Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SOP for GOP to Pay Friendly Bloggers

jamie (78724) writes | more than 4 years ago

Republicans 1

jamie writes "According to the conservative political journalism site Daily Caller: "'It's standard operating procedure' to pay bloggers for favorable coverage, says one Republican campaign operative. A GOP blogger-for-hire estimates that 'at least half the bloggers that are out there' on the Republican side 'are getting remuneration in some way beyond ad sales.'" Or in some cases, it's the ads themselves: ads at ten times the going rate are one of the ways conservative bloggers apparently get paid by the politicians they write about. In usual he-said she-said fashion, Daily Caller finds a couple of obscure liberal bloggers to mention too, but they fully disclosed payment and one of them even shut down his blog while doing consulting work, unlike Robert Stacy McCain and Dan Riehl."
Link to Original Source

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Preaching to the choir (1)

geek2k5 (882748) | more than 4 years ago | (#33357430)

If a political party pays a blogger to favorably comment on the party, what are the odds that the blogger's audience is already predisposed toward that party? It might be considered preaching to the choir.

It would be interesting to determine the political leanings of various bloggers and compare that to what they are receiving from various political parties, both directly and indirectly. It would also be interesting to compare audience size and composition versus payments to determine whether there is a good return on investment.

I seem to recall a similar controversy in the blogging world when it comes to product endorsements. At what point should a blogger who endorses a product say that they have received payments or free products, other than a single sample, from a corporation?

Ideally, ethical bloggers should mention that they are being paid, directly or indirectly, by the organizations they comment about. They might provide details of the payment so that people can judge how much bias might be generated. (A sample of a product would likely produce less bias than a year's supply.)

I do applaud those exceptionally ethical bloggers that shut down their blog while doing consulting work to avoid conflict of interest problems. I suspect that they mention what they are doing on their blog, as well as provide links to what they are doing.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?