The following is based on a blog post I wrote a year ago, but it seems worth revisiting on New Year's Day. I'm not a huge fan of New Year's resolutions--after all, why not work to improve yourself every day of the year rather than just on January 1?--but I'd like to propose a resolution that can improve your 2013 both personally and professionally: Write. Religiously. Every week. Start now.

You can launch a blog today. It is easy to do on Wordpress or Blogger. Beware, because the few minutes you take to launch a blog will commit you to dozens or hundreds of hours in 2013 to develop content and engage with others, but that's the whole idea, isn't it? (If, for now, you lack the confidence to share your ideas and observations with the world, start by writing for yourself.)  

For me, writing was not an easy habit at first, but now it has become so essential that when I have trouble finding time to write, I become uneasy. The ideas start piling up. I can actually begin to lose sleep because I lay in bed composing in my mind the blog posts I am not producing for my blog. It is not rare for me to wake up with a developed line of thought, head directly to my PC and furiously type before I lose the idea and perspective. Sometimes those ideas stand up but other times they melt in the morning light.

Do I sound like an addict? Perhaps, but there are worse things than being addicted to a habit that leaves one empowered, educated and improved. I have experienced strong and demonstrable benefits because of my work on Experience: The Blog. Here are the ways you might also benefit by making a commitment to write regularly:
  

• Reaffirm and strengthen the ideas you bring into the world: The process of blogging forces me to take an idea that I am confident is sound and discover the holes--and trust me, some of your strongest beliefs can begin to look awfully shaky as you convert a string of ideas into a cohesive and persuasive argument. As I compose a blog post to convince others of my perspective, I must first convince myself. I do this by filling in the blanks, taking time to analyze and study, and finding third-party data and information that substantiate my arguments. Once the blog post is fully baked, it not only becomes a piece of content for my readers but also a viewpoint I can call upon in meetings, when I am presenting or as I develop strategies on the job.
   
• Develop a point of view: We recognize that brands are strengthened not when they are all things to all people but when they focus on one meaningful perspective for one meaningful audience. In the same way, writing can help you to focus your thinking in a way that develops your personal brand. When you blog for others, you begin to think about who it is you want to read your content and what you want them to think and do. My blog and my audience force a discipline in the things I read, research and think, and this has paid dividends by sharpening my reputation, skills and point of view.
   
• Improve your writing: This benefit is obvious: the more you write, the better you become. I hesitate to say this because you may be thinking, "But Augie, you suffer from run-on sentences, passive voice and just misused the colon in the last sentence." All may be true, but do not let your fear of grammar prevent you from improving your grammar. Today, I can look back at my early blog posts and easily recognize that my writing and proofreading have improved. Any embarrassment I may feel about the lesser quality of my writing four years ago is more than compensated by the realization I would still be stuck at that level had I not started and committed to my blog. If you lack confidence in your composition or proofreading skills, ask a friend or peer to review your blog posts before you publish.
   
• Build a network around ideas: The world is full of curators; millions of Twitterers share links to interesting articles and blog posts. Curating is valuable service, to be sure, but without creators, there would be nothing for curators to curate. At this stage in social media development, it is no longer easy to develop a following merely by curating--too many people share too many of the same links--but the world always needs more creators. Creators are the people who stop (or decrease) social media from merely being an echo chamber, and creators also earn the most attention. There is no more powerful way to be recognized and build an engaged network than by giving others content and ideas they may consider and share.
   
• Create your own database of news and statistics: Ever have the experience of vaguely recalling an interesting bit of data or news but being unable to locate the content when you need it? Blogging is a great way to create your own personal database of the information you want to find again in the future. When I find interesting data or a pertinent case study, I write about and link to it, and that means I can always find this information by returning to my own blog. Take my last blog post, "Where Social Media Will Grow in 2013 (and Where it Won't)"; that one blog post contains more than 40 links; as a result, I will never have to waste time searching for the American Express study that found people tell 15 friends and family about positive brand experiences but 24 people about negative ones.  

Is it a little late to make a New Year's resolution? By the first week of February, most of us are already well on our way to breaking our promises to lose weight, quit smoking or get out of debt, but here's a resolution you can and should keep: Write. Religiously. Every week. Starting right now.

I would recommend that you blog, but if (for now) you lack the confidence to share your ideas and observations with the world, start by writing for yourself. Select a topic--I'd recommend a professional one, but you can choose any topic in which you have passion and curiosity--and commit to capture your thoughts every single week.

A young peer recently asked me if I would recommend returning to school for her MBA. I was surprised by the question but more surprised by my answer. I told her I thought she would get more personal and professional benefits if she committed that same time every week to read and comment on others' blogs, watch TED Talks, keep up with news, develop her ideas in a blog and build a network. Since then I have questioned if dismissing education was really the right call, but this soul searching has left me even more convinced that I have gained more through writing this blog than I ever could sitting in a classroom.

Writing was not an easy habit at first, but now it has become so essential that in those periods when I have trouble finding time to write, I become uneasy. The ideas start piling up. I begin to capture them in snippets of text that I email myself. I can actually begin to lose sleep because I lay in bed composing in my mind the blog posts I am not producing. It is not rare for me to wake from a fitful sleep with a developed line of thought, head directly to my PC and furiously type before I lose the idea and perspective. (As with most dreams, sometimes those ideas stand up but other times they melt under the morning light.)

Do I sound like an addict? Perhaps, but there are worst things than being addicted to a habit that leaves you empowered, educated and improved. I have experienced strong and demonstrable benefits because of my work on Experience: The Blog. Here are the ways you might benefit by making a commitment to write regularly:
 

• Reaffirm and strengthen the ideas you bring into the world: The process of blogging forces me to take an idea that I think is fully developed and discover the holes--and trust me, some of your strongest beliefs begin to look awfully shaky as you convert a string of ideas into a cohesive viewpoint. As I compose a blog post to convince others of my perspective, I must first convince myself. I do this by filling in the blanks, taking time to conduct research and citing links that substantiate my arguments. Once the blog post is fully baked, it not only becomes a piece of content for my blog but also a fervently held principle in my brain--one I can call upon in meetings, when I am presenting or when developing strategies on the job.
    
• Discredit ideas before someone discredits them for you: You know those scenes in old movies when the frustrated writer rips a sheet of paper from his or her typewriter and tosses it into a pile of crumbled ideas around the wastebasket? Well, that happens in real life, too. For every four blog posts I publish, I begin and discard one more. I frequently find that something I believed to be a solid and thorough concept is really just a bundle of random notions. Sometimes, I even discredit my own hypothesis--the opinion I was certain would change others' minds is so flimsy it fails to convince even me. There is true value in destroying your own ideas; better you do it while writing alone then have someone else do it for you.
    
