I ramble a little here, but bear with me.
Recently, I said the Underground wasn’t going to finish 2009 the same way it began it. That’s about to become true.
The Original Trout Underground Manifestor header, circa 2005
Interest in advertising on the Trout Underground is growing (slowly), and suddenly, we’re important enough that a couple manufacturers want to shower me with gear to review (one of them offered to let me keep the swag).
It seems the Undergrounders love gear reviews, but here’s the rub: if a reviewer knows in advance he’s keeping the gear he’s reviewing, then a cynic might suggest he’s receiving a form of payment for the review.
The advertising angle is pretty much the same; advertisers have dollars-and-cents leverage when they’re not happy with editorial content, and some are notoriously willing to use it.
My journalism training suggests compensated reviews represent a sizable conflict of interest, and it’s one reason why you might question the unbiased nature of those high-end destination reviews when a lodge paid the writer to be there.
Can you trust me to honestly review a piece of gear when the gear itself becomes a payoff – a form of blogola? Can you trust me to say what I think knowing an advertiser might object?
I think you can, but it’s a question my readers have the right to ask.
I will say this: perceived conflict of interest has long been one of journalism’s slipperier slopes, and without the trust I’ve built among my readers, the Underground is little more than 1700+ posts of search engine content.
Why is all this an issue?
The Underground Gets Real
Because while the Trout Underground’s big fun – and yes, I believe it fills a niche mainstream fly fishing media doesn’t – it’s also the following: A hell of a lot of work.
Writing is my day job, and investing vast expanses of time here absent any real return isn’t fiscally sane – especially when the economy is face planting and hordes of part time amateur writers are turning the professional writing world into a race to the low bid.
An Early Trout Underground Header Image
The L&T’s totally cool about the amount of time I waste spend here, but we both know I’d generate a lot better return if I invested it in my business, or [gasp] wrote articles for print magazines.
Which – in the case of the Underground – seemingly leaves me with two choices.
- Let the Underground float downstream, belly up in the current
- Find a way to make a few guilt-free dollars off the site – but do so transparently
What’s going to happen? I’m not sure, but Singlebarbed and I are in the process of creating our Advertising/Gear Whore policy, the genesis of which you’ll find after I’ve made some long-winded observations about…
The Underground’s Take on the Future of Fly Fishing Media
Keith at Singlebarbed and I have always been clear with each other why we write our blogs; we’re happy writing and publishing the stuff the magazines aren’t publishing.
That’s not necessarily a shot at the print folks; the Internet is a different animal, though fly fishing’s media would do well to heed the lessons of newspapers, which are in a free fall (The Rocky Mountains News ceased publishing today, and even the SF Chronicle is threatening to close)
Recently, Phil Monahan lost his job at the helm of American Angler because the magazine owner’s newspaper operations sucked the life out of the organization.
Monahan and I had our disagreements online, but he’s a talented editor who somehow grew American Angler’s reader base in a stagnant market. Simply put, he deserved better than he seemingly got.
More Underground Header goodness
It also seems Underground Fave fly fishing writer Dave Hughes recently left Amato Publishing due to budget issues, and you don’t have to look to closely to see the cracks widening at a few other publications.
And yes, because I write a blog, you’re expecting me to tell you that blogs are the the future of fly fishing online, and no others need apply?
Not so much.
Blogs as Traffic Magnets?
In truth, I believe the standalone, original-content blog format is something of a dead end – at least in terms of viable fly fishing media properties.
More than a year ago, I predicted blogs – at least those with hopes of generating enough revenue to make them worth writing – might have to serve a larger master.
One obvious niche is the role of traffic magnet to a larger entity. In this context, you could consider bloggers the online equivalent to columnists at a newspaper, whose job it is to keep readers coming back.
This one came a little later; I'm not clear on the date.
And yes, you might notice the new, high-profile online magazines have sprouted blogs. That seems like a necessary survival tactic when you’re releasing an online magazine every couple months (an eternity in Internet time).
Without something to keep readers engaged, online magazines are forced to re-acquire a sizable chunk of their readership every issue. That’s not good.
Still, the blogs mentioned really have yet to fill the “columnist” role, and the online sites associated with fly fishing’s magazines are similarly devoid of “anchor” blogs (with Field & Stream being a surprising exception).
One thing is clear; fly fishing blogs are finally gaining ground in the fly fishing industry: MidCurrent’s Marshal Cutchin and I found ourselves on the cover of Orvis’ fly fishing catalog.
The Trout Underground’s stand on the McCloud & Nestle led to an appearance on TU’s On the Rise show, and more media folks have been popping their heads into my virtual online window.
