Pay Per Post Model Moves To Twitter

from the things-that-shouldn't-surprise-you dept

The Federal Trade Commission recently said it was looking into how it could require disclosure when bloggers are being paid to write about a product, the latest move in a long-running flap over the potential abuse of word-of-mouth marketing. A big driver behind this flap was the emergence a few years ago of a company called PayPerPost, which (as its name indicates) paid bloggers to write nice things about its customers’ products. PayPerPost raised a lot of questions about deceptive advertising, in particular, who should be held responsible for it: the blogger or the company paying the blogger. As Mike noted at the time, focusing on one platform misses the larger point that deceptive advertising is deceptive advertising, regardless of where it appears. With that in mind, it shouldn’t be at all surprising to see the company behind PayPerPost — which has since changed its name to Izea — is now paying folks to post its customers’ messages to their Twitter account. Seeing as how Twitter only allows messages of 140 characters or less, there’s not a lot of room for disclosure there. These sorts of efforts will continue to spread to new platforms as they emerge, particularly when they grab new users in the way Twitter has. Perhaps the only saving grace is that as these shady marketing efforts grow, people will become more and more skeptical about product recommendations from untrusted sources online, undermining the value of paid placements for companies. This sort of microshilling doesn’t seem like it will have a long shelf life — especially if the FTC decides to get involved.

Filed Under:
Companies: izea, twitter

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Pay Per Post Model Moves To Twitter”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

“Perhaps the only saving grace is that as these shady marketing efforts grow, people will become more and more skeptical about product recommendations from untrusted sources online, undermining the value of paid placements for companies.”

I think most people are already (and have always been) skeptical of product recommendations from unknown sources. People aren’t stupid, they know to take into account the possibility that someone is getting paid (or somehow benefiting) to recommend something.

Anonymous Coward says:

Whatcha gonna do?

How on earth could this type of thing be effectively regulated. If it is illegal in the US, people will just open shop in India or somewhere that it is not illegal.

If a major company engages in the practice it will eventually come to light and be an embarrassment. Small companies will probably be the ones who try it. If they have a bad product, then they are going to have a lot more unsatisfied customers than they can afford to pay, so they will lose, too.

A lot of young people have grown up online. My kids seem to have a sixth sense, and they notice things before I do. This kind of thing might work for a while, but I think it is probably not going to be a long-term problem.

Mark Pannell (user link) says:

Disclosure Legislation, etc.

Let’s be honest. How many people can’t see through the syrupy sweet content of amateurish PPP blog posts and/or tweets? This type of practice will always exist in one way or another. Disclosure legislation just keeps the honest people honest. The respected bloggers who author PPP content have been honest about it anyhow. Does that make people like Steve Hall less credible? I don’t think so. But I also don’t rush out and buy every product he mentions either. And as far as Twitter is concerned, it takes more than 140 characters to influence my buying decisions.

Wolfy says:

To poster #1 who said “People aren’t stupid”… I hate to break it to you, but, people ARE stupid. What’s worse, is the trend is we are getting more stupid as time goes on. I point to the rise in religion in the U.S. and the corresponding drop in the number of people who believe in evolution. I am terribly sorry to say I rest my case.

B. Jewel says:

Re: Re:

People are not stupid just deceived until they discover the truth. Deceived would be to believe in the big bang theory and that mankind evolved from a ape or monkey. I rather believe anything except that. I stumbled across this site looking for any negative information concerning pay per post before I got involed. It sounded like a perfect way to add a little extra cash to the household finances. I had no clue deception was involved. My hat is off to the creater of Tech Dirt. I am postive this site is not the result of a big bang THEORY but an actual smart created person.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...