Time to regulate paid Aussie blog comment – and to penalise the offenders

Media Alliance also has the Journalists’ Code of Ethics which addresses this very subject and can be perused at http://www.alliance.org.au/code-of-ethics.html

Introduction of such rules or regulations should not target bloggers alone and should be applied equally to all forms of media, end of story.

Isn’t there some catch-all Trade Practices law about “misrepresentation”? If someone’s presenting themselves as independent when they’re really a paid shill, is that not misrepresentation?

That said, whether people choose not to do bad thing comes down to the likelihood of being caught out. The sheer volume of material makes that less likely. But, does the massively-increased number of watchers turn the tables the other way?

It will be interesting to see whether Australia follows-suit and just how affected word-of-mouth marketing agencies will be – especially those who incentivise their followers or fans to talk about a particular product or experience.

Stilgherrian has it.

This kind of thing should be addressed in the context law that outlines the requirement to clearly define paid comment.

Also agree that it’ll be a pretty difficult thing to police; maybe we need to watch how the US model plays out for that one, because if ours is hard, theirs will be next to impossible.

(This comment is brought to you by me; I paid for my comment and agree with it wholeheartedly)

Yeah good luck with that. Buyer beware. It’s a nonsense to think something like this could be policed. If it is a problem the blogging community should establish their own code.

Jim, policing it is indeed the issue. Everyone is now a “content creator” or, in the eyes of the current law, a “publisher”. When publishing was only done by professionals in an “industry”, or even a “community”, a code can be created and enforced. But even then… well, hello Cash for Comment!

To answer the word of mouth agency question…I think it’s relevant if you assume compainies are naive enough to run WOM campaigns that encourage people to say something against their actual opinion (not that surprising an assumption, but a surefire recipe for failure in any case).

So long as you run honest, targeted WOM campaigns, giving people the freedom to say whatever they like about a product, I’m not sure how relevant legislation would be to the industry.

Either way, we find that people mention how they came about a product in conversations they have anyway…so maybe society has already taken care of it in its own way.

It’s an interesting debate.

I would assume – under any kind of social media legisaltion – that if people are being incentivised by payment or otherwise to talk about a particular brand (even if it’s one they honestly like) there’s still an agenda that would need to be disclosed.

@stilgheririan The crowd will decide what works. If you’re worried about cash comment – research the comment. If you are worried about others being “tricked” by cash for comment… buyer beware. I know we try to legislate against stupidity in the offline world no need to try it online as well

Tune in to ‘A Current Affair’ this evening and watch them plug a product away… Certainly all media needs to be governed. or Bloggers should disclose if they are plugging for $’s (a ‘proptional blog’) – like an ‘advertisement feature’ in a magazine..?

It is a good point to raise and legislation is a very important thing online over the next 5 years – it will be massive 🙂

Let bloggers do what they want. The stupid or greedy ones will destroy their credibility with readers.

@fitzroyalty very eloquently put. The crowd doesn’t like it – they move. It’s not like trad media where broadcasters pay millions for license, so that we’re guaranteed a lack of diversity. If you think your fave blogger is dodgy find another.

Duncan Riley is right – needs to be across the board not just bloggers.

ie – TV show product placement, current affairs shows, print media, radio, bands, events etc … it transperency is so important it must be equally important across the board.

The line between marketing and journalism gets even more blurred: I’m on a list for freelance journos where we receive info about writing opportunities and something came through the other day from a PR firm seeking writers to ‘do what you do anyway’ ie write comments in blogs. I sent off for more info out of curiosity but got no reply so can’t offer any more details. It doesn’t sit right with me, personally, but I suspect some writers may do it, especially as freelance budgets continue to decrease.

your hair is boofy

@Katrina Fox It’s nothing new. PR agencies have being doing cash for comment facilitation for years surely? What you’re describing is something different. That’s how they’re trying to facilitate spam. So basically NOT paying the blogger but paying a spammer. Your instinct is right. Don’t do it! You’ll feel dirty 🙂

What is it that motivates the average punter to read a blog; authenticity, authoritative review, independent thought etc

It stands to reason therefore that a blogger that compromises their content will overtime see their readership become tired of their commercialised viewpoint, eventually switching to a new, less commercialised commentator for insights.

So that being the natural order of things, is it really necessary to legislate or mandate guidelines for disclosure?

Perhaps Cash for Comment will resolve itself by itself

I suppose if you leave a toxic situation long enough it’ll eventually resolve itself naturally. Turds and toilet paper are both biodegradable and will decompose in the pan. But some of us like to flush.

Hmmm… Maybe it’s a little early in the day for that metaphor.

Is there an inverse correlation between the amount of “paid for” comment and the quality of the writing? From my observation of Australian food blogs I would say that those with something to say, say it, and say it well, without (obvious) sponsorship. Those who simply recount their PR sponsored visits to restaurants, review donated books etc. produce fairly dull repetitive blogs i.e. the Sydney bloggers who reviewed Swedish cuisine courtesy of Ikea, and the pumping of Angus burgers at McDonalds.

OK these blogs are obviously sponsored, but a worry is that they also seem to be ones that feature in blog charts , etc. But what does the future hold? I see lots of good bloggers run out of steam as either the creativity or cash (for meals) runs low, and I see the sponsored blogs getting more exposure. Maybe a clear declaration of up-front sponsorship on each article would help restore some balance, or at least it would stop any confusion.

Stilgherrian never too early in the day for a feces metaphor. However the user always has the power to flush. Asking Dad to come in and do it for you is abdicating personal responsibility. What if you’re in a public toilet & Dad’s not around to flush?

PhilD – If bloggers are running out of ideas.. then go and do something else. Why is it a worry if the sponsored blogs are featured in charts? I have had a videoblog for 10 years (altho back then we didn’t call it a blog). In pre google pre yt days we got some sponsorship. We learned the hard way that there are plenty of places for businesses to spend money online. That’s why today I still do a vlog but don’t try to monetize it. It’s an entry point to our other products and services. However I try to give folks valuable info they need so they keep the WOM activity going. If I wanted to vlog about politics or something equally unsponsorable I would not expect to get any $ for it. I would do so because it is something I want to do. Seems to me many bloggers want the benefits of a trad publishing model but don’t want the constraints & shackles of it. Trying to get Govt intervention to help you create a biz model on the Net is a recipe for waste. What’s next? A tax to help pay bloggers? If you betray the trust of your audience they’re unlikely to stick around. So if you are going to try to monetize your blog you’d better paint it red ( the monetization not the blog) .

We had thousands of hours of content (Inc the worlds 1st Net comedy series) that was incredibly hard to monetize back then. So it died.

The Internet is the REAL free market economy. Get used to it. Government can’t help you nor should they.

Ah, Jim, thank you for going with the flow of the faeces, so to speak. “Embrace and extend” the metaphor, to quote the old Microsoft strategy.

@stilgherrian – classic comparison
though not sure which is the turd and which is the toilet paper in this analogy?

me personally, I like to flush I guess, so I’ll withdraw my earlier comments

If this was extended across all media then the street press would have to shut down.
They are completely upfront with everyone except their readers about “editorial” content equaling advertisements.

Andrew F, the street press are just publishers like any other, and the Trade Practices Act applies to them like any other business. If they’re failing to distinguish paid-for content… well, I suppose this jost shows how hard it is to police what’s happening already.

it’s funny how one person should dictate the thousands of bloggers in Australia.

The irony of this angle coming from the PR industry is absolutely sublime.