Fake Bloggers named and shamed

[contextual staff]

I always talk myself up on my own blog. I tell people what a wonderful lover I am, caring guy, masculine and extremely handsome. What's wrong with that? If I don't do it, who will?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1361968.ece

[IndigoBlack]

So like most things having to do with the internet, how do they propose to differentiate between who is a faker and who is legit?

[Deejay Dan]

I take very little stock in what I read on blogs, unless I actually know the person. It's a shame that corporate America has ruined blogging just like they did with instant messaging, ads are now plastered all over the place inside the client and IM conversations.

There is no way to figure out who is doing honest to goodness reviews and who is faking or being paid for it. If it's a negative review, it's more likely to be truthful.

[John Scott]

In 2004, it emerged that John Rechy gave himself a five-star review on Amazon for his book The Life and Adventures of Lyle Clemens, which was attributed only to “a reader from Chicago”. Amazon since has tightened up procedures to try and verify the identity of reviewers.

LOL.

[ewomack]

Hey! Opportunist antennas rise up! Why stop with blogs? Write an entire "memoir" about your experiences with people all over the globe, publish it with the help of a multinational, and get it on Ophra's book club. You'll get caught, and Ophra will hate you, but you'll make your publisher rich!!

What? Oh... that's been done? Never mind.

We take so much on faith in the "information" age...

[waffles]

And that is why when I review something I always make sure I talk about negative things. If nothing else, there's always an area to be improved.

[kristeejo]

my blog is fake.

[bested]

Originally Posted by Deejay Dan

I take very little stock in what I read on blogs, unless I actually know the person. It's a shame that corporate America has ruined blogging just like they did with instant messaging, ads are now plastered all over the place inside the client and IM conversations.

There is no way to figure out who is doing honest to goodness reviews and who is faking or being paid for it. If it's a negative review, it's more likely to be truthful.

Contrary to your belief, it is quite easy to tell when somebody is being paid to review a website. Think about it, why else would you review a website? I really see no problems with this as long as the website has something relevant to your blog and your readers might actually be interested in it.

It's also quite easy to tell if the reviews are paid if they have big http://reviewme.com banners on it saying "Get reviewed by this website for $120" or whatever. Unless they're lying!!

[waffles]

I'd review a site if I genuinely like it. And I'm reviewing other radio or music blogs right now so I'll have some new content over the summer. So there are reasons besides money.

[bested]

Yes, indeed there are reasons besides for the money, but you could sometimes tell... but the biggest point is, who cares if your being paid for it if it is relevant to what you usually write about?

The only people who probably care, are other webmasters jealous of how much money you could make with a review blog.

Damn I have an article for everything... haha
-

[chicgeek]

Regardless of having "an article for everything", please do not post it. We interpret it as a form of self-promotion.

[bested]

Ok... I won't post them anymore ~_~

I just thought they were relevant, and could be hopeful... sorry