Why I won’t use PayPerPost (and if I do, I will disclose)

Last night I gave away a $1,200 Sonos music system in a random raffle at Gnomedex (hundreds of people witnessed that, and Richard MacManus was the winner). Why? Because I got it for free from the company because I’m an “A list” blogger. I’m not the only one who got one for free. It’s great marketing. Get people who will talk about your product to try out your product, right?

Well, I never really gave them a review until today. Why? Because I felt sleazy about it. Even if I disclosed it I figured that you’d still be wondering in your head whether I was saying they rock just because I got a free one or because I really felt that way.

In fact, if I knew that other bloggers got a free one that would change MY perception of what they wrote. I wouldn’t know how to process that conflict of interest as a reader. I might be so disturbed that I’d unsubscribe because I wouldn’t find them trustworthy anymore. Or credible.

After all, I read blogs and forums to try to learn the TRUTH about products, companies, movements, and ideas. Advertising rarely brings truth. And taking a $1,200 Sonos system is a lot closer to advertising than blogging or journalism.

It’s why the best newspapers have rules against taking free stuff. I remember when I had lunch with Dan Gillmor back when he worked at the San Jose Mercury News. He always had to pay for lunch, even, to remove any conflicts of interest that might appear.

Todd Bishop, of the Seattle PI, paid for a ticket to Gnomedex I learned from Chris Pirillo. That made me believe what he wrote even more than if the paper hadn’t invested $500 and signed up just like every other attendee.

So, what TechCrunch writes about PayPerPost (a new company that got a lot of blog attention over the past few days) rings very true with me. Taking payments for writing stuff on my blog, even if I disclose it, makes me very uncomfortable.

It’s why I try not to accept free stuff anymore and if I do get free stuff I give it away.

Now, I’m not opposed to doing advertising. I’m joining a company where that’s the main business model. And, I just left one where, really, my entire show was paid for by Microsoft.

But, all I really have at the end of the day is my credibility. I’m going to fight to protect that. So, here’s some rules I’m going to live by.

1) If I ever run advertising I will disclose that. Even if inside a post. For instance, if I had kept the Sonos, that would have been getting compensated for writing something. So, everytime I said “the Sonos rocks” I would also put “disclosure, I received a free one which I consider compensation for writing about it.”

2) I will try to keep my advertising and editorial separate and easily identifyable. For instance, if I did do a PayPerPost post, I would start the post “this is a paid advertisement” and I would only post an advertisement in that post and would keep it separate from posts where I was actually giving you my real, uncompensated, position.

3) Disclosure is ALWAYS needed when you take advertising. At least to keep your credibility. Elliott Back of PayPerPost doesn’t agree. Well, if I find out someone is getting compensated for what they are writing and doesn’t disclose that it will earn an immediate unsubscribe from me and will probably get a post questioning everything that blogger wrote.

Why is disclosure so important? Because I, as a reader, need to know about potential conflicts of interest.

Oh, and about the Sonos? It rocks. It’s a wonderful system. Everyone who visited my house recently fell in love with it (Buzz was begging me to give it to him, for instance). And, I can say that now with a clear head and without you wondering if I said that cause I had been compensated or not.

How about we start a blog where we can “out” bloggers who accept free stuff without disclosing that?

Speaking of which, a Nokia phone just arrived here. I’m going to try that out for a few months and then give it away or send it back before I write my thoughts about it. Will other bloggers who got that same phone make the same committment to their readers?

Does credibility matter in the blogosphere?

Full disclosure: I’ve received in the past a Lenovo Thinkpad (which I’m still using, for a few months I passed it around the office, but I’ll give that away at a future conference or send it back to Lenovo cause I think it was considered a press loan, not a gift). I also have a couple of Nokia phones (gotta send them back cause they are considered a loan, not a gift). I’ve also received an OQO (which I lost on my trip to Philadelphia, really bummed me out too cause it was a beautiful machine and I bet I’m gonna have to come up with the money for that soon since that was considered a loan, not a gift as well). A variety of books (I gave many of them away to coworkers at Microsoft). Oh, and I was a member of Sprint’s Ambassador program (they loaned us a cell phone, which Patrick left in a rental car, sigh).