• Develop a point of view: We recognize that brands are strengthened not when they are all things to all people but when they focus on one important and meaningful perspective for one important and meaningful audience. Writing helps you focus your thinking in a way that develops your personal brand. When you write--particularly when you blog for others--you begin to think about who you want to read your content and what you want them to think and do. As I have focused my blog's topics, I have also been focusing my thinking and developing a point of view. My blog and my audience force a discipline in the things I read, research and think that I otherwise may lack.
    
• Improve your writing: This benefit is obvious: the more you write, the better you write. I hesitate to say this because you may be thinking, "But Augie, you suffer from run-on sentences, passive voice and just misused the colon in the last sentence." All may be true, but I have come to realize that people inflate the fear of grammar but too often discount the fear of weak thinking. In the midst of a strong and persuasive argument, most will overlook (and not even notice) a missing comma or dropped preposition, but the best grammar in the world cannot save a weak idea. I can look back at my early blog posts and easily recognize the ways my writing and proofreading have improved. Any embarrassment I may feel about my past writing skills is more than compensated by the realization I'd still be stuck at that level had I not started and committed to my blog.
    
• Build a network around ideas: The world is full of curators; millions of Twitterers share links to interesting articles and blog posts. Curating is valuable service, to be sure, but without creators, there would be nothing for curators to curate. At this stage in social media development, it is no longer easy to develop a following by curating--too many people share too many of the same links--but the world can always use more creators. Creators are the people who stop (or decrease) social media from merely being an echo chamber, and creators also earn the most attention. There is no more powerful way to bring attention to you and build an engaged network than by giving others content and ideas to think about, to react to or that they can share with others.
    
• Create your own database of news and statistics: Ever have the experience of vaguely recalling an interesting statistic or survey but being unable to locate the content when you need it? Blogging is a great way to create your own personal database of the content you want to find again in the future. If I find interesting data or the results of a pertinent study, I write about it and link to it, and that means I can always find it by returning to my own blog. Take my last blog post, "Eight Ways Social Business and Mobile Tech are Changing Your Business": That one blog post contains 39 links; as a result, I will never have to waste time searching for the study that found teens sometimes opt to meet friends online rather than drive to meet them in real life. Whenever I need a data point for a deck I'm compiling, I will often use the search engine on my blog rather than go to Google--my blog has better and more helpful results (at least as far as I'm concerned). 

In three days, it will be the two year anniversary of my first blog post on Experience: The Blog.  Originally intended to be an exploration of experiential marketing strategies, my interest and focus quickly turned to social media and how the growth of the peer-to-peer groundswell creates challenges and opportunities for marketers.  It is apt to recall on how my blog started as one thing and became another, because change is in the air again.  I'd like to reflect on that change, put it into context and invite you to join me as I shift my blog publishing to a new address.

A month ago, news broke that Forrester would be altering its blog policies and analysts would shift their industry-related blogging into a new, common platform on Forrester.com.  I posted at the time that I believed aggregating Forrester's thought leadership in one place made sense and that I was eager to continue blogging, sharing news, and building my reputation within the new Forrester blog.

The reaction was swift and emotional.  Hundreds of tweets and blog posts weighed in on the topic; a few supported the new blogging policies, but most did not.  One person tweeted I was "licking the boots of (my) corporate paymasters," and a friend sent an email with heartfelt condolences at the loss of my blog.  I ignored the tweet and assured my friend that I was not progressing through any of the stages of grief (unless bemusement was one of those stages.)

The reaction was interesting on several levels.  First of all, there seemed to be a knee-jerk backlash to the very concept of corporate rules for social media. The idea that corporate policies don't have a place in social media is patently ridiculous and ignores the responsibility companies have to protect against legal, reputation and brand harm. 

Many observers made rather wild assumptions about the intent of the new policy, drawing incorrect conclusions that analysts posting to the new Forrester platform would no longer be free to share their thoughts without constraint.  This is also silly--how could it possibly benefit Forrester to restrain analysis, dialog and thought leadership?  Those are the very things that create value, demand and differentiation for Forrester's services.

Lastly, there were detractors who implied Forrester's actions were designed to undermine analysts' abilities to build their brands and reputation.  I find this accusation lacking for reasons far greater than that I still have my own blog with my own name and my own thoughts.  In fact, I was particularly bothered by this argument because of what it implied:  That my reputation, personal brand and value were inexorably bound to an Internet domain.

To paraphrase the movie "The Elephant Man," I am not a URL; I am a human being! Wherever I go in life, my experience, knowledge, reputation, abilities, value, and personal brand go with me.  "Experience: The Blog" doesn't contain Augie Ray; I contain it.  And later this week when I meet with a Fortune 100 organization to discuss their social media opportunities, it won't be my Twitter feed or domain address they care about but my ability to consider their situation, analyze the research conducted by Forrester, and draw insights and recommendations that drive their business.

My blog has not come to the end of the road;  it's just changing lanes.  If you subscribed to "Experience: The Blog" I invite you to join me at Augie Ray's Blog for Interactive Marketers (or subscribe to my blog's RSS feed).  I hope to see you at the new URL and (as always) welcome your comments, feedback, criticisms and ideas.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Forrester Launches Own Blog Platform (rfistudios.com)
• Why Forrester Made The Right Call About Employee Blogs (socialmediatoday.com)
• I've Digitally Moved! (ampersanddot.com)
• Why our analysts blog at forrester.com (socialmediatoday.com)

Image via Wikipedia

The long-awaited new guidelines from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) were published today, and they aren't much of a surprise. While addressing blogs, message boards, and other forms of new media, the FTC didn't stray from its traditional commitment to ensure that consumers know when they are seeing paid advertising.

What does today's FTC update mean to Social Marketers and bloggers? You may find it interesting what the FTC did--and didn't--say:


1. Sponsorship = Advertising:

Given marketers' and bloggers' use of the term "Sponsored Conversations" to refer to paid blog posts, it is probably no coincidence that the FTC uses the term "sponsorship" in the following statement: “The fundamental question is whether, viewed objectively, the relationship between the advertiser and the speaker is such that the speaker’s statement can be considered ‘sponsored’ by the advertiser and therefore an ‘advertising message.’”

A blogger who posts a product-based statement independently and without commercial arrangements with the brand is not making an endorsement by the FTC's definition and thus needs not be concerned about the rules governing advertising. But as we'll see, a blogger's post that is sponsored can become an advertising endorsement and may trigger legal requirements with respect to factual information and disclosure of commercial arrangements, under certain conditions.


