BlogCouncil Suggestion: Blogwide Link to Disclosure Policy

I provided a suggestion for the BlogCouncil open-source disclosure guidelines: link DPs from corp/agency/blogger sites. Somehow that was missing from the guidelines, but is a natural addition.

It looks like Andy doesn't realize our interests are aligned on this topic, but they are. Hopefully, my follow-up comment helps make that more clear:

"Andy: My comment is about DisclosurePolicy.org and DPs in general. I disclosed in-comment my affiliation with DisclosurePolicy.org and sig-linked to DisclosurePolicy.org. DP.org clearly states its affiliation with PPP, the company that originated the concept of Disclosure Policies almost 2 years ago.

I shared with you then the value of Disclosure Policies and I'm excited by BlogCouncil's draft guidelines. You said this is an open-source effort so I'm sharing experience from being in the trenches on this topic. Unless you encourage corporations and bloggers to communicate their Disclosure Policies sitewide with a "Disclosure Policy" link, the content of the policies can shift without readers realizing it. It's important for a reader to know what to expect from the site they visit and linking a DP does that. That's all my comment above was trying to contribute: 1) corp/agency, link your own Disclosure Policy and 2) encourage bloggers you engage to do the same.

Linking your DP sitewide is something I see BlogCouncil has adopted and I commend you. The guidelines will go further to maximize transparency if you incorporate this suggestion for others to follow that lead."

UPDATE 07-29: I'm not sure what happened, but it looks like my suggestion above left BlogCouncil moderation, but never published in their open-source "call for comments" section. Maybe Trackback is the better vehicle...I'll give it a try.

BlogCouncil Throws Their Support Behind Disclosure Policies

It looks like Andy Sernovitz may have buried the hatchet regarding Disclosure Policies. BlogCouncil, the organization run by Andy and his GasPedal company, has published their own Disclosure Policy online and provided guidelines for corporate Disclosure Policies. Great work Andy!

Check them out and comment if you have suggestions -- they welcome improvements on these draft guidelines. I've offered to help their efforts however possible.

The momentum grows...just as Privacy Policies are a cornerstone to protecting consumer data, Disclosure Policies offer a safer, more transparent online world for all of us going forward...

Calacanis Starts to See the Bigger Picture Behind Disclosure Policies

Jason Calacanis posted about affiliate links and the need for disclosure. That's just one of the many uses for Disclosure Policies.

Allen Stern carried Jason's thinking further to include employees who link to their company websites. Again, a perfect use for Disclosure Policies.

The key is aligning author and reader expectations when they visit a property. The more people think about disclosure of conflicts of interest, the more they realize a broad, flexible framework like Disclosure Policies is the way to go. The same evolution of thought happened with Privacy Policies. Hopefully, this evolution will proceed quicker -- before the government tries to regulate.

If you are an affiliate or employee who links to their company, get yourself a Disclosure Policy before it's too late...

The Disclosure Debates, Blow-by-Blow: ShoeMoney, SEOmoz (and Andy)

ShoeMoney (Jeremy Schoemaker) and SEOmoz (Rand Fishkin) kicked off a great debate on Disclosure the last couple weeks, largely focused on affiliate links, but with implications for any blogger who covers a topic or provides a link for cash or non-cash benefit.

ShoeMoney kicked if off with Full Disclosure - Assume The Position.

Which prompted SEOmoz to respond with The Vast Ocean Between Shoemoney & SEOmoz and Why You Should Be Able To Trust Blog Links.

Prompting a showdown here SEOmoz vs. ShoeMoney.

An audio debate here Debating Blogging Disclosure With Rand Fishkin On Net Income.

And a (w)rap up here Blogging Disclosure Rap Up where there was a guest appearance by Andy (Beard, not Sernovitz) providing his take on the debate/debacle with Blogging Full Disclosure Debacle - Grow Some Brass Ones.

This series of posts is definitely worth a read for every blogger.

For some background on the variety of reasons bloggers write/link, Andy's post Top 32 Forms of Linking Payola is an eye-opener on the spectrum of incentives bloggers face/embrace every day.

A Plug(-in) for Disclosure Policies

Andy Beard has done some good work over at http://disclosurepolicyplugin.com/, creating a WordPress plugin for DPs. He even created a streamlined version as Feedburner Disclosure Feedflare. The ability for disclosures to be keyword-specific (with auto-matching) is pretty interesting. Nice job Andy!

Is Mea Culpa the Default Disclosure Policy?

Amit over at Digital Inspiration had a nice wrap-up post on the elite bloggers who took Microsoft Ferrari Laptops pre-loaded with Vista. Disclosure of the $2000 blogola (er, review machine) wasn't required: Some disclosed, some didn't. Some think it's fine, some think it's not.

After the flare-up and Microsoft/Edelman (you know, the guys on probation by WOMMA) PR clean-up, some bloggers will keep the free laptop, some will send it back, some will donate it and one will re-gift to his wife (nice). Diverse bloggers, diverse disclosure approaches, diverse conflict resolution -- what's a reader to do?

Given that most of these bloggers don't have linked Disclosure Policies on every page, how would readers know what to expect? Without a Disclosure Policy, elites decide on a case-by-case basis how to diffuse any negative reaction. Is that sufficient or sustainable?

If those bloggers had Disclosure Policies that detailed their affiliations, what they do with free products and how they disclose, then audiences would know what to expect of their trusted blog sources. Without a Disclosure Policy framework, the emerging conflicts standard for the elites sounds like mea culpa...

