The U.S. Federal Trade Commission this week announced rules for bloggers who take money and various other forms of booty in exchange for reviewing products. Somehow I missed this business of selling one’s soul. But I think it is a good idea to take a moment and be straight with my readers about the limits of my journalistic ethics in this space.
I don’t take money for reviewing products because I don’t review products. Never have, never will. So don’t send me any products, okay?
Publishers send me early copies of a few books per year, generally hoping I’ll either provide a quote for the book jacket or write a positive column about it. I do accept such books but rarely write about them. If I give a quote it is never for money, mainly because I didn’t think anyone would pay. I was probably right about that.
I once sent a book of mine to Joe Bob Briggs only to have him give it away on his web site. Tacky.
While it is true that I write for money, in the case of this page the only money comes from those ads you haven’t been clicking on. I have no idea what those ads will be, by the way. They are served automatically by IDG Technet, which sends me each month a check that is pitifully smaller than I was led to believe it would be.
If you want to suggest a topic to me and accompany that suggestion with a gift or a check, it pretty much guarantees I won’t write about what you want me to. This is all part of my reverse psychology plan to get Microsoft to pay me $1 million to never write anything about them again. So far that strategy is not working.
Bear Stearns (remember them?) once offered me money to participate in a conference call with their customers. I had done such a call before for free to talk about my Google shipping container data center column but felt too much like a talking dog and didn’t want to do it again. So they offered money. I said “no.” And of course Bear Stearns is now dead. So be careful what you ask of me.
I write for other publications like the New York Times and they pay me, but so far that pay is not from vendors except in the case of Perforce Software, where I write a column for their company newsletter. But I’ve never written about Perforce here. Until now that is. Does that mean the FTC will now arrest me specifically because of this disclosure? Sounds like a Star Trek episode.
Most of my income actually comes from giving speeches and participating in events like brainstorming sessions, many of which happen at companies I have written about. Often I learn things at these events that are worth writing about, though strictly within the bounds of whatever non-disclosure agreement I’ve signed (violate NDA = wife takes kids and leaves). So in this sense I do take money from companies I might write about. But the companies never give me money specifically to write (except for Perforce, above) and they often don’t like at all what I end up writing. Screw ’em.
The FTC rules say nothing about giving speeches or selling one-page screenplays for $2 million. If they expand the rules in that direction, of course, I may yet be in trouble.
In that case there’s always pizza delivery.
Hey, Bob, can you post a link to those rules? I’m curious. (Oh, and it’s ABOUT TIME.)
I’ve found in reviewing cars that most companies (possible exception: Volkswagen) actually appreciate a critical review as long as you’re critical about things that are actually bad. (Unlike the typical review of the Chrysler Sebring, for example, where the writer has apparently not been in the car yet.) You can slam a car hard and as long as you’re justified, they’ll appreciate the honesty; because then any praise is believable. Still, far too many car reviewers pull their punches, only attacking vehicles they deem socially acceptable to slap around (e.g. anything made by an American company except the Corvette and Mustang). Yes, you CAN criticize Hondas and BMWs… as long as you’re fair. I think most readers would appreciate honest, rather than trendy, analyses. But that’s a different subject.
When I suggested that one product sent to me by a vendor had an overly high shipping fee and that you should ignore 2/3 of the kit, they changed their pricing and shipping policies — and put in a prominent link to the review. They said that readers would believe a review that wasn’t all praise.
Attacking software, again, is generally accepted by vendors, as long as you’re fair in your criticisms. One large statistical software company actually put me onto the beta testing team as a result of a review in a relatively small web site.
My point being — to all you bloggers out there who take stuff for review — it’s a time-honored tradition to take as many goodies as you can use. But be honest when you review your goodies, because any legitimate vendor will appreciate your honesty more than a fluff job that sounds like one of their advertising men wrote it for you. You’ll keep on getting stuff, you’ll feel better about yourself, you’ll be serving your readers and gaining new ones, and you’ll probably conform to the FTC rules, though I can’t say for sure, since I don’t know what they are yet.
Oh, and you can disclose that you got the stuff for free – nobody will lose respect for you. I think people know writers don’t buy everything they review, and being up front only increases your credibility.
Thanks for another good column, Bob.
I added the FTC link as you suggested.
MS should pay up on that $1 million, it must be a trivial amount to them.
The only flaw being how many blog posts would appear from bloggers all over the world hoping to get some cash for shutting up themselves!
The AT&T ad links to a 404.
Hence, John’s pitifully small checks.
We already know what we are, the only issue is negotiating a price 😉
BTW Perforce is very good. There should be a Nobel prize for KISS.