And yes, the number of commercial enterprises looking for free access to my readership has grown by an order of magnitude over the last few months (and illustrated why many of fly fishing’s small businesses could stand to read a book on pitching story ideas).
Simply put, the online revolution is happening even in the quiet backwater that is fly fishing.
The Underground’s Ad/Gear Whore Policy
Barring the sudden appearance of a wealthy patron (hear me, trustfunders?), advertising is now a reality for the Underground. Problem is, standard online banner ads aren’t always effective – especially over long ad runs.
Rather than trap advertisers within the confines of a 160 x 600 pixel banner ad, I’m adding “ad pages” to the Underground’s mix. To reach the growing number of folks who read my content via RSS and email feeds (they may never physically visit the site), I’ll be creating dedicated ad posts, essentially mimicking the pages in magazines that are dedicated to ads.
Clearly marked ‘Advertising’ (in multiple ways), these ad posts offer an advertiser a little more elbow room – and a chance to deliver “content” they couldn’t otherwise deliver.
Frankly, it makes a hell of a lot of sense for everyone involved, and rest assured, the advertising posts will remain separate from the editorial posts you’re (presumably) here to read and comment on.
If online advertising can’t be made to to work for everyone involved (not just in fly fishing, but across the Internet), then it’s entirely possible – as some have predicted – the Internet will have presided over the death of intellectual property.
With a series of unpretty options as my alternative, I believe this is one way to make viable online advertising a reality.
As for gear reviews, I promise to be entirely transparent about the disposition of the stuff I receive. Singlebarbed and I have agreed to do something good and useful with the first pile of gear coming to us (like raffle it and donate the proceeds to a worthy cause).
If we keep something, we’ll “pay” for it somehow (donating the media price equivalent somewhere). More on this come.
Finally, The Underground e-Newsletter
Also, the Underground’s firing up an e-newsletter service. It’s yet to be named, but the e-newsletter should offer:
- Photos, shorter works, snark and other information not available on the blog
- A chance for me to fire off news alerts about breaking stories/legislation/actionable items
- Access to some of the older Underground pieces that deserve a second showing
If you’re a regular Undergrounder, then by all means, sign up (I’ll have a signup button in the sidebar soon).
I see this is yet another step in the big experiment that began when I began writing the Trout Underground in November, 2005.
The world is shifting beneath our feet – and some days it feels like it’s spinning faster than it did ten years ago – and like everyone, I’m trying to make sense of it.
As always, thanks for visiting, reading, and commenting on the Underground.
It’s been a hoot, and it’s about to get even more interesting.
See you on the river, Tom Chandler.
Tom,
As I’ve watched the TU grow I often wondered how you would be able to keep up with it all. You have indeed worked very hard to make it what it has become and I think you’re due for an honest reward. So I see nothing wrong with selling advertising space. Where I see a conflict of interest is if you were reviewing products from those same advertisers. Sure, those who know you believe that you will be unbiased in your reviews but you have been around long enough to know that’s not enough these days. I think the line is accept the advertising but do not review the advertiser’s products or do the reviews but don’t accept the advertising. I think if you try to do both it’s going to get messy.
greg hall(Quote)
Tom, I have been a fan of the Underground since its inception. You are a fine, clever writer with a sense of humor, wit and ability to entertain. Most notably, however, is your sense of truth and being able to effectively “get the word” out on issues of conservation and other threats to our fisheries. The Nestle debacle is an just one example.
More to the point, I think many of your readers trust your opinions and integrity. Few should fault you for trying to make a little $$ off YOUR blog to pay bills or contribute (slightly) to your mortgage… even though we damn well know you’ll use the new add revenue to just buy a few more 5wt cane rods that you don’t need. Come to think of it, maybe THAT’S why you seem so conflicted… do the savvy marketing types of these companies know you don’t prefer their $700 graphite dream sticks?
Dave Neal(Quote)
Whatever you do, don’t stop having fun.
And, you would just be taking a page from the Lifehacker book by having ad-only posts. They call them sponsor shout outs… and as a primarily RSS reader, I have absolutely no problem with them. The difference is that I’d probably read the ones on your site, being fishing related.
I’m in for the long haul, so advertise away.
Eric(Quote)
As one with journalism background I understand the implied lines between advertising and editorial content. Newspapers have wrestled with this for ages. (Not so much now that there is so little newspaper advertising.) Thank goodness my work is purely subscriber supported.
