How Much Does BlogHer Think Your Trust Capital Is Worth? Five Bucks.

by anna on September 30, 2010

The BlogHer View definition in a new window Publishing Network has just launched a new sponsored campaign to target their network members who use Twitter and Facebook. 100 bloggers from the 2,500-blogger strong network have been invited to participate in the “ninja team” running this campaign, and in return they will receive the lofty sum of $5 per tweet/Facebook message they send, based on the email I read (see below, with salient parts bolded):

We’ve got some fun and easy, 100-blogger promotional programs in support of current and future ad campaigns, and we hope you might be interested.

Our review programs are always popular, but we are often restricted to working with a handful of bloggers at a time. That’s no fun, when we have so many awesome reviewers available!

We want to help spread the word about our great contests and our fantastic review content, while spreading around a more income to our reviewers, and we wondered if you’d be interested?

We’re looking to build a ninja team of twitter and facebook gurus to help us promote active (and upcoming) BlogHer programs.

You don’t have to have thousands of followers or facebook friends to participate.

You don’t have to be based in the United States.

You don’t have to retweet canned phrases.

You don’t have to participate in any programs that you aren’t interested in.

We’ll be asking for one tweet or facebook message a week, in your own voice, for four weeks, on either facebook or twitter, and we’ll paying you $20. Easy-peasy.

We are very conscious of the integrity View definition in a new window of your twitter and facebook accounts – we don’t want you to be spamming your friends with sponsored messages, so we won’t ask for your participation in every campaign, unless you truly feel that it is a great fit for your readers.

If you’re interested, we’ll have a couple of these programs kicking off next week.

Wow, this sounds like a great deal. I bet Pioneer Woman, Bossy, Nie Nie and all of the other biggies who are still on BlogHer are all over this shit. $5 a tweet?! AWESOME.

People? Don’t sell your tweets. Not now, probably not ever. OK, maybe if you can get like $10,000 for one, like Kim Kardashian can (supposedly), then get back to me about it, OK? But not for $5. You are going to lose followers, you’re going to annoy people, and it’s not worth it. “Not enough room” in the review program, please. Don’t even get me started.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

{ 19 comments }

1
Yum Yucky September 30, 2010 at 8:48 am

Posts like this is why I am fan… of you, of course. Not the $5 tweets. #eww on that.

2
anna September 30, 2010 at 10:27 am

Thanks. What they will say is $5 is more than any other sponsored tweet campaign is paying, which might be true. But my thought is, don’t do a sponsored tweet campaign unless you are getting in the thousands of dollars for it, and even then, be very careful and give it a lot of thought before you do so.

3
agirlandaboy September 30, 2010 at 8:48 am

I agreed to consider this campaign, but my decision had nothing to do with the money it would earn me and everything to do with the money it would earn an organization that works to support teenagers starting and joining service clubs. The fact that I could tweet four times (out of the hundreds of tweets I post in a month) and earn that organization a few extra bucks (they get 50 cents for every comment left on the targeted post) makes a big difference to me. That’s a lot different than tweeting about the newest menu item at Burger King, I think.

For me, my level of annoyance at Twitter parties and sponsored posts is greatly influenced by the cause being promoted AND the frequency of the tweets. One tweet a week in support of good cause? I’d do that for free, so the $5/tweet price is negligible.

4
Kerry September 30, 2010 at 10:21 am

So this is for not-for-profits, not consumer goods companies?

5
anna September 30, 2010 at 10:26 am

Not the email I posted, no. At least not exclusively.

6
agirlandaboy September 30, 2010 at 10:52 am

Some yes, some no, and you can decide whether to be part of a campaign on a case-by-case basis.

7
anna September 30, 2010 at 10:25 am

That’s how they get you, Leah, though. They get you with the goody two shoes campaigns and then, before you know it, you’re face down in a pile of Nestle Good Start with a straw up your nose and a fist full of fivers.

Besides, the email I saw did not have any brand names attached to it. It just said that you could opt out of whatever campaigns you did not want to do or whatever.

8
agirlandaboy September 30, 2010 at 10:51 am

Yeah, but I’m still happy to do the goody-two-shoes stuff and then opt out of the rest, depending on whether it’s a company I’d support anyway, monetary incentive or no. With charity stuff, I tend to look at it the way I look at kids who volunteer at soup kitchens for the sole purpose of putting it on their college applications: they may not be doing it for the “right reasons,” but the result is still a benefit for the people who need it. (Which isn’t to say we can’t be critical of the process, of course.)

9
Ammie @ Domesticallyobsessed.com September 30, 2010 at 11:41 am

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! Great visual, Anna. Much agreed to the commentor above-THIS is why I come back. Content with integrity and a balls-to-the-wall no-nonsense smack to the face. And I agree–simply because I was in advertising–you know those really sweet ads on TV about how you should consult with your doctor if you have disease so and so? Guess what? Those puppies are paid by the drug dealers. Notice how they are immediately followed a few commercials later with a drug that just happens to address disease so and so? Hmmm…..that’s called branding. Coincidence? Nah-uh.

10
Maggie McGary September 30, 2010 at 9:52 am

I thought Twitter was banning all 3rd party paid tweets?

http://techland.com/2010/05/24/twitter-to-block-third-party-sponsored-tweets/

Or did I miss something?

11
Ginger September 30, 2010 at 10:14 am

My understanding was that it was blocking sponsored tweets that used the Twitter API–so an application that did them rather than individuals. I could be confused about that though, as I tend to gloss over stuff about sponsored tweets if possible.

12
jonniker September 30, 2010 at 10:17 am

That’s different than if you or I do a sponsored tweet. What they’re referring to are applications like Twitterrific or Tweetdeck who, as part of their business model, would interject advertisements paid for by sponsors in the middle of your twitter stream — and they’d be made to look like a tweet. In other words, it wasn’t a PERSON tweeting those ads, but a pre-populated tweet paid for by a company and just thrown in there at random. Like spam, but with tweets.

13
anna September 30, 2010 at 10:23 am

Ginger and Jonna are right, they banned apps that would do it, though the original wording of the press release was somewhat confusing. What they said was that users own their tweets, so you can pay a user to tweet something, but you cannot program something through the Twitter API to show an ad.

14
cindy w September 30, 2010 at 11:30 am

Yeah, I got that email & promptly deleted it. So not worth the effort.

15
kitchenMage September 30, 2010 at 12:07 pm

Ha! I got the mail and my first thought was, “How long until Anna has a copy and a ‘don’t sell yourself short’ rant?” Answer: Not very long at all… Needless to say I deleted the mail.

16
Susan Tiner September 30, 2010 at 2:22 pm

This is interesting. I wonder how many tweets are basically just ads at this point.

17
Laura September 30, 2010 at 4:40 pm

This whole idea is incredibly condescending. Both to the writers/tweeters and readers/followers. I’d like to take some ninja stars to the overall tone of the pitch letter. Are the little housewives actually supposed to be excited about the idea of making a bit of pin money? Give me a break.

18
Anon Y. Mous September 30, 2010 at 7:32 pm

I don’t sell out for a DIME less than the cost to feed my family of four at McDonald’s. So there.

19
Poppy Buxom October 6, 2010 at 10:12 pm

Shit, I missed this whole kerfuffle. I wonder whether I got one of those emails … I tend to chuck out BlogHer emails unread. (Curmudgeonly of me, I admit. But if my editor wants me to know something, she can email me herself.)

Comments on this entry are closed.