Update 2: I’m sorry. Elliott is not an employee of PayPerPost. His blog made it sound like he was and I made a mistake there.

104 thoughts on “Why I won’t use PayPerPost (and if I do, I will disclose)

  1. Aren’t free “review samples” fairly common practice? I guess the difference would be they if get returned. Say Sonos sent you the system with the expectation that you would send it back after you put it through it’s paces for review?

    Like

  2. Aren’t free “review samples” fairly common practice? I guess the difference would be they if get returned. Say Sonos sent you the system with the expectation that you would send it back after you put it through it’s paces for review?

    Like

  3. Brad: the best news organizations ALWAYS return the free samples. And, Consumer Reports goes even further and won’t accept them OR advertising. It’s why my dad always believes what he reads in Consumer Reports.

    If I sent back the Sonos or other things, that would be good. Any post then wouldn’t be considered compensated.

    But, I’m hearing more and more about bloggers who are taking free stuff, or getting compensated for what they post, without disclosing that to their readers and that’s disturbing.

    Like

  4. Brad: the best news organizations ALWAYS return the free samples. And, Consumer Reports goes even further and won’t accept them OR advertising. It’s why my dad always believes what he reads in Consumer Reports.

    If I sent back the Sonos or other things, that would be good. Any post then wouldn’t be considered compensated.

    But, I’m hearing more and more about bloggers who are taking free stuff, or getting compensated for what they post, without disclosing that to their readers and that’s disturbing.

    Like

  5. Long: actually, the good companies are including lesser-known bloggers in their freebie campaigns too.

    Like

  6. Long: actually, the good companies are including lesser-known bloggers in their freebie campaigns too.

    Like

  7. Good question, Brad. Was it a loaner or a gift?

    As to Scoble’s question: Of course credibility matters. A policy of disclosure is completely in line with that. Hold fast.

    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, magazine publishers used to talk about the Chinese Wall between advertising and editorial.

    If the readers couldn’t trust the editorial, they wouldn’t come for the advertising. That was the theory. But the wall was rarely impermeable.

    Now that blogging has collapsed the function of publisher and author to a single individual, there is no wall other than the authenticity and integrity of the blogger.

    Discerning readers will sniff that out soon enough.

    Like

  8. Good question, Brad. Was it a loaner or a gift?

    As to Scoble’s question: Of course credibility matters. A policy of disclosure is completely in line with that. Hold fast.

    A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, magazine publishers used to talk about the Chinese Wall between advertising and editorial.

    If the readers couldn’t trust the editorial, they wouldn’t come for the advertising. That was the theory. But the wall was rarely impermeable.

    Now that blogging has collapsed the function of publisher and author to a single individual, there is no wall other than the authenticity and integrity of the blogger.

    Discerning readers will sniff that out soon enough.

    Like

  9. PodTech could learn a thing or two: “advertising and editorial separate and easily identifyable.”

    Lately, it’s been extremely difficult to determine what’s original content and what’s an advertisement. PodTech has seemingly become a mouthpiece for its advertisers and the once original content has suffered.

    Like

  10. PodTech could learn a thing or two: “advertising and editorial separate and easily identifyable.”

    Lately, it’s been extremely difficult to determine what’s original content and what’s an advertisement. PodTech has seemingly become a mouthpiece for its advertisers and the once original content has suffered.

    Like

  11. Had the N91 for a couple of months myself. It’s a great phone, think you’ll enjoy using it Scoble.

    Like

  12. Had the N91 for a couple of months myself. It’s a great phone, think you’ll enjoy using it Scoble.

    Like

  13. Fwiw once you’ve established the practise, you could comment on the stuff and then provide an audit trail of the raffles, auctions for charity etc of the items you’ve been sent and reviewed. If you wait until the item has actually been returned your review is that much out of date.

