Is The Future Of Advertising Public Relations?
Is The Future Of Advertising Public Relations?
by
Jason Falls
By Jason Falls

I recently arranged for a group of bloggers in a certain industry to receive some exclusivity in advance notice of a new product. There was no stipulation from my client that they write about the product, though we anticipated they would given some of the first, hands-on exposure to it. All of them wrote about it and most in favorable fashion. The new product is off to a good start and I’m happy that some good, new-fashioned public relations helped.

(I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.)

What’s even more impressive about the success of the new product outreach is that when I originally approached this group of bloggers about the possibility of getting them on the inside of a product launch they responded with a complaint.

“Why is it that your clients think we’re good enough to try and hock their PR crap on, but when we approach them for advertising dollars we get the run-around?”

Fair question.

The answer wasn’t easy for them to swallow, but here it is:

Crystal Ball, Exterior by Bitterjugg on FlickrFirst, you don’t have eyeballs. Clients who work with advertising agencies are normally paying a lot of money to reach as many people as possible. Traditionally, advertising dollars are spent trying to reach the most number of people at the lowest per-person cost. While advertising on your blog is far cheaper than any other form of media buy my client might have, your total audience is a rounding error in what they normally reach. The PR outreach includes you because A) bloggers are often looking for good material, especially the exclusive kind, and it might be an easy sell to place our product information in front of your audience and B) bloggers often serve as clearinghouses for material for larger audiences and influencers, even traditional journalists. Your blog is niche, but influential. We wouldn’t spend dollars on your blog because you don’t have quantity in audience. We’ll gladly spend some nominal time and dollars with a PR effort, however, because we think you have a higher quality audience.

Second, you don’t make it easy for us. For a blog to put itself into serious contention for advertising dollars, the buyer needs to know your traffic, your demographics and your reach. Unless your site is big enough to be measured regularly by ComScore or you’ve added the Quantcast code to produce some analytics of your audience, we don’t know who your readers are. I can’t convince a brand manager to spend $500, $1,000 or $10,000 on a blog ad buy if I can’t reasonably say the audience includes the target demographic we’re trying to reach. And I’m sorry, “Well, we write about cars, so our audience is dudes,” doesn’t cut it. Most bloggers don’t want to share their traffic numbers. They either are ashamed they have a small audience, jealous of those with bigger audiences or just don’t realize if they did they might get more advertisers. You have to help us before we can reasonably help you.

Last, online advertising is much less effective than online editorial coverage. Think about it. When’s the last time you clicked on a banner ad? When’s the last time you even looked at one long enough to recognize the product, the message and consider clicking? Now tell me what product or service Chris Brogan wrote about in his controversial Dad-O-Matic post from Dec. 2? I read the post. I remember the product, learned something I didn’t know about it and perhaps even brought it back into my consideration set. (Not really. I don’t shop. But still.)

Gladly, this small group of bloggers was delighted I was so honest with them. I’m sure a few of them ran out and signed up to have Quantcast measure them or at least reconsidered how they package and approach sponsors. Despite the reasons listed, though, I pursued an advertising buy on behalf of the client. While due diligence went a long way in forging a better relationship with the bloggers, ultimately the plan didn’t work out. They still warmly received the product and wrote about it on launch.

The combination of my experience working through advertising issues with bloggers, the prevailing wisdom that traditional advertising is broken – at least to the point that its performance is being questioned now more than ever – and the hullabaloo over Brogan’s paid post got me thinking about the future of advertising again. I’ve said before I think a new way of advertising to customers is coming. From, “The Demise Of Online Advertising Is Upon Us,” on Sept. 8:

We have to come up with something better.

By we, I mean some combination of advertising professionals, marketers and media outlets. Whomever cracks the code first will have a leg up on redefining an entire industry. What’s intriguing is that the answer is going to be a blend of advertising, content and engagement which makes me think social media thinking will have something to do with it.

Pay-per-click and cost-per-thousand are becoming tired for chief marketing officers because they under-perform expectations which, in and of themselves, are all out of whack because of the bullshit Nielsen, Arbitron and others have been feeding them for decades. So smart marketers are looking toward engagement and content – elements of social media – to reach their audiences. Some, like Izea, are pushing the boundaries and experimenting with sponsored posts, which are more effective in delivering messaging so long as they’re read. What this proves is marketers are looking for more effective ways to deliver their messages to consumers.

Was Izea wrong to lure influencer bloggers into a $500 gift card in exchange for a post scheme? No. Was Chris Brogan wrong for accepting the offer and blogging about K-Mart? Not unless Chris Heuer was, too, which he wasn’t.

In my opinion the sponsored post will find a nice living space in social media because most blog readers and mainstream consumers either A) Don’t notice it’s sponsored or B) Don’t care as long as the content is relevant to their need in reading said blog. I browse the posts at Uncrate.com fairly regularly. If one of their posts was sponsored it wouldn’t bother me so long as the product fell into the category of stuff guys would love. If it was for Nice-N-Easy hair coloring for women, it might bother me. Let’s hope Uncrate’s editors aren’t that dumb. Darren Rowse’s blog is chock full-o-ads. Doesn’t bother me in the least because I get value from his insights and the man has mouths to feed. Brogan caught heat for his sponsored post for one reason: To date he has epitomized the core tenants of social media philosophy – sharing, transparency and a near void of consumerism. On ChrisBrogan.com, that post would have been highly inappropriate. It was on DadOMatic.com where it was exceptionally well received, by the way.

What has been lost in this whole debate is that all Izea did was offer up a tried and true PR tactic. They provide access to the product for a media outlet to write about it. While I’m personally not a fan of the play or no pay approach, you can’t find a PR firm out there that hasn’t shipped free products, paid for media junkets or offered gratuitous perks to media outlets to fan the flames of a pitch. Crossing the line to insist on coverage in exchange for the perks does make it advertising and is less credible as such.

So what happens now? The Izea experiment has shown that A) Sponsored posts do get the word out there but that B) In some circles they’re not well received. Developing what advertising will look like in our new, social connectivity-dominated web was nothing more than trial-and-error in what will eventually become the greatest communications invention of our time: the effective and engaging online advertisement.

But what the experiment also tells us is that whatever the future of advertising is, it will be centered on content and engagement which is what good public relations has been doing for years.

Right? Wrong? The comments are yours.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

  • Pingback: 8 (Marketing) Bloggers To Watch in 2009 | Justin Whitaker()

  • Pingback: All Things Green On St. Patrick’s Day! « Sound Bytes()

  • Pingback: Is the Future of Advertising Public Relations? « Sound Bytes()

  • dews
  • shailesh

    I am from India i have completed my TY Bcom 4 Years before & i have done 3D animation 1 year course in Arena . i have worked with Big studios in animation Dept like CREST & TRINE ANIMATION STUDIO for last 3 years .
    If i do a PG Diploma in Advertising & Public Relation from KC College for 1 year it will help me in future or not please let me know .

    Because i am from middle class family and nobody is there to give me guidance so Respected Sir/Madem please help me out .

  • shailesh

    I am from India i have completed my TY Bcom 4 Years before & i have done 3D animation 1 year course in Arena . i have worked with Big studios in animation Dept like CREST & TRINE ANIMATION STUDIO for last 3 years .
    If i do a PG Diploma in Advertising & Public Relation from KC College for 1 year it will help me in future or not please let me know .

    Because i am from middle class family and nobody is there to give me guidance so Respected Sir/Madem please help me out .

  • shailesh

    I am from India i have completed my TY Bcom 4 Years before & i have done 3D animation 1 year course in Arena . i have worked with Big studios in animation Dept like CREST & TRINE ANIMATION STUDIO for last 3 years .
    If i do a PG Diploma in Advertising & Public Relation from KC College for 1 year it will help me in future or not please let me know .

    Because i am from middle class family and nobody is there to give me guidance so Respected Sir/Madem please help me out .

  • shailesh

    I am from India i have completed my TY Bcom 4 Years before & i have done 3D animation 1 year course in Arena . i have worked with Big studios in animation Dept like CREST & TRINE ANIMATION STUDIO for last 3 years .
    If i do a PG Diploma in Advertising & Public Relation from KC College for 1 year it will help me in future or not please let me know .

    Because i am from middle class family and nobody is there to give me guidance so Respected Sir/Madem please help me out .

  • Ha – great post. In a word, YES, I'd agree : )

  • Ha – great post. In a word, YES, I'd agree : )

  • Ha – great post. In a word, YES, I'd agree : )

  • Ha – great post. In a word, YES, I'd agree : )

  • Ha – great post. In a word, YES, I'd agree : )

  • Ha – great post. In a word, YES, I'd agree : )

  • Pingback: HRM Today - Blog Archive » How you can make a difference. Be Different. Do Different. Act Different.()

  • Pingback: How you can make a difference. Be Different. Do Different. Act Different. « Marenated()

  • Pingback: 5 Twitter Stars You Must Follow Today — Communication & Cognition()

  • Excellent commentary, Michael. Thanks for the perspective. You're right – reach and followers are very different animals and those which carry very different implications for ROI, planning, influence, etc. It's smart for businesses to take those into consideration when approaching bloggers, etc. There are some folks on Twitter with 10K+followers that I wouldn't trust or believe if you were holding a gun to my head, so reach … maybe. Impact … not so much.

    In terms of Chris's potentially serial sponsored posts, I think on Dad-O-Matic it works and the audience would support it. They understand Chris is smart enough to give them sponsor information that is relevant to them, he had a family to feed and so on. I also think they're there to learn about Dad-centric stuff and products and services come into play. Sure, it'll turn some folks off, but sites like ReadWriteWeb, Mashable and what not churn out the “Thanks to our sponsors” posts once a week or month or whatever and no one bitches about them. Without them, those sites couldn't pay the fine people who blog for them.

    Sponsored posts would be harder for Chris to implement on ChrisBrogan.com, however, because he's largely talking to an audience that loathes advertising interference (social media purists) and that Chris has told before he won't pepper them with marketing messages (no ads on his site, etc., though he does experiment with ads on RSS feeds).

    Like with most decisions, the sponsored post one really varies from site to site and community to community. Those that don't like it don't have to stick around and won't. Those that don't mind will. And there's plenty of audience out there on both sides of the stick.

    Thanks again for continued discussion and stop lurking … you're comments are strong.

  • Excellent commentary, Michael. Thanks for the perspective. You're right – reach and followers are very different animals and those which carry very different implications for ROI, planning, influence, etc. It's smart for businesses to take those into consideration when approaching bloggers, etc. There are some folks on Twitter with 10K+followers that I wouldn't trust or believe if you were holding a gun to my head, so reach … maybe. Impact … not so much.

    In terms of Chris's potentially serial sponsored posts, I think on Dad-O-Matic it works and the audience would support it. They understand Chris is smart enough to give them sponsor information that is relevant to them, he had a family to feed and so on. I also think they're there to learn about Dad-centric stuff and products and services come into play. Sure, it'll turn some folks off, but sites like ReadWriteWeb, Mashable and what not churn out the “Thanks to our sponsors” posts once a week or month or whatever and no one bitches about them. Without them, those sites couldn't pay the fine people who blog for them.

    Sponsored posts would be harder for Chris to implement on ChrisBrogan.com, however, because he's largely talking to an audience that loathes advertising interference (social media purists) and that Chris has told before he won't pepper them with marketing messages (no ads on his site, etc., though he does experiment with ads on RSS feeds).

    Like with most decisions, the sponsored post one really varies from site to site and community to community. Those that don't like it don't have to stick around and won't. Those that don't mind will. And there's plenty of audience out there on both sides of the stick.

    Thanks again for continued discussion and stop lurking … you're comments are strong.

  • Excellent commentary, Michael. Thanks for the perspective. You're right – reach and followers are very different animals and those which carry very different implications for ROI, planning, influence, etc. It's smart for businesses to take those into consideration when approaching bloggers, etc. There are some folks on Twitter with 10K+followers that I wouldn't trust or believe if you were holding a gun to my head, so reach … maybe. Impact … not so much.

    In terms of Chris's potentially serial sponsored posts, I think on Dad-O-Matic it works and the audience would support it. They understand Chris is smart enough to give them sponsor information that is relevant to them, he had a family to feed and so on. I also think they're there to learn about Dad-centric stuff and products and services come into play. Sure, it'll turn some folks off, but sites like ReadWriteWeb, Mashable and what not churn out the “Thanks to our sponsors” posts once a week or month or whatever and no one bitches about them. Without them, those sites couldn't pay the fine people who blog for them.

    Sponsored posts would be harder for Chris to implement on ChrisBrogan.com, however, because he's largely talking to an audience that loathes advertising interference (social media purists) and that Chris has told before he won't pepper them with marketing messages (no ads on his site, etc., though he does experiment with ads on RSS feeds).

    Like with most decisions, the sponsored post one really varies from site to site and community to community. Those that don't like it don't have to stick around and won't. Those that don't mind will. And there's plenty of audience out there on both sides of the stick.

    Thanks again for continued discussion and stop lurking … you're comments are strong.

  • Excellent commentary, Michael. Thanks for the perspective. You're right – reach and followers are very different animals and those which carry very different implications for ROI, planning, influence, etc. It's smart for businesses to take those into consideration when approaching bloggers, etc. There are some folks on Twitter with 10K+followers that I wouldn't trust or believe if you were holding a gun to my head, so reach … maybe. Impact … not so much.

    In terms of Chris's potentially serial sponsored posts, I think on Dad-O-Matic it works and the audience would support it. They understand Chris is smart enough to give them sponsor information that is relevant to them, he had a family to feed and so on. I also think they're there to learn about Dad-centric stuff and products and services come into play. Sure, it'll turn some folks off, but sites like ReadWriteWeb, Mashable and what not churn out the “Thanks to our sponsors” posts once a week or month or whatever and no one bitches about them. Without them, those sites couldn't pay the fine people who blog for them.

    Sponsored posts would be harder for Chris to implement on ChrisBrogan.com, however, because he's largely talking to an audience that loathes advertising interference (social media purists) and that Chris has told before he won't pepper them with marketing messages (no ads on his site, etc., though he does experiment with ads on RSS feeds).

    Like with most decisions, the sponsored post one really varies from site to site and community to community. Those that don't like it don't have to stick around and won't. Those that don't mind will. And there's plenty of audience out there on both sides of the stick.

    Thanks again for continued discussion and stop lurking … you're comments are strong.

  • Excellent commentary, Michael. Thanks for the perspective. You're right – reach and followers are very different animals and those which carry very different implications for ROI, planning, influence, etc. It's smart for businesses to take those into consideration when approaching bloggers, etc. There are some folks on Twitter with 10K+followers that I wouldn't trust or believe if you were holding a gun to my head, so reach … maybe. Impact … not so much.

    In terms of Chris's potentially serial sponsored posts, I think on Dad-O-Matic it works and the audience would support it. They understand Chris is smart enough to give them sponsor information that is relevant to them, he had a family to feed and so on. I also think they're there to learn about Dad-centric stuff and products and services come into play. Sure, it'll turn some folks off, but sites like ReadWriteWeb, Mashable and what not churn out the “Thanks to our sponsors” posts once a week or month or whatever and no one bitches about them. Without them, those sites couldn't pay the fine people who blog for them.

    Sponsored posts would be harder for Chris to implement on ChrisBrogan.com, however, because he's largely talking to an audience that loathes advertising interference (social media purists) and that Chris has told before he won't pepper them with marketing messages (no ads on his site, etc., though he does experiment with ads on RSS feeds).

    Like with most decisions, the sponsored post one really varies from site to site and community to community. Those that don't like it don't have to stick around and won't. Those that don't mind will. And there's plenty of audience out there on both sides of the stick.

    Thanks again for continued discussion and stop lurking … you're comments are strong.

  • Jason,

    Long time lerker, first time commenter…I thought this was a really well written and well thought out post. Your answers to the bloggers was both fair and honest which is tough to get these days. I do think that this is just the first revolution however, I believe we are getting closer and closer to a point where virtually every product has a pre-launch.

    However with that said, I think the interesting thing to watch over the next 12-18 months is how many people claim that because they have 1000's of Twitter followers they can drive traffic for you and thus should be a paid blogger. As I noted in this post (http://www.michaelgcohen.com/2008/12/followers-…) , there is a tremendous difference between simply having followers and actually having “reach” and it is the latter which is valuable.

    I also have to ask out loud what the reaction would start to be if @chrisbrogan wrote a sponsored post on the Dad-O-Matic site every week would people start to tune out? If that is the case then where is the sustainability? If someone like Chris (or another respected blogger) wants to suplement his income regularly with sponsored posts, will people tune out and the sponsored opportunites run dry?

  • Jason,

    Long time lerker, first time commenter…I thought this was a really well written and well thought out post. Your answers to the bloggers was both fair and honest which is tough to get these days. I do think that this is just the first revolution however, I believe we are getting closer and closer to a point where virtually every product has a pre-launch.

    However with that said, I think the interesting thing to watch over the next 12-18 months is how many people claim that because they have 1000's of Twitter followers they can drive traffic for you and thus should be a paid blogger. As I noted in this post (http://www.michaelgcohen.com/2008/12/followers-…) , there is a tremendous difference between simply having followers and actually having “reach” and it is the latter which is valuable.

    I also have to ask out loud what the reaction would start to be if @chrisbrogan wrote a sponsored post on the Dad-O-Matic site every week would people start to tune out? If that is the case then where is the sustainability? If someone like Chris (or another respected blogger) wants to suplement his income regularly with sponsored posts, will people tune out and the sponsored opportunites run dry?

  • Jason,

    Long time lerker, first time commenter…I thought this was a really well written and well thought out post. Your answers to the bloggers was both fair and honest which is tough to get these days. I do think that this is just the first revolution however, I believe we are getting closer and closer to a point where virtually every product has a pre-launch.

    However with that said, I think the interesting thing to watch over the next 12-18 months is how many people claim that because they have 1000's of Twitter followers they can drive traffic for you and thus should be a paid blogger. As I noted in this post (http://www.michaelgcohen.com/2008/12/followers-…) , there is a tremendous difference between simply having followers and actually having “reach” and it is the latter which is valuable.

    I also have to ask out loud what the reaction would start to be if @chrisbrogan wrote a sponsored post on the Dad-O-Matic site every week would people start to tune out? If that is the case then where is the sustainability? If someone like Chris (or another respected blogger) wants to suplement his income regularly with sponsored posts, will people tune out and the sponsored opportunites run dry?

  • Jason,

    Long time lerker, first time commenter…I thought this was a really well written and well thought out post. Your answers to the bloggers was both fair and honest which is tough to get these days. I do think that this is just the first revolution however, I believe we are getting closer and closer to a point where virtually every product has a pre-launch.

    However with that said, I think the interesting thing to watch over the next 12-18 months is how many people claim that because they have 1000's of Twitter followers they can drive traffic for you and thus should be a paid blogger. As I noted in this post (http://www.michaelgcohen.com/2008/12/followers-…) , there is a tremendous difference between simply having followers and actually having “reach” and it is the latter which is valuable.

    I also have to ask out loud what the reaction would start to be if @chrisbrogan wrote a sponsored post on the Dad-O-Matic site every week would people start to tune out? If that is the case then where is the sustainability? If someone like Chris (or another respected blogger) wants to suplement his income regularly with sponsored posts, will people tune out and the sponsored opportunites run dry?

  • Jason,

    Long time lerker, first time commenter…I thought this was a really well written and well thought out post. Your answers to the bloggers was both fair and honest which is tough to get these days. I do think that this is just the first revolution however, I believe we are getting closer and closer to a point where virtually every product has a pre-launch.

    However with that said, I think the interesting thing to watch over the next 12-18 months is how many people claim that because they have 1000's of Twitter followers they can drive traffic for you and thus should be a paid blogger. As I noted in this post (http://www.michaelgcohen.com/2008/12/followers-…) , there is a tremendous difference between simply having followers and actually having “reach” and it is the latter which is valuable.

    I also have to ask out loud what the reaction would start to be if @chrisbrogan wrote a sponsored post on the Dad-O-Matic site every week would people start to tune out? If that is the case then where is the sustainability? If someone like Chris (or another respected blogger) wants to suplement his income regularly with sponsored posts, will people tune out and the sponsored opportunites run dry?

  • Jason,

    Long time lerker, first time commenter…I thought this was a really well written and well thought out post. Your answers to the bloggers was both fair and honest which is tough to get these days. I do think that this is just the first revolution however, I believe we are getting closer and closer to a point where virtually every product has a pre-launch.

    However with that said, I think the interesting thing to watch over the next 12-18 months is how many people claim that because they have 1000's of Twitter followers they can drive traffic for you and thus should be a paid blogger. As I noted in this post (http://www.michaelgcohen.com/2008/12/followers-…) , there is a tremendous difference between simply having followers and actually having “reach” and it is the latter which is valuable.

    I also have to ask out loud what the reaction would start to be if @chrisbrogan wrote a sponsored post on the Dad-O-Matic site every week would people start to tune out? If that is the case then where is the sustainability? If someone like Chris (or another respected blogger) wants to suplement his income regularly with sponsored posts, will people tune out and the sponsored opportunites run dry?

    • Excellent commentary, Michael. Thanks for the perspective. You're right – reach and followers are very different animals and those which carry very different implications for ROI, planning, influence, etc. It's smart for businesses to take those into consideration when approaching bloggers, etc. There are some folks on Twitter with 10K+followers that I wouldn't trust or believe if you were holding a gun to my head, so reach … maybe. Impact … not so much.

      In terms of Chris's potentially serial sponsored posts, I think on Dad-O-Matic it works and the audience would support it. They understand Chris is smart enough to give them sponsor information that is relevant to them, he had a family to feed and so on. I also think they're there to learn about Dad-centric stuff and products and services come into play. Sure, it'll turn some folks off, but sites like ReadWriteWeb, Mashable and what not churn out the “Thanks to our sponsors” posts once a week or month or whatever and no one bitches about them. Without them, those sites couldn't pay the fine people who blog for them.

      Sponsored posts would be harder for Chris to implement on ChrisBrogan.com, however, because he's largely talking to an audience that loathes advertising interference (social media purists) and that Chris has told before he won't pepper them with marketing messages (no ads on his site, etc., though he does experiment with ads on RSS feeds).

      Like with most decisions, the sponsored post one really varies from site to site and community to community. Those that don't like it don't have to stick around and won't. Those that don't mind will. And there's plenty of audience out there on both sides of the stick.

      Thanks again for continued discussion and stop lurking … you're comments are strong.

  • Eh … two different things, really, but similar. Certainly the lack of transparency makes McDonalds look bad, but seeding and paid testers/guerilla marketing effforts aren't always bad things. I think they belong in a different category of judgement than social media, however. But thanks for pointing it out. Might even be worth a different post altogether.

  • Eh … two different things, really, but similar. Certainly the lack of transparency makes McDonalds look bad, but seeding and paid testers/guerilla marketing effforts aren't always bad things. I think they belong in a different category of judgement than social media, however. But thanks for pointing it out. Might even be worth a different post altogether.

