DISQUS

Jonny Tokyo · 10 months ago

Disclosure is not required here IMHO. So long as I get my product, why should I care who gets a slice of the pie? Perhaps because of his reach people are jealous.

Scobleizer · 10 months ago

Good point. A few things: 1. I hate the original Kindle. As Dawn says I panned it. http://scobleizer.com/2007/11/25/dear-jeff-bezo... 2. I didn't tell anyone to buy it, just that I had bought it. 3. I will disclose these in the future when I use them, especially when I am asking people to buy it or giving a review that's positive. 4. I see a lot of people making a ton of money off of their blog's advertising (or, off of their PR firm) yet I don't see disclosure of those kinds of financial kickbacks when they link to their blogs.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

I don't believe that my summary of the story indicated jealousy. As I mentioned on FriendFeed, I think supporting Scoble and other users of the community who add value is a great idea. Scoble is somebody I have watched for years, and both traded ideas with and learned from. I would encourage people to use the affiliate links this way, so long as it is believed that it does not sway their bias.

Scobleizer · 10 months ago

One thing in your story that I just noticed on rereading. I didn't recommend the Kindle. At least not the 1.0 version. I'm hoping that a 2.0 version will show up. When it does I'll write a review then. I haven't seen the 2.0 version yet so there's no way I could recommend anything to anyone. My previous reviews of the Kindle have bashed it pretty hard. If there's one disappointment in your post today that'd be it since it's not accurate to say I recommended anything.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Robert, I want to be 100% accurate, so I'll remove the "recommended" text. Thanks for pointing that out.

Thomas Hawk · 10 months ago

I don't see anything wrong with linking to amazon or affiliate links. I've got an amazon affiliate account. If I find a book that I like and am going to blog about it do I include my affiliate link. Sure. Why the heck not? If I talk about my Canon 5D M2, or drobo, or whatever, will I put one in? Sure. I've never seen anything wrong with any of that.

Thomas Hawk · 10 months ago

oh, and I also sell adds on my blog through Federated Media. Don't see a problem with that either.

Erica Baker · 10 months ago

It is indeed much ado about nothing. Damn near any Amazon link you encounter these days is going to have an affiliate code embedded in it. Most of mine do and its no big deal, people click or they don't. If it starts to get spammy thats when the problems happen. However if you're posting a link to a product you're discussing, why not put the affiliate link in there? You were going to link to it anyway and the same people were going to click the link anyway. I fail to see the problem here.

AJ Kohn · 10 months ago

@Chris: +1. I run a book blog. I review books and I bash Kindle. I still have affiliate links. The issue shouldn't be whether you use affiliate links it should be whether the affiliate links taint that person's reviews of products. *MANY* in the Kindle space are tainted but Scoble is not one of them.

Mike Doeff · 10 months ago

I'm ok with Robert doing this if he discloses it - e.g. by adding in [AD] and limiting this to once a day. I'd also want him to care about the products, which I'm assuming is the case with the Kindle.

ontarioemperor · 10 months ago

Mike, I was just reading a Steven Hodson Inquisitr post that tangentially wondered if you can really disclose within the limitations of a tweet. Your "[AD]" idea certainly allows a way to do that. Personally I prefer the hashtag #sponsored (although I guess the hashtag #ad has the benefit of being shorter).

Dawn Douglass · 10 months ago

Back in November of 2007 Scoble offered the Kindle through his Amazon affiliate deal and then gave it a poor review. If you look at his post here http://tinyurl.com/74atmx you can see me telling him in the comments: "Well, Robert, you talked yourself out of a $40 commission. But I appreciate your honesty. I’ll wait and hope that they get the next version right."

I think the majority of Scoble's readers know that he says what he truly believes, no matter what. This "conflict of interests" argument in Scoble's case isn't a valid attack.

Now if you want to argue what an ass Scoble is in other areas, I'm with you, but I don't think you can legitimately throw doubts on his integrity when it comes to product reviews.

Scobleizer · 10 months ago

Full disclosure: I blocked Dawn on friendfeed, which is just one of the reasons she thinks I'm an ass.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Fuill disclosure: You're not an ass. :-)

Scobleizer · 10 months ago

Your $20 affiliate check is in the mail.

Jesse Stay · 10 months ago

Too much disclosure!

Dawn Douglass · 10 months ago

Actually, I appreciate the block. My FF experience has been much better without all your noise. I highly recommend people people disagree with you about politics and religion so you'll block them, too.

Scobleizer · 10 months ago

My FF experience has been better too, so we both win! :-)

Dawn Douglass · 10 months ago

And yet I still stick up for right, despite you publicly calling me an idiot and unintelligent. You're welcome.

AJ Kohn · 10 months ago

*shakes head* Kindle wouldn't have half of the Internati buzz without affiliates pimping it for referral fees. Yet, no one really thinks about it on this macro level. Instead you aim at the guy who didn't get a free v1 Kindle and panned it when he did get one. It's the right thing to be cautious of, but applied to the wrong person.

