I don’t have a big problem with services like PayPerPost (mostly because it encourages its bloggers to disclose a PPP post). And, really, if a blogger does paid reviews, it’s part of living in a free market society. For the most part, blogging doesn’t pay (much), and if you can make a buck or three, I can understand the enticement.
But, it’s . . . just . . . not . . . right.
David Binkowski often enough writes about PayPerPost and his opinions are pretty clear.
Sara of Suburban Oblivion, while not giving her opinion, recently asked her readers about paid reviews. (She and others do product reviews, but I saw no indication if they’re paid or not.) It seemed that most of the commenters have no problem with paid reviews.
If you’re being paid to review and blog about a product, there always will be a veil of bias hanging over the post.
I don’t think I’m being utopian by stating that blog posts are viewed as being honest. Forthright. Upfront.
Trusted. Blogs are a powerful online, word-of-mouth, connecting resource. And, being paid to give an opinion hints at being biased. Not entirely honest.
Like advertising, I suppose services like PPP have their place. But, they do not — they cannot — have the same value as an honest, transparent product review.
As a public relations/marketing communications professional, I will not ask a blogger for a published review. I figure that, if a person blogs, he or she is naturally opinionated and will (postiviely or negatively) blog about the product, if he or she wants to.
The only thing I will ask for is for feedback — privately. That is one of the greatest values: objective subjective feedback.
Granted, however, I do tend to expect, or hope bloggers to blog about the product (because, as I stated, they’re opinionated). So, while not asking for a post, I have stated that, if a blogger does, then we’d try to work out a system where any of his or her readers who order a product and reference the blog, receives a small discount.
One of the greatest assets of social media is in how it connects. But, because that connection is done behind computer screens and keyboards — where you can easily be anonymous — what you type is who you are. Your reputation, your credibility is on the line whenever you blog.
If you’re being paid to review a product, your greatest asset – your credibility – suffers. And, no amount of payment will rebuild what’s been lost.
– Mike
Good post Mike. Thanks.
Thanks for the links, Mike. I am obviously in agreement with your take, so much so that I recently wrote an “Executive Perspective” on how the PPP model will kill the credibility of the blogosphere.
What I wonder is what percent actually comes back to the bloggers and how much companies like PPP are keeping? Either they’re making a lot of money and screwing the bloggers, paying them a whopping $7 per post, or advertisers aren’t really sold that the model works and aren’t ponying up for “paid conversations” (sounds a lot like that failed Edelman/Newsgator partnership called “Hosted Conversations”, doesn’t it?).
Sherrilynne: Thanks for the visit (and do you have a similar view, regarding the Nov. 25 where you live post?).
David: I guess it’s not surprising to see different variations of “blogging” being developed, like PPP. You could also look at what a blog really is, and how it’s defined: with and w/out allowing comments (aka Seth Godin), public vs. password restricted, etc.
Your exec paper would be an interesting read. While I don’t think paid reviews is a viable, effective approach, the optimist in me hopes that blogging will be grassroots enough that they’ll be in the very minority. And, that most bloggers won’t accept payola for reviews, and marcomm pros won’t get lazy and fork out money when they can’t do their work the right way.
–Mike
[…] 4. Which is better: paid or unpaid reviews? Well I’ve read Mike’s arguments and I have to say I agree. If there is a fee involved then financially yes, you will gain from what your doing but I think credibility is definitely being lost in the process. […]
Mike I’ve got a great view here, but alas, not as nice as the pic in the Telegraph. BTW, this post made ‘Jo’s PR top 5′. http://strivepr.com/wordpress/2007/12/07/dec-7th-jos-pr-top-5/
Hi
I’m not familiar with paid reviews - but what happens if the product really sucks? If you are being paid for the review are you obliged to say it’s great? If you don’t and say it’s crap - do you still get paid?
I’m not sure I would trust a paid review.
Anyway - very thought provoking blog, glad I found you.
I think a lot of what you said is very true - most people wouldn’t trust reviews that are paid. If someone is paid, a favourable reivew is usually expected.
That said, paid opinion can come in many forms, and paid surveys are very common. Would being paid to complete a survey influence your decision? Probably not. So I think paid surveys is not necessarily worse than unpaid surveys.
Dear Paid Survey Guide:
First, one comment at a time. No duplication. (I deleted your second, duplicated comment. If it was a mistake, fine. If it happens again, I’ll delete all of your comments.)
Anything done without even the possibility of influence is ideal and better, more honest. Even paid reviews, the reviewer can be honest. But, there’s a shadow of doubt, at the very least.
The same is said for paid surveys. If paid, there’s some influence on the outcome, even if minor. If the pay is nominal, a $1 say, the influence is nominal.
It also depends who is doing the paying. If it’s a party without a vested interest in the result it is much different than if the payer has a vested interest.
-Mike