  • Eh … two different things, really, but similar. Certainly the lack of transparency makes McDonalds look bad, but seeding and paid testers/guerilla marketing effforts aren't always bad things. I think they belong in a different category of judgement than social media, however. But thanks for pointing it out. Might even be worth a different post altogether.

  • Eh … two different things, really, but similar. Certainly the lack of transparency makes McDonalds look bad, but seeding and paid testers/guerilla marketing effforts aren't always bad things. I think they belong in a different category of judgement than social media, however. But thanks for pointing it out. Might even be worth a different post altogether.

  • Eh … two different things, really, but similar. Certainly the lack of transparency makes McDonalds look bad, but seeding and paid testers/guerilla marketing effforts aren't always bad things. I think they belong in a different category of judgement than social media, however. But thanks for pointing it out. Might even be worth a different post altogether.

  • My fault. Sorry Dave. I hadn't seen the full list of target bloggers, but there are certainly some there that were chosen for audience only – not smart. Not sure who devises the strategy for Izea, but I would assume it's not Chris. If it is, or whomever it is, I'd love to know that answer, too. Good call.

  • My fault. Sorry Dave. I hadn't seen the full list of target bloggers, but there are certainly some there that were chosen for audience only – not smart. Not sure who devises the strategy for Izea, but I would assume it's not Chris. If it is, or whomever it is, I'd love to know that answer, too. Good call.

  • My fault. Sorry Dave. I hadn't seen the full list of target bloggers, but there are certainly some there that were chosen for audience only – not smart. Not sure who devises the strategy for Izea, but I would assume it's not Chris. If it is, or whomever it is, I'd love to know that answer, too. Good call.

  • My fault. Sorry Dave. I hadn't seen the full list of target bloggers, but there are certainly some there that were chosen for audience only – not smart. Not sure who devises the strategy for Izea, but I would assume it's not Chris. If it is, or whomever it is, I'd love to know that answer, too. Good call.

  • My fault. Sorry Dave. I hadn't seen the full list of target bloggers, but there are certainly some there that were chosen for audience only – not smart. Not sure who devises the strategy for Izea, but I would assume it's not Chris. If it is, or whomever it is, I'd love to know that answer, too. Good call.

  • Pingback: Links of the day 12-22-2008 | hatim.indexdev.net()

  • Pingback: The Good Old Personal Touch « Oldskoolmark’s Weblog()

  • cheapsuits

    Jason, Bloomberg News reported today that McDonalds paid people to stand in line and purchase a new product on launch day. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101… I think that puts the whole IZEA bruhaha to rest. Nuff said.

  • cheapsuits

    Jason, Bloomberg News reported today that McDonalds paid people to stand in line and purchase a new product on launch day. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101… I think that puts the whole IZEA bruhaha to rest. Nuff said.

  • cheapsuits

    Jason, Bloomberg News reported today that McDonalds paid people to stand in line and purchase a new product on launch day. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101… I think that puts the whole IZEA bruhaha to rest. Nuff said.

  • cheapsuits

    Jason, Bloomberg News reported today that McDonalds paid people to stand in line and purchase a new product on launch day. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101… I think that puts the whole IZEA bruhaha to rest. Nuff said.

  • cheapsuits

    Jason, Bloomberg News reported today that McDonalds paid people to stand in line and purchase a new product on launch day. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101… I think that puts the whole IZEA bruhaha to rest. Nuff said.

  • cheapsuits

    Jason, Bloomberg News reported today that McDonalds paid people to stand in line and purchase a new product on launch day. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101… I think that puts the whole IZEA bruhaha to rest. Nuff said.

    • Eh … two different things, really, but similar. Certainly the lack of transparency makes McDonalds look bad, but seeding and paid testers/guerilla marketing effforts aren't always bad things. I think they belong in a different category of judgement than social media, however. But thanks for pointing it out. Might even be worth a different post altogether.

  • I am shocked that they chose Loren Feldman. Shows they did absolutely no research, while yes he's popular he is tied directly to racism and negativity:

    http://valleywag.gawker.com/tech/loren-feldman/

    Shows you how little research this company did and why it would be bad for your brand to blindly jump into paying people. Makes all parties involve look bad by tying themselves to offensive, racist people.

  • I am shocked that they chose Loren Feldman. Shows they did absolutely no research, while yes he's popular he is tied directly to racism and negativity:

    http://valleywag.gawker.com/tech/loren-feldman/

    Shows you how little research this company did and why it would be bad for your brand to blindly jump into paying people. Makes all parties involve look bad by tying themselves to offensive, racist people.

  • I am shocked that they chose Loren Feldman. Shows they did absolutely no research, while yes he's popular he is tied directly to racism and negativity:

    http://valleywag.gawker.com/tech/loren-feldman/

    Shows you how little research this company did and why it would be bad for your brand to blindly jump into paying people. Makes all parties involve look bad by tying themselves to offensive, racist people.

  • I am shocked that they chose Loren Feldman. Shows they did absolutely no research, while yes he's popular he is tied directly to racism and negativity:

    http://valleywag.gawker.com/tech/loren-feldman/

    Shows you how little research this company did and why it would be bad for your brand to blindly jump into paying people. Makes all parties involve look bad by tying themselves to offensive, racist people.

  • I am shocked that they chose Loren Feldman. Shows they did absolutely no research, while yes he's popular he is tied directly to racism and negativity:

    http://valleywag.gawker.com/tech/loren-feldman/

    Shows you how little research this company did and why it would be bad for your brand to blindly jump into paying people. Makes all parties involve look bad by tying themselves to offensive, racist people.

  • Sorry – you're missing my point – I probably wasn't clear. I have no problem with the Dad-O-Matic post; but what about the other bloggers that were targeted? Loren Feldman? Julia Roy? I have nothing against anyone who was included, but I question the targeting.

  • Sorry – you're missing my point – I probably wasn't clear. I have no problem with the Dad-O-Matic post; but what about the other bloggers that were targeted? Loren Feldman? Julia Roy? I have nothing against anyone who was included, but I question the targeting.

  • Sorry – you're missing my point – I probably wasn't clear. I have no problem with the Dad-O-Matic post; but what about the other bloggers that were targeted? Loren Feldman? Julia Roy? I have nothing against anyone who was included, but I question the targeting.

  • Sorry – you're missing my point – I probably wasn't clear. I have no problem with the Dad-O-Matic post; but what about the other bloggers that were targeted? Loren Feldman? Julia Roy? I have nothing against anyone who was included, but I question the targeting.

  • Sorry – you're missing my point – I probably wasn't clear. I have no problem with the Dad-O-Matic post; but what about the other bloggers that were targeted? Loren Feldman? Julia Roy? I have nothing against anyone who was included, but I question the targeting.

  • The target was Dads. While Dad-O-Matic is the brainchild of Chris Brogan, it has nothing to do with marketing. It's about dads. Which means, frankly, it was well-targeted in my opinion. K-Mart wanted Dads to be reminded they had what their kids need. So they sent a dad (Brogan) to K-Mart with his kids. The fact he's also a marketing blogger is irrelevant. Just my take.

  • The target was Dads. While Dad-O-Matic is the brainchild of Chris Brogan, it has nothing to do with marketing. It's about dads. Which means, frankly, it was well-targeted in my opinion. K-Mart wanted Dads to be reminded they had what their kids need. So they sent a dad (Brogan) to K-Mart with his kids. The fact he's also a marketing blogger is irrelevant. Just my take.

  • The target was Dads. While Dad-O-Matic is the brainchild of Chris Brogan, it has nothing to do with marketing. It's about dads. Which means, frankly, it was well-targeted in my opinion. K-Mart wanted Dads to be reminded they had what their kids need. So they sent a dad (Brogan) to K-Mart with his kids. The fact he's also a marketing blogger is irrelevant. Just my take.

  • The target was Dads. While Dad-O-Matic is the brainchild of Chris Brogan, it has nothing to do with marketing. It's about dads. Which means, frankly, it was well-targeted in my opinion. K-Mart wanted Dads to be reminded they had what their kids need. So they sent a dad (Brogan) to K-Mart with his kids. The fact he's also a marketing blogger is irrelevant. Just my take.

  • The target was Dads. While Dad-O-Matic is the brainchild of Chris Brogan, it has nothing to do with marketing. It's about dads. Which means, frankly, it was well-targeted in my opinion. K-Mart wanted Dads to be reminded they had what their kids need. So they sent a dad (Brogan) to K-Mart with his kids. The fact he's also a marketing blogger is irrelevant. Just my take.

  • Thank you Kara. I'm off to read it now!

  • Thank you Kara. I'm off to read it now!

  • Thank you Kara. I'm off to read it now!

  • Thank you Kara. I'm off to read it now!

  • Thank you Kara. I'm off to read it now!

  • Thank you, so much, Sam, for the well thought, well said response. It's fantastic to hear that someone grounded in advertising may be contemplating the effectiveness of certain types. It's also refreshing to know an educator out there is trying to ensure our next generation of advertising professionals is well-equipped to deal with the new media landscape.

    I'll be in touch as this is much too good to be lost in the comments of a blog.

  • Thank you, so much, Sam, for the well thought, well said response. It's fantastic to hear that someone grounded in advertising may be contemplating the effectiveness of certain types. It's also refreshing to know an educator out there is trying to ensure our next generation of advertising professionals is well-equipped to deal with the new media landscape.

    I'll be in touch as this is much too good to be lost in the comments of a blog.

  • Thank you, so much, Sam, for the well thought, well said response. It's fantastic to hear that someone grounded in advertising may be contemplating the effectiveness of certain types. It's also refreshing to know an educator out there is trying to ensure our next generation of advertising professionals is well-equipped to deal with the new media landscape.

    I'll be in touch as this is much too good to be lost in the comments of a blog.

  • Thank you, so much, Sam, for the well thought, well said response. It's fantastic to hear that someone grounded in advertising may be contemplating the effectiveness of certain types. It's also refreshing to know an educator out there is trying to ensure our next generation of advertising professionals is well-equipped to deal with the new media landscape.

    I'll be in touch as this is much too good to be lost in the comments of a blog.

  • Thank you, so much, Sam, for the well thought, well said response. It's fantastic to hear that someone grounded in advertising may be contemplating the effectiveness of certain types. It's also refreshing to know an educator out there is trying to ensure our next generation of advertising professionals is well-equipped to deal with the new media landscape.

    I'll be in touch as this is much too good to be lost in the comments of a blog.

  • Pingback: No Straw Men : links for 2008-12-24()

  • I'm with you on almost all of this, Jason.

    My main question around the Izea thing, from a PR perspective (setting aside my personal viewpoint on whether it's a good idea in general), relates to targeting. Who was Izea/Kmart targeting with this? The Dad O'Matic post seems reasonable, but the marketing bloggers? Is Kmart's target the marketing community? Did they want Marketing Magazine to write about their campaign? Wouldn't they be better served by targeting shopping blogs (or a niche thereof)? Any thoughts?

  • I'm with you on almost all of this, Jason.

    My main question around the Izea thing, from a PR perspective (setting aside my personal viewpoint on whether it's a good idea in general), relates to targeting. Who was Izea/Kmart targeting with this? The Dad O'Matic post seems reasonable, but the marketing bloggers? Is Kmart's target the marketing community? Did they want Marketing Magazine to write about their campaign? Wouldn't they be better served by targeting shopping blogs (or a niche thereof)? Any thoughts?

  • I'm with you on almost all of this, Jason.

    My main question around the Izea thing, from a PR perspective (setting aside my personal viewpoint on whether it's a good idea in general), relates to targeting. Who was Izea/Kmart targeting with this? The Dad O'Matic post seems reasonable, but the marketing bloggers? Is Kmart's target the marketing community? Did they want Marketing Magazine to write about their campaign? Wouldn't they be better served by targeting shopping blogs (or a niche thereof)? Any thoughts?

  • I'm with you on almost all of this, Jason.

    My main question around the Izea thing, from a PR perspective (setting aside my personal viewpoint on whether it's a good idea in general), relates to targeting. Who was Izea/Kmart targeting with this? The Dad O'Matic post seems reasonable, but the marketing bloggers? Is Kmart's target the marketing community? Did they want Marketing Magazine to write about their campaign? Wouldn't they be better served by targeting shopping blogs (or a niche thereof)? Any thoughts?

  • I'm with you on almost all of this, Jason.

    My main question around the Izea thing, from a PR perspective (setting aside my personal viewpoint on whether it's a good idea in general), relates to targeting. Who was Izea/Kmart targeting with this? The Dad O'Matic post seems reasonable, but the marketing bloggers? Is Kmart's target the marketing community? Did they want Marketing Magazine to write about their campaign? Wouldn't they be better served by targeting shopping blogs (or a niche thereof)? Any thoughts?

  • I'm with you on almost all of this, Jason.

    My main question around the Izea thing, from a PR perspective (setting aside my personal viewpoint on whether it's a good idea in general), relates to targeting. Who was Izea/Kmart targeting with this? The Dad O'Matic post seems reasonable, but the marketing bloggers? Is Kmart's target the marketing community? Did they want Marketing Magazine to write about their campaign? Wouldn't they be better served by targeting shopping blogs (or a niche thereof)? Any thoughts?

    • The target was Dads. While Dad-O-Matic is the brainchild of Chris Brogan, it has nothing to do with marketing. It's about dads. Which means, frankly, it was well-targeted in my opinion. K-Mart wanted Dads to be reminded they had what their kids need. So they sent a dad (Brogan) to K-Mart with his kids. The fact he's also a marketing blogger is irrelevant. Just my take.

      • Sorry – you're missing my point – I probably wasn't clear. I have no problem with the Dad-O-Matic post; but what about the other bloggers that were targeted? Loren Feldman? Julia Roy? I have nothing against anyone who was included, but I question the targeting.

        • I am shocked that they chose Loren Feldman. Shows they did absolutely no research, while yes he's popular he is tied directly to racism and negativity:

          http://valleywag.gawker.com/tech/loren-feldman/

          Shows you how little research this company did and why it would be bad for your brand to blindly jump into paying people. Makes all parties involve look bad by tying themselves to offensive, racist people.

        • My fault. Sorry Dave. I hadn't seen the full list of target bloggers, but there are certainly some there that were chosen for audience only – not smart. Not sure who devises the strategy for Izea, but I would assume it's not Chris. If it is, or whomever it is, I'd love to know that answer, too. Good call.

  • Hi Jason —

    I always appreciate your forthright commentary, for sure! We are in an exciting time as techy, innovative marketers and this platform is perfect for transparent integrity and creativity.

    I've made reference to your comments on my blog directed toward social media pr for the legal marketing industry.
    http://tinyurl.com/a84h4l

    Happy holidays to you and your familyl
    Kara

  • Hi Jason —

    I always appreciate your forthright commentary, for sure! We are in an exciting time as techy, innovative marketers and this platform is perfect for transparent integrity and creativity.

    I've made reference to your comments on my blog directed toward social media pr for the legal marketing industry.
    http://tinyurl.com/a84h4l

    Happy holidays to you and your familyl
    Kara

  • Hi Jason —

    I always appreciate your forthright commentary, for sure! We are in an exciting time as techy, innovative marketers and this platform is perfect for transparent integrity and creativity.

    I've made reference to your comments on my blog directed toward social media pr for the legal marketing industry.
    http://tinyurl.com/a84h4l

    Happy holidays to you and your familyl
    Kara

  • Hi Jason —

    I always appreciate your forthright commentary, for sure! We are in an exciting time as techy, innovative marketers and this platform is perfect for transparent integrity and creativity.

    I've made reference to your comments on my blog directed toward social media pr for the legal marketing industry.
    http://tinyurl.com/a84h4l

    Happy holidays to you and your familyl
    Kara

  • Hi Jason —

    I always appreciate your forthright commentary, for sure! We are in an exciting time as techy, innovative marketers and this platform is perfect for transparent integrity and creativity.

    I've made reference to your comments on my blog directed toward social media pr for the legal marketing industry.
    http://tinyurl.com/a84h4l

    Happy holidays to you and your familyl
    Kara

  • Hi Jason —

    I always appreciate your forthright commentary, for sure! We are in an exciting time as techy, innovative marketers and this platform is perfect for transparent integrity and creativity.

    I've made reference to your comments on my blog directed toward social media pr for the legal marketing industry.
    http://tinyurl.com/a84h4l

    Happy holidays to you and your familyl
    Kara

    • Thank you Kara. I'm off to read it now!

  • sbradley3

    Jason, thank you for the great food for thought. I'm an Ogilvy guy, and I still believe in campaigns. I believe in messages that extend over years, and I believe in relationships. I am a huge fan of Kevin Roberts' idea of Lovemarks, and work in my psychophysiology lab supports his ideas. And sadly short-term ROI will almost always undercut these types of relationships.

    All of this sounds weird coming from a guy who grew up, literally, in my parents' direct response advertising agency. The first two decades of my life were financed by advertising that got its report card every day: people either returned a card via business reply mail or called a toll-free number, or the ad failed. (And in truth Ogilvy gave a lot of props to direct response).

    So I've been intellectually puzzled by interactive advertising. I've stood at the edge of the stream and thought and thought.

    We were at first, I think, mesmerized by the fact that we could so easily count each click. It seemed like a panacea in the world of TV, where we have to hope upon shaky Nielsen data knowing all the while that we go to the bathroom during commercials.

    And you are absolutely right that the banner ad is not the be all, end all.

    And you are right that the future will be a lot more like the recent effort by P&G to lure Mommy Bloggers to Cincinnati to talk about diapers. And this is, I must admit, mostly a public relations function.

    I just hate to give away buzz marketing, guerrilla marketing, and pretty much anything cool to the PR folks. It feels as if everyone thinks we ad guys are stuck in an episode of Mad Men. Take away big media buys, and are we really inept?

    So what do I teach? Mostly I try to teach critical thinking skills and socialize students to the general problem. If I get to teach them Ad Principles as a sophomore, it will be two years before they graduate. And the world changes so quickly. So I have to teach them how to solve problems rather than to solve a specific problem.

    At Texas Tech, we're greatly expanding our advertising curriculum in an attempt to deal with this changing environment. Because we cannot begin to give it proper treatment in our current 39 credit hours.

    And I'm hoping that trying to teach this fast-moving landscape is going to increasingly use technology such as Skype to bring experts such as yourself into the classroom.

    So, to bring it back to Ogilvy, I believe in narrative and storytelling. It's a basic part of human culture, and storytelling dates to antiquity. It's easy to tell a story in a 30 second television ad. Even a magazine ad. It's not so easy online, unless you move into the branded entertainment content. But I do tell stories in my blog, and so do you.

    The cognitive scientist in me knows that the background clutter makes it into the brain a lot more than you think. But that's impossible to measure, and that's pretty difficult to sell a client even during a good economy.

    But what an awesome challenge, right? I feel pretty lucky that I get to go to work every day thinking about this stuff.

  • sbradley3

    Jason, thank you for the great food for thought. I'm an Ogilvy guy, and I still believe in campaigns. I believe in messages that extend over years, and I believe in relationships. I am a huge fan of Kevin Roberts' idea of Lovemarks, and work in my psychophysiology lab supports his ideas. And sadly short-term ROI will almost always undercut these types of relationships.

    All of this sounds weird coming from a guy who grew up, literally, in my parents' direct response advertising agency. The first two decades of my life were financed by advertising that got its report card every day: people either returned a card via business reply mail or called a toll-free number, or the ad failed. (And in truth Ogilvy gave a lot of props to direct response).

    So I've been intellectually puzzled by interactive advertising. I've stood at the edge of the stream and thought and thought.

    We were at first, I think, mesmerized by the fact that we could so easily count each click. It seemed like a panacea in the world of TV, where we have to hope upon shaky Nielsen data knowing all the while that we go to the bathroom during commercials.

    And you are absolutely right that the banner ad is not the be all, end all.

    And you are right that the future will be a lot more like the recent effort by P&G to lure Mommy Bloggers to Cincinnati to talk about diapers. And this is, I must admit, mostly a public relations function.

    I just hate to give away buzz marketing, guerrilla marketing, and pretty much anything cool to the PR folks. It feels as if everyone thinks we ad guys are stuck in an episode of Mad Men. Take away big media buys, and are we really inept?

    So what do I teach? Mostly I try to teach critical thinking skills and socialize students to the general problem. If I get to teach them Ad Principles as a sophomore, it will be two years before they graduate. And the world changes so quickly. So I have to teach them how to solve problems rather than to solve a specific problem.

    At Texas Tech, we're greatly expanding our advertising curriculum in an attempt to deal with this changing environment. Because we cannot begin to give it proper treatment in our current 39 credit hours.

    And I'm hoping that trying to teach this fast-moving landscape is going to increasingly use technology such as Skype to bring experts such as yourself into the classroom.

    So, to bring it back to Ogilvy, I believe in narrative and storytelling. It's a basic part of human culture, and storytelling dates to antiquity. It's easy to tell a story in a 30 second television ad. Even a magazine ad. It's not so easy online, unless you move into the branded entertainment content. But I do tell stories in my blog, and so do you.

    The cognitive scientist in me knows that the background clutter makes it into the brain a lot more than you think. But that's impossible to measure, and that's pretty difficult to sell a client even during a good economy.

    But what an awesome challenge, right? I feel pretty lucky that I get to go to work every day thinking about this stuff.

  • sbradley3

    Jason, thank you for the great food for thought. I'm an Ogilvy guy, and I still believe in campaigns. I believe in messages that extend over years, and I believe in relationships. I am a huge fan of Kevin Roberts' idea of Lovemarks, and work in my psychophysiology lab supports his ideas. And sadly short-term ROI will almost always undercut these types of relationships.

    All of this sounds weird coming from a guy who grew up, literally, in my parents' direct response advertising agency. The first two decades of my life were financed by advertising that got its report card every day: people either returned a card via business reply mail or called a toll-free number, or the ad failed. (And in truth Ogilvy gave a lot of props to direct response).

    So I've been intellectually puzzled by interactive advertising. I've stood at the edge of the stream and thought and thought.

    We were at first, I think, mesmerized by the fact that we could so easily count each click. It seemed like a panacea in the world of TV, where we have to hope upon shaky Nielsen data knowing all the while that we go to the bathroom during commercials.

    And you are absolutely right that the banner ad is not the be all, end all.

    And you are right that the future will be a lot more like the recent effort by P&G to lure Mommy Bloggers to Cincinnati to talk about diapers. And this is, I must admit, mostly a public relations function.

    I just hate to give away buzz marketing, guerrilla marketing, and pretty much anything cool to the PR folks. It feels as if everyone thinks we ad guys are stuck in an episode of Mad Men. Take away big media buys, and are we really inept?

    So what do I teach? Mostly I try to teach critical thinking skills and socialize students to the general problem. If I get to teach them Ad Principles as a sophomore, it will be two years before they graduate. And the world changes so quickly. So I have to teach them how to solve problems rather than to solve a specific problem.

    At Texas Tech, we're greatly expanding our advertising curriculum in an attempt to deal with this changing environment. Because we cannot begin to give it proper treatment in our current 39 credit hours.

    And I'm hoping that trying to teach this fast-moving landscape is going to increasingly use technology such as Skype to bring experts such as yourself into the classroom.