    Like

  14. Fwiw once you’ve established the practise, you could comment on the stuff and then provide an audit trail of the raffles, auctions for charity etc of the items you’ve been sent and reviewed. If you wait until the item has actually been returned your review is that much out of date.

    Like

  15. The answer is simple – keep something similar to a blogroll about every product you receive for free. Return everything considered a loan, since they’re trying to get free publicity for nothing, and auction them off for charity. You could then review them if they suit your fancy.

    If you need the “free stuff” badly, then just start putting ads on your blog and using the proceeds to purchase the items. You’d at least make a few thousand per month. Just bid in your own auctions, and if you win, you keep it. That’s real credibility, because you put your money where your mouth (keyboard?) is.

    Like

  16. The answer is simple – keep something similar to a blogroll about every product you receive for free. Return everything considered a loan, since they’re trying to get free publicity for nothing, and auction them off for charity. You could then review them if they suit your fancy.

    If you need the “free stuff” badly, then just start putting ads on your blog and using the proceeds to purchase the items. You’d at least make a few thousand per month. Just bid in your own auctions, and if you win, you keep it. That’s real credibility, because you put your money where your mouth (keyboard?) is.

    Like

  17. Raj: I totally agree. PodTech needs to make that MUCH clearer. And, if I’m ever asked to break this contract with you I’ll quit. I’d rather keep my credibility intact, even if that means taking a vow of poverty.

    The audience, by the way, is way too connected and way too smart for anyone to fool them for long. The sleazy ones will get picked out and the advertisers on sleazy bloggers will get bad PR.

    Like

  18. Raj: I totally agree. PodTech needs to make that MUCH clearer. And, if I’m ever asked to break this contract with you I’ll quit. I’d rather keep my credibility intact, even if that means taking a vow of poverty.

    The audience, by the way, is way too connected and way too smart for anyone to fool them for long. The sleazy ones will get picked out and the advertisers on sleazy bloggers will get bad PR.

    Like

  19. It could be said that Sonos compensated you handsomely for your glowing review. Let us not forget, you donated their product on a stage in front of 500 elite bloggers who, on aggregate, wield considerable power. Your compensation was in blogger currency: praise and goodwill. Had your donation been anonymous–or better still, had you returned Sonos’ product unopened–the ethics of your review would be clearer.

    Like

  20. It could be said that Sonos compensated you handsomely for your glowing review. Let us not forget, you donated their product on a stage in front of 500 elite bloggers who, on aggregate, wield considerable power. Your compensation was in blogger currency: praise and goodwill. Had your donation been anonymous–or better still, had you returned Sonos’ product unopened–the ethics of your review would be clearer.

    Like

  21. Wow, deja vu from a few months ago. I won’t dig up the post, but we’ve heard all this from you before.

    Robert, don’t take this harshly, but to be completely honest, you’ve lost more credibility by blindly promoting a plethora of Microsoft products in your time there than if you simply gave a few free products a good review. It’s understandable, as how could you possibly be familiar with all the Microsoft products you talk about and each of their competitors? You can’t, but that makes you an informed, low credibility blogger on each one.

    You know, thousands do just fine reviewing free products every day. I’ve received hundreds of free games and DVDs to review. But you know what? They’re all on a level playing field. And the funny thing is, I tend to rank the things I purchase with my hard earned cash better than the free stuff. That’s because I get sent things in the full range of garbage to greatness, but I only purchase quality. The main conflict of interest I had when I started was that I didn’t like to have to give low review scores and then speak to the PR people about it. You got over that pretty quickly though.

    The main difference between what I do and what you do is that I’m reviewing things every day as a second job. You are a blogger who just happens to get sent free stuff. If anything, I’d rather not have these preachy posts and disclaimers all the time. Just don’t talk about products you get sent at all if you aren’t able to keep your objectivity.