Vince DeGeorge · 10 months ago

I have no issues with this. Robert is a unique 'brand'... No one has to follow him or click the links. Also, an endorsement of the kindle is hardly being a shill, it's a good device - might as well be paid in doing so. That said, I'd say free service like FF and Twitter should get a cut.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Interesting, Vince. So you believe the platform for Scoble's ad should make money off his efforts? How would that break down - 95% for Amazon, 3% for Robert and 1% each for FriendFeed and Twitter?

victorseo · 10 months ago

Louis,
Probably sooner than you think. :)

Dennis D. McDonald · 10 months ago

How is this any different from my linking to my blog where I talk about things that are relevant to my paid social media strategy consulting?

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Dennis, a few things:

1) You haven't been singled out by TechCrunch and other visible blogs for wasting your time on Twitter and FriendFeed.
2) You don't yet have 75,000 aggregate followers, I believe.
3) You probably disclose your consulting gig on the blog.

This is newsworthy primarily because of Robert's reach and the criticism he has taken, not so much that he'll make a few bucks.

Dennis D. McDonald · 10 months ago

Yes, I agree there is a difference in scale here (by several orders of magnitude!) but there is a long long history of celebrities taking advantage of their reach, and the only significant difference here is that celebrities can now set up their own "networks."

If I read something by Scoble, Brogan, Kawasaki, etc. etc. etc. I automatically assume commercial motives. The question is whether or not there is value in what they say and how they say it. Obviously many many people see the value.

For additional comments, see my post "Free Rides Can’t Last Forever" (http://www.ddmcd.com/rides.html).

Dennis D. McDonald
Alexandria, Virginia USA
http://www.ddmcd.com

Vanguy · 10 months ago

Very interesting read, Louis.
Thanks a lot.

Jesse Stay · 10 months ago

Wow - nice catch! I've thought about that - it's definitely an interesting strategy, and if you're going to do any sort of reviewing of products, why not use an affiliate link instead of normal link? Assuming you're doing a review or similar, is disclosure really necessary so long as the end user gets the same expected result?

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Jesse, assuming you are doing a review, disclosure I believe would be
absolutely necessary, even more than in this example. After all,
wouldn't you be more biased to say a product was good/great if there
was a benefit to you if someone were to buy it?

Jesse Stay · 10 months ago

Only if you do it for select products - if you do affiliate links for every
single product you review, can there be any bias? In this case, I agree -
perhaps some disclosure would have been necessary, but perhaps not if that's
what you do for every review? I don't know - maybe even then a blanket
disclosure would be helpful.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

If you did affiliate links for every product you reviewed, then your over-arching bias would be to always give positive product reviews. I would always lean toward disclosure, but there is some truth in the assumed bias.

Jesse Stay · 10 months ago

Very good point.

magitam · 10 months ago

Not necessarily - if you're reviewing something, for the sake of reviewing it - and included links, you don't necessarily have to sound off on it, as a good thing, but potentially that "click" through could end up leading to a sale, regardless of your recommendation.. Sometimes people want to buy stuff, in spite of the drawbacks and the weaknesses - it's upto others to judge and decide.. surely..

nicefishfilms · 10 months ago

Very clever indeed. This makes complete sense if it stays conversational and genuine.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

I think it was certainly conversational. But I also think it looked forced. What is the possibility that he thought to link to Amazon and push people to go check it out? I believe Scoble is and always has been genuine. I like the guy. But you can be both conversational and forced.

Scobleizer · 10 months ago

Forced? Hmm, well, we'll see in March whether this whole thing is forced or not. Either way I'll have a news story. If a Kindle 2.0 shows up, I'll have a news story. If a Kindle 1.0 shows up I'll have a news story. And, if I make a billion off of my affiliate link (I seriously doubt I'll make anything because how many people will buy it based on my link last night) then I'll have a news story.

Jeffro2pt0 · 10 months ago

But if he would have provided disclosure, would that have backfired the idea and less people would have clicked on it?

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Jeffro, that's possible. If he disclosed it was an affiliate link, there would be some who might natively go to Amazon, or ignore the thread. But others might actually want to 'reward' Robert for his work in the same way they rewarded John Gruber. I think Robert's well enough liked by the community for him to do well even with disclosure.

jyamasaki · 10 months ago

Wow. Impressive that you caught this. I'm curious if this is/was/will be a business strategy opportunity for friendfeed or twitter (I can see folks over at twitter going "dammit! cat's out of the bag!"). I'm also anticipating the dialogue of reaction regarding if disclosure is necessary or not.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

I would be surprised if Robert were the first one to try this strategy on FriendFeed and Twitter. FriendFeed, since the beginning, has let people import their Amazon Wish Lists, as you can see when you check my feed, though almost all were done in late 2007.

http://friendfeed.com/louisgray?service=amazon

It wouldn't be too difficult for FriendFeed to either enable their affiliate link for all Amazon purchases, or to let users define their own, I am guessing. But I think that wouldn't be enough for the service to call a business model, as I doubt enough people click through and by for their social media friends.

jeffdoug · 10 months ago

Good catch on the link. I too think disclosure is required.

