PayPerPost, Affiliate Disclosure, and the FTC
So there has been a lot of news about PayPerPost finally requiring bloggers to post disclosures for paid posts.
When I recently reveiwed a similar site, Reviewme.com, I mentioned this flaw in PayPerPost’s business model. And I wasn’t the only one. Michael Arrington over at TechCrunch nearly crucified them when they first came out basically claming they were destroying the blogosphere. He had articles titled, “PayPerPost Is Now Officially Absurd” and “PayPerPost Chronicles Their Amorality”. Fun stuff.
But now even Michael admits they are going in the right direction. In a recent post about the company Michael responds to a comment saying, “Just writing something positive about your company nearly killed me.” But write something positive he did.
This is all just the tip of the ice burg, however. The FTC has been putting pressure on affiliate websites in the form of an issued “staff opinion” that said “companies engaging in word-of-mouth marketing, in which people are compensated to promote products to their peers, must disclose those relationships.”
In theory, I agree with this. But in practice it’s not highly practical. And I I feel almost exactly the way Brian Clark (CopyBlogger) feels,
“This is huge. I can certainly live with it, although I feel a bit offended that I’m subject to potential legal action thanks to the actions of unethical marketers who have prompted blanket sanctions against everyone involved in a legitimate industry.”
I’m going to start mentioning now when I link to products or services where I may recieve a “kick back”. I have no problem with it. But I really think this is more of an issue where only “full time” affiliate websites and blogs whose agenda is to drive sales should be required to do this. As Brian Clark also mentions, “I hate the use of (aff) following the link. It’s just bad, distracting copy”. I agree.
Tags: PayPerPost, Affiliate Disclosure, FTC, Michael Arrington, Brian Clark
