More happenings on the sponsored text debate: John Battelle, CEO of FM Publishing, the ad network behind the ads, throw his authors, including us, under a bus today when he writes:
I think the key, as Scoble says, is to disclose. Our draft principles say:
Appearing in Ads: If you lend your voice or name to copy in an ad unit (for instance, “My dream search engine would operate on my spoken word,”) disclose that fact and your relationship with the advertiser, if any, in a post or on a disclosure page.
I think that’s absolutely right, and I wish all our authors did this before running the campaign.
hmm. Disclose? Disclose what? That the text inside of an ad unit is an ad? Thanks, John. Classy move.
I’m now pissed off at every single person involved in this. Denton for bringing up a non issue to attack competitors, Malik for folding immediately and making it seem like someone did something wrong, and now Battelle, our agent, saying he wished we had made a disclosure on this.
Any competing ad networks out there want our business, and promise not to throw us under a bus whenever Valleywag attacks?
Just for the record, here’s the horrible, horrible text that everyone says blows TechCrunch’s credibility permanently. It was contained within an obvious ad unit – a banner ad.
TechCrunch wasn’t much fun in the very early days. We were mostly talking to ourselves because readers were scarce. But as the site grew and more readers came along, things got exciting. The discussion in the comments to each blog post was as or more compelling than the actual news we were reporting. People’s opinions matter, and intelligent debate stimulates the mind. TechCrunch became People Ready.
We’ve added more software over time to engage our community and encourage even more active participation. Most recently we launched a discussion called TechCrunch Forums where anyone can talk about anything they like, without being tied to the current content on TechCrunch. Conversation has blossomed, and some of the most interesting ideas I’ve seen originate there.
We are always looking for more ways to pull down barriers and connect people. And we’ll keep experimenting, keeping the things that work.
Wow, this sure went from a spirited debate about the defects of “conversational marketing” to a train wreck.
But it’s not about secret endorsements, it’s simply about the defects of getting a *crappy conversation* going because you paid bloggers, indirectly, to play your game. People didn’t like that and participants are paying the price. Sheesh Mike, stop whining and welcome to the Web 2.0 you helped create.
[deleted]
Why can Disney and KGO Radio get away with doing stuff that’s FAR beyond what Federated Media and Tech Crunch did?
http://scobleizer.com/2007/06/23/why-can-leo-laporte-and-disney-do-it-but-mike-arrington-and-techcrunch-cant / has the details.
Sorry, Michael, I still strongly disagree with you.
First of all, this whole “People Ready” advertorial thing is — in itself — laughably embarrassing. I mean, seriously, who comes up with crap like this? PR / Marketing people get paid for this brilliance?! Just the issue of you and your brand being associated with this nonsense is unflattering. What next, “CrackerReady: Cheesewhiz changed my life!” or “PixelReady — How Dell Monitors help me See The Future”?
Yes, Valleywag is a P.O.S. entity… one step lower than the National Enquirer in both class and substance and accuracy. But that doesn’t mean that even Nick can’t accidentally stumble upon something substantive once in a blue moon. The source of the story, in this case, is irrelevant, and the issues should be judged on their own merit.
IMHO, the principle here is unambiguously simple: Own your words. Either you stand behind what you write (no matter whether it’s ad copy or whatever) or you don’t. People judge you by your words, as well they should. If you don’t give a whit about “People Ready” whatsits or, worse yet, are embarrassed about the whole cheesy thing, then run away. I mean, seriously, do you REALLY need the money?! Can’t someone of your stature save his words and reputation for something he truly believes in and respects or even feels passionate about?
So, Michael, it’s not about ads vs. not-ads. Your readers are smart enough to tell the difference. We just wonder whether you’re one step away from doing TV infomercials (and yes, we know those are ads, too), and we cringe at the chipping away — however small — such shilling does against your reputation.
“TechCrunch became People Ready.”
So you really don’t see anything wrong with having that sentence published with your name on it, bought and payed for by the company that thought up that hollow marketing phrase?
Did have both the portions of your brain that regulate ethics and common sense removed? Have you been high on something for the past few days? Or is it just a general lack of sleep?
Seriously.
Sure I understand you being pissed of at being screwed by Denton, but your lack of selfreflection is becoming disturbing.
Adam nailed it. Yes, we know it was an ad. A very lame ad. Why would you put your name on such a thing? Surely there are other ads that you can be running to make payroll and pay the bills.
Stop treading water. Non-issue is the right word.
it was an ad. if your problem is you couldn’t infer that Michael was being paid to endorse the product, I think you’re kinda dumb for not being able to figure that out, and yes, I suppose Web 2.0 standards should somehow incorporate helping out the stupid people who can’t figure that out.
If your problem is that you don’t like that Michael would try to make money this way, my bet is Michael doesn’t care what you think. I’ll go $100 on that. If that’s the case, it isn’t Michael’s problem, it’s yours.
Battelle is doing what any good advertiser would do when the firestorm of public opinion (including from potential clients) has gone hot. He is covering his proverbial tush.
