Affiliates are getting a rough time at the moment, it seems that for our small cut we seem to take more than our fair share of the responsibility for what an advertiser is doing. I see being an affiliate as being a middle man, it’s like if one of my friends turned around to me and said “I heard you’re not happy with your bank, I bank with HSBC and they’re brilliant”. Does the fact that he works for HSBC influence MY decision? Not at all. What would influence my decision is the research I then go on to do about HSBC and whether or not they are worth switching to – what HSBC tell me on their website or in person would be the deal maker/breaker. You know what, at the end of the day my relationship will be with HSBC not my friend. If he bullshits me I’ll be sure to tell HSBC, “Such and such said I could get a free million pound overdraft and 4 free flights a year”. It’s up to them to deal with him. This is how I like to think of affiliate marketing but in the modern world it seems to be a changing.
For example there are content publishers out there who go out of their way to deceive the general public in to signing up for something. Who should punish these affiliates/content publishers? The answer to me is an obvious one – the merchant/advertiser! If I’m referring 20 people a day to a product on false promises and 15 of them back out ASAP (and complain, complain people, that’s the key) then it should be the person who owns the product I’m pushing that severs the relationship. Cancel all commissions and make all my traffic invalid. A techy solution to a techy problem. This is what will really bring order to the affiliate marketing game. If the advertiser is breaking any rules to convert the affiliates traffic (after all, affiliates ONLY provide traffic) then that’s where the hammer should fall in terms of the law.
The problems aren’t only with affiliates though. What about publishers who big-up their stats in order to get more money for banner ads, or who have totally untargeted ads. There are plenty of big name bloggers out there who advertise RSS feed counts knowing fine well that thanks to e-mail subscription services a lot of their subscribers may be counted twice. Where does the responsibility fall with this? This is even trickier than the affiliate example. For example I know of one local website (very local to where I live) that accepts banner advertisements from numerous companies whose services aren’t even valid to our locale. We couldn’t use their services if we wanted to! Yet this very big local firm is more than happy to accept the advertising cash. Surely the advertiser should be doing the research? But shouldn’t the publisher tell them “Your service can’t be used here”? It’s tricky, is anybody even doing anything wrong?
2009 has been a breakthrough year for those of us looking to make a living from the internet. It is the year where a clear divide has appeared between those people in countries that can do whatever the hell they like without fearing the consequences and those who find themselves always looking over their shoulders. Much like taxes, you regulate too heavy in one area and people move to a more “friendly” place. I think 2010 could be the start of an internet marketing migration.
One Response to “Advertiser Or Publisher – Who Has Responsibility?”
Petra Weiss
January 2, 2010
As an Affiliate Marketer I think you really have to chose the programs you advertise very wisely, and only back what you really believe to have value and what you think (or hopefully know) delivers on its promises. If you have tried something and know it works, go for it. But don’t make false statements. It will come back and bite you.
|.-= Petra Weiss´s last blog ..Happy New Year To All My Readers! =-.