Obligatory link to the newsletter,
https://www.perforce.com/newsletters/2009/summer/codereview_cringely.html
You should try SVN and git; and their comparison with SVN is sadly out of date; with any comparison of git entirely lacking.
And yet another version control system Bazaar, http://bazaar-vcs.org/en/
Bob, you will always be in demand!
I’ll take a sausage with olives.
Ads??? What ads? Maybe my ad filtering is too good. I’ll try to turn them off selectively for cringely.com, and then start clicking on them relentlessly.
Please promise me there will be no mischief attached to the ads. By mischief I mean someone trying to put stuff on or take stuff off of my PC. I’ll look at the ad, consider the company, etc. But if the firm starts mucking with my PC, all bets are off.
These days, I keep falling back on a Frank Zappa quote dished out by one of the “quote of the day” services: “America is a country of laws: poorly written, and randomly enforced.”
It’s that first fault that is salient in my mind these days. It never seems as if laws are written to remedy a situation. They are poorly written, perhaps because of corruption.
So, the biggest question in my mind is whether these guidelines will actually remedy a bad situation. It’s wonderful that the Obama administration sees blogs as legitimate media, and, in as much, it seeks to regulate them to curb the abuse of the influence they exert on financial markets. The question is do these guidelines do that?
I wish someone would comment on that. Maybe I will. I have to read the 81 pages first.
After a period of time, competitors will be blowing the whistle on the competition and it will be interesting to see how the government reacts and implements these guidelines.
A propos of what I said last week:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/ftc-regulation
[…] one of my blogging idols Robert X. Cringely pointed out today “The U.S. Federal Trade Commission this week announced rules for bloggers who take money and […]
Hey Bob, your Mortgage Blog link is wrong on the right panel:
http://blog.cringelysmortgage.com/blog/
Thanks for the skinny. Secrets are universally bad.
Life is so relative. I would send you a story and _hope_ that you would publish it.
You _should_ gather some idea what those ads might be, by the way. For right or wrong, they reflect on you – some perhaps not so favourably. At best they’re an indicator of how badly you need the money.
I wouldn’t know – I never see the ads, anyway.
Totally agree.
Bob!
Signing up to an add service without any idea
of what they will be serving up on your site,
is probably the dumbest and most amoral thing
I’ve ever seen from you.
Don’t you know that kind of behavior is evil?
:@
For the adds, change your feeds to only include just the link and a short summary, rather than the entire article. That way people at least have to go to your page and see the adds, even if they don’t click on them.
Bob,
If you want ads to be viewed (and clicked on), then don’t use DoubleClick.
My statistics show that a single, simple filter of *doubleclick* blocks 1/3 of all adverts.
One filter for 1/3 of all ads. No way am I going to give that up.
,dave
On this machine, I have doubleclick and all it’s variants, in the hosts file,
blocked with a rule in my firewall and blacklisted in AdBlock plus!
Just to be sure.
🙂
Just blocking Flash takes car of a good deal more as well. 😉
[…] google shared Love for Sale. […]
Tried to help you out by clicking on an AT&T add. that should bring you a nice $.12. I was not compensated for this endorsement, but when I called to terminate my AT&T service, the customer service was awesome! They disconnected my crappy service in a professional and prompt manner.
And this is why we love reading what you write. Candor! Keep it cranked up to 11.
Next to your sad laments there was an ad for Long John Silvers fish sticks or whatever they sell. I’d love to see the algorithm that did that.
I’ve never seen ads on this site, either. I don’t have ad blocking software but I do block JavaScript from third-party sites. Is your ad provider using JavaScript or something else other than just text and images?
Dear Advertisers,
I’m willing to click your ad, but I’m not going to let you run a bunch of scripts on my machine. Sorry.
Love,
A different Russ
I find it amazing that they take the time to create rules for bloggers but they leave financial analysts alone to act on their own accord. They evaluate corporations from quarter to quarter while being courted, gifted , and fed and then are expected to give an unbiased rating of buy, sell or hold which effects the price as well as our money, retirement funds and now our tax dollars that go to bail them out.
But spend the money on bloggers who might affect a few hundred sales instead of billions of dollars – way to go gov!
I’d love to click on your ads – but the companies serving them better start abusing privacy policies and sharing/gathering my private data a lot more efficiently so truly targets ads appear that I actually want to click on. Does t-Mobile know that they are a crap carrier I can’t use in Montana? You’re blog doesn’t seem to know this. And a Quest Business ad about Fortune 500 “tailored network solutions”? I’m not even a Fortune 1,000,000 company. I thought I put all my personal data up on Facebook so the Internet would know better and give me ads about skiing!
Plus I use your ad-free RSS anyway.
