Just a little survey…
Do you feel that I’m cheating when I write paid advertorials without disclosing that it’s an advertorial?
The reason why I don’t disclose is because I choose my advertorials with care. It could be because I couldn’t accept the client’s tyrannical way of dictating my post or I simply don’t and won’t believe in the products/services. So each and every advertorial that I’ve written, I consider as my own original content.
Some people feel really strongly about putting the disclosure clause in the post, as if it’s a one liner answer to all ethical issues on the blogosphere, which in my humble opinion is a LOAD OF CRAP.
Honey, there is simply no space for ethics or credibility on the Internet. We are our own ethics. We are our own credibility. Each and everyone of us, behind the computer. Without us, there’s nothing on the Internet.
Until some higher being overrules bloggers in this matter, I will not fail to impose my own ethics and rules onto my own blog.
Reminder, you are not the higher being.
The truth is, I’ve considered putting the disclosure line if I were writing a partial review, but that’s just me. So far I’ve been fortunate enough not to have to do that. That said, I respect and will defend the choice that other bloggers are making in this respect, whether they want to disclose or not. The last thing I want is someone or something to take away that choice we have as bloggers.
Can you imagine what it would be like if we were saddled with the rules and ethics of the traditional media? Can we still call ourselves the new media? The rules are different here, accept it. Learn to manage it instead of complaining how unethical or lack of credibility we are because that’s not what you normally have to deal with when it comes to the traditional media.
Yes it’s a volatile, scary sphere, which is also why it’s so amazing.
I’m a blog. My readers are here to read what I’m saying. I’m the opinion leader of this little space. If you think that my blog is cheating off your trust because I did not disclose what I’m writing as advertorials, I kindly ask you to leave this blog, because you have also insulted me as a person.
I AGREE totally with you on this!! Who are they to say what you can and cannot write, and the ironic thing is that these people claim not to read the mainstream media because of the same reasons they are advocating on blogs.
Its your site. Do what you want and those who don’t like it can sod off. No one complains when a commercial cuts right into the show you are watching on tv without notice (well actually we do but they don’t hear us anyway). We just get up for a drink and return when the show starts again ;)
hmm.. what are the difference if you were to disclose it?
after all, isn’t the frank comment and recommendation that counts? someone please enlighten me.
That bogged my mind for a while, when I was thinking of whether to disclose or not on my paid ads on the beauty site. But after a while, sod it, I don’t have time for this. And so what if you don’t disclose? It’s clear that it’s an ad, and people should be smart enough to know so. If not, then like Paris said, you can ask them to sod off.
regardless of whether one is being paid or not, isn’t a review of a restaurant/movie/song/hot model an advertorial anyway?
michelle: yes, the irony. what rights do have to the term “alternative media” if we’re expected to adhere to standards in the traditional media?
parisb: yeah! readers have all the rights to making choices too!
hocmun: yeah, i agree with you that the comment section is also a great supplement to the actual review.
tine: yeah. on the blogosphere, it’s really up to you how you want to deal with your blogspace, as well as the repercussions following your actions.
eyeris: i guess some ppl think that the disclosure would allow readers to judge better and not to trust an article blindly. but by subscribing to this, it’s almost as if blogger are expected to lie for money which is an unfair generalisation of bloggers to begin with.
Well said! There’s a whole different set of ‘ethics’ to blogging as opposed to traditional media, and if some people just can’t hack it, then it’s just too bad – for them.
As I recall, an overwhelming lot of people were unwilling to believe the world was ROUND at one time…*LOL*…just a matter of time.
I don’t think it’s a matter of “cheating”, inasmuch as there are no rules or laws that you’re trying to work around. And like you and others have said, you obviously have the power to write whatever you want in your blog, as much as people have the power to stay and read or move along.
However, I don’t there’s anything inherently wrong in placing a disclaimer on a blog when a review is done to disclose that the review was paid for.
