Of Sponsorships and Freebies

Sponsorship really is a very tricky business. Every time a corporate entity tries to sponsor a smaller entity, the communities participating or monitoring either entity will be up in arms. The problem is the somewhat incorrect perception people have that if you are sponsoring someone or give them a freebie, from your perspective that you are trying to influence their opinion, and from the receiver's perspective that they have "sold out" and become shills.

We saw the whole blogosphere erupt when Microsoft gave out free Vista-enabled laptops to bloggers. Om Malik called it blogger Kryptonite, Jason Calacanis simply called it a bribe, and many bloggers just sent the laptops back to Redmond. People interpreted the move as Microsoft trying to bribe bloggers to write positively about Vista, and the fact that it was Microsoft and many technologically aware (in the media) have an irrational hate for Microsoft didn't help at all. The question we have to ask ourselves is "...is it ethical for the bloggers to accept [such gifts] and how will it impact their Microsoft coverage in the future?"

A few somewhat similar example that involves another company that everyone loves to hate: If you ever hear the Podcast This Week in Tech you know that their bandwidth is provided completely free of cost by AOL, and therefore Leo Laporte constantly finds himself mentioning to his listeners how the free bandwidth provision, in the absence of which his whole network would not be able to survive, does not prevent him from discussing negative news about AOL.

Again, I find myself thinking that as long as it doesn't influence your opinion at all (meaning if you hate the gift, you blog your hate), and as long as you make fair disclosure about getting the gift (some people forget), there shouldn't be a problem at all.

Digg.com came under a lot of scrutiny a little while back because the Digg community purportedly found evidence that Digg was censoring negative articles about GoDaddy.com, their main sponsor.

If you have heard Diggnation enough, you may have heard Kevin talk about how the fact that they are sometimes sponsored by Microsoft Zune doesn't force them to put the product in a positive light, and the same goes for any other product that sponsors their Podcast. That said, it still doesn't prevent from the community from irrationally hating you for accepting a gift, even if it is intangible, and is highly unlikely to alter your opinion about a product. Have a look at the community's response to Virgin America's sponsorship of the latest episode of Diggnation:

Please, there has already been an "article" (a direct link to a VA page that asks for your Digg username and newsletter signup) on the Diggnation/VA advertising alliance on the front page today, let's not encourage this use of Digg as a blatant commercial advertising outlet no matter who is using it for that purpose. Buried, bury it to protest what seems to be the future of Digg, gratuitous advertising in the name of the site.

What a ***** whore-out. Thanks for this guys. Diggnation is becoming a big commercial for whoever pays the whore bills? Kevin Rose is such a ***** camera whore.

So there is a problem, and people do throw fits, you just need to make certain to the majority that you aren't compromising your integrity, and let the insane (and incidentally vocal) minority harp on.

Enjoy the post? Here are some more that may interest you.

Chip Griffin: Pardon the Disruption, February 17, 2007: “More on the Ethics of Freebies in the Blogosphere” — Muhammed Saleem has a good discussion of "sponsorships and freebies" and the ethics of it all in the blogosphere. An excerpt: Again, I find myself thinking that as long as it doesn't influence your opinion at all (meaning if you

Dan, February 16, 2007

How is this different than companies giving out free software and products for reviewers? In the review case everyone knows that they got the product free so they would review it, does that color their review?

We want everyone to say nice things about our new Vista WPF app NoteScraps, but I would hate to get slammed for giving out review copies.

NoteScraps

Brian Clark, February 16, 2007

How did Nike become the biggest show brand on the planet?

By getting athletes to wear their shoes. Which they accomplished by paying those athletes tons of money.

Due to the people that blaze the trail online being somewhat anti-commercial, what's perfectly fine offline gets attacked online. Until the segment goes mainstream of course (i.e. ads on blogs, which used to be a heinous crime), and then everything is fine.

The people drawing all the hatred today are pioneers who are suffering the arrows, but could become giant players in a few short years.

HMTKSteve, February 17, 2007

So, does this mean the biggest "spammers" on Digg are Alex and Kevin?

Zach Katkin, February 17, 2007

I think much of the blogosphere are ethical and the laptops, if accepted, would not silence criticism or cause undo praise.

Daniel R, February 20, 2007

The Digg community has always been a rough place, where any commercialism gets slammed. I've written about this particular part of the Digg crowd, labeling them as the "OMT-WFTCrowd":

"Indeed, there are issues, but these issues does not warrant the Digg.com headline "Microsoft bribing with free high-spec laptops" nor the byline "What The Fuck". But this is social media, where sensationalist bloggers and writers, what I dub the ��OMG WTF" crowd, have a higher say than most online PR folks on a good day."

Marketers and PR folks need to be careful on approaching social media sites like Digg, following full disclosure and strong execution, to minimize the OMG-WTF crowd while also acknowledging that while you can try to be as fair as possible, there will always be critics.