2. The FTC is furnishing guidelines, not rules:

The FTC has the power of Federal law to enforce legal advertising standards, but today's document defines guidelines and not rules. The Commission recognizes that the marketing and communications world is changing and is too complex for hard and fast rules. The FTC notes that it will have to “consider each use of these new media on a case-by-case basis for purposes of law enforcement, as it does with all advertising.”

So, what factors will the FTC weigh in determining if a given relationship between brand and blogger meets the standard for an "endorsement"? Today's FTC document lists the following:

• Whether the speaker is compensated by the advertiser or its agent;
• Whether the product or service in question was provided for free by the advertiser;
• The terms of any agreement;
• The length of the relationship;
• The previous receipt of products or services from the same or similar advertisers, or the likelihood of future receipt of such products or services; and
• The value of the items or services received.

In other words, the FTC is not tightly defining the legal standards for bloggers and brands, but it is telling us enough to advise caution with respect to paid blog posts, endorsements, and disclosure.


3. Independent consumers are still free to share their praise of brands:

Some more histrionic observers felt the FTC's guidelines would limit consumers' ability to compliment and recommend products via ratings, on blogs, and in Social Networks. This is nowhere near the case; the FTC notes that “a consumer who purchases a product with his or her own money and praises it on a personal blog or on an electronic message board will not be deemed to be providing an endorsement.”


4. It is not necessarily an exchange of value between brand and blogger that triggers an endorsement but the existence of a material relationship.

The FTC furnishes three similar examples of a blogger writing about a brand to draw distinctions between what is and is not an endorsement.

The first example is a simple and obvious one--the consumer buys the product and then praises it; this is clearly a legitimate, unsponsored communication.

The second example involves a blogger who posts praise after receiving free product. The key in this example is that the blogger who praises the brand is not targeted by that brand but instead receives a coupon for free product generated by a store computer based upon the consumer's past purchase patterns. In this case, the FTC notes "given the absence of a relationship between the speaker and the manufacturer or other factors supporting the conclusion that she is acting on behalf of the manufacturer (i.e., that her statement is 'sponsored'), her review would not be deemed to be an endorsement."

The last example should be considered carefully by marketers who have established networks of consumers to whom product is regularly distributed. The example involves a consumer who joins "a network marketing program under which she periodically receives various products about which she can write reviews if she wants to do so." Says the FTC, "If she receives a free bag of the new dog food through this program, her positive review would be considered an endorsement." As we'll explore later, the Commission suggests that endorsements made via blog posts require disclosure and adherence to the legal requirements of paid advertising.


5. Giving product to bloggers for the purpose of posting reviews may or may not make the bloggers' recommendations an "endorsement" (but it probably does):

The FTC takes great pains to try to address the issue of brands that disseminate free product for the purpose of garnering positive product reviews in Social Media. The Commission states that a blogger who "receive(s) merchandise from a marketer with a request to review it, but with no compensation paid other than the value of the product itself" may be considered "endorsed" by the brand depending upon "among other things, the value of that product, and on whether the blogger routinely receives such requests."

The FTC clarifies that last portion of their statement in this way: "If that blogger frequently receives products from manufacturers because he or she is known to have wide readership within a particular demographic group that is the manufacturers’ target market, the blogger’s statements are likely to be deemed to be 'endorsements.'" In the view of the FTC, "Although the monetary value of any particular product might not be exorbitant, knowledge of the blogger’s receipt of a stream of free merchandise could affect the weight or credibility of his or her endorsement."

In other words, someone who maintains a review blog and regularly receives free product for the purpose of authoring and posting reviews is more likely to be considered an "endorser" than a blogger who only occasionally receives products to review. Some find this curious, because it seems contrary to established practices in traditional media. There are, of course, journalists--such as movie reviewers or food critics--who frequently receive free product, but their articles in newspapers and magazines are not considered "endorsements" per the FTC.

To those who want to make the case that bloggers are being treated differently than journalists in traditional media, the FTC has a response: "The Commission acknowledges that bloggers may be subject to different disclosure requirements than reviewers in traditional media." In other words, get over it!

Regardless of whether you find this guidance puzzling or not, this much is clear: The FTC is putting brands on notice. Giving free products to popular bloggers or recruiting networks of consumers into "word of mouth marketing programs" for the purpose of distributing free products for review will likely be considered and regulated as paid media.


6. The fact that compensated bloggers are free to say whatever they want does not prevent their posts from being considered legal endorsements:

It doesn't matter that a brand pays a blogger and then permits him or her to express anything s/he wants, without editorial control or rules. And it also doesn't matter that bloggers compensated by a brand feel they are expressing their true and honest opinions, unbiased by the commercial arrangement. The FTC notes that “an advertiser’s lack of control over the specific statement made via these new forms of consumer-generated media would not automatically disqualify that statement from being deemed an ‘endorsement’ within the meaning of the Guides.’”


7. The fact that compensated bloggers are free to say whatever they want does not protect the brand from the legal responsibilities that come with paid advertising:

The FTC understands that marketers may not have control over what bloggers say, but "if the advertiser initiated the process that led to endorsements being made – e.g., by providing products to well-known bloggers or to endorsers enrolled in word of mouth marketing programs – it potentially is liable for misleading statements made by those consumers."

The risks to brands also include the risk that a compensated blogger fails to disclose the material relationship. Notes the FTC, "In employing this means of marketing, the advertiser has assumed the risk that an endorser may fail to disclose a material connection or misrepresent a product, and the potential liability that accompanies that risk." The Commission promises, should legal action result from a blogger's failure to disclose, that it will "exercise its prosecutorial discretion" and "consider the advertiser’s efforts to advise these endorsers of their responsibilities and to monitor their online behavior."

In short, marketers must understand they are accepting certain legal risks by entering into Sponsored Conversations. These risks can be mitigated by carefully apprising bloggers of rules for disclosure and accuracy and then monitoring them for compliance, but this does not completely eliminate all risk.


8. Because Social Media is a vehicle for authentic peer-to-peer dialog, the presence of sponsored speech (i.e., advertising) is suggesting a greater need for disclosure than may be required in other media.

The FTC recognizes that the medium matters; consumers are more likely to recognize advertising as advertising in some media more than others. A TV ad is clearly "sponsored" and thus does not require any special disclosure on the part of advertisers or networks. But in Social Media, the distinction between earned and paid media is far less evident to consumers.