It’s not a matter of morality so much as it is of the market, I think. I can’t speak for everyone, but when I read a review of something, I usually read to get a supposedly unbiased opinion of a product/service/whatever, so that I can predict to some extent the what I’ll hopefully get when I later spend my hard-earned cash on the same thing.
Now, I’m not saying that you individually should think like me and adopt my morals/thoughts. But I’d wager that when most people read a review, they’re looking for a relatively unbiased opinion on which they can plan how to act. So to better appeal to more readers (ie, the ‘market’), you could put in a disclaimer when you’ve received compensation.
Of course, it’s your prerogative as to whether to include a disclaimer. But some readers might be more hesitant to read/trust your reviews, and perhaps frequent your blog less. Of course, if you never put a disclaimer on, there’s no way for a reader to know whether or not you were compensated. But if you start putting disclaimers, then at least the reader can see that you’re willing to highlight the times when your reviews are not 100% unbiased.
I guess what it boils down to is, I think you have nothing to lose by putting a disclaimer, and only can gain more readers by putting a disclaimer up for review that you’re paid for.
sorry for the long post, by the way. I guess I’ve just been thinking a lot about this, especially in light of the gamespot.com scandal involving a similar issue with allegations of biased reviews.
beetrice: yes. time will tell i guess, actually time has told, just that it’s not caught up yet here.
echolia: hey don’t worry, always good to have someone trying to clarify their opinions instead of jumping to conclusions with short, arrogant scoffs at things they’re not quite educated about. i can see where you’re coming from and in some ways you’ve confirmed my point that bloggers should be allowed to strive at their own terms and conditions. of course, they also have to make do with the repercussions following their actions. personally, i just don’t like putting the disclaimer as i feel it robs away the originality and creativity from me…with the disclaimer, sure enough ppl would think that i didn’t write it myself but as mere rehash from a press release!
well, money changes everything. clients expect a GOOD review all the time, because they’re basically paying you for it, and it’s fine if its a good review BECAUSE the product is genuinely good. but readers will cry foul ANYWAY because they will assume that you are being paid to write good stuff for the client. That’s out of your control, so screw them lah. hehehe. can’t please eveyrone. for every person who complains about you writing an ‘advertorial’, there will be plenty others who appreciate your honesty about the product, whether its good or bad.
I would say you are misrepresenting your freedom of expression here.
To be sure one of the main attractions of a blog is that it is your outlet of creativity and what you want to tell the world. But to say in essence that “no one tells me what to write” works both ways: if your readers can’t tell you what to write, then neither should advertisers.
After all no matter how entertaining, original, or unique a person’s blog is, it is traffic that is the overwhelming factor that determines whether a blogger is chosen for an advertorial. So I wouldn’t take lightly the readers who give you the traffic.
At the end of the day the post inspired by an advertorial would not have been posted if not for the deal made. While there’s nothing wrong with that and most people who get advertorials write quality posts, I don’t see why readers don’t deserve to have say, a line reading “I got this phone from YYY”, or “I was asked by XXX to review this place” any more than “I got this phone from my mom” or “I went to this place because I heard of it from a friend”
eyeris: yeah. what’s the point of publishing the disclosure when the advertorials will lose its merit anyway. i only accept paid reviews that i could report truthfully and i don’t see why i must put a clause that will send out the wrong message. of course in my case, client have their say to a certain degree, but only as much as the accuracy of the brand names or usage of cuss words. i have a lot of faith in my readers anyway, i mean i’ve only started receiving advertorials in the past one year and my average traffic is an all time high now. if i’m doing something wrong, i don’t know what it is.
t2: i don’t really get the gist of your comment but i will try. you’re saying i owe it to my readers to publish a disclosure because they’re the reason i get advertorial deals to begin with? well, you haven’t told me though why it’s necessary when i personally count on my readers’ intelligence and trust in me that I will not mislead them in anyway. as i was saying, the choice is with bloggers and readers too, and the decision makers would have to deal with whatever repercussion, bad or good.
