Oooh, are you trying to stir things up again over here? Funny thing happened. Right when we were all commenting about Pay Per Post, many garden bloggers, including at least one Ranter, received an offer of money to write about maple trees and the solicitation even included "suggested text" for the article - how thoughtful!

Hah! I thought a little parody might lighten the mood. If it ignites the situation again, then great!

I really enjoyed Michelle Owens and Eliz's comments at the bottom of your post. They were very succinct and brought it back to the core issue.

Are you signing up for B4B?

Are you trying to get us all in trouble again?? You are BAD...in a funny way.

I hope so. Cheers for dropping by Carol and I'm glad you saw the humour in it.

Haha! This was too funny, Stuart. Loved the Amway reference too :-)

You ARE naughty....and also a funny, funny guy, Stuart. Just what I needed for a Saturday morning. I'll have to pass on the B4B though, unless you're into Guiness. :-)

So who would pay attention to posts about refinancing their credit cards from California, or Bulgaria or Kenya when they live in Brisbane, Australia.......

That is too funny!

Hope I can visit Australia someday and buy you a beer!

I'd love that Nelumbo.

Cheers for your comments Colleen, jodi and Bare Bones.

Wow,

You guys really did a number on Tricia. I'm part of GTS but I don't read much of her blog that isn't gardening related.

A few months back I got an e-mail from someone asking me to blog about their fertilizer. I turned them down because there wasn't anything in it for me. I told him (or her?) to give away free samples if they want people to blog about it for free.

A couple of months after that I see that GardenRant is giving blogging about the fertilizer after they got a free sample and they even got some to give away.

What is that if not shilling? Did GR not receive a good in exchange for writing about it? How is that different from the PPP that Tricia does?

And really Stuart as a monetized site you (me too) can't really go around casting stones on this subject. There is no difference between yours (our) adsense ads and Amazon links.

I appreciate your comments MrBrownThumb but let me point out just a few notes where you've erred.

1. Firstly, us *guys* (by this I'm guessing you're talking about those who have agreed with my sentiments on the subject) haven't done a NUMBER on Tricia.

You must understand that I have high regard for Tricia and her blog (recently mentioning that as a blogger she would be me in my Top 14).

2. This discussion has NOT been about advertising. I understand there are people who disapprove of any form of commercialization of the blogosphere and they are entitled to their opinion. As you noted in your comment I have advertising on my blog and make a small income for it. But this conversation has not been about bloggers not making money from their content.

3. The issue that is being discussed is the difference between objective content and advertising. On my blog I use both forms but with distinct boundaries. Unfortunately Tricia had been accused of writing content that was unobjective advertising.

Let me ask the question: If Tricia wasn't getting paid for the post, would she have written about the service and linked to the company that was paying the bill? If the answer is Yes, then she has nothing to answer for. If No, then the material is unobjective and forces her readers to question her integrity on every other matter she blogs about.

PPP advertisers are relying on word-of-mouth advertising - a VERY powerful form of communication. The problem occurs when that word-of-mouth becomes a drone in the desert because people are no longer willing to listen to it.

Keep writing FOR your audience and you can't go wrong.

BTW - as for the GR blog post. They were giving away some samples? How did they benefit????

Stuart,

What was the purpose or intent of saying she "whored" her blog out? You do realize what that word means and the origins right? That word and its connotations don't create any warm and fuzzy feelings in people, especially when it is aimed at them.

I went to school and studied marketing. So believe it or not I understand and can see the distinction that you and GR are trying to make between PPPs and monetizing a site/blog.

But it is intellectually dishonest. The moment a blogger monetizes their blog they are indeed shilling if they know what they are doing.

As you know the adsense ads appear based on content and keywords. The moment you sit down and write an entry you are in fact shilling because you know that the ads will appear based on what you write about and that will attract search engines who will bring people who may click on the ads on the site.

Or do you want me to believe you don't understand how content and keyword work together in the adsense program? I am also suppose to get the impression that you don't do any SEO? Maybe find out which are short tail and long tail keywords? Which keywords are high paying and which are low paying?

Did you just slap the adsense code on your site without looking at any of the documentation on the adsense website/help section?

Purely coincidence that your banner is above the fold and on the left hand side of the screen? And is it also coincidence that you have a link banner above the content?

What about your domain? Just a coincide that you choose a domain with a high keyword value?

