Make Money Online

As an editor there times when you find yourself torn between personal/public sentiment and the journalistic ideal of providing a neutral forum. Last month with the dust-up over having Hydra as an advertiser when our authors are calling for an association to promote ethical standards, Hydra’s subsequent response, and the discussion of when it is appropriate to drop an advertiser, has lead me affect a change in Revenews advertising policy.

Effective immediately: Any potential direct advertiser who in the 12 months prior to requesting an ad does not maintain a clean record will be denied placement. Clean record shall constitute not having the advertiser’s business tactics identified as being unethical or harmful by Ben Edelman, Kellie Stevens, Center for Democracy and Technology, Sun Microsystems, the Webwatch Project, not having been fined by the FTC, or currently in a lawsuit with a state attorney general.

Ultimately Revenews does not seek to become a watchdog group and the final decision on whether or not to accept an advertiser will still be the burden of the editor. However I have seen good people like the folks at ABestWeb, the PMA, Avantlink, ShareASale take steps to improving the makeup of our industry. I applaud their efforts as well as the efforts of those listed above who spend time and energy being vigilant. I think it is time Revenews makes a stand as well.

See the original post:
Hard to Make a Stand

Since this type of discussion is important and it is rare for an ad network to come forth while under fire, below is the response from Mason Wiley, the SVP of Marketing for Hydra, as originally posted in the comments section Brad Waller’s article Reason #4837 Why This Industry Needs an Association and in response ultimately to Ben Edelman’s research here:

Hello, SVP of Marketing for Hydra here to throw in my 2 cents… or fuel for the fire. First off, we aren’t going to pull our ad just because the discussion puts us under a harsh spotlight. We really truly have nothing to hide. The fact that people use adware is not news. It is not illegal. Some advertisers even request it. And for the record it represents just a small fraction of our overall business.

Does allowing adware by some affiliates hurt all others? In theory, It could. Is it truly a widespread problem in reality? Frankly, we hadn’t thought of it before – as I said, it’s not a big part of our business. But now that our attention has been called to it, we’re looking into it.

If you recall, Hydra was the first to eliminate cash incentivizers due to shadiness. We have made heavy investments to provide rigorous compliance – in fact we are widely regarded as exceptionally aggressive in that area. We also spend legal and research dollars to vet claims by advertisers. And more.

I don’t bring these points up thinking they can counteract the this whole adware brouhaha. The point is this: Hydra does not wish to engage in shady black or grey hat practices – NOR do we feel it is in our economic interest to do so. Do you think we want to jeopardize the inroads we have made with major brand name advertisers in order to score a quick buck? (the answer is no) We have had great success playing by the rules… and we want to be even more successful.

So we welcome any efforts to set professional standards, monitor and police, and generally clean up the affiliate marketing space. The better advertisers understand how reputable affiliates and networks work, the safer they will feel, and the more ad dollars they’ll pump in. That would be good for affiliates. That would also be good for us. Our interests are totally aligned on that one!

Anyway it’s end of day Friday so I will stop for now. But i do look forward to continuing the discussion.

If you have your two cents about Hydra specifically, CPA networks in general, or the proliferation of adware, the comment section below is a good place to express those opinions.

See more here:
Hydra Responds