No, I don’t feel cheated because the advertorial you wrote, I can relate. Not like some other bloggers that write on Online Casino lah, Hotel la or whatever craps that doesn’t has anything to do with Malaysia or things that I can relate to. I don’t even think the bloggers themself even use any of the craps before.
Actually, no one is wrong here.
What a blogger say is his/her own entire opinion. Even if it’s unpaid, a blogger’s choice may not be yours.
Let’s just say it’s really an advertorial, I’m sure people will know by reading it even if no disclaimer is being put up. If someone silly to believe 100%, so be it.
And if the product is no good, the buyer will not continue getting the product anyway. So, there’s nothing wrong in it.
Well, unless there’s some fanatic fans who would do anything the blogger do, like, maybe Kenny Sia say he likes McD, so that fanatic fan eat McD everyday. Haha..
” as i was saying, the choice is with bloggers and readers too, and the decision makers would have to deal with whatever repercussion, bad or good.”
But the point is you haven’t given them that choice.
“when i personally count on my readers’ intelligence and trust in me that I will not mislead them in anyway”
Well if they disagree? Then are they less intelligent? Why not give them the chance to decide whether you are misleading them or not ( and I am not saying that you are). The purpose of an advertorial from the advertising company’s perspective is not pretty photos or toys, correct? It is to promote a product to readers; they effectively become consumers, and I believe they have the small right of knowing when a product is being promoted.
If a friend of mine invited me out and started telling me about some product, I would think much more of her if she told me up front that she was getting a small commission, rather than find out only later. If the product is good it is still good; if the person is good she is still good. But trust in a friendship doesn’t come without disclosure.
Similarly a newspaper needs to mark clearly sections that are advertorials, rather than claim that its readers should trust its integrity – otherwise it’s topsy turvy. The disclosure can only promote integrity.
simon: thanks!
YM: yeah, i’m not saying that non-disclosure is right for everyone because not all bloggers are the same. in my case, it’s only right for me. if one decides to mislead their readers by doing partial reviews on products that are shit then they have to deal with their readers leaving.
t2: when im promoting about something without getting approached by any company it’s promoting too. for instance, im promoting ipanema sandals at my own free will. i promoted yo sushi. i promoted a lot of other things without getting paid. but at the same time im getting paid too review/promote things that i happen to believe in. my point is, i don’t mislead my readers for money. if ppl find my reviews shit, they can always voice it out on the comment section.
as for your friendship analogy, i think it only happens in a direct selling situation. this are advertorials we’re talking about, only serve to raise awareness, not raise sales number.
hmm..i don’t see anyone complaining about food reviews and some places reviews..so for those who complained any advertorial posts, they just don’t understand the word ‘review’..so can just buzz off :)
Actually I do want to complain on food reviews on TV. All of them are fakes. They are paid i think. Cos the food usually on TV are no good!! X’P
‘Do you feel that I’m cheating when I write paid advertorials without disclosing that it’s an advertorial?’
Yes, it is cheating, and as punishment I sentence you to do an advertorial to get me a cute GF. ;-)
‘Honey, there is simply no space for ethics or credibility on the Internet.’
No Space for Ethics??? Of course there is, or else I’m not a six foot six tall viking named Sven with long hair and a masculine beard and a doodle a horse would be proud of.
‘Until some higher being overrules bloggers in this matter,’
Actually, the usual laws of the land are just as enforceable on the internet as they are off it. So, no making death threats or slandering people etc.
‘I’m the opinion leader of this little space.’
That’s your opinion. In my opinion we’re a consensual oligarchy who have to answer to the senatorial committee that meets every Tuesday to decide what you can and can’t blog about. This of course can be vetoed by the Proconsuls if they have a two thirds majority in which case the senatorial committee must meet again on the Wednesday to decide new and various topics of interest. Any read who doesn’t like the topic will be invaded by our army of rampant mice.
*****
Being serious for a second, Blogs do come under the same laws / rules as other traditional media which is why lawsuits can still be put against someone breaking the law, such as slander, false advertising [ie claiming I’m a six foot six viking for instance] and other things. It’s a common misunderstanding by some people that because they’re on the internet that they somehow are above or beyond ordinary laws. As the police say, there are no new crimes being committed on the internet, it’s just that the delivery method has changed. So, before writing another advertorial, ensure that a disclosure statement is not required by law. If it isn’t, then don’t worry about what people say.