How about that lawnmower review blog of yours. Are you really that interested in lawnmowers or did you realize how valuable the keywords in the posts are to advertisers?

You seem like a really smart guy Stuart and I don't for a second buy that you just slapped your adsense code on the site and never gave it a second thought. When you started to give it a second thought that's where you lost the moral high ground. None of us that monetize our sites are any better than the PPP people. We can try to rationalize it by calling it advertorials and making the intellectually dishonest distinctions that you and GR have done. But the truth is that is part of the same beast that is advertising and marketing.

Do you really not understand how GR benefited? They received a product with a monetary value. That bottle of fertilizer isn't free at the stores- the average gardener didn't get that "free" sample. GR those free bottle because they were going to blog about them. The manufacturer essentially paid GR by giving them a tangible item with a dollar value. Just like the people who pay Tricia cash to write about their products/services.

That same manufacturer also offered me a link to my blog from their blog for writing about the product. You and GR know the value of links and that people will pay you good money to put a link on your blog to their website. So that's two items that have a dollar value that GR got for writing about that bottle of fertilizer.

Really of all of the people on the internet to call out and to put on blast I could think of many more that I would choose before I would do that to a fellow garden blogger.

Great comment Mr BrownThumb.

What you say about the use of Adsense and SEO is quite correct apart from the conclusion you make and how it is the same as PPP.

Let's use current print media as an example. Assume the editor wants to write an article on "Tropical Plants". The sales rep for the magazine then goes to advertisers and offers them a spot within the article. However, the content is not written for the advertiser and they receive no other special treatment apart from having their promotion appear within that article.

Therefore, the content is objective and untainted by the advertising.

This is how Adsense ads relate to a blog or website's content.

Back to the magazine example: if the sales rep offered the advertiser a written article that would appear as if it were objective content yet it predominantly related to the advertisers product or service then this would taint the validity of the magazine's reputation.

In other words, the magazine would be *whoring* itself to the advertiser. (Yes, I have a good handle on the meaning of this word and meant it as you understand it - because that is what it is).

PPP is like this second example.

It seems you are confusing two different debates. If you don't like advertising on blogs then that is your opinion and you're entitled to it. However, this is not that debate!

Here we are discussing what is content and what is advertising.

From your comments it appears you, along with some other garden bloggers, don't understand the difference and this is why the discussion started in the first place.

Yes, I could have picked on other genres to argue my point but why should I? This is a gardening blog and I talk about gardening and blogging and garden blogging. Why shouldn't I have discussed a garden blogger who has been doing this?

BTW - if you've read my blog over the time I've been writing it you will have noticed my love affair for lawns and lawn mowers. Yes, I did start my lawn mower blog to earn some extra money but also to separate writing about mowers on this blog. So what? Is there something wrong with discussing my passion and earning money from it?

I don't know what to tell you to convince you that I'm not confused or confusing the subject. What I am saying is that there is little to no difference between both practices.

The problem I have with your old media example is that the newspapers have been "whoring" themselves out for a long time. Without the advertisers the newspapers couldn't really survive.

Do you really think that the thought of attracting more or particular advertisers and reader to the newspaper doesn't cross the mind of the editor? He's not operating in a vacuum-he has to be aware of the loss of readership to new media, a newspapers need to make a certain amount of money.

And who do you really think the sales team is going to approach with the ad space for the article about plants? The local dog walking company or the local greenhouse?

One of my professors was found of saying that "television shows were invented to keep commercials from bumping into each other."

Media and advertisers have been doing the horizontal mambo together for eons.

Again, I don't dislike ads on blog. I have plenty of them. I think more people who blog should have them. Given our economy and how many workers in various industries in America are losing jobs that get outsourced I think everyone should start a blog and monetize it. It is a great passive form of income that one can do in their spare time.

The problem isn't with monetized blogs-because I do it-the problem is with people pretending that there is a difference between monetizing a blog and attracting advertisers and with writing an entry for someone for cash.

In the end our money is minted at the same place the money PPPs people get. The industry that allows us to make money from ads in our sidebars is the same industry that allows for people to make money from sponsored posts.

To pretend that we are somehow different or better than the PPP people is a very disingenuous.

Let me give you one last analogy to explain the vast difference between the debates.

Imagine your blog is a car. Advertising on a blog is like placing some sponsorship stickers on the paintwork.

PPP is letting them drive the car.

HUGE difference.

From the "Bloggers Code of Ethics": Distinguish factual information and commentary from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
Susan