    Like

  22. Wow, deja vu from a few months ago. I won’t dig up the post, but we’ve heard all this from you before.

    Robert, don’t take this harshly, but to be completely honest, you’ve lost more credibility by blindly promoting a plethora of Microsoft products in your time there than if you simply gave a few free products a good review. It’s understandable, as how could you possibly be familiar with all the Microsoft products you talk about and each of their competitors? You can’t, but that makes you an informed, low credibility blogger on each one.

    You know, thousands do just fine reviewing free products every day. I’ve received hundreds of free games and DVDs to review. But you know what? They’re all on a level playing field. And the funny thing is, I tend to rank the things I purchase with my hard earned cash better than the free stuff. That’s because I get sent things in the full range of garbage to greatness, but I only purchase quality. The main conflict of interest I had when I started was that I didn’t like to have to give low review scores and then speak to the PR people about it. You got over that pretty quickly though.

    The main difference between what I do and what you do is that I’m reviewing things every day as a second job. You are a blogger who just happens to get sent free stuff. If anything, I’d rather not have these preachy posts and disclaimers all the time. Just don’t talk about products you get sent at all if you aren’t able to keep your objectivity.

    Like

  23. Free stuff doesn’t make you a liar. If it does it’s easy to spot. Companies have paid massive amounts of money to fly me to fantastic destinations to show me their latest products and not once has that entered my mind when giving my opinion. Readers can sense a mile away the delicate whiff of bullshit and you’d be betraying their trust to try it on with them. Not only that you’d be lying to yourself.

    A good editor will be able to tell whether a product is actually as good as it’s been described. Your credibility lays in your ability to genuinely understand and review a product with the reader in mind not whether you’ve got one tucked away in the desk drawer somewhere. I think you should go easier on yourself and keep a few of the freebies. Though next time you’re giving away the really good stuff let me know and I’ll clear a space.

    Like

  24. Free stuff doesn’t make you a liar. If it does it’s easy to spot. Companies have paid massive amounts of money to fly me to fantastic destinations to show me their latest products and not once has that entered my mind when giving my opinion. Readers can sense a mile away the delicate whiff of bullshit and you’d be betraying their trust to try it on with them. Not only that you’d be lying to yourself.

    A good editor will be able to tell whether a product is actually as good as it’s been described. Your credibility lays in your ability to genuinely understand and review a product with the reader in mind not whether you’ve got one tucked away in the desk drawer somewhere. I think you should go easier on yourself and keep a few of the freebies. Though next time you’re giving away the really good stuff let me know and I’ll clear a space.

    Like

  25. Pay Per Post will die a whimpering pathetic death.

    Let’s play Pay For Post!

    Send money! Send Product! Send Hookers!

    Of Course I will Blog for Money! I did Before, I’ll try it again. But before you jamb my comments waving money to gush about Your Unique Product, let me lay out the rules of engagement.

    Send Money!
    I do enough shit for love.

    Send product!
    I will not comment on stuff I have not tried or used. No, You will not get it back as I will road test it to the point of failure.

    You do not have editorial control over my posting. You are taking a chance, But it is a relatively cheap chance. Remember New Coke?

    You may correct my punctuation, grammar, and we will talk about my use of profanity, but you have no more editorial control, especially if what I write is a resounding bitchslapping of some dog of a product that you think will appeal to millions.
    Send Hookers!
    This one is non-negotiable. Send the Money in the Product, and have it Delivered by a Hooker. It is a well known fact that men are more pliable after a gut wrenching orgasm. (You will have to fine tune this one for other orientations)

    This is a WIN-WIN!.

    You will get product testimonials, at a far cheaper rate than a PR Firm will give you, much more honest, (which if you have the brains god gave a gerbil, you would contact us directly, rather using yet another third person enabler, who has shoved the stick of metrics so far up your ass, that you think this is a good idea) and last but not least, we will finally elevate women who prefer to swap money for sex, into a more respected place in society.

    Before you reject this idea, think about how much money you are currently shoving down the ratholes of Advertising Agencies and PR Firms.

    http://theheadlemur.typepad.com/ravinglunacy/2006/06/pay_per_post_se.html

    Like

  26. Pay Per Post will die a whimpering pathetic death.

    Let’s play Pay For Post!

