LoudLaunch.com Maybe PayPerPost Done Right

LoudLaunch.com is a forthcoming platform that will allow advertisers to fund the development of blogs on certain topics. At first blush it appears to be very similar to PayPerPost, which has had its share of controversy. Tom Hespos grilled them today at Ad:Tech.

While little information is available other than what's up on the site, I think that this can be a very compelling platform if - and only if - they let their bloggers maintain an independent voice. Of course, transparency is critical here too. If a service can match up advertisers with bloggers who are passionate on a subject and eager to make money for blogging, go for it. Time will tell. We need more info.

Do you agree? Does it taint these bloggers in your view if they get cash? The model at its core is similar to Weblogs Inc, except they get the advertiser is involved front. In the TV world there's a similar reputable analogy in the Family Friendly Programming Forum. It's been hailed a success for years.

Comments

[Philipp Lenssen]

I really want to see the specifics of this site... it's certainly not a black and white issue.

For example, paying a blogger *to post on a certain topic* is something different than paying a blogger *to post positively on a certain topic* (disclosed in both cases, of course). The former -- you pay for a product review, but you take the risk it might end up as negative rant! -- certainly sounds more ethical, though is it the right thing to do for a blogger?

[Paul Chaney]

I blogged about pay-per-post over at my blog on Allbusiness.com, noting Jim Kukral's anti-ppp campaign, Blog Honor.

It doesn't bother me that bloggers get paid, either using the WIN model or the PPP model. What does bother me a little is if they do it without disclosing that fact.

What bothers me most though is if they spin the post in favor of the product just to make a buck. That's really where integrity goes out the window. I don't know that I'd mind someone not telling me they're getting paid so long as they're stating their true feelings about the product.

In the long run though, it's probably best to mimic the Weblogs Inc model, and keep the editorial content completely separate from the ads. That's the safe road, and the high road as well.

[Jeremy Luebke]

I know that ReviewMe just launched and they are going the ethical route.

[Deva Hazarika]

"If a service can match up advertisers with bloggers who are passionate on a subject and eager to make money for blogging, go for it." - That I have no problem with, but with technology today, sponsorships could easily be done in realtime after the fact. It's the GUARANTEED payment here that's the real problem imo.

"Does it taint these bloggers in your view if they get cash?" - I think the bigger problem is this sort of stuff tainting the entire blogging industry, rather than concerns about the specific bloggers who participate - http://www.emaildashboard.com/2006/11/blurring_the_li.html

[Tim]

It sounds like it'll be better than some of the other paid to blog sites. I like your Weblogs, Inc. analogy.

[makethelogobigger]

It's human nature to distrust someone paid by a company to review their product. Spin it any way you want, but that’s product placement no matter how you cut it. Good luck overcoming the perception people have of them not being objective.

And what brand will stick with a reviewer who says negative things all the time about their product?

Best case example on this whole topic is Consumer Reports. They‘re not beholden to any one brand, even though they are being paid to perform tests on products and write reviews. That's how they ensure they can be impartial.

Furthermore, the line then gets blurred between what a blogger is and a reviewer is if all you do is review stuff, no?

If I want reviews on something, I know who I'm going to, and that's usually the prominent leaders in their respective fields. Are we now going to have a world full of 10 million review blogs by John Q. Public just because they have a blog?

If you find a product you believe in and want to share it, cool. Make it an organic part of your writing/posting from time to time.

Otherwise, trust goes out the window. Which is the one thing any blogger has with their audience: trust.

If everyone starts posting reviews hoping to get paid, how do I know your payment isn't affecting the review?

And in that case, why would I keep reading a blog that's now become an endorsement machine? Where's the original content then, the thing people came to your blog for in the first place, ya know?

As for disclosure statements, I talked with a representative of PPC at ad:tech last week, and he told me they also pay people to carry a disclosure statement. That's even more offensive.

Are blogger's day jobs not paying enough that they have to now be paid to review stuff as well as be paid to say their ethical?

[dawn]

I knew we'd see a service like ours (not yet launched) arrive but this one opened bigger, better and sooner than we expected. We're putting together a database of bloggers willing to write up product reviews but we never thought of paying them -- we're about content not advertorial. I knew (I have a personal blog) that PR people were using blogads to find bloggers who might review things and we decided to put together a better means for them to find the right bloggers. We charge a flat-fee for access to the database (right now we're giving away a few select accounts to get things moving) but there is no pay for play.

Now what we're wondering is whether or not bloggers will be willing to review items for free -- my guess is that we'll end up with smaller niche bloggers who are happy to get free stuff but aren't ready to make the ad leap.

[makethelogobigger]

(Correction, I meant PPP - Pay Per Post - at ad:tech, not PPC.)

[Paula Neal Mooney]

Sounds fascinating to me. I can't wait till they "loud launch" so I can find out more details. Thanks for the info...

http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/17770/paula_mooney.html

[Paul Chaney]

Your statement, "they get the advertiser is involved front" doesn't make grammatical sense. Did you mean to say, "they get the advertiser involved upfront."?

[Brian DeSpain]

I have had significant problems with Loudlaunch - most specifically having my site reviewed on a anti-semitic hate site. Read more here.

http://thalasar.com/archives/press_release/advertisers_sho.html

[Damon]

Is Loud Launch still operating? I submitted my blog over a week ago and I haven't heard anything from them.

[Bruno]

LoudLaunch is really cool! I'm using it and loving!