PPP Podcast Interview
I am getting paid for the following post:
Does disclosing that I am getting paid to write a post change the way people think of me? Would I be unethical if I did not disclose this information?
After listening to the Tech Crunch podcast interview this evening I now have a clearer understanding of the controversy surrounding the 3 month old PayPerPost. Apparently starting on day one of the launch of this company Tech Crunch has had major issues with PayPerPost. The core of the controversy is that paid bloggers are not required to disclose that they are being paid for blogging.
Before I comment about this issue I have to tell what lengths I went to to listen to this podcast. After trying to play the podcast on my extremely slow dialup and only getting to listen to 40 seconds of it, I asked my husband to play the podcast over the phone from his work so I could listen to it. So for roughly an hour I listen to an internet podcast over the phone. And I am really glad I did.
Now more than ever am I convinced that PayPerPost is paving the way for the next generation of internet marketing. The reason I say this is because it's a great idea that has a huge amount of potential. Plus there are large number of people that are offended by it. How many times have people been offended by change and then a few years later follow the leaders of the that change? Oveture to Google is a prime example mentioned on the podcast. As good as those companies are and the great things Google has done for internet marketing (particularly Adsense), is it going to last forever? Eventually there needs to be change and improvement. After a concept has been tapped out and abused over time there needs to come a new concept to change the flavor. Get ready people because blog advertising is the new ingredient in internet marketing.
The interviewer of the podcast was Michael Arrington of Tech Crunch. He was interviewing Ted Murphy, founder of PayPerPost and Josh Stein, a PayPerPost board observer. After reading the review Michael posted about PPP on it's launch day, I didn't know if this podcast interview was going to be a bashing interview. Michael did say "PayPerPost.com offers to sell your soul". Pretty strong words if you ask me. The interview was actually quite civil all except for the uncontrollable giggle that seemed to overtake Michael Arrington a few times. That was the only part of the interview I found unprofessional. Rob Hof from BusinessWeek was also being interviewed. Though he does not agree with the whole blogging for pay without disclosing payment, he did express his disagreements respectfully.
There are a few things I would like to point out about the controversy of being paid for blogging with out disclosure. One, it seems as though an established blogger with a large number of readers accomplished this because a certain amount of trust was gained from their readers. The trust relationship started somewhere between the lines of the bloggers posts. Not necessarily in the words themselves. A relationship whether established offline or online is done so because of the human connection. You relate to the writer which causes you to feel that you "know them" on some level. That being said if a trusted blogger decided to get paid to review a website/product/service that interests them without disclosing they are getting paid, has that caused them to be untrustworthy? That is a question that needs to be answered by the individual but I would ask you this. Why does it have to matter if the content doesn't change? Does it really have to change the relationship?
Secondly, what about the un heard of or new bloggers with very few readers, like me.
If readers and improved content is what they are seeking then the same principles will hold true-gaining trust by making connections and building relationships.
Lets also not forget that people don't have to check their brains at the door as soon as they enter a blog. If what you read you don't like, then don't read it whether it be paid for posts or not. As a PPP blogger we are not required to take any opp that does not truly interest us. I have never taken an opp that my grandma would be ashamed of. So my readers will at least know this. Every PPP opportunity that I give a review/opinion/buzz about results in true content. There are many opportunities that I have skipped because I do not agree with or believe in. My hope is that as I develop relationships and gain readership my readers would never have to worry that what I post about lacks truth or integrity, whether paid or unpaid.
The podcast interview also revealed the direction that Ted and the board members would like to see PPP head toward. Ted mentioned that possibly in the future a high ranking, high readership, high quality type blog might be able to get paid a very large amount of money for just one post. He specifically said $5000 for a post. It is becoming more and more clear to me that I need to improve on my own blogging,(content especially) to keep up with the direction this company is headed.
Lastly, I would like to ask this question. What is the difference between affiliate marketing practices and blogger marketing exactly. The practice of placing links that lead to payment in one way or another is not near a new concept. I can't say I see "if you buy something from this link I will get paid" on the posts that include these types of links. Yet, the tracking link reveals this secret. The only real difference I see is that you are guaranteed payment with PPP instead of hoping and wish someone will buy something.
I have probably spent close 3 hours putting this post together in my mind and on my blog. I did this because I have become outraged at this outrage and wanted my voice to be heard. I also did this because this is the type of opportunities that the PPP bloggers love to take. Giving us freedom to write what we want and how we want it. PPP is getting an almost 1200 word post when they only required 100, because they allowed this freedom.
So I will wrap up by saying, it's as though people have closed their minds to new possibilities. Instead of giving constructive criticism they say things like "selling your soul" and "unrepentant". On a few occasions I have accidentally written the words Tech Church instead of Tech Crunch but now I am thinking maybe the words fit. Tech Church- the Church of the Latter Day Bloggers (no offense to any Mormons).
