…

Through poker gratuites des règles du poker…

Why should bloggers who conscientiously disclose precisely which posts are sponsored and which aren’t, consistently refusing to accept opps that require either non-disclosure (from those companies that offer such opps–PPP not included) or sitewide disclosure only be villified along with those who are willing to hide the sponsored nature of their posts? While I believe that PPP should not accept advertising opps that require sitewide-only disclosure, they are still the only paid posting company I know of that requires disclosure in some form.

I write paid posts for a number of different paid posting companies, and on my blog, every single paid post is placed into the Paid Posts category–without exception. (I refuse to accept opps that require non- or sitewide-only disclosure, because I believe that integrity demands complete disclosure.) Most of these paid posts also either include the disclosure badge of the particular paid posting company or individual advertiser or a short statement to the effect that the post is sponsored. (My disclosure policy is clearly spelled out on my blog.)

About the loss of Google PR for PPP bloggers, I believe it to be totally unfair. Each blog should be judged individually, in my view, based on the quality of its own reviews and its own disclosure policy and practices, rather than stripping all PPP blogs of PR across the board. (Yes, my blog just lost PR yesterday, along with many others, after I’d waited nine months to achieve my PR 3 and only had it for about a month–though for some reason, the PR widget I have on my blog is still reporting PR 3.) As things sit right now, Google is penalizing those bloggers who have transparent disclosure policies, which means they are effectively penalizing us for being honest, while the less-transparent bloggers are slipping under the radar. (In a sense, who can blame them, when they know they’re being targeted?)

This blogger, however, will not bow to the wrath of Google. I intend to continue operating my blog in the way I feel to be right and to the best of my ability, providing as much quality content as I possibly can, and attempting to post only those paid opps that I believe might be relevant to my readers lives in some way and which I feel I can present to them in an appealing manner, tying them in some way to my blog’s niche. (Some of my paid posts have, in fact, been quite popular among my readers.)

While I can’t say that I’m not extremely disappointed to have lost my PR–or that I’m not thoroughly disillusioned with Google for taking it away–I can say that I don’t feel I’ve done a single thing wrong. If this is what Google feels it must do–for whatever reason–it certainly has the right to take back something it gave in the first place. However, I, also, have the right to continue doing what I believe to be right–whatever Google may think.

There are some things that are more important than page rank–like integrity.

Sincerely,
Jeanne Dininni

Goddamn!

great point! Never thought about that before.
Someone need to compete with Google, they’re tooooo damn evil!
Even this whole PPP thing is build up due to the domination of google search engine!

Oh, btw, what about Text Link Ads on this site?
I might miss your reply, apologise if that’s the case.

As far as PPP goes, I’m one happy postie that discloses and until someone decides to start donating to help feed my family and pay some bills around here, no one will dictate the content that goes on my blogs but me. That includes the advertisers in the marketplace and PPP. If I can’t give an honest opinion on a subject that I find RELEVANT to my blog, I don’t take the opportunity to make the post.

In reality, there are some big assumptions being made here about PPP posties that don’t apply across the board. But it’s nice of most of you “A-List” bloggers to stand in judgment of how others decide to make their money online. My blog was never meant to target you so stop worrying about how I make a few bucks online.

Personally, I’m going to stay happy on the “Z-List” because all of you guys with your high paying sponsors, big opinions, and corporate backings only steer me away from wanting to be more than a girl with a few opinions and the freedom to post it on the web… when I choose and where I choose.

TechCrunch, can’t you find anything better to blog about? Your continuous posts about PPP only keeps the fire burning and keeps people interested. With this kind of exposure it’ll sure be difficult to say that PPP will hit deadpool when they have so much exposure. You know what they say, any publicity is good publicity and you guys sure hand it out to “the most evil person in the room” a lot.

I can appreciate that some people have a problem with this type of service. To be honest most of the advertister’s I know that use the system ROUTINELY request neutral un-biased opinions. Why? Because they want to generate honest buzz/awareness/feedback. If Tech Crunch has a better method at the same cost rate, please let us know. Otherwise, I would love to see Duncan put his money where his mouth is if he really believes that PPP will be gone in 12 months. What do you say Duncan, ready to stand by your words or do you not believe in what you say?

As for Ted’s point, this is harmful to their community of bloggers and unjustly penalizes them. First, PPP does require disclosure. Second, why is the source of the link penalized as opposed to the destination (this is a MAJOR POINT)? And third, does PR really matter in building traffic? In other words, did these blogs become less relevant because of their PR drop?

I would hope that Tech Crunch would be more concerned with the points made than by who made them.