"Marketing's New Rage: Brands Sponsoring Influential Bloggers"
That's the headline of a recent article at WWD.com which has to do with brands sponsoring bloggers.
"Barneys New York, Gap, Coach and other big brands are collaborating with bloggers to create new and controversial forms of advertising for a more social age. They might invite a blogger to guest blog, sponsor a series of daily outfit posts featuring their product, create or request a video of the blogger talking about the brand or wearing the product or even ask the blogger to design for the brand."
There's nothing "new" about it. This form of sponsored blogging has been going on for years. It just used to be called pay-per-post, that is until some influential bloggers joined the ruckus (which made it seem okay for many), then Forrester, in their infinite wisdom, white-washed the whole thing by dubbing it "sponsored conversations." Call it what you will, you can't get a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Of course, never mind me. I'm the product of the Jason Calacanis school of blogging (I used to write for Weblogs Inc in its heyday.). Jason reinforced in us that editorial and advertorial do not mix, and I have tried to live by that motto ever since.
Quite honestly, I've tried to remain moot on this subject for the past couple of years, hoping that the whole thing would just go away. But, here it is again, so I'm speaking my mind.
Some of you will say it's a moot point now that the FTC has weighed in with full-disclosure guidelines. Perhaps, but I can't get away from the belief that what is really at stake is an abrogation and subsequent erosion of trust. My character and the reputation I've built is all I have. To lose your trust would be a death-knell.
On the other hand, if someone were to dangle a fat check in front of my face in exchange for a few posts, would I bite? (I may be a purist, but I'm a pragmatic one.) Though the likelihood of that ever happening is slim to none, still, if it ever did, I'd like to believe I could courteously say "No, thank you."
So, am I too much of a tight-a**? Holier than thou? What's your take? Feel free to disagree.
Paul as I get your intent. The reality of the world is everything is advertising, everything is influence and persuasion. This very post is your attempt to influence the reader in one direction.
I think the reader can decide if a post has gone over the line. Which in many cases it does. Often times so much that the post is worthless.
That is what I find way tired. Posts on the web that are so blatant in commerciality that it offers no redeeming value. Let the reader beware and then the Blogger beware that the reader is indeed judging you harshly.If the blogger cares then he/she will maintain that proper integrity depending on their intent and purpose.
Tim, as always, yours is the voice of reason. Thank you for weighing in.
Fantastic post, Paul, and couldn't agree more. I don't see anything wrong with advertising or marketing per se, but at least make sure it's fully disclosed.
Danny Brown wrote a post yesterday on the topic, if you're interested – seems he feels the same way as you do.
http://dannybrown.me/2010/08/31/why-affiliate-mar…
Thanks for a great post, looking forward to reading more from you.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Janice and for the link to Danny's post. I'll go one further just to tell you how tightly-bound to my editorial/advertorial ethic — I won't even put affiliate links in my posts, disclosed or not. That's what the sidebar is for IMO.
Paul, I'm a blogger from the middle east and i have been blogging since a year now and believe me i couldn't care less about advertising for products by writing for them on my blog. I do that for free for the brands that i believe are successful. Local brands i mean.
I go to the place if i like it i write it and if i don't like it i don't write. It's as simple as that.
Good for you Aalhasani. That's the true spirit of blogging. Shoot from the hip and speak from the heart (and head).
Very good thoughts, Paul. I wrestled with this issue myself as I considered an opportunity for sponsored blogging. Like you, I decided that it's not what I want to use my blog for. Do I then become self-righteous about those that do? Nope. As a purist, I might argue you're prostituting your blog by using it as a platform to persuade for a client. But writing persuasive copy for clients is what I do as a copywriter anyway. So can I really condemn someone else just because they use their blog as the vehicle? Not me. Also, providing for my family is my number one priority. If I felt sponsored blogging was an avenue to accomplish that when other avenues were closed, I'd do so in heartbeat. Or work at McDonalds. Hmmm, McDonalds provides meals.
Some of you say its a moot point as the FTC has weighed on the guidelines for full disclosure. Maybe, but I can not get out of the belief that what is really at stake is an erosion of confidence and subsequent repeal.
Pingback: Walgreens Using Paid Social Media to Promote Prescription Plan | Social Commerce Today