Pay Per View Journalism - Right or Wrong?

"During a recent interview with Podtech's Maryam Scoble, Mary Jo Foley revealed that ZDNet has a payment scheme in place that rewards its bloggers based on the number of clicks their posts get. Foley recently left Ziff Davis to become a free agent. Her primary gig involves writing a well-read blog on Microsoft for ZDNet, which CNET owns. Foley says she likes the pay-for-performance model because "It rewards people… who do a lot of work to make sure that their blogs are popular, which is what I do." Foley's writing has long been a must-read for keeping up with all things Microsoft." (via Micropersuasion)

Why Right?

On one hand, I'll say that it's fair enough. Site traffic and pageviews go hand in hand with advertising revenue, and this payment scheme can be viewed as nothing more than a profit sharing exercise. Do well in terms of readership numbers, and you get rewarded. This is nothing new if you consider the way TV ratings have worked since the very beginning.

Why Wrong?

On the other, the web is a slightly different animal, and what transpires may have far reaching consequences on how journalists operate altogether. Remember, most, if not all of ZDNet is a professional media organization. Consider this:

• Where do you draw the line between search friendly posts and keyword stuffing?
• Would this compromise the quality of writing just to get more organic search traffic?
• Would your compensation be based on how many top Diggers you know, rather than how many good stories you put out?
• Will this lead to even more sensationalist headlines just to grab attention?
• How much frustration will writers who just want to write, rather than market their stories encounter?

These are the questions and issues which mainstream media needs to grapple with.

How right (or wrong) do YOU think it is?

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to profy RSS feed!