[...] Blogs are PR 2.0 right? It would only makes sense then that the new “it” tactic on the PR/advertising border is sponsored blog pots. Its not really a new idea, but with the launch of Pay Per Post this past week rumors flying around of at least 2 other sponsored post sites kicking off soon, the niche is definetly hot right now. I’ve long held that paying for blog posts makes much better sense from an SEO point of view than paying per-month for a run of site link (more more detail, check out my post on that). And from a marketing and public relations POV the benefits are obvious. The problem is that a few holier-than-thou (at least when its convieniant for them) blogging elite have decided that the lack of a disclosure requirement in the PayPerPost system means the whole idea is shady. Of course I wonder how many of these same guys have a problem with film and television product placements, but thats beyond the point. The sponsored posts model is a great way for non-elite bloggers to make a little bank, and its up to them weather or not they want to potentially damage their reputation because they didn’t disclose a five or ten dollar payment to talk about a specific product. Before I go any further, yeah, this post is a trial run of PayPerPost.com for me, and yeah I’m making ten bucks on it, but that brings me to my next point. The coolest thing I see in this system is that it allows advertisers to select, as payperpost has done, to set a “neutral tone”, that is they’ll pay you even if you don’t say only positive things about the product. With this option payperpost goes from being a sleezy way to buy good press for your product to a less-sleezy than traditional advertising way to spend a few bucks to generate organic buzz about a product or service. So, in the not-so-humble opinion of this cowboy the sponsored posts model is a wonderful thing for bloggers and advertisers when (and only when) disclosure is made, and no restrictions are placed on the “tone” of the post. [...]