Comments on: PayPerPost: A Cancer on the Blogosphere, or Merely Semi-Sleazy? http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/ Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:34:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: seamonkeyrodeo » Archive » Blog Money Influence http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-16395 seamonkeyrodeo » Archive » Blog Money Influence Tue, 17 Oct 2006 23:21:01 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-16395 [...] The Ugly: PayPerPost If you’ve been living under a rock for the last few weeks you may have missed the discussion of PayPerPost’s business model that’s been spreading like kudzu: just to pick some names you might recognize, Doc Searls, Dan Gillmor, Jason Calcanis, Jeremy Wagstaff, Dave Winer, Robert Scoble, and Michael Arrington have all weighed in of late. Or you could just check Technorati. [...] [...] The Ugly: PayPerPost If you’ve been living under a rock for the last few weeks you may have missed the discussion of PayPerPost’s business model that’s been spreading like kudzu: just to pick some names you might recognize, Doc Searls, Dan Gillmor, Jason Calcanis, Jeremy Wagstaff, Dave Winer, Robert Scoble, and Michael Arrington have all weighed in of late. Or you could just check Technorati. [...]

]]> By: Evil Genius Chronicles » PayPerPost and the Race to the Bottom http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-16239 Evil Genius Chronicles » PayPerPost and the Race to the Bottom Tue, 17 Oct 2006 01:50:46 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-16239 [...] Later: I wrote the above before I knew that this subject was such a tempest in a chamber pot. I was talking only about the specfic scumbaggy case above, but Doc Searls hates this idea in any form. I don’t know that I agree with his take or that of Jason Calcanis. I’m closer to where Dan Gillmor came down. Really, how is taking PayPerPost money any different from doing something like the Darren Rowse approach of blogging a subject specifically because it will generate good Adsense revenue? How is this different from Hugh MacLeod shilling for nice suits and wine? Why is one more cynical than the other? [...] [...] Later: I wrote the above before I knew that this subject was such a tempest in a chamber pot. I was talking only about the specfic scumbaggy case above, but Doc Searls hates this idea in any form. I don’t know that I agree with his take or that of Jason Calcanis. I’m closer to where Dan Gillmor came down. Really, how is taking PayPerPost money any different from doing something like the Darren Rowse approach of blogging a subject specifically because it will generate good Adsense revenue? How is this different from Hugh MacLeod shilling for nice suits and wine? Why is one more cynical than the other? [...]

]]> By: THE IDENTITY GANG / Get a real job http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-16184 THE IDENTITY GANG / Get a real job Mon, 16 Oct 2006 16:28:07 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-16184 [...] Dan Gillmor on Jason Calacanis on PayPerPost: I don¹t trust companies that try to fool people. [...] [...] Dan Gillmor on Jason Calacanis on PayPerPost: I don¹t trust companies that try to fool people. [...]

]]> By: Dan Gillmor http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15772 Dan Gillmor Fri, 13 Oct 2006 23:15:41 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15772 Seth, no I hadn't seen Nick's piece. Very very interesting piece. I'm not sure that disclosures remove the problem in every case, but at least they give the reader the opportunity to reflect more on the source. I agree that if VCs are giving academics $$$, there's a problem especially when we don't know about it. Seth, no I hadn’t seen Nick’s piece. Very very interesting piece.

I’m not sure that disclosures remove the problem in every case, but at least they give the reader the opportunity to reflect more on the source. I agree that if VCs are giving academics $$$, there’s a problem especially when we don’t know about it.

]]> By: Seth Finkelstein http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15474 Seth Finkelstein Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:33:27 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15474 Dan(G), my argument is that for anything beyond small stuff, transparency is woefully insufficient at best, and can be an excuse at worst (as in, sure, A. Lister is set up to make a zillion dollars from XYZ, but he's *said* that, so, no problem). The arrangements where venture capitalists give a piece of a deal to academics strike me as *far* more of a problem than the microscams of cheap PR. The reaction seems to me to have an element of attempting to gain a moral high ground which isn't so evident (and inversely, and somewhat amusingly, the counter-argument is a kind of claim that big crooks justify small crooks, everyone's got some sort of hustle going on, etc.) Related, have you seen this post? It may be a bit too narrowly focused, but I think it brings up other aspects of the issues here: <a href="http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/10/a_glass_house.php" rel="nofollow"> http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/10/a_glass_house.php</a> Dan(G), my argument is that for anything beyond small stuff, transparency is woefully insufficient at best, and can be an excuse at worst (as in, sure, A. Lister is set up to make a zillion dollars from XYZ, but he’s *said* that, so, no problem). The arrangements where venture capitalists give a piece of a deal to academics strike me as *far* more of a problem than the microscams of cheap PR. The reaction seems to me to have an element of attempting to gain a moral high ground which isn’t so evident (and inversely, and somewhat amusingly, the counter-argument is a kind of claim that big crooks justify small crooks, everyone’s got some sort of hustle going on, etc.)

