The Paid-Post Debate: Journalists Have More Credibility Than Bloggers (depending)
Thanks you for visiting. Please consider subscribing to the RSS feed.
What? They don’t? Oh…. my bad.
Where shall I start?
What so enrages the masses online is that the soft sell is often concealed, disguised as an independent product or service review.
Untrue. PayPerPost requires disclosure on every blog. Many advertisers require a disclosure be IN their post.
”It’s very topical,” says Josh Stein, a Draper Fisher managing director who is taking a seat on PayPerPost’s board. ”It’s a new frontier in advertising.” Or, at least, an extension of an old idea, akin to payola on the radio and product placement in movies and television.
Bad analogy on the payola, even though I’ve joked about the word “blogola” in past posts. The key issue with payola is that radio stations weren’t disclosing the payments. If they disclose, it isn’t illegal and it isn’t payola. Look it up. Forbes has fact checkers, right?
I am surprised that I didn’t hear from the “fact checkers” that the reporter said would be calling me, and given the two big errors I found in his article, he could have used their services. I could tell over the phone that the reporter would be spinning his article a certain way…
Colleen at Simple Kind of Life was interviewed for the article, and wrote the above quote. Guess the fact checkers took the day off.
(Colleen wrote a great response, so click the link above and check it out. Oh, I wasn’t paid to link to her. Gotta disclose, donchaknow.)
Anyway, the use of the analogy in this context wasn’t done for historical or legal accuracy, it was done to inflame readers. (Hey, if Gelles can read minds, why can’t I?)
Advertisers offer a set price for each blogger’s post and dictate where to link, what to write about and what tone to use in a review (from ”neutral” to ”rave”).
Not true. Advertisers can request ‘positive’ articles. Again, the word “rave” is being used to inflame the reader. I’m still reading minds. David Gelles may want to put his tinfoil hat on.
”When one blogger misbehaves, it reflects poorly on all bloggers,” sniffs Jeff Jarvis, a professor at the City University of New York’s Graduate School of Journalism and another PayPerPost critic. ”They may make a buck on this, but it will never gain credibility.”Through his own blog, BuzzMachine.com, Jarvis earns around $1,000 a month through banner advertising and affiliate programs.
Because earnings = credibility. Yeah, a lot of bloggers aren’t impressed by that number. A reporter with even a rudimentary understanding of how to make money in the blogosphere would know this.
But, since when is a banner ad, and ESPECIALLY an affiliate ad, better than a paid post? If there is disclosure, there is NO difference. Don’t bother trying to explain it to me, my mind is closed. That’s my disclosure for that argument.
But, Jeff is really concerned about credibility, right? Let’s dig under the hood a bit and see what we can find…
Betting on Black20
May 10th, 2007I’ve just invested in Black20, an energetic and creative new small-TV company that is sure to grow big. Virginia Heffernan wrote a great piece telling their story so rather than try to tell it again, I’ll just say go there. And go watch some Black20 videos. These guys are talented, funny, ambitious, smart, and tireless. I’ve just invested in the studio of the future.
Of course, once you go to Black20’s website and click on the “Advertising” link, you’re taken to a page with the following (emphasis mine):
PREMIUM SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIESAny of the above advertising opportunities can be combined with organic product integration. In other words, let’s work together to find a way to incorporate your product into BLACK20 quality programming, assuring your message is reaching your target audience. You’re Snickers? Ok great. You want someone to choke on a candy bar cause it’s packed with delicious peanuts? Drop us a line so we can negotiate a deal before we sell that gem off to Baby Ruth.
Yeah. How is this different from PayPerPost? Because PPP is textual and Black20 is video? Actually, PPP has video opps, also. Could it be that PPP is a competitive business model to Black20’s?
No, couldn’t be that… Could it?
Shouldn’t that have been something Gelles checked out? Maybe I should apply for a fact checker job at Forbes, because it’s actually pretty easy.
“The Paid-Post Debate: Journalists Have More Credibility Than Bloggers (depending)”
5 Comments - Show Original Post Collapse commentslucia said…
Ahh.. but the Black20 advertorial is different because he tells us he just invested in the company. So, in other words, his running a commercial and sending his readers to a page of links is ok because if the company does well, that’s money in his pocket.
See how different that is?
10:11 AM
Delete
Tim said…LOL. It’s crystal clear.
10:24 AM
Delete
Jeff Jarvis said…Well, good digging: I hadn’t seen that at Black20.
But now that you mention it, I’d say there is at least this difference: Black20 has content with ads in it. In a PPP post, the ad IS the content. And dull content at that. Talmudic hair-splitting? Perhaps. I’m not much of a fan of product placement, either.
I blogged about the article, too, and said the reporter at a minimum buried the lead: This is about SEO, folks. It’s not about people reading and trusting PPP bloggers. It’s about Google seeing the links. It turns bloggers into human sploggers.
1:17 PM
Delete
VC Dan said…This is a great article! I’d digg it if I wasn’t responding by phone right now.
@JJ: It’s not hair-splitting, it’s called hypocrisy.
Make up your mind. Prior to backing PPP-competitor (for video sponsors) Black20, you proclaimed the issue was all about advertisers getting into a publisher’s editorial. Now that you’ve backed a company that sells exactly that, you switch to SE relevance impacts as being the primary problem.
What will you say when you realize that sponsored posts use anchor text that is much MORE relevant than the average organic post that makes SE results less relevant with anchor text like “see this post” or “click here”. Go check your own posts for the relevenace between anchor text and site linked because I’ll probably use it as just one example of how organic relevance pales in comparison to market systems…
9:09 AM
Delete
Tim said…Good point, Dan. I’ve been trying to work through this argument in comments on other blogs and in a subsequent post on 6/13, recognizing Google’s proprietary right to alter their algorithm balanced against what the unintended consequences will be (link selling going underground, no disclosures).
Your comment was more clear and succinct that my babble, thanks! Can’t wait to read more about organic relevance vs. market systems.
9:45 AM
Popularity: 7% [?]
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
[…] And, it was Reported, as opposed to editorialized. Go figure. Catherine Seda at Entrepreneur manages to write a balanced here’s-the-good-and-the-bad article, while Forbes mangles it. […]