The nature of Social Media and the FTC's greater expectation for disclosure is evident in their revised example pertaining to a video game blogger who is sent a free game system by a manufacturer, along with a request that the blogger write about the system. Notes the Commission, "Because his review is disseminated via a form of consumer-generated media in which his relationship to the advertiser is not inherently obvious, readers are unlikely to know that he has received the video game system free of charge in exchange for his review of the product, and given the value of the video game system, this fact likely would materially affect the credibility they attach to his endorsement" (emphasis mine).


9. If your organization doesn't have Social Media guidelines in place, create and communicate them ASAP!

The FTC notes that employers are liable for the actions of their employees in Social Media. For example, if an employee participates in a Facebook forum or bulletin board by praising his or her employer's brands but fails to disclose his or her relationship to the brands, that could trigger prosecution.

The FTC notes that legitimate efforts to create and enforce rules that protect consumers from injury "would warrant consideration in its decision as to whether law enforcement action would be appropriate." Moreover, the FTC notes that "although the Commission has brought law enforcement actions against companies whose failure to establish or maintain appropriate internal procedures resulted in consumer injury, it is not aware of any instance in which an enforcement action was brought against a company for the actions of a single 'rogue' employee who violated established company policy."

So, get your Social Media policies in place and actively enforce them. Not only is this a good, common sense practice, it also helps to establish a defense in the event one of your employees strays into a legal minefield.


10. The FTC has outlined when material relationships must be disclosed, but it still hasn't said what constitutes "clear and conspicuous" disclosure on blogs, microblogs, or elsewhere in Social Media.

The FTC's approach to disclosure requirements is based on three primary questions:

• Does a material relationship exist between endorser (i.e., blogger, consumer posting in Social Media, etc.) and brand?
• If so, would the presence of this material relationship affect the weight or credibility given to the endorsement by consumers?
• If so, is the endorsement likely to be recognized as paid advertising by consumers based on the circumstances, communications vehicle, and medium?

The FTC outlines a slew of diverse and subtle examples of when material arrangements relating to endorsements must be disclosed, both in Social and traditional media. For example:

• A film star appears in a commercial endorsing a food product in exchange for a $1M fee or royalties on sales; no disclosure is required because such payments likely are ordinarily expected by viewers.
• A well-known professional tennis player appears on a talk show and raves about the laser vision correction surgery at a clinic that she identifies by name. The athlete does not disclose that she has a contractual relationship to speak publicly about the clinic. Consumers might not realize that a celebrity discussing a medical procedure in a television interview has been paid for doing so, and knowledge of such payments would likely affect the weight or credibility consumers give to the endorsement. Thus, disclosure is legally required.
• The same tennis player under the same contract endorses the clinic via a real-time Social Media site, and the same rules apply; consumers might not realize that she is a paid endorser and knowing this might affect the weight consumers give to her endorsement, so the relationship with the clinic should be disclosed.
• A physician endorses an anti-snoring product. Consumers would expect the physician to be reasonably compensated for his appearance in the ad, so no special disclosure is required to alert consumers the physician was paid.
• But the same physician in the same ad may require disclosure if he receives a percentage of gross product sales or he owns part of the company; either of these facts would likely materially affect the credibility that consumers attach to the endorsement. Accordingly, the advertisement should clearly and conspicuously disclose such a connection between the company and the physician.

So, assuming a brand does have a commercial arrangement with a blogger, the blogger endorses the brand's product, and this relationship requires disclosure in the blog post, what meets the legal definition of "Clear and Conspicuous" disclosure? The FTC doesn't attempt to address this question at all. In other FTC documents, it establishes standards as to how proximal and evident disclosures must be, but the new guidelines do not attempt to address acceptable disclosure in Social Media. It is left to brands to discern if its disclosure policies are sufficient under the laws and guidelines established by the Commission.

Marketers are advised to ensure sponsored bloggers write and construct their blog posts in a way that make the disclosure immediately apparent to even the most casual of readers. This means disclosure in the headline or in the first part of the blog post and not a brief mention at the end!

The FTC guidelines are purposely vague, but their direction is clear. The FTC is taking a conservative approach to whether compensation to bloggers and others in Social Media--be it cash or free product--must be disclosed to consumers. The Commission's guidance suggests that the sorts of arrangements that involve remunerating others to promote products via WOM make their blog posts and other comments in Social Media legal endorsements. Since these endorsements are not expected or recognized by consumers as paid media, the FTC believes that disclosure is most likely required.

Marketers and bloggers who engage in these sorts of commercial arrangements must understand their legal obligations and the risks of failing to adhere to FTC laws pertaining to advertising. Marketers must be prepared to ensure that bloggers disclose material relationships and do not make false or unsubstantiated claims; bloggers who are compensated are also potentially legally liable for their failure to disclose commercial arrangements or for incorrect claims communicated via their blog posts.

As noted, the FTC believes each situation is unique and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. As enforcement actions occur in the future, we will be provided with further clarifications to how the Commission and courts interpret the legal issues of sponsorship, endorsement, and disclosure in our new and evolving Social Media channels.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Internet Polices Itself on Blogger Advertising Better Than the FTC Ever Could (usnews.com)
• Fairness in Advertising Must Extend to the Blogosphere (usnews.com)
• Exploring Sponsored Conversations With IZEA's Ted Murphy (socialmediatoday.com)

Image by geekstinkbreath via Flickr

Related articles by Zemanta

• Paid Blog Posts: The Need for Total Disclosure But Only Partial Independence (socialmediatoday.com)
• Building Trust Online (ducttapemarketing.com)

I've been invited to participate in a webinar about Ethics in Blogging, sponsored by SocialMediaToday.com and The Social Media Group. The event will occur Thursday, September 24th at 1 pm ET/10 am PT. You can register to listen and participate for free, and the event is a steal at that price!

Related articles by Zemanta

• Fairness in Advertising Must Extend to the Blogosphere (usnews.com)
• U.S. plans to monitor blogs for biased claims, payments (cbc.ca)
• This is Not a Sponsored Post: What You Need to Know About Sponsored Conversations & the FTC (socialmediatoday.com)

This is the second of a two-part post about the law, ethics, and risks of Paid Blog Posts and how marketers can protect their brands while participating in "sponsored conversations." Part One was "Paid Blog Posts: The Need for Total Disclosure But Only Partial Independence".