From where I sit, the
BWOsflies in the ointment are the possible retention of said gear and the separation of editorial content from the handling of the business side of advertising. However, many blogs like TU — written by an individuals — don’t fit a model that easily allows for a separation of the two. (But maybe it will allow for the creation of a highly paid position for the L&T Nancy at TU?)I would generally agree with Greg, but while scheduling advertising to not coincide with reviews is something to strive for, coordination may be a tad difficult. To take that idea a step further, what’s to say conclusions won’t be drawn when a glowing review appears one week after or before the appearance of an ad as big as the blog masthead? I would suggest that, at the very least, reviews should never run alongside ads, acknowledging that this might be more difficult in the confined space of a blog page instead of a multipage fly fishing magazine. (More work, but such is the price of professionalism, no?)
One thing on which I’ll take a more firm stance: hot links to manufacturers or retail sources for products inserted into reviews will blur the difference between professional editorial content and an advertorial.
As for the retention of gear, a lot of “unpretty options†come to mind, with the most self-serving idea being “donating†gear to random but deserving TU readers willing to pay shipping costs. Think of the feeding frenzy that would result! And one could argue that the idea of raffling the gear and donating the proceeds would bring about questions of any back-alley affiliation with the receiving organization. No easy way out of this one.
One thing I don’t doubt is that professionalism and transparency must be part of crafting a TU/Singlebarbed editorial/advertising policy. (After all, blogs may be the Fourth Estate of the future.) Good luck guys. I look forward to your conclusions.
Patrick K.(Quote)
I’m sad to read that Dave Hughes has left Amato Publications. I lived in Portland, Oregon at the time Dave Hughes was brought on board as the editor of The Fly Fishing and Fly Tying Journal. He cleaned up what had been a raggedy, unkempt poorly edited magazine and brought in articles from Ed Engle, Gierach, AK Best and many others. Hughes has always been a class act and it’s a shame that Amato was too cheap to keep him.
greg hall(Quote)
I told him they’d never buy the noblesse oblige stuff, especially from Singlebarbed.
I’d prefer a simple, ” …we’re in it for the Chicks.”
That, they’d swallow.
KBarton10(Quote)
The Trout Underground and Singlebarbed are the only two fly fishing mags I’ve read regularly in a couple of years. Intelligent,witty and topical, these blogs are sort of a hybrid between The Onion and The Nation. Both those mags advertise to stay afloat and I trust their work. So, Congratulations,count me in, just try to remember who you are when Rupert Murdoch calls.
frogmorton(Quote)
Thanks for the courtesy of taking our temperature on the question.
I say, Go to it.
30 years ago, a certain (now) major flyfishing writer booked a trip with my guide outfit in order to write a feature/review for his paper, a good old daily for a certain good old Eastern Seaboard blue-collar port city. He will deny this, but it’s true: payola. He shook us down for a free trip and implied that an adverse answer would result in adverse press. Integrity is not medium-specific. Blogola (I hope you coined that, btw) is only the newest face of the simplest question in journalism: integrity. Sure, the media are shifting, and it’s ice-out in the river of journalism, but integrity is found still in the words and choices, over the long run, after careful study and loyal reading. There’s no model for ensuring integrity; there’s only the close reading and long-term attention of an audience that does not have one finger on the remote control.
I for one hope that the new model emerges quickly (I need something to teach my high school journalism students, and their anxious parents). But it doesn’t take a new model to understand that we have to trust the writers, and that their ethical posture is not simple. That won’t change. Go to it.
Over a year ago, in one of the first product posts I read on this blog, you talked up a certain fly reel, which became the first product I bought on the say-so of an internet personality. I had to make the decision while standing in a fly shop in Craig, Montana. I was in a hurry. The sound of big rainbows slurping baetis was practically audible, and the smoking corpse of my Orvis CFO was cooling in the fly bag. I went with your rec, and it was a good call, and since then I’ve listened closely. That advice was free, offered out like endless rain into a paper cup. That’s good karma, coming back, if you ask me.
You deserve some profit. Shoot, take the loot then tell the truth; we’ll be here. Anyone cynical enough to be swayed by waders and flylines wouldn’t have a tenth the patience you’ve shown in throwing such pearls of photography and writing out before such a swine as I.
And for the rest of us yawpers your material success is hope.
Go to it.
Dave
davem(Quote)
Tom, there are sure a lot of well-put sentiments in the responses I’ve read here before posting this. And I’m happy to agree with everyone who beat me to this comment: Go for it.
The ethical dilemma here in my estimation is no different than what print media have faced ever since Gutenberg invented the printing press and publishers discovered how to make money putting ads next to news and opinion. These days only the paper has been removed from the equation. Integrity is apparent regardless of the presentation medium. And you’ve already earned your stripes.
Peter Eisch(Quote)
Whether or not they are viable as fly fishing media properties I like a lot of the stand alone original content fly fishing blogs. Some of these guys are quite articulate writers and good photographers and I get a personalized look at streams and land around the country that I may not have known about. Another aspect is that these guys are not trying to impress their readers with snappy, witty, snarky ad copy stuff. Just good down home story telling.
greg hall(Quote)
Tom,
Like some of your other loyal readers I have no problem whatsoever with you and Keith making a few honest bucks off your sites. You both devote a huge amount of time on your sites and provide a lot of humerous reading and good information. And like a couple of other have mentioned, your sites are the ones I read most often. So go for it!
Patrick beat me to it with his idea on what to do with the swag! I think “feeding frenzy” is a bit of an understatement though in the response you would get!
Harry(Quote)
Flyfishers (at least most of us) are gear hounds. I would really appreciate honest reviews with comments of support, or disagreement!
Advertising? Of course. It’s what makes the world go around! Websites/Blogs such as this ARE the new media, and they need to be supported by both advertisers and readers (by clicking on the ads that you are interested in). In a perfect world it would be “nice” if you had all the time in the world to manage this site, and could do interesting gear reviews (I want more!!!), and not need advertising. But this is far from a perfect world!
Keep it real…and go for it.
Andy(Quote)
I say go for it too TC. I feel like the online world is akin to the Wild West and you’ve demonstrated that you are ethical and prescribe to the rules of journalism. You’ll know you are in the right place if you start stirring up trouble. Good luck with the transformation.
El Pescador(Quote)
Have you ever considered becoming an earmark? $20 million for the “Study of Getting Some To Read What Others Are No Longer Reading” could go a long way in getting you over the hump.
If Nancy can’t get you included, then ads are fine with me and I would even pay for a subscription, as I do with all the magazines. Great products will always attract revenue.
TU qualifies.
Turnip Truck Driver(Quote)
This post is too long. There were no cool pictures, only screen shots of your banner. I couldn’t figure out what you were trying to say, because it was too long and had no pictures. Can you condense this into something like one or two sentences and then add a cool picture of a trout on the upper Sac and repost ? thanks, from your attention deficit disorder blog readers.
hdw(Quote)
So you’re saying you’re in it for the money/schwag? ;)
Personally, I see no reason you should have to desensitize your readers to what you’re about to do, or feel the need to justify it. Domains, Hosting, Upkeep, and most of all time spent keeping quality content at the top of the page isn’t cheap. And last I checked, no one ever stopped reading print mags cause of ads, they stopped cause the content sucks 99.999% of the time. You could cover this site in ads and no one would care- so long as the quality didn’t decline.
Good luck- especially getting fly companies to pay their bill in a timely manner…
Alex(Quote)
Gee Tom, we know you are a great guy who will stand up to his principles and call the shots as you see them. If the stuff you try sucks, it sucks, and nobody’s ad money will make any sway in how you say it.
Pardon me, but that ain’t the way it is. Money is money and it has power. In the beginning subtle, but with time, it will become blatant. Sooner or later the money will corrupt the process, and more likely sooner.
The loss of advertising money or potential gain of a few bucks makes the correct selection of words in an impartial review suspect at best and a sellout lie at worst. One fudged review, or even worse, the perception of a fudged review and so goes your reputation and the invitation to controversy. That will make TU, and you, just like the rest of the fly fishing publications, perceived lackeys for the industry afraid to have advertising money taken away. It is difficult to live with a cut in pay and the prospect of a pay cut impacts decisions. Gee, did that new Orvis rod really suck that bad? Or, that new SA fly line isn’t worth the money, so it might be best not to post that review. That way nobody will be upset.
If you want the money, or need the money, think of a way to put firewalls between you, TU, the reviews and the advertisers. Make it obvious to all involved. Look at the steps that the Consumers Union takes in its product reviews. Oops, they don’t have advertising.
BTW if you need an impartial third party to do the reviews and keep the swag, let me know.
Woody(Quote)
TC
For what it’s worth, I would like to echo the previous comments that you should continue with full force and effect to receive any financial gain from your efforts that you see fit. You have certainly earned the appropriate credibility with this audience of misfits and malcontents (oxymoron?) and the right to lead your site in any direction you feel appropriate.
From my perspective, the real question is what are the expectations of your prospective advertisers? If they are willing to reap any benefits of the traffic and eyeballs you or Keith generate are they also then willing to face the truth of any comments and/or reviews that you produce? In other words, if you tell the truth and they don’t like it, is it their intent to withhold their support (advertising) or are they willing to take the good with the potentially not-so-good as the price/risk for access to your audience?
