Jim – Interesting responses to your questions. I’m heading over to read then more thoroughly and comment. I suggest those with a keen interest in this debate head on over.

For the record, I either tag or disclaim any PPP posts when I post them. I don’t see where adding something to my sidebar would matter or even get the same attention as a tag or in-post disclaimer, since metrics show that sidebar links are rarely clicked.

At three posts per day with an average payment of $5.50, I’m not going to get rich. I’m maybe going to pay for my web host. Or if I’m really lucky, that new camera lens I want. But I won’t be giving up my day job or night job anytime soon.

I don’t understand why there’s such pushback to an opportunity to make a few bucks where I choose the content, the tone and the topic. If it isn’t interesting to me, I don’t bother with it. You won’t see me posting links to sites that I wouldn’t bother with myself, but if I were using the Adsense model I’d certainly have links to sites that I wouldn’t bother with myself, which I find more bothersome than the PPP model.

DnW

Once again, for me, it all comes down to disclosure. If PPP changed their terms and demanded that bloggers disclose then that would make it a much better proposition.

And the more I think about it the more I think Scoble is right about gaming Google. Maybe this all just comes down to getting extra google juice.

http://www.revenews.com/jimkukral/archives/002352.html

“Jim Kukral is paid to blog, or makes money by virtue of the attention his blog attracts but he’s holier than the PayPerPost model?”

Peter, c’mon, no one here is buying this argument. Simply put, there IS a difference between writing content DIRECTLY AND INDISPUTABLY just because someone is paying you to do it in a specific way versus blogging about something that you recommend.

Flat out, without the disclosure rule in place, PPP could be a breeding ground for illigitimate webmasters wanting to earn a quick buck, and furthermore, can/will ruin the reputation of bloggers who do in fact rely on REAL recommendations to build credibility and trust.

“Disclosure is an important issue and it’s one that PayperPost have been watching and listening to and thinking very hard about. But if we’re going to disclose then shouldn’t the top 0.01% as well?”

The top 0.01% aren’t distributing a methodology/system on how to do what they do. You’re comparing two different things.

“Perhaps all that PayPerPost have done here is what was needed – to kick a disorganized, unregulated, amateur pursuit in the pants so hard that we’ll come out the other end with ‘professional news and views sites’ which are not blogs per se, and blogs as we currently know them. At the moment the blogosphere is very far from Fleet Street and try to pretend that it is is wrong. ”

Or perhaps we’re all dumb enough to keep feeding the flame and making PPP rich along the way? I’ve considered it as others have I”m sure. Spin it any way you wish, but to me, there is absolutely no upside to non-disclosure from either end. The blogger who participates in this will never build an audience, and the advertiser will probably never see an roi long term.

Full disclosure: I founded and own a blog advertising cpa network. We’ll never ask anyone to write something for money though, or not to disclose that an ad is an ad/sponsor.

And not just with PPP but as you said with everybody – starting from the top.

I’m encouraged that you’re thinking hard about the disclosure issue.

#1. Yep, I’m ignorant, I agree. For the everyday person “won” is what it means. Take a look at the just recent vc funding for b5media. Notice they have not used the word “won”. But it’s all semantics anyway.

#2. I never said that the spoof blog was trying to make money with PPP. Do you understand the term “spoof”? It’s taking a go at PPP. Obviously, if PPP allowed this blog in their whole system is flawed.

#3. This is a column … an opinion piece. We are allowed to have opinions aren’t we. Just like your opinion about me/this post right here.

BTW, Danielle – if you were to use PPP would you disclose this to your readers?

Yeah, I’ve contracted exhaustion after partying heartily but never ended up in hospital. Is he really alright?

Loren – Trust no one, eh! :) Maybe I’m an idealist (on my good days) but I thought maybe blogging could be different, more open, less like MSM.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m as capitalist as they come.

I don’t really mind people doing it, it’s just why not disclose it? Because we’re not talking about ads in the sidebar or a banner mid way through a post – we’re in effect talking about an advertorial.

BTW, how was the party? Where’s the pics? Where’s Mr Char?

As someone else has said on this very discussion on numerous other boards “Since when did Blogging ever have credibility”.

Jim Kukral is paid to blog, or makes money by virtue of the attention his blog attracts but he’s holier than the PayPerPost model? What about TechCrunch? Engadget? All paid to blog, but no-one questions their ethics despite them never stating that they had any (well, TechCrunch did recently).

Disclosure is an important issue and it’s one that PayperPost have been watching and listening to and thinking very hard about. But if we’re going to disclose then shouldn’t the top 0.01% as well? Where did that product X Scoble mentioned this week come from? Did Engadget pay for their toys? etc etc.

Perhaps all that PayPerPost have done here is what was needed – to kick a disorganized, unregulated, amateur pursuit in the pants so hard that we’ll come out the other end with ‘professional news and views sites’ which are not blogs per se, and blogs as we currently know them. At the moment the blogosphere is very far from Fleet Street and try to pretend that it is is wrong.

#1 – The word “won” has more than one dictionary meaning. Often in the sales business, you would describe acquiring a new project as “winning a new account”. It’s something you have worked toward and gained. So to criticize someone for using the word when your only knowledge of it is based on one of the multiple definitions is just in poor taste, and frankly makes you look ignorant.

#2 – The “spoof” blog that you mentioned is not an approved PayPerPost blog. It states clearly in their Terms of Service that blogs created solely to gain profit will not be accepted. Also, there are several requirements on blog age and content that the creator of the spoof blog obviously didn’t read.

#3 – Although I have done my research on PayPerPost, I am NOT a PayPerPost blogger. Please don’t discount this as a biased comment. I am just trying to make the following point: Before you post a debatable topic on a blog with such high traffic, you should DO YOUR RESEARCH on both sides or you’ll end up sounding extremely uneducated like this guy.

It’s not going to hurt blogging I don’t think, it’s just not a good think I don’t think.

Thus, it can make building integrity for those that want it (say, you and me) that much harder.

BTW, if you were to use PayPerPost would you disclose it?

Building integrity with readers is the key to long-term blogging success (and blogging revenue).