Ethics of Monetization for Web Publishers

 I’ve heard conversation recently regarding the ethics of affiliate marketing [1], but similar concerns arise regarding contextual and direct advertising for web publishers. Affiliate marketing may be the most obvious, but what about other forms of advertising as well?

So I’m going to hit on the variations: contextual advertising, direct advertising, and the biggie,  affiliate marketing (in part 2). But please remember we’re not talking splogs here, man. I’m talking about ethical considerations of monetization to support content-driven sites.

And for the record, I wholeheartedly support the notion of getting paid for producing web content.  Making and maintain websites is hard work. Consistently bringing value to the table is hard work. People deserve to get paid for it. The trick is always in the details, huh?

Contextual Ads

I have a low carb community that’s been around since 1999. It has always been free and I like it that way–but somebody has to pay for the costs of the server and software (and we won’t even get into the notion of a pittance for the “labor of love” part).

So what to do? I can either charge for the content, thus interfering with carrying out the site’s mission (promoting healthy, sustainable low carb eating)–or I can put up ads and learn the ropes of affiliate marketing to keep revenue rolling and the site online. The squeeze is even tougher right now, since ad revenue has not surprisingly nosedived this year.

While the ads are set so that I seldom see (to avoid accidental clicks), I get a little shudder every time I do. You know what kind of ads come up for weight-loss sites, don’t ya? There is a ton of the ”Lose 17 pounds and get a flat belly in 2 days without any effort on your part using our absolutely amazing super-secret Herbal Supplement” stuff. Yeah. Let’s sell some false hope to fat people, shall we? [2] Eyew.

I managed to justify this:

• I don’t pick the ads. The ones that are most clicked are the ones that will end up showing the most. It’s self-determination at it’s finest.
• People who are attracted to the extreme advertising BS are not a good fit for my site, which promotes a very moderate approach. They would be leaving in a matter of seconds anyway. Might as well use their defection to help fund the site for people we can help.
• The Worst of the Worst I block. There is one advertiser in particular that I refuse to allow on any of my sites, because I know too much to sleep at night if I felt like I was associated with sending anybody there. They also keep spamming me–and I report every blessed one with gusto. I like to think it helps.
• The advertisers that appear to have the most “staying power” are the ones that are the best fit. I take comfort in that. I also suspect they do better with their advertising investment because they are a good match for what we promote. I love when this happens, because good-fit advertising is, indeed, offering a service.
• Without the ads, there would be no site. This is the plain, simple reality. I could dramatically writhe in cognitive dissonance until the second coming over allowing advertising for the same products  we routinely warn people against, but facts are facts: If you love missionary work, you’d better get yourself some sponsors, dude.

Maybe I’m fooling myself here, and I have already sold out. But until somebody gives me a better answer, I’m not going to feel too bad for not saving people from themselves. That’s a much bigger job than I want to undertake, let me tell ya!

Direct Advertising

I’m still learning the ropes on selling direct advertising, so I can’t speak to this from personal experience, other than to say I have no doubt the same issues are going to be there, except worse–you’re essentially handpicking ads, so you don’t even have “the ads are served automatically and I don’t pick ‘em” argument to stand behind. I guess I’ll cross that ethical bridge when I come to it (in the not-too-distant future). We’ll see how it goes, huh?

I do find myself wondering how others make that choice–do you allow advertising for stuff you feel fishy about? And how fishy is too fishy? Is it “just business” or lending your personal reputation to your advertisers? Because I’m guessing what’s just business for the publisher is buying your brand to the advertisers. Who’s more on target?

Footnotes

1. Thanks to @GenuineChris for the inspiration–particularly on affiliate marketing! [↑]
2. I can use the word “fat” without being a bitch ’cause I used to be fat. Don’t make the rules. [↑]

Possibly Related

• Are All Affiliate Marketers Sellouts?
• How-to Comply with the CAN-SPAM Act
• Good Karma Manifesto
• Email Marketing

Posted on May 1, 2009 at 6:23 pm in: Marketing, Small Biz Tips

Tagged as: advertising, ethics, Marketing