    So, to bring it back to Ogilvy, I believe in narrative and storytelling. It's a basic part of human culture, and storytelling dates to antiquity. It's easy to tell a story in a 30 second television ad. Even a magazine ad. It's not so easy online, unless you move into the branded entertainment content. But I do tell stories in my blog, and so do you.

    The cognitive scientist in me knows that the background clutter makes it into the brain a lot more than you think. But that's impossible to measure, and that's pretty difficult to sell a client even during a good economy.

    But what an awesome challenge, right? I feel pretty lucky that I get to go to work every day thinking about this stuff.

  • sbradley3

    Jason, thank you for the great food for thought. I'm an Ogilvy guy, and I still believe in campaigns. I believe in messages that extend over years, and I believe in relationships. I am a huge fan of Kevin Roberts' idea of Lovemarks, and work in my psychophysiology lab supports his ideas. And sadly short-term ROI will almost always undercut these types of relationships.

    All of this sounds weird coming from a guy who grew up, literally, in my parents' direct response advertising agency. The first two decades of my life were financed by advertising that got its report card every day: people either returned a card via business reply mail or called a toll-free number, or the ad failed. (And in truth Ogilvy gave a lot of props to direct response).

    So I've been intellectually puzzled by interactive advertising. I've stood at the edge of the stream and thought and thought.

    We were at first, I think, mesmerized by the fact that we could so easily count each click. It seemed like a panacea in the world of TV, where we have to hope upon shaky Nielsen data knowing all the while that we go to the bathroom during commercials.

    And you are absolutely right that the banner ad is not the be all, end all.

    And you are right that the future will be a lot more like the recent effort by P&G to lure Mommy Bloggers to Cincinnati to talk about diapers. And this is, I must admit, mostly a public relations function.

    I just hate to give away buzz marketing, guerrilla marketing, and pretty much anything cool to the PR folks. It feels as if everyone thinks we ad guys are stuck in an episode of Mad Men. Take away big media buys, and are we really inept?

    So what do I teach? Mostly I try to teach critical thinking skills and socialize students to the general problem. If I get to teach them Ad Principles as a sophomore, it will be two years before they graduate. And the world changes so quickly. So I have to teach them how to solve problems rather than to solve a specific problem.

    At Texas Tech, we're greatly expanding our advertising curriculum in an attempt to deal with this changing environment. Because we cannot begin to give it proper treatment in our current 39 credit hours.

    And I'm hoping that trying to teach this fast-moving landscape is going to increasingly use technology such as Skype to bring experts such as yourself into the classroom.

    So, to bring it back to Ogilvy, I believe in narrative and storytelling. It's a basic part of human culture, and storytelling dates to antiquity. It's easy to tell a story in a 30 second television ad. Even a magazine ad. It's not so easy online, unless you move into the branded entertainment content. But I do tell stories in my blog, and so do you.

    The cognitive scientist in me knows that the background clutter makes it into the brain a lot more than you think. But that's impossible to measure, and that's pretty difficult to sell a client even during a good economy.

    But what an awesome challenge, right? I feel pretty lucky that I get to go to work every day thinking about this stuff.

  • sbradley3

    Jason, thank you for the great food for thought. I'm an Ogilvy guy, and I still believe in campaigns. I believe in messages that extend over years, and I believe in relationships. I am a huge fan of Kevin Roberts' idea of Lovemarks, and work in my psychophysiology lab supports his ideas. And sadly short-term ROI will almost always undercut these types of relationships.

    All of this sounds weird coming from a guy who grew up, literally, in my parents' direct response advertising agency. The first two decades of my life were financed by advertising that got its report card every day: people either returned a card via business reply mail or called a toll-free number, or the ad failed. (And in truth Ogilvy gave a lot of props to direct response).

    So I've been intellectually puzzled by interactive advertising. I've stood at the edge of the stream and thought and thought.

    We were at first, I think, mesmerized by the fact that we could so easily count each click. It seemed like a panacea in the world of TV, where we have to hope upon shaky Nielsen data knowing all the while that we go to the bathroom during commercials.

    And you are absolutely right that the banner ad is not the be all, end all.

    And you are right that the future will be a lot more like the recent effort by P&G to lure Mommy Bloggers to Cincinnati to talk about diapers. And this is, I must admit, mostly a public relations function.

    I just hate to give away buzz marketing, guerrilla marketing, and pretty much anything cool to the PR folks. It feels as if everyone thinks we ad guys are stuck in an episode of Mad Men. Take away big media buys, and are we really inept?

    So what do I teach? Mostly I try to teach critical thinking skills and socialize students to the general problem. If I get to teach them Ad Principles as a sophomore, it will be two years before they graduate. And the world changes so quickly. So I have to teach them how to solve problems rather than to solve a specific problem.

    At Texas Tech, we're greatly expanding our advertising curriculum in an attempt to deal with this changing environment. Because we cannot begin to give it proper treatment in our current 39 credit hours.

    And I'm hoping that trying to teach this fast-moving landscape is going to increasingly use technology such as Skype to bring experts such as yourself into the classroom.

    So, to bring it back to Ogilvy, I believe in narrative and storytelling. It's a basic part of human culture, and storytelling dates to antiquity. It's easy to tell a story in a 30 second television ad. Even a magazine ad. It's not so easy online, unless you move into the branded entertainment content. But I do tell stories in my blog, and so do you.

    The cognitive scientist in me knows that the background clutter makes it into the brain a lot more than you think. But that's impossible to measure, and that's pretty difficult to sell a client even during a good economy.

    But what an awesome challenge, right? I feel pretty lucky that I get to go to work every day thinking about this stuff.

  • Great points, Professor Bradley and thanks for making them.

    I would argue that good public relations is out-in-the-open. It certainly is becoming moreso in the blogger era when first contact is written about. There's little hidden in some blogger's minds because full transparency is important to their audience.

    But I would also like to ask an advertising professor, when you look at the conversion rates of online ads, the misleading effectiveness of ROI numbers on traditional ads (I still contend Arbitron and Nielsen, plus other “how many eyeballs” companies have been using fuzzy math all these years) which are probably as effective as online ads are, what do you teach? How to make ads better or how to reach more people creatively?

    My contention is that most folks don't look at ads. Sure, the coupon-clippers do, but I swear to you I was working at an ad agency at age 33 before I ever stopped on a print ad in a magazine. Just part of my experience to block them out. I don't think I'm a rarity.

    So how to you approach the advertising professionals of tomorrow and make them good, whole, etc., when society is migrating more and more away from their efforts and the Internet has brought about better metrics proving that advertising has perhaps been less effective than we always thought?

    (Keep in mind I work at an ad agency. I don't believe in the doomsday scenario, but I know something isn't working well and needs to be fixed.)

    Thanks for the input. I look forward to more discussion.

  • Great points, Professor Bradley and thanks for making them.

    I would argue that good public relations is out-in-the-open. It certainly is becoming moreso in the blogger era when first contact is written about. There's little hidden in some blogger's minds because full transparency is important to their audience.

    But I would also like to ask an advertising professor, when you look at the conversion rates of online ads, the misleading effectiveness of ROI numbers on traditional ads (I still contend Arbitron and Nielsen, plus other “how many eyeballs” companies have been using fuzzy math all these years) which are probably as effective as online ads are, what do you teach? How to make ads better or how to reach more people creatively?

    My contention is that most folks don't look at ads. Sure, the coupon-clippers do, but I swear to you I was working at an ad agency at age 33 before I ever stopped on a print ad in a magazine. Just part of my experience to block them out. I don't think I'm a rarity.

    So how to you approach the advertising professionals of tomorrow and make them good, whole, etc., when society is migrating more and more away from their efforts and the Internet has brought about better metrics proving that advertising has perhaps been less effective than we always thought?

    (Keep in mind I work at an ad agency. I don't believe in the doomsday scenario, but I know something isn't working well and needs to be fixed.)

    Thanks for the input. I look forward to more discussion.

  • Great points, Professor Bradley and thanks for making them.

    I would argue that good public relations is out-in-the-open. It certainly is becoming moreso in the blogger era when first contact is written about. There's little hidden in some blogger's minds because full transparency is important to their audience.

    But I would also like to ask an advertising professor, when you look at the conversion rates of online ads, the misleading effectiveness of ROI numbers on traditional ads (I still contend Arbitron and Nielsen, plus other “how many eyeballs” companies have been using fuzzy math all these years) which are probably as effective as online ads are, what do you teach? How to make ads better or how to reach more people creatively?

    My contention is that most folks don't look at ads. Sure, the coupon-clippers do, but I swear to you I was working at an ad agency at age 33 before I ever stopped on a print ad in a magazine. Just part of my experience to block them out. I don't think I'm a rarity.

    So how to you approach the advertising professionals of tomorrow and make them good, whole, etc., when society is migrating more and more away from their efforts and the Internet has brought about better metrics proving that advertising has perhaps been less effective than we always thought?

    (Keep in mind I work at an ad agency. I don't believe in the doomsday scenario, but I know something isn't working well and needs to be fixed.)

    Thanks for the input. I look forward to more discussion.

  • Great points, Professor Bradley and thanks for making them.

    I would argue that good public relations is out-in-the-open. It certainly is becoming moreso in the blogger era when first contact is written about. There's little hidden in some blogger's minds because full transparency is important to their audience.

    But I would also like to ask an advertising professor, when you look at the conversion rates of online ads, the misleading effectiveness of ROI numbers on traditional ads (I still contend Arbitron and Nielsen, plus other “how many eyeballs” companies have been using fuzzy math all these years) which are probably as effective as online ads are, what do you teach? How to make ads better or how to reach more people creatively?

    My contention is that most folks don't look at ads. Sure, the coupon-clippers do, but I swear to you I was working at an ad agency at age 33 before I ever stopped on a print ad in a magazine. Just part of my experience to block them out. I don't think I'm a rarity.

    So how to you approach the advertising professionals of tomorrow and make them good, whole, etc., when society is migrating more and more away from their efforts and the Internet has brought about better metrics proving that advertising has perhaps been less effective than we always thought?

    (Keep in mind I work at an ad agency. I don't believe in the doomsday scenario, but I know something isn't working well and needs to be fixed.)

    Thanks for the input. I look forward to more discussion.

  • Great points, Professor Bradley and thanks for making them.

    I would argue that good public relations is out-in-the-open. It certainly is becoming moreso in the blogger era when first contact is written about. There's little hidden in some blogger's minds because full transparency is important to their audience.

    But I would also like to ask an advertising professor, when you look at the conversion rates of online ads, the misleading effectiveness of ROI numbers on traditional ads (I still contend Arbitron and Nielsen, plus other “how many eyeballs” companies have been using fuzzy math all these years) which are probably as effective as online ads are, what do you teach? How to make ads better or how to reach more people creatively?

    My contention is that most folks don't look at ads. Sure, the coupon-clippers do, but I swear to you I was working at an ad agency at age 33 before I ever stopped on a print ad in a magazine. Just part of my experience to block them out. I don't think I'm a rarity.

    So how to you approach the advertising professionals of tomorrow and make them good, whole, etc., when society is migrating more and more away from their efforts and the Internet has brought about better metrics proving that advertising has perhaps been less effective than we always thought?

    (Keep in mind I work at an ad agency. I don't believe in the doomsday scenario, but I know something isn't working well and needs to be fixed.)

    Thanks for the input. I look forward to more discussion.

  • Thanks for the input James. I'm certainly not a doomsday sayer for online advertising, but the model is broken and needs fixing. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm sure interested in finding out, or even figuring it out before someone else does. Thanks for the input.

  • Thanks for the input James. I'm certainly not a doomsday sayer for online advertising, but the model is broken and needs fixing. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm sure interested in finding out, or even figuring it out before someone else does. Thanks for the input.

  • Thanks for the input James. I'm certainly not a doomsday sayer for online advertising, but the model is broken and needs fixing. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm sure interested in finding out, or even figuring it out before someone else does. Thanks for the input.

  • Thanks for the input James. I'm certainly not a doomsday sayer for online advertising, but the model is broken and needs fixing. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm sure interested in finding out, or even figuring it out before someone else does. Thanks for the input.

  • Thanks for the input James. I'm certainly not a doomsday sayer for online advertising, but the model is broken and needs fixing. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm sure interested in finding out, or even figuring it out before someone else does. Thanks for the input.

  • Potatoe, potatoe … What's two years? (Wait a minute. Two years ago no one knew who I was … heh.)

  • Potatoe, potatoe … What's two years? (Wait a minute. Two years ago no one knew who I was … heh.)

  • Potatoe, potatoe … What's two years? (Wait a minute. Two years ago no one knew who I was … heh.)

  • Potatoe, potatoe … What's two years? (Wait a minute. Two years ago no one knew who I was … heh.)

  • Potatoe, potatoe … What's two years? (Wait a minute. Two years ago no one knew who I was … heh.)

  • Need to correct myself…Whack-a-Flack is circa 2001 (I've been doing this for way too long if 2001 seems like the late 90s!).

  • Need to correct myself…Whack-a-Flack is circa 2001 (I've been doing this for way too long if 2001 seems like the late 90s!).

  • Need to correct myself…Whack-a-Flack is circa 2001 (I've been doing this for way too long if 2001 seems like the late 90s!).

  • Need to correct myself…Whack-a-Flack is circa 2001 (I've been doing this for way too long if 2001 seems like the late 90s!).

  • Need to correct myself…Whack-a-Flack is circa 2001 (I've been doing this for way too long if 2001 seems like the late 90s!).

  • sbradley3

    I agree that it is foolish for bloggers to expect advertising dollars without some indication of ROI.

    However, you seem to be talking about a bigger distinction between advertising and public relations. Yet you don't come right out and make the conclusion.

    Every traditional definition of advertising contains the word “mass,” as in a mass audience. You seem de facto to pick up that definition. Simply put, a blog cannot garner advertising dollars because it is not mass.

    However, as an advertising professor, I refuse to lose ground to public relations simply because of quantity. There is a separate function for each, and each has its place. Although it is quite possible that many ad buys simply are not worth the time of a media buyer to make them, paid advertising can still be effective whether it is mass or not.

    As a former reporter (admittedly weird for an ad prof), I greatly valued my public relations contacts. They were invaluable. But the two functions are separate. Intertwined but separate.

    The fractionated audience makes mass communications difficult; however, there is still an important role for paid, clearly labeled persuasion.

    I would have great fears for the entire media enterprise if every effort of persuasion came through not quite out-in-the-open public relations.

  • sbradley3

    I agree that it is foolish for bloggers to expect advertising dollars without some indication of ROI.

    However, you seem to be talking about a bigger distinction between advertising and public relations. Yet you don't come right out and make the conclusion.

    Every traditional definition of advertising contains the word “mass,” as in a mass audience. You seem de facto to pick up that definition. Simply put, a blog cannot garner advertising dollars because it is not mass.

    However, as an advertising professor, I refuse to lose ground to public relations simply because of quantity. There is a separate function for each, and each has its place. Although it is quite possible that many ad buys simply are not worth the time of a media buyer to make them, paid advertising can still be effective whether it is mass or not.

    As a former reporter (admittedly weird for an ad prof), I greatly valued my public relations contacts. They were invaluable. But the two functions are separate. Intertwined but separate.

    The fractionated audience makes mass communications difficult; however, there is still an important role for paid, clearly labeled persuasion.

    I would have great fears for the entire media enterprise if every effort of persuasion came through not quite out-in-the-open public relations.

  • sbradley3

    I agree that it is foolish for bloggers to expect advertising dollars without some indication of ROI.

    However, you seem to be talking about a bigger distinction between advertising and public relations. Yet you don't come right out and make the conclusion.

    Every traditional definition of advertising contains the word “mass,” as in a mass audience. You seem de facto to pick up that definition. Simply put, a blog cannot garner advertising dollars because it is not mass.

    However, as an advertising professor, I refuse to lose ground to public relations simply because of quantity. There is a separate function for each, and each has its place. Although it is quite possible that many ad buys simply are not worth the time of a media buyer to make them, paid advertising can still be effective whether it is mass or not.

    As a former reporter (admittedly weird for an ad prof), I greatly valued my public relations contacts. They were invaluable. But the two functions are separate. Intertwined but separate.

    The fractionated audience makes mass communications difficult; however, there is still an important role for paid, clearly labeled persuasion.

    I would have great fears for the entire media enterprise if every effort of persuasion came through not quite out-in-the-open public relations.

  • sbradley3

    I agree that it is foolish for bloggers to expect advertising dollars without some indication of ROI.

    However, you seem to be talking about a bigger distinction between advertising and public relations. Yet you don't come right out and make the conclusion.

    Every traditional definition of advertising contains the word “mass,” as in a mass audience. You seem de facto to pick up that definition. Simply put, a blog cannot garner advertising dollars because it is not mass.

    However, as an advertising professor, I refuse to lose ground to public relations simply because of quantity. There is a separate function for each, and each has its place. Although it is quite possible that many ad buys simply are not worth the time of a media buyer to make them, paid advertising can still be effective whether it is mass or not.

    As a former reporter (admittedly weird for an ad prof), I greatly valued my public relations contacts. They were invaluable. But the two functions are separate. Intertwined but separate.

    The fractionated audience makes mass communications difficult; however, there is still an important role for paid, clearly labeled persuasion.

    I would have great fears for the entire media enterprise if every effort of persuasion came through not quite out-in-the-open public relations.

  • sbradley3

    I agree that it is foolish for bloggers to expect advertising dollars without some indication of ROI.

    However, you seem to be talking about a bigger distinction between advertising and public relations. Yet you don't come right out and make the conclusion.

    Every traditional definition of advertising contains the word “mass,” as in a mass audience. You seem de facto to pick up that definition. Simply put, a blog cannot garner advertising dollars because it is not mass.

    However, as an advertising professor, I refuse to lose ground to public relations simply because of quantity. There is a separate function for each, and each has its place. Although it is quite possible that many ad buys simply are not worth the time of a media buyer to make them, paid advertising can still be effective whether it is mass or not.

    As a former reporter (admittedly weird for an ad prof), I greatly valued my public relations contacts. They were invaluable. But the two functions are separate. Intertwined but separate.

    The fractionated audience makes mass communications difficult; however, there is still an important role for paid, clearly labeled persuasion.

    I would have great fears for the entire media enterprise if every effort of persuasion came through not quite out-in-the-open public relations.

  • sbradley3

    I agree that it is foolish for bloggers to expect advertising dollars without some indication of ROI.

    However, you seem to be talking about a bigger distinction between advertising and public relations. Yet you don't come right out and make the conclusion.

    Every traditional definition of advertising contains the word “mass,” as in a mass audience. You seem de facto to pick up that definition. Simply put, a blog cannot garner advertising dollars because it is not mass.

    However, as an advertising professor, I refuse to lose ground to public relations simply because of quantity. There is a separate function for each, and each has its place. Although it is quite possible that many ad buys simply are not worth the time of a media buyer to make them, paid advertising can still be effective whether it is mass or not.

    As a former reporter (admittedly weird for an ad prof), I greatly valued my public relations contacts. They were invaluable. But the two functions are separate. Intertwined but separate.

    The fractionated audience makes mass communications difficult; however, there is still an important role for paid, clearly labeled persuasion.

    I would have great fears for the entire media enterprise if every effort of persuasion came through not quite out-in-the-open public relations.

    • Great points, Professor Bradley and thanks for making them.

      I would argue that good public relations is out-in-the-open. It certainly is becoming moreso in the blogger era when first contact is written about. There's little hidden in some blogger's minds because full transparency is important to their audience.

      But I would also like to ask an advertising professor, when you look at the conversion rates of online ads, the misleading effectiveness of ROI numbers on traditional ads (I still contend Arbitron and Nielsen, plus other “how many eyeballs” companies have been using fuzzy math all these years) which are probably as effective as online ads are, what do you teach? How to make ads better or how to reach more people creatively?

      My contention is that most folks don't look at ads. Sure, the coupon-clippers do, but I swear to you I was working at an ad agency at age 33 before I ever stopped on a print ad in a magazine. Just part of my experience to block them out. I don't think I'm a rarity.

      So how to you approach the advertising professionals of tomorrow and make them good, whole, etc., when society is migrating more and more away from their efforts and the Internet has brought about better metrics proving that advertising has perhaps been less effective than we always thought?

      (Keep in mind I work at an ad agency. I don't believe in the doomsday scenario, but I know something isn't working well and needs to be fixed.)

      Thanks for the input. I look forward to more discussion.

      • sbradley3

        Jason, thank you for the great food for thought. I'm an Ogilvy guy, and I still believe in campaigns. I believe in messages that extend over years, and I believe in relationships. I am a huge fan of Kevin Roberts' idea of Lovemarks, and work in my psychophysiology lab supports his ideas. And sadly short-term ROI will almost always undercut these types of relationships.

        All of this sounds weird coming from a guy who grew up, literally, in my parents' direct response advertising agency. The first two decades of my life were financed by advertising that got its report card every day: people either returned a card via business reply mail or called a toll-free number, or the ad failed. (And in truth Ogilvy gave a lot of props to direct response).

        So I've been intellectually puzzled by interactive advertising. I've stood at the edge of the stream and thought and thought.

        We were at first, I think, mesmerized by the fact that we could so easily count each click. It seemed like a panacea in the world of TV, where we have to hope upon shaky Nielsen data knowing all the while that we go to the bathroom during commercials.

        And you are absolutely right that the banner ad is not the be all, end all.

        And you are right that the future will be a lot more like the recent effort by P&G to lure Mommy Bloggers to Cincinnati to talk about diapers. And this is, I must admit, mostly a public relations function.

        I just hate to give away buzz marketing, guerrilla marketing, and pretty much anything cool to the PR folks. It feels as if everyone thinks we ad guys are stuck in an episode of Mad Men. Take away big media buys, and are we really inept?

        So what do I teach? Mostly I try to teach critical thinking skills and socialize students to the general problem. If I get to teach them Ad Principles as a sophomore, it will be two years before they graduate. And the world changes so quickly. So I have to teach them how to solve problems rather than to solve a specific problem.

        At Texas Tech, we're greatly expanding our advertising curriculum in an attempt to deal with this changing environment. Because we cannot begin to give it proper treatment in our current 39 credit hours.

        And I'm hoping that trying to teach this fast-moving landscape is going to increasingly use technology such as Skype to bring experts such as yourself into the classroom.

        So, to bring it back to Ogilvy, I believe in narrative and storytelling. It's a basic part of human culture, and storytelling dates to antiquity. It's easy to tell a story in a 30 second television ad. Even a magazine ad. It's not so easy online, unless you move into the branded entertainment content. But I do tell stories in my blog, and so do you.

        The cognitive scientist in me knows that the background clutter makes it into the brain a lot more than you think. But that's impossible to measure, and that's pretty difficult to sell a client even during a good economy.

        But what an awesome challenge, right? I feel pretty lucky that I get to go to work every day thinking about this stuff.

        • Thank you, so much, Sam, for the well thought, well said response. It's fantastic to hear that someone grounded in advertising may be contemplating the effectiveness of certain types. It's also refreshing to know an educator out there is trying to ensure our next generation of advertising professionals is well-equipped to deal with the new media landscape.