    Send money! Send Product! Send Hookers!

    Of Course I will Blog for Money! I did Before, I’ll try it again. But before you jamb my comments waving money to gush about Your Unique Product, let me lay out the rules of engagement.

    Send Money!
    I do enough shit for love.

    Send product!
    I will not comment on stuff I have not tried or used. No, You will not get it back as I will road test it to the point of failure.

    You do not have editorial control over my posting. You are taking a chance, But it is a relatively cheap chance. Remember New Coke?

    You may correct my punctuation, grammar, and we will talk about my use of profanity, but you have no more editorial control, especially if what I write is a resounding bitchslapping of some dog of a product that you think will appeal to millions.
    Send Hookers!
    This one is non-negotiable. Send the Money in the Product, and have it Delivered by a Hooker. It is a well known fact that men are more pliable after a gut wrenching orgasm. (You will have to fine tune this one for other orientations)

    This is a WIN-WIN!.

    You will get product testimonials, at a far cheaper rate than a PR Firm will give you, much more honest, (which if you have the brains god gave a gerbil, you would contact us directly, rather using yet another third person enabler, who has shoved the stick of metrics so far up your ass, that you think this is a good idea) and last but not least, we will finally elevate women who prefer to swap money for sex, into a more respected place in society.

    Before you reject this idea, think about how much money you are currently shoving down the ratholes of Advertising Agencies and PR Firms.

    http://theheadlemur.typepad.com/ravinglunacy/2006/06/pay_per_post_se.html

    Like

  27. How does it make you sleezy to take payment for writting about something you believe in?

    Oh crap that’s what you did all year at Microsoft last year. You were getting paid to talk about Microsoft. It’s called a job. What’s the difference. I’m sick of “A-List” Hypocrisy and monkey business. Get off your freaking high horse.

    Just another case of hypocrisy coming from all these “a-list purists”

    Unsubscribed. This is a crock of bs. Goodbye Scoble. Respect lost.

    Like

  28. How does it make you sleezy to take payment for writting about something you believe in?

    Oh crap that’s what you did all year at Microsoft last year. You were getting paid to talk about Microsoft. It’s called a job. What’s the difference. I’m sick of “A-List” Hypocrisy and monkey business. Get off your freaking high horse.

    Just another case of hypocrisy coming from all these “a-list purists”

    Unsubscribed. This is a crock of bs. Goodbye Scoble. Respect lost.

    Like

  29. I appreciate your credibility. How you have earned credibility though has more to do with your disclosing where you stand than feeling like everyone else needs to live by the same standards you hold yourself to.

    For example, I wouldn’t be comfortable with hanging onto the Nokia for a few months. But I don’t have a problem with you doing so, since you’ve made it clear what you’re comfortable with. (I will appreciate it if you remind us it was provided to you when you write your thoughts after a few months though!)

    I think Ryan Mahoski brings up an interesting point. Payment isn’t always in the form of cash or tangible goods. In fact, recognition is often perceived as even more valuable in the blogsphere… especially from the perspective of folks that aren’t A-listers.

    Like

  30. I appreciate your credibility. How you have earned credibility though has more to do with your disclosing where you stand than feeling like everyone else needs to live by the same standards you hold yourself to.

    For example, I wouldn’t be comfortable with hanging onto the Nokia for a few months. But I don’t have a problem with you doing so, since you’ve made it clear what you’re comfortable with. (I will appreciate it if you remind us it was provided to you when you write your thoughts after a few months though!)

    I think Ryan Mahoski brings up an interesting point. Payment isn’t always in the form of cash or tangible goods. In fact, recognition is often perceived as even more valuable in the blogsphere… especially from the perspective of folks that aren’t A-listers.

    Like

  31. >How does it make you sleezy to take payment for writting about something you believe in?

    Because as a reader I don’t know if you’re doing it for the love or if you’re doing it for the money. I especially will think you’re sleazy if you don’t disclose that. And my conflicts have always been disclosed so that you can apply that lens there.