Tom Gray was right: Money Changes Everything. Start with a group of people with the desire to share experiences, observations, information, and knowledge; add a large number of subscribers; insert cash-rich brands struggling with the slow bleed of ad-supported channels; and what do you get? Bloggers extorting free product from brands; bloggers who rave about tourist destinations while failing to reveal the free trips they receive; brands offering payments for positive reviews; brands spamming blogs' comments to promote themselves; fake brand-sponsored blogs (or flogs) masquerading as legitimate consumer-generated content; and brands so desperate for attention in Social Media that they'll exploit global news and events in order to spam consumers.

How bad has it gotten already in the blogosphere? So bad that you can't even trust mom. (Next we'll be questioning the authenticity of apple pie.) CNN.com has a front page headline today asking, "Can you trust 'mommy bloggers'?" The answer is apparently not. "There has been a turn of goodwill [against mommy bloggers]," says Liz Gumbinner, the publisher and editor-in-chief of Cool Mom Picks. The influx of advertiser money has "created a new generation of bloggers who blogged to get free stuff."

It's a sad sign of maturity that the once (relatively) altruistic world of blogging is now struggling with the invasion of commerce. Some bemoan this, but it's always been inevitable that some bloggers with lots of readers would want to monetize and that brands would pay to reach those readers. The problem today is that there are no rules of the road for either bloggers or brands, and as noted in the list above, mistakes are both common and embarrassing.

The next year or two is going to see substantial changes coming to the blogosphere, with firms like Forrester offering guidance that will become de facto standards and the FTC jumping into Social Media with strong new rules. Even then, with the world of Social Media continuing to evolve, brands that aren't careful can stumble, and doing so in our ever more connected world can be costly and damaging.

In my last blog post, we explored how brands can pay for posts in a way that meets important ethical and legal standards for advertising. We focused on the concepts of Disclosure and Independence, but are these enough to protect brands? No, conducting business in a legal and ethical manner are table stakes, but brands will not enhance their reputations or protect themselves from all harm merely by being legal and ethical.

What else should marketers consider when planning and executing "sponsored conversations" in the blogosphere? Before we explore this question, it's important to remind ourselves why marketers are so eager for bloggers' attention in the first place; after all, brands already have access to advertising vehicles on blogs that are far easier and less risky than paid blog posts, such as banner ads and Google's AdSense. The reason that brands want mention and acclaim within the content of blogs is, as noted by Forrester's Josh Bernoff, that "sponsored conversations" done right are genuine because they are in the blogger's voice.

Being "genuine" is important; being perceived by consumers as "genuine" is vital. Marketers must not lose focus on the goal of promoting genuine dialog on blogs or doing anything that would undermine perceived authenticity in the minds of blog readers. With this in mind, we can explore how brands can create or undermine genuine dialog with "sponsored conversations."

Form of Payment to Bloggers

As Jeremiah Owyang points out, the form of compensation matters. He's identified eight types of compensation for bloggers, ranging from blogola to access. It is very important for marketers to understand that these forms of payments are not equivalent options and that the way bloggers are paid may be more important than the amount they're paid.

Cash: If all brands want to do is buy blog awareness and links without regard for the impact on consumer perception, then paying cash to bloggers is fine. Of course, marketers do care about consumer perception, which is why writing a check for a blog post is a weak and risky option. Paying cash for a blogger to post about your product does not buy authenticity for that product; in fact, it does the opposite.

My hope is that, as disclosure and transparency become the law and expectation in the blogosphere, we'll see the disappearance of marketplaces that connect greedy bloggers wanting to sell the trust of their readers and brands looking for the easiest way to be mentioned within blog content. After all, when fully disclosed at the outset of a blog post, what blog subscriber would continue reading past the words, "This blog was paid $500 to write 300 words about Jinkies cereal...?"

Product Demonstrations: While blog readers are apt to find posts less genuine when bought and paid for with cash, they will have a different reaction when bloggers are compensated with free or demonstration products. Readers will be more inclined to engage with and believe posts that begin, "I was given the opportunity to try new and improved Jinkies cereal, and here's what I thought..."

No one objects when a movie reviewer gets to see a preview of a film for free, and we expect car makers to lend new models to "Car and Driver" magazine for the purpose of evaluating and publishing reviews to their readers. Access and product demonstrations are forms of compensation that increase the authenticity and reduce the risk consumers will punish brands or bloggers with diminished trust. (Of course, depending on the product, there is a huge difference between giving a product and loaning it to bloggers--see below for a discussion on the importance of perceived value.)

None: The only form of compensation that can be completely disclosed without any risk whatsoever to brand sentiment is none--nothing of value given to bloggers other than great brand experiences that motivate them to share.

Social Media hasn't changed the basic principles of Word of Mouth. The same is true today as ten, twenty, or fifty years ago--the best form of advertising isn't tell people things but to get people telling each other. Of course, advertising will always be a vital part of the marketing mix; brands like Disney were built and are maintained with large investments in advertising, but the company's ads are not why Disney World was mentioned on 10,000 blogs in the past week while Six Flags' 14 parks were mentioned only 4,300 times. Creating authentic buzz on blogs with no special compensation is the ultimate answer to the challenges and opportunities presented by Social Media.

Of course, getting people talking is still hard work! As noted by the Word of Mouth (WOM) Marketing Association, "Word of mouth can be encouraged and facilitated. Companies can work hard to make people happier, they can listen to consumers, they can make it easier for them to tell their friends, and they can make certain that influential individuals know about the good qualities of a product or service." In short, "sponsored conversations" may have a place in building WOM, but it must be a portion of an overall WOM plan and not a replacement for it.

In the end, smart marketers will challenge themselves to avoid the easy path of pulling out the checkbook to pay off bloggers and instead seek ways to create genuine buzz in genuine ways. A fan who raves (without compensation) about a positive brand experience is extremely authentic; a blogger given a product to review is mostly authentic; a person given cash to say something on their blog does not convey genuine sentiment and (when properly disclosed) will tend to reduce rather than enhance the brand's authenticity.

Perception of Financial Value of Offers to Bloggers

Whether or not compensation is monetary, the cash value of the offer must be carefully considered by marketers. This is because the value given to a blogger in return for a paid post will be subconsciously assessed by consumers as they weigh the credibility of the sponsored conversation, the blog, and the brand.

To illustrate this point, let's return to the example previously introduced of new car reviews in auto enthusiast magazines. Subscribers of car magazines understand the quid pro quo between automakers and the publication: Car makers lend cars to the magazine for the purpose of evaluation and review; they don't transfer ownership of the cars to the writers. If readers learned that "Car and Driver" reporters were making tens of thousands of dollars a year by reselling the "gifts" they received from car makers, this knowledge would substantially affect the perception of trust for both the magazine and the brands. (Even under the system of loaned cars, it still caught some bloggers' attention when Motor Trend editor Arthur St. Antoine admitted he didn't even own a car because he had access to "too many test cars.")

