Comments on: Are Bloggers Allowed to Make Money?

By: Tangerine Toad

Tangerine Toad — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:58:32 +0000

I think we need to look at blogs for what they are: online evolutions of newspapers and magazines.
Much as we’d like to think that they’re some revolutionary new thing, they’re basically not that different than what newspapers were about a few hundred years ago: one persons opinion.
Now our blogs may be more similar to magazines in that they focus on an esoteric subject like marketing, but they’re still in the same ballpark.
And readers of newspapers and magazines have come to accept that a certain amount of advertising is necessary to get the content they want. Provided, as many have mentioned, it’s clear that the advertising doesn’t impact the editorial.
Now what gets dodgy and what’s causing you and Mack and Jaffe such tsouris, is the fact that the money marketing bloggers– especially opinion bloggers (as opposed to aggregators) can make from advertising is pretty minimal. Certainly not enough to support themselves or to enable them to provide better or different content.
So then it starts to seem like a vanity project. Jaffe asking for an iPhone becomes “Is my blog that cool that you’d give up an iPhone to be associated with it?”
And that’s a whole different question than “Are the readers of your blog valuable enough as potential consumers for me to pay money to advertise my iPhone to them?”
Seeing ads on blogs I read doesn’t bother me. I mean more power to you if you can get someone to pay you. But when you start letting the advertising creep into the editorial (e.g. Jaffe’s Nikon camera) then you’ve pissed me off and likely lost me as a reader.

By: Ted Green

Ted Green — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:33:00 +0000

Lewis,
I really appreciate the fact that Mack recognizes the value of reader contributions to the overall value of a blog. [DISCLOSURE: I am a reader making a contribution that is hopefully increasing the value of this blog.] I think you should cut him a little slack on this.
You say he is just plain “wrong” on this…I would say that you are both wrong, or right.
Look, it is an interesting intellectual exercise to debate the value of the reader’s contribution to the overall value of the blog. Your position suggests that we come here for your genius and your genius only. Not true…you have some very smart commentators, including other bloggers…making very smart contributions to your topics. This does have value to me and is part of why I read your blog.
On the other hand, as one of your contributors, I admit, I am not looking for compensation. Your compensation to me is to keep publishing a blog of interesting topics and information for my personal development.
So Mack is right…my (and others) comments add value to your blog. But you’re right, the real currency I’m paid with is my increased skills and knowledge gleaned from your blog.

By: Dustin Jacobsen

Dustin Jacobsen — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:59:50 +0000

Maybe it isn’t so much about compensating people that leave comments, but providing a value in return for their time and participation.
For instance, providing special perks to individuals that actively participate in the community. This could include things like free content that would otherwise require payment. This could be achieved with some type of point system that rewards with access to special articles, ebook, etc.

By: Jim Kukral

Jim Kukral — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:19:20 +0000

I know a thing or two about blog monetization. It basically comes down to one major factor, and that is…
Does your advertising attempt to deceive your reader, or not.
If it doesn’t, then no problem. If it does, then you run the huge risk of trying to fool your friends.
Personally, I think it’s a decision each blog owner needs to make on their own.
I’ve been working for years to help blog owners find new ways to do this, and lately, specifically, to have fun doing it.

By: Lewis Green

Lewis Green — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:14:23 +0000

Ann and Toby:
Good stuff! Thank you.

By: Ann Handley

Ann Handley — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:37:18 +0000

To clarify, since I had a few inquiries, here’s what HuffPo is doing:
“… we will choose one commenter a month to become a featured blogger at HuffPost. Yes, a blogger! Reading through the comments on our site, we realized that our readers are an underutilized resource …. smart and opinionated. Our decisions will be based on how many fans a commenter has, how often their comment is selected as a favorite and our moderators’ favorites. Every comment has an I’m A Fan Of and a Favorite link so start voting for the comments and commenters you like best. We will announce the first one at the end of this month!”
Apologies if the use of the word “articulate” was misleading — that’s not quite accurate.

By: Toby

Toby — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:15:24 +0000

Lewis – The “open only to docs”, who have been confirmed against a data base, community Sermo.com has an interesting model. All of its content initially begins with a question from a member of the community. A survey is included with the post pertaining to the topic.
Members are paid by Sermo based on the value to the community. But not all members receive payment. It’s a random system as determined by the “sermo gods.” I’m interviewing Dr. Daniel Palestrant, Founder & Chief Executive Officer, and if Ann agrees, will be happy to post on DF.
Who would have imagined that 3 years or even 1 year ago we would be having type of conversation regarding paid comments?

By: Lewis Green

Lewis Green — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:01:50 +0000

Cam,
“I’ll state once again that advertising on or sponsorships of a site can be of value to the readers, providing the ad is sufficiently non-intrusive, plainly identified, and clearly relevant to the topic at hand, and therefore the readers.”
I couldn’t agree more! Thanks!

By: Cam Beck

Cam Beck — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 20:36:09 +0000

I’m not opposed to blog monetization at all, as long as it’s done the right way. No pop ups, pop unders, overlays that scream “NOTICE ME OR ELSE I WON’T ALLOW YOU TO READ THIS PAGE.”
In other words, the same rules that apply to other companies doing advertising should apply to bloggers – particularly so to us, since we are the ones clamoring for a dialog.
What the bloggers who successfully monetize their blogs do with that money is their business, but it should no way be done in a way that could be construed by a reasonable person as a bribe.
I guess I wouldn’t even object, however, if the blogger used the money to run promotions and sweepstakes designed to increase readership (which extends the reach and increases potential revenue), but there comes a point when doing so much of that transforms the nature of the site, and it becomes something other than a blog.
I’ll state once again that advertising on or sponsorships of a site can be of value to the readers, providing the ad is sufficiently non-intrusive, plainly identified, and clearly relevant to the topic at hand, and therefore the readers.

By: Lewis Green

Lewis Green — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:00:49 +0000

Okay. Now Ann may have something. How about if every month, Mack, you chose the top three contributors and offered them each an award. And if you wanted it to have monetary value, how about a gift certificate to Amazon.com books at various levels, say $15, $10, and $5? That, assumes, blog monetization, of course, with or without advertising from Amazon.com