Brandon J. Mendelson · 10 months ago

I'm not sure disclosure is needed. If Robert was a reporter, I'd have problems with this. But as a blogger and as a fellow geek? I don't know.

movieguyjon · 10 months ago

I feel kind of similar about it. I'm not sure disclosure of any kind is needed, or really all that good of an idea. I don't want to know I'm helping someone else make money, so if I saw a disclosure like that I'm pretty sure I wouldn't click on any of the links.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Interesting, Jon. So if you find out you would be helping an individual rather than a company, you would make sure not to buy? Seems to me I would be more inclined to buy knowing that Robert got a cut than if he didn't.

movieguyjon · 10 months ago

I think I'm still a part of an old mentality of distrust toward affiliate links in general, which is tough to explain. When I think about it, I'd rather someone like Scobez get a cut of the sale. But there's this underlying stigma that is tough to shake, and I think is where my problem lies.

If that makes sense. Like, this whole affiliate link system isn't new, but it's starting to gain traction, and it's making me re-think how I view the system in general. Not saying my initial point of view is right or anything like that, but it was the first thing that popped into my head when I read about the links.

Koffee · 10 months ago

the word sordid comes to mind

Tobias Verhoog · 10 months ago

I can't really blame him, but some disclosure would have been nice.

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

HUUHHHHHHHH -- SCANDAL!!! I feel so violated...

Martha · 10 months ago

Good for him. If I was in the market to buy one and he had a link, it's no skin off my back. If I wasn't in the market his post about it would just fly right under my radar.

coldbrew · 10 months ago

Nice catch. He may need to be un-followed moving forward. From what I can tell, he is genuine, but he missed out on being transparent and that screws with my bullshit meter (it may need adjustment).

Roberto Bonini · 10 months ago

Doh! Amazon Affiliates are the obvious play. It makes complete sense. Will be interesting to see how/if this catches on.

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

I think content should never contain affiliate links as to remove all chances AND suspicions of conflict of interest. I think the only thing one can safely get out of social media is reputation - personal branding you could say, which can be "monetized" true better job opportunities, consulting offers, etc. Affiliate links in your content destroys the trustworthiness of your brand, at least for me.

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

@Roberto & colbrew believe me I expect Kindle's for ALL of US!

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

But nothing wrong with charging $200 per hour because you're a super star. Super stars are - per definition - scarce.

magitam · 10 months ago

Jeez - what's the big deal?? Just cos he used an affiliate link?? Seriously - you need to lighten up sometimes on the whole "disclosure" thing - at the end of the day, if you're interested, you shouldn't care if the person recommending it is getting something out of it or not - seriously, if anything it should be the other way - you should want for the person suggesting it to get something from it.. I don't understand what the big deal is if someone uses an affiliate link or not? Had it been a shortened URL - you wouldn't know it anyways - so why make any fuss over it? Seriously - it's about the guy making money off of recommending something that he would do anyways.. How is it any different to what he already does?

coldbrew · 10 months ago

I think you are missing the fact that conflict of interest plays a role in determining the authenticity. If it were to become common practice, one would have to at least begin to question the motivation. I don't have any Amway friends and never will. I would not take any nomination for Obama's senate seat from Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich seriously either. People generally do not like being sold.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

You're right - people don't generally like being sold. I once was roommates with pair of Amway clones, and it was such an eye-opener. That said, I don't think Robert's Amazon link = Amway.

coldbrew · 10 months ago

I agree about Scoble. But, he is the exception, not the rule. Twitter had to make some adjustments to nofollow and Google has adjusted their algo specifically (or so it seems) for dealing with the use of Twitter for SEO purposes.

victorseo · 10 months ago

All commentators are “sellers”. We are selling our brand, our image, our perspective etc. Do people generally like to be sold? People generally like to buy. And if we help them make a buying choice, are they being sold? I think not. Is disclosure required here? If you consider that Scobleizer is a trusted “brand” it is unlikely that he would risk his brand for a few affiliate dollars. Promoting a product misleadingly is an unforgiveable offense and would quickly ruin the “brand”. Profiting from an honest opinion is fair, and frankly, it is a given, that if we can, we will. If Magic Johnson says I should wear NIKE shoes, I sort of know he is going to profit, somehow. What’s the difference here? As soon as anyone hypes a crappy product, there will soon be a vacancy in the blogosphere that needs filling.

coldbrew · 10 months ago

@sofarsoshawn: believe me, this thread is not about the Kindle

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

true, no more sarcasm (well maybe a lil), it's a little bit equitable to investment bankers plugging their own stocks before the first financial plummet after which, disclosure became a must if there was any possible conflict of interest. I'm not equating it 100% at all, but it is akin in that it casts doubt on that persons repupation as a reliable source

Markus Merz · 10 months ago

Thanks for bringing up the subject. Let's move:

A) Microblogging services could have user preferences where a user could add all his affiliate IDs
B) All appropriate links could be automatically exchanged against affi links
C) Also the disclosure could be automated in the web GUI or in the data stream

I don't see a problem beause I love to give a comission to somebody who recommend something useful.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Markus, that would be interesting. So let's pretend the microblog services get you to register your affiliate link and away we go. Wouldn't that just attract the SEO and spammer types like flies? Not that they haven't got routes already through fake domain names...