How should appropriate cost or value be determined for a paid blog post? Relying on the traditional impressions/readers/eyeballs method of pricing paid media is extremely dangerous for "sponsored conversations." Marketers need to recognize the distinction between paid advertising on blogs (which can vary by the number of impressions) and paid editorial on blogs (which should not). While this may sound counterintuitive, marketers must never lose sight that their actions in Social Media must be seen as genuine by consumers.

Blog readers will likely accept the authenticity of a blog post from a mommy blogger who received a case of free diapers for the purpose of sharing relevant perceptions with her readers. But will readers' perception of authenticity scale with the size of the blogger's audience? If a blogger with a thousand readers receives one case, should a blogger with 10,000 readers receive 10 cases and another with 100,000 readers get 100 cases?

No, consumers' perception of authenticity is based on factors other than the size of the blog's audience. While marketers will and should consider the size and composition of a blog's audience when identifying potential blogging partners, the only factor that matters when determining the value of the offer is how it will be perceived by consumers. Paying more to a blogger with a large audience is risky because it not only raises the question of the authenticity of the blogger's sentiment but does so across a wide audience.

The question of how consumers will perceive value is a tricky one, because it is subjective and not objective. The perception of value will vary based on a variety of factors such as:

• Actual dollar value of compensation


• Form of compensation


• Type of product or service


• Type of blog


• Contractual obligation of the blogger

Consider your own reaction to the following similar situation:

• A blogger is paid $1,500 for a blog post of 500 words.


• A blogger's trip to a brand tradeshow (worth $1,500) is paid by the brand with the expectation of a three blog posts about the brand.


• A blogger's trip to a blog conference (worth $1,500) is paid by a brand with no expectation of coverage for the brand.


• Ninety-five boxes of disposable pull-up training pants (3800 diapers worth $1,500) are sent to a mommy blogger, enough diapers for 12 to 18 months for one child.


• A car maker loans a car to an auto blogger for a month, and since it can no longer be sold new, the loss of value of that car is in excess of $1,500.


• A blogger is given the opportunity to give away a $1,500 prize as part of a brand-sponsored contest on the blog. No direct compensation is paid to the blogger, but this promotion allows him or her to increase the blog's readership and earn more money from the paid advertising on the site.


• A blogger is paid $1,500 cash for 15 hours of consulting and research conducted by the brand into the needs and wants of consumers (with no anticipation of coverage on the blog).


• A blogger is given the opportunity to interview the CEO of the company in order to furnish content for the blog. The executive's time plus the time required to arrange the interview costs the organization $1,500.

Each of these situations has an actual, objective value of $1,500, but the perception of consumers will vary widely. Brands should proceed with caution, deal only with reputable bloggers, generally avoid cash compensation, and above all research and test the way different forms and amounts of compensation will be perceived by consumers. Compensating bloggers for posts may be a form of paid media, but treating it as if it's just another option in your media mix--a simple question of reach and impressions--can be very harmful to brands in Social Media.

Blog POV

The final dimension that should concern marketers as they evaluate options for sponsored conversations is the Point of View (POV) of the blog. This includes several factors such as:

• What is the blog's POV with respect to Paid Blog Posts? How often does the blog participate in sponsored conversations? What brands has it promoted in the past? Under what circumstances has it taken paid blog posts? Has it furnished readers with appropriate disclosures? These are questions that should influence a brand's willingness to work with one blog or another.


• What is the blog's POV with respect to the brand? A blog may have never mentioned the brand in the past, may have criticized it, or may have praised it. If the blog has been critical of the brand in past, that doesn't necessarily mean it should be avoided; in this case, marketers should consider if the criticism was reasonably fair, dispassionate, and professional. A toilet paper company would be well advised to avoid attempting a "sponsored conversation" with a blogger who rails against the destruction of forests, but finding someone who has complained about the texture of the toilet paper may make sense when rolling out a new, softer version of the product.
  
  Of course, sometimes a brand may find bloggers that have praised the brand or perhaps even find blogs dedicated to promoting the brand. It is not uncommon to find blogs such as Only WDWorld and Harley Davidson Sportster--blogs dedicated to a brand. The rules of the road in terms of maintaining credibility are different on these sorts of blogs since there is no allusion to objectivity. If your brand has fan blogs, this opens up additional opportunities for "sponsored conversations" or other forms of relationships with reduced risk.
  
  
• What is the blog's POV on brands, marketing, the category, or the world at large? Making sure a blog is aligned with and appropriate for a brand is vital when marketers create partnerships with bloggers. There are many ways a brand could be embarrassed by an association with a blogger, and since the rules for bloggers are far less defined and rigid than for traditional media, brands must proceed with caution. Thorough vetting is necessary to make sure the blog and blogger demonstrate the sort of professionalism, consistency, attitude, and beliefs that enhance and support the brand.

Clearly, blogs are here to stay and will only grow in importance to readers and marketers. And there is no stopping the flow of money to bloggers from brands eager for more Social PR. This is recipe both for success and mistakes. Some marketers will succeed in building their brands authentically using Social Media and blogs, but others will get caught in embarrassing situations involving inappropriate disclosure, unethical influence, excessive payments, or improper control of bloggers' content.

Social Media may provide an opportunity for your brand to go viral, but it does the same for your mistakes. A single embarrassment can undo a great deal of brand building in Social Media, so the burden is on marketers to proceed cautiously and with a full understanding of the risks.


If you have additional thoughts on the factors that enhance the opportunities and minimize the risks, please comment!

Calling the world of blogs the "blogosphere" makes it sound futuristic, but the truth is that it's more like the Wild West. There are few best practices; no recognized industry organization has the power to set or enforce standards; rules are in flux (with the FTC currently reevaluating their guides); and modern-day brothel owners are eager to tell you how easy it is to buy blog love. ("Hey big boy, hot Playboy bunnies crave to tweet you!")

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the best way to gain attention in Social Media is to earn it honestly with great brands that resonate with an audience, terrific consumer experiences, and customer service that delights. But for marketers who wish to pay for blogger attention, there are controllable factors that can help to protect the brand and diminish the risks.

I decided to revisit the topic of "sponsored conversations" after an interesting week of discussion. Four days ago, I posted a purposely provocative article to my blog entitled, My Paid Blog Post on the Forrester Blog. In it, I pointed out an apparent contradiction between Forrester's guidance on paid blog posts and their own site's rules against paid blog posts. Forrester's Josh Bernoff responded with a fair clarification of their stance in a blog post entitled "To Augie Ray: Thanks for the offer, but we don't take sponsorships." I very much appreciate the insightful, serious, and interesting dialog that has occurred within the comments of my blog and elsewhere, particularly from Josh and his Forrester peers, Jeremiah Owyang and Sean Corcoran.

