Geek News Central

My view on PayPerPost

In GNC #316 Todd asks our opinions of Mark Hopkin’s post on Mashable that questions whether IZEA is evil or not ,and I wanted to share my opinion with you.

PayPerPost is a shortcut that damages the future potential of Blogging.  Bloggers that participate in this type of marketing get extra money now, but limit the money they could get in the future, and the money available to everyone else.  In essence it is a selfish act and “Advanced Monetization” is an euphemism in the class of “friendly fire”.  Let me expand.

I do not mean this as a criticism of Mr Hopkin’s views, this is not a simple topic with an obviously correct answer.  In these cases different people will put different weights on different facts which will alter their own personal conclusion.  Unfortunately human nature often drives us to subconsciously select the parts of the story that support a position that benefits ourselves.  Some of Mark’s points are valid to a degree.  

However three of his points are misguided

Not only is there not enough information for “the market” to make an educated choice, to promote products without disclosure actually subverts the possibility of a free market to create the correct balance.  The whole PayPerPost paradigm offers incentives to game the system for quick personal gain without consideration of effect it has on others.

This matters because of the foundation that Blogging (and following that PodCasting and video) is based on.  It is a raw and honest expression form closer to a diary entry than a magazine article.  Because people have shown their vulnerability, been willing to make public mistakes, been honest in their opinions a level of trust has built for the medium.  The opportunity is there for this to continue, and to build, and to be the major cornerstone of media.  This is the potential prize if we maintain our integrity, but it will not yield explosive growth.  It may grow in explosive spurts, but will take time.

The path of the hidden ad would bring the blog back to the level of the TV advertorial and is old media thinking.  I have posted before on the difference between good and bad marketing, and almost by definition a company that needs to make their ads seem like real news or opinion are trying to fool their audience.  If you play this game you are complicit in the lie. 

This is not Chicken Little, the sky is not going to fall in if a few small blogs do this.  There are more than enough dodgy blogs out there already and this has not killed anything.  The problem comes if this gets large enough to be considered normal, or if well known sites that have built trust with their audience start accepting covert endorsements.  If the audience feels they are being lied to they will cease to consume.  This will reduce the audience, reduce the marketing clout and the blogger will be ultimately worse off.  If you want to understand how this can happen read and understand this.

No matter what justification you give, posting an advertisement or PR release without disclosure would be considered (correctly) by your audience as a lie.  People don’t like to be lied to, and are better than you think at detecting it.  You will gain in the short term but it will harm you more when you are eventually discovered.  If enough bloggers engage in deceptive advertising practices it will negatively effect all bloggers.

Exit mobile version