Should Paid Bloggers Heed Smorty's Advice About Google PR?
November 25th 2007 01:01
Smorty's Latest Advice to Its Bloggers for Maintaining Their Google PR
In light of the recent PR cuts that many blogs have experienced during the latest Google update, Smorty has recently begun offering its bloggers advice on how to reduce the likelihood that their PR will be cut. This advice is, of course, based on the widely held assumption that the reason for these unprecedented PR cuts is the widespread practice of paid posting. Here's what Smorty has begun advising its bloggers:
There have been some recent changes that Google have made with regard to sponsored postings. Smorty would like to offer you some advice on this issue. Google has primarily targeted PayPerPost member blogs and reduced their Page ranks across the board. Although this WILL NOT REDUCE your rankings or readership, your blog will receive more campaign offers if it has a higher page rank. To prevent any future loss of page rank due to this issue you can take the following steps:
1. Remove all sponsored post tags on each of your posts. Google can follow these tags to determine if you are being paid for posts.
2. Remove any PayPerPost tags on your posts for "hire me" and "review me". Any general affiliate banners are fine to keep.
1. Remove all sponsored post tags on each of your posts. Google can follow these tags to determine if you are being paid for posts.
2. Remove any PayPerPost tags on your posts for "hire me" and "review me". Any general affiliate banners are fine to keep.
Is This Good Advice, and Should It Be Followed?
While I certainly do not mean to malign Smorty--since I've found them to be a fair company to work with--I must nonetheless question the overall wisdom and, in particular, the ethics of this particular course of action. (I do recognize, of course, that many believe the above steps to constitute necessary acts of self-preservation for bloggers who are being targeted for PR cuts, presumably because of paid posting, which Google purportedly equates with link-selling.) And while no one can be absolutely certain whether that was, in fact, the reason for the recent PR cuts--and many actually question this, since presumably many who don't post paid content were also targeted--we bloggers still need to determine what our response to the situation will be.
My Thoughts on the Matter: Stick to Your Principles
Though every blogger must decide for him or herself what course to take--because each will have to live with the consequences of that decision, whatever they may be--I tend to feel that it's always best to stand by your principles, maintain high ethical standards, and do right by your readers.
The following are a few of my thoughts on the matter which are quoted from a comment I wrote in response to another comment left on one of my recent posts:
I see the entire situation a bit differently than Smorty does. I feel it's unethical not to disclose the sponsored nature of our paid posts to our readers--which is why I never accept paid posts that require non-disclosure. (See my disclosure policy.) I believe my readers have the right to know when a post I've written was sponsored and when it was spontaneous.
I think it's a shame that PayPerPost is being targeted by Google simply because their ethical standards are high enough that they require disclosure, and I applaud them for being the only paid posting company I know of that does. It's just the right thing to do! (It's funny the way honesty can get you into trouble sometimes.)
I feel that PPP doesn't go quite far enough, however, in that they allow certain advertisers to specify "sitewide disclosure only," which simply causes confusion, because the reader has to guess which posts are sponsored and which aren't; and that's unfair. (Along with not accepting "non-disclosure" posts, I never accept "sitewide disclosure only" posts, either.)
Despite Smorty's advice, I have no intention of removing my sponsored posts from my Paid Posts category. That category was created specifically for the benefit of my readers, because I believe in being honest and above board with them. If Google can't handle it, they'll do whatever they have to do. But, that's OK, because at least I'll know that I did what I knew to be right.
I think it's a shame that PayPerPost is being targeted by Google simply because their ethical standards are high enough that they require disclosure, and I applaud them for being the only paid posting company I know of that does. It's just the right thing to do! (It's funny the way honesty can get you into trouble sometimes.)
I feel that PPP doesn't go quite far enough, however, in that they allow certain advertisers to specify "sitewide disclosure only," which simply causes confusion, because the reader has to guess which posts are sponsored and which aren't; and that's unfair. (Along with not accepting "non-disclosure" posts, I never accept "sitewide disclosure only" posts, either.)
Despite Smorty's advice, I have no intention of removing my sponsored posts from my Paid Posts category. That category was created specifically for the benefit of my readers, because I believe in being honest and above board with them. If Google can't handle it, they'll do whatever they have to do. But, that's OK, because at least I'll know that I did what I knew to be right.
And that, dear Reader, is my view in a nutshell. While I realize that there are many aspects to this issue which make it complex, I also strongly believe that there are some principles that simply shouldn't be sacrificed for expedience' sake. For me, at least, that's the easy part.
The hard part could come later.
Thanks for reading,
Jeanne
This is not a sponsored post.
Did you enjoy this post? Have any thoughts on the issue? If so, we'd love to hear them!
| 52 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Unfortunately, I think the "review my post" badge is only one of several things that can cause problems with Google. I can see all PPP's buttons and badges being potential problems.
I even read on Andy Beard's blog today that an official statement from PayPerPost has said that a source inside Google has told PayPerPost that the big G is looking for such phrases as "PayPerPost," "PPP," "ReviewMe," and "PayU2Blog" inside the body of our posts. And it doesn't matter whether the particular post in which we mention these words or phrases is sponsored or not. Because of this, PPP has even gone so far as to say that, in our disclosure, we should thank the "sponsor," without actually mentioning the sponsor's name.
Here's a link to the post: Zerorank - More Pagerank Carnage (Round 5).
But, as I've said about Smorty's advice, my plan is to continue "business as usual." I'm not prepared to allow Google to dictate the topics I'm allowed to discuss on my blog. Nor will I begin to speak "in code" to prevent them from recognizing the fact that I'm discussing a paid posting service. And, when I disclose the paid nature of a post, I will continue to disclose the company for whom it was written. After all, isn't that what the word "disclosure" means?
Thanks for the visit!
Jeanne
Comment by Hotel Mark
I think it's ethical to make a disclosure about ppp. After all, many of the opportunities are not exactly on topic of our blogs, and if we make a number of these ppp there's always a danger of losing credibility with our regular readers. And if we accepted only "on topic" subjects, how many opportunities would we get?
Having said that, I am thinking of dropping my "hire me" widget. I feel it does not serve much purpose at this stage in my blog.
It's good to hear other views on this subject, at least as bloggers we have something in common.
Best wishes, Mark.
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I really believe full disclosure is very important. After all, we would like our readers to trust our reviews and opinions, and why should they, if we never reveal which reviews are paid and which are spontaneous? When we provide something less than full disclosure, it looks as if we have something to hide. We may not actually have anything to hide, but that's the perception we create.
It's unfortunate that most of the available opps are somewhat less than ideal matches for our blogs' topics; but, with a bit of extra thought and work, I believe we can make them relevant in one way or another, remembering that our readers also have lives outside the area that our blog addresses and their lives require a variety of products and services to run smoothly. It's up to us to relate the product or service to our readers' lives in a way that will interest them.
Right now, one of my paid reviews is #3 out of 10 posts in my Popular Posts list (it was #4 yesterday), and it really has nothing at all to do with writing. I did my best to present it as a writer speaking to writers and addressing their needs; but, at the end of the day, LED Christmas lights just don't have much to do with writing--and yet my readers have accepted this post and made it popular.
Thanks so much for your input on this important issue!
Jeanne
Comment by tlcorbin-raginravensview
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Hadn't really viewed it from that angle before!
Thanks for your input!
Jeanne
Comment by Anonymous
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
That may very well be, but I'm still not entirely sure of the reason Google cut so many websites' PR, because many of the affected sites didn't write paid posts for PPP, Smorty, or anybody else.
Thanks for your comment!
Jeanne