- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostFriday Miscellania
- Next Post »King for a Week - The Blazing Center
What Should We Disclose?
- 10/27/07
- 24
Rather than attempt to answer a question today, I thought I'd ask one instead. This is a question primarily for people who read blogs, though certainly people who write them may be interested as well. The question is this: How much should bloggers disclose?
Let me explain. Bloggers tend to put a lot of work into their sites but receive relatively little in return. There are usually just a few options open to bloggers who wish to make a few dollars. One of the more popular of these are affiliate programs. Stores like Amazon and Westminster Books offer programs whereby anyone who links to them will receive a small amount of compensation. It's usually a safe bet that if a blogger links to Amazon, he is doing so through his affiliate account, meaning that any items that are sold after people click through that link will kick back about 6%. Westminster's program is a little different in that they tally clicks and pay out a certain amount at the end of the month based on the total number of visitors sent to them.
What I am asking today is whether you think bloggers should disclose when they are referring people to some kind of affiliate program. If a blogger writes a book review and links to a store for which he is an affiliate, should he disclose that he is part of the affiliate program?
I'd be interested in your responses to this.
Why? Well, there may be several ramifications. Here is just one: In theory, a person may direct visitors to a particular store or even a particular product he would not otherwise direct people to because he knows he will receive some kind of compensation. He may direct people to a store that offers higher prices or inferior service not because this represents the best deal but because he stands to benefit. Just take a look at the number of bloggers who chose to announce that Westminster Books (which has an affiliate program) upgraded their design compared to those who announced that Monergism Books (which at that time did not have a program) had upgraded. People stood to benefit directly from one announcement but not the other.
This is not to accuse anyone of dishonesty or deliberate deception. But it is definitely something worth considering as bloggers attempt to establish some kind of code of conduct and as they seek to find their place in this new media.
So let's talk it through...
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I write books and blogs for fun while doing web design and consulting for a living. I worship and serve at 
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
Comments (24)
Tim,
I think it's a free market and it's up to each individual what he or she chooses to endorse. I don't think one should be obligated to disclose his affiliations. Folks come to your blog because they trust your heart and intentions. I'm sure it's the same for other blogs. I don't buy every book you link to, and I don't even buy every book you enthusiastically endorse. So I don't think it matters if you get a kickback or not. More power to you if your success as a blogger opens up an avenue to a book vendor that they didn't have before. If bloggers start giving zany reviews that totally miss the mark and seem out of character compared to their usual content, it won't take long before their readers will suspect some disingenuous motives, and stop reading. I think it will all come out in the wash.
If I like your blog and I plan on buying a book because you reviewed it and made me interested, the first thing I'm going to do is search for who has the lowest price and can ship it to me fastest. I'm not going to automatically use your "you can buy it here" link. The internet is about comparison shopping, right?
However, if I know you are getting a cut, and I know that your blog is a good part of my day, then I'm going to consider using your link just to cut you a buck or two for the favor. Mouths, kine, grain, all that.
So to me, announcing that it is a sponsored link is going to be a good thing, not a bad thing.
I agree with Darby. Furthermore, it's up to the companies in question if they want to start some kind of blog advertising. Companies are *paying* to have that kind of advertising. So it shouldn't suprise us if they *get* that kind of advertising. Putting up big incentives means that they will get more exposure. If Monergism wants that, then they should start that kind of program. Furthermore, it's up to consumers to shop around and get the best price for what they want. That's just called being a good steward of God's resources given to us.
I think it is important for the bloggers to be up front about their referral links. It allows the person reading to make the decision to support or not, without being used or manipulated. It also keeps the bloggers honest about their intentions. Of course, this is not to say that every post or link needs a disclaimer, but rather there should be a general principle of openness and disclosure. I was actually considering this when I made this post:
http://seminarian.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/a-note-on-referrals-and-affiliates/
This is especially true when another vendor has the same book for a better price, may even have free shipping and would actually be a better deal for the customer and yet only the site which one has an affiliate program with the blog gets mentioned. For this reason disclosure might be a good idea. For example, a certain vendor I know of currently have rock bottom prices for the book "Pierced for our Trangressions" and still has some in stock, but other vendors get mentioned by blogs like yours but they are out of stock.
I don't think it's dishonest if you do not disclose. When I buy a book - that is what I get. I can choose to buy super cheap, buy "Christian", buy according to who gives frequent flyer miles, etc., but in the end I get a book. Whether you have a link to Amazon or Monergism, I will buy based on whatever criteria I choose. If you get a kick-back or some type of compensation then good on you. It's a completely different story if you state that such and such a book is only available at XYZ site.
BTW, your recommendation is a large part of the equation in whether I decide to buy a particular book or not.