          I'll be in touch as this is much too good to be lost in the comments of a blog.

  • Pingback: Do It Yourself Tips for Marketing & PR « Be Innovation()

  • Good point, Stephen. I think there will be bloggers who abuse the system and aren't as transparent. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart, so those will be sniffed out and pay the price. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Good point, Stephen. I think there will be bloggers who abuse the system and aren't as transparent. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart, so those will be sniffed out and pay the price. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Good point, Stephen. I think there will be bloggers who abuse the system and aren't as transparent. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart, so those will be sniffed out and pay the price. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Good point, Stephen. I think there will be bloggers who abuse the system and aren't as transparent. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart, so those will be sniffed out and pay the price. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Good point, Stephen. I think there will be bloggers who abuse the system and aren't as transparent. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart, so those will be sniffed out and pay the price. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Excellent point, Roger. Thanks for the additional thoughts.

  • Excellent point, Roger. Thanks for the additional thoughts.

  • Excellent point, Roger. Thanks for the additional thoughts.

  • Excellent point, Roger. Thanks for the additional thoughts.

  • Excellent point, Roger. Thanks for the additional thoughts.

  • Excellent post. Whether sponsored blog post or not, honesty and transparency are essential. Blogging has been pioneered “as platform for personal and authentic voice,” to quote Denise Shiffman (The Age of Engage). Keeping blogging honest will be the key to ensuring these sponsored posts create value for the blogger, his readers and — yes — the marketer. Marketers themselves should demand that even paid reviews be honest, with both positive and not so positive dimensions of the product experience being reported. Otherwise the “medium” loses the very essence of what makes it so valuable to the audience. Negative aspects represent an opportunity for the marketer to respond and eventually improve the product. My only questions is if bloggers will have the wherewithal to maintain that level of integrity in the face of monetary compensation. Or will they shape their responses to please the sponsor to increase the chances of similar offers in future.

  • Excellent post. Whether sponsored blog post or not, honesty and transparency are essential. Blogging has been pioneered “as platform for personal and authentic voice,” to quote Denise Shiffman (The Age of Engage). Keeping blogging honest will be the key to ensuring these sponsored posts create value for the blogger, his readers and — yes — the marketer. Marketers themselves should demand that even paid reviews be honest, with both positive and not so positive dimensions of the product experience being reported. Otherwise the “medium” loses the very essence of what makes it so valuable to the audience. Negative aspects represent an opportunity for the marketer to respond and eventually improve the product. My only questions is if bloggers will have the wherewithal to maintain that level of integrity in the face of monetary compensation. Or will they shape their responses to please the sponsor to increase the chances of similar offers in future.

  • Excellent post. Whether sponsored blog post or not, honesty and transparency are essential. Blogging has been pioneered “as platform for personal and authentic voice,” to quote Denise Shiffman (The Age of Engage). Keeping blogging honest will be the key to ensuring these sponsored posts create value for the blogger, his readers and — yes — the marketer. Marketers themselves should demand that even paid reviews be honest, with both positive and not so positive dimensions of the product experience being reported. Otherwise the “medium” loses the very essence of what makes it so valuable to the audience. Negative aspects represent an opportunity for the marketer to respond and eventually improve the product. My only questions is if bloggers will have the wherewithal to maintain that level of integrity in the face of monetary compensation. Or will they shape their responses to please the sponsor to increase the chances of similar offers in future.

  • Excellent post. Whether sponsored blog post or not, honesty and transparency are essential. Blogging has been pioneered “as platform for personal and authentic voice,” to quote Denise Shiffman (The Age of Engage). Keeping blogging honest will be the key to ensuring these sponsored posts create value for the blogger, his readers and — yes — the marketer. Marketers themselves should demand that even paid reviews be honest, with both positive and not so positive dimensions of the product experience being reported. Otherwise the “medium” loses the very essence of what makes it so valuable to the audience. Negative aspects represent an opportunity for the marketer to respond and eventually improve the product. My only questions is if bloggers will have the wherewithal to maintain that level of integrity in the face of monetary compensation. Or will they shape their responses to please the sponsor to increase the chances of similar offers in future.

  • Excellent post. Whether sponsored blog post or not, honesty and transparency are essential. Blogging has been pioneered “as platform for personal and authentic voice,” to quote Denise Shiffman (The Age of Engage). Keeping blogging honest will be the key to ensuring these sponsored posts create value for the blogger, his readers and — yes — the marketer. Marketers themselves should demand that even paid reviews be honest, with both positive and not so positive dimensions of the product experience being reported. Otherwise the “medium” loses the very essence of what makes it so valuable to the audience. Negative aspects represent an opportunity for the marketer to respond and eventually improve the product. My only questions is if bloggers will have the wherewithal to maintain that level of integrity in the face of monetary compensation. Or will they shape their responses to please the sponsor to increase the chances of similar offers in future.

  • Excellent post. Whether sponsored blog post or not, honesty and transparency are essential. Blogging has been pioneered “as platform for personal and authentic voice,” to quote Denise Shiffman (The Age of Engage). Keeping blogging honest will be the key to ensuring these sponsored posts create value for the blogger, his readers and — yes — the marketer. Marketers themselves should demand that even paid reviews be honest, with both positive and not so positive dimensions of the product experience being reported. Otherwise the “medium” loses the very essence of what makes it so valuable to the audience. Negative aspects represent an opportunity for the marketer to respond and eventually improve the product. My only questions is if bloggers will have the wherewithal to maintain that level of integrity in the face of monetary compensation. Or will they shape their responses to please the sponsor to increase the chances of similar offers in future.

    • Good point, Stephen. I think there will be bloggers who abuse the system and aren't as transparent. Fortunately, the public is pretty smart, so those will be sniffed out and pay the price. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Hey Jason. Great post. Your breakdown on what's in it for the blogger is spot on I think.

    There's one key thing that you hinted at but didn't focus on in this exchange, and it's the reason why this kind of bargaining arrangement works (and has done for donkey's years in trad PR and media)…

    When you offer up this kind of exchange there's a huge incentive for the blogger aside from cash: exclusive content. Bloggers – like every other media outlet – struggle for scale and inventory… therefore the gift of free, interesting content is always attractive… the have a hungry audience to satisfy just like the WSJ, and not much horsepower to help them.

    Beyond that, whether its paid for, assisted or just good old fashioned home brewed, the question – as you rightly say – is whether or not the content is good. As a reader so long as its interesting and relevant, I don't give a damn… and nor does anyone else…. So – well said. You're spot on…. Incentivised blogging will continue and grow….

  • Hey Jason. Great post. Your breakdown on what's in it for the blogger is spot on I think.

    There's one key thing that you hinted at but didn't focus on in this exchange, and it's the reason why this kind of bargaining arrangement works (and has done for donkey's years in trad PR and media)…

    When you offer up this kind of exchange there's a huge incentive for the blogger aside from cash: exclusive content. Bloggers – like every other media outlet – struggle for scale and inventory… therefore the gift of free, interesting content is always attractive… the have a hungry audience to satisfy just like the WSJ, and not much horsepower to help them.

    Beyond that, whether its paid for, assisted or just good old fashioned home brewed, the question – as you rightly say – is whether or not the content is good. As a reader so long as its interesting and relevant, I don't give a damn… and nor does anyone else…. So – well said. You're spot on…. Incentivised blogging will continue and grow….

  • Hey Jason. Great post. Your breakdown on what's in it for the blogger is spot on I think.

    There's one key thing that you hinted at but didn't focus on in this exchange, and it's the reason why this kind of bargaining arrangement works (and has done for donkey's years in trad PR and media)…

    When you offer up this kind of exchange there's a huge incentive for the blogger aside from cash: exclusive content. Bloggers – like every other media outlet – struggle for scale and inventory… therefore the gift of free, interesting content is always attractive… the have a hungry audience to satisfy just like the WSJ, and not much horsepower to help them.

    Beyond that, whether its paid for, assisted or just good old fashioned home brewed, the question – as you rightly say – is whether or not the content is good. As a reader so long as its interesting and relevant, I don't give a damn… and nor does anyone else…. So – well said. You're spot on…. Incentivised blogging will continue and grow….

  • Hey Jason. Great post. Your breakdown on what's in it for the blogger is spot on I think.

    There's one key thing that you hinted at but didn't focus on in this exchange, and it's the reason why this kind of bargaining arrangement works (and has done for donkey's years in trad PR and media)…

    When you offer up this kind of exchange there's a huge incentive for the blogger aside from cash: exclusive content. Bloggers – like every other media outlet – struggle for scale and inventory… therefore the gift of free, interesting content is always attractive… the have a hungry audience to satisfy just like the WSJ, and not much horsepower to help them.

    Beyond that, whether its paid for, assisted or just good old fashioned home brewed, the question – as you rightly say – is whether or not the content is good. As a reader so long as its interesting and relevant, I don't give a damn… and nor does anyone else…. So – well said. You're spot on…. Incentivised blogging will continue and grow….

  • Hey Jason. Great post. Your breakdown on what's in it for the blogger is spot on I think.

    There's one key thing that you hinted at but didn't focus on in this exchange, and it's the reason why this kind of bargaining arrangement works (and has done for donkey's years in trad PR and media)…

    When you offer up this kind of exchange there's a huge incentive for the blogger aside from cash: exclusive content. Bloggers – like every other media outlet – struggle for scale and inventory… therefore the gift of free, interesting content is always attractive… the have a hungry audience to satisfy just like the WSJ, and not much horsepower to help them.

    Beyond that, whether its paid for, assisted or just good old fashioned home brewed, the question – as you rightly say – is whether or not the content is good. As a reader so long as its interesting and relevant, I don't give a damn… and nor does anyone else…. So – well said. You're spot on…. Incentivised blogging will continue and grow….

  • Hey Jason. Great post. Your breakdown on what's in it for the blogger is spot on I think.

    There's one key thing that you hinted at but didn't focus on in this exchange, and it's the reason why this kind of bargaining arrangement works (and has done for donkey's years in trad PR and media)…

    When you offer up this kind of exchange there's a huge incentive for the blogger aside from cash: exclusive content. Bloggers – like every other media outlet – struggle for scale and inventory… therefore the gift of free, interesting content is always attractive… the have a hungry audience to satisfy just like the WSJ, and not much horsepower to help them.

    Beyond that, whether its paid for, assisted or just good old fashioned home brewed, the question – as you rightly say – is whether or not the content is good. As a reader so long as its interesting and relevant, I don't give a damn… and nor does anyone else…. So – well said. You're spot on…. Incentivised blogging will continue and grow….

    • Excellent point, Roger. Thanks for the additional thoughts.

  • Hi Jason. First time commenter. Love the post. I would like to add some perspective.

    First, small isn't necessarily bad from an advertisers POV. It's relatively easy to get big mass channels but the wasted circulation is huge. If the audience is small, but of high quality, then it is worth the investment. Advertising is becoming less homogeneous every day and the WOM generated from a small high-quality audience extends the message nicely.

    And when you use blog networks like @FederatedMedia (we buy them and I know their CEO @JohnBattelle but other than that I don't have any relationship with them) you can efficiently advertise on blogs even small ones.

    Finally, as suggested by @anita response isn't the only game in town. I love response, I've spent 20+ years in diirect markketing, but awareness, engagement and involvement are also valid advertising objectives. That said, a recent test on Federated's blog network for a CPG new product launch generated superb CTR and 25% conversion to trial coupons. The Product Manager was thrilled and this channel will play a key role in '09.

    James

  • Hi Jason. First time commenter. Love the post. I would like to add some perspective.

    First, small isn't necessarily bad from an advertisers POV. It's relatively easy to get big mass channels but the wasted circulation is huge. If the audience is small, but of high quality, then it is worth the investment. Advertising is becoming less homogeneous every day and the WOM generated from a small high-quality audience extends the message nicely.

    And when you use blog networks like @FederatedMedia (we buy them and I know their CEO @JohnBattelle but other than that I don't have any relationship with them) you can efficiently advertise on blogs even small ones.

    Finally, as suggested by @anita response isn't the only game in town. I love response, I've spent 20+ years in diirect markketing, but awareness, engagement and involvement are also valid advertising objectives. That said, a recent test on Federated's blog network for a CPG new product launch generated superb CTR and 25% conversion to trial coupons. The Product Manager was thrilled and this channel will play a key role in '09.

    James

  • Hi Jason. First time commenter. Love the post. I would like to add some perspective.

    First, small isn't necessarily bad from an advertisers POV. It's relatively easy to get big mass channels but the wasted circulation is huge. If the audience is small, but of high quality, then it is worth the investment. Advertising is becoming less homogeneous every day and the WOM generated from a small high-quality audience extends the message nicely.

    And when you use blog networks like @FederatedMedia (we buy them and I know their CEO @JohnBattelle but other than that I don't have any relationship with them) you can efficiently advertise on blogs even small ones.

    Finally, as suggested by @anita response isn't the only game in town. I love response, I've spent 20+ years in diirect markketing, but awareness, engagement and involvement are also valid advertising objectives. That said, a recent test on Federated's blog network for a CPG new product launch generated superb CTR and 25% conversion to trial coupons. The Product Manager was thrilled and this channel will play a key role in '09.

    James

  • Hi Jason. First time commenter. Love the post. I would like to add some perspective.

    First, small isn't necessarily bad from an advertisers POV. It's relatively easy to get big mass channels but the wasted circulation is huge. If the audience is small, but of high quality, then it is worth the investment. Advertising is becoming less homogeneous every day and the WOM generated from a small high-quality audience extends the message nicely.

    And when you use blog networks like @FederatedMedia (we buy them and I know their CEO @JohnBattelle but other than that I don't have any relationship with them) you can efficiently advertise on blogs even small ones.

    Finally, as suggested by @anita response isn't the only game in town. I love response, I've spent 20+ years in diirect markketing, but awareness, engagement and involvement are also valid advertising objectives. That said, a recent test on Federated's blog network for a CPG new product launch generated superb CTR and 25% conversion to trial coupons. The Product Manager was thrilled and this channel will play a key role in '09.

    James

  • Hi Jason. First time commenter. Love the post. I would like to add some perspective.

    First, small isn't necessarily bad from an advertisers POV. It's relatively easy to get big mass channels but the wasted circulation is huge. If the audience is small, but of high quality, then it is worth the investment. Advertising is becoming less homogeneous every day and the WOM generated from a small high-quality audience extends the message nicely.

    And when you use blog networks like @FederatedMedia (we buy them and I know their CEO @JohnBattelle but other than that I don't have any relationship with them) you can efficiently advertise on blogs even small ones.

    Finally, as suggested by @anita response isn't the only game in town. I love response, I've spent 20+ years in diirect markketing, but awareness, engagement and involvement are also valid advertising objectives. That said, a recent test on Federated's blog network for a CPG new product launch generated superb CTR and 25% conversion to trial coupons. The Product Manager was thrilled and this channel will play a key role in '09.

    James

  • Hi Jason. First time commenter. Love the post. I would like to add some perspective.

    First, small isn't necessarily bad from an advertisers POV. It's relatively easy to get big mass channels but the wasted circulation is huge. If the audience is small, but of high quality, then it is worth the investment. Advertising is becoming less homogeneous every day and the WOM generated from a small high-quality audience extends the message nicely.

    And when you use blog networks like @FederatedMedia (we buy them and I know their CEO @JohnBattelle but other than that I don't have any relationship with them) you can efficiently advertise on blogs even small ones.

    Finally, as suggested by @anita response isn't the only game in town. I love response, I've spent 20+ years in diirect markketing, but awareness, engagement and involvement are also valid advertising objectives. That said, a recent test on Federated's blog network for a CPG new product launch generated superb CTR and 25% conversion to trial coupons. The Product Manager was thrilled and this channel will play a key role in '09.

    James

    • Thanks for the input James. I'm certainly not a doomsday sayer for online advertising, but the model is broken and needs fixing. I don't know what the future holds, but I'm sure interested in finding out, or even figuring it out before someone else does. Thanks for the input.

  • Well, I love pushback, Anita.

    First, some online advertising is effective. In general, however, “effective” is 2-5% click thru rates? (Yeah, I've had some commentors claim 25% for what they do, but whatever.) The residing “good” metric is less than one percent click thrus … that's plain crap. If I'm a brand manager either my creative sucks or banner ads suck … I'm betting it's the latter more so than the creative. Online advertising is growing because off-line isn't turning in much better performance. And I get your argument for branding, but again … I can't tell you the last time I even looked at a banner ad and the only ones I can remember lately are the ones that jump out, force you to close something and those piss me off. (Remember … I work at an agency. I'm supposed to dig that. But I don't and I'm sure others don't either.) You have a point and I'm not trying to discredit your stance, just think there's more to a determination that online advertising is effective than it's growth.

    2 – It's cheaper and more efficient to pitch than spend the time to execute advertising. That and for smaller blogs that charge, say $250 or $500 for a monthly ad, most national brand managers are going to say, “WHAT? Come talk to me when you have a need.” Those are buys that are normally handled by regional or local marketing folks, not national brand managers. They talk in seven figure ad buys. $250 isn't even a rounding error to them. It's what they spend on working lunches 4-6 times a month.

    3 – Agreed and covered in 2.

    4 – Agreed

    5 – Agreed as well.

    Thanks a ton for the thoughtful comments and time it took to plug it all in. Much appreciated.

  • Well, I love pushback, Anita.

    First, some online advertising is effective. In general, however, “effective” is 2-5% click thru rates? (Yeah, I've had some commentors claim 25% for what they do, but whatever.) The residing “good” metric is less than one percent click thrus … that's plain crap. If I'm a brand manager either my creative sucks or banner ads suck … I'm betting it's the latter more so than the creative. Online advertising is growing because off-line isn't turning in much better performance. And I get your argument for branding, but again … I can't tell you the last time I even looked at a banner ad and the only ones I can remember lately are the ones that jump out, force you to close something and those piss me off. (Remember … I work at an agency. I'm supposed to dig that. But I don't and I'm sure others don't either.) You have a point and I'm not trying to discredit your stance, just think there's more to a determination that online advertising is effective than it's growth.

    2 – It's cheaper and more efficient to pitch than spend the time to execute advertising. That and for smaller blogs that charge, say $250 or $500 for a monthly ad, most national brand managers are going to say, “WHAT? Come talk to me when you have a need.” Those are buys that are normally handled by regional or local marketing folks, not national brand managers. They talk in seven figure ad buys. $250 isn't even a rounding error to them. It's what they spend on working lunches 4-6 times a month.

    3 – Agreed and covered in 2.

    4 – Agreed

    5 – Agreed as well.

    Thanks a ton for the thoughtful comments and time it took to plug it all in. Much appreciated.

  • Well, I love pushback, Anita.

    First, some online advertising is effective. In general, however, “effective” is 2-5% click thru rates? (Yeah, I've had some commentors claim 25% for what they do, but whatever.) The residing “good” metric is less than one percent click thrus … that's plain crap. If I'm a brand manager either my creative sucks or banner ads suck … I'm betting it's the latter more so than the creative. Online advertising is growing because off-line isn't turning in much better performance. And I get your argument for branding, but again … I can't tell you the last time I even looked at a banner ad and the only ones I can remember lately are the ones that jump out, force you to close something and those piss me off. (Remember … I work at an agency. I'm supposed to dig that. But I don't and I'm sure others don't either.) You have a point and I'm not trying to discredit your stance, just think there's more to a determination that online advertising is effective than it's growth.

    2 – It's cheaper and more efficient to pitch than spend the time to execute advertising. That and for smaller blogs that charge, say $250 or $500 for a monthly ad, most national brand managers are going to say, “WHAT? Come talk to me when you have a need.” Those are buys that are normally handled by regional or local marketing folks, not national brand managers. They talk in seven figure ad buys. $250 isn't even a rounding error to them. It's what they spend on working lunches 4-6 times a month.

    3 – Agreed and covered in 2.

    4 – Agreed

    5 – Agreed as well.

    Thanks a ton for the thoughtful comments and time it took to plug it all in. Much appreciated.

  • Well, I love pushback, Anita.

    First, some online advertising is effective. In general, however, “effective” is 2-5% click thru rates? (Yeah, I've had some commentors claim 25% for what they do, but whatever.) The residing “good” metric is less than one percent click thrus … that's plain crap. If I'm a brand manager either my creative sucks or banner ads suck … I'm betting it's the latter more so than the creative. Online advertising is growing because off-line isn't turning in much better performance. And I get your argument for branding, but again … I can't tell you the last time I even looked at a banner ad and the only ones I can remember lately are the ones that jump out, force you to close something and those piss me off. (Remember … I work at an agency. I'm supposed to dig that. But I don't and I'm sure others don't either.) You have a point and I'm not trying to discredit your stance, just think there's more to a determination that online advertising is effective than it's growth.

    2 – It's cheaper and more efficient to pitch than spend the time to execute advertising. That and for smaller blogs that charge, say $250 or $500 for a monthly ad, most national brand managers are going to say, “WHAT? Come talk to me when you have a need.” Those are buys that are normally handled by regional or local marketing folks, not national brand managers. They talk in seven figure ad buys. $250 isn't even a rounding error to them. It's what they spend on working lunches 4-6 times a month.

    3 – Agreed and covered in 2.

    4 – Agreed

    5 – Agreed as well.

    Thanks a ton for the thoughtful comments and time it took to plug it all in. Much appreciated.

  • Well, I love pushback, Anita.

    First, some online advertising is effective. In general, however, “effective” is 2-5% click thru rates? (Yeah, I've had some commentors claim 25% for what they do, but whatever.) The residing “good” metric is less than one percent click thrus … that's plain crap. If I'm a brand manager either my creative sucks or banner ads suck … I'm betting it's the latter more so than the creative. Online advertising is growing because off-line isn't turning in much better performance. And I get your argument for branding, but again … I can't tell you the last time I even looked at a banner ad and the only ones I can remember lately are the ones that jump out, force you to close something and those piss me off. (Remember … I work at an agency. I'm supposed to dig that. But I don't and I'm sure others don't either.) You have a point and I'm not trying to discredit your stance, just think there's more to a determination that online advertising is effective than it's growth.

    2 – It's cheaper and more efficient to pitch than spend the time to execute advertising. That and for smaller blogs that charge, say $250 or $500 for a monthly ad, most national brand managers are going to say, “WHAT? Come talk to me when you have a need.” Those are buys that are normally handled by regional or local marketing folks, not national brand managers. They talk in seven figure ad buys. $250 isn't even a rounding error to them. It's what they spend on working lunches 4-6 times a month.

    3 – Agreed and covered in 2.

    4 – Agreed

    5 – Agreed as well.

    Thanks a ton for the thoughtful comments and time it took to plug it all in. Much appreciated.

  • Hi Jason, happy holidays.

    First of all I want to congratulate Chris Brogan for having the guts to write his sponsored post and for your support of it. I thought Chris's post was well done — it's obvious he put a lot of work into it with an actual visit — by the whole family, no less! — and photos, etc. I haven't been in a Sears or KMart store in years, but that post intrigued me enough that I might actually think of them next time.