    Like

  32. >How does it make you sleezy to take payment for writting about something you believe in?

    Because as a reader I don’t know if you’re doing it for the love or if you’re doing it for the money. I especially will think you’re sleazy if you don’t disclose that. And my conflicts have always been disclosed so that you can apply that lens there.

    Like

  33. @28. Gimme a f***king break! You wrote a book to get paid, right? Certainly you didn’t do it for charity. Otherwise you would have dropped it from the sky rather than put it on Amazon. Should we now not read your book because you wrote it and got paid for it? You didn’t blatantly state that but one would have to be naive to think otherwise. Should you tell us if people that invite you to a conference to speak comped you your room and possibly your travel before your speak? I mean, you credibilty my be at risk. People who write columns do it for money. I could give a shit if a blogger is getting paid for their writing. All that should be important is what they have to say. Do you really think this will turn the blogosphere into Pravda? Are you really that distrustful of people?

    Like

  34. @28. Gimme a f***king break! You wrote a book to get paid, right? Certainly you didn’t do it for charity. Otherwise you would have dropped it from the sky rather than put it on Amazon. Should we now not read your book because you wrote it and got paid for it? You didn’t blatantly state that but one would have to be naive to think otherwise. Should you tell us if people that invite you to a conference to speak comped you your room and possibly your travel before your speak? I mean, you credibilty my be at risk. People who write columns do it for money. I could give a shit if a blogger is getting paid for their writing. All that should be important is what they have to say. Do you really think this will turn the blogosphere into Pravda? Are you really that distrustful of people?

    Like

  35. #29: Dmad, it’s obvious you have never thought about conflict of interest. The publisher that paid for my book wasn’t paying me to take a specific stance like “PayPerPost” will.

    A columnist is paid to write, yes, but newspapers don’t let advertisers tell columnists what to write.

    Like

  36. #29: Dmad, it’s obvious you have never thought about conflict of interest. The publisher that paid for my book wasn’t paying me to take a specific stance like “PayPerPost” will.

    A columnist is paid to write, yes, but newspapers don’t let advertisers tell columnists what to write.

    Like

  37. Just a note that I wasn’t the single winner – I was in a syndicate of about 8 of us who added our raffle tickets together. So somehow the 8 (or 9?) of us will have to split the Sonos 🙂 I love the product though.

    Like

  38. Just a note that I wasn’t the single winner – I was in a syndicate of about 8 of us who added our raffle tickets together. So somehow the 8 (or 9?) of us will have to split the Sonos 🙂 I love the product though.

    Like

  39. ‘A columnist is paid to write, yes, but newspapers don’t let advertisers tell columnists what to write.’

    True but if someone from the advertising department rings an editor and says there’s ad money in a column about how colour laser printers are da bomb then you bet your ass that before long there’d a column about it and there’d be advertising in that very same issue from said company.

    Like

  40. ‘A columnist is paid to write, yes, but newspapers don’t let advertisers tell columnists what to write.’

    True but if someone from the advertising department rings an editor and says there’s ad money in a column about how colour laser printers are da bomb then you bet your ass that before long there’d a column about it and there’d be advertising in that very same issue from said company.

    Like

  41. Robert: “A columnist is paid to write, yes, but newspapers don’t let advertisers tell columnists what to write.”

    Not true. It’s not so black and white, but that behavior is more common than it should be. And it isn’t advertisers doing all the offering. I’ve heard stories of magazine editors saying “If you pay for a back page ad, we’ll score your product higher.” It’s sad but true. Good companies like Ziff Davis (1up.com, EGM, etc.) keep their advertising/PR people completely separate from their editors and I think that helps.

    Like

  42. Robert: “A columnist is paid to write, yes, but newspapers don’t let advertisers tell columnists what to write.”

    Not true. It’s not so black and white, but that behavior is more common than it should be. And it isn’t advertisers doing all the offering. I’ve heard stories of magazine editors saying “If you pay for a back page ad, we’ll score your product higher.” It’s sad but true. Good companies like Ziff Davis (1up.com, EGM, etc.) keep their advertising/PR people completely separate from their editors and I think that helps.