I guess I've always taken it for granted that people realize that my product links to Amazon are through my affiliate program. I agree that it's important that your readers know that you're getting a kick-back from their purchases, but I question if a disclaimer is necessary.
I appreciated affiliate links before I started my own blog just because I could get additional information on the product more quickly. If someone recommends a book I'm interested in, I think it's convenient to be able to click a link to see the price and read other reviews.
This is a very difficult issue with which I have struggled immensely.
Money makes people act differently. I know that I have decided that I can't put ads or accept requests to review books because I will lose objectivity. If I did accept them, I would always in the back of my mind consider that my motives for being positive about X are swayed by the fact that I know a few dollars will come my way. I also know that my blog will be changed because of that.
Because I have made that decision, I will be poorer financially. I also accept that I may show up lower in Google rankings because I will not have reciprocal links back to large publishers or AdSense advertisers. People will not be able to find me as easily.
The pressure to forgo relative obscurity for affiliations and ad revenue is immense. I may be a fool for spurning what those affiliations and revenue sources may bring me, but I also know that no one will sway me but the Lord. I am free to speak without fear of losing advertisers. I know that my readers can rest assured that my content reflects what God is telling me, not what my affiliates or advertisers are.
I may be poorer, but I am more free to speak and less in the grip of the fear of loss.
I guess I normally just assume that if someone has a link to an on-line store for a book (or anything else for that matter) they mention that they are getting a cut/kickback/commission/whatever-you-want-to-call-it. That being said, as a non-blogging reader of blogs I do look more favorably on a blogger who is up front and open about it, and I don't mean just a little disclosure statement in fine print at the bottom of the page.
I have gone out of my way to buy through a provided link when disclosure is handled in a very open and honest manner.
I have also gone out of my way to not buy books through the provided link when it is through amazon.com or christianbook.com as a matter of principle about who gets the benefit of my dollars.
Some blogs recommend books but instead of providing the title to the book they only provide a "click here" link to an on-line store. I avoid those links like the plague even though disclosure may be given and I would normally consider buying from that store.
Russ
Personally, the links I have on my blogs are just search boxes that clearly read "Amazon". And, as said earlier, I view affiliate links as a convenience - whether or not I choose to click-through there, or elsewhere it's a moot point. There are lots of things I call attention to online and in my personal life that are to the 'exclusion' of others alternatives - whether or not I get some form of cut.
Even though I haven't received much traffic to my blog, I thought about this heavily. I had Adsense on there for a while, but I just didn't feel right about having it on because some of the links it presented were to things I actually warn against. I decided that if I am in need of money that bad, the best thing to do is just get money from working and post what glorifies God without the fear of confusion. This eliminates the chance of someone visiting the site and then being mislead by wandering onto something that I would not recommend. If it were something that I do recommend like your links to Sproul's book, however, I would not be opposed to it.
I use Amazon affiliate links on my blog, but ONLY to products that I wholeheartedly endorse and recommend. If I'm making a reference to an Amazon book I DON'T recommend, I might do the Amazon link, but I wouldn't do it under my affiliate account.
Good food for thought.
This is what is great about WTS Books. They have the lowest prices, best selection, best service, AND the affiliate program.I love serving people by leading them to great books at great prices (which is usually far more helpful than just writing what I'm thinking each day).
I don't think the issue is so much whether or not a blogger should disclose his/her affiliate links (they are obvious once a person clicks on any given link to a book), but instead whether or not a blogger should endorse a particular product based upon receiving something in return rather than based upon a genuine willingness to recommend that particular title.
I think the misleading thing is to recommend something out of motivation for a payback rather than because it is something the person really would recommend even if there was no payback.
The responsible Christian should do his/her own homework anyway before buying, rather than simply blindly purchasing from whomever the blogger is linking to. I just don't think the disclosure thing is that big an issue. What is a big issue is knowing who one is buying from, so as to make sure one doesn't end up dealing with someone like the old Discerning Reader site.
I don't think affiliate disclosure is necessary. This is a common practice among bloggers and website authors. I do, however, want to see disclosure on "pay for post" entries or compensated endorsements.
Disclosure - no hard and fast rules.....
Motive - well, that's always something you need to examine, but I think you are fine...Your example of Westminster/Monergism is an excellent one to remind folks of their responsibility to 'delightfully' blog about what is truly delightful, rather than profitable. But this would be a guide onto one's conscience before God, rather than a rule we readers use to judge bloggers.
Representation - overall, this may be the most important issue for me. If you tell your readers this website has the cheapest prices, you would be lying if it is not true. Or if the website's banner on your site makes the wrong representation on anything, that's wrong too.
I honestly didn't know (or was only vaguely aware) that there is such a thing as affiliate links. Since we are Christians first and bloggers second, it would be nice to know that someone is getting paid (however little it might be) if I click through to purchase a book; as someone else pointed out, I might even be more encouraged to purchase the book via that route.
