PayPerPost article

[SoonerGirl]

Bloggers Must Disclose Paid Posts Interesting...although it says that bloggers must disclose accepting payment "either in the write-up or in a general disclosure policy on the blogger's Web journal", so I'm sure all disclosures will end up down in the fine, fine, fine print.



-SG

[A.N.Onym]

Ya, down in the footer, where they belong

No, really, I'd rather tell me readers I am paid to review, but not paid for my opinion. I don't think hiding this stuff is a honest thing to do to my readers.

[eKstreme]

Honesty is the key, and the distinction between reviews and opinions is a subtle but important one. Stating it up-front or in a separate page might make the review more accepted.

Pierre

[Robert Paulson]

Interesting. I don't recall ever seeing ads for Air Jordans claim that Michael Jorden was compensated for his appearance in the commericials or for the use of his likeness in the logo. Or the disclaimer that Larry Bird and MJ both didn't sit around eating french fries and making impossible shots, on camera, for money (feeling old today ). You kinda already knew that, didn't you? And when you heard "I was not paid for this endorsement", you thought "yeah, but you probably were fellated a few times and got lots of free product", right?

It seems pretty odd that there would be a law about this - you build trust or you don't with your blog and how you run it. If you lose trust you'll lose readers. That's the biggest punishment of all, if you make your living from your blog. You don't need lawmakers to jump in onm that.

And here's the funniest part - about two weeks ago, for the first time I got paid to put up a blog entry I didn't write, and I was so excited I just copied and pasted and happily stuffed the cash into my Paypal pocket. Didn't even think about warning readers (this offer came out of the blue - like pennies from heaven - who questions that?). Looks like I better put up a disclaimer (way down low, in the fine, fine print ). My wife probably wouldn't be ok with the other form of 'payment'.

[earlpearl]

I think I saw that Donna identified a paid blog entry not to long ago. It happened to be about some tools that I think are excellent. Her mention was right out in the open and anything but fad ed nor was it at the bottom of the page.

Certainly, in that case it didn't matter to me considering both the source and what she was blogging about.

I suppose its a reasonable consumer protection.

Dave

[dazzlindonna]

Over the years, I've had a ton of people email me and ask me to review some seo tool or something, and most of the time, I would (for free). It gave me something to blog about for one thing, without me having to rack my brain, and it also was of interest to the readers. So I figure I've earned the right to get paid every now and then for a review, and I'll continue to also do free reviews when I want. Either way, I'll state my opinion of the product, good or bad, and money doesn't play into it. I don't mind disclosing the payment, although I have to also agree that it's kinda weird considering all of the celebrity endorsements that have inundated us for decades (as Robert Paulson brought up). But Dave's point is well made. I think (hope) that over the years, my straightforwardness has come through on my blog, and I assume people will know that I'm telling it like it is - paid or not. But I imagine there's probably a million or so bloggers out there who may not have that same level of trust because they just don't care one way or another. So, I can see how it could be useful. If I stumbled upon a blog from someone I didn't have any kind of trust relationship with, I might want to be reassured that the review I'm reading is an honest opinion - paid or not. Of course, who's to say whether I could believe that or not. I dunno. I think the big bru-ha-hah is a little silly, but whatever....

[earlpearl]

Hehe. Talk about "trust rank". yeah. paid or not, time and experience tells me I'd trust Donna's comments....but would I trust everyone else....nah!

You earn it over time.

[skitzzo]

I recently did a paid review of a product as a post as well in SEOR's blog, and mentioned the fact that it was a paid review right off the bat. Personally I'll review most any product etc that I am asked to, however, I won't just rubber stamp a good review. In fact, I go into most things more than a bit skeptical so a good review is going to either A) be well earned or B) cost you a LOT more money than you're willing to pay for it .

Personally, I think this method of advertising is brilliant and I will be using it shortly. From a blog owner's perspective, it gives you a chance to earn more in one post than you might in an entire day from adsense or YPN earnings.

Now, it probably does give the SE's a hard time but hey, that's their job right?

[jadibones]

Originally Posted by skitzzo

I recently did a paid review of a product as a post as well in SEOR's...

Funny, I reviewed that product too . I've been offered 3 reviews so far on reviewme.com, but I have only accepted 2 of them. If it's a bad product, I'd just rather not review it at all. Like Donna, in most cases, I'd probably do it for free anyway.

[eKstreme]

I feel so sad now: no one's asked me to review stuff

Oh well, I might update my review of ReviewMe and explain very politely how it sucks for the reviewers in this respect.

Pierre