    I do want to respectfully push back a little, though:

    (1) Online advertising is effective, especially for branding. I think we need to get it out of the realm of direct response, and expecting to see an immediate and direct payback (click through to sale). That's not expected from PR, so why hold advertising to the same standard? The fact that online advertising is growing shows advertisers think it has value.

    (2) I don't buy that “your blog is too small for ads, Mr. or Ms Blogger.” If the blog is big enough to hire an expensive PR firm to go to work pitching the blogger to get them to write about your company or your product, then the blog is “big enough.”

    (3) The real impediment to advertising on small blogs is structural. It's hard to cost-effectively put ads on small sites. Doesn't mean the ad wouldn't be valuable, and doesn't mean it couldn't be different. But today it would cost more for a brand manager to work through the bureaucracy via the company’s ad agency and corporate ad manager, than a $500 ad itself would cost.

    (4) Every business blog is commercial in some way – I don’t understand all the hubbub. Even the consultant who “doesn’t accept ads” is really advertising his or her own services, or his or her personal brand. I have no problem with that – in fact, I’d have far less respect for them if they weren’t a good business person first and foremost.

    (5) Finally, I think bloggers need services like IZEA. I don’t plan to sign up for IZEA – but for smaller bloggers who want to monetize all the hard work they put into their blogs, IZEA is a more realistic way to do that than ads (see the realities of point #3). To me it’s worse for bloggers to work hard and starve to death, than to work hard and earn a better life for themselves and their families.

  • Hi Jason, happy holidays.

    First of all I want to congratulate Chris Brogan for having the guts to write his sponsored post and for your support of it. I thought Chris's post was well done — it's obvious he put a lot of work into it with an actual visit — by the whole family, no less! — and photos, etc. I haven't been in a Sears or KMart store in years, but that post intrigued me enough that I might actually think of them next time.

    I do want to respectfully push back a little, though:

    (1) Online advertising is effective, especially for branding. I think we need to get it out of the realm of direct response, and expecting to see an immediate and direct payback (click through to sale). That's not expected from PR, so why hold advertising to the same standard? The fact that online advertising is growing shows advertisers think it has value.

    (2) I don't buy that “your blog is too small for ads, Mr. or Ms Blogger.” If the blog is big enough to hire an expensive PR firm to go to work pitching the blogger to get them to write about your company or your product, then the blog is “big enough.”

    (3) The real impediment to advertising on small blogs is structural. It's hard to cost-effectively put ads on small sites. Doesn't mean the ad wouldn't be valuable, and doesn't mean it couldn't be different. But today it would cost more for a brand manager to work through the bureaucracy via the company’s ad agency and corporate ad manager, than a $500 ad itself would cost.

    (4) Every business blog is commercial in some way – I don’t understand all the hubbub. Even the consultant who “doesn’t accept ads” is really advertising his or her own services, or his or her personal brand. I have no problem with that – in fact, I’d have far less respect for them if they weren’t a good business person first and foremost.

    (5) Finally, I think bloggers need services like IZEA. I don’t plan to sign up for IZEA – but for smaller bloggers who want to monetize all the hard work they put into their blogs, IZEA is a more realistic way to do that than ads (see the realities of point #3). To me it’s worse for bloggers to work hard and starve to death, than to work hard and earn a better life for themselves and their families.

  • Hi Jason, happy holidays.

    First of all I want to congratulate Chris Brogan for having the guts to write his sponsored post and for your support of it. I thought Chris's post was well done — it's obvious he put a lot of work into it with an actual visit — by the whole family, no less! — and photos, etc. I haven't been in a Sears or KMart store in years, but that post intrigued me enough that I might actually think of them next time.

    I do want to respectfully push back a little, though:

    (1) Online advertising is effective, especially for branding. I think we need to get it out of the realm of direct response, and expecting to see an immediate and direct payback (click through to sale). That's not expected from PR, so why hold advertising to the same standard? The fact that online advertising is growing shows advertisers think it has value.

    (2) I don't buy that “your blog is too small for ads, Mr. or Ms Blogger.” If the blog is big enough to hire an expensive PR firm to go to work pitching the blogger to get them to write about your company or your product, then the blog is “big enough.”

    (3) The real impediment to advertising on small blogs is structural. It's hard to cost-effectively put ads on small sites. Doesn't mean the ad wouldn't be valuable, and doesn't mean it couldn't be different. But today it would cost more for a brand manager to work through the bureaucracy via the company’s ad agency and corporate ad manager, than a $500 ad itself would cost.

    (4) Every business blog is commercial in some way – I don’t understand all the hubbub. Even the consultant who “doesn’t accept ads” is really advertising his or her own services, or his or her personal brand. I have no problem with that – in fact, I’d have far less respect for them if they weren’t a good business person first and foremost.

    (5) Finally, I think bloggers need services like IZEA. I don’t plan to sign up for IZEA – but for smaller bloggers who want to monetize all the hard work they put into their blogs, IZEA is a more realistic way to do that than ads (see the realities of point #3). To me it’s worse for bloggers to work hard and starve to death, than to work hard and earn a better life for themselves and their families.

  • Hi Jason, happy holidays.

    First of all I want to congratulate Chris Brogan for having the guts to write his sponsored post and for your support of it. I thought Chris's post was well done — it's obvious he put a lot of work into it with an actual visit — by the whole family, no less! — and photos, etc. I haven't been in a Sears or KMart store in years, but that post intrigued me enough that I might actually think of them next time.

    I do want to respectfully push back a little, though:

    (1) Online advertising is effective, especially for branding. I think we need to get it out of the realm of direct response, and expecting to see an immediate and direct payback (click through to sale). That's not expected from PR, so why hold advertising to the same standard? The fact that online advertising is growing shows advertisers think it has value.

    (2) I don't buy that “your blog is too small for ads, Mr. or Ms Blogger.” If the blog is big enough to hire an expensive PR firm to go to work pitching the blogger to get them to write about your company or your product, then the blog is “big enough.”

    (3) The real impediment to advertising on small blogs is structural. It's hard to cost-effectively put ads on small sites. Doesn't mean the ad wouldn't be valuable, and doesn't mean it couldn't be different. But today it would cost more for a brand manager to work through the bureaucracy via the company’s ad agency and corporate ad manager, than a $500 ad itself would cost.

    (4) Every business blog is commercial in some way – I don’t understand all the hubbub. Even the consultant who “doesn’t accept ads” is really advertising his or her own services, or his or her personal brand. I have no problem with that – in fact, I’d have far less respect for them if they weren’t a good business person first and foremost.

    (5) Finally, I think bloggers need services like IZEA. I don’t plan to sign up for IZEA – but for smaller bloggers who want to monetize all the hard work they put into their blogs, IZEA is a more realistic way to do that than ads (see the realities of point #3). To me it’s worse for bloggers to work hard and starve to death, than to work hard and earn a better life for themselves and their families.

  • Hi Jason, happy holidays.

    First of all I want to congratulate Chris Brogan for having the guts to write his sponsored post and for your support of it. I thought Chris's post was well done — it's obvious he put a lot of work into it with an actual visit — by the whole family, no less! — and photos, etc. I haven't been in a Sears or KMart store in years, but that post intrigued me enough that I might actually think of them next time.

    I do want to respectfully push back a little, though:

    (1) Online advertising is effective, especially for branding. I think we need to get it out of the realm of direct response, and expecting to see an immediate and direct payback (click through to sale). That's not expected from PR, so why hold advertising to the same standard? The fact that online advertising is growing shows advertisers think it has value.

    (2) I don't buy that “your blog is too small for ads, Mr. or Ms Blogger.” If the blog is big enough to hire an expensive PR firm to go to work pitching the blogger to get them to write about your company or your product, then the blog is “big enough.”

    (3) The real impediment to advertising on small blogs is structural. It's hard to cost-effectively put ads on small sites. Doesn't mean the ad wouldn't be valuable, and doesn't mean it couldn't be different. But today it would cost more for a brand manager to work through the bureaucracy via the company’s ad agency and corporate ad manager, than a $500 ad itself would cost.

    (4) Every business blog is commercial in some way – I don’t understand all the hubbub. Even the consultant who “doesn’t accept ads” is really advertising his or her own services, or his or her personal brand. I have no problem with that – in fact, I’d have far less respect for them if they weren’t a good business person first and foremost.

    (5) Finally, I think bloggers need services like IZEA. I don’t plan to sign up for IZEA – but for smaller bloggers who want to monetize all the hard work they put into their blogs, IZEA is a more realistic way to do that than ads (see the realities of point #3). To me it’s worse for bloggers to work hard and starve to death, than to work hard and earn a better life for themselves and their families.

  • Hi Jason, happy holidays.

    First of all I want to congratulate Chris Brogan for having the guts to write his sponsored post and for your support of it. I thought Chris's post was well done — it's obvious he put a lot of work into it with an actual visit — by the whole family, no less! — and photos, etc. I haven't been in a Sears or KMart store in years, but that post intrigued me enough that I might actually think of them next time.

    I do want to respectfully push back a little, though:

    (1) Online advertising is effective, especially for branding. I think we need to get it out of the realm of direct response, and expecting to see an immediate and direct payback (click through to sale). That's not expected from PR, so why hold advertising to the same standard? The fact that online advertising is growing shows advertisers think it has value.

    (2) I don't buy that “your blog is too small for ads, Mr. or Ms Blogger.” If the blog is big enough to hire an expensive PR firm to go to work pitching the blogger to get them to write about your company or your product, then the blog is “big enough.”

    (3) The real impediment to advertising on small blogs is structural. It's hard to cost-effectively put ads on small sites. Doesn't mean the ad wouldn't be valuable, and doesn't mean it couldn't be different. But today it would cost more for a brand manager to work through the bureaucracy via the company’s ad agency and corporate ad manager, than a $500 ad itself would cost.

    (4) Every business blog is commercial in some way – I don’t understand all the hubbub. Even the consultant who “doesn’t accept ads” is really advertising his or her own services, or his or her personal brand. I have no problem with that – in fact, I’d have far less respect for them if they weren’t a good business person first and foremost.

    (5) Finally, I think bloggers need services like IZEA. I don’t plan to sign up for IZEA – but for smaller bloggers who want to monetize all the hard work they put into their blogs, IZEA is a more realistic way to do that than ads (see the realities of point #3). To me it’s worse for bloggers to work hard and starve to death, than to work hard and earn a better life for themselves and their families.

    • Well, I love pushback, Anita.

      First, some online advertising is effective. In general, however, “effective” is 2-5% click thru rates? (Yeah, I've had some commentors claim 25% for what they do, but whatever.) The residing “good” metric is less than one percent click thrus … that's plain crap. If I'm a brand manager either my creative sucks or banner ads suck … I'm betting it's the latter more so than the creative. Online advertising is growing because off-line isn't turning in much better performance. And I get your argument for branding, but again … I can't tell you the last time I even looked at a banner ad and the only ones I can remember lately are the ones that jump out, force you to close something and those piss me off. (Remember … I work at an agency. I'm supposed to dig that. But I don't and I'm sure others don't either.) You have a point and I'm not trying to discredit your stance, just think there's more to a determination that online advertising is effective than it's growth.

      2 – It's cheaper and more efficient to pitch than spend the time to execute advertising. That and for smaller blogs that charge, say $250 or $500 for a monthly ad, most national brand managers are going to say, “WHAT? Come talk to me when you have a need.” Those are buys that are normally handled by regional or local marketing folks, not national brand managers. They talk in seven figure ad buys. $250 isn't even a rounding error to them. It's what they spend on working lunches 4-6 times a month.

      3 – Agreed and covered in 2.

      4 – Agreed

      5 – Agreed as well.

      Thanks a ton for the thoughtful comments and time it took to plug it all in. Much appreciated.

  • I dig you. A lot. Just sayin'. Thanks for sticking up for me, commenting, laughing. You rock.

  • I dig you. A lot. Just sayin'. Thanks for sticking up for me, commenting, laughing. You rock.

  • I dig you. A lot. Just sayin'. Thanks for sticking up for me, commenting, laughing. You rock.

  • I dig you. A lot. Just sayin'. Thanks for sticking up for me, commenting, laughing. You rock.

  • I dig you. A lot. Just sayin'. Thanks for sticking up for me, commenting, laughing. You rock.

  • Well, my dear, you were one of the few who got it then and did a great service to your clients. Congratulations. And you're dead on still – add value. Bravo and thank you for sharing.

  • Well, my dear, you were one of the few who got it then and did a great service to your clients. Congratulations. And you're dead on still – add value. Bravo and thank you for sharing.

  • Well, my dear, you were one of the few who got it then and did a great service to your clients. Congratulations. And you're dead on still – add value. Bravo and thank you for sharing.

  • Well, my dear, you were one of the few who got it then and did a great service to your clients. Congratulations. And you're dead on still – add value. Bravo and thank you for sharing.

  • Well, my dear, you were one of the few who got it then and did a great service to your clients. Congratulations. And you're dead on still – add value. Bravo and thank you for sharing.

  • Wow. Thanks for the compliment John. I normally only get re-reads because people can't believe I'm dumb enough to say stuff out loud. Heh.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  • Wow. Thanks for the compliment John. I normally only get re-reads because people can't believe I'm dumb enough to say stuff out loud. Heh.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  • Wow. Thanks for the compliment John. I normally only get re-reads because people can't believe I'm dumb enough to say stuff out loud. Heh.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  • Wow. Thanks for the compliment John. I normally only get re-reads because people can't believe I'm dumb enough to say stuff out loud. Heh.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  • Wow. Thanks for the compliment John. I normally only get re-reads because people can't believe I'm dumb enough to say stuff out loud. Heh.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  • Gracias. I prefer the comments, but then again, I should.

  • Gracias. I prefer the comments, but then again, I should.

  • Gracias. I prefer the comments, but then again, I should.

  • Gracias. I prefer the comments, but then again, I should.

  • Gracias. I prefer the comments, but then again, I should.

  • Yeah Liz, but keep in mind those who were critical of Chris are social media purists, in the bubble, who don't neccessarily consider or see the outside-the-bubble world. To them, it was a travesty. To the rest of the world it was no different than a celebrity endorsement which is perfectly acceptable and even effective in some cases.

  • Yeah Liz, but keep in mind those who were critical of Chris are social media purists, in the bubble, who don't neccessarily consider or see the outside-the-bubble world. To them, it was a travesty. To the rest of the world it was no different than a celebrity endorsement which is perfectly acceptable and even effective in some cases.

  • Yeah Liz, but keep in mind those who were critical of Chris are social media purists, in the bubble, who don't neccessarily consider or see the outside-the-bubble world. To them, it was a travesty. To the rest of the world it was no different than a celebrity endorsement which is perfectly acceptable and even effective in some cases.

  • Yeah Liz, but keep in mind those who were critical of Chris are social media purists, in the bubble, who don't neccessarily consider or see the outside-the-bubble world. To them, it was a travesty. To the rest of the world it was no different than a celebrity endorsement which is perfectly acceptable and even effective in some cases.

  • Yeah Liz, but keep in mind those who were critical of Chris are social media purists, in the bubble, who don't neccessarily consider or see the outside-the-bubble world. To them, it was a travesty. To the rest of the world it was no different than a celebrity endorsement which is perfectly acceptable and even effective in some cases.

  • Agreed, Tom. What Chris did was as much exploration as it was taking advantage of his stature. It's pioneers and envelope pushers like him who will help us define what is good and bad as social media matures.

  • Agreed, Tom. What Chris did was as much exploration as it was taking advantage of his stature. It's pioneers and envelope pushers like him who will help us define what is good and bad as social media matures.

  • Agreed, Tom. What Chris did was as much exploration as it was taking advantage of his stature. It's pioneers and envelope pushers like him who will help us define what is good and bad as social media matures.

  • Agreed, Tom. What Chris did was as much exploration as it was taking advantage of his stature. It's pioneers and envelope pushers like him who will help us define what is good and bad as social media matures.

  • Agreed, Tom. What Chris did was as much exploration as it was taking advantage of his stature. It's pioneers and envelope pushers like him who will help us define what is good and bad as social media matures.

  • LINK dawg. Gotta have the link! (Thanks, though.)

  • LINK dawg. Gotta have the link! (Thanks, though.)

  • LINK dawg. Gotta have the link! (Thanks, though.)

  • LINK dawg. Gotta have the link! (Thanks, though.)

  • LINK dawg. Gotta have the link! (Thanks, though.)

  • Integrated communications thinking, Danny? Really? You think companies can handle that?

    (you're freakin' right and dead on and they should but let's be real)

    Thanks for chiming in.

  • Integrated communications thinking, Danny? Really? You think companies can handle that?

    (you're freakin' right and dead on and they should but let's be real)

    Thanks for chiming in.

  • Integrated communications thinking, Danny? Really? You think companies can handle that?

    (you're freakin' right and dead on and they should but let's be real)

    Thanks for chiming in.

  • Integrated communications thinking, Danny? Really? You think companies can handle that?

    (you're freakin' right and dead on and they should but let's be real)

    Thanks for chiming in.

  • Integrated communications thinking, Danny? Really? You think companies can handle that?

    (you're freakin' right and dead on and they should but let's be real)

    Thanks for chiming in.

  • @JasonFalls, I am chuckling over this… “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

    Not chuckling at you Jason (really!) but at the notion that developing a relationship with a blogger, reporter, journalist, etc. is “NEW.” Is it new because PR folks keep hitting a brick wall once again? I remember “whack a flack” from the 90s (a game that journalists created on-line to whack PR flacks) and now they are moving to 140-character pitches to get even.

    Stop the madness PR people!! Just know that you WILL need to develop relationships with these people or agencies like Doe-Anderson will wipe you off the PR map.

    Phew! Okay. I can breathe now…. Oh yeah, and for anyone who's interested I recommend “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR” by Al Ries and Laura Ries.

    @AdamSinger, love and respect your passion here…but it really does depend on community. The thing is, if we aren't the community we are just guessing at what we think the community wants/thinks/feels. I am not part of the Dad-o-Matic or Motrin Mom community…because I am not a dad (obviously) or a mom. Or put another way…I am not the “target audience.” I belong to non-marketing communities (socnets) also and I can tell you a sponsored post is completely overlooked if it's a product that the community loves/admires/would kill for (talking about luxury brand purses in this example, in case you are curious).

    Happy holidays!

  • @JasonFalls, I am chuckling over this… “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

    Not chuckling at you Jason (really!) but at the notion that developing a relationship with a blogger, reporter, journalist, etc. is “NEW.” Is it new because PR folks keep hitting a brick wall once again? I remember “whack a flack” from the 90s (a game that journalists created on-line to whack PR flacks) and now they are moving to 140-character pitches to get even.

    Stop the madness PR people!! Just know that you WILL need to develop relationships with these people or agencies like Doe-Anderson will wipe you off the PR map.

    Phew! Okay. I can breathe now…. Oh yeah, and for anyone who's interested I recommend “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR” by Al Ries and Laura Ries.

    @AdamSinger, love and respect your passion here…but it really does depend on community. The thing is, if we aren't the community we are just guessing at what we think the community wants/thinks/feels. I am not part of the Dad-o-Matic or Motrin Mom community…because I am not a dad (obviously) or a mom. Or put another way…I am not the “target audience.” I belong to non-marketing communities (socnets) also and I can tell you a sponsored post is completely overlooked if it's a product that the community loves/admires/would kill for (talking about luxury brand purses in this example, in case you are curious).

    Happy holidays!

  • @JasonFalls, I am chuckling over this… “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

    Not chuckling at you Jason (really!) but at the notion that developing a relationship with a blogger, reporter, journalist, etc. is “NEW.” Is it new because PR folks keep hitting a brick wall once again? I remember “whack a flack” from the 90s (a game that journalists created on-line to whack PR flacks) and now they are moving to 140-character pitches to get even.

    Stop the madness PR people!! Just know that you WILL need to develop relationships with these people or agencies like Doe-Anderson will wipe you off the PR map.

    Phew! Okay. I can breathe now…. Oh yeah, and for anyone who's interested I recommend “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR” by Al Ries and Laura Ries.

    @AdamSinger, love and respect your passion here…but it really does depend on community. The thing is, if we aren't the community we are just guessing at what we think the community wants/thinks/feels. I am not part of the Dad-o-Matic or Motrin Mom community…because I am not a dad (obviously) or a mom. Or put another way…I am not the “target audience.” I belong to non-marketing communities (socnets) also and I can tell you a sponsored post is completely overlooked if it's a product that the community loves/admires/would kill for (talking about luxury brand purses in this example, in case you are curious).

    Happy holidays!

  • @JasonFalls, I am chuckling over this… “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

    Not chuckling at you Jason (really!) but at the notion that developing a relationship with a blogger, reporter, journalist, etc. is “NEW.” Is it new because PR folks keep hitting a brick wall once again? I remember “whack a flack” from the 90s (a game that journalists created on-line to whack PR flacks) and now they are moving to 140-character pitches to get even.

    Stop the madness PR people!! Just know that you WILL need to develop relationships with these people or agencies like Doe-Anderson will wipe you off the PR map.

    Phew! Okay. I can breathe now…. Oh yeah, and for anyone who's interested I recommend “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR” by Al Ries and Laura Ries.

    @AdamSinger, love and respect your passion here…but it really does depend on community. The thing is, if we aren't the community we are just guessing at what we think the community wants/thinks/feels. I am not part of the Dad-o-Matic or Motrin Mom community…because I am not a dad (obviously) or a mom. Or put another way…I am not the “target audience.” I belong to non-marketing communities (socnets) also and I can tell you a sponsored post is completely overlooked if it's a product that the community loves/admires/would kill for (talking about luxury brand purses in this example, in case you are curious).

    Happy holidays!

  • @JasonFalls, I am chuckling over this… “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

    Not chuckling at you Jason (really!) but at the notion that developing a relationship with a blogger, reporter, journalist, etc. is “NEW.” Is it new because PR folks keep hitting a brick wall once again? I remember “whack a flack” from the 90s (a game that journalists created on-line to whack PR flacks) and now they are moving to 140-character pitches to get even.

    Stop the madness PR people!! Just know that you WILL need to develop relationships with these people or agencies like Doe-Anderson will wipe you off the PR map.

    Phew! Okay. I can breathe now…. Oh yeah, and for anyone who's interested I recommend “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR” by Al Ries and Laura Ries.

    @AdamSinger, love and respect your passion here…but it really does depend on community. The thing is, if we aren't the community we are just guessing at what we think the community wants/thinks/feels. I am not part of the Dad-o-Matic or Motrin Mom community…because I am not a dad (obviously) or a mom. Or put another way…I am not the “target audience.” I belong to non-marketing communities (socnets) also and I can tell you a sponsored post is completely overlooked if it's a product that the community loves/admires/would kill for (talking about luxury brand purses in this example, in case you are curious).

    Happy holidays!

  • @JasonFalls, I am chuckling over this… “I say new-fashioned because old-fashioned is sending blast emails to hundreds of media outlets or bloggers and calling it a day. New-fashioned is reaching out personally to individuals to build a relationship and working with them to meet their needs and yours in symbiotic fashion.”