The experience has caused me to reconsider my opinions of "sponsored conversations." I still believe very strongly that paid blog posts carry enormous risks for brands--legal, ethical, and, most of all, consumer perception--but there also is a place for brands to compensate bloggers for attention in the blogosphere. The problem is that, in lieu of established standards and governing bodies, there is no alternative for marketers except to proceed with care, knowledge, and a great deal of preparation to build meaningful relationships with relevant bloggers. "Sponsored conversations" may be paid media, but smart marketers will treat them more like strategic partnerships than advertising.

To properly explore the benefits and dangers to brands, we first have to recognize that the "sponsorship" in "sponsored conversations" can take a wide variety of forms. On his blog, Jeremiah Owyang identifies eight types of blog compensation. While paying cash to bloggers is easy, it also raises the greatest ethical fears and risks for the brands. But what about free product, junkets, and access? (I've been offered and turned down monetary compensation for coverage on Experience: The Blog, but I haven't hesitated to use those opportunities to gain access to information and insight I can share on my blog; in essence, I've accepted compensation in form of interesting content, opinion, and experience for my readers.)

With no established standards, what can marketers do to ensure their paid blog posts authentically build brands in Social Media? What factors separate blogola (the Social Media version of radio's payola scandal) from the sorts of compensation arrangements that meet with the approval of consumers and the FTC?

I believe there are several factors that marketers must consider when participating in sponsored conversations. We'll explore the first two--which largely pertain to issues of law and ethics--in this blog post. In my following post, I'll suggest several other factors that marketers must consider to protect their brands from risks and harm when paying for coverage on blogs.

The first two important factors for brands are Disclosure and Independence. It's important to note that these are not simple elements that merely are present or not. Both Disclosure and Independence have nuances and complexities that marketers must understand to avoid costly and embarrassing mistakes when compensating bloggers:

Paid Blog Post Disclosure

Not all disclosure is equal. To be effective, disclosure must be clear and conspicuous, detailed, and complete.

Clear and conspicuous: If a blogger is contractually obligated to furnish coverage in exchange for compensation of any kind, this fact must be evident to even the casual reader. Consumers must know when they are being exposed to paid advertising in manner that is instantaneously obvious. A small disclaimer at the end of a long blog post isn't conspicuous--it doesn't inform consumers until after they've dedicated time and attention.

Consumers seeing an advertorial ad in a newspaper know it's an ad with little interpretation and no doubt. These article-like ads are identified as paid media in several visual ways including special fonts, backgrounds, or borders, but mostly by plastering the ad with the word "advertising." For example, here is a blog post about just such an ad that appeared in L.A. Times, and it not only demonstrates how print advertorial ads are set apart from content, but also the risks that come from ads that appear to be editorial, even in established media like newspapers.

What would be the equivalent for blogs? How might paid blog posts be instantaneously identified as such by even a casual blog reader? Perhaps the term "Advertisement" should appear in the blog headline or in a repeated background image. Or, the very first paragraph of a blog post could declare the article is a paid advertisement in letters that are bolded and highlighted. No disclosure standards exist (yet), so it is left to marketers to establish the disclosure rules they feel are essential to protect the brand, ensure consumer acceptance, and adhere to legal and ethical expectations.

Detailed: The second aspect of disclosure is that bloggers must be thorough in revealing the form and amount of compensation. Consumers must know if cash was paid, free product was given, or the blogger received some other form of remuneration. I'd also suggest that the value of this compensation be disclosed to ensure the sort of transparency expected in Social Media and to protect brands from lost trust should consumers subsequently learn of unexpectedly lucrative blogger agreements.

Some may argue that disclosing the value of compensation is more than is necessary since magazines and television networks don't reveal the cost of their ads to consumers. This is true, but the difference with paid blog posts--and it is an important one to both brands and bloggers--is that what is being purchased is not merely advertising but editorial attention. Brands do not need special disclosures when paying for traditional and customary online banner or AdSense advertising on blogs, but when a blogger's words and sentiment may be influenced by compensation, consumers need to know more.

This is one area the FTC is specifically exploring as it considers more thorough rules for sponsored conversations. In their proposed new guides, an example is furnished of a gaming blogger being provided a new game system to review; the FTC states, "the blogger should clearly and conspicuously disclose that he received the gaming system free of charge." While these guides are not yet approved and in place, it is clear that bloggers compensated for posts are going to be expected to disclose far more than is common today.

Complete: To protect their brands, marketers must ensure bloggers reveal any special arrangements between brands and bloggers, not merely when a pay-for-post agreement exists. In the same way newspapers are expected to disclose their interests and potential conflicts when covering a story, bloggers must do the same to protect the credibility of both the blog and the brand.

I call this the "wink wink nudge nudge" rule. It is designed to protect against questionable and risky situations such as when a brand pays a blogger to be "a consultant" without (wink wink nudge nudge) defining any specific quid pro quo on the blog. Or when marketers pay a blogger to furnish content for the brand's site without any agreement (wink wink nudge nudge) for positive coverage on the blogger's own blog. Any time marketers feel a "wink wink nudge nudge" coming on when negotiating deals with bloggers, that's evidence the circumstances may not meet ethical standards or require greater disclosure.

Paid Blog Post Independence

In some ways, disclosure and independence are opposing forces in the battle for consumer trust. For paid blog posts to have authenticity for brands, consumers must feel the blogger is working independent of brand interference, but the moment we disclose the presence of an agreement, consumer trust begins to erode. Nothing marketers or bloggers do will prevent some degree of suspicion that the brand's consideration to the blogger didn't just buy coverage but in fact positive sentiment.

This sounds like a problem of perception, but this is an issue as much of reality as perception. Once we compensate bloggers, how do we know that we haven't swayed their opinions? Let's be honest, what do we marketers really want when we compensate bloggers--mere coverage or positive sentiment such as praise, endorsements, and recommendations? If we compensate a blogger and he or she bashes our brand, will this impact our willingness to pay this person again? Consumers are smart; they know the answers to these questions and don't need any excuses to be suspicious of paid blog arrangements. Any missteps or mistakes will be costly and consumer reaction will be unforgiving, so brands and bloggers must strive to make independence a reality even though it's a battle for consumer perception we cannot completely win.

