Paying bloggers for coverage: a good idea?
In social media, you can buy a Twitter background, or get your name into an iPhone app, or slather yourself all over a YouTube clip. But it's all fun and games until you whisper the phrase "sponsored post." Companies paying bloggers for coverage remains a taboo in many circles, as research firm Forrester learned this week after publishing a report called "Add Sponsored Conversations to Your Toolbox." The $795 write-up (which admittedly I haven't paid to read) encourages companies to consider buying up positive coverage from respected bloggers. ReadWriteWeb responded by calling the practice "a dangerous and unsavory path for new media and advertisers to go down." (I agree, though I find it strange coming from a blog that features sponsored posts.) As Brian points out on Adweek.com, this paid-blogging approach is often recommended for smaller, "low-buzz" brands like mufflers or batteries. And yet the case studies usually focus on companies like Disney and Kmart. Personally, I think there's nothing wrong with giving bloggers free samples, even if the products are pricey. But when there's a direct quid pro quo for coverage, you've got a recipe for eroded credibility on both sides. That said, I know plenty of hardworking bloggers who subsist on paid reviews and other sponsored projects. It's not a clear-cut issue, but I do know one thing: If the folks at Forrester are serious about their stance, they should have tried to pay guys like me to cover the report. But if you notice, they didn't have to. Photo: voxeros on Flickr. —Posted by David Griner |
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Unfortunately, this is no different than traditional PR. There is credibility to be lost, and I'm sure blogs are headed towards that direction if agencies start including this in every online media plan they propose.
Posted by: rabram | Mar 3, 2009 10:07:43 AM
Well, corporations control the mainstream media so why shouldn't bloggers be bribed, oops, I mean lobbied as well.
Optimistically pessimistic,
Unconcerned Citizen
Posted by: Unconcerned Citizen | Mar 3, 2009 11:08:55 AM
I think it's ok to pay as long as the blog can say what they want about the product (you can't pay to guarantee a positive review) and the blog discloses that it's writing a paid review. If readers see that a blog only writes positive paid reviews, their credibility (and thus, future revenue potential) will decrease, so there's a natural push to stay credible.
Posted by: Cory O'Brien | Mar 3, 2009 12:30:19 PM
Responding to Cory: I ethically agree with what you said. One problem, though... What you mentioned would only work in an ideal world. What can very well happen is companies can pay for a positive review for themselves, or they can pay for negative reviews about a competitor. Blog readers would see both kinds of reviews and assume the blog is credible. No one would know the truth if they kept a tight poker hand.
As for not guaranteeing a positive review, that just wouldn't happen in many cases. Why pay for what can potentially hurt your company? Companies or agencies would rather sneak a few more bills out of their pocket, treat bloggers to a fancy dinner or some nifty-but-useless gift to put on their desk, and pat them on the back after the positive review was written.
Posted by: rabram | Mar 3, 2009 1:03:13 PM
Re: Rabram: I guess it just comes down to the ethics of the blogger then. If they take money to write a positive review of one product and a negative review of another, there really wouldn't be any way to know. However, unless the other product was truly bad, other bloggers would eventually give it a positive review, and the (paid for) negative review would stick out. However, I do agree with you, my solution is very idealistic.
As for not guaranteeing a positive review, I think there are two solutions:
1. Bloggers just refuse to do a review unless they can speak freely about the product. Again, this comes down to the ethics of the blogger.
2. Companies believe in their product and do their research enough to know that a blogger will *most likely* give it a positive review. If you look through a blog's history, it's can be pretty easy to tell what they like and don't like, so it's not like you're giving up all control by not guaranteeing a positive review, you're just making sure they can speak their mind without worrying if they're speaking positive enough about a product or service. ;)
Posted by: Cory O'Brien | Mar 4, 2009 2:50:07 AM