    Not chuckling at you Jason (really!) but at the notion that developing a relationship with a blogger, reporter, journalist, etc. is “NEW.” Is it new because PR folks keep hitting a brick wall once again? I remember “whack a flack” from the 90s (a game that journalists created on-line to whack PR flacks) and now they are moving to 140-character pitches to get even.

    Stop the madness PR people!! Just know that you WILL need to develop relationships with these people or agencies like Doe-Anderson will wipe you off the PR map.

    Phew! Okay. I can breathe now…. Oh yeah, and for anyone who's interested I recommend “The Fall of Advertising & the Rise of PR” by Al Ries and Laura Ries.

    @AdamSinger, love and respect your passion here…but it really does depend on community. The thing is, if we aren't the community we are just guessing at what we think the community wants/thinks/feels. I am not part of the Dad-o-Matic or Motrin Mom community…because I am not a dad (obviously) or a mom. Or put another way…I am not the “target audience.” I belong to non-marketing communities (socnets) also and I can tell you a sponsored post is completely overlooked if it's a product that the community loves/admires/would kill for (talking about luxury brand purses in this example, in case you are curious).

    Happy holidays!

    • I dig you. A lot. Just sayin'. Thanks for sticking up for me, commenting, laughing. You rock.

      • Need to correct myself…Whack-a-Flack is circa 2001 (I've been doing this for way too long if 2001 seems like the late 90s!).

        • Potatoe, potatoe … What's two years? (Wait a minute. Two years ago no one knew who I was … heh.)

  • This post is really interesting to me as I started in PR at the height of the blast-fax, blast-email boom and quickly told my boss I wasn't doing it. Instead, I would take the time to research each reporter I contacted and be sure I knew what they wrote about and had something to say that they were interested in. Of course, my hours skyrocketed and the client got mad and I was removed from the account (and ultimately left the job because management wouldn't support me). No one ever stopped to see that I got more placements than anyone else AND I built relationships with those media because they appreciated that I took the time – many of which I still have today.

    Now, in the new-fashioned PR world, it's the same with bloggers but it has to be looked at differently. It's not trying to get in a newspaper that may or may not reach your targeted consumer, but it's about researching the blogger AND the audience now. If you take the time to do so, I believe the time is better spend and the results will ultimately be better. However, while this makes logical sense, it's hard to prove still. As tracking and monitoring gets better and better I anticipate BIG changes here though and ROI will be much easier to find.

    In terms of advertising and how it can be done, I actually think that Daily Candy does a good job of this. They have a “Dedicated Email” that is marked as such that comes out every so often. It's a paid placement but they strictly ensure it's a product that their readers will be interested in and it's kept in the same vein as the products/topics they cover. With the disclosure right up front, it's clear to me what it is and it's up to me to scan it. I don't mind the ads and have even bought things from them just because their ususally things I'd like (and they usually have some good promotion that goes along with it). As you say, ultimately it works because it ads value to me for being a member.

    That's what it will always be about. Adding value. If advertisers can figure out a way to work with a blogger, e-newsletter, e-zine, etc. then they can come up with a creative way to advertise, I think. However, I'm in PR and not advertising so for now, I'm just about sharing the information love.

  • This post is really interesting to me as I started in PR at the height of the blast-fax, blast-email boom and quickly told my boss I wasn't doing it. Instead, I would take the time to research each reporter I contacted and be sure I knew what they wrote about and had something to say that they were interested in. Of course, my hours skyrocketed and the client got mad and I was removed from the account (and ultimately left the job because management wouldn't support me). No one ever stopped to see that I got more placements than anyone else AND I built relationships with those media because they appreciated that I took the time – many of which I still have today.

    Now, in the new-fashioned PR world, it's the same with bloggers but it has to be looked at differently. It's not trying to get in a newspaper that may or may not reach your targeted consumer, but it's about researching the blogger AND the audience now. If you take the time to do so, I believe the time is better spend and the results will ultimately be better. However, while this makes logical sense, it's hard to prove still. As tracking and monitoring gets better and better I anticipate BIG changes here though and ROI will be much easier to find.

    In terms of advertising and how it can be done, I actually think that Daily Candy does a good job of this. They have a “Dedicated Email” that is marked as such that comes out every so often. It's a paid placement but they strictly ensure it's a product that their readers will be interested in and it's kept in the same vein as the products/topics they cover. With the disclosure right up front, it's clear to me what it is and it's up to me to scan it. I don't mind the ads and have even bought things from them just because their ususally things I'd like (and they usually have some good promotion that goes along with it). As you say, ultimately it works because it ads value to me for being a member.

    That's what it will always be about. Adding value. If advertisers can figure out a way to work with a blogger, e-newsletter, e-zine, etc. then they can come up with a creative way to advertise, I think. However, I'm in PR and not advertising so for now, I'm just about sharing the information love.

  • This post is really interesting to me as I started in PR at the height of the blast-fax, blast-email boom and quickly told my boss I wasn't doing it. Instead, I would take the time to research each reporter I contacted and be sure I knew what they wrote about and had something to say that they were interested in. Of course, my hours skyrocketed and the client got mad and I was removed from the account (and ultimately left the job because management wouldn't support me). No one ever stopped to see that I got more placements than anyone else AND I built relationships with those media because they appreciated that I took the time – many of which I still have today.

    Now, in the new-fashioned PR world, it's the same with bloggers but it has to be looked at differently. It's not trying to get in a newspaper that may or may not reach your targeted consumer, but it's about researching the blogger AND the audience now. If you take the time to do so, I believe the time is better spend and the results will ultimately be better. However, while this makes logical sense, it's hard to prove still. As tracking and monitoring gets better and better I anticipate BIG changes here though and ROI will be much easier to find.

    In terms of advertising and how it can be done, I actually think that Daily Candy does a good job of this. They have a “Dedicated Email” that is marked as such that comes out every so often. It's a paid placement but they strictly ensure it's a product that their readers will be interested in and it's kept in the same vein as the products/topics they cover. With the disclosure right up front, it's clear to me what it is and it's up to me to scan it. I don't mind the ads and have even bought things from them just because their ususally things I'd like (and they usually have some good promotion that goes along with it). As you say, ultimately it works because it ads value to me for being a member.

    That's what it will always be about. Adding value. If advertisers can figure out a way to work with a blogger, e-newsletter, e-zine, etc. then they can come up with a creative way to advertise, I think. However, I'm in PR and not advertising so for now, I'm just about sharing the information love.

  • This post is really interesting to me as I started in PR at the height of the blast-fax, blast-email boom and quickly told my boss I wasn't doing it. Instead, I would take the time to research each reporter I contacted and be sure I knew what they wrote about and had something to say that they were interested in. Of course, my hours skyrocketed and the client got mad and I was removed from the account (and ultimately left the job because management wouldn't support me). No one ever stopped to see that I got more placements than anyone else AND I built relationships with those media because they appreciated that I took the time – many of which I still have today.

    Now, in the new-fashioned PR world, it's the same with bloggers but it has to be looked at differently. It's not trying to get in a newspaper that may or may not reach your targeted consumer, but it's about researching the blogger AND the audience now. If you take the time to do so, I believe the time is better spend and the results will ultimately be better. However, while this makes logical sense, it's hard to prove still. As tracking and monitoring gets better and better I anticipate BIG changes here though and ROI will be much easier to find.

    In terms of advertising and how it can be done, I actually think that Daily Candy does a good job of this. They have a “Dedicated Email” that is marked as such that comes out every so often. It's a paid placement but they strictly ensure it's a product that their readers will be interested in and it's kept in the same vein as the products/topics they cover. With the disclosure right up front, it's clear to me what it is and it's up to me to scan it. I don't mind the ads and have even bought things from them just because their ususally things I'd like (and they usually have some good promotion that goes along with it). As you say, ultimately it works because it ads value to me for being a member.

    That's what it will always be about. Adding value. If advertisers can figure out a way to work with a blogger, e-newsletter, e-zine, etc. then they can come up with a creative way to advertise, I think. However, I'm in PR and not advertising so for now, I'm just about sharing the information love.

  • This post is really interesting to me as I started in PR at the height of the blast-fax, blast-email boom and quickly told my boss I wasn't doing it. Instead, I would take the time to research each reporter I contacted and be sure I knew what they wrote about and had something to say that they were interested in. Of course, my hours skyrocketed and the client got mad and I was removed from the account (and ultimately left the job because management wouldn't support me). No one ever stopped to see that I got more placements than anyone else AND I built relationships with those media because they appreciated that I took the time – many of which I still have today.

    Now, in the new-fashioned PR world, it's the same with bloggers but it has to be looked at differently. It's not trying to get in a newspaper that may or may not reach your targeted consumer, but it's about researching the blogger AND the audience now. If you take the time to do so, I believe the time is better spend and the results will ultimately be better. However, while this makes logical sense, it's hard to prove still. As tracking and monitoring gets better and better I anticipate BIG changes here though and ROI will be much easier to find.

    In terms of advertising and how it can be done, I actually think that Daily Candy does a good job of this. They have a “Dedicated Email” that is marked as such that comes out every so often. It's a paid placement but they strictly ensure it's a product that their readers will be interested in and it's kept in the same vein as the products/topics they cover. With the disclosure right up front, it's clear to me what it is and it's up to me to scan it. I don't mind the ads and have even bought things from them just because their ususally things I'd like (and they usually have some good promotion that goes along with it). As you say, ultimately it works because it ads value to me for being a member.

    That's what it will always be about. Adding value. If advertisers can figure out a way to work with a blogger, e-newsletter, e-zine, etc. then they can come up with a creative way to advertise, I think. However, I'm in PR and not advertising so for now, I'm just about sharing the information love.

  • This post is really interesting to me as I started in PR at the height of the blast-fax, blast-email boom and quickly told my boss I wasn't doing it. Instead, I would take the time to research each reporter I contacted and be sure I knew what they wrote about and had something to say that they were interested in. Of course, my hours skyrocketed and the client got mad and I was removed from the account (and ultimately left the job because management wouldn't support me). No one ever stopped to see that I got more placements than anyone else AND I built relationships with those media because they appreciated that I took the time – many of which I still have today.

    Now, in the new-fashioned PR world, it's the same with bloggers but it has to be looked at differently. It's not trying to get in a newspaper that may or may not reach your targeted consumer, but it's about researching the blogger AND the audience now. If you take the time to do so, I believe the time is better spend and the results will ultimately be better. However, while this makes logical sense, it's hard to prove still. As tracking and monitoring gets better and better I anticipate BIG changes here though and ROI will be much easier to find.

    In terms of advertising and how it can be done, I actually think that Daily Candy does a good job of this. They have a “Dedicated Email” that is marked as such that comes out every so often. It's a paid placement but they strictly ensure it's a product that their readers will be interested in and it's kept in the same vein as the products/topics they cover. With the disclosure right up front, it's clear to me what it is and it's up to me to scan it. I don't mind the ads and have even bought things from them just because their ususally things I'd like (and they usually have some good promotion that goes along with it). As you say, ultimately it works because it ads value to me for being a member.

    That's what it will always be about. Adding value. If advertisers can figure out a way to work with a blogger, e-newsletter, e-zine, etc. then they can come up with a creative way to advertise, I think. However, I'm in PR and not advertising so for now, I'm just about sharing the information love.

    • Well, my dear, you were one of the few who got it then and did a great service to your clients. Congratulations. And you're dead on still – add value. Bravo and thank you for sharing.

  • Wow. Great thought provoking post Jason. I'm going to have to re-read a few times to digest this. Lots to think about over the holiday break.

  • Wow. Great thought provoking post Jason. I'm going to have to re-read a few times to digest this. Lots to think about over the holiday break.

  • Wow. Great thought provoking post Jason. I'm going to have to re-read a few times to digest this. Lots to think about over the holiday break.

  • Wow. Great thought provoking post Jason. I'm going to have to re-read a few times to digest this. Lots to think about over the holiday break.

  • Wow. Great thought provoking post Jason. I'm going to have to re-read a few times to digest this. Lots to think about over the holiday break.

  • Wow. Great thought provoking post Jason. I'm going to have to re-read a few times to digest this. Lots to think about over the holiday break.

    • Wow. Thanks for the compliment John. I normally only get re-reads because people can't believe I'm dumb enough to say stuff out loud. Heh.

      Thanks for stopping by.

  • Pingback: The future of advertising « Connect()

  • Not sure what's better here, the original post or the subsequent comments. Either way, I enjoy your take on new-fashioned PR.

    Great post.

  • Not sure what's better here, the original post or the subsequent comments. Either way, I enjoy your take on new-fashioned PR.

    Great post.

  • Not sure what's better here, the original post or the subsequent comments. Either way, I enjoy your take on new-fashioned PR.

    Great post.

  • Not sure what's better here, the original post or the subsequent comments. Either way, I enjoy your take on new-fashioned PR.

    Great post.

  • Not sure what's better here, the original post or the subsequent comments. Either way, I enjoy your take on new-fashioned PR.

    Great post.

  • Not sure what's better here, the original post or the subsequent comments. Either way, I enjoy your take on new-fashioned PR.

    Great post.

    • Gracias. I prefer the comments, but then again, I should.

  • Pingback: Links of the day 12-22-2008 | Hatim's Development Blog()

  • Liz

    Awesome insight as to why PPC is not always #1 on the list of those looking to advertise. I was blown away when people were upset with Chris Brogan and the others who accepted the shopping spree from Sears. I had the same reaction as you did. It's a bit sad to me that bloggers are seeming much more concerned about monetary ROI than about being a recognized authority and receiving validation of what they do.

  • Liz

    Awesome insight as to why PPC is not always #1 on the list of those looking to advertise. I was blown away when people were upset with Chris Brogan and the others who accepted the shopping spree from Sears. I had the same reaction as you did. It's a bit sad to me that bloggers are seeming much more concerned about monetary ROI than about being a recognized authority and receiving validation of what they do.

  • Liz

    Awesome insight as to why PPC is not always #1 on the list of those looking to advertise. I was blown away when people were upset with Chris Brogan and the others who accepted the shopping spree from Sears. I had the same reaction as you did. It's a bit sad to me that bloggers are seeming much more concerned about monetary ROI than about being a recognized authority and receiving validation of what they do.

  • Liz

    Awesome insight as to why PPC is not always #1 on the list of those looking to advertise. I was blown away when people were upset with Chris Brogan and the others who accepted the shopping spree from Sears. I had the same reaction as you did. It's a bit sad to me that bloggers are seeming much more concerned about monetary ROI than about being a recognized authority and receiving validation of what they do.

  • Liz

    Awesome insight as to why PPC is not always #1 on the list of those looking to advertise. I was blown away when people were upset with Chris Brogan and the others who accepted the shopping spree from Sears. I had the same reaction as you did. It's a bit sad to me that bloggers are seeming much more concerned about monetary ROI than about being a recognized authority and receiving validation of what they do.

  • Liz

    Awesome insight as to why PPC is not always #1 on the list of those looking to advertise. I was blown away when people were upset with Chris Brogan and the others who accepted the shopping spree from Sears. I had the same reaction as you did. It's a bit sad to me that bloggers are seeming much more concerned about monetary ROI than about being a recognized authority and receiving validation of what they do.

    • Yeah Liz, but keep in mind those who were critical of Chris are social media purists, in the bubble, who don't neccessarily consider or see the outside-the-bubble world. To them, it was a travesty. To the rest of the world it was no different than a celebrity endorsement which is perfectly acceptable and even effective in some cases.

  • Hi Jason, thank you for sharing your example of blogger outreach. The argument put forward with regard to bloggers monetizing their sites with banner ads etc… definitely rings true. As you practice social media you understand that for your clients, advertising is not what you would consult them to do as your approach is outreach and seeding via conversation and you gave the bloggers invaluable advice.
    With regard to paid-per-post and Chris Brogan, for us watching how the events unfolded I applaud Chris for 'having a go' as social media and online pr is all about learning. Surely through testing and seeing what works, what rings true and false with consumers we get closer to understanding and honing our craft and the discussions that have occurred from this allow us to debate best practice.

  • Hi Jason, thank you for sharing your example of blogger outreach. The argument put forward with regard to bloggers monetizing their sites with banner ads etc… definitely rings true. As you practice social media you understand that for your clients, advertising is not what you would consult them to do as your approach is outreach and seeding via conversation and you gave the bloggers invaluable advice.
    With regard to paid-per-post and Chris Brogan, for us watching how the events unfolded I applaud Chris for 'having a go' as social media and online pr is all about learning. Surely through testing and seeing what works, what rings true and false with consumers we get closer to understanding and honing our craft and the discussions that have occurred from this allow us to debate best practice.

  • Hi Jason, thank you for sharing your example of blogger outreach. The argument put forward with regard to bloggers monetizing their sites with banner ads etc… definitely rings true. As you practice social media you understand that for your clients, advertising is not what you would consult them to do as your approach is outreach and seeding via conversation and you gave the bloggers invaluable advice.
    With regard to paid-per-post and Chris Brogan, for us watching how the events unfolded I applaud Chris for 'having a go' as social media and online pr is all about learning. Surely through testing and seeing what works, what rings true and false with consumers we get closer to understanding and honing our craft and the discussions that have occurred from this allow us to debate best practice.

  • Hi Jason, thank you for sharing your example of blogger outreach. The argument put forward with regard to bloggers monetizing their sites with banner ads etc… definitely rings true. As you practice social media you understand that for your clients, advertising is not what you would consult them to do as your approach is outreach and seeding via conversation and you gave the bloggers invaluable advice.
    With regard to paid-per-post and Chris Brogan, for us watching how the events unfolded I applaud Chris for 'having a go' as social media and online pr is all about learning. Surely through testing and seeing what works, what rings true and false with consumers we get closer to understanding and honing our craft and the discussions that have occurred from this allow us to debate best practice.

  • Hi Jason, thank you for sharing your example of blogger outreach. The argument put forward with regard to bloggers monetizing their sites with banner ads etc… definitely rings true. As you practice social media you understand that for your clients, advertising is not what you would consult them to do as your approach is outreach and seeding via conversation and you gave the bloggers invaluable advice.
    With regard to paid-per-post and Chris Brogan, for us watching how the events unfolded I applaud Chris for 'having a go' as social media and online pr is all about learning. Surely through testing and seeing what works, what rings true and false with consumers we get closer to understanding and honing our craft and the discussions that have occurred from this allow us to debate best practice.

  • Hi Jason, thank you for sharing your example of blogger outreach. The argument put forward with regard to bloggers monetizing their sites with banner ads etc… definitely rings true. As you practice social media you understand that for your clients, advertising is not what you would consult them to do as your approach is outreach and seeding via conversation and you gave the bloggers invaluable advice.
    With regard to paid-per-post and Chris Brogan, for us watching how the events unfolded I applaud Chris for 'having a go' as social media and online pr is all about learning. Surely through testing and seeing what works, what rings true and false with consumers we get closer to understanding and honing our craft and the discussions that have occurred from this allow us to debate best practice.

    • Agreed, Tom. What Chris did was as much exploration as it was taking advantage of his stature. It's pioneers and envelope pushers like him who will help us define what is good and bad as social media matures.

  • Jason,

    Excellent article, I see I was the First to Digg it. Hope I captured the essence in the description

  • Jason,

    Excellent article, I see I was the First to Digg it. Hope I captured the essence in the description

  • Jason,

    Excellent article, I see I was the First to Digg it. Hope I captured the essence in the description

  • Jason,

    Excellent article, I see I was the First to Digg it. Hope I captured the essence in the description

  • Jason,

    Excellent article, I see I was the First to Digg it. Hope I captured the essence in the description

  • Jason,

    Excellent article, I see I was the First to Digg it. Hope I captured the essence in the description

    • LINK dawg. Gotta have the link! (Thanks, though.)

  • Hallelujah indeed, Jason.

    I've been advocating for a while now that there shouldn't be any walls when it comes to getting the word out about a product, company or service. It's like saying there's a difference between “traditional PR” and “online PR” – why not just call it PR?

    Wouldn't it be more productive to gel PR, advertising, marketing and more into one overall bracket that gets the best of all worlds? After all, we're all in it for the same result – exposure.

  • Hallelujah indeed, Jason.

    I've been advocating for a while now that there shouldn't be any walls when it comes to getting the word out about a product, company or service. It's like saying there's a difference between “traditional PR” and “online PR” – why not just call it PR?

    Wouldn't it be more productive to gel PR, advertising, marketing and more into one overall bracket that gets the best of all worlds? After all, we're all in it for the same result – exposure.

  • Hallelujah indeed, Jason.

    I've been advocating for a while now that there shouldn't be any walls when it comes to getting the word out about a product, company or service. It's like saying there's a difference between “traditional PR” and “online PR” – why not just call it PR?

    Wouldn't it be more productive to gel PR, advertising, marketing and more into one overall bracket that gets the best of all worlds? After all, we're all in it for the same result – exposure.

  • Hallelujah indeed, Jason.

    I've been advocating for a while now that there shouldn't be any walls when it comes to getting the word out about a product, company or service. It's like saying there's a difference between “traditional PR” and “online PR” – why not just call it PR?

    Wouldn't it be more productive to gel PR, advertising, marketing and more into one overall bracket that gets the best of all worlds? After all, we're all in it for the same result – exposure.

  • Hallelujah indeed, Jason.

    I've been advocating for a while now that there shouldn't be any walls when it comes to getting the word out about a product, company or service. It's like saying there's a difference between “traditional PR” and “online PR” – why not just call it PR?

    Wouldn't it be more productive to gel PR, advertising, marketing and more into one overall bracket that gets the best of all worlds? After all, we're all in it for the same result – exposure.

  • Hallelujah indeed, Jason.

    I've been advocating for a while now that there shouldn't be any walls when it comes to getting the word out about a product, company or service. It's like saying there's a difference between “traditional PR” and “online PR” – why not just call it PR?

    Wouldn't it be more productive to gel PR, advertising, marketing and more into one overall bracket that gets the best of all worlds? After all, we're all in it for the same result – exposure.

    • Integrated communications thinking, Danny? Really? You think companies can handle that?

      (you're freakin' right and dead on and they should but let's be real)

      Thanks for chiming in.

  • You wonder why corporate blogs aren't necessarily as trusted (Forrested proved this) – because of an obvious bias. I think the average blog reader is actually quite bright, and this research proves they see through it.

    I read alot of blogs and forums Jason and I will tell you sponsored posts are never taken well by passionate communities, they simply don't like it. Not necessarily when the COMPANY is writing it (pure advertorial) but if the editor is writing it, it is definitely viewed as selling out and seen as influence.

    Companies are already being talked about in the blogosphere – more than 80% of bloggers mention brands already according to Technorati. Injecting yourself via money into the conversation isn't the answer if you aren't being talked about. This is a weak tactic at best. Far better approaches I've done (and others have) for years.

    The reason this idea upsets me is because yes to a degree I feel like this cheapens approaches that naturally generate conversation for brands. Although I do not think Izea and others will ruin a good thing for pay per post, I think the most influential sites and bloggers wouldn't do this. Can you imagine Seth Godin or Mike Masnick taking money for a post? Doubt it.

