February 1st, 2007
PayPerPosts: You're going to have to live with them
Jeff Jarvis at BuzzMachine notes how he slammed PayPerPost, which pays bloggers to promote products. He takes PayPerPost to task for not mandating disclosure earlier and being a murky on the topic.
All of those criticisms are valid. However, the blogosphere is going to have to get used to these guys. As I reported Tuesday, PayPerPost has a new graphical disclosure bar that may ease some concerns.
But the most notable PayPerPost announcement next week is going to be tools for advertisers that will allow them to target top 100 bloggers. Don't think a top blogger will do a PayPerPost for $5 to $10? You're probably right. How about $2,000? Then the equation changes a bit. One sponsored PayPerPost a week can make a big difference and someone will pull it off without hurting his or her credibility.
Jarvis adds in his post that the advertising relationship is murky in PayPerPost blogs. He refers back to his journalism ethics–which I share. However, as we've seen repeatedly journalism ethics and blogger ethics are two different things. The latter is still being formed.
Bottom line (to me at least): PayPerPost's business isn't all that different than paid search results. In the beginning, there's consternation. Then acceptance. Then profits. PayPerPost's latest tools may just make it more acceptable.
Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and Editorial Director of ZDNet sister site TechRepublic. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.
Subscribe to Between the Lines via Email alerts or RSS.