Markus Merz · 10 months ago

Well, if people are spammy I would simply unsubscribe. That's how the new social media work :)

ChangeForge | Ken Stewart · 10 months ago

Where's Mona at? Why isn't she commenting here ;-P

I think I would tend to agree overall, but you have to admit it was thinly veiled... it's not like you wouldn't notice it was an affiliate link when you clicked, right?

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

It was thinly veiled, or I wouldn't have seen it. I just did a mouse-over. Note that in my screen capture in the post, I think that it was an affiliate link surprised some in the thread, so not 100% of the people knew.

As for Mona, it wasn't my turn to watch her.

ChangeForge | Ken Stewart · 10 months ago

I just figured she would be all over this ;-)

I agree, though. In principal disclosure is always nice. Being in IT and working on websites in my past - I have a habit of looking at links as I'm clicking on them to ensure I'm not going somewhere totally crazy... but you bring to light a very salient point - that of trust.

Rutger Blom · 10 months ago

Maybe Twitter and Friendfeed will charge users like these in future?

Noah David Simon · 10 months ago

If I am blocked by Scoble does that mean I can't buy
a book now?

andy brudtkuhl · 10 months ago

Scott - nice!

Tad, Now in Color! · 10 months ago

I don't really mind at all. The affiliate cash doesn't hurt the purchaser at all. Who cares if Scobez makes some extra money?

Chris Charabaruk for Hire · 10 months ago

What's so big about sticking in affiliate links like that? I do it all the time when I reference books, and have been doing so for a good long time now. I thought by these days, it'd be a no-brainer to do something like this. Much ado about nothing.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

@Chris and all, I wouldn't call this "much ado about nothing". The reason I posted is because of Robert's visibility and the previous discussion of how he was "wasting his time". How could he convert the community to revenue? If he put a note out on Twitter asking for $5 via PayPal, would that have been effective or as good? It's an interesting move.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Now, how will the Scoble followers truly respond to this, will we see a weekly recommendation or a periodic update about some cool new product. I think it is about time we see some Friendfeed monetization going on, but is Scoble really using his large audience to good effect to pull this kind of move off or will people suggest that he is becoming a "sell out" to companies.

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

Crafty..... but lol!!! :o)

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Erica, I wouldn't put this in the "problem" category. But Scoble potentially converting his user stream across multiple networks into revenue is newsworthy, especially versus December's discussion about needing an intervention and how he was propping up service valuations and getting nothing in return. I think you'll see the biggest "criticism" I had was that it wasn't disclosed - which others across the Web have had mixed agreement with.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Erica, you make a good point, and if truly unique and geniune recommendations start appearing in my Twitter or Friendfeed stream I will be encouraged to check them out, but if more and more and more people start doing this giving me a constant stream of very genune people just mentioning one product they really like the flow becomes very clogged!

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

Erica: Do a affiliate link for charity then.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Meryn, who makes the money though?

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

Josh: How do you mean? My point was that you shouldn't give your "constituency" any reason to doubt your objectivity, your honesty. Likewise, I also don't like sales person who work on commission basis. They're just wrong incentives. They could be honest, sure. But they also could be saying things out of financial interest.

Brian Sullivan · 10 months ago

I suspect that Robert's posting of links here contravenes Amazon's operating agreement -- section 10 specifically but I that is between him and Amazon.

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

I must add that full upfront disclosure (should practically be part of his blog header) would help a lot.

Mike Doeff · 10 months ago

Brian, what does section 10 of that agreement specify? (too lazy to look)

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Meryn, we see Scoble has already had enough pressure from people on the Seagate deal: http://tr.im/95tc I don't necessarily believe that Scoble is doing this out of financial interest, he makes enough money elsewhere, this is just a subsidary income!

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

why???? why does it matter? In a sense, if you post a NON aff link, do you feel thats better? if so WHY?

Robert Scoble · 10 months ago

Meryn: I will disclose from now on. I wasn't telling anyone to buy them. I actually hate the first Kindle quite a bit. Here's my review: http://scobleizer.com/2007/11/25/dear-jeff-bezo...

Robert Scoble · 10 months ago

By the way, I see lots of people linking to their blogs where they make a lot more money off of the hits through advertising. I never see disclosure of those links.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Robert, what didn't you disclose before then. I am confused why you say you are going to disclose from now on!

