July 1st, 2006

Paying for Bad PR

by

After my initial revulsion at http://www.payperpost.com, the new service that connects bloggers who want to shill with companies in need of shilling, I created an account to get a look at the terms of the offers. After some very bad PR, PayPerPost is not surprising PAYING bloggers to drum up some more PR — and, one would assume, BETTER PR. But that’s not the case. Here’s the offer of $100 to give “your honest opinion, good bad or otherwise.”

PayPerPost 100

So here’s a more sober reflection on PayPerPost — I can’t blame them for trying. I don’t think this is evil. I do think this will be a tremendous hassle for blogging because it because it blurs the line between marketing and non-marketing content.

I’m also deeply skeptical that companies will pay for a post if the entire concept is in general disrepute — it’s like paying for bad PR. And speaking of which, I don’t think companies will pay unless they can ensure a positive result, which seems like a logistical impossibility.

So that’s what I think in more than 100 words. And the money shot is in the traced link to PayPerPost above.

Now let’s see if I can get paid for providing bad PR — that would be truly bizarre. Some people say there’s no such thing as bad PR — don’t you believe it.

PRE-POST UPDATE: Right before posting this, I went to confirm my interest in the offer and it was gone! Fortunately, I had already captured the screen shot. I guess this one is a freebie.

Seems like PayPerPost realized themselves how dumb it is to pay for bad PR.

Comments (7 Responses so far)

  1. a controversy in the last 24 hours with its offer of paying bloggers to write about specific topics as a form of advertising.”, writes The Blog Herald. Jackson Miller calls Payperpost “an efficient tool for facilitating product placement”, whilevarious others have called it “shilling”. Now, I can see why, if your blog exists to promote your own products and services, that you might not want to shill, sorry promote, someone else’s products at all. Those blogs would also most likely (

  2. a controversy in the last 24 hours with its offer of paying bloggers to write about specific topics as a form of advertising.”, writes The Blog Herald. . Jackson Miller calls Payperpost “an efficient tool for facilitating product placement”, whilevarious others have called it “shilling”. Now, I can see why, if your blog exists to promote your own products and services, that you might not want to shill, sorry promote, someone else’s products at all. Those blogs would also most likely (

  3. will pay for a post if the entire concept is in general disrepute — it’s like paying for bad PR. And speaking of which, I don’t think companies will pay unless they can ensure a positive result, which seems like a logistical impossibility,” fromPublishing 2.0. For what it’s worth, I doubt PayPerPost will last too long, but the idea might. With the blogosphere as large as it is, and representing all walks of life, there will always be those who’ll gladly take the unethical, undisclosed buck. Hopefully they

  4. will pay for a post if the entire concept is in general disrepute — it’s like paying for bad PR. And speaking of which, I don’t think companies will pay unless they can ensure a positive result, which seems like a logistical impossibility,” from Publishing 2.0. For what it’s worth, I doubt PayPerPost will last too long, but the idea might. With the blogosphere as large as it is, and representing all walks of life, there will always be those who’ll gladly take the unethical, undisclosed buck. Hopefully they

  5. put New Orleans in perspective for me. I’m really torn about moving my ragtag operations there. I need to work on my bravery. [IMG] I checked out the new Netscape so you don’t have to. Everyone seems to be bashing PayPerPost. That means there is something there. Real people like the folks who blog on MySpace and Youtube will have no problem selling out for a few bucks. It’s the fucking American Way (even if the phrase isn’t mentioned in the new Superman flick

  6. Now that you’re registered on the site… does that mean your credibility is completely shot?

    KIDDING!

  7. [...] Then Marshall Kirkpatrick posted about it on TechCrunch, saying it entices bloggers to “sell their soul,” and all hell broke loose. My pal Scott Karp got his knickers in a royal twist over the idea, saying that the whole concept of blogging has “now been starkly divided into the pre-PayPerPost era and the post-PayPerPost era” and that blogging has “been irrevocably tainted” (Scott has since followed up with a more thoughtful post). [...]

  8. [...] Everyone seems to be bashing PayPerPost. That means there is something there. Real people like the folks who blog on MySpace and Youtube will have no problem selling out for a few bucks. It’s the fucking American Way (even if the phrase isn’t mentioned in the new Superman flick.) [...]

  9. Actually, that offer was limited to 10 people. I got mine in, but the offer disappeared right after that, around 2 pm yesterday, so I assume I got the last or next to last slot.

    The post is at this link.

  10. J,

    You have very nice blog, so don’t take this the wrong way, but the fact that you got the offer before me shows the gross inefficiency of the system. Based solely on reach, the money would have been better spend here:

    JJeffryes vs Publishing 2.0

    Although, given my attitude towards PayPerPost, perhaps not.

  11. You have very nice blog, so don’t take this the wrong way, but the fact that you got the offer before me shows the gross inefficiency of the system. Based solely on reach, the money would have been better spend here:

    No worries. I fully admit I have the equivalent of a cat blog, it’s just that instead of being obsessed with cats, I’m obsessed with design. I run it mostly so the people I talk to regularly can read the crazy theories I spout off in one place, instead of me having to repeat them each time we talk.

    But back to the point, the PayPerPost isn’t about getting links on quality blogs. It’s about getting links on lots of blogs. The goal is to have thousands of links, and with that in mind, trying to weigh them somehow to make more appear on blogs with more traffic would be mostly a waste of resources.

    Look at it from the perspective of an advertiser. They are buying clicks on links, not articles. In theory, people are much more likely to click on a link in an article in a blog than on a banner or text ad. If this is true, then $50,000 spent on PayPerPost gets you 10,000 blog posts. I’ve got to think even 10,000 posts on poorly read blogs would get much better results than the same amount of money spent on traditional internet advertising, not to mention the effect on the Google results (want better page rank? A few thousand posts should do the trick).

    I think most of the storm and fury here is due to a misunderstanding of what this is all about. It’s just a way to pay for links attached to relevant posts. It’s not terribly different from a text ad, except that each poster gets to write their own ad copy, with almost no restrictions. And if that’s not Web 2.0, I don’t know what is.

  12. [...] Everyone seems to be bashing PayPerPost. That means there is something there. Real people like the folks who blog on MySpace and Youtube will have no problem selling out for a few bucks. It’s the fucking American Way (even if the phrase isn’t mentioned in the new Superman flick.) [...]

Add Your Comment

Subscribe

Receive new posts by email