Taking DPs to the Next Level

Although we're just starting here at DP.org to build adoption by bloggers and expectations by audiences, some folks are already thinking about ways to take Disclosure Policies even further. Nick Wilson, co-founder of Performancing.com, sees the potential of some XML-based Disclosure Policy standards similar to P3P -- allowing browsers to alert users when a Disclosure Policy is present and provide a built-in button for viewing. There are also ways this builds flexibility across media types/players.

As I've said many times, transparency is bigger than affiliate links, sponsored posts or non-cash influence buying and I like the scope of Nick's thinking. It all starts with a basic Disclosure Policy and links from every page -- we can build from there.

You can hear Nick's Disclosure Policy thoughts towards the end of his podcast here (including some worthwhile SiteMaps coverage). Nick also mentioned he'll be unveiling his own Disclosure Policy soon. His adoption sets a great example for all Performancing members and probloggers.

Tags: DisclosurePolicy, Disclosure Policy, performancing, problogger, nick wilson, sitemaps

WOMMA Marketer Guideline Comments from a Blogger/Audience Perspective

WOMMA has called for comments on their latest WOM marketer guidelines and I provided the following. They say it takes 24 hours for comments to post so mine should appear tomorrow. Given that WOMMA is directed at marketers (members include BzzAgent, Edelman, Amway and others), I'd encourage bloggers and audiences to cruise over and comment to make sure all sides have a voice in the result. Comments will not be accepted after November 14, 2006 so get moving -- at the end of the day, it's your blogs and influence they're after...

[my comment]

As a venture investor in various technology companies involved in online marketing and using online marketing, I think these guidelines are a great step in the right direction. I'm also one of the contributors at http://www.DisclosurePolicy.org/, trying to provide mirrored guidance to bloggers and a Disclosure Policy framework to help audiences learn the disclosure practices of the bloggers they read. This problem requires a match of marketer, blogger and audience expectations. I've provided some WOMMA marketer guideline-specific comments/questions below:

---
Overall comment:
[DR] Are these guidelines only for blogs, or do they apply to podcasts, vlogs, photo sharing, social networks etc.? If all of consumer generated media, then it's probably worth reviewing the guidelines with other media in mind.
[DR] How do these guidelines apply for offline marketing that mirrors online (e.g. BzzAgents)? You could probably replace "blogger" in each guideline with "affiliate marketer" to address offline/online.

1. I will always be truthful and will never knowingly relay false information. I will never ask someone else to deceive bloggers for me.
[DR] Great!

2. I will fully disclose who I am and who I work for (my identity and affiliations) from the very first encounter when communicating with bloggers or commenting on blogs.
[DR] Does linking to your company in the siglink of a comment (so audiences can always click for context) satisfy this requirement? Does this apply for every encounter or just the first (because comment discussions can spread across posts sometimes)? Does this apply to every blogger/blog or only those a marketer is trying to partner with?

3. I will never take action contrary to the boundaries set by bloggers. I will respect all community guidelines regarding posting messages and comments.
[DR] Given that guidelines #8-#10 leave room for various methods of disclosure, who controls the method (blog-wide, post-specific, in-post, sidebar, sentence, link to sponsor, video?, audio?, photos?). Because of the diversity of consumer generated media, this guideline (#3) seems to indicate that bloggers control the exact method, so long as the marketer can satisfy #8-#10. Is that correct?

4. I will never ask bloggers to lie for me.
[DR] Great!

5. I will use extreme care when communicating with minors or blogs intended to be read by minors.
[DR] It's not clear what "extreme care" means. How can a marketer know they have met this standard?

6. I will not manipulate advertising or affiliate programs to impact blogger income.
[DR] What is meant by "manipulate" given that advertising on a blog "impacts blogger income"? Is this directed at click-fraud -- so the focus is discouraging fraudulent behavior?

7. I will not use automated systems for posting comments or distributing information.
[DR] What is meant by "automated systems"? Is an affiliate program an "automated system", or AdSense or email marketing -- they all automate distributing information?

8. I understand that compensating bloggers may give the appearance of a conflict of interest, and I will therefore fully disclose any and all compensation or incentives.
[DR] Does this include ALL cash and non-cash compensation such as exclusive press releases, free passes, reciprocal marketing etc.? Presumably this includes affiliate programs since they incentive bloggers to write content that drives clicks/purchases -- does this apply to affiliate network terms (e.g. LinkShare) as well as brand-specific programs (e.g. Amazon)? Does it say "I [marketer] will disclose" on purpose, instead of "I will require blogger to disclose" -- what would it mean for the marketer to disclose if the blogger is not required (and how would requiring comport with #3)? Does this say that the exact type and magnitude of affiliate compensation must be disclosed? Is it relevant to readers (novice & pro) that affiliate linking bloggers disclose they get compensated specifically for convincing readers to click and purchase the product via an affiliate link? Is there a spectrum across personal sites, professional sites, journalistic sites and commercial sites where disclosure requirements differ?

9. I understand that if I send bloggers products for review, they are not obligated to comment on them. Bloggers can return products at their own discretion.
[DR] Does this say that sending product for review with a specific requirement of coverage is a violation of these guidelines? The language "I understand" sounds like hand-waving instead of an actual guideline.

10. If bloggers write about products I send them, I will proactively ask them to disclose the products’ source.
[DR] What does "I will proactively" mean if a marketer asks a blogger to disclose and they don't -- is that a violation of these guidelines? If so, how would that fit with #3 which clarifies that bloggers own the policies of their blogs. Does this guideline require that bloggers describe the value of the gift and what will happen to it after review? Does this guideline any specific method of disclosure or is that left up to guideline #3?
---

The more clarity WOMMA can provide to marketers on these guidelines, the more I can match with DisclosurePolicy.org's message for bloggers and audiences -- providing full circle awareness. I'd be happy to provide context on any of my questions above -- just call/email. Keep up the great work!

[/my comment]