Brian Sullivan · 10 months ago

10. Responsibility for Your Site
You will be solely responsible for the development, operation, and maintenance of your site and for all materials that appear on your site. For example, you will be solely responsible for:
the technical operation of your site and all related equipment
ensuring the display of Special Links on your site does not violate any agreement between you and any third party (including without limitation any restrictions or requirements placed on you by a third party that hosts your site)
creating and posting Product descriptions on your site and linking those descriptions to the Amazon Site catalog
the accuracy and appropriateness of materials posted on your site (including, among other things, all Product-related materials and any information you include within or associate with Special Links)
ensuring that materials posted on your site do not violate or infringe upon the rights of any third party (including, for example, copyrights, trademarks, privacy, or other personal or proprietar

John Grinde · 10 months ago

@scobleizer I don't have a problem with affiliate links in Twitter, but a disclosure would be appreciated.

coldbrew · 10 months ago

What's in section 10? Sounds like interesting reading, but not this morning :)

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

I see the thread has gotten to be 90% on the disclosure issue - and good morning, Robert. What are alternative ways you think Robert and others could convert their visibility on these networks to revenue?

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Friendfeed and Twitter would intergrate Amazon Affiliates program into their service and identify keywords such as Kindle, turning them into an affiliate link?

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

Robert, just to be clear: I do trust you that you're not becoming the stereotypical "upselling" sales person. Anyway, you see the fuss. I think you know as no others that full transparency is best.

xavier vespa · 10 months ago

poor guy, one affiliate link, and the whole blogosphere jumps on him.

Robert Scoble · 10 months ago

Louis: want to make money on social networks? Put ads on your blogs and link to them. Oh, wait, this is an aggregator and it does that by default. Or, get a job at a PR firm because you are a highly thought of blogger (or keep your job because of that). I never see people disclosing those kinds of links. Meryn: I will diclose from now on when I link to sites using affiliate codes. Personally I doubt I'll make any substantial income off of these links. Certainly hasn't been the case yet.

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

Meryn... WHY is it best and for who? would it have made you feel better if it was a NON aff link?? why? would it have mattered if it was a NON aff link but not disclosed? Or was disclosed?

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Xavier, it's a buildup of frustration that people have been gaining since the early years, it's not just Scoble, but he is just incredibly popular!

Robert Scoble · 10 months ago

xavier: I actually think this is funny since the link itself gives disclosure of a kind. There's lots of people making money here that aren't disclosing it.

Nathan Rein · 10 months ago

how is §10 of the Amazon agreement relevant? sorry for being dense, but I read it and I don't see the connection.

Brian Sullivan · 10 months ago

The agreement has a discussion about where you can post links - specifically on "your site" - section 10 further refines the definition of "your site".

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

The focal point here for me is finding a way to convert the followers to revenue. Robert knows that from me its not personal. I don't run ads on the blog, or charge people to read, and I have zero problem with his Seagate ads. I have zero problem with his links to Amazon having affiliate URLs. As mentioned in the article, I would have preferred a note of disclosure, but what I like here is the thinking about how he can leverage his work over the last few years in building a network.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Adding on... if you were thinking about buying a Kindle or anything from Amazon, start with Robert's URL and make the poor guy some cash! :-)

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

why?? he aint POOR is he? lol... but I agree in that sense, if I was buying sommat anyway, i'd rather it went to help someone than not. :o)

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

If Robert would be pitching products and asked readers to "tip" him for his advice by buying the product through an affiliate link, then I would consider that a very fair deal. I've said this somewhere else, but this is relevant here: I'm more likely to pay for "donation ware" than for shareware.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

But Meryn, this point could easily be argued on Paypal donations used by bloggers and podcasters, right?

AJ Kohn · 10 months ago

Oh, feel free to go to my book blog and help me out as well! (http://usedbooksblog.com)

mikepk · 10 months ago

I only see a very small problem with this. I think disclosing the affiliate link would have been better, but many people look to Robert as an online "cool hunter" of sorts. That's adding value to the information exchange and being compensated shouldn't be frowned upon IMHO. If he handles it poorly (and obvious conflicts of interest arise) he will lose his value add and lose his followers.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

AJ, I don't think this is a cue for you to jump in, assuming everyone would accept this method of "helping you out", although you are wellknown to many and therefore it could work in your favour!

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

That's ok, but thats only you Meryn. ;o) So you would rather use my beer button my blog than click an aff link when buying something you would buy anyway but decided to buy then through my post etc..,? what difference does it make either way?

AJ Kohn · 10 months ago

@mikepk: I partially agree. I don't think disclosure is really needed. (I don't need the useless privacy updates I get from every credit card either.) It comes down to trust. Do you trust that the individual is not being influenced by the monetary incentive? If you suspect there is bias based on the affiliate relationship then that person loses trust and followers and ultimately hurts their own revenue stream.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Mike, Scoble has done far more controversial things then a simple disclosure such as the recent Facebook events: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-9839474-36.html

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

@mikepk I agree it's a small problem, however I would like to know why Scoble didn't disclose, that is if he feels up to answer it ~ Scoble? Btw I think Robert Scoble is a God with a chiseled body

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

Chris.... thats what i would do... i wouldn't just go through his, id rather choose who my aff payment goes to :o)

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

need to get yer eyes tested shawn. :o)

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Everyone seems to getting a little too smart for their own good in this thread, it is moreso the matter of Scoble's linking that has caused this ripple effect amongst bloggers trying to get some financial action on a popular Friendfeed discussion!