Related, have you seen this post? It may be a bit too narrowly focused, but I think it brings up other aspects of the issues here:

http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/10/a_glass_house.php

]]> By: Dan... http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15418 Dan... Thu, 12 Oct 2006 02:32:22 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15418 My bad. If you believe that payola goes away if the payee has to work a bit to receive it or because they also get paid by an employer then we're not on the same page -- it's all payola. My points have nothing to do with defending payola. In fact, I am drawing a broader definition of payola than you are -- including the most prevalent, lucrative forms used by the elites such as free books, free passes, free product, exclusive PR etc. that are worth thousands of dollars. More than that, I am making clear that in a multi-cultural online world built on free expression you will find people drawing the line at a variety of places -- and the elites typically have more power/influence to distract from their own practices. I'd be amazed if we disagree on that point. I'd love to cooperate on a long-term disclosure solution that scales from personal chat blogs to personal/biz blogs to probloggers, but we'd need to agree that citizen blogger freedom is fundamental and all forms of compensation are fair game to disclose. I've already reached out by email and hope we can do something together. My bad. If you believe that payola goes away if the payee has to work a bit to receive it or because they also get paid by an employer then we’re not on the same page — it’s all payola. My points have nothing to do with defending payola. In fact, I am drawing a broader definition of payola than you are — including the most prevalent, lucrative forms used by the elites such as free books, free passes, free product, exclusive PR etc. that are worth thousands of dollars.

More than that, I am making clear that in a multi-cultural online world built on free expression you will find people drawing the line at a variety of places — and the elites typically have more power/influence to distract from their own practices. I’d be amazed if we disagree on that point.

I’d love to cooperate on a long-term disclosure solution that scales from personal chat blogs to personal/biz blogs to probloggers, but we’d need to agree that citizen blogger freedom is fundamental and all forms of compensation are fair game to disclose. I’ve already reached out by email and hope we can do something together.

]]> By: Dan Gillmor http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15395 Dan Gillmor Wed, 11 Oct 2006 23:54:41 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15395 Dan, mob rule has nothing to do with anything we're discussing here. Your comparison of book reviews to what your client, PayPerPost, is doing is not a solid one. The time commitment to read a book is considerably greater than mentioning a product in a blog item, for one thing. I don't regard getting galley proofs of a new book as compensation of any kind. My compensation when I wrote reviews was getting paid -- by the publication -- for the time it took to read the book and write the review. What's troublesome is the idea that it's fine to tout products for money without disclosing the financial arrangement. Defend the practice if you want, but we're far, far from being on the same page. Dan, mob rule has nothing to do with anything we’re discussing here.

Your comparison of book reviews to what your client, PayPerPost, is doing is not a solid one. The time commitment to read a book is considerably greater than mentioning a product in a blog item, for one thing. I don’t regard getting galley proofs of a new book as compensation of any kind. My compensation when I wrote reviews was getting paid — by the publication — for the time it took to read the book and write the review.

What’s troublesome is the idea that it’s fine to tout products for money without disclosing the financial arrangement. Defend the practice if you want, but we’re far, far from being on the same page.

]]> By: Contentious » Transparency vs. Payola: Weighing Risks http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15360 Contentious » Transparency vs. Payola: Weighing Risks Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:50:41 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15360 [...] Over at the Center for Citizen Media blog, I’ve joined an interesting conversation concerning the thorny issue of payola in online media. See: PayPerPost: A Cancer on the Blogosphere, or Merely Semi-Sleazy? by Dan Gillmor. [...] [...] Over at the Center for Citizen Media blog, I’ve joined an interesting conversation concerning the thorny issue of payola in online media. See: PayPerPost: A Cancer on the Blogosphere, or Merely Semi-Sleazy? by Dan Gillmor. [...]

]]> By: Amy Gahran http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15352 Amy Gahran Wed, 11 Oct 2006 18:58:30 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15352 Personally I think in all aspects of conversational media, whenever you're not completely transparent, it'll come back to haunt you. It's nearly impossible to hide any relevant information, and it's too easy for someone else to say things about you (true or false) and have that be findable online. It comes down to: Know yourself, and know your core community. What are you willing to risk, and what are they willing to accept? I figure if you're going to stick your neck out and start publishing online, complete transparency is the safest strategy. Any level of obfuscation or concealment carries risks. Personally, I think it's up to each individual to decide which risks they're willing to take. Payola entails risks. So does blogging under a pseudonym. Or accepting a press pass. It's all tradeoffs. But in my book, if you're not transparent, you're asking to be "outed" at some point -- and that's rarely fun or convenient. IMHO, of course :-) - Amy Gahran Personally I think in all aspects of conversational media, whenever you’re not completely transparent, it’ll come back to haunt you. It’s nearly impossible to hide any relevant information, and it’s too easy for someone else to say things about you (true or false) and have that be findable online.

It comes down to: Know yourself, and know your core community. What are you willing to risk, and what are they willing to accept?

I figure if you’re going to stick your neck out and start publishing online, complete transparency is the safest strategy. Any level of obfuscation or concealment carries risks. Personally, I think it’s up to each individual to decide which risks they’re willing to take. Payola entails risks. So does blogging under a pseudonym. Or accepting a press pass.

It’s all tradeoffs. But in my book, if you’re not transparent, you’re asking to be “outed” at some point — and that’s rarely fun or convenient.

IMHO, of course :-)

- Amy Gahran

]]> By: Paul Elosegui http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15345 Paul Elosegui Wed, 11 Oct 2006 17:42:48 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/10/09/payperpost-a-cancer-on-the-blogosphere-or-merely-semi-sleazy/#comment-15345 Social spam is worse than email spam Social spam is worse than email spam

]]>