![]() ![]() That said I’m always very grateful when care and consideration goes into sharing products/experiences with me. I ask publicity folk to observe the messaging on my blog, only send appropriate products and to check with me first before wasting stamps, carbon miles, packaging, the postman’s time etc. I’m vocal about my anti-consumption and anti-wastage beliefs. In many cases I am sent a product/service for free after I’ve paid for it myself and reviewed it… by way of thank you. I mention if this is the case in the post/mention. I am often sent products, or invited to experience services. However, from time to time I will receive a product/service for free. From time to time a product/service is not appropriate for my personal consumption, but I might mention it if it can benefit my readers (eg: a product for kids). Most of the time I will share my own experience. My recommendations are genuineĪll recommendations and reviews across all my channels (blogs and social media) are my own, unless specified clearly at the top of a post/mention (eg: from time to time someone else might write the review). Of course it might change and I’ll be sure to alert you all if it does. ![]() To these ends I’ll outline my current position. I’m aware of the responsibility this entails. ![]() I’m effectively endorsing the moisturiser in a much more potent way than if my blog was an aggregated news site and some anonymous writer posted the moisturiser mention. So when I mention a certain type of moisturiser on my site, both my brand and myself are implicated (and, yes, I feel totally douchy calling myself a “brand”…but let’s move on). We’re talking about me my blog pivots around me as a person. ![]() What I mean is this: when we talk about my blog, we’re not talking about an abstract brand, like Tim Tams. I devote all my energies to servicing this site and its related entities and I have to earn an income from it. In part because, as I say, your shit will stink very quickly if you don’t. And so I’m presented with a true opportunity: to define them for myself. I don’t have a structure above me that dictates cash-for-comment or advertorial parameters. Now, firmly ensconced in new media, I’m seeing the importance of taking a stance on all this and owning the situation in a fitting way. I’ve seen both sides of the old media equation and know which side I prefer to stand on. Radio is much the same (observe various cash-for-comment scandals over the years). I then moved into the world of magazines, as editor of Cosmopolitan, where such boundaries are flouted in truly horrific ways. Newspapers tend to have policies in place dictating that journos can’t accept “gifts” over a certain amount and must disclose where, say, a travel trip is paid for by a third party. At newspapers, you develop a visceral fear of being found out on ABC’s Media Watch. I come from an old media newspaper background where the divide between “church and state” is instilled during our cadetship training. Play dirty and your stink wafts.īut I feel it’s a good time to spell things out as media – both old and new – are going through lots of changes and folk are getting caught out (note the Kangaroo Island social media brouhaha). And if you start to get sneaky and greedy and grimy, everyone will smell it immediately. That’s the thing about operating online: like attracts like. Please note: This post was updated a little FebruImage by jacksondickie I’ve been operating with a policy of “as much transparency as possible” and have trusted that only authentic opportunities and partnerships would come my way, and that readers would know my position just from joining me on my journey. It’s important I explain clearly my blog monetising position. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |