Dear Ted
I used to write to Santa around this time of year, but I think I’m a little old for that now. Plus, some little kid told me the other day that Santa isn’t real – I don’t think that can be true, but I admit it shook me more than a little. So, I decided that as I couldn’t write to Santa anymore, each year I’d write to someone from my life – whether that be someone that I know, or someone that works for a company I deal with, a Government that has dominion over me, and so on. This is the first year and I thought that I’d send a missive to the Murphman.
Ted, I’m a fairly new Postie – I’ve been regularly submitting posts for just over a month now – but I was interested in PPP for quite some time before that. The idea of “getting paid to blog about the things you love” appealed to me, on top of which I was rooting for your success because one of my friends works for you. You always want your friends to be successful, right?
I’ve read much of what people like Arrington and Calacanis (and many others who’s names I can’t remember) have written about PPP, and the personal attacks they’ve made against you and other members of your team. They do like to bandy the “e” word about, don’t they? Even my personal blogging inspiration, Wil Wheaton, jumped on that bandwagon and boy, did he go down in my estimation because of it. I’ve written posts and comments defending PPP and criticising the critics for their double-standards and lack of perspective.
What I’m trying to say, is that I am a PayPerPost fan and I’m glad to see that you’re having the success that you are – 100,000+ bloggers and 12,500+ advertisers, after what? 18 months? All power to you.
But I have to temper my admiration with some disappointment, and it’s this which is the focus of this letter (sorry to be on a downer at this festive time of year). I’d just like to share with you some of the issues that have made themselves apparent while I’ve been using PPP over the last month or so.
The first issue is purely technical, and I suspect many Posties will have the same gripe; the site is really slow. I mean, snail-pace. It can take about a minute for my dashboard to load when I sign in. That’s on a 1mb broadband line with a less than 6 months old iMac. It’s slow enough that I’ve lost Opportunities because of it. I know that Pete and the guys are working on it, and that it’s probably a result of your success where your hardware hasn’t kept pace with your users, but that’s something that should have been foreseen perhaps?
The next issue is one that I know has been a bugbear for PPP since the beginning and you’ve taken a lot of flak for it – disclosure. It’s good that PPP requires disclosure now, but some of your advertisers don’t seem so keen on the idea. I’ve seen Opps that specifically state that in-post disclosure is not acceptable. Personally, I don’t think this is the right way to allow advertisers to go. On The Wolf’s Howl @ BlogSpot, I’ve made a promise to all my readers that EVERY sponsored post will be identified in-post, in addition to my site-wide disclosure notice. When I see an Opp that objects to this, that’s an Opp that I can’t take.
My reason for imposing this restriction on myself is that a lot of people read blogs in a feed reader. If you’ve only got a site-wide disclosure, and not in-post, then those reading your blog in a feed-reader will not see anything to indicate that the post they are reading has been paid for. While it may be obvious from the content, I feel that it is beholden on me to be 100% transparent with my readers when it comes to what I’ve been paid for and what I haven’t. I know that not all bloggers hold the same opinion I do and that’s fair enough. I just don’t think advertisers should be able to dictate disclosure policy.
While we’re on the subject of advertisers, you’ve been making much of the fact that you have in excess of 12,500 on board now. Congratulations on getting so many, but I’d be interested in knowing how many are active, as the number of available Opps doesn’t seem to be increasing. Indeed, the number today is quite low and, if taken as a percentage of that 12,500, is really not anything to write home about. I know you’ve got an uphill struggle because of people like TechCrunch, with a mountain of bad press to overcome and I imagine it’s hard to convince new advertisers to come on board, but you need to maximise the Opps available from the ones you’ve got or you’re going to start losing bloggers, which you really can’t afford.
And so that leads me to bloggers. Again, the numbers are impressive – over 100,000 now. But how many are actively writing posts for PPP? With the limited number of Opps, I guess it can’t be too many. And I know that a lot are quite upset that their Google PageRank has been annihilated because of their association with PPP. Even with the introduction of RealRank, you run the risk of losing quite a number of accounts.
I think it’s the limited number of Opps that are your biggest enemy. Before I started writing for PPP, I read a blog post that was attacking your business model, and I made a comment along the lines that PPP encourages bloggers to only take posts that they have experience of or interest in and to write about what they know. The blogger suggested that I needed to wake up and smell the coffee but that if I was happy to prostitute my integrity and shill for Ted Murphy, then I could go ahead with his blessing. But having written for PPP for a while now, I can see how bloggers would be prepared to let their standards slip, because they need to earn some money and the only Opps available are ones they don’t have any experience of, but they can fake it. That perpetuates the unsavoury image of PPP that has been propogated and does you no favours at all.
Something else that does you no favours is RockStartUp. Don’t get me wrong, I love it. I really enjoy seeing you guys getting up to all your stunts, Postie Patrols, Cake Plows, etc. But you’re not presenting an image of a serious-minded company to the world at large. What you look like is a company that likes to spend money and party. I remember the first episode I ever saw dealt with your move to bigger offices, and at one point you were berating a painter for standing on a $700 chair. I’m sorry, Ted, but a start-up shouldn’t be spending its investor’s money on $700 chairs; it’s a waste and I know that others have pulled you up on this. They’ve also pulled you up on all the larking about that you do. I know, and so do most Posties I’m sure, that you’re just showing the bits where you guys let off steam and that most of the time you’re all very much nose to the grindstone making PPP work – but there’s been a lot of episodes about that, and not so many about the work that you’re doing. It’s the wrong balance for a start-up and doesn’t help the public perception of the company.
Neither does the name change. We’ll forget for the minute that Izea sounds either like Scandinavian furniture or really horrible toilet paper, but what we can’t forget is that it makes you look like you’re trying to distance yourselves from PayPerPost. It makes it look like you think all the detractors are right and PPP is something akin to prostitution that should only happen in dark alleyways. I can see your point about having an “umbrella” name to cover all the other things you do, but that just leads me on to my next point.
Fragmentation. Or, if I’m being kind, differentiation. You’re expanding into other areas – URL brief, Zookoda, RealRank, etc – which is understandable; every company wants to expand. But I think you’re taking your eye off the ball. What’s made you (in)famous is PPP, but it doesn’t seem to be receiving any of your attention at the moment. You’re branching out into other areas and it’s not clear where you’re trying to go.
Social Spark is apparently your next big thing. I don’t know too much about it, but it sounds like social networking for advertisers and bloggers. An interesting idea, but – on the face of it – not really a big advance on PPP Direct. And another name change. Does this now replace PPP entirely or does it run alongside? If it runs alongside, whither the future for PPP? From what I’ve seen about Social Spark, I think you’d have been much better adding the functionality to PPP, carrying on calling it PPP and really getting out there and selling it to advertisers. Oh, and Social Spark? If people abbreviate it like they do PayPerPost, that comes out to SS. Perhaps not the best thought-out name you could have come up with?
I know that your venture capitalists have been vocal in their support for you, but I would expect no less. I also know that some commenters were concerned that in your second round, you didn’t pull in any new investors. As a Postie, I’m concerned that you seem to be spending a lot of money, but I’m not convinced you’re bringing in all that much. At some point, your VC’s are going to want a return on their investment.
I’m sorry to sound so negative. I’m not trying to shoot you full of holes; I’m just highlighting some issues that have occurred to me as a fairly new Postie. I want PPP – or Social Spark, or Izea, or whatever the future branding of the company may turn out to be – to be a big success. I know that you guys have all worked hard to make it what it is today; I guess what I’m really saying is that the early vision seems to have become clouded – you’re no longer as focused as you were. I want PPP to become a force for good in the blogging world, bringing advertisers and bloggers together. After all, it means more money for me too. But I think you’re at a crossroads and you need to read the signs carefully before deciding which way to turn.
I wish you every success in 2008 and hope that Izea will achieve the vision that you have for it. I hope that you will take this letter in the constructive manner that it is meant, and if I’ve made any errors, or if there’s anything you want to respond to, I hope you’ll use the comments to do so.
Merry Christmas, and thanks for your time.
Wolfie.
Brief notes
Filed under: Blogging, Internet, Motorsport, Religion, Sport
Just one of those round-up sort of posts that I do when I haven’t got too much to say about a subject.
1. In Formula One the off-season shenanigans continue, with Renault sure that they’ll get Alonso back for 2008, but the man himself not saying. Speculation is high that in 2009 he’ll be driving a red car. Meanwhile, Ralf Schumacher is touting for the McLaren drive by singing their praises, as well as testing for Force India, the team who have taken over Spyker. Finally, Pro-Drive will not be competing in 2008 because of a question of legality over their use of McLaren “customer cars”. Do we think that someone out there doesn’t like Dave Richards?
2. Arrington’s having a pop at PayPerPost again – in fact, a couple of times over the last few days. As a much better writer than I once said “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” Is there something going on between PPP CEO Ted “Whoo” Murphy and Mr A? I think there could be. And Scoble used the ‘e’ word again in a recent blog post to describe PPP. Let’s get real, people, shall we? It’s only blogging; it don’t mean nuthin’.
3. If you’ve got a Canon camera of a certain vintage (go to this page and look for Case Id 37383 for details) you could be at risk of a fault that will stop the CCD functioning properly. Thankfully, Canon are offering free repairs for the fault (via an authorised Canon repair centre) and – having got my camera back today – I can confirm the service is speedy and the work excellent.
4. Eastbourne Borough are STILL unbeaten in the league – 16 games into the season – and are tussling with Lewes at the top of the table. The Boxing Day game between the two sides could turn out to be a promotion decider.
5. Once again, the tolerance of one culture unto another never ceases to amaze me. This time it’s the Sudanese, who have been rioting in (appropriately) Martyr’s Square, calling for a British schoolteacher to be executed because she allowed her class of six and seven year olds to name a teddy bear Mohammed. It’s good to know that all the different races and religions in the world continue to get along together so well.
6. There’s supposed to be a big announcement tonight by the British Inventors Society that will change the face of the world by introducing “something” that could produce climate-safe energy at 80% less cost. Think this is one of those wait-and-see type of things; after all, another British invention was supposed to revolutionise personal transport, but most people won’t have ever seen a Sinclair C5!
Update: 7. Forgot to say that The Wolf’s Howl passed a milestone of its own this week – it now has over 100 posts! Yay!! The first was on 21 March, and this one is number 106. That makes an average of one post every 2.4 days, which is a better rate than I ever expected to be blogging at. Whether it’s worth reading is another issue entirely, but then you’d be a better judge of that dear Reader than I would be.
Twice the Howl
During last week, you may have noticed that for a little while The Wolf’s Howl was unavailable, due to a violation of the Wordpress Terms of Service. Turned out that the “Review My Post” links that I had to PayPerPost were not allowed. You’ll notice that they are now all gone!
What the situation highlighted for me was that I didn’t have an effective back up of The Wolf’s Howl – I had most of the posts but not the links or the pages. While I was trying to sort out the violation and get wolfshowl.com back up and running, I also set up The Wolf’s Howl over at Blogspot.
The situation with Wordpress is now resolved, but I’ve decided that I’m going to keep the Blogspot Howl going; there will now be two Wolf’s Howls – one here at Wordpress and one at Blogspot – which will be identical from now on. If nothing else, they’ll provide me with an effective back up!
Wesley Crusher drops the ball on viral marketing.
Anyone who’s read The Wolf’s Howl more than once (thanks, by the way) will know from this post that it’s Wesley Crusher – Wil Wheaton in the real world – who got me into blogging. His was the first blog that I read with any great regularity and I still do; I think he’s great at making his everyday life (touched as it may be with a bit of Hollywood glamour) real for his readers. I recommend you read him.
Constant Readers will also know that a little while ago I responded to some posts by Jason Calacanis about PayPerPost. I couldn’t get past the idea that here was a man criticising bloggers for using their blogs to earn money, while at the same time using his blog to earn money. It didn’t seem quite right, but the main thing that I objected to was that he called PayPerPost evil. As I said at the time:
“Evil is Hitler. Evil is people dying of starvation in the Third World while the West gets morbidly obese. Taking money for talking about products is journalism.”
Now I’m afraid that poor Wil has joined that clan. In this post (a sequel to this one where he was trying to drum up votes for himself on Bloggers Choice Awards ), he says that PayPerPost is “at best deeply unethical, and at worst damn close to evil”. You see, there’s that e word again.
I’m sorry, but I can’t equate a bunch of bloggers taking payment to write about a product or service as evil. Let’s have a little perspective here, people, shall we.
I don’t get behind this idea that blogs are somehow sacrosanct and free of outside influence, that they are somehow pure. Let’s take Wil, for instance, he’s been using advertising on his site for a while. This post details his reasons for taking it down, but the upshot is that he is not averse to earning money from his blog. Calacanis has all sorts of links around his blog that earn him revenue, as does Mike Arrington (TechCrunch) – who just recently at MESH called PayPerPost CEO Ted Murphy “the most evil man in the room” – that e word yet again.
