Pay Per Post now requires disclosure on blogs

10 comments

As a result of the recent kerfluffle by the FTC about word of mouth advertising Pay Per Post is requiring disclosure.

I smell some size 13 network footprints as a result. And don't try and sell me on the 'it's for the buzz not the link pop!' or you go in the pile with the folks promoting 'just publish unique content and people will link to you'.

Comments

a bit self serving here, but...

Rae recently posted about a ReviewMe review quickly generating direct sales
http://www.sugarrae.com/blog/my-reviewme-advertiser-experience/
I recently had a review which paid for itself in its first day
http://www.seobook.com/archives/001965.shtml

IMHO you can ignore links. If a site is useful, generating conversation, and gaining mindshare the links and rankings will fall into place.

>IMHO you can ignore links I

>IMHO you can ignore links

I tend to agree. I haven't bothered with links (either way) for 5 years.

I read sugarrae's post

I read the post prior to submitting the article. You're still going in the pile Aaron :).

People who don't have to 'bother with links' or get to use content for natural link development must be selling persian carpets or something or have sites that are 10 years old. I doubt it works for newer sites in competitive arenas like casinos or credit debt recovery, stuff like that. Try throwing up some 'unique content' on debt recovery on a new site and not bothering with aggressive link development. Good luck. Pablum like that doesn't work against sites with 50 .edu's and 30K backlinks that have been sitting there since 1997.

In short, either you're in a noncompetitive arena or you've got an unnatural advantage if you can promote those kinds of tactics.

I don't get why the current fad is to pretend that the serps don't matter. Like they don't drive the majority of everyone's traffic (of those that are ranking anyway).

I thought profitable and effective business management was about creating and leveraging unnatural advantages?

>>If a site is useful,

>>If a site is useful, generating conversation, and gaining mindshare

>competitive arenas like casinos or credit debt recovery, stuff like that

I've seen it work for Viagra in recent years. In this particular case they used humor to "generate conversation."

A few humor examples... how

A few humor examples...
how many ways can a spammer spell viagra
trying a wide variety of penis enlargement products

Viagra

If I get one more freaking spam viagra e-mail or Viagra SERP when searching for something totally unrelated.

EMAIL : If I block the word 'viagra' 'cialis' 'home mortgage' and 'penis' from my inbox my spam goes down 90%

SEARCH : If I use the - sign in front of 'viagra' 'cialis' 'home mortgage' and 'penis' my spam goes down 90%

in this case it was a

in this case it was a blow-by-blo... err, ummmm, very detailed description of a problem situation caused by experimenting with viagra.

Linkbait

I saw this article on the homepage of Digg and Netscape and I'm pretty sure it had no problem getting links 15 things you don't know about your penis

Welcome to my world...

Quote:
IMHO you can ignore links. If a site is useful, generating conversation, and gaining mindshare the links and rankings will fall into place.

Aaron, I'm so proud of you. :D

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.