While there are bound to be people who may (still) consider PayPerPost to be lacking intelligence and a practitioner of the dark arts, I do suppose it’s about time we move on, knowing there’s absolutely nothing that can be done to stop bloggers from using paid review services.
Blogging
Unless they choose to not participate, of course. In this case, it would all boil down to a matter of choice. And often the choices made reflects the quality of the reviews.
But why? While most of it has to do with the comprehensiveness of a review and the efforts that bloggers commit to research before documenting their objective opinions and findings, the lesser known but equally vital factor that most of us have left out lies with the companies offering these review services to bloggers.
As of now, ReviewMe and PayPerPost appears to be the most popular. During my time spent online, I’ve read quite a handful of reviews written by bloggers who are publishers with either 1 of the 2 companies and found a lack of quality from the ones from PayPerPost. It almost always appear to be too simplifiled and lacklustre. Reviews written by publishers of ReviewMe however are always a notch up.
I could be generalizing here but as mentioned earlier, this is merely based on my observation from the reviews that I’ve come across. I attribute it to 2 factors.
1. Ease of entry as a reviewer.
2. Requirements of an advertiser.
The easier it takes for bloggers to join as reviewers, the more difficult it is to ensure quality reviews. With PayPerPost, that’s exactly what’s happening. All it takes to join is a blog that is 90 days old with minimally 20 entries. Suffice to say, I can have a blog that is low-trafficked, not well-ranked and still participate as long as that requirement is met. How difficult can that be? Anyone can do it.
Now, I’ve got advertiser accounts with both companies and was toying with the idea of having a review done on a jewelry site I own a while back. A run-through on how I can purchase my reviews at both sites led me to believe advertisers play an important role as well.
Advertisers decide on the price and the amount of words for a review with PayPerPost. What bothers me is that they can also decide if the review is to be positive or negative. If an advertiser on a tight budget comes along and orders a positive review, requesting minimally 50 words and a payment of $5, I wonder just how thorough and honest that review will be. How is this considered proper disclosure?
Fine then, how about $5 for 300 words and a netural review? I’m not sure if anyone will be willing to conduct a proper research and spend their time writing a review for that amount, which appears to be the reason why reviews from PayPerPost don’t seem to measure up.
In the case of ReviewMe, advertisers only get to decide on the blogs they want their review written by. The price is determined by a blog’s popularity based on the company’s algorithm. Constructive criticism is encouraged from bloggers instead of allowing advertisers to choose its outcome and reviews have to be minimally 200 words long.
I’m not condeming PayPerPost or its bloggers but rather hoping they improve their current system and encourage openess between advertisers, bloggers and readers.
And with Sponsored Reviews launching soon, they better.
Until then, I wouldn’t count on a PayPerPost review to influence my decision unless I know the blogger writing it is a trustworthy fellow. Other than that, it’s really just a good way to get cheap backlinks. $50 for a review with 50 words can easily get me 10 non-authoritative backlinks.
Blogging
Unless they choose to not participate, of course. In this case, it would all boil down to a matter of choice. And often the choices made reflects the quality of the reviews.
But why? While most of it has to do with the comprehensiveness of a review and the efforts that bloggers commit to research before documenting their objective opinions and findings, the lesser known but equally vital factor that most of us have left out lies with the companies offering these review services to bloggers.
As of now, ReviewMe and PayPerPost appears to be the most popular. During my time spent online, I’ve read quite a handful of reviews written by bloggers who are publishers with either 1 of the 2 companies and found a lack of quality from the ones from PayPerPost. It almost always appear to be too simplifiled and lacklustre. Reviews written by publishers of ReviewMe however are always a notch up.
I could be generalizing here but as mentioned earlier, this is merely based on my observation from the reviews that I’ve come across. I attribute it to 2 factors.
1. Ease of entry as a reviewer.
2. Requirements of an advertiser.
The easier it takes for bloggers to join as reviewers, the more difficult it is to ensure quality reviews. With PayPerPost, that’s exactly what’s happening. All it takes to join is a blog that is 90 days old with minimally 20 entries. Suffice to say, I can have a blog that is low-trafficked, not well-ranked and still participate as long as that requirement is met. How difficult can that be? Anyone can do it.
Now, I’ve got advertiser accounts with both companies and was toying with the idea of having a review done on a jewelry site I own a while back. A run-through on how I can purchase my reviews at both sites led me to believe advertisers play an important role as well.
Advertisers decide on the price and the amount of words for a review with PayPerPost. What bothers me is that they can also decide if the review is to be positive or negative. If an advertiser on a tight budget comes along and orders a positive review, requesting minimally 50 words and a payment of $5, I wonder just how thorough and honest that review will be. How is this considered proper disclosure?
Fine then, how about $5 for 300 words and a netural review? I’m not sure if anyone will be willing to conduct a proper research and spend their time writing a review for that amount, which appears to be the reason why reviews from PayPerPost don’t seem to measure up.
In the case of ReviewMe, advertisers only get to decide on the blogs they want their review written by. The price is determined by a blog’s popularity based on the company’s algorithm. Constructive criticism is encouraged from bloggers instead of allowing advertisers to choose its outcome and reviews have to be minimally 200 words long.
I’m not condeming PayPerPost or its bloggers but rather hoping they improve their current system and encourage openess between advertisers, bloggers and readers.
And with Sponsored Reviews launching soon, they better.
Until then, I wouldn’t count on a PayPerPost review to influence my decision unless I know the blogger writing it is a trustworthy fellow. Other than that, it’s really just a good way to get cheap backlinks. $50 for a review with 50 words can easily get me 10 non-authoritative backlinks.
Comments