Thursday, May 31, 2007

This blogger is not FOR SALE

Many suppose because I am paid to review products, services and websites that I am "for sale" and will do any task for money. This is incorrect. I am an Internet marketer that provides a valuable service to advertisers and my disclosure policy and blogging ethics are prominently displayed above the fold on my blogs.

I had an experience today that made me shudder.
  • Advertiser B wanted me to edit a post I had already written, published
    and been paid for by Advertiser A.

  • Advertiser B wanted me to add his link into Advertiser A's post.
There were instructions about what Advertiser B wanted as far as the site review and then a BTW note about the link. I wrote a post for Advertiser B, fitting all the guidelines, except I did not link Advertiser B from Advertiser A's post. When I submitted the task, I left a comment about how I ethically could not do what Advertiser B was asking. I did not think it would be a problem.

First, I was emailed that there were instructions I had disregarded and that I needed to look at the task again. A minute later, I received an email that my post had been rejected and that I should "try again." The only thing I had not done on that assignment was link Advertiser B from Advertiser A's post.

I have a call into the paid to blog service and I am hoping this will all go away and that I will be paid for the work I did for Advertiser B. If not, this post will be modified with the name of the paid to blog service and the advertiser.

Albert Einstein said, "Relativity applies to physics, not ethics."

I say, "Honesty is not optional and deception is always exposed."

What do you say?


3 comments:

Cyberpartygal said...

This is too much. Don't do it even if your post for Advertise B is rejected!

Kate said...

Advertiser B was legally out of line. Advertiser A had paid you for a service and you fulfilled your contract according to the terms you have with them. Advertiser B was attempting to benefit from Advertiser A's money, without Advertiser A's consent.

I do believe that's known as "tortious interference with contract" by Advertiser B which would put YOU at risk of being liable to Advertiser A.

lucia said...

Advertiser B is way out of line!

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails