I've been thinking about this whole "getting paid for blogging" thing. It seems unethical, generally, to me, unless it is clear to your readers that you are getting paid for blogs that you write. At WHY magazine, our editorial and advertising are demarcated clearly, because we feel an obligation to our readers to offer content that is bias-free, so that when we say we like ABC Company, you know that we do -- we really, really do!
Google AdSense seems all right (as you can see), because it's clear to the reader that there are ads on the page, and those AdSense ads are so ubiquitous and universally understood that no explanation is really necessary.
But how do the paid posts work? Do bloggers have to write positive reviews? Is truthful and well-written enough? And is there a way to offer full disclosure to my readers while, at the same time, getting paid for reviews of products/sites I would write anyway?
It seems silly to leave myself out of potential money-making avenues when there is a way to do it in which both blogger and reader wins. This is a recession, after all.
I'm going to do a little research and get back to you...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Please get back to us after your research - very interested to read your take on sponsored posting, as I have a major post brewing on the topic.
I'm also in the same boat as you, with pretty much the same questions.
The disclosure thing I think we're all okay with. Even though these services say that reviews don't have to be positive, I would find it hard to believe you'd receive many more review requests if you tended to be more negative than positive - that's my major sticking point.
The other is in not overdoing the reviews on your site (1 every 15 posts sounds about right to me) and being fully open to your readership.
I'm actually doing a sponsored review in the next 3 days, so check how I go about it. :-)
Post a Comment