There is a fantastic blog controversy raging on the Internet. A company called PayPerPost has started paying bloggers to bloggertise.
What is PayPerPost
A blogger interested in making a few bucks can create an account with PayPerPost and then filter through the list of opportunities. Each opportunity lists who the advertiser is, how many words need to be written, the amount to be paid to the blogger upon posting and if the tone should be positive, negative or neutral. The blogger is not required to disclose that the post is an advertisement, but they are often required to include pre-defined link and sometimes a picture.
The opportunities that bloggers can choose from include things like video phones, neck ties, vacation locations and many, many more. The price paid for a posts ranges from $2.50 up to $10.00 and there is no limit to the number of posts a blogger can do. The only requirement is that the blogger has been blogging for 90 days prior to signing up with PayPerPost.
Blogging about the advertisers product does create buzz in the blogosphere, but the real value seems to be in gaming the search engines. The search engines look at the words that are actually linked and then the destination of the link to determine some authority. For example, in PayPerPost’s opportunities exists an opportunity to be paid $10 to blog about the PayPerPost’s crew as seen on The Today Show. In the opportunity, bloggers are asked to link to the blog post the crew did about the appearance, but the words they needed to link were "Guerilla Marketing." Now, when you search Google on Guerilla Marketing they show up as the fifth result (I know it’s spelled wrong but that’s how they spelled it). Another example is the search for Ninja Costume. The number one result returned is an advertiser on PayPerPost.
What is the Controversy
Because PayPerPost does not require full disclosure, many "A-list" bloggers have come out to call PayPerPost and their bloggers evil, scum and the scourge of the earth. To quote Jay Allen:
Pay per post is one of the most vicious and vile economic schemes to cast its shadow over online publishing. Anyone who perpetuates such a system deserves a public stoning (even if they don’t say "Jehovah"). You either pay online publishers for who and what they are, or you keep your wallet out of the game. The Internet already has enough spam; we don’t need bloggers generating it for commission.
Jason Calacanus, who made millions of dollars by paying bloggers to blog, is adamantly opposed to PayPerPost’s model. The difference being that Calacanus paid bloggers to blog about niche topics and then sold advertising on these blogs. The line that separates journalist from advertiser existed in his model. PayPerPost’s model at best blurs this line – at worst, they erase it completely.
My initial reaction was not as strong as Michael Arrington’s, Jason Calacanus’ or Jay Allen’s. However, after talking with co-Horse Power author, Robert Payne, he made a point that changed my mind. He hypothesized that if he read a positive review of a pair of skis on a blog that prompted him to buy, he would be very upset to find out that the review was driven purely off of this bloggertisement. Especially if he found that the reviewer had never even tried the skis. This made me reflect on past purchasing decisions I have made because of blog and forum posts.
I think much of the controversy goes away if PayPerPost were to force bloggers to disclose these bloggertisements with each post. I’m not sure who would keep reading a blog that posted nothing but bloggertisements, but at least it would be transparent and honest.