Just food for thought: when a newspaper or TV news program does a story on the broadcaster's/publisher's parent corporation or an affiliated company or major shareholder, the journalist explicitly mentions the relationship, in order to keep everything above board. (For all I know, this might be because of SEC regulations and has nothing to do with any ethical code of conduct, though.)
I'm wondering about the difference in Sponsor vs. Affiliate vs. Advertiser.
I thought a Sponsor was someone who paid for your service. I've wondered if "Crossway" and "Westminster" paid you for the space to Advertise on your blog. I thought that was what Advertisers did. Affiliates pay a percentage for the business that you send their way. Your heading says "Sponsors" but your lead says, "Advertise Here".
I don't believe there is a moral dilemma when it comes to disclosure. I let people know if a company I advertise for is an affiliate of mine or not. I'm hoping that they will do me the favor of purchasing the product though my link but they are not morally obligated to do so.
Take this for example. On my guitar site I've added a new affiliate and I've sent nearly 1,000 visitors their way but I've only earned commissions on two sales. I would be willing to bet (figure of speech) that more than two of the one thousand purchased the product but they returned to the site at a later time and through a different or direct link.
I assume that any ads on the site or links from the site are to affiliate programs. Just like the ads that may be on the site bring in some money for the site owner. I see nothing wrong with it at all. If you're the person that brings a book/product to my attention I'm happy to buy from the link you give -if it's the lowest price of course ; )
Just mark any link as an affiliate link. People can then decide for themselves.
Disclosure is important for the sake of integrity and honesty, but the only time disclosure is necessary is in those instances where a product is being reviewed and/or endorsed that the blogger stands to financially profit from the sale of the product.
When I reviewed movies for a daily newspaper, the publishing company paid for our ticket: we were not allowed to accept free admission, popcorn, or any other gratuity. This at least maintained a semblance of not being a shill for the movie.
When I was previously reviewing books on my blog and elsewhere, the book was provided in galley form with the promise of a bound edition when the book was released. I never liked this arrangement because (a) it might have caused me to like a book slightly more than I would have, and (b) the readers still might have a question in their mind about my objectivity - although some of my negative reviews did not raise any doubts.
At the same time, it is important to remember that our profit from affiliate links comes not because of the book but because of the vendor. If I were to review a book and provide a link, I would be financially affiliated not with the book but only with the vendor, i.e., Amazon, CBD, Westminster, etc. That does make a difference, does it not?
Great question, Tim!
I'd never really considered the implications of this before (and don't really have time to blog regularly, so this is of minimal impact to me anyway, at least at the moment), but it seems to me that as Scripture commands us to flee even "the appearance of impropriety," we ought to be up front about this from the get-go...maybe a statement or a disclaimer that certain links do indeed go to affiliated programs in the links section of a blog, for example.
I don't think it's ethically *necessary* to disclose that a link is an affiliate link. It may be *beneficial*, in that your readers may *want* to support you by using them.
But I was linking to Amazon pages (for example) long before I ever participated in their affiliate program. It's useful, to my (few) readers and to me. So why not use affiliate links when I do it?
I think if we are participating in affiliate programs, it is best that we disclose it. Then people can do what they want with the information. The more savvy blog readers will figure it out anyways, but there are many blog readers who have no idea that affiliate programs exist or that someone making a recommendation could actually profit from their purchase through a link.
Although I do not participate in any affiliate programs myself, when I mention a book on my blog I usually provide a link to CBD (if they have it) or to Amazon. I do this as a courtesy to readers who may want to find out more information about the book.
I like the fact that I don't make any money from links on my blog. For me it keeps things simpler, and I never have to second guess my motives for posting or linking to something. This is also one of the reasons why as a pastor I do not accept extra fees for ministerial services like weddings, funerals, counseling, etc. I like being able to minister freely in these situations without the complicating factor of, "Am I doing this partly for the money?"
Here in the UK there's a large website called MoneySavingExpert.com. It's entirely funded by affiliate links, which in the finance sector are generous. But prominently linked on every page is the site's funding policy. The relevant part for this discussion is: The MoneySaving articles are written, then totally separately, paid links are looked for. If no paying link is available, absolutely nothing in the article changes. Nothing. Ever. If the best is the best and doesn't pay, it stays the best. The link used is simply a ‘non-affiliated' i.e. non-paying link. Financial considerations do not impact articles.
Then, every link that earns money has an * next to it, so there's complete disclosure. Plus, at the bottom of every page, a non-affiliate version of every link is listed, so that those who object to affiliate links can still easily click through to the sites.
This may be overkill, but Martin Lewis who runs the site has built a huge amount of trust, and actually a not-incosiderable amount of money. He's not a Christian, but believes this ethical stance is important. Surely we should do likewise.