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Rob, so it would be with a simple drop-down menu on Amazon: Scoble, Arrington, Winer, Gilmor, Gray,Le Meur etc etc :)

Brian Sullivan · 10 months ago

I looked at and clicked on the link -- the link has the word "scobleizer" in it -- seems to me that is effective disclosure? It doesn't go directly to the amazon Kindle page either -- it goes to an intermediary link. I think there was disclosure if not totally overt. Only an idiot would think it is not an affiliate link.

Chris Charabaruk · 10 months ago

I see no issue, here. I've been doing the same thing since signing up with Amazon's affiliates program, and practically every link to Amazon on my site is an affiliate link like that. I figured it was common sense by now to do things like this, especially given the current economic climate. (Every little bit helps, after all.)

Disclosure would have been more important back in the days when affiliate linking was still more an experiment, but these days, I expect to get affiliate links from others, and I simply return the favour when passing on links to others. After all, what's the point of all of us having them if we don't use them?

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

As mentioned on FriendFeed, 90% of the discussion has ended up on the disclosure side. I find Robert's opportunity to convert his network to revenue to be the most important "newsy" element. He was criticized for wasting his time away from the blog, and he is now looking at ways to take advantage of what he's built. End of story. And if I were buying a Kindle, I would use his link.

Chris Charabaruk · 10 months ago

Well, I can't really support the "needs disclosure" side of the argument. As far as I'm concerned. Amazon affiliate linking is so ubiquitous that there's no point; I automatically assume any Amazon-bound link is an affiliate link these days and can't understand why others wouldn't think the same.

As for the Kindle, I agree with Robert's old review, but I'd still buy one. If they made 'em available in Canada, that is.

Ben Hwang · 10 months ago

Amazon affils make 4% across the board unless you meet certain requirements. If you do it by performance, you can get it up to 8.5%.

Matik72 · 10 months ago

It was bound to happen. Robert fessed up. If it become all about the all mighty "income", I will have to revisit whom I am subscribed to on Twitter, Friendfeed, et al. Not a terribly big deal imho.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Josh, why do you suddenly think that now!

directeur · 10 months ago

The honnesty in affiliate revenues is easy to tell: A review that is supposed to describe you a product MUST include a disclosure about the affiliation. A simple link without a real review is called an Ad. What I mean, is that when you making a full review with list of advatnages, you have to tell me if you are affiliated with the product owner or not so I can tell if your review is biased or not.

·[▪_▪]· · 10 months ago

There is no need for disclosure. I automatically assume that everyone is out for a buck. If someone posts a link to a product, i'll just assume they might make something from my purchase. So what. If i want the product (i should have researched it), it was a useful tip and they may deserve a some referral income. This is very similar to viral marketing. Although scobleizer's link was in the clear, in the future they won't be. There's nothing we can do to stop it. It's simply capitalism doing its thing.

Robert Scoble · 10 months ago

Josh: I didn't disclose because I didn't ask anyone to buy anything. In fact, I really hate the original Kindle (I sold mine a long time ago after giving it a horrible review). The link itself is disclosure, by the way. If you don't know how to read URLs you should learn how Amazon and other places work. This discussion is good for everyone to become more knowledgeable about that. By the way, I did disclose within minutes of posting that item. Louis asked me about it and I disclosed within a few minutes.

Josh Haley · 10 months ago

I'm just messin' with him. I say go for it. Affiliate marketing has helped me too, I just haven't really pushed it on my friends yet.

·[▪_▪]· · 10 months ago

As for it being spam: block him if you don't want to see it.

Greg (GuitarBuster) · 10 months ago

I'm really angry now, none of you guys have an affiliate beer link on your site.

Meryn Stol · 10 months ago

Robert, I think lot of people tend to assume "purposive behavior" when someone "steps out of line" (at least in their view). My first reaction was likewise. I think you've got enough social capital to ride through this controversy. :)

Brian Bufalo · 10 months ago

Doesn't Robert Scoble live in America? Anyone heard of this crazy thing they do there...capitalism?! I can't believe he's trying to make a buck in a capitalist society...simply amazing! He want's food on his table? Clothes on his back. Ridiculous. Have him move to Cuba and roll cigars in the name of the homeland and earn a living the real way in a Communist state. That's how to capitalize. I can't believe this is news.

