MarketingVOX gets it wrong, too.
Thanks you for visiting. Please consider subscribing to the RSS feed.
MarketingVOX posted the news about PPP receiving $7M additional VC funding, but managed to get in an incorrect assertion when it said that PPP has received criticism because of
“Its seeming violation of the trust between blogger and reader - trust based on transparency and openness…”
See, that’s just the thing: PPP requires disclosure by its bloggers. This is transparency. This is openness. Driving paid-post brokers underground would be a step backwards to a time when deals were cut under the table with only the top bloggers to get the word out about new products, services, and websites. A time when the trust between a blogger and reader was abused because the reader was never aware of a post being a commercial.
When did blogs receive some special status as sanctuaries from commerce? A blog is a website with content is updated frequently. Sometimes the content is personal. Sometimes the content is commercial. Just like the rest of the web. Making it and keeping it open and transparent is what readers want.
The critics of paid posts want to treat blog readers like children. They act like the nannies of the blogosphere, telling the rest of us what we can and can’t write about, what is worthy and unworthy of being read.
Why not let the marketplace decide?
If paid posts are a bad idea, the market will tell us soon enough. Advertisers won’t pay for them and bloggers won’t write them if audiences go away. The only reason for the nannies to oppose brokers like PPP & ReviewMe is that these companies disrupt current advertising business models, creating more competition (and many, many more competitors) - nothing more, nothing less.
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.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment