Bloggers At War
Who needs pay per view?
I think it's rather ridiculous the volume of blog commentary that's trying to suggest that it's no big deal to muddy the line between covering companies as a reporter (via blog or for the Armpit, USA Gazette) and promoting their product(s).
I also continue to be amused how in this day and age, nobody is ever wrong. Om Malik (probably the nicest guy in the industry and someone I respect greatly and chat with occasionally) gets the closest to admitting personal error, though in his second paragraph he does use an ancient PR trick and apologizes for YOU potentially being upset by any conflict of interest, not necessarily for doing anything wrong.
And I do think something is wrong here, though please note I'm not advocating a conflict of interest gestapo. But a reporter's job (and these folks are reporters) is to get at the truth. A marketing department's job is frequently to prevent that from happening. Regurgitating marketing is a poor idea, but participating in said marketing is even worse, if only for appearance's sake.
Particularly if in the Warren Ellis sense of the word, you think journalism is primarily a quest to bring people the truth. With bloggers as hybrid reporters/celebrities running among friends who are developing startups, and the volume of viral marketing and astroturf, the water's already gotten pretty muddy of late. Why make it worse?
Keep the lines clear.
The rest of the "scandal" is just kind of cute. CNET giving ethics lessons, self-promotional juggernauts suddenly shocked and defensive when people finally criticize the degree of industry snuggling, and marketing departments trying to convince everyone that a marketing/objective analysis melting pot is in every reader's best interest.
Pass the popcorn.