tlott

It sounds to me like you disapprove of any website/blog that tries to monetize their views. It takes a lot of hours to produce content. Why would someone not try to generate revenue from it? If the bloggers themselves didn't put card offers on their sites, they'd have banner space instead. Guess what? The card companies and other affiliates would target that ad space with the same credit card offers anyway.

I fail to see what is dishonest about promoting cards in the way the bloggers are. Where are the deceptive or false claims? They clearly disclose their relationship w/ the advertiser as required by the FTC.

They're marketers doing what they do - marketing. No different than marketers in any other industry. If credit card affiliate revenue dies down, they'll have to diversify. Personally, I believe promoting these sorts of products will continue to be lucrative for the foreseeable future.

ingy

Amen !!!!!!!

Adam1222

The degree of disclosure is actually quite new, and it is not quite transparent. Many of the larger blogs do not make their ownership clear, and to the average reader (i.e., not a Flyertalker), they are not marketers, but travel content experts. As has been discussed many, many, many times here, some of these blogs occupy spaces where the ethics of journalism don't apply, even where the content of the articles would lead a reader to believe otherwise.

If these bloggers self-identified as marketers, we wouldn't be here. Instead, they come up with names that suggest they are experts in Cheap Travel or miles and points, or "secrets", and that they -- out of the pure desire to share their frugality -- will teach you how you too can be a Cheap Travel Guy.

Whereas specific links to cards *sometimes* disclosure they lead to commissions, it is not clear that the "advice" given is not always objective (rarely, on some blogs), nor is the special treatment given to certain bloggers always disclosed.

As for it taking many hours to monetize content, no one is forcing them to do that. For many of these blogs, the content was far better when they posted less and had real jobs.

Finally, just because something may be legal under the regs of the FTC and the statutes that it enforces, doesn't mean it is immune from criticism.

You're free to disagree, of course, and think that there is nothing wrong. But that doesn't require accusing people of having improper motives like jealousy and anger, or otherwise calling them names.

TMM1982

Adam, what's a real job, in your opinion? And are you saying that the bloggers now have "fake jobs?" Since apparently they're no longer real.

Raffles

I'd say the concept of 'real job' - beyond about 10 per cent of the population who teach / nurse / police / clean streets - is a bit outdated.

Pretty sure we can all list about 100 job titles off the top of our heads which contribute even less to the greater welfare of society than running a travel blog. Running a mommy blog for a start :-)

Not sure the world would be a better place if I closed Head for Points and went back to structuring leveraged buyouts!

TMM1982

I mean honestly, who the hell wants an 8 to 5 where you have to wear a suit when you could stay home, write a blog in your undies, and get at least 6 figures? I'd say anyone who calls what I just described a fake job is suffering from severe jealousy.

gpapadop

Amen ^

Adam1222

Yes, you've called people, and me, jealous before.
I'd personally be bored out of my mind and feel like a waste of a human being. I'm putting on my suit shortly and have a very exciting, intellectually stimulating day ahead, 6 figures and all.

As for the fake shock at the use of the term "real job", in your time honored tradition of taking a long, thoughtful post and attacking one minor component rather than engage, whatever it means, flying yourself and your boyfriend to luxury hotels in first class cabins and writing about it, and then complaining that the flight attendant didn't say nice enough things when handing you a dish of nuts, doesn't strike me as a real job.

That's not to say blogging is never a real job, or working from home is not a real job. What I don't consider a real job is traveling the world on leisure trips and summarizing each detail.
And I think running a mommy blog does contribute more to society. The world needs good mothers; it doesn't need tips on travel to the Le Meridien

TMM1982

IMO, a real job is one where someone makes enough money to provide the living they desire. It's clear that Ben has pulled off the American Dream. You may not consider it a "real job" but I doubt Ben really cares. He's probably having tea at the London Mayfair right now while you are putting on your suit.

Nobody ever said the world needed bloggers. The world doesn't need movies, ice cream shops, or google either. But nonetheless they are all here to stay.

Adam1222

The American Dream actually typically involves putting down roots and raising a family. But regardless, you're missing the point, which is that accusing people of being "jealous" of that is off-base and unjustified. I am perfectly comfortable accepting the fact that I rather have my job/life than Ben's, and Ben rather have his/job life than mine. "Jealousy" is a lazy retort. (And you're moving the goalpost here. You were accusing me of being jealous of someone who spends their day sitting at home in their underwear, now at the person has transported themselves to tea at the Mayfair.) Your dream may be to sit at home all day in your underwear, mine is not. You cannot win an argument by insisting otherwise.

I was responding to this quote:
"Pretty sure we can all list about 100 job titles off the top of our heads which contribute even less to the greater welfare of society than running a travel blog. Running a mommy blog for a start."

My response remains accurate and relevant. Your attack does not.

TMM1982

That might be your definition but there is nothing typical about it. The typical definition of the American Dream is the ideal that every US citizen should have an equal opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative." I'd say this fits Ben to a T. You don't have to like it but honestly that's just too dang bad.

It is you who is missing the point. As for accusing people of being "jealous," I call them as I see them. You are free to disagree just as I am free to disagree back

tlott

Valid point. Obviously you're right, there is not always disclosure of their ownership. I'd argue that it doesn't make much of a difference in the content they produce. Whether the publisher/blogger is an independent affiliate or their site is owned by a larger business, if they are trying to maximize their revenue they're going to produce similar content and promote similar offers.

To me, it seems like the big players are all trying to maximize revenue so they're going to push their most lucrative offers. They should steer clear of claiming their offer is the best publicly available (most sign up points, etc) if that's false.

If a marketer self-identified as a marketer, they wouldn't be a very good one! That's not going to engender trust with your audience - of course they're not going to do that. What we are witnessing here is repeated all over the internet in different niches.

In a small way, they kind of do self identify as a marketer, "advertiser disclosure" is code for this. It's a positive thing for consumers that the FTC rules were created to force publishers to disclosure when they're being compensated. Imagine the outrage here if there were no disclosures. (5-10 years ago they weren't required)

Agree the disclosures could be more conspicuous. But do you really blame them for doing what is required and not more? Can't imagine many other businesses undercutting their conversions/sales in such a manner.

They have "real jobs". The business model is the modern equivalent of physical magazines selling ad space.

I never accused you of being jealous - although I do think there's an undercurrent of that from some in this forum... and that's ok... human nature. Most people here seem to be able to have a respectful discussion regardless.

Adam1222

"I call them as I see them," is not an effective retort, when you are attacking people based on their motivations, of which you know nothing. As I have said before and I will continue to say, your repeated insults and attacks on people by calling them "jealous" or otherwise are disrespectful, inappropriate, and incorrect. "I call them as I see them," does not excuse your behavior, but rather demonstrates an unwillingness to admit that you may be wrong in your assessments of strangers' motives.

There are many reasons people are critical of others' acts beyond "jealousy." I don't assume you are jealous of my reasoning and writing skills, my ability to combine professional success while also traveling a fair bit, and my general handsome, charming nature, based on your attacks.

TMM1982

There is nothing to excuse. You just don't like that someone is calling you out. As an attorney, you should know there is something called the first amendment which prevents you from abridging my right to free speech. You don't have to like it but you do have to accept it.

Adam1222

Actually, since I'm not the Government, the First Amendment says no such thing.