PayPerPost: Return Of Marquiism

So it looks like some bad ideas just won't die. A few years ago, I was embroiled in a blogosphere deathmatch with Marc Canter, when he was pushing the Marqui content management solution by a pay-bloggers-to-blog scheme (see Marqui), culminating in a live debate with Marc and the president of Marqui, Stephen King supporting the practice, and Jason Calacanis and I, on the other, poking holes in it (see here).

Now, the generally reviled practice is being revived by PayPerPost, a company that just raised $3M (see PaidContent story).

Here's what PayPerPost says in its pitch:

[from PayPerPost :: Get Paid for Blogging, Blog Advertising, Advertise on Blogs]

Our system is relatively simple for both the advertisers and bloggers that are part of our network. Bloggers, you create an account in our system by providing some basic information. You are here to make money so a valid TAX ID (either social security number for individuals or an EIN for companies) is required.

Once your account is created, you are ready to submit your blog for approval. Typically, blogs are approved within 24 hours, but it may take up to 72 hours depending on the amount of submissions. Once your blog has been approved, you are ready to take Opportunities. Think of an Opportunity as a posting on a bulletin board that an advertiser has made. They are looking for people to write about Web sites, products and services in exchange for cash. Select the Opportunity that you are most interested in and review the requirements set forth by the advertiser.

Advertisers will post all sorts of Opportunities, from a simple "link back to this site" to product reviews with pictures. Each Opportunity will have different compensation based on the advertiser. It's up to you to pick the Opportunities that best suit you. If it doesn't feel right, if you don't own the product, or if you can't be honest we ask you to pass on the Opportunity.

Once you have selected an Opportunity, create a post on your blog, paying attention to the Opportunity requirements the advertiser has set forth. Then submit the direct link back to us. Our team will review the content and either approve or deny the post. If it is denied, you will be given a chance to revise and resubmit. Post reviews are usually approved within 48 hours, but may take up to 72 hours, or 3 business days. Your post must remain live on your blog for 30 days. Keep blogging as usual... eat a sandwich; go get a haircut.

After thirty days (and also at random) we will check to see if the blog post is still live. If the post is live, you have satisfied your agreement and you will get paid. We will issue your payment via PayPal based on the PayPal e-mail address you provide us. We don't pay in gold, baseball cards, experience points or foodstamps, so please don't ask. If you don't have a PayPal account, please get one or don't sign up.

The generally snarky tone draws the reader away from the issue: people are being paid to blog (flog?) products or services, and it may not be evident that this is being done. And, even when some sort of disclosure is being made -- as with the Marqui bloggers -- the review/rejection cycle will rapidly lead to inoffensive posts by bloggers softsoaping the readers.

At any rate, this is an inherently iffy model, completely unlike a free market model for licensing and reusing blog content (as SocialRoots is pursuing -- full disclosure: SR is an advisory client, and I have a stake in the company), and is at best a questionable edge of the blogosphere, and at the worst, a cancer that could erode trust and reputation for all that it touches.

[Update: 9:52am 5 Oct 2006

I signed up for an account, and found out that the micropayments involved in PayPerPost are really small. For $7 a web search company called List'd is trying to get bloggers to flog its eBay tool.

I wanted to see if anyone had taken the bait, so I did a Google search on "A completely new AJAX enabled keyword search to help you find the right category" thinking that real stooges would simply lift the text entirely. Bingo! The top hit on Google for that phrase was Sabrina's Adventures, and she makes no statement about being paid for the blog post:

So the blog payola seems to be working, inasmuch as people like Sabrina are willing to dupe people for $7.]

tags: blog+payola, payperpost, socialroots, blogging, marketing, bad+marketing+practices, marc+canter, marquiism, jason+calacanis, marqui, stephen+king

Comments

[Dan...]

Hey Stowe,

Thanks for sharing -- this is a great example of the platform:
- introducing people to a new product
- asking for a blogger to share their opinions
- understanding those opinions could be negative, neutral or positive
- advertiser making no demands on keeping the payment any secret
- the blogger making no extra money for a click/conversion (ala AdSense) so there is no incentive to deceive

The blogger was in control of choosing or not choosing the opportunity among hundreds based upon their comfort with the subject, tone etc. The blogger helped cover their hosting/time/effort with $7. Readers of that blog got to learn about a new eBay listing tool and didn't have to put up with AdSense/popups/other 'ugly' advertising because the blogger's expenses were covered in a more elegant fashion.

That sounds like a win-win-win...I've researched the platform since it's founding and there are thousands of these examples. There will always be outliers in large populations, but a market system like PPP (with ranking for bloggers and advertisers) will reward quality transactions like this and discourage lower quality ones -- ultimately raising the quality of the entire system over time (just as eBay feedback has grown buyer/seller sophistication over time).

The company is young and growing fast so tell them your feedback -- they are listening and working to build the best marketplace possible to serve everyone's needs. In fact now that you're registered, there are some PPP opportunities asking for opinions on the service/funding and paying $10 for your time/effort sharing postive, negative or neutral reviews...the exercise would be valuable for your readers to see that covering your expenses and remaining objective don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Thanks gain for the post!

[henriette weber andersen]

I like when they try to pay people to be "influencers" - the good part is just that people see through it -

for example Canada's word of mouth agency "the influencers.. " ( no link you have to google it guys =)

I think that people would actually loose credibility by signing up for such a scheme - and I think it's on the edge to how much you can actually force word of mouth...

[Stowe Boyd]

Dan -

I think you should make clear that you are a VC backing the company.

If you thin=k that it is a win-win-win for a blogger to simply copy some marketing text, paste it into her blog -- without any actual review of the product, as far as I know -- and suggest that others should try it like she will ("next time I have something to sell I will definetely use List'd"), then you are way way off base.

This is a disease, not some simple and user-friendly revenue gimmick: it is social spam, just like the earliest incarnation of BuzzAgents.

[Dan...]

Yes, I specifically siglinked to my venture capital blog where I blogged about our PPP investment (and see from MyBlogLog that your readers have clicked to see my context). You know as well as I that siglinks exist to help people understand the context of a commenter. I researched the company for months, really trying to understand what makes it tick. I've seen the win-win-win firsthand that you question.

The fact that we disagree on the "right" answer is a powerful reason why a marketplace will fail trying to artificially solve what markets and ranking/quality systems are meant to solve. Thanks again for the added exposure and the ongoing input to improve the product. These guys are young but listening to everyone's input...