    Like

  43. I agree with you Robert on complete disclosure of any “gifts” you receive because of who you are and that you write (and well from my viewpoint). I have written a column for a User Group magazine for over 20 Years and I always let people know whether I received the software/hardware as a gift or I paid for it. Normally I did contribute the product as a raffle prize at meetings. This way I felt much better and could be objective in my comments on a product.

    Good luck at your new company and I look forward to more blogs from you.

    Like

  44. I agree with you Robert on complete disclosure of any “gifts” you receive because of who you are and that you write (and well from my viewpoint). I have written a column for a User Group magazine for over 20 Years and I always let people know whether I received the software/hardware as a gift or I paid for it. Normally I did contribute the product as a raffle prize at meetings. This way I felt much better and could be objective in my comments on a product.

    Good luck at your new company and I look forward to more blogs from you.

    Like

  45. But yet you will blindly accept Al Gore’s theory on global warming without questioning who is behind the funding of the research and what the motives of those funding that research are. Brilliant!

    Like

  46. But yet you will blindly accept Al Gore’s theory on global warming without questioning who is behind the funding of the research and what the motives of those funding that research are. Brilliant!

    Like

  47. Dmad: good point, but irrelevant. The fact that you know who funded his research demonstrates that he disclosed it.

    Like

  48. Dmad: good point, but irrelevant. The fact that you know who funded his research demonstrates that he disclosed it.

    Like

  49. If disclosure is all that matters, then PayForPost needs to definitely change their name. Then, you can post full disclosure about the company that “sponsored” the post and still disguise the fact that the post was actually paid for.

    Is this right, wrong, ethical or just economics?

    Like

  50. If disclosure is all that matters, then PayForPost needs to definitely change their name. Then, you can post full disclosure about the company that “sponsored” the post and still disguise the fact that the post was actually paid for.

    Is this right, wrong, ethical or just economics?

    Like

  51. Companies give you free stuff, you play with it, you give it away, and you blog about it. You feel OK because you make full disclosure, and you don’t keep the free stuff. PayPerPost gives me money when I blog about something one of their advertisers will pay for. I feel OK because I make full disclosure, and I won’t write crap just to get paid. And I’m not going to keep the prize, either. I’ll most likely spend it within days, if not hours, of receiving it. As long as both of us maintain our honesty and integrity, I don’t see a problem.

    Like

  52. Companies give you free stuff, you play with it, you give it away, and you blog about it. You feel OK because you make full disclosure, and you don’t keep the free stuff. PayPerPost gives me money when I blog about something one of their advertisers will pay for. I feel OK because I make full disclosure, and I won’t write crap just to get paid. And I’m not going to keep the prize, either. I’ll most likely spend it within days, if not hours, of receiving it. As long as both of us maintain our honesty and integrity, I don’t see a problem.

    Like

  53. Another one to send to the PR folks. 🙂

    I wish all tech reviewers had a link to their bio – that included how long they’d used the platform/software and which competitor products they used.

    Business reporters should have to disclose stock/mutual fund positions in anything that they write about (pan a company, better tell me you own stock in a competitor).

    Some political reporters don’t vote for just that reason.

    Like

  54. Another one to send to the PR folks. 🙂

    I wish all tech reviewers had a link to their bio – that included how long they’d used the platform/software and which competitor products they used.

    Business reporters should have to disclose stock/mutual fund positions in anything that they write about (pan a company, better tell me you own stock in a competitor).

    Some political reporters don’t vote for just that reason.

    Like

  55. The practice of “reviewing” until you give it away is ridiculous. I gave away my laptop now …I’m reviewing a new laptop…whew, rough life. Guess what? You are in the top .0001% of bloggers out there that get a laptop much less anything else. Most bloggers are happy to earn enough for a cheese burger from AdSense. It’s easy to give things away when they will surely be replaced by the next item you are “reviewing”.

