PR in the blogosphere: What's ethical?

PR in the blogosphere: What’s ethical?

16 July 2009 432 views Comments

Earlier this week, Forbes wrote an article calling out Ted Murphy of Izea Entertainment for paying bloggers to write good reviews of his clients’ products and services. The first line of the article even refers to Ted as a “scam artist”.

So what are these “scams” that Ted pulls? He engages bloggers to write reviews for clients like Kmart, Hewlett-Packard, SeaWorld, Sears and Dirt Devil, and he pays them up to $3,000 for a 200-word blurb! Of course, when you know a $3,000 paycheck is on the way, your review is bound to be positive (and they most often are).

So what I wonder is: what ethics apply here? When is it okay for a PR pro to engage (and pay) a blogger to endorse a product? Is it not okay at all?

In my opinion, there’s a fine line between endorsements and bribery when it comes to PR in the blogosphere.

Back in the days of traditional media relations (and still today), it is perfectly acceptable to invite a food critic to a new restaurant to sample the food in hopes that a good review would come of it. And for as long as I can remember, I’ve based my decisions on what movies to see because of what the critics have said. So shouldn’t the same rules apply here? Bloggers are increasingly becoming more and more influential, so why not give them a voice when it comes to product/service reviews?

In my opinion, it’s perfectly okay to give an influential blogger a free pass to an amusement park so they can review it. You’re not paying them, you’re just simply giving them an option to test out your park for themselves – even if it costs you a few free tickets. Same goes for product reviews: Why not send out your new baby product to a mommy blogger to see what she thinks of it? This is an old practice and it is perfectly ethical in my opinion. (Of course, as long as the blogger discloses that such company provided the free tickets/product.)

HOWEVER, paying someone $3,000 to say they love Dirt Devel is a completely different story (keep in mind, I can’t verify that actually happened – just using it as an example). Adding such a high dollar amount starts to create a huge bias and completely kills all influence a blogger has. If you want a blogger to review a cool new vacuum, send them one to try out – don’t bribe them with cash! Frankly, cash exchanging hands like that really makes the whole thing an unethical mess!

So what do you think? Are there clear lines here? Is it all fair game? Or is it all unethical?

Leave some comments please!

Nicole

Really great point, Mike! I'm surprised no one else thought of that - it does seem like such a waste of money! But then again, tons of companies hire (and spend thousands with) "social media experts" who really have no clue what they're doing just because the companies don't understand the web enough to get the right people working for them.

@mikeschaffer

In the print edition of many newspapers, you have ads that are made up to look like editorial content. Good design work, for sure. However, if you at the top of the page, they always say something that clearly identifies it as a paid advertisement.

As Lauren said, if an ad is identified as an ad, that's one thing. Without, it's payola.

The other major point that somehow hasn't gotten attention is that these major companies are willing to basically throw away thousands of valuable marketing dollars for a good review on a site with a few hundred page views. $3,000, depending on your market and demo goals, can DEFINITELY be used in a much smarter way.

It reeks of someone using the Web without understanding how to maximize value.

Lauren Fernandez

I think it might be the FCC - I get that and the FTC confused all the time. Sorry about that!

Davina Brewer

Agree, “there’s a fine line between endorsements and bribery.”

Cash for reviews and stories, buying column inches, airtime on blogs should be labeled for what it is – Advertising.

Now a free test drive of a product (then having to return it) or a small sample is one thing. But there’s a big difference between a free theme park pass (if blogger just happens to be in town) and an expenses-paid trip (fly, stay, eat, play).

The ticket is $70 access (like free movie pass) while the free trip is compensation for services to be rendered, and a disclaimer should be included on the “endorsement.” That the FTC may make this required speaks to a lack of ethical disclosure of these practices.

Nicole

Great comment, Rich! I totally agree!

We'll see what type of rules & regulations end up coming out of this...it can't be a gray area forever, right?

Like Lauren said, the FTC is watching so hopefully this won't be allowed for much longer - at least not without proper disclosure.

Rich Pulvino

Hi Nicole,

I agree with your point about traditional media relations and how supplying a sample is perfectly ethical, so long as the blogger discloses the information behind receiving the product from the company.

What Ted is doing (IMO) is very similar to what brands do when they pay a celebrity spokesperson to be in a commercial in support of their brand...the difference here is that the spokesperson being paid is a part of the consumer-driven media in the blogosphere, which is becoming increasingly influential each day. While there are rules in place against individual journalists for major publications receiving monetary payments in results of story placements and positive reviews, blogs are still considered by the government and mainstream media to be in that gray area (whether or not the writer is a journalist is an entire new post in itself).

In the end, Ted's actions say a lot about his media relations skills and about his confidence in the clients and brands he represents. A true communicator with media relations skills would be able to find opportunities for his/her clients without the assistance of fat paychecks.

As a young PR pro who just finished up in the academic world, this guy is the exact opposite of the type of mentor/role model to look for in the profession.

Cheers,

Rich

Nicole

Thanks for the great comments, Rowena & Lauren!

Rowena - totally agree about the Walmart thing! It was totally wrong for them not to disclose that Walmart & Edleman hired them! Did they think no one would ever find out?

Lauren - Def agree! If they get paid $3000, they need to disclose it or I think it's unethical...but I also don't really think they should be paid in cash at all. Maybe a gift card to the store they are reviewing, but cash just creates so much bias.

Lauren Fernandez

Hey N - Great topic. This is actually pretty hot right now with the FTC, as they are going to begin monitoring paid blog posts and the such.

Here's my thought - what if they have a disclaimer, ie. something that states they were paid to write it? Such as what we see in advertisments. The amount of money, in my opinion, could also come into play.

Ethics are always hard - its really a personal choice and not something that can be 'regulated.'

Rowena Briones

I agree with you - I think that paying a blogger up to $3000 to endorse your product adds a little bias on the part of that blogger, along with some added pressure to say only positive things about the product.

I do think, however, if a blogger is given a free product as you are proposing, the blogger needs to be transparent about it and say that they received the product as part of a deal with the company.

This reminds me of the whole Wal-Marting Across America blog that revealed the bloggers were hired by Wal-Mart and Edleman to go on their promotion tour. Where do you draw the line on some harmless self promotion and blatant astroturfing?

Should we have a stricter code of ethics on the blogosphere? Is there truly a way to ensure all companies and bloggers are transparent?

I certainly don't have the answers, but it definitely is an interesting conversation to have with anyone active in the blogosphere.