    It depends on why you blog, really…if you just want to make a buck go for it, but IMO people put in too much work to risk selling their brand down the river for a gift card.

  • You wonder why corporate blogs aren't necessarily as trusted (Forrested proved this) – because of an obvious bias. I think the average blog reader is actually quite bright, and this research proves they see through it.

    I read alot of blogs and forums Jason and I will tell you sponsored posts are never taken well by passionate communities, they simply don't like it. Not necessarily when the COMPANY is writing it (pure advertorial) but if the editor is writing it, it is definitely viewed as selling out and seen as influence.

    Companies are already being talked about in the blogosphere – more than 80% of bloggers mention brands already according to Technorati. Injecting yourself via money into the conversation isn't the answer if you aren't being talked about. This is a weak tactic at best. Far better approaches I've done (and others have) for years.

    The reason this idea upsets me is because yes to a degree I feel like this cheapens approaches that naturally generate conversation for brands. Although I do not think Izea and others will ruin a good thing for pay per post, I think the most influential sites and bloggers wouldn't do this. Can you imagine Seth Godin or Mike Masnick taking money for a post? Doubt it.

    It depends on why you blog, really…if you just want to make a buck go for it, but IMO people put in too much work to risk selling their brand down the river for a gift card.

  • You wonder why corporate blogs aren't necessarily as trusted (Forrested proved this) – because of an obvious bias. I think the average blog reader is actually quite bright, and this research proves they see through it.

    I read alot of blogs and forums Jason and I will tell you sponsored posts are never taken well by passionate communities, they simply don't like it. Not necessarily when the COMPANY is writing it (pure advertorial) but if the editor is writing it, it is definitely viewed as selling out and seen as influence.

    Companies are already being talked about in the blogosphere – more than 80% of bloggers mention brands already according to Technorati. Injecting yourself via money into the conversation isn't the answer if you aren't being talked about. This is a weak tactic at best. Far better approaches I've done (and others have) for years.

    The reason this idea upsets me is because yes to a degree I feel like this cheapens approaches that naturally generate conversation for brands. Although I do not think Izea and others will ruin a good thing for pay per post, I think the most influential sites and bloggers wouldn't do this. Can you imagine Seth Godin or Mike Masnick taking money for a post? Doubt it.

    It depends on why you blog, really…if you just want to make a buck go for it, but IMO people put in too much work to risk selling their brand down the river for a gift card.

  • You wonder why corporate blogs aren't necessarily as trusted (Forrested proved this) – because of an obvious bias. I think the average blog reader is actually quite bright, and this research proves they see through it.

    I read alot of blogs and forums Jason and I will tell you sponsored posts are never taken well by passionate communities, they simply don't like it. Not necessarily when the COMPANY is writing it (pure advertorial) but if the editor is writing it, it is definitely viewed as selling out and seen as influence.

    Companies are already being talked about in the blogosphere – more than 80% of bloggers mention brands already according to Technorati. Injecting yourself via money into the conversation isn't the answer if you aren't being talked about. This is a weak tactic at best. Far better approaches I've done (and others have) for years.

    The reason this idea upsets me is because yes to a degree I feel like this cheapens approaches that naturally generate conversation for brands. Although I do not think Izea and others will ruin a good thing for pay per post, I think the most influential sites and bloggers wouldn't do this. Can you imagine Seth Godin or Mike Masnick taking money for a post? Doubt it.

    It depends on why you blog, really…if you just want to make a buck go for it, but IMO people put in too much work to risk selling their brand down the river for a gift card.

  • You wonder why corporate blogs aren't necessarily as trusted (Forrested proved this) – because of an obvious bias. I think the average blog reader is actually quite bright, and this research proves they see through it.

    I read alot of blogs and forums Jason and I will tell you sponsored posts are never taken well by passionate communities, they simply don't like it. Not necessarily when the COMPANY is writing it (pure advertorial) but if the editor is writing it, it is definitely viewed as selling out and seen as influence.

    Companies are already being talked about in the blogosphere – more than 80% of bloggers mention brands already according to Technorati. Injecting yourself via money into the conversation isn't the answer if you aren't being talked about. This is a weak tactic at best. Far better approaches I've done (and others have) for years.

    The reason this idea upsets me is because yes to a degree I feel like this cheapens approaches that naturally generate conversation for brands. Although I do not think Izea and others will ruin a good thing for pay per post, I think the most influential sites and bloggers wouldn't do this. Can you imagine Seth Godin or Mike Masnick taking money for a post? Doubt it.

    It depends on why you blog, really…if you just want to make a buck go for it, but IMO people put in too much work to risk selling their brand down the river for a gift card.

  • Amen to that J-Baer. Thanks for stopping by.

  • Amen to that J-Baer. Thanks for stopping by.

  • Amen to that J-Baer. Thanks for stopping by.

  • Amen to that J-Baer. Thanks for stopping by.

  • Amen to that J-Baer. Thanks for stopping by.

  • Agreed and well said. Thanks for coming back and chiming in, Craig.

  • Agreed and well said. Thanks for coming back and chiming in, Craig.

  • Agreed and well said. Thanks for coming back and chiming in, Craig.

  • Agreed and well said. Thanks for coming back and chiming in, Craig.

  • Agreed and well said. Thanks for coming back and chiming in, Craig.

  • Yes, Jay. But I think were talking about two slightly different points. Bloggers want to have an audience big enough to attract advertising attention but don't want to deal with the attention from PR. They're not apt to release their numbers because they want this air that they have a huge audience. Once you look at the traffic for most blogs, though, you realize A) No sponsor is going to spend much money on those numbers and B) Only the really smart PR folks who know targeting a niche audience of influencers on a topic is worth the effort are going to pay them much mind, either.

    You're right, PR folks are starting to know that finding those small but active niche audiences is effective and therefore even small trafficked blogs are worth investing some time in. But the advertisers only see total eyeballs and not eyeballs of influencers. Believe me, I've made the case for brand managers before and they still respond with, “yeah, but that's not very many people.”

  • Yes, Jay. But I think were talking about two slightly different points. Bloggers want to have an audience big enough to attract advertising attention but don't want to deal with the attention from PR. They're not apt to release their numbers because they want this air that they have a huge audience. Once you look at the traffic for most blogs, though, you realize A) No sponsor is going to spend much money on those numbers and B) Only the really smart PR folks who know targeting a niche audience of influencers on a topic is worth the effort are going to pay them much mind, either.

    You're right, PR folks are starting to know that finding those small but active niche audiences is effective and therefore even small trafficked blogs are worth investing some time in. But the advertisers only see total eyeballs and not eyeballs of influencers. Believe me, I've made the case for brand managers before and they still respond with, “yeah, but that's not very many people.”

  • Yes, Jay. But I think were talking about two slightly different points. Bloggers want to have an audience big enough to attract advertising attention but don't want to deal with the attention from PR. They're not apt to release their numbers because they want this air that they have a huge audience. Once you look at the traffic for most blogs, though, you realize A) No sponsor is going to spend much money on those numbers and B) Only the really smart PR folks who know targeting a niche audience of influencers on a topic is worth the effort are going to pay them much mind, either.

    You're right, PR folks are starting to know that finding those small but active niche audiences is effective and therefore even small trafficked blogs are worth investing some time in. But the advertisers only see total eyeballs and not eyeballs of influencers. Believe me, I've made the case for brand managers before and they still respond with, “yeah, but that's not very many people.”

  • Yes, Jay. But I think were talking about two slightly different points. Bloggers want to have an audience big enough to attract advertising attention but don't want to deal with the attention from PR. They're not apt to release their numbers because they want this air that they have a huge audience. Once you look at the traffic for most blogs, though, you realize A) No sponsor is going to spend much money on those numbers and B) Only the really smart PR folks who know targeting a niche audience of influencers on a topic is worth the effort are going to pay them much mind, either.

    You're right, PR folks are starting to know that finding those small but active niche audiences is effective and therefore even small trafficked blogs are worth investing some time in. But the advertisers only see total eyeballs and not eyeballs of influencers. Believe me, I've made the case for brand managers before and they still respond with, “yeah, but that's not very many people.”

  • Yes, Jay. But I think were talking about two slightly different points. Bloggers want to have an audience big enough to attract advertising attention but don't want to deal with the attention from PR. They're not apt to release their numbers because they want this air that they have a huge audience. Once you look at the traffic for most blogs, though, you realize A) No sponsor is going to spend much money on those numbers and B) Only the really smart PR folks who know targeting a niche audience of influencers on a topic is worth the effort are going to pay them much mind, either.

    You're right, PR folks are starting to know that finding those small but active niche audiences is effective and therefore even small trafficked blogs are worth investing some time in. But the advertisers only see total eyeballs and not eyeballs of influencers. Believe me, I've made the case for brand managers before and they still respond with, “yeah, but that's not very many people.”

  • Agree with you on the future of advertising lying mostly in conversations Tom. But think about your advertising on blogs part – Izea created conversation about their brand and their partner's brand by paying a blogger to write about them. It's conversation but manufactured with an ad buy of sorts. It was an experiment, but one that had mostly good reactions from the intended audience. I think we'll see conversation continue to be the focus, content the mechanism but pay for play as having a role in it all.

    Thanks for the input.

  • Agree with you on the future of advertising lying mostly in conversations Tom. But think about your advertising on blogs part – Izea created conversation about their brand and their partner's brand by paying a blogger to write about them. It's conversation but manufactured with an ad buy of sorts. It was an experiment, but one that had mostly good reactions from the intended audience. I think we'll see conversation continue to be the focus, content the mechanism but pay for play as having a role in it all.

    Thanks for the input.

  • Agree with you on the future of advertising lying mostly in conversations Tom. But think about your advertising on blogs part – Izea created conversation about their brand and their partner's brand by paying a blogger to write about them. It's conversation but manufactured with an ad buy of sorts. It was an experiment, but one that had mostly good reactions from the intended audience. I think we'll see conversation continue to be the focus, content the mechanism but pay for play as having a role in it all.

    Thanks for the input.

  • Agree with you on the future of advertising lying mostly in conversations Tom. But think about your advertising on blogs part – Izea created conversation about their brand and their partner's brand by paying a blogger to write about them. It's conversation but manufactured with an ad buy of sorts. It was an experiment, but one that had mostly good reactions from the intended audience. I think we'll see conversation continue to be the focus, content the mechanism but pay for play as having a role in it all.

    Thanks for the input.

  • Agree with you on the future of advertising lying mostly in conversations Tom. But think about your advertising on blogs part – Izea created conversation about their brand and their partner's brand by paying a blogger to write about them. It's conversation but manufactured with an ad buy of sorts. It was an experiment, but one that had mostly good reactions from the intended audience. I think we'll see conversation continue to be the focus, content the mechanism but pay for play as having a role in it all.

    Thanks for the input.

  • I think the difference in our view points Adam is that you're looking at it from a social media purists standpoint. I'm looking at the total landscape. People outside our bubble, who read Perez Hilton, the Huffington Report and maybe Uncrate or some product review sites and aren't hypersensitive to the whole social media spectrum aren't going to care if a post is paid for so long as it's not out of the parameters of content that they expect. I won't ever accept money to post about a certain topic on this blog, but if I were to do product reviews for another site, I might consider it depending upon the product, etc. Part of my audience (on that site) may not like it and stop coming, but there will be plenty of outside-the-bubblers who won't notice or care if they do.

    In principle, I agree with you. In reality, I know paid posts will continue and probably find a happy home in some industries and niches.

  • I think the difference in our view points Adam is that you're looking at it from a social media purists standpoint. I'm looking at the total landscape. People outside our bubble, who read Perez Hilton, the Huffington Report and maybe Uncrate or some product review sites and aren't hypersensitive to the whole social media spectrum aren't going to care if a post is paid for so long as it's not out of the parameters of content that they expect. I won't ever accept money to post about a certain topic on this blog, but if I were to do product reviews for another site, I might consider it depending upon the product, etc. Part of my audience (on that site) may not like it and stop coming, but there will be plenty of outside-the-bubblers who won't notice or care if they do.

    In principle, I agree with you. In reality, I know paid posts will continue and probably find a happy home in some industries and niches.

  • I think the difference in our view points Adam is that you're looking at it from a social media purists standpoint. I'm looking at the total landscape. People outside our bubble, who read Perez Hilton, the Huffington Report and maybe Uncrate or some product review sites and aren't hypersensitive to the whole social media spectrum aren't going to care if a post is paid for so long as it's not out of the parameters of content that they expect. I won't ever accept money to post about a certain topic on this blog, but if I were to do product reviews for another site, I might consider it depending upon the product, etc. Part of my audience (on that site) may not like it and stop coming, but there will be plenty of outside-the-bubblers who won't notice or care if they do.

    In principle, I agree with you. In reality, I know paid posts will continue and probably find a happy home in some industries and niches.

  • I think the difference in our view points Adam is that you're looking at it from a social media purists standpoint. I'm looking at the total landscape. People outside our bubble, who read Perez Hilton, the Huffington Report and maybe Uncrate or some product review sites and aren't hypersensitive to the whole social media spectrum aren't going to care if a post is paid for so long as it's not out of the parameters of content that they expect. I won't ever accept money to post about a certain topic on this blog, but if I were to do product reviews for another site, I might consider it depending upon the product, etc. Part of my audience (on that site) may not like it and stop coming, but there will be plenty of outside-the-bubblers who won't notice or care if they do.

    In principle, I agree with you. In reality, I know paid posts will continue and probably find a happy home in some industries and niches.

  • I think the difference in our view points Adam is that you're looking at it from a social media purists standpoint. I'm looking at the total landscape. People outside our bubble, who read Perez Hilton, the Huffington Report and maybe Uncrate or some product review sites and aren't hypersensitive to the whole social media spectrum aren't going to care if a post is paid for so long as it's not out of the parameters of content that they expect. I won't ever accept money to post about a certain topic on this blog, but if I were to do product reviews for another site, I might consider it depending upon the product, etc. Part of my audience (on that site) may not like it and stop coming, but there will be plenty of outside-the-bubblers who won't notice or care if they do.

    In principle, I agree with you. In reality, I know paid posts will continue and probably find a happy home in some industries and niches.

  • Very valid point Barbara. There's a different in pay-per-post and pay-per-promotion of that post. I would agree with you and also say that the promotional tactics shouldn't change whether the post is paid for or not. Don't go above and beyond what you normally do just to drive eyeballs or you're crossing that line into spamville. Thanks as always!

  • Very valid point Barbara. There's a different in pay-per-post and pay-per-promotion of that post. I would agree with you and also say that the promotional tactics shouldn't change whether the post is paid for or not. Don't go above and beyond what you normally do just to drive eyeballs or you're crossing that line into spamville. Thanks as always!

  • Very valid point Barbara. There's a different in pay-per-post and pay-per-promotion of that post. I would agree with you and also say that the promotional tactics shouldn't change whether the post is paid for or not. Don't go above and beyond what you normally do just to drive eyeballs or you're crossing that line into spamville. Thanks as always!

  • Very valid point Barbara. There's a different in pay-per-post and pay-per-promotion of that post. I would agree with you and also say that the promotional tactics shouldn't change whether the post is paid for or not. Don't go above and beyond what you normally do just to drive eyeballs or you're crossing that line into spamville. Thanks as always!

  • Very valid point Barbara. There's a different in pay-per-post and pay-per-promotion of that post. I would agree with you and also say that the promotional tactics shouldn't change whether the post is paid for or not. Don't go above and beyond what you normally do just to drive eyeballs or you're crossing that line into spamville. Thanks as always!

  • I sure hope you're right, Adam. But I think there will always be a bit of ambiguity in blogging. TechCrunch is leading the way, of course, refusing to respect embargoes and such. They are a legit media outlet refusing to behave like one would traditionally. That won't change and will probably trend a bit. PR folks have to be nimble now more than ever but perhaps the landscape in some industries will settle a bit. Thanks for chiming in.

  • I sure hope you're right, Adam. But I think there will always be a bit of ambiguity in blogging. TechCrunch is leading the way, of course, refusing to respect embargoes and such. They are a legit media outlet refusing to behave like one would traditionally. That won't change and will probably trend a bit. PR folks have to be nimble now more than ever but perhaps the landscape in some industries will settle a bit. Thanks for chiming in.

  • I sure hope you're right, Adam. But I think there will always be a bit of ambiguity in blogging. TechCrunch is leading the way, of course, refusing to respect embargoes and such. They are a legit media outlet refusing to behave like one would traditionally. That won't change and will probably trend a bit. PR folks have to be nimble now more than ever but perhaps the landscape in some industries will settle a bit. Thanks for chiming in.

  • I sure hope you're right, Adam. But I think there will always be a bit of ambiguity in blogging. TechCrunch is leading the way, of course, refusing to respect embargoes and such. They are a legit media outlet refusing to behave like one would traditionally. That won't change and will probably trend a bit. PR folks have to be nimble now more than ever but perhaps the landscape in some industries will settle a bit. Thanks for chiming in.

  • I sure hope you're right, Adam. But I think there will always be a bit of ambiguity in blogging. TechCrunch is leading the way, of course, refusing to respect embargoes and such. They are a legit media outlet refusing to behave like one would traditionally. That won't change and will probably trend a bit. PR folks have to be nimble now more than ever but perhaps the landscape in some industries will settle a bit. Thanks for chiming in.

  • And a valuable two cents at that Stuart. Well said.

  • And a valuable two cents at that Stuart. Well said.

  • And a valuable two cents at that Stuart. Well said.

  • And a valuable two cents at that Stuart. Well said.

  • And a valuable two cents at that Stuart. Well said.

  • Bingo. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Even in “traditional” marketing, the word gets out, but sometimes people take offense. Some folks are pissed about the Whopper Virgins campaign, for example.

    Ultimately, if your goal in your marketing is to both influence the right people in sufficient numbers, AND keep everyone 100% happy, you're going to find yourself an extremely disappointed marketing practitioner.

  • Bingo. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Even in “traditional” marketing, the word gets out, but sometimes people take offense. Some folks are pissed about the Whopper Virgins campaign, for example.

    Ultimately, if your goal in your marketing is to both influence the right people in sufficient numbers, AND keep everyone 100% happy, you're going to find yourself an extremely disappointed marketing practitioner.

  • Bingo. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Even in “traditional” marketing, the word gets out, but sometimes people take offense. Some folks are pissed about the Whopper Virgins campaign, for example.

    Ultimately, if your goal in your marketing is to both influence the right people in sufficient numbers, AND keep everyone 100% happy, you're going to find yourself an extremely disappointed marketing practitioner.

  • Bingo. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Even in “traditional” marketing, the word gets out, but sometimes people take offense. Some folks are pissed about the Whopper Virgins campaign, for example.

    Ultimately, if your goal in your marketing is to both influence the right people in sufficient numbers, AND keep everyone 100% happy, you're going to find yourself an extremely disappointed marketing practitioner.

  • Bingo. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Even in “traditional” marketing, the word gets out, but sometimes people take offense. Some folks are pissed about the Whopper Virgins campaign, for example.

    Ultimately, if your goal in your marketing is to both influence the right people in sufficient numbers, AND keep everyone 100% happy, you're going to find yourself an extremely disappointed marketing practitioner.

  • Bingo. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Even in “traditional” marketing, the word gets out, but sometimes people take offense. Some folks are pissed about the Whopper Virgins campaign, for example.

    Ultimately, if your goal in your marketing is to both influence the right people in sufficient numbers, AND keep everyone 100% happy, you're going to find yourself an extremely disappointed marketing practitioner.

    • Amen to that J-Baer. Thanks for stopping by.

  • You got it. Giving bloggers first stab at a product or service is a great PR tactic that has been going on for years with journalists. I don't think utilizing this with bloggers is bad in anyway. People can opt out of reading someone if they choose, and if they like the content, they will continue to follow and pass on regardless like you mentioned.

    The Izea was more experimental which is why it had critics. If it becomes a common thing, it will just seem more natural. The content is what matters, and as long an not intruding on the content, no one will care, and bloggers can earn money that way.

    I don't think the more shotgun approach to PR will die out completely, but will take a hit. Conversations and relationships are key and it's more of a favor than a dead on pitch at that point, but takes a long slow time to develop and feel the level of comfort. Curious to see how things develop.

  • You got it. Giving bloggers first stab at a product or service is a great PR tactic that has been going on for years with journalists. I don't think utilizing this with bloggers is bad in anyway. People can opt out of reading someone if they choose, and if they like the content, they will continue to follow and pass on regardless like you mentioned.

    The Izea was more experimental which is why it had critics. If it becomes a common thing, it will just seem more natural. The content is what matters, and as long an not intruding on the content, no one will care, and bloggers can earn money that way.

    I don't think the more shotgun approach to PR will die out completely, but will take a hit. Conversations and relationships are key and it's more of a favor than a dead on pitch at that point, but takes a long slow time to develop and feel the level of comfort. Curious to see how things develop.

  • You got it. Giving bloggers first stab at a product or service is a great PR tactic that has been going on for years with journalists. I don't think utilizing this with bloggers is bad in anyway. People can opt out of reading someone if they choose, and if they like the content, they will continue to follow and pass on regardless like you mentioned.

    The Izea was more experimental which is why it had critics. If it becomes a common thing, it will just seem more natural. The content is what matters, and as long an not intruding on the content, no one will care, and bloggers can earn money that way.

    I don't think the more shotgun approach to PR will die out completely, but will take a hit. Conversations and relationships are key and it's more of a favor than a dead on pitch at that point, but takes a long slow time to develop and feel the level of comfort. Curious to see how things develop.

  • You got it. Giving bloggers first stab at a product or service is a great PR tactic that has been going on for years with journalists. I don't think utilizing this with bloggers is bad in anyway. People can opt out of reading someone if they choose, and if they like the content, they will continue to follow and pass on regardless like you mentioned.

    The Izea was more experimental which is why it had critics. If it becomes a common thing, it will just seem more natural. The content is what matters, and as long an not intruding on the content, no one will care, and bloggers can earn money that way.

    I don't think the more shotgun approach to PR will die out completely, but will take a hit. Conversations and relationships are key and it's more of a favor than a dead on pitch at that point, but takes a long slow time to develop and feel the level of comfort. Curious to see how things develop.

  • You got it. Giving bloggers first stab at a product or service is a great PR tactic that has been going on for years with journalists. I don't think utilizing this with bloggers is bad in anyway. People can opt out of reading someone if they choose, and if they like the content, they will continue to follow and pass on regardless like you mentioned.

    The Izea was more experimental which is why it had critics. If it becomes a common thing, it will just seem more natural. The content is what matters, and as long an not intruding on the content, no one will care, and bloggers can earn money that way.

    I don't think the more shotgun approach to PR will die out completely, but will take a hit. Conversations and relationships are key and it's more of a favor than a dead on pitch at that point, but takes a long slow time to develop and feel the level of comfort. Curious to see how things develop.

  • You got it. Giving bloggers first stab at a product or service is a great PR tactic that has been going on for years with journalists. I don't think utilizing this with bloggers is bad in anyway. People can opt out of reading someone if they choose, and if they like the content, they will continue to follow and pass on regardless like you mentioned.