In the print media, advertising space is quite often sold off the back of editorial; this editorial is not always identified as being paid for. Likewise, I’m sure there’s many a product manager who’s been told “Well, we’ll run the piece if you pay us £XXX to cover colour separation charges”. It’s been going on since Man invented the printing press, so why should the Internet and blogs be any different?
“Disclosure”, I can hear you shouting from all sides. “What about disclosure?” Well, now this is a thorny issue as I have read comments by some (not necessarily PayPerPost Posties) who say that they would not disclose when – or if – their blog has sponsored content. However, in a section called Requirements of Note, PayPerPost say on their site – before you even sign up to be a Postie – that:
“You must be prepared to disclose your relationship with PayPerPost advertisers and advise your readers of any sponsored content via a disclosure policy or on a per post basis.”
They also say:
“It’s up to you to pick the Opportunities that best suit you and your blog. If it doesn’t feel right, if you don’t own the product, or if you can’t be honest we ask you to pass on the Opportunity. Dishonest or completely off-topic posts can ultimately hurt your blog’s credibility. We strongly encourage you to only take opportunities that relate to you.”
There will always be some bloggers who do not disclose all of their sponsored content, – or who will alter their opinion just to get paid – but they are by no means all part of the Postie clan and by no means all individuals without vested business interests.
I think a little perspective needs to be taken. If you’re reading about a product or service on someone’s blog there’s always the possibility that their opinion is coloured by some outside influence; they may be getting paid for the blog, sure, but there may be all sorts of other reasons why they have the opinion they do. If you’re going to base your buying decision on what you read on the Internet, then you need to make sure that you’ve read lots of opinions, including the magazines and periodicals that deal with that market sector.
Every development in technology eventually leads to a widespread business application; now it’s the turn of blogging.
- – -
I suppose, for the sake of clarity, that I should disclose at this point that I am not a PayPerPost Postie. I do not work for PayPerPost. I know one of the guys that works there, but that’s it. This blog is not sponsored, this post is not sponsored. Any links I provide are there because I think you might find them interesting. I do have a link to the company that I work for, but I do not earn commission from anyone clicking that link. Thank you.
Jason Calacanis vs PayPerPost. Why?
I started writing this as a comment to this post on CodeHappy, but as it went on, it got longer and longer so I thought I’d pull it out and make a proper post of it:
I’d never heard of this Jason Calacanis guy until today but jeez, what a guy(!). I wasted some time reading his various posts about PayPerPost and you guys really do seem to have upset him; his morals and ethics are obviously highly offended. Oh wait, they can’t be – he’s doing just the same thing.
He doesn’t seem to realise that this is the real world; “covert marketing” as he insists on calling it has been around since there have been products to sell. The only difference now is that blogs and the Internet make it all more widespread.
At one point is he (or one of the blogs he links to, I forgot which and I’ve lost the link) makes the comparison with product placement in movies. Is there really ANY part of the Net that isn’t just one big advert? If anything mentions a company or product, don’t you think – as an intelligent individual – there’s at least a chance this is an advert?
And what of the PayPerPost posties? Jason seems to be calling them – by association – horrible and evil. Really? Just for taking a few dollars to talk about a product? If I recommend a product to a friend ‘cos I think it’s good, does it really matter if it’s by telling them directly or by putting it on a page on a website, where other people might read it too? I don’t think that makes me evil. Evil is Hitler. Evil is people dying of starvation in the Third World while the West gets morbidly obese. Taking money for talking about products is journalism.
Jason also talks about disclosure. He says that every one who is paid to blog should disclose this fact in the blog. There may be some value to this but if you’re going to start doing it with blogs, then shouldn’t you do it everywhere? I see blogs as being similar to newspapers – just with more staff writers. Does every newspaper journo disclose all the various little deals that he makes with companies to “enhance” their reviews? How many magazines sell editorial content along with display advertising – content that is not disclosed as bought space? The PayPerPost posties make the decision to disclose or not on a post-by-post basis; they’re the ones writing, it’s their decision.
So Jason, leave the guys alone. You’re only worried ‘cos they’re muscling in on your action.
(Just so’s you know, Jason, I was not paid by PayPerPost to write this post, I am not one of their posties or one of their advertisers but I do know Peter Wright. OK? Thanks.)
Wolfs Helpers
