<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Block-Level Page Analysis, Sponsored Posts and Link Development</title>
	<atom:link href="http://danzarrella.com/block-level-page-analysis-sponsored-posts-and-link-development.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://danzarrella.com/block-level-page-analysis-sponsored-posts-and-link-development.html</link>
	<description>DanZarrella.com, Social &#38; Viral Marketing Scientist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:12:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack of All Blogs &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Sponsored Posts</title>
		<link>http://danzarrella.com/block-level-page-analysis-sponsored-posts-and-link-development.html/comment-page-1#comment-68</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack of All Blogs &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Sponsored Posts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Jul 2006 18:07:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danzarrella.com/block-level-page-analysis-sponsored-posts-and-link-development.html#comment-68</guid>
		<description>[...] Blogs are PR 2.0 right? It would only makes sense then that the new &#8220;it&#8221; 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&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;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 &#8220;neutral tone&#8221;, that is they&#8217;ll pay you even if you don&#8217;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 &#8220;tone&#8221; of the post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Blogs are PR 2.0 right? It would only makes sense then that the new &#8220;it&#8221; 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&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;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 &#8220;neutral tone&#8221;, that is they&#8217;ll pay you even if you don&#8217;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 &#8220;tone&#8221; of the post. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