    You make yourself feel better by giving things away, but you are no better than anyone else who accepts products or cash. You are simply rent-to-write.

    The only reason you can even consider doing something like this is the fact that you don’t need the money or the product. It’s like celebrities getting $10k gift bags at award shows. Give the stuff to the people who need it least. They do the same thing, take a couple photos then give the product to mom because you just got another to replace it.

    If you were to give the same offer to honestly review and keep a $1200 product the overwhelming majority of the blogosphere would do it. Hell, send me a Sonos. I will review it, I will be honest in my review and I won’t have a problem at all sleeping at night.

    I find it honorable that you give your products away, however you have to acknowledge that there is a huge difference between you and the rest of the world.

    Like

  56. The practice of “reviewing” until you give it away is ridiculous. I gave away my laptop now …I’m reviewing a new laptop…whew, rough life. Guess what? You are in the top .0001% of bloggers out there that get a laptop much less anything else. Most bloggers are happy to earn enough for a cheese burger from AdSense. It’s easy to give things away when they will surely be replaced by the next item you are “reviewing”.

    You make yourself feel better by giving things away, but you are no better than anyone else who accepts products or cash. You are simply rent-to-write.

    The only reason you can even consider doing something like this is the fact that you don’t need the money or the product. It’s like celebrities getting $10k gift bags at award shows. Give the stuff to the people who need it least. They do the same thing, take a couple photos then give the product to mom because you just got another to replace it.

    If you were to give the same offer to honestly review and keep a $1200 product the overwhelming majority of the blogosphere would do it. Hell, send me a Sonos. I will review it, I will be honest in my review and I won’t have a problem at all sleeping at night.

    I find it honorable that you give your products away, however you have to acknowledge that there is a huge difference between you and the rest of the world.

    Like


  57. #29: Dmad, it’s obvious you have never thought about conflict of interest. The publisher that paid for my book wasn’t paying me to take a specific stance like “PayPerPost” will.

    What gave you the impression that we are making bloggers take a specific stance. Bloggers choose what they want to write about Robert. Maybe if it was called “Microsoft PayPerPost” you would have actually used the system before you bashed it.

    Like


  58. #29: Dmad, it’s obvious you have never thought about conflict of interest. The publisher that paid for my book wasn’t paying me to take a specific stance like “PayPerPost” will.

    What gave you the impression that we are making bloggers take a specific stance. Bloggers choose what they want to write about Robert. Maybe if it was called “Microsoft PayPerPost” you would have actually used the system before you bashed it.

    Like

  59. Pingback: ymichllg
  60. Pingback: Swingers sex
  61. Pingback: dfgdsgbvdfs
  62. I take the swag, I always list full disclosure that I was using a free sample. I even keep a page that lists all of the stuff I’ve received for free and links to the reviews.

    I don’t have the same moral qualms about it that you do. If I don’t like something then I’m going to say it. On my reviews for my free Nokia phone I give lists of the people I think should be fired because of poor design decisions.

    My rule of thumb is that all a “free sample” guarantees is a mention, and that’s if I end up using it.

    Like

  63. I take the swag, I always list full disclosure that I was using a free sample. I even keep a page that lists all of the stuff I’ve received for free and links to the reviews.

    I don’t have the same moral qualms about it that you do. If I don’t like something then I’m going to say it. On my reviews for my free Nokia phone I give lists of the people I think should be fired because of poor design decisions.

    My rule of thumb is that all a “free sample” guarantees is a mention, and that’s if I end up using it.

    Like

  64. Pingback: madonna porn
  65. Pingback: bdsm
  66. “…whether I was saying they rock just because I got a free one or because I really felt that way.”
    You don’t even need to say they rock. Say that they are the worst thing you saw. What counts is a mention. Negative -11 and positive 11 are the same [11].

    Like

  67. “…whether I was saying they rock just because I got a free one or because I really felt that way.”
    You don’t even need to say they rock. Say that they are the worst thing you saw. What counts is a mention. Negative -11 and positive 11 are the same [11].

    Like

Comments are closed.