Borrow one of TPG's "interns" :)

The few, the proud, the bloggers who post in EMPR.

Correct.
Also correct. ;)

The arrangements between each blogger and the aggregator can and do vary. I'm not sure why that relationship matters to you as a reader, but I know that my arrangement is different from other bloggers and I am not unique in that position.

Regarding the CC links, BA plays zero role in that relationship. If I want CC links I negotiate with the providers myself and keep all the revenue I generate from them. But I cannot go to someone a BA and ask for links. It simply doesn't work that way. There are a couple rules with respect to types of ad placement to protect the main ad sales channel that HoM does provide but that's the only guidance I'm given about CC shilling.

Really? As a reader, it helps me evaluate the independence and credibility of the sources -- the same way it is important in print journalism whether an article is written by a outside contributor, a staff writer, the editorial board, or the marketing apartment. It's also important with BA because so many of its writers have no real qualifications or expertise.

The issue of standards isn't about obtaining credit card links (though affiliating with BA likely increases one's ability to get affiliate links, directly or indirectly). It's about (1) standards of quality, given how frequently some of the newer BA blogs say things that are either demonstrably false or misguided, (2) disclosure standards for when credit cards or other products are being sold, (3) disclosure standards when bloggers are given freebies or better treatment from travel providers.

At this point, Randy and Boarding Area are "experts" in credit card marketing. Most of the newer bloggers are not, and have no understanding of the ethical and legal issues implicated by their marketing practices.

On the basis that Randy / HOM have no direct card deals AFAIK, that's an odd statement to make!

This is also, you assume, a deliberate business decision.

How hard is it to dismiss the idea that links shared by Boarding Area have any sense of additional value/import because of the BA affiliation? It is an ad sales network, not an editorial board. Forbes does the same crap. Find voices you actually trust, not marketing groups.

In print you see a byline. You have no idea if that person is a FTE or freelancer shilling. Arguably there is some editorial control but in the case of the websites that is exercised by the individual title, just like with a magazine or newspaper. Do you dismiss the reporting in Wired because you don't like/trust Vogue? Both are under a common administrative umbrella but really operate as separate entities.


Do you legit believe that there are BA-affiliated blogs that have CC links but are not disclosing such? Point to one. I'd love to see it. The affiliate programs are ridiculously strict about such. No one making bank selling CCs is going to risk that at this point, especially with how hard getting links is and especially how hard it is to get back in once booted.

I believe this statement misses a lot of reality, unless the expertise is simply posting all the time, regardless of relevance. And the BA crew who do so are hardly alone. I also don't quite get the "Randy/BA" inclusion there rather than naming a few blogs that are actually good at it and make real money from it. Certainly there are others unaffiliated that are as good if not better, assuming you're measuring by revenue.

I think there's plenty of crap being published all over the place. But the obsession with the idea that Boarding Area is anything more than an ad network is just bizarre to me. Especially since this isn't new news. Y'all have known for years this is the case but insist on claiming otherwise. I just don't get it.

First of all, I have repeatedly pointed to specific examples of BA blogs that have improper disclosures of affiliate links. I have cited specific examples and how they violate the relevant FTC guidance. You have disagreed. The fact that there is a disclosure buried on a website doesn't mean it's good enough. The fact that there is little risk of the current administration going after Joe Knownothings blog post that hides that his advice is not objective or disinterested doesn't make it right.

Two Examples of BA blogs failing to be sufficiently straightforward.
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/28206911-post261.html
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/external-miles-points-resources/1483373-one-mile-time-omaat-discussions-merged-210.html


Second, I've never seen BA admit it is an "ad network." But regardless, it is a non sequitur that just because you are "only" a platform or an ad network means you cannot set terms and conditions for participation. You and other defenders use this as some sort of talisman when there is no logical reason why an "ad network" cannot have quality and other standards for its members. The reason BA doesn't have standards isn't because it's an "ad network", it's because BA has decided it doesn't want to have standards, and prizes quantity over quality. This is a valid criticism -- and remains so since you and others refuse to acknowledge that the lack of quality control is a deliberate choice.

As for how I read news, actually yes, if one conde nast publication does a story citing another one, that relationship would be referenced in the story, and I would think of it differently than a story from an independent source. And most bylines actually *do* indicate the affiliation of the writer or allow a reader a way of figuring it out. See, e.g.,
http://ethics.npr.org/g-transparency/guidance-for-bylines-on-npr-org/
Given how much mutual gratification many BA blogs give each other, blowing smoke up each other, I think the nature of their relationship and how they mutually benefit from each other's profits are important.
What I find most outrageous, perhaps, is your indignation about calls for transparency. It's hypocritical to purport to advocate for consumers, and transparency in travel company practices, and rant like this against calls for transparency by a company like BA that makes money off of peddling products.

To the suggestion that BA can't be an expert in credit card marketing practices because it doesn't have any direct links itself, that also is illogical. You can be an expert about things you dont do directly. Are you actally going to say Randy doesnt know alot about how credit card and affiliate marketing works? That doesnt pass the sniff test.

The idea that there should be standards that bloggers follow isn't as outlandish as you suggest. The idea that Boarding Area could and should impose such standards on members of its "ad network", which it recruits and encourages to flood the internet with garbage, is not refuted by anything you say. One good set of proposed standards is here: https://mor10.com/code-of-ethics-for-bloggers-social-media-and-content-creators/

As to the "but there's other garbage out there too" argument, "don't pick on BA", for better or worse, BA has developed as a behemoth in the "travel" blog world, and is the largest business in the space. Market leaders should be held responsible for the highest ethical and quality standards.

