In an attempt to level the rough edges that popped up with unethical ’sponsored posts’, the new policy makes it mandatory for bloggers to disclose details of their payments in written on the blogger’s web journal.

The policy change made by PayPerPost last week is a significant move making it more effective, however, still it remained in the hands of bloggers whether to disclose the payment details or not. But, now they’ll have to empty their purse on the table.

All of you reading this post would agree with the US Federal Trade Commission that openly questions the practice because it’s deceptive and violates consumer-protection laws.

David Sifry, founder of the blog search site Technorati, praised PayPerPost’s move:

Overall, this is an encouraging and long-awaited change. I think that people have learned that without trust, all posts become suspect. ... By encouraging honesty and transparency in sponsored posts, PayPerPost adds (some) clarity to the waters they muddied when they launched six months ago.

Doesn’t matter PayPerPost has changed it’s policy, but it will never melt the unscrupulous motive associated with its launch. It undoubtedly routed the main purpose on which blogs are based. Now who will believe them, what if they’re still paid and do not disclose their identity? The neutral or false reviews would cheat innumerable consumers. Where is the trust factor behind that ’self expression’?

It’s strange that, though we’re finally moving in the right direction, it was done only when FTC somehow realized that it’s wrong and jumped into it. It’s also surprising that the blogosphere kept mum for so long. The full disclosure model would bring transparency, but now, apparently, we don’t care about that, we’re not concerned about what PayPerPost or it’s so-called ‘transparent’ reviews instore for us and that too despite the fact that the company now presses on word-of-mouth (WOM) or buzz marketing relationships it holds.

At disclosurepolicy.org, they clearly mention:

Because advertisers are offering bloggers payment or gifts to create content about specific products or services, the blogger’s interest in the product or service may be in part the financial gain. Whether the blogger would have included content in his/her blog about the product or service without gift or payment, the fact is the blogger is receiving payment for certain content.

By disclosing the purpose of a blog, bloggers are letting readers know more about the information they’ll be reviewing. Bloggers retain the freedom to write original content, as well as select which advertisers they will represent in exchange for gifts or money. Any ethical concerns will remain where they’ve always been - on the individual level. Because it is a blogger’s freedom to select which topics will bring them payment, he/she remains responsible for his/her own reputation.

Nevertheless, the mission of PayPerPost - ‘the top marketplace connecting bloggers and marketers’ - caters marketers, advertisers and bloggers who’re here to make money and not for READERS. Readers do not have any place here whatsoever. They’ve even increased the minimum price per post by one dollar to five dollars per post. Now, where is the ’self expression’, I’ll call it pure advertising.

Flogs rot and we can smell it out easily

Now coming back to ‘honesty and transparency’, we encounter ‘flogs’ or fake blogs every now and then. Let’s take the latest case of blog - alliwantforxmasisapsp.com, supported by Sony and Zipatoni.

According to Bulldog Reporter/Peppercom business blog survey, ‘blogs are not a credible source of information!’ However, those in this business already know that it’s very easy to smell whether the coverage is truly transparent and authentic or not.

Cymfony’s Jim Naill comments:

The blog world is a very open, self-policing and pretty unforgiving world when you try to trick them with things like this. I don’t understand why marketers, after all the different examples of this, don’t get the message that you can’t get away with faking these kinds of blogs.

As Sally Falkow says, companies should learn the rules of ‘corporate citizenship’ and realize that they just can’t twist the new media for their gains and can’t get out of the veritable clutches of social media. They’d simply end up paying a heavy price.

Here I’d also like to come back to the Digg scam that surfaced a couple of weeks back where one of its top user was caught posting, rather advertising, for money and was later banned and reinstated after an apology. However, social networks like digg are too strong, apparently because of their cult contributors, though not foolproof, and any such marketing gimmick will be instantly buried.

Still, these incidents have undoubtedly put a question mark on the transparency, making it bit opaque. No, we cannot wipe out the practice, but at least we can keep our eyes open.

Thanks: Sally Falkow