Update: During the transition from WordPress to Squarespace (06.08.09), the post comments were lost for this post. If you commented before the transition, I've included them in one huge comment at the bottom of this post. Apologies for the inconvenience for you all. Thanks for your understanding. Sometimes transitions have glitches.

Mainstream media is mostly about money, so they reveal every time they have a financial conflict of interest. But bloggers are more about influence than money. So they have conflict of interest all over their blog, with every post. For example, every time you link to someone, you are hoping for some sort of acknowledgment, or some sort of good karma. Do you need to acknowledge that so as to protect your readers? Of course not. -Penelope Trunk, Brazen Careerist

Two weeks ago I was a guest panelist at Girls Night Out on Twitter. The conversation centered around working for brands. Earlier that day I had interviewed Stephanie Precourt about the article in BusinessWeek for which her blog was highlighted. More conversation is now centering around whether or not those of us being paid to blog should disclose. There are arguments for and against.

Today, IZEA, formerly PayPerPost, announced its plans to pay people to tweet about brands. In Mashable's coverage of the announcement, the comments ask if Twitter can remain "pure" with folks being paid to tweet. I contend that Twitter has never been, nor will it be, "pure" when it comes to brands. Whether you're cognizant or not of the fact that you're representing a brand, you are. All the time. Even when you talk about other people you think people should follow on Twitter, you're giving them an endorsement. Whether it's person to person, person to product or person to service, you are paying attention and asking others to pay attention to something.

Guilty By Association?

The day after that #gno I was heading out the door to SeaWorld on the same trip that Julia Allison got righteously beat up for "shilling" for on Gawker. I think Gawker and Valleywag have a thing for (beating up on) Julia and I know she can take care of herself. But I was there, in the photos. People mentioned me in the comments. I sat at the cafe shaking my head. Am I now shilling, too? Guilty by association, one of my friends emailed me, with a link to the articles. But that's weird. I don't feel guilty. I don't feel like I owe my readers an apology because I disclosed that Busch Entertainment was footing the bill. I didn't get a check out of the deal (to some people's horror - I was confronted about the fact at #gno) but felt that the experience was worth the time invested. I had fun. It was vacation-like. I got to meet people like Steve and Tara. Julia was apparently paid cash to go on the trip. That's the issue Gawker took umbrage with.

The Hybrid

So, I kept digging. Externally, internally. Is it ok to get paid to post? Is it ok to get free things in exchange for a review of a product? Is a hybrid ok? Should I take cash only? I've conducted countless off-the-cuff interviews. There's no conclusive, one-size-fits-all answer. The FTC is probably about to find that out, too, if they haven't already. In the interview with Stephanie Precourt I asked:

Q: When we see a ball player, a country music singer or actress wearing this brand of sunglasses or that brand of shirt because they were paid X number of dollars to wear it (or given it for free), do you feel we’re being marketed to or manipulated? Do you think they should say, during their interview at the Grammy’s reception, “by the way, ———– paid me ———– to wear this dress?” Is there any difference in this situation than for us as social media consumer/producers?

Stephanie: I feel the same way sometimes, but would not want to suggest I am some kind of celebrity. If a celebrity I think is fashionable is wearing something that I like, I don’t care if they paid for it or it was given to them. If they chose to wear it, then I think that is enough influence. I think my readers know me well enough that if I choose to talk about something, it’s because I actually think it’s cool and it’s not only because I got it for free. It’s something I will allow in my life or to reflect on me no matter who paid for it.

I think it will get really old if I have to post a picture of my baby and say: I bought this outfit for her with my own money! But I think it’s honest, and a plug for the company, if I was sent something she is wearing and in the post I mention that. That’s just how I feel and want to continue to be honest. In the social media/blogging setting I think we’re going to have to be up front about what is sponsored or given to us at all times in order for our other words to be taken seriously by our peers. And vice versa.