I've never claimed such. I would LOVE to see the crap not promoted alongside my content. But I also know that I don't run the company. But there's also a difference between "can" and "must" when it comes to the organizational structure. An ad network can exercise such standards but it is not obligated to. Even if a group of folks here continue to demand such.

Would it be better for society as a whole if there was less crappy content published? Probably. Is it worth the endless rants here tipping at that windmill? I guess y'all think so.


That's not what I presented/asked. If you think Vogue is publishing bad content would you discount the stories Wired publishes?

Mutual benefit is tough. I'd bet that the ad rates I get paid wouldn't change much at all if half the BA bloggers disappeared from the site. Of course, that depends on which half. ;)

Boarding Areas doesn't peddle products. That's my issue with the tirades here. They're focused on the wrong target.

What "transparency" do you want from Boarding Area? Should the company publish its ad rates? No way that's going to happen. What other data does Boarding Area create/possess that "should" be published?

I also don't know that any of the sites that Boarding Area aggregates/hosts claims to advocate for consumers or transparency in travel company practices. But I'll admit I haven't gone searching for mission statements on most of them. ;)

Nope. Just that it is irrelevant to the other points being made in this discussion.

If you are talking about credit card affiliate links, they (the individual blogger) would lose the links (be dropped) due to lack of compliance. Chase, Citibank, AMEX are real sticklers now for compliance. So if what you are saying is true, those bloggers would not have the links any longer; or you are saying that Chase, Citibank, AMEX (etc.) have decided to NOT enforce compliance standards on BA bloggers. Which I know is not the case.

The credit card affiliation is between the individual blogger and credit card company, and they are responsible for proper compliance. Sure, they will get warnings, but there is a reason it is not so easy to get direct links anymore.

So, I am confused.

The bare minimum of compliance from the perspective of the bank is not the same as a best practice from a consumer perspective. It is a very technical minor disclosure statement that the average "newbie" who relies on the info of these shlock blogs. As noted, banks know that reality is a regulator is not going to go after these know nothing bloggers who "recommend" credit cards without making it clear their "advice " is really an ad.

And you are basing this on? I am assuming that you are expert in the compliance standards for credit cards, correct? And also are an expert and understand the compliance standards that the credit card companies require of bloggers?

I'm not going to pass judgement on what's good or not good for consumers. But, you seem to be holding the bloggers to a higher standard than the big banks. Perhaps, if the banks were held to a higher standard than this problem would be eradicated. I think going after AMEX, Citibank and Chase might be a better place to start.

The only reason it is "tipping at that windmill" is because you and other apologists let Randy off the hook. If you actually don't like seeing crap promoted alongside your content, there are ways you could do something about it, rather than rant at people who have the temerity to call out the crap. "It's Randy's company he's going to do what he wants, individual writers and content consumers just have to suck it up and should give up calling it out" - wow, so bold, so brave.

If Vogue consistently engaged in unethical journalistic conduct, yes, it would impact my view of Wired.

If you go to boardingarea.com's main page, I just saw an ad for TD Bank and the new Delta Skymiles Amex. Indirectly, as an "ad network", it peddles far more. Events like BAcon facilitate sales formally; other connections facilitate sales more.

1) A requirement that any ads masquerading as "advice" be clearly disclosed as such.
2) Rewriting the http://boardingarea.com/about-us/ page that is incredibly misleading and does not indicate the nature of the business it and its hosted blogs run. "The blogs you will find on BoardingArea are the best of the best, the cream of the crop, the cat’s meow… you get the idea. Each blog in the BoardingArea network has been hand selected by our team for its quality of content, its timeliness and, last but not least, for its entertainment value."
- You yourself have suggested THIS IS A LIE.


You really seem to just be trying to be contrary here, but sure, here are some examples of BA bloggers taking travel providers to task for not being sufficiently transparent:
http://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.c...oking-classes/
http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea....yre-next-room/
http://andystravelblog.boardingarea....ing-new-video/


This was a response to someone else saying BA cant be an expert because it doesnt have direct links.

"Expert" appears to be a loaded word for you, but, yes, I am quite familiar with the compliance approaches of large financial institutions, as well as their lobbying and political activity designed to ensure minimal enforcement or the relaxation of standards.

Based on your own logic, every blog with credit card links is following the banks' compliance standards scrupulously. Ergo, if I see a blog engaging in a practice, I know that is not prohibited by the bank.

Nope, I am equally an advocate for increased authority given to the CFPB and other regulatory institutions to protect consumers. And in appropriate fora, I am quite vocal in ways I think financial institutions in the US are harmful to consumers. But this is a thread about Boarding Area, which I didn't create.

And I think it should be easier to affect change at Boarding Area than at Citi, so long as people don't throw their hands up in the air and say "Well that's how Randy wants to do it so who are we to criticize his shlockpeddling."

Yet you appear to be holding Boarding Area to a standard above the requirements of the CFPB based on your comments.

Again, can v must.

Just because you want something to happen differently doesn't mean it will or even that it should.

Cute that you think you're teaching me that.
Thankfully, I don't live my life just staying silent about things that I think are wrong because they may not change or because some people don't agree with me. What a pathetic existence that would be. I couldn't imagine being upset that my writing was being displayed along crap, but simply accepting that as an unchangeable fate because some guy named Randy says it's so. I've gone up against folks a lot more powerful than the king of the deceptive miles marketing blogs; sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

(And there's a complex regulatory scheme here, involving both the FTC, CFPB, and state consumer laws. Plus I've been quite explicit and referred to ethical standards, which are not the same as legal standards. )