The Old Advertising Merry Go Round
Every handful of months, I get into a debate with myself, that eventually spills out into my personal advisory board. The debate is always the same: my blog gets lots of visitors, and it’s really decently rated. I could sell a sponsorship that would have value to the sponsor, and that would be beneficial to me (I have this fantasy of a special account for flying to conferences, paid strictly by sponsor ads). Because I’m always only thinking about one single sponsor, classy-like, the way Robert Scoble does it, I figure it won’t be too big a deal.
My advisory board always gives me good counsel. It splits every time on the difference between perceptions (”do I become a number if you start selling me as one?”) and opportunity (”why not? You do great stuff here.”) I’m grateful for all the perspectives, and I take each of them deeply to heart.
And just as I was fairly sure I was going to tip towards the side of trying out a sponsor ad for a few months as a trial, it comes up in conversation elsewhere.
Allen Stern wrote about it here, but gets an earful here on FriendFeed.
Of the comments that drew my attention, Dave Winer said something that resonated with me. Here’s the snip:
“i only click on ads thst interest me and only when i have the time. whcih means that i never click on ads on what you call content. never seen one that interests me and i’m generally not shopping when reading blogs.”
So, there I am. I’ve got a blog that puts out content that has nothing to do with products or services directly, and what it does, the last thing I want is for you to worry that there’s an unseen payoff.
I don’t want dyou to shop while you’re reading and participating here. If I do a project like that, I’ll do it elsewhere. That’s the ruling for now. Okay?
That said, you’re ad-free (except for the RSS ad at the bottom of each post).
What do you think about all that?
These posts are made for sharing. Feel free to repost all or portions of this (as long as it’s not for profit). If you do post it, please make sure you kindly link back to [chrisbrogan.com] and give me credit. Thanks!
Photo credit, katmere
Related articles by Zemanta
- Dave Winer for CTO of the United States
- FriendFeed: The Blogger’s New Best Friend and Marketing Tool?
- TechCrunch slams Scoble for adding ads [Online Advertising]
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=7824aa57-a245-445c-a4f0-c0ba8af970fe)
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to receive future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Hi Chris. Thanks for the honesty and transparency on this subject. Your point about how people generally aren’t shopping when they’re reading blogs rings true for me, but it once again brings up the question of how to monetize blog traffic. Or perhaps, it’s simply a question of subject matter and not medium (ie blog). Thoughts?
Oh, y’know. He’s got that one big fat bling ad in the corner, that’s what I mean. Not like… 2,484,970 ads like other sites.
@Jim - well thanks. I dunno. I don’t think all blogs should be ad free. I think it’s context. Chris Penn will show up any moment and call all my sidebar widgets and proclaimations ads. He’s right. But then, they’re the ads that don’t pay me cash directly.
My stance on ads is softening, but will I play that out here, at [chrisbrogan.com] ? Not sure.
Thanks for being real and sharing as you try to figure this out.
I’m definitely on the side of people who don’t click on adds when reading blogs. I really don’t click on adds at all. If I want to go shopping i know what I’m looking for and generally have a good idea of what sites I’m going to go looking for the product/service on.
All that said, i don’t have my own blog … so I’ve not had to battle this one out yet. I’m sure it’s tough when you know you could be making money. These are just my thoughts as a person who enjoys reading good, thought provoking & useful, content.
I wouldn’t be offended if you put ads on your site, Chris. People can either click on them or not as they choose. I’m sure any sponsor you picked would have information that I might want to know about. Plus, I think everyone deserves to be compensated in some way for their creative work. That’s how I make my living. I don’t expect others to give it away for free. Intellectual property has a value. If you aren’t charging a subscription fee, advertising is a good alternative for proper compensation. You have my support.
is there a difference, everyone beside Chris, between having ads and counting clicks…and having a sponsor that may not get clicks but is paying for exposure? I’m not sure I can describe the difference, and I’m not sure that anyone would do that kind of sponsorship, but maybe that is a way to think about it…particularly on a blog like this that does have thoughtful traffic.
