The Marqui Blog Shills story keeps on keeping on. I have taken some time off, but I need to assimilate the various points being made in comments and trackbacks to my last post on the topic of Marqui, a content managemeny company, who has launched an innovative but ethically questionable marketing campaign, where it directly compensates bloggers to write about the company's product.

Just to reprise, I have argued that what the bloggers are up to is not necessarily evil, but that they are squandering the trust that people have for them. I maintain that it is inevitable that readers will question this practice as being too cosy with the sponsor, as contrasted with renting rectangular real estate over in the margins (ads).

Over at Meryl's notes, I seem to have been lumped in with a bunch of the Marqui bloggers, which is surprising on one level, since I have been writing in opposition to this newest take on paid placement:

[from meryl's notes: The Future in Marketing?]

The Future in Marketing?

I'm one of them. I've been bought. Marqui has assimilated me, but I still retain control over my opinions.

[Which is the Marqui blogger's argument in a nutshell.]

[...]

Rather than rehashing what fellow Marqui bloggers are saying, I’ll point the way as they share their stories and beliefs about this program. the head lemur, sooz, Richard McManus, Mitch Ratcliffe, Stowe, Robin Good.

Hey, include me out!

I have had direct discussions with several of those folks listed, and I would like to respond to various questions and issues raised:

Robin Good recapitulates the now-standard argument for Marquiism: we are paid to mention, but not praise; our reputations remain intact; its not really different from ads; readers will ultimately judge Marquiists on the value of their words; we serve them, not Marqui. He asks me if I am willing to review the outcome and impacts of the campaign with him when its all done, in March 2005. Sure, Robin, of course.

Alan Herrel (the head lemur) asks "We can disagree, but before tarring and feathering , don't you think that a little evidence is in order?" Hmmm. I don't really think I am leaping to conclusions. My argument is that being paid to write about a company, without clearing marking it as a sponsored entry, a form of advertisement [a practice we are open to, by the way, at Corante] is ultimately confusing to readers who are unacquainted with the subtleties involved in Marquiism. That's all. Its confusing, and as a result it will (to at least some extent) debase the purported goals of social media -- to have an open dialogue based on personal convictions.

Ted Rheingold, Ralph Poole, and John Furrier chime in with me, replaying the themes of loss of trust, independence, and the small-potatoes aspect of Marqui's money. Why risk so much for so little?

Brian Moffatt challenges my impartiality, and asks for full disclosure on my relationship with Silkroad, whose ad is prominently displayed in the upper right hand corner of Get Real at the time of this writing. First of all, I am not impartial; I am an extremely biased individual, as I have stated on innumerable situations. All knowledge arises from an emotional involvement in understanding the world. That's why the concept of journalistic impartiality is a sham, and why I advocate gonzo media so strongly.

Yes, Silkroad is a client of mine: they advertise at Get Real and Strange Attractor, two blogs at Corante, they are a client in my Social Tools Advisory Service, and they are a sponsor of the recently announced True Voice (The Business of Blogging) seminar series. I have had lots of clients over the past ten plus years as a consultant, including Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, Jabber, and literally dozens of others. But, strangely enough, I haven't even had a conversation with the folks at Silkroad about the Marqui campaign. I mentioned them in the recent debate since they are the most prominent ad on my blog, and because I have written next to nothing about their product.

Most folks are unaware that before Marqui's identity was revealed, Marc Canter had started a back channel discussion with me, Jason Calcanis, and a number of others about the concept of paid placement in blogs. I disagreed then, as did Jason, and many of the others. Jason and I went public with our disapproval. The fact that Marqui is a CMS company, like Silkroad, is just a coincidence.

Again: I disapprove of the practice of Marquiism, I recommend that bloggers and sponsors resist the temptation to indulge in it. It is a vice, but not one that should lead to banishment from the community of bloggers, or jail time. Its just socially unacceptable, like interrupting people all the time or not sending thank you letters. Just bad etiquette: the sort of thing that erodes people's willingness to invite you back or accept your invitations. I recently wrote that a brand, today, in out socialized world, is an invitation. If you invite, and people decline, its not much of a party, is it?