That being said, “People Powered” is a silly meme and I’ve said all I dare say on that. I point anyone interested to the last thread for excruciatingly long details.
Look at this practically. Lets cost out these ads for a moment.
If you do this again tomorrow or something similar to it: Nick will be on it in less time than it will take me to write this sentence. If not him, then someone else. What could have been seen as a mistake initially will be seen as believing that your reader base are a bunch of idiots who only jump if someone tells them to.
Things would start at around that point and become much worse. Lost readers, lost RSS subscribers, lost “relevance”, lost revenue…
Right now, the actual “cost” of this debacle has been low. In fact, it has probably provided a nice big bump in traffic. The point is, all moral indignation aside try to think of this in business terms Mike.
If you disappoint your readers enough, it could eventually hurt your readership. There are a *lot* of people who don’t like this idea.
What’s better? Learning from this and next time you are presented with the opportunity to do a campaign like this, discussing it more fully to ensure your readers don’t see it as shilling. Or stubbornly getting your ire up, calling everyone an idiot and then deciding the entire thing is worthless?
You can be upset as you care to be, but as always the bottom line is the bottom line.
Luckily, like I’ve said, no one will give a wit about this in about week (this time, at least).
mike
i’m involved in this a bit. hope you aren’t pissed at me.
fred
I wonder what will happen when you throw them under a bus… You should try it. TC is the number one objective source of information combined with no censorship and clear disclosures. There’s no way anyone can stop you.
I think it’s your turn now Mike. Negotiate a better deal with a better agency and dominate the world.
I hope this is an American thing, because I hate to see this kind of childish finger pointing come bug me in the near future.
Michael’s quote (not an endorsement at all if you think about it) was IN A BANNER! Now get over it already…
Tomorrow Paris Hilton will be released and we’ll ask her about People Ready Business,
god please wake me up when this is all over..
Michael: How much will you charge to admit that you’re wrong? In an ad box, of course.
Sigh, are you still whining about this? Grow a spine, dude.
You’re the first to flame, but when you get flamed yourself you behave as a whiny sissy.
Please…
True, it was an ad. And everyone’s allowed to take ad money. But disclose if you do.
Weren’t you one of the ‘be honest, disclose’ preachers? So you sold your soul to FM. Nothing wrong with that, just don’t throw this kind of fit.
So… Mike, tell me. What did finally happen to the Acer/MS notebook?
Stand your ground Mike. It’s a freakin’ ad.
Rex
You’re not going to win every engagement with your critics. Sometimes it’s best just to make a brief statement about “reviewing processes”, absorb some short term criticisms (warranted and unwarranted) and shrug it off.
Remember those days when you didn’t have to worry about “payroll to meet” to cloud your judgement, Mike?
I know very little about the specific ad campaign, but since I like to shout my radical opinions everywhere possible, albeit my back hurts, so I can’t read all the genius comments here…
I am against all “advertorials” and incentivized, compensated opinion blogging and PayPerPost type comment spam.
I often recommend or trash talk products in my blogs and on Twitter, Jaiku, etc. But I never review any product sent to me free, and I never promote something because I’m incentivized.
But what about this?
A client buys a blog design from my employer. I then “promote” it in a low key manner, but Twittering links to posts, and by posting comments in client-relevant blogs, as “Naturally Yours” with the blog URL embedded in my “name”.
The client blog is not selling anything, and the client web site is not ecommmerce, no shopping cart or other way to purchase online.
I am publicizing the blog, and indirectly, the client’s products, in a non-compensated way. If the client said he’d pay me $5 per blog comment, that would be blog whoring, right?
Pretending to like a product, pretending to be a satisfied customer, but really you just say any positive or negative crap, because you’re paid to do it.
rememeber that parody blog mocking TechCrunch? well, now there’s one mocking this debacle – wipeready.com. doh!
Can a journalist like some product or company, and speak kindly of it on his blog, but also have a non-disclosed financial or other reward connecting journalist with product/company?
No.
But to me, it’s not just disclosure vs. non-transparency.
Even when disclosed, transparent, I still don’t wish to read any advertorial or incentivized opinions or reviews.
Users wish to gain advice only from actual satisfied customers, who are expressing their unbiased, unselfishly motivated experiences and insights.
If a product/company really is revolutionary and great, it won’t need to pay people to pretend to be happy customers.
Payola, they call in the record/radio business.
Mike,
The world goes crazy when money is involved.
I agree with you on this one: you are acting as a business owner. For journalism in the large you would be the owner or publisher. When that person writes it’s often labeled as an editorial. That person is expected to have a view on the world. They publish and conduct their business to make money (i.e. survive or profit).
Blogging has an anti-business culture. Any linking of money to words is suspect. Thus, as an owner/businessman you can’t win when the “integrity” police show up. It’s OK (with me) for you to pioneer the business of blogging. It’s the natural evolution of blogging for it to scale into a variant of publishing… large scale, for profit publishing.
The bloggers that want complete transparency (or just like to take potshots, like Valleywag) will circle and throw stones for any financial links with big corporate interests but it’s still good business to trade on your “name” which in effect has become a brand.