Enter Penelope Trunk

The room was riled up as the panel talk drew to a close. I was near the front of the room and had seen Penelope Trunk honest, vocal...some may say offensive. This was my first BlogHer, 2007. Chicago. Watching Penelope speak her mind to a packed room, I left inspired rather than pissed. I seemed to be one of few willing to admit a shot to the arm of honesty felt good. About a week after my interview with Stephanie, Penelope Trunk wrote: Which means that the arcane conflict of interest rules are to protect the newspaper, not the readers. And this, by the way, is why newspapers are going down: because they are more about themselves, and their hierarchies, and rules and structures, than they are about what their readers want. Readers should not care about the business dealings of the writers or their publishers. Readers just want good content. [emphasis mine]

The Wallet

I carry a wallet around town. I got it for free and love it. When someone asks me about it (it happens frequently) I say that I know the guy who thought it up, drew up plans for it, created it at the factory and now has this one tiny product out in the world. It's a creative triumph. I don't mention that I got it for free. I just tell them the story behind it. And here's the rub with pay-per-post. It's not that I think I should/shouldn't disclose (even though I usually do on my blog but don't in person - why should I differentiate?). I think that when a blogger gets free stuff, but isn't paid for her consulting time, she's getting "stuff" to craft a story. If I craft a story around a brand, it's worth something. In the case of the wallet, a woman was climbing a mountain once. She fell. When she came out of shock she realized her wallet had been shattered. Demolished. It had been in a bag she was wearing around her waist. It was underneath her tailbone. And you know what? It may have saved her from paralysis. Who knows. But I'll bet you can't say that about your wallet.

The Power of Story

You see that story? Now you want in. You want to know more about the company. You want to hear more about the woman who fell. Her background, maybe. How long has she been climbing? What is the wallet made out of that it absorbed her fall? The power of story is in its ability to keep you asking questions. Last night as I left Pixar's latest film, Up, having watched it for the second time (it's not that much different in 3D, I don't think), I wanted to know what happens next. That's the power of story. That's worth more than a few hundred dollars a post. Or a hundred dollars a tweet.

A powerful tagline, like a heartbeat, can last for years.

And what's the power of Twitter, really? You can plant the seed of a story. I don't accept cash to blog or tweet yet. Because I think the value in the power of story I can tell is worth more than a few hundred dollars a post. The story I tell can be retold by the company itself, in its marketing materials. It can be retweeted. Its worth isn't readily quantifiable.

Define "Paid" The question isn't "should we be paid to blog/tweet/spread the word about a company we love." The question isn't even "how do we know they really love or even like the company" for which they are evangelizing. The question should be, "what is the value of the advice I give, the consulting I do, the post I write and the tweets I share." That's a harder question to ask. And I don't think the answer is in any of the blog posts I've read. It's definitely not in the comments section. You're going to find that answer for yourself by researching what the market is offering, what your time/energy resources allow, what you determine is the value of your storytelling. And whether or not your responsibility to the brand includes crafting a story. (One reason I haven't decided to go with IZEA is that I don't want to craft a story in a vacuum for your company. I would prefer to do consulting, get to know you, become professional friends with you, as a client, before crafting a story.)

Back to the wallet. I contacted Mike, the friend who owns the wallet company. Based on the story of his customer who fell, I told him he should change his tagline. To Jimi. It'll save your ass.

Your Storyteller Value The final question is this. Is the stuff you're getting for free worth the story you're telling? And if not, can you put a price on it that will make it worth your while to share the story? Determine the value of your storytelling. And make the decision for yourself. We're all being paid to tell our stories. If the payment is a good feeling at someone responding with laughter to your story - and that's enough for you - then be aware of that. If you like being paid attention to - and that's sufficient - know that. I'm going to agree with Penelope Trunk that readers don't need to know you were paid to write a post. I think the knowing you need to focus on is knowing your worth as a storyteller.

It's a tougher, but far more important, question that you need to answer for yourself.