ah I see what you're saying. What's in it for you––journalists submit their PR requests, and you give them a quote. Usually not that many people provide quality quotes––and if yours is quality & relevant, you've got a good shot at the journalist using your quote in their article. That's some pretty low friction PR, and is great if you're trying to get buzz as an expert, or for your business/product/book/etc

@bluetidepro I was confused as well. If *sources* are providing services to *journalists*, logically, journalists would be the ones paying. I can see what Matt is saying regarding the source paying, but it seems like the goal of that business model is to help people promote themselves -- whereas the opposite business model would be more about helping journalists find quality sources. (Kind of like the talent placement / staffing business model, where the party seeking the source pays.) I suppose they're both viable.

@danielle_biondo Thanks for the review Danielle! Glad Press Hunt's been useful 👍 We've got a bunch more coming in the next month!

@tim_nugmanov Thanks Tim! Alerts coming ASAP 🚀

@kensavage Thanks for commenting Ken! Yes, except a few big differences: 1. HARO’s requests are anonymized––they don’t give you the journalist’s direct contact info. 2. They only update requests 3x a day, while we update hourly. 3. They don’t aggregate requests, so they have much less with less breadth. 4. HARO charges you to search through requests, while we offer it for free (we only charge for access to contact info). 5. HARO is traditionally for coverage in only articles & blog posts, while we’ve optimized for every medium from articles to TV to podcasts.

@isaac_hammelburger Thanks Isaac hope you enjoy it! Much better than HARO in our opinion (they haven't even updated the © on their footer since 2015 😂)

@isaac_hammelburger @juhaszhenderson Don't hate on HARO on the © since you are being told above you don't have privacy policy nor terms and conditions. It is a big deal.

please see responses above about PP, etc @nicobotti

@narek_vardanyan Thanks Narek! Looking forward to your feedback!

@narek_vardanyan thanks!

@caseymdoza Hi Casey! Yes you can get started submitting requests to me directly at matt@presshunt.co 👍

@jenleine_blance Thanks Jenleine looking forward to your feedback!

@parag_r Thanks Raj! Next on the list is categorization for search filters, but at least for now you can search for keywords!

@_jacksmith Hey Jack! Thanks, looking into that now!

@_jacksmith Yo just solved this, mind checking it out to see if it works on your end? Really appreciate the feedback!

@juhaszhenderson @_jacksmith thanks for checking us out Jack. Been a minute (years) since we spoke. hope all is well!

@juhaszhenderson @andrewmedal great to see you involved Andrew. @Matt: yes, seems fixed now fyi seeing some broken profile images though: https://nimb.ws/bgY8Df

@charlmaine_abad thank you!

@bonnie_bennet thank you!

@tom4 yes, great use case. Awesome Tom. Thanks for the notes and feedback. I'll share with the team. We really appreciate this insight!

@marksnowdon1 Thanks for commenting Mark! Yes, you can sign up for free at https://presshunt.co/signup

@marksnowdon1 @juhaszhenderson thanks Mark, let us know if you have any other questions. And, we love feedback.

I meant to say: how is this different from HARO?

Hi @christenvidanovic Thanks for the question. We're different from HARO in a couple key points: 1. HARO’s requests are anonymized––they don’t give you the journalist’s direct contact info, even after you pay. 2. They only update requests 3x a day, while we update hourly. 3. They don’t aggregate requests from all over the web through different sources, so they have much less with less breadth. 4. HARO charges you to search through requests, while we offer it for free (we only charge for access to contact info). 5. HARO is traditionally for coverage in only articles & blog posts, while we’ve optimized for every medium from articles to TV to podcasts. Thanks!

@sheena_javier thank you, we hope it provides value to our users. We welcome any more feedback. Thanks!

@jackie_pacificar awesome, thank you!