I agree with Woody that this could in fact be a slippery slope if not managed appropriately on the front end of any deal, leading to the uncomfortable decisions that he noted. In my humble opinion, if you keep it real they will continue to get eyeballs and attention even in the face of reviews/comments that may not be entirely complimentary. ‘Course, I may be naive in this regard (in fact, its highly likely)
Couple of final thoughts . . .
1. I have always appreciated receiving “value” advice from those I feel are more technically capable of evaluating products/services than I am. Keith does a great job at this with his renegade tying materials. Perhaps you could provide reviews on products that separate the wheat from the chaff, just like you have done on the Patagoochie softshell. I for one would appreciate credible opinions on offerings that rise above all the marketing background noise and point to quality, usability and value.
2. The TU “Tip Jar”. What you and Keith provide is entertainment (and quality information) – no question about that. When we as consumers of entertainment find something that pleases us – rises above the ordinary – we are led to recognize said with some sort of tip. Think waiter, comedian or street performer. If you had an easy way for us to express our appreciation with a few shekels when the spirit moves us I think you would be surprised by how many “tips” you and Keith would receive. I wouldn’t hesitate to drop a couple of bucks in the electronic tip jar from time to time to keep the entertainment coming.
Wow, this has gotten long. That is all. Keep up the good work and I’ll be along for the ride whatever the itinerary.
SA
Suburban Aggie(Quote)
Go for it! I like the idea of an ad post, just be sure to label it clearly. I read through the RSS feed and would like to see “AD” in the headline. I don’t visit the actual site all that often but I read every day.
Its a real testament to the power of the new media when a company peddling “new tech laden gear” wants to advertise on a blog with pledged allegiance to the Phillipson Bamboo and Fiberglass anachronisms. Yes we can!
Ethan(Quote)
Why not take the donated gear and raffle it off to your readership?
That way your not keeping it, not having to report revenue/gifts to the IRS, and perhaps it eases your conscience a bit…
clayton(Quote)
TC –
If you need to make money, then you need to make money, and no one can fault you for that. Lord knows I could stand to make more too. But I have to be honest – remaining objective while developing advertising relationships with the industry is walking an extremely fine line (if it’s even possible). The argument is that the blog has gotten to be a hell of a lot of work without paying for itself, but I guess my question would be – does it have to continue grow, therefore necessitating more advertiser dollars, or is it possible to scale back to what feels sustainable, still maintain the core quality, although on a smaller scale, and forgo the entanglements in favor of retaining a truly independent voice? I fear that in the long run, it won’t be as simple as just providing ads and getting $/swag in return, but will get more complicated than that. It almost always does.
Regardless, I’ve always appreciated your candor and when needed, irreverence – I hope it doesn’t become a conflict of interest as the blog evolves. I wish you all the best.
Smithhammer(Quote)
Tom, I have been on both sides of this question, and have done time in the ad business. Many outdoor magazines today run an endless number of articles on the latest and greatest lodge or product. We are victims, it seems, of the success of our sport in creating a market.
I say do it. Keep the gear – collect cash if you can. But do us a favor – run reviews in a specific sidebar, and put a link at the bottom of the article. And if a piece of gear is sub-par, return it to the manufacturer and don’t write a review. Please don’t sacrifice the original and entertaining posts that you make to schlep gear for a vendor… we get enough editorial bagasse from the mainline media… which is why there are so many readers HERE.
Mike Spies(Quote)
TC –
I say it’s all good. You are who you are and have your own unique style. As long as you let the advertisers come to you becuase of that style you will be fine.
I’ve always said if we could pull together about10- 20 bloggers and put out a publication online or off it would be something special.
Murdock(Quote)
Hi Tom,
Long time reader and I don’t know that I ever commented on your blog but I value your site and try to visit it often….I think we’ll all know if you you are selling out! Besides most of the quality companies will stand by their products and if we buy their products and they suck or don’t perform, we’ll just send them back. That being said…..I think everyone knows a $20 starter rod and reel combo or an old garage sale find, could deliver the same experience as a rod much more dear. I say go for the ad revenue and take this beast into the next decade and beyond!
Matt(Quote)
Hey, I posted this article and took a little time off. Wasn’t expecting the volume of comments, and it’s interesting that most revolve around the ad aspect, and not the “future of fly fishing media” stuff also included in the original post.
Obviously, I can’t respond to each post individually, but a few thoughts did occur to me:
I’m not planning to alter my editorial mix (