<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Affiliate Link Bashing and The Self-defeating Marketing community</title>
	<link>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html</link>
	<description>I think there's an opinion on that subject lying around here somewhere....</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 08:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: uk deals</title>
		<link>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-129121</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-129121</guid>
					<description>I was just searching the web for info on the latest slap when I came across this article. It's seems that G goes through a regular cycle of slapping down sites with affiliate links on (there's a pretty big hit right now). I can only guess that right now they're pushing their own affiliate programme hard and want people to sign up to it rather than using other networks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was just searching the web for info on the latest slap when I came across this article. It&#8217;s seems that G goes through a regular cycle of slapping down sites with affiliate links on (there&#8217;s a pretty big hit right now). I can only guess that right now they&#8217;re pushing their own affiliate programme hard and want people to sign up to it rather than using other networks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Bargain Shopper</title>
		<link>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-129094</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:43:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-129094</guid>
					<description>Affiliate links are generating a lot of revenue on the internet. If someone has a good looking website and it points the visitor to the right direction, then why not give the webmaster a cut? It doesn't cost the consumer anything. To the visitor, it is truely a "free" service.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Affiliate links are generating a lot of revenue on the internet. If someone has a good looking website and it points the visitor to the right direction, then why not give the webmaster a cut? It doesn&#8217;t cost the consumer anything. To the visitor, it is truely a &#8220;free&#8221; service.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-128449</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 17:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-128449</guid>
					<description>Personally, whenever I see a link on a site pointing to a product or service, I assume that the publisher is getting something out of it. I have no problems with that at all and find the whole disclosure issue a bit tedious. As you say in your post, webmasters inject value into the web so why shouldn't they be able to get something back in return?

I do tire of reading the self righteous BS that comes out of some of the folks in the community. Maybe they're just bleating because they never made any money from affiliate marketing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, whenever I see a link on a site pointing to a product or service, I assume that the publisher is getting something out of it. I have no problems with that at all and find the whole disclosure issue a bit tedious. As you say in your post, webmasters inject value into the web so why shouldn&#8217;t they be able to get something back in return?</p>
<p>I do tire of reading the self righteous BS that comes out of some of the folks in the community. Maybe they&#8217;re just bleating because they never made any money from affiliate marketing?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-128434</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 17:39:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-128434</guid>
					<description>I have to agree, there is a purist movement out there that refuses to accept the way things are suppose to work. There is absolutely nothing wrong with affiliate links.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to agree, there is a purist movement out there that refuses to accept the way things are suppose to work. There is absolutely nothing wrong with affiliate links.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Scott K</title>
		<link>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-128432</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.johnon.com/630/ftc-truth-in-advertising.html#comment-128432</guid>
					<description>I completely agree with you.  I do not have any problem whatsoever with affiliate links. Providers should be reimbursed for quality content in some way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I completely agree with you.  I do not have any problem whatsoever with affiliate links. Providers should be reimbursed for quality content in some way.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