Does disclosing that I am getting paid to write a post change the way people think of me? Would I be unethical if I did not disclose this information?
After listening to the Tech Crunch podcast interview this evening I now have a clearer understanding of the controversy surrounding the 3 month old PayPerPost. Apparently starting on day one of the launch of this company Tech Crunch has had major issues with PayPerPost. The core of the controversy is that paid bloggers are not required to disclose that they are being paid for blogging.
Before I comment about this issue I have to tell what lengths I went to to listen to this podcast. After trying to play the podcast on my extremely slow dialup and only getting to listen to 40 seconds of it, I asked my husband to play the podcast over the phone from his work so I could listen to it. So for roughly an hour I listen to an internet podcast over the phone. And I am really glad I did.
Now more than ever am I convinced that PayPerPost is paving the way for the next generation of internet marketing. The reason I say this is because it's a great idea that has a huge amount of potential. Plus there are large number of people that are offended by it. How many times have people been offended by change and then a few years later follow the leaders of the that change? Oveture to Google is a prime example mentioned on the podcast. As good as those companies are and the great things Google has done for internet marketing (particularly Adsense), is it going to last forever? Eventually there needs to be change and improvement. After a concept has been tapped out and abused over time there needs to come a new concept to change the flavor. Get ready people because blog advertising is the new ingredient in internet marketing.
The interviewer of the podcast was Michael Arrington of Tech Crunch. He was interviewing Ted Murphy, founder of PayPerPost and Josh Stein, a PayPerPost board observer. After reading the review Michael posted about PPP on it's launch day, I didn't know if this podcast interview was going to be a bashing interview. Michael did say "PayPerPost.com offers to sell your soul". Pretty strong words if you ask me. The interview was actually quite civil all except for the uncontrollable giggle that seemed to overtake Michael Arrington a few times. That was the only part of the interview I found unprofessional. Rob Hof from BusinessWeek was also being interviewed. Though he does not agree with the whole blogging for pay without disclosing payment, he did express his disagreements respectfully.
There are a few things I would like to point out about the controversy of being paid for blogging with out disclosure. One, it seems as though an established blogger with a large number of readers accomplished this because a certain amount of trust was gained from their readers. The trust relationship started somewhere between the lines of the bloggers posts. Not necessarily in the words themselves. A relationship whether established offline or online is done so because of the human connection. You relate to the writer which causes you to feel that you "know them" on some level. That being said if a trusted blogger decided to get paid to review a website/product/service that interests them without disclosing they are getting paid, has that caused them to be untrustworthy? That is a question that needs to be answered by the individual but I would ask you this. Why does it have to matter if the content doesn't change? Does it really have to change the relationship?
Secondly, what about the un heard of or new bloggers with very few readers, like me.
If readers and improved content is what they are seeking then the same principles will hold true-gaining trust by making connections and building relationships.
Lets also not forget that people don't have to check their brains at the door as soon as they enter a blog. If what you read you don't like, then don't read it whether it be paid for posts or not. As a PPP blogger we are not required to take any opp that does not truly interest us. I have never taken an opp that my grandma would be ashamed of. So my readers will at least know this. Every PPP opportunity that I give a review/opinion/buzz about results in true content. There are many opportunities that I have skipped because I do not agree with or believe in. My hope is that as I develop relationships and gain readership my readers would never have to worry that what I post about lacks truth or integrity, whether paid or unpaid.
The podcast interview also revealed the direction that Ted and the board members would like to see PPP head toward. Ted mentioned that possibly in the future a high ranking, high readership, high quality type blog might be able to get paid a very large amount of money for just one post. He specifically said $5000 for a post. It is becoming more and more clear to me that I need to improve on my own blogging,(content especially) to keep up with the direction this company is headed.
Lastly, I would like to ask this question. What is the difference between affiliate marketing practices and blogger marketing exactly. The practice of placing links that lead to payment in one way or another is not near a new concept. I can't say I see "if you buy something from this link I will get paid" on the posts that include these types of links. Yet, the tracking link reveals this secret. The only real difference I see is that you are guaranteed payment with PPP instead of hoping and wish someone will buy something.
I have probably spent close 3 hours putting this post together in my mind and on my blog. I did this because I have become outraged at this outrage and wanted my voice to be heard. I also did this because this is the type of opportunities that the PPP bloggers love to take. Giving us freedom to write what we want and how we want it. PPP is getting an almost 1200 word post when they only required 100, because they allowed this freedom.
So I will wrap up by saying, it's as though people have closed their minds to new possibilities. Instead of giving constructive criticism they say things like "selling your soul" and "unrepentant". On a few occasions I have accidentally written the words Tech Church instead of Tech Crunch but now I am thinking maybe the words fit. Tech Church- the Church of the Latter Day Bloggers (no offense to any Mormons).
posted by Mona at 10:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home