I’d have to agree with Dave Winer - generally, when I’m reading blogs, I’m not even looking at the ads, let alone thinking of clicking them. With blogs, I’m all about the content and the author, rather than any ads.
Hey Chris, I appreciate your making your thought process an open book. I wouldn’t be offended if you placed ads on your site, but I do see how it is more touchy for you especially. You have such an active audience and your readers also provide so much content in the comment section, I can see how this could be perceived badly. What you really need is a separate blog, where you just SHOUT and don’t allow any comments - there you could advertise with impunity :)
I’d say take an ad, but not just from the highest bidder. Whomever your advertisers are should meet a minimum level of credibility.
I agree with jon. It depend on what kind of sponsor you would get on board with your site. Ad’s for selling is just one part of advertising, product and brand placement is another. If there is company that wants to be related to your “brand” then it don’t necessary mean immediate sales, but building their own brand with your audience.
I agree on the “sales ad’s”, most of us (readers) rarely click on ad’s thinking we are now going to buy what’s offered. However I think that also depend on what the blog is about. Like few of my friend have mobile tech oriented blogs where they do deep reviews on hardware, it’s only natural there to have “sales ads” for places you could buy such a device.
There was a great question about this ad subject in LinkedIn where I also did a post to my blog about my own answer.
http://ratecards.net/blog/2008/08/26/online-ads-versus-other-media-ads/
Hi Chris. I mentioned your decision in a comment on Nick O’Neill’s post “The State of Social Advertising” (http://www.socialtimes.com/2008/08/the-state-of-social-advertising/?disqus_reply=1868038#comment-1868038). I think it’s the right one. It shows respect to the advertiser and the reader.
Interesting discussion, Chris. Makes me laugh, I was following an odd thread off MSN about why more women were becoming terrorists and in the middle of the page was an Obama ad. While I’m not entering a political discussion here, it made me pause and question, is this the place he wants his ad to be? Anyway, you’ve got a great following and influence, who needs ads? Good choice, helps people focus on your thoughts and less on the dancing whatever in the right corner of the screen.
I understand what Winer is saying and why some who have commented here think you have made the right choice. I have to admit that while I am not shopping when reading blogs, most of my impulse purchases end up happening then. Everything from fashion to restaurants to gadgets to random items. I love the people I read and the content they provide me, whatever their niche, and could never resent them for trying to monetize what they have to offer. Even a blogger has to eat. If I can help them by stopping for one minute and looking over ads to see whether there’s anything interesting there, I will.
Get sponsored! You add so much value to your readers and there is no reason you shouldn’t benefit in return. But you’re right, do the single sponsor. Offset the expenses you incur in conferences, etc. where you ultimately are able to bring even more value to the reader.
I’m conflicted. I appreciated what you do here and I don’t think you should have to do it for free. As a visitor it doesn’t make a difference to me whether or not there is advertising on your blog (I don’t think it compromises your integrity). However the level of engagement that I will have with the advertising aside from branding will be minimal.
I think ads are fine when in context and providing they don’t interfere with your message. You’re providing useful info. and you deserve to be compensated.
The trouble with the web is that so many people are clamouring for attention and the ‘give it away for free’ culture is the lowest level attractor there is (unless you actually pay people to read your stuff!) which means that we’re all expected to be ad free in order to look bona-fide, genuine and honest.
WEB2 has forged a new look and a friendlier way of presenting information to people (amongst other things) which has meant that we all expect information to be given freely. The trouble is, most of us need to earn a crust, so unless you’re a philanthropic rich guy, I say don’t be afraid to allow ads on your blog.
Your blog is a good one, I really don’t think you’ll lose readers because of a few well placed and content targeted ads :-)
Leave a comment
FriendFeed had this many likes and comments: hide
I think you are making the correct choice, 100%.