One irony of paid blog posts is that while consumers, bloggers and Social Media practitioners may demand the complete and total independence of bloggers, the FTC has different ideas. For brands, there can be such a thing as too much independence, because the onus is still on the brand to make sure the compensated blogger's content is accurate. This is paid media, and like all paid media, the FTC expects advertisers to ensure accuracy.

In the proposed rule changes, an example is cited of a skin care products advertiser purchasing editorial coverage via a blog advertising service. In the example, the blogger makes a product claim that is not true, and the FTC notes, "the advertiser is subject to liability for false or unsubstantiated statements made through the blogger’s endorsement." The FTC goes on to suggest:

"In order to limit its potential liability, the advertiser should ensure that the advertising service provides guidance and training to its bloggers concerning the need to ensure that statements they make are truthful and substantiated. The advertiser should also monitor bloggers who are being paid to promote its products and take steps necessary to halt the continued publication of deceptive representations when they are discovered."

This is dangerous ground for marketers. Asking for prior review of bloggers' posts is considered a very troubling practice that undermines the necessary independence of the blogger. Asking for such a review--even in the absence of intent to evaluate and control sentiment--can influence the blogger's words and stated opinions. Conversely, leaving bloggers to their own devices can expose brands to risk. Best practices will develop, but for now it's clear brands must:

• Set expectations that bloggers will be factual and will validate or ask for confirmation of all statements of fact contained within paid blog posts;
  
• Furnish vital brand facts to bloggers so they can write their posts with both independence and knowledge;
  
• Monitor the bloggers who are compensated to ensure their accuracy.
  
  

Another practice that I believe will develop is that the level of independence afforded to bloggers will be part of the disclosures associated with paid posts. Did the agreement require the mention of a product's new feature? Was there an expectation of positive sentiment? Was the brand given the opportunity to review the blog post before it was published? Or did the brand furnish compensation with no expectation as to content, sentiment, prior review, or anything else other than accuracy?

If brands want to pay for play in Social Media where transparency is king, queen, and prime minister, then the independence afforded bloggers must be as great as legally advisable and disclosed thoroughly.

Disclosure and Independence are the primary factors that ensure paid blogging is executed in a legal and ethical manner, but there are other attributes that can help or significantly harm a brand's reputation when compensating bloggers. We'll explore these other important factors--which include form of compensation, financial value, and the blog's existing and implicit credibility--in my next blog post on Experience: The Blog.

IZEA is a leader in the "sponsored conversation" business, which is a euphemism for paid blog posts and tweets. IZEA promises benefits to everyone--hard-working bloggers can earn cash based on the size of their audience; brands can reach consumers via difficult-to-crack Social Media channels; and consumers can learn about new products and services from the bloggers they trust. It all sounds so positive, and it is complete and utter rubbish.

If you believe IZEA has the Midas Touch, it might help to brush up on your mythology; we all know Midas turned everything he touched into gold, but we forget how the story ends. Upon receiving his magical ability, Midas converted a few baubles into gold and at first was pleased, until he tried to eat and drink and found that solid gold food was not going to fill his stomach. His prayers to have the ability reversed were answered, and Midas renounced wealth and lived humbly the rest of his days.

IZEA promises easy gold, but those who engage with IZEA may find themselves wishing--as did Midas--for a quick exit. IZEA and other "sponsored conversation" firms are the wrong model for Social Media. Wrong for whom, you might ask? Absolutely everyone!

Why IZEA is Wrong for Brands

Like Midas, who was pleased with his initial results, IZEA claims their early programs furnished positive ROI. Brands would be wise to proceed with caution before basing expectations upon the outcome of IZEA's first programs; marketers have sometimes been enthused by the early success of new tactics and rushed into investments, only to be disappointed by diminishing results as those tactics became more commonplace.

For example, GM O'Connell, founder and chairman of the agency that in 1994 invented the banner ad we know today, noted that the very first banner campaign attracted a 42 percent clickthrough rate (CTR). That first banner ad garnered a CTR 100 to 300 times higher than is common today because it was unique and attracted attention. Paid blog posts and tweets are likely to follow the same path--furnishing some reason for initial optimism but ultimately earning the same consumer indifference and loathing as banner ads. For financial reasons, brands must proceed very cautiously with "sponsored conversation" tactics.

Another reason for brands to reject IZEA and their ilk is the quality of the blogs and Twitter accounts to which they furnish access. The IZEA home page lures marketers with names like Chris Pirillo (Technorati Authority of 537), Janice Croze (Authority of 1388) and Chris Brogan (Number 2 on the Ad Age 150) You don't need to scratch too deeply to see the giant chasm that exists between these people and the typical bloggers and Twitterers offered by IZEA. For example, on IZEA's SocialSparks.com I quickly found a "verified" blog called "OOooooh what does that do?!" offering sponsored conversations, but it turns out to be not a blog but a spammer's trap. In the IZEA community, this valueless spam site earned three "props!"

IZEA is now plotting to bring pay-per-tweet to Twitter, but this sort of platform already exists. As I noted in a blog post back in May called "How to Lose Friends and Alienate People," Twittad.com has been offering paid Tweet opportunities for some time. As with IZEA, the quality is not what brands expect and demand. In that article I noted, "For just $918, you can sponsor the misspelled, fraudulent 'Official Joe Jonas Brothers' Twitter account, @JoesephJonas. With this sort of quality and authenticity, how could brands possibly lose?"

I am hardly suggesting that brands don't belong on blogs and in tweets, but for conversations to be truly valuable, they must be earned, not sponsored. On Twitter this weekend, I complimented a movie, recommended a brunch, and shared an interesting Social Media friend-tracking tool. I didn't get paid to tweet these things--my comments were earned by businesses that furnished the kind of function or experience I wanted to share.

I'm not even suggesting that brands cannot target bloggers or Twitterers for special attention. Far from it--Social Media PR that focuses on finding the right blogs and crafting the right approach for each blogger is an extremely valuable tool in the social marketing toolkit. But there is a world of difference between a smart, respectful, and customized Social Media PR effort and simply hawking your brand in a marketplace of mercenary bloggers willing to sell their readers' trust to whichever brands pay the price.

Paying for blog mentions is the lazy way for marketers to garner attention in Social Media, and as this approach becomes more common it will be apparent to consumers which brands earn buzz and which need to pay for it. In a medium as transparent as Social Media, brands that get people talking authentically create their own gold, but brands who pay for the attention they cannot earn legitimately will only make their brand's impoverishment of loyalty and influence that much more evident.

Please return tomorrow when we explore "Why IZEA is Wrong for Absolutely Everyone: Bloggers and Consumers".