I was listening to this episode of Cranky Geeks: Episode 64: Microsoft takes on the free world, says open-source software infringes on its patents… – Cranky Geeks and heard about a the uproar about PayPerPost.

I just don’t get it. Maybe it’s a reputation from before I used them, but I don’t see any issue whatsoever.

1) I only take the posts I want. Right now there tons of opportunities on insurance, and other stuff, but I haven’t taken any b/c I don’t find them interesting. If I don’t find it interesting, neither will my audience (who I assume is like me interest-wise).

2) I ALWAYS identify paid content. You’ll notice that this post didn’t start with the words “Paid Advertisement”. That’s because it’s not one. I just heard this and wanted to write. I know some of the ones that are paid might sound like something I’d write about anyway; that’s because I want them to be obvious, but seemless. By that I mean I want it to be clear that it’s a paid post, but I also want it to feel like I wrote it and didn’t just paste in some advertising copy. I want a story from my life or an anecdote to be a part of every post unless it’s just a link–whether it’s paid or not.

Maybe others don’t identify their paid posts, but I have to. One, I’m bound by ethics to. The other reason is that PayPerPost requires that I disclose the fact that I’m paid. In fact, my first paid post was turned down until I put the words “Paid Advertisement” at the beginning of it.

3) I sometimes rethink posts before I post them. I can always fail to submit the information and after an hour it goes back into the stack for someone else to take. This happened twice today. I noticed the post I was going to write required a link I didn’t want to put in this blog, so I decided not to take it. Another time I decided the site just didn’t interest me after all.

Sorry, just some misconceptions that I wanted to clear up at least in reference to this blog. Let me know what you think.

Paul

Advertisements