Update: Call off the dogs folks. I should clarify. I’m not talking about specific people in this post. More about the concepts as Smorty and its first batch of bloggers seem to put them out there:
1. It is not the same as an ad in your sidebar which is separated from your content. PERIOD.
2. It is unethical to have a paid link in a post and not disclose it for the world to see. PERIOD.
3. Referring to point 1, I find the rationale that this is the same as a link block in your sidebar dumb, not the people saying it. PERIOD.
4. I think the whole process is completely unethical and Smorty is getting away with what PayPerPost was crucified and almost run out of business for as far as disclosure and ethics. In fact, I think Smorty is worse because they actually advise against doing negative posts.

To anyone I’ve offended, I’m sorry. If you think Smorty is a good thing and you can make a quick buck using them, go right ahead, but you should consider separating your Smorty posts out in some way so that people know what’s paid content and what’s your content. When I see a whole assload of posts extolling the virtues of a service in the same way, I see it as nothing more than linkspamming and search engine result bumping..

Though it’s never been actually written in any law, there is an understood separation of church and state in the United States of America. We don’t have Priests running the government, and we don’t have politicians running churches. It’s just the way it is. In publishing, there’s a similar church - state issue, and it’s usually between advertising and editorial content. Advertising is a separate department and should have no influence on editorial content whatsoever.

Recently, however, we’re seeing a change in that. Services are springing up like moles in a wack-a-mole game offering to pay bloggers for doing their linkspamming for them. Not content with spamming comments sections with ads for various erection enhancing drugs, they’ve now resorted to buying bloggers off to mention their links inside a post.

The first to offer such a service was PayPerPost. You’re paid per post for taking an “opportunity,” you write about a topic, and once your post is approved you make some coin. Originally, in full sleazy linkspamming fashion, PayPerPost didn’t require disclosure. It was optional to tell readers that you were being paid for writing on a topic or product; the presumption of course being that you could just slap it into your content, “forget” to mention that you’re being paid to write it, and call it a day. Money made, link spammed, and everyone is happy.

Luckily for the blogosphere, people like Jason Calacanis jumped all over this sleaze and helped create a backlash of people who saw this for exactly what it was: linkspamming.

Since then, of course, PayPerPost has began requiring participants to disclose that they’re being scummy linkspammers, but the bad taste and poor ethics of the company tarnished their reputation in a profound way that they may never recover from, and you know what? Good. I hope they do go out of business.

Then the folks that do ad buys for this site decided that they too would try their hands at the paid content model also with a venture called ReviewMe. You’re paid to write reviews of products or services and you must disclose the fact that the post is a paid post. I’m not particularly thrilled with this model either, as people do have a habit to write favorable reviews when paid. I for one do all reviews with review samples requested from the manufacturer or products I’ve purchased myself. In that way, I feel no obligation in any way to be “kind” to the company that makes the product or service I’m reviewing.

To their credit, ReviewMe did learn from PayPerPost’s mistake and required disclosure from day one.

Smorty, on the other hand, is infinitely more sleazy.

Smorty has a word limit on posts that you write and insert a paid link into. Your post must be between 150-400 words. You’re encouraged to post multiple versions of the same post to different blogs because that will earn you more money. One of my favorite parts of Smorty is this in the rules section:

You do not have to necessarily endorse the advertiser’s website products or services, just mention them in your blog. It is entirely your opinion to post, however, please keep in mind that the advertiser has the opportunity to dispute each individual post based only on our terms. If your post fits within Smorty’s terms then Smorty administrators will still approve your post so you get paid.

In other words, beware of the pissed of advertisers. They go a step further, of course, in their FAQ, advising you not to write something negative at all:

What are the rules of writing an opinion article?
Please refer to our blogger rules page for all rules, however here are a few points

* Each opinion must be unique and especially written for that campaign and must be relevant to the campaign subject.

* We advise you not to write negative opinions as these are more commonly disputed.

* Each post must include the anchor text with a direct link to the advertisers page provided.

* Each post must include only one (1) outbound link which must be the campaign owners provided URL.

* Posts should be a minimum of 150 words and not exceed 400 words

The funniest part of Smorty, for me, was doing some digging on the company and its procedures. Aside from a metric assload of posts announcing that the blog owner had sold out to linkspammers, I’ve yet to see any kind of disclosure on any blogs that work the program. I’ve seen a lot of similar links, though. In fact, just about every post that announced the blogger had joined Smorty had some variation of the search engine baiting text that appears on each page of Smorty’s website:

Advertise on blogs, the best online advertising method of all. Blog advertising builds quality relevant inbound links to increase search engine rankings. Make money from blogging, get paid to blog weekly. Get paid for blogging your opinions by writing articles.

Another funny aspect to Smorty, and I reckon PPP also, is how people try to wrench those links into their post. Typical Smorty posts looked something like this:

I was walking to the store the other day and I passed a BURGER KING, crossed the street, and walked into a grocery store.

Seriously. They’re that bad.

I’ve seen a lot of the same justifications / rationalizations for using Smorty, the main one being the absolutely ludicrous argument that doing sponsored linkspamming is no different than accepting text ads or banner ads on your site. No one can possibly be dumb enough to actually believe that. I’ll accept that people are just justifying a deal that’s somewhat shady as enough for me to not pursue that angle any further, but let me just say this. If you think throwing content onto your blog is the same as running a clearly marked ad in your sidebar, you seriously need to evaluate your content better.

People have every right to make money however they want on their blogs. I won’t fault anyone who can’t do this entirely as a hobby. Hell, I was always dead against running ads, but now run 2 or 3 links a month that I clearly define as sponsors in my upper right corner. I don’t write about sponsors. I don’t necessarily use their services (and if I do, I don’t pimp them), and I don’t let the fact that they’re sponsors reflect on my opinion on them.

I also don’t give them ink in my content. PERIOD.

To anyone thinking that this expands your horizons of blogging, seriously, you need to get a grip. You can expand your blogging horizons by flipping through a Sears catalog if that floats your boat, but don’t hand me a line about how writing about something you have no interest in just so you can place an irrelevant link in the middle is somehow making you a better blogger with wider appeal.

I’d just ask the people doing this crap one thing. If you saw comments that had some weird text surrounding a link for no exam life insurance, getting paid while blogging, or some other obscure and silly sales pitch, would you unspam it?

If you’re honest with yourself, you already know the answer.