Make money. Stay cranky. Don’t expect critics to pound sand.
Go figure.
Well, here I am again, not having the same opinion as the crowd. No big surprise. What happens in the context of an ad, is subject to that obvious context, it’s a paid statement, it would be the same if Mike appeared on a Microsoft commercial endorsing the product, it wasn’t mixed in with his editorial though, that IS THE BOTTOM LINE, it was in the context of an ad.
I think the real problem here is people really really just hate Microsoft and they should rebrand themselves or somethiing because I don’t see the crowd easing up any time soon. If this was Apple people would eat it up like peanutbutter-n-jelly.
Once again, Mike, and everyone else for that matter, disclosed that they were paid by Microsoft for words, simply by placing in a clear ad space. I don’t always agree with Mike, but in this case, everyone else is clearly overreacting, and it’s unfortunate, because now people’s businesses will never be people ready. Call me a Redmond shill if you will, but I’m just a dude with a brain who can actually analyze something outside the herd mentality. Just incase anyone missed my number one point, by placing the words in an ad, clear disclosure DID take place, and the garbage marketing people ready crap did not appear in any editorial done by Mike or his people, get a new advertising network Mike.
Oh, one last thing to remember folks, with successs comes envy? Without envy this would have never been brought up, hold your head high people.
Somebody better hang Scoble, I think he likes Seagate! Oh no!!! He has endorsed their products before, he has said that he likes them, he has said that he was paid for them. No one hung Scoble!! That’s because what Scoble did was fine, I think this all amounts to Microsoft hate and Envy of success of some bloggers. Enough said.
-Geekspeaker
“Never Trust a Blogger with a loyal following, Read Geekspeaker, and your business will be people ready in no time.”
adbrite have you emailed Micheal yet?
Some of you Enron trolls just don’t get it, do you?
Web users hate corporate messaging. We hate hype and sales. We enjoy sincere, unbiased advice.
Companies have expertise that they must learn how to impart to online communities in a Non-Commercial Manner. It will generate good will, which will lead to increased sales, if the product is good.
Why is the web hostile to blatant and covert marketing? We’ve been lied to. Consumer fraud. Non-interactive pulpit pounding aka broadcasting.
We are no longer passive “consumers”.
We now are destroyers of Business As Usual (ie, mammonistic).
That clever ad campaign ain’t worth
The time taken from minimum wage labor;
They hold on to these tales till it’s the dog that wags.
God save us all if he lets the cat out the bag.
So look for truth, quit seeking forgiveness.
You need to cut the noose, but you don’t believe in scissors.
Part of Michael’s charm is that he wears his heart on his sleeve. OK – so the People Ready thing is a bit naff. OK – so Denton knows just how to push Mike’s buttons and Mike has duly responded.
As Fred Wilson has said – ferget it. move on. And as Nic says – Paris Hilton gets out of clink tomorrow and is appearing on Larry King (presumably for a FAT fee) by (probably) making a total ass of herself. Far more entertaining.
Worry not Michael – by Wednesday nite, the Paris and Larry show will be dominating the news and probably techmeme. And in a week’s time?
Like we’re all doing with this medium – live, learn and join the rest of us with goldfish attention spans.
You had to know this would happen. Disclosure of sorts would have been the best route.
Hrm, maybe this is all part of the plan?! Brilliant!
underwear,peopleready,PROFIT
You could start your own ad network and call it “PayPerQuote,” part of the deal being nice sound bites from TC to go in ad units.
Yeah, Mike, I know that text in a box is an ad. But how do I know the context? Maybe they’re quoting you from an interview, a talk at a conference, who knows…It’s not clear you’re getting paid unless you disclose.
its add copy dude what is wrong w/ you? Talk about throwing people under the bus look at you your bus throwing acrivities.. friends and the agent who helped you become financially sucessful you rant about instead of a one line clarification and be done with it instead you blew up because you are pissed off at a bully that everyone takes with a grain of salt any way. Your readers know you to be legit why sink to this level?
I didn’t see a single person bitched about the “search for better search” sponsored by Hakia. I didn’t see any disclosure and I’m OK with that since it says SPONSORED BY HAKIA.
Where’s all the Hakia rage? Was there something truly different about People Ready besides running where an AD ran and having MICROSOFT slapped all over it instead of saying “Sponsored by Micorosft” or is this just humans being hypocrites?
If there’s truly a difference other than in one case it was MSFT and in once case it wasn’t, I’d really like to understand it. I don’t.
Figures that PayPerPost spam would appear on this thread.
Hey PayPerPost, how’s the blog-whoring business coming along? Lots of sleazy “will opine for compensation” bloggers out there for ya?
How many times do you listen to the radio and hear on-air talent pushing dog food, Lasik and the latest Chrysler product? These people say nothing about the content being an ad but just launch into it, and once they get started, you know it’s an ad. Words in a banner? Same idea but much more clear.
most of the commenters here are missing the point. The question here is whether mike should have disclosed (and his point is that it was so obviously disclosed), and not whether he should have allowed his name on a crappy marketing campaign.
Hello its good