elveston priory

I’m intrigued by this concept, on WinExtra, OddTimeSignatures and Geek News Central today, that top bloggers might take cash for posts without disclosure. It’s actually an accusation that pops up in the comments from time to time, and I hope none of our readers take the idea seriously. That said, Mashable is mentioned a few times so I’ll respond.

Many top blogs, if you’ve been keeping track, have yearly revenues that end in “million”. Many more have revenues in six figures. With the exception of some marketing-focused blogs, accepting cash for posts without disclosure would destroy your reputation and therefore your revenues. There is nobody who would take the bait.

Now if you’re talking about the separate issue of whether PR firms set embargoes on certain stories, the answer is obviously yes: they always have. This is usually so they can arrange for beta testing ahead of time and also generate buzz when a lot of people cover the same topic on the same day. I see no evidence on any blog that embargoed posts are more positive than usual: sometimes they’re higher quality because you get a lot more time to test the app and gather your thoughts.

If there is a problem with this system, however, it’s that a lot of the blogs get told the same story by the founders and PR firms (either via email or on the phone), and end up making very similar points in their reviews. To combat this problem, I’m constructing a “Hype Filter (TM)” for our writers to attach to their phones when talking to PR people and founders. It will be on general sale in 2010. Until construction is complete, however, I’ll just advise all our bloggers to avoid repeating PR spiels whenever possible: in Mashable’s case, there’s definitely room for improvement.

PS. I can’t vouch for the numbers in the BusinessWeek article linked above: just pointing out that blogger revenues are not insignificant.

Share This