Go ahead and write whatever you like. :D
you go girl!
Indeed this is an interesting read. Disclosures are a waste of time anyway, and to disclose what? That one is writing a paid post and that one’s readers should tread with caution when reading the discloser’s postings? Or should one blatantly plaster one’s advertorial with PAID POSTING THIS ONE, READ WITH CARE FOR I WONT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR REACTIONS, PHYSICAL OR IMAGINARY? In the case of required disclosure, I think the “advertiser” and/or the host is responsible if such content borders infringement of some sort. Like you said, this is your personal homestead and if there is no higher being, present company includes, that rules you, heck, no need to disclose the disclosure leh.
i dont get the “if u dont like it, get out of here, the writer has the right to write whatever he wants!” argument.
there’s this little line i wld like to share: “my right to swing my arms around ends at ur nose”. although it’s generally used for illustrating cases of assault & battery, i do think it helps in my idea of how we can’t possibly go as far as saying “i can write whatever i want in my blog!!”.
as much as we exclaim freedom of speech rarara,etc ..it definitely ends at the point of violating defamation laws and /or ethics.
i dont mind a nice debate but name-calling for no reasons other than “u suck! and i can write whatever shit i want” is frikin stupid.
example: i dont particularly like minishorts but i wont only say shes stupid bcoz she sucks. *i wld state reasons*. ie: coz shes such a hypocrite pretending to be a virgin on her blog and being an over-eccentric english grammar nazi in other ppl’s blogs padahal sendiri alw doing stupid grammar/spelling mistakes.
anyways, not disclosing whether it’s an advertorial or not is only a matter of choice. it’s plain stupid to tell ppl they r cheating bcoz they didnt disclose it purely for reasons of:
1-traditional journalists get paid to write reviews also. how is that different? all that crap we read abt how great this food is how great this product is are all paid reviews in one form or another. most journos have their hands tied to write nice stuf abt those products & services bcoz they r big advertisers in the newspapers/mags.
and do they tell u the review is an advertorial? no ley. most of them dont anyways.
2-a writer/blogger’s integrity is at stake here as much as a traditional media person’s. their readers wld gauge themselves hhow much of the review they can believe or not.
after reading him for so long abt his adventures and whatnots, the readers wld know somewhat what kind of person the blogger is. if they think he’s not trustworthy enough to buy the products he promote, they wont feel cheated anyways coz they wont buy those products bcoz of his promotion.
think about it, why wld ppl buy from ppl they dont trust anyways?
what’s there to cheat?
oh ya, another thing, by arguing that not disclosing it’s an advert will cheat the readers is a snobbish thing to do coz u think readers are simply stupid lambs who need so much guidance on their lives they cant think for themselves.
Though I more or less can sense whether a post is an advertorial or not, I believe it is more ethical to state so somewhere in the article.
yatz: those are probably not paid i guess.
ym: haha dunno lah. have to ask the tv! i think the hochiak! show is quite good.
dabido: of course if it’s required by law for whatever reason, this blog will adhere to the rules and regulations.
albert: thank you. i try not to hurt or mislead anyone.
sherry: thanks :)
joe clueless: exactly. bloggers decide for themselves & should thread carefully, especially those who take on whatever advertorials without any consideration for themselves or their readers. i’m not against those who prefer to disclose, cause it’s their choice and their beliefs, just not mine.
naeboo: naeboo for president! totally agree, i think the reason why some ppl don’t get this is they don’t understand the psyche and dynamism of the blogosphere. unfortunately some of these ppl are also bloggers, obviously warming up their butts on a moral high horse, haha.
huajern: more ethical in relative to what?
Oh my god! I’m so dumb and am misled. I will never believe in any veracity in this blog again, that is if I will ever visit it again. Bye.