    The Izea was more experimental which is why it had critics. If it becomes a common thing, it will just seem more natural. The content is what matters, and as long an not intruding on the content, no one will care, and bloggers can earn money that way.

    I don't think the more shotgun approach to PR will die out completely, but will take a hit. Conversations and relationships are key and it's more of a favor than a dead on pitch at that point, but takes a long slow time to develop and feel the level of comfort. Curious to see how things develop.

    • Agreed and well said. Thanks for coming back and chiming in, Craig.

  • Hey Jason, great point you make about bloggers fearing that their audiences are too small. So isn't it funny that, with Web audiences, small is the new big? PR folks who reach out to bloggers covering tiny niches can be sure, as never before, that they're reaching their target community. Yeah, it's tough to get used to if you're accustomed to landing stories in magazines with 7-figure circulations, but it may prove more effective in the end. Thanks.

  • Hey Jason, great point you make about bloggers fearing that their audiences are too small. So isn't it funny that, with Web audiences, small is the new big? PR folks who reach out to bloggers covering tiny niches can be sure, as never before, that they're reaching their target community. Yeah, it's tough to get used to if you're accustomed to landing stories in magazines with 7-figure circulations, but it may prove more effective in the end. Thanks.

  • Hey Jason, great point you make about bloggers fearing that their audiences are too small. So isn't it funny that, with Web audiences, small is the new big? PR folks who reach out to bloggers covering tiny niches can be sure, as never before, that they're reaching their target community. Yeah, it's tough to get used to if you're accustomed to landing stories in magazines with 7-figure circulations, but it may prove more effective in the end. Thanks.

  • Hey Jason, great point you make about bloggers fearing that their audiences are too small. So isn't it funny that, with Web audiences, small is the new big? PR folks who reach out to bloggers covering tiny niches can be sure, as never before, that they're reaching their target community. Yeah, it's tough to get used to if you're accustomed to landing stories in magazines with 7-figure circulations, but it may prove more effective in the end. Thanks.

  • Hey Jason, great point you make about bloggers fearing that their audiences are too small. So isn't it funny that, with Web audiences, small is the new big? PR folks who reach out to bloggers covering tiny niches can be sure, as never before, that they're reaching their target community. Yeah, it's tough to get used to if you're accustomed to landing stories in magazines with 7-figure circulations, but it may prove more effective in the end. Thanks.

  • Hey Jason, great point you make about bloggers fearing that their audiences are too small. So isn't it funny that, with Web audiences, small is the new big? PR folks who reach out to bloggers covering tiny niches can be sure, as never before, that they're reaching their target community. Yeah, it's tough to get used to if you're accustomed to landing stories in magazines with 7-figure circulations, but it may prove more effective in the end. Thanks.

    • Yes, Jay. But I think were talking about two slightly different points. Bloggers want to have an audience big enough to attract advertising attention but don't want to deal with the attention from PR. They're not apt to release their numbers because they want this air that they have a huge audience. Once you look at the traffic for most blogs, though, you realize A) No sponsor is going to spend much money on those numbers and B) Only the really smart PR folks who know targeting a niche audience of influencers on a topic is worth the effort are going to pay them much mind, either.

      You're right, PR folks are starting to know that finding those small but active niche audiences is effective and therefore even small trafficked blogs are worth investing some time in. But the advertisers only see total eyeballs and not eyeballs of influencers. Believe me, I've made the case for brand managers before and they still respond with, “yeah, but that's not very many people.”

  • Jason

    Great post. Thanks for writing. My two cents below.

    I think the future of advertising is Conversations. Whether those conversations are instigated by PR, Advertising or simply occur organically and a brand uses SM to participate… conversations will drive brand growth in the future.

    Advertising on blogs: Honestly, I wouldn't want to advertise on a blog. The real value for my client is the commentary the blogger ads not the commentary my copywriter will write. Bloggers should figure that out. Paid vs Free commentary — that is up for grabs I guess. If a blogger is clearly shilling for the dough, his/her readers will see that and eventually if he/she does it enough, the readers will stop following and find another thought leader in the space. If he/she is simply saying, hey I really like this product/service, and the brand is paying them to review the product/service, that is fine by me provided the product/service is within the sphere of why i read that blog.

  • Jason

    Great post. Thanks for writing. My two cents below.

    I think the future of advertising is Conversations. Whether those conversations are instigated by PR, Advertising or simply occur organically and a brand uses SM to participate… conversations will drive brand growth in the future.

    Advertising on blogs: Honestly, I wouldn't want to advertise on a blog. The real value for my client is the commentary the blogger ads not the commentary my copywriter will write. Bloggers should figure that out. Paid vs Free commentary — that is up for grabs I guess. If a blogger is clearly shilling for the dough, his/her readers will see that and eventually if he/she does it enough, the readers will stop following and find another thought leader in the space. If he/she is simply saying, hey I really like this product/service, and the brand is paying them to review the product/service, that is fine by me provided the product/service is within the sphere of why i read that blog.

  • Jason

    Great post. Thanks for writing. My two cents below.

    I think the future of advertising is Conversations. Whether those conversations are instigated by PR, Advertising or simply occur organically and a brand uses SM to participate… conversations will drive brand growth in the future.

    Advertising on blogs: Honestly, I wouldn't want to advertise on a blog. The real value for my client is the commentary the blogger ads not the commentary my copywriter will write. Bloggers should figure that out. Paid vs Free commentary — that is up for grabs I guess. If a blogger is clearly shilling for the dough, his/her readers will see that and eventually if he/she does it enough, the readers will stop following and find another thought leader in the space. If he/she is simply saying, hey I really like this product/service, and the brand is paying them to review the product/service, that is fine by me provided the product/service is within the sphere of why i read that blog.

  • Jason

    Great post. Thanks for writing. My two cents below.

    I think the future of advertising is Conversations. Whether those conversations are instigated by PR, Advertising or simply occur organically and a brand uses SM to participate… conversations will drive brand growth in the future.

    Advertising on blogs: Honestly, I wouldn't want to advertise on a blog. The real value for my client is the commentary the blogger ads not the commentary my copywriter will write. Bloggers should figure that out. Paid vs Free commentary — that is up for grabs I guess. If a blogger is clearly shilling for the dough, his/her readers will see that and eventually if he/she does it enough, the readers will stop following and find another thought leader in the space. If he/she is simply saying, hey I really like this product/service, and the brand is paying them to review the product/service, that is fine by me provided the product/service is within the sphere of why i read that blog.

  • Jason

    Great post. Thanks for writing. My two cents below.

    I think the future of advertising is Conversations. Whether those conversations are instigated by PR, Advertising or simply occur organically and a brand uses SM to participate… conversations will drive brand growth in the future.

    Advertising on blogs: Honestly, I wouldn't want to advertise on a blog. The real value for my client is the commentary the blogger ads not the commentary my copywriter will write. Bloggers should figure that out. Paid vs Free commentary — that is up for grabs I guess. If a blogger is clearly shilling for the dough, his/her readers will see that and eventually if he/she does it enough, the readers will stop following and find another thought leader in the space. If he/she is simply saying, hey I really like this product/service, and the brand is paying them to review the product/service, that is fine by me provided the product/service is within the sphere of why i read that blog.

  • Jason

    Great post. Thanks for writing. My two cents below.

    I think the future of advertising is Conversations. Whether those conversations are instigated by PR, Advertising or simply occur organically and a brand uses SM to participate… conversations will drive brand growth in the future.

    Advertising on blogs: Honestly, I wouldn't want to advertise on a blog. The real value for my client is the commentary the blogger ads not the commentary my copywriter will write. Bloggers should figure that out. Paid vs Free commentary — that is up for grabs I guess. If a blogger is clearly shilling for the dough, his/her readers will see that and eventually if he/she does it enough, the readers will stop following and find another thought leader in the space. If he/she is simply saying, hey I really like this product/service, and the brand is paying them to review the product/service, that is fine by me provided the product/service is within the sphere of why i read that blog.

    • Agree with you on the future of advertising lying mostly in conversations Tom. But think about your advertising on blogs part – Izea created conversation about their brand and their partner's brand by paying a blogger to write about them. It's conversation but manufactured with an ad buy of sorts. It was an experiment, but one that had mostly good reactions from the intended audience. I think we'll see conversation continue to be the focus, content the mechanism but pay for play as having a role in it all.

      Thanks for the input.

  • I disagree vehemently with the part of your post about pay-for-play being an effective route and personally see it as one of the most uncreative attempts at exposure in social media I've seen to date. You were on a good tangent up until mentioning the Izea thing – their service isn't an experiment or pushing the envelope at all – feels more like a dated tactic slapped on to new media. I wrote a bunch more thoughts on why paid blogging is a lose-lose situation here, and I stand by these:
    http://thefuturebuzz.com/2008/12/17/paid-bloggi

    Not worth it for bloggers. Way too much risk. Not nearly enough payoff. Don't do it.

  • I disagree vehemently with the part of your post about pay-for-play being an effective route and personally see it as one of the most uncreative attempts at exposure in social media I've seen to date. You were on a good tangent up until mentioning the Izea thing – their service isn't an experiment or pushing the envelope at all – feels more like a dated tactic slapped on to new media. I wrote a bunch more thoughts on why paid blogging is a lose-lose situation here, and I stand by these:
    http://thefuturebuzz.com/2008/12/17/paid-bloggi

    Not worth it for bloggers. Way too much risk. Not nearly enough payoff. Don't do it.

  • I disagree vehemently with the part of your post about pay-for-play being an effective route and personally see it as one of the most uncreative attempts at exposure in social media I've seen to date. You were on a good tangent up until mentioning the Izea thing – their service isn't an experiment or pushing the envelope at all – feels more like a dated tactic slapped on to new media. I wrote a bunch more thoughts on why paid blogging is a lose-lose situation here, and I stand by these:
    http://thefuturebuzz.com/2008/12/17/paid-bloggi

    Not worth it for bloggers. Way too much risk. Not nearly enough payoff. Don't do it.

  • I disagree vehemently with the part of your post about pay-for-play being an effective route and personally see it as one of the most uncreative attempts at exposure in social media I've seen to date. You were on a good tangent up until mentioning the Izea thing – their service isn't an experiment or pushing the envelope at all – feels more like a dated tactic slapped on to new media. I wrote a bunch more thoughts on why paid blogging is a lose-lose situation here, and I stand by these:
    http://thefuturebuzz.com/2008/12/17/paid-bloggi

    Not worth it for bloggers. Way too much risk. Not nearly enough payoff. Don't do it.

  • I disagree vehemently with the part of your post about pay-for-play being an effective route and personally see it as one of the most uncreative attempts at exposure in social media I've seen to date. You were on a good tangent up until mentioning the Izea thing – their service isn't an experiment or pushing the envelope at all – feels more like a dated tactic slapped on to new media. I wrote a bunch more thoughts on why paid blogging is a lose-lose situation here, and I stand by these:
    http://thefuturebuzz.com/2008/12/17/paid-bloggi

    Not worth it for bloggers. Way too much risk. Not nearly enough payoff. Don't do it.

  • I disagree vehemently with the part of your post about pay-for-play being an effective route and personally see it as one of the most uncreative attempts at exposure in social media I've seen to date. You were on a good tangent up until mentioning the Izea thing – their service isn't an experiment or pushing the envelope at all – feels more like a dated tactic slapped on to new media. I wrote a bunch more thoughts on why paid blogging is a lose-lose situation here, and I stand by these:
    http://thefuturebuzz.com/2008/12/17/paid-bloggi

    Not worth it for bloggers. Way too much risk. Not nearly enough payoff. Don't do it.

    • I think the difference in our view points Adam is that you're looking at it from a social media purists standpoint. I'm looking at the total landscape. People outside our bubble, who read Perez Hilton, the Huffington Report and maybe Uncrate or some product review sites and aren't hypersensitive to the whole social media spectrum aren't going to care if a post is paid for so long as it's not out of the parameters of content that they expect. I won't ever accept money to post about a certain topic on this blog, but if I were to do product reviews for another site, I might consider it depending upon the product, etc. Part of my audience (on that site) may not like it and stop coming, but there will be plenty of outside-the-bubblers who won't notice or care if they do.

      In principle, I agree with you. In reality, I know paid posts will continue and probably find a happy home in some industries and niches.

      • You wonder why corporate blogs aren't necessarily as trusted (Forrested proved this) – because of an obvious bias. I think the average blog reader is actually quite bright, and this research proves they see through it.

        I read alot of blogs and forums Jason and I will tell you sponsored posts are never taken well by passionate communities, they simply don't like it. Not necessarily when the COMPANY is writing it (pure advertorial) but if the editor is writing it, it is definitely viewed as selling out and seen as influence.

        Companies are already being talked about in the blogosphere – more than 80% of bloggers mention brands already according to Technorati. Injecting yourself via money into the conversation isn't the answer if you aren't being talked about. This is a weak tactic at best. Far better approaches I've done (and others have) for years.

        The reason this idea upsets me is because yes to a degree I feel like this cheapens approaches that naturally generate conversation for brands. Although I do not think Izea and others will ruin a good thing for pay per post, I think the most influential sites and bloggers wouldn't do this. Can you imagine Seth Godin or Mike Masnick taking money for a post? Doubt it.

        It depends on why you blog, really…if you just want to make a buck go for it, but IMO people put in too much work to risk selling their brand down the river for a gift card.

  • Pay-per-posts is an old 2006 discussion. Nothing ever wrong with it as long as it's disclosed. My beef with IZEA (and I've told both @tedmurphy and @chrisbrogan this) was the incessant retweets @ Twitter which, honestly, was advertising for K-Mart. Thus, the question for me is Twitter. And THAT, my friends, are the new eyeballs Ted wanted for K-Mart. And THAT is where I struggle: Twitter is a different *micro-blogging* and this form of advertising is coming to Twitter. In fact. with Chris' blessing of IZEA, it's here. But it should be *labeled* as advertising. Label, label, label. Otherwise, believe me, the big successful retailers will not play.

  • Pay-per-posts is an old 2006 discussion. Nothing ever wrong with it as long as it's disclosed. My beef with IZEA (and I've told both @tedmurphy and @chrisbrogan this) was the incessant retweets @ Twitter which, honestly, was advertising for K-Mart. Thus, the question for me is Twitter. And THAT, my friends, are the new eyeballs Ted wanted for K-Mart. And THAT is where I struggle: Twitter is a different *micro-blogging* and this form of advertising is coming to Twitter. In fact. with Chris' blessing of IZEA, it's here. But it should be *labeled* as advertising. Label, label, label. Otherwise, believe me, the big successful retailers will not play.

  • Pay-per-posts is an old 2006 discussion. Nothing ever wrong with it as long as it's disclosed. My beef with IZEA (and I've told both @tedmurphy and @chrisbrogan this) was the incessant retweets @ Twitter which, honestly, was advertising for K-Mart. Thus, the question for me is Twitter. And THAT, my friends, are the new eyeballs Ted wanted for K-Mart. And THAT is where I struggle: Twitter is a different *micro-blogging* and this form of advertising is coming to Twitter. In fact. with Chris' blessing of IZEA, it's here. But it should be *labeled* as advertising. Label, label, label. Otherwise, believe me, the big successful retailers will not play.

  • Pay-per-posts is an old 2006 discussion. Nothing ever wrong with it as long as it's disclosed. My beef with IZEA (and I've told both @tedmurphy and @chrisbrogan this) was the incessant retweets @ Twitter which, honestly, was advertising for K-Mart. Thus, the question for me is Twitter. And THAT, my friends, are the new eyeballs Ted wanted for K-Mart. And THAT is where I struggle: Twitter is a different *micro-blogging* and this form of advertising is coming to Twitter. In fact. with Chris' blessing of IZEA, it's here. But it should be *labeled* as advertising. Label, label, label. Otherwise, believe me, the big successful retailers will not play.

  • Pay-per-posts is an old 2006 discussion. Nothing ever wrong with it as long as it's disclosed. My beef with IZEA (and I've told both @tedmurphy and @chrisbrogan this) was the incessant retweets @ Twitter which, honestly, was advertising for K-Mart. Thus, the question for me is Twitter. And THAT, my friends, are the new eyeballs Ted wanted for K-Mart. And THAT is where I struggle: Twitter is a different *micro-blogging* and this form of advertising is coming to Twitter. In fact. with Chris' blessing of IZEA, it's here. But it should be *labeled* as advertising. Label, label, label. Otherwise, believe me, the big successful retailers will not play.

  • Pay-per-posts is an old 2006 discussion. Nothing ever wrong with it as long as it's disclosed. My beef with IZEA (and I've told both @tedmurphy and @chrisbrogan this) was the incessant retweets @ Twitter which, honestly, was advertising for K-Mart. Thus, the question for me is Twitter. And THAT, my friends, are the new eyeballs Ted wanted for K-Mart. And THAT is where I struggle: Twitter is a different *micro-blogging* and this form of advertising is coming to Twitter. In fact. with Chris' blessing of IZEA, it's here. But it should be *labeled* as advertising. Label, label, label. Otherwise, believe me, the big successful retailers will not play.

    • Very valid point Barbara. There's a different in pay-per-post and pay-per-promotion of that post. I would agree with you and also say that the promotional tactics shouldn't change whether the post is paid for or not. Don't go above and beyond what you normally do just to drive eyeballs or you're crossing that line into spamville. Thanks as always!

  • Some of us are older than you when it comes to defining old-fashioned. When the trade press was the principle target of tech PR, the major goal was indeed personal engagement with specific editors and reporters. Things broke down with blogging, not because there were so many bloggers, but because the bloggers were so ambivalent about their motives. The trade press was paid to write. It was their job to report on what was pitched to them. Blogging went through a long period of confusion about whether it was a professional activity or a personal method of sharing with friends. As more bloggers realize and admit that they are professional writers, PR will return to its traditional role of getting the right story in front of the right people, and then stepping back and letting them do their job.

  • Some of us are older than you when it comes to defining old-fashioned. When the trade press was the principle target of tech PR, the major goal was indeed personal engagement with specific editors and reporters. Things broke down with blogging, not because there were so many bloggers, but because the bloggers were so ambivalent about their motives. The trade press was paid to write. It was their job to report on what was pitched to them. Blogging went through a long period of confusion about whether it was a professional activity or a personal method of sharing with friends. As more bloggers realize and admit that they are professional writers, PR will return to its traditional role of getting the right story in front of the right people, and then stepping back and letting them do their job.

  • Some of us are older than you when it comes to defining old-fashioned. When the trade press was the principle target of tech PR, the major goal was indeed personal engagement with specific editors and reporters. Things broke down with blogging, not because there were so many bloggers, but because the bloggers were so ambivalent about their motives. The trade press was paid to write. It was their job to report on what was pitched to them. Blogging went through a long period of confusion about whether it was a professional activity or a personal method of sharing with friends. As more bloggers realize and admit that they are professional writers, PR will return to its traditional role of getting the right story in front of the right people, and then stepping back and letting them do their job.

  • Some of us are older than you when it comes to defining old-fashioned. When the trade press was the principle target of tech PR, the major goal was indeed personal engagement with specific editors and reporters. Things broke down with blogging, not because there were so many bloggers, but because the bloggers were so ambivalent about their motives. The trade press was paid to write. It was their job to report on what was pitched to them. Blogging went through a long period of confusion about whether it was a professional activity or a personal method of sharing with friends. As more bloggers realize and admit that they are professional writers, PR will return to its traditional role of getting the right story in front of the right people, and then stepping back and letting them do their job.

  • Some of us are older than you when it comes to defining old-fashioned. When the trade press was the principle target of tech PR, the major goal was indeed personal engagement with specific editors and reporters. Things broke down with blogging, not because there were so many bloggers, but because the bloggers were so ambivalent about their motives. The trade press was paid to write. It was their job to report on what was pitched to them. Blogging went through a long period of confusion about whether it was a professional activity or a personal method of sharing with friends. As more bloggers realize and admit that they are professional writers, PR will return to its traditional role of getting the right story in front of the right people, and then stepping back and letting them do their job.

  • Some of us are older than you when it comes to defining old-fashioned. When the trade press was the principle target of tech PR, the major goal was indeed personal engagement with specific editors and reporters. Things broke down with blogging, not because there were so many bloggers, but because the bloggers were so ambivalent about their motives. The trade press was paid to write. It was their job to report on what was pitched to them. Blogging went through a long period of confusion about whether it was a professional activity or a personal method of sharing with friends. As more bloggers realize and admit that they are professional writers, PR will return to its traditional role of getting the right story in front of the right people, and then stepping back and letting them do their job.

    • I sure hope you're right, Adam. But I think there will always be a bit of ambiguity in blogging. TechCrunch is leading the way, of course, refusing to respect embargoes and such. They are a legit media outlet refusing to behave like one would traditionally. That won't change and will probably trend a bit. PR folks have to be nimble now more than ever but perhaps the landscape in some industries will settle a bit. Thanks for chiming in.

  • Jason…dead on. I'm definitely a hybrid of PR, direct marketing, and social media marketing (or listening as I like to call it). The years of the one line of communication between businesses and clients is over. Everyone wants a relationship and wants to get to know who you are before they buy. The most successful conversions I have had this past year have come mainly from creating a close personal connection with the client and generally just being a nice person (read not email spamming them). Just my two cents…

  • Jason…dead on. I'm definitely a hybrid of PR, direct marketing, and social media marketing (or listening as I like to call it). The years of the one line of communication between businesses and clients is over. Everyone wants a relationship and wants to get to know who you are before they buy. The most successful conversions I have had this past year have come mainly from creating a close personal connection with the client and generally just being a nice person (read not email spamming them). Just my two cents…

  • Jason…dead on. I'm definitely a hybrid of PR, direct marketing, and social media marketing (or listening as I like to call it). The years of the one line of communication between businesses and clients is over. Everyone wants a relationship and wants to get to know who you are before they buy. The most successful conversions I have had this past year have come mainly from creating a close personal connection with the client and generally just being a nice person (read not email spamming them). Just my two cents…

  • Jason…dead on. I'm definitely a hybrid of PR, direct marketing, and social media marketing (or listening as I like to call it). The years of the one line of communication between businesses and clients is over. Everyone wants a relationship and wants to get to know who you are before they buy. The most successful conversions I have had this past year have come mainly from creating a close personal connection with the client and generally just being a nice person (read not email spamming them). Just my two cents…

  • Jason…dead on. I'm definitely a hybrid of PR, direct marketing, and social media marketing (or listening as I like to call it). The years of the one line of communication between businesses and clients is over. Everyone wants a relationship and wants to get to know who you are before they buy. The most successful conversions I have had this past year have come mainly from creating a close personal connection with the client and generally just being a nice person (read not email spamming them). Just my two cents…

  • Jason…dead on. I'm definitely a hybrid of PR, direct marketing, and social media marketing (or listening as I like to call it). The years of the one line of communication between businesses and clients is over. Everyone wants a relationship and wants to get to know who you are before they buy. The most successful conversions I have had this past year have come mainly from creating a close personal connection with the client and generally just being a nice person (read not email spamming them). Just my two cents…

    • And a valuable two cents at that Stuart. Well said.