Josh Chandler · 10 months ago

Meryn, until his next controversy that is :)

Ian May · 10 months ago

If I find a product I truly like, and have it myself, or I am planning to buy it, and I want to share it with everyone else, I'll go check to see if it's available on Amazon, and post the affiliate link. I don't see any problem with that. Conversely, if you post an affiliate link to something I want (amazon or anywhere else) I don't care that you make some commission, as long as I get the product I want at the price I am willing to pay.

ernie yacub · 10 months ago

louis, one way to monetize is to use community currencies.

obviouspop · 10 months ago

Ha! Louis, you're great, but this one reads like an Onion story... the odds he'll make any significant money off of Amazon affiliates is low, and I don't see how using this to support your blog is a problem. Amazon didn't pay him to blog about the Kindle. I have a music blog and when I review an album I put up the cover with an amazon link and if a reader ends up buying it, I make money, but not much. But this in no way lessons the credibility of my reviews or blog. If Scoble found something interesting to post or twitter about and he can link to it and make a few bucks I don't see a problem with that. If the only reason he's twittering is to try to sell it, then I would have a *small* problem with it... good bloggers need a way to support themselves and their blogs, if we're going to take away something as little and as harmless as the Amazon affiliates program from them as a tool to make a few bucks the I have a problem with that. I see it as harmless. People getting paid directly to blog about something is another matter. This is a non-issue.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

If I wrote like the Onion, I'd be a lot funnier for sure.

The story here is that Robert has a unique opportunity. He's built up a network over time of influential people across networks who could give back for his efforts, and this could be the first step. Nowhere do I say I was harmed, angry, a victim, etc.

Robert Linthicum · 10 months ago

I hope he gets rich--we will still be in his debt.

Karim · 10 months ago

[stares into thread] For relaxing times... make it... Suntory time. [raises glass of whiskey] http://www.SUNTORY.com

Roger · 10 months ago

I've posted Affiliate links on Twitter, but only for products that I think will interest and be of benefit to my Twitter followers. I think it is in the gray area ethically, since Scoble is not making it clear he is linking to his affiliate account. So is Scoble endorsing Kindle? We do not know. All we can surmise is that he is trying to capitalize on his followers.

Hutch Carpenter · 10 months ago

Here's what I wrote in this post, Using FriendFeed for E-Commerce (http://bit.ly/sWKi):

"The secret sauce of FriendFeed is the development of a trusted network of referrals and commentary by users. People add users to and prune users from their subscriptions based on how well interests align. Once you subscribe to someone, you develop a good feel for their interests and perspectives over time.

This process lowers the barrier to accepting information from someone, as you learn to trust him or her."

As long as Robert actually likes the product, I don't mind. If some spammers cross the line to just ramming product reviews through the system. They will fail. I'd unsubscribe.

thomaspower · 10 months ago

Press on Robert and show us all the way, you and Louis are making the market try anything and everything until you find a hit. TPx

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Trying is part of the fun. It's enjoyable to find new services, try new things and see the result. Robert's been somebody I've enjoyed following and interacting with for years. Glad you're participating as well. (Especially on Socialmedian)

thomaspower · 10 months ago

Hey Louis you're welcome without you and Robert where would any of us be? You two guys are leading us all through Geek Valley with your firelight torches. None of us even have eyes we are blind. What is interesting is the emerging transfer of power from old dotcoms to the Friendfeed, SocialMedian, Twitter triumvirate and in that order. I think new power is forming and I want to support it and help it grow. I actually think even Google is now waning and that means they must take action. Microsoft after 15 years and probably $15bn haven't even got the Internet yet. Yahoo/AOL are hasbeens. Twitter is Linkedin 2.0 and Facebook is just a computer game like World of Warcraft. What does that leave? It leaves Robert and Louis and 000s of followers ... keep truckin' man we are right behind you. TPx

cjromb · 10 months ago

And it might get some good coverage if it wasn't competing with the US Airways crash and the Inauguration train ride.

Maybe I'm missing the point, Louis. Perhaps an overarching disclosure, but really! People would have to be a bit naive not to realize a link to a product on Amazon probably has an affiliate code associated with it an awful lot of the time.

Amazon put the program in place so influencers like Scobleizer could use that influence to direct users to Amazon's products, thus potentially keeping the influencers funded so they can continue to provide the rest of us with their opinion on products we might be interested in. There's a cost for that time, and if we're not paying it to the influencer directly, how does the cost of that time get funded?

And what's the difference? You pay the same for the product with or without an affiliate code.

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

Robert...you only disclosed it AFTER getting "caught red handed" by your own addmission, you had NO real intention of doing a disclosure and you know it.... thats why you said "caught red handed"... either you had no intention, or hoped to not get spotted... but you were, now you say we "should learn how URLs work" as if we should know better... unbelievable.

Rob Sellen · 10 months ago

robert linthicum.. why?? what do we owe him???

Mattb4rd · 10 months ago

@Rob he's received far more publicity doing it the way he did than he would have with a pre-disclosure. It's all "meh" to me.

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

@Mattb4rd I disagree, especially since when one says the alternative would be lessened yet there's no going back, no do overs to see what happens this renders your whole point moot. Openness & transparency beforehand would have rendered would have lessened the controversy

Eric Berlin · 10 months ago

Ad network Magpie was widely criticized for selling ad space via twitter tweets. I wonder if sending out affiliate links will get a similar reaction. My feeling is that doing either/both is absolutely fine since Twitter is an opt-in service. If you don't like it, opt out and unfollow!

Mattb4rd · 10 months ago

@shawn .. that's exactly my point. Controversy = publicity.