This is a timely topic for me, though, as for the first time ever I – as a “blogger” – have been approached to review something. Two things actually. All in the last month. A ski movie on my outdoor blog and a tech book on my web development blog. The ski movie I gladly accepted and will shortly be reviewing. It was just OK (and I’ll say so) but nothing beats a free ski movie.
But for the tech book I wasn’t really the target audience. It was for for a “non-coder”. So my first thought was “why should I take the time to review this if I’m not getting paid?”. Then my second though was “well, if I got paid my review would mean jack squat”. Hmm. I decided to review it anyway, out of curiosity, but it gave me some interesting perspective. How DOES a company get someone to review something, anyway? I won’t be doing it again.
In the “old media”, did book/product/etc reviewers just get paid a flat salary by their publisher so they were “non-biased” but were still motivated to write a review (i.e. got paid)?
Cheers, and thanks for continuing your great blog post-PBS. I’ll try to click on interesting ads. 🙂
Bob,
Now I know what’s wrong with this world… It’s Me!
I can read your column and enjoy it a LOT! But I read WAY TOO SLOW to wade through 81 pages of legal mumbo jumbo to find out I should not accept something in exchange for a good review. I have to guess that’s the bottom line – – don’t give a good review just because you got the item for free, and maybe you should tell your audience that you got it for free – – but I’ll never know for sure because I don’t have time to read the document.
Keep up the great work.
Surfing with Firefox 3 at the moment and I see no ads!
I’ve got the Adblock Plus. Noscript, Optimize Google and TACO add-ons
running in FF and very rarely do I see any ads.
Just had a quick squiz with Google Chrome and BLECH!
The ads make your site look tacky and ugly !
Thank goodness for FireFox and it’s 3rd party add-on developers.
I clicked on your adds…..enjoy your Cairib cruise.
Did Price Namor end up in jail?
Here’s the real kicker: according to page 47 of the FTC guidelines, the rules don’t apply to reviewers in “traditional media,” who can accept free goods and act as shills without disclosure:
“The Commission acknowledges that bloggers may be subject to different disclosure
requirements than reviewers in traditional media. In general, under usual circumstances, the
Commission does not consider reviews published in traditional media (i.e., where a newspaper,
magazine, or television or radio station with independent editorial responsibility assigns an
employee to review various products or services as part of his or her official duties, and then
publishes those reviews) to be sponsored advertising messages. Accordingly, such reviews are
not “endorsements” within the meaning of the Guides. Under these circumstances, the
Commission believes, knowing whether the media entity that published the review paid for the
item in question would not affect the weight consumers give to the reviewer’s statements.”
Sorry about the extra line-feeds. I did a cut/paste from the FTC PDF, and they came along for the ride.
Bob, I wish Reply had preview and/or comment edit options (e.g., like MIT Technology Review).
Arthritis in your pooch can be a major problem that many people never even think of in senior dogs.
I would like to stay in touch, What is your facebook page?
dnliykqzsldtbvl, pantene pro v, uuegWCfKQZJDBqowLFOI.
Fantastic blog! I’ll probably be mentioning some of this info in my next speech.
All in all I do not make comments on blogs, but I have to mention that this post really forced me to do so. Really terrific post.
Sensible information here and I like the theme and the layout of your web site too. I hope this web site keeps growing and you continue to build it.
Very informative article post. Cool.
good (article|information) thanks
good (article|information) thanks
household insurance quotes
household insurance quotes
This is the reason I keep returning to this blog. I can’t believe how many posts I missed since I was here last!
your pooch can be a major problem that many people never even think of in senior dogs.
Beats dre headphones producing software program will help you and guidebook you concerning how to framework your beats that will undoubtedly trigger other individuals to dance inside the dance floor.
Levels of competition are competitive along with the cost of rent are probably the utmost inside locale, in spite of this, you employ a ton get not just for regarding the superior quality involved with lodging still as a result of amazing haul back links, a new blooming communal picture as well as proximity to one of the greatest community galleries within the whole world. [url=https://www.longchampoutletsusa.com]longchamp sale[/url]
Make sure you grasp all the methods of make money from this company. Isn’t BPO, premises efficiency and supplying. Understanding the concepts of the particular attaining strategies of the forex market can evaluate business energy. Its also wise to help you procedure of itemizing real estate to start reselling these. [url=https://www.longchampoutletsusa.com]longchamp sale[/url]
Why your personal lender contends upon an evaluation quite simply shouldn’t be honest to obtain a residence just for no greater than what it is worth to consumers. A banker needs to observe that if you payout your loan, your banker definately will reclaim most of the payday loan from your good discounts with the asset. https://www.longchampoutletsusa.com
http://thanhhienhotel.com/news/index2.htmlnike james