Here are two excerpts from this article I find interesting given some recent comments on another thread on this site.....
“It’s standard operating procedure” to pay bloggers for favorable coverage, says one Republican campaign operative. A GOP blogger-for-hire estimates that “at least half the bloggers that are out there” on the Republican side “are getting remuneration in some way beyond ad sales.”
.........
"Ad purchases at above market rates are a common means by which some campaigns seek to influence bloggers, according to numerous campaign operatives and bloggers.
Bloggers, aware of this, have begun to request improbably high rates on their own.
Florida political blog Shark-Tank.net, which reaches about 15,000 viewers per month, is asking campaigns for $3,200 a month for a large banner ad. For that same price, an advertiser could purchase similar space on political blogs reaching over 1 million readers each week.
Shark-Tank.net managing editor Javier Manjarres said in an interview that his site’s advertising and editorial decisions are “completely separate” and noted a “tough love” article the site published about Senate candidate Marco Rubio, one of the site’s biggest advertisers.
Beyond advertising purchases, some bloggers earn money as consultants to campaigns."
To read the full article click on the link below:
http://dailycaller.com/2010/
My statement: I will state that I take no remuneration of any kind for my website either from ads or any other source. This blog is a non-profit citizen's blog. Should I ever decide to go for a for profit blog and take ads I will communicate this to my readers. I have in the past put up banners on my website (links to other blogs) but have never charged for them. Some say I am giving away my hard work for free. My response is that for now, the small amount of ad revenue I would make is not worth the hassle filing this site as a business and the other administrative work involved.
For discussion: If a site is taking political ads and providing political coverage, do you feel that this could impact the coverage of events? Has this happened already in Hoboken where a blog either had ads or a sponsorship influence the editorial slant? Share your thoughts below in the comments. ◦
Logging you in...
InfotainMe · 762 weeks ago
1) Reform-minded - broadly speaking.
2) An independent thinker - at least as far as local politics goes.
If you as the host go over the top for a candidate it will inevitably hurt the candidate - as 411 has seriously and probably permanently damaged Beth Mason.
Really, there won't be a political test of conscience until there is a 2nd choice in town. Right now there isn't - just a group loosely referred to as reform, the old guard, and Ms Mason's perpetual campaign. The latter 2 don't get a drop of consideration. One can afford to be fair about Ms. Mason's better angels (when they appear) and to question Zimmer's agenda, choices, etc. It changes nothing - there's still only one candidate to take seriously.
When there is a real second candidate, things will get interesting. Until then, the divisions as presently defined will live on and editorial policy here and elsewhere won't play that much of a role in people's thinking.
Lookforward · 762 weeks ago
ss1959 · 762 weeks ago
p1ywood 98p · 762 weeks ago