Mona N. · 10 months ago

Did I miss the worship Robert Scoble weekend memo? ;) Happy Birthday btw!

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

yup just the tail end...

sofarsoshawn · 10 months ago

I dare someone to get him a Kindle for his birthday...

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Shawn, if I buy Scoble a Kindle for his b'day, I'll use his affiliate
link for sure.

Television Spy · 10 months ago

This kind of thing happens so often amongst A-list bloggers, people may not realize it but it's a very common practice (not something I agree with, but still common).

Laura_N · 10 months ago

Personally, I think this is a non-issue, but I am curious as to one thing. Scoble is suggesting people order it so they can be the first to get a v2., and if they don't get a 2 just return it. So if a sale is made, does he get his affiliate cut even if the person returns it? If so, then this is a scam that could be milked ad infinitum. But it can't be that way - I think I just answered my own question.

Adam Curry · 10 months ago

I don't get what the big deal is.... you guys are crazy. Hope ya got some bling, Robert. :)

Jim · 10 months ago

Who cares if he made a buck off it? I could care less. He built up his audience, so let him profit.

Ron Harwood-micronet · 10 months ago

I don't see the big deal, If you like the "product" and buy the product, the price is the price affiliate link or not.

Robert Scoble · 10 months ago

Wow, Adam, it has been way too long since I have seen you. Nice to see you here on friendfeed.

ScottBourne · 10 months ago

I personally get pretty tired of the faux outrage of people. The folks complaining about "disclosure" act like they have some rights here. They don't - other than to follow or not. That's it. And what's particularly funny to me is that everyone who WOULD be following Robert here would probably be smart enough on their own to figure out Robert had a chance to make a buck from the Kindle link. I tell you this not healthy. Save your complaints for something that's a real affront.

Peter · 10 months ago

I think the link is disclosure enough and Robert is worth some extra money..

Pankaj · 10 months ago

Just another example of political correctness gone to an extreme. Save the bandwidth and end this discussion. There's nothing wrong with affiliate links and people clamoring for disclosure should just be smart enough to move on with their lives.

Zack Brandit · 10 months ago

All I can say is congratulations Robert for this important initiative! This is an excellent approach to start a discussion about monetization on Twitter, FF and others (One I support). We used to have the same reaction when advertising and affiliation came to blogs, those have now many supporters. There are many questions such as: should we find a standard (disclosure)? What about the platform own future monetization model? etc.

Phil Boiarski · 10 months ago

Possessed? Demonetize the need demon. Focus on giving gifts of value and beauty without expecting gold. Value what cannot be bought or sold.

ChaCha Fance · 10 months ago

Who gives a *** People promote affiliate links everyday. If that's what he wants to do, so be it. I'd probably do the same thing if I had that many followers.

David Risley · 10 months ago

Catching up on my Reader and saw this post just now. Funny how such a thing would garner so much attention just because its Scoble. I think that putting an affiliate link into Twitter is perfectly fine. As long as it is relevant. To me, there is no difference between an affiliate link and a non-affiliate link if it leads to the same place either way. As for disclosure, that isn't a big deal to me either. Again, relevancy is the test. If you recommend crap, people will be all over you and your credibility is lost. That's how social media works.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

David, I would tend to agree with you - it's all pretty much the same.
The interesting part about all of it for me was pretty simple.
Scoble's been charged with wasting his time and not having a revenue
strategy for social media. This looked like the first step and was why
I covered it. The excitement about disclosure ended up being more than
I had anticipated.

David Risley · 10 months ago

Well, if this is part of a larger strategy by Robert, its about time. With the kind of influence he has in this space, if he isn't making a good living at this, he is really under-utilizing his brand.

dave · 10 months ago

Pretty cool news as far as I'm concerned. Having run into some serious opposition to doing this in the distant & recent past, I'm happy to see Scoble make the move (and take the heat) so that this is not considered spamming. For those that share information freely with their followers offering a link that might make them a small income seems extremly fair and should not be viewed as anti-Social Networking. Good for him and everyone else.

Louis Gray · 10 months ago

Dave, I like your take on it. I think there is an opportunity for bigger names to leverage their efforts thus far, and this is a pretty direct way to do it. Many have been frustrated by the approach, but I'd rather buy from a Scoble affiliate link than give Amazon all the money. That said, I don't think I'd make much even if I started posting links everywhere. Simply put, if people don't already have their wallets out, my posting a link won't change things.

Craig · 10 months ago

Maybe this is going to be the new trend. You will probably be next, and nothing wrong with that if you are. Why not try to make a little side income from your power of influence with affiliate sales. If I can make a little bit extra money by referring a product to my Twitter friends, I would to.

Scott Loftesness · 10 months ago

Best selling Digital SLRs: http://snurl.com/a8gwa (Playing Scoble's game!)

Chris Charabaruk · 10 months ago

Let's see you give an honest review of them, or tell us something we didn't already know about them. Then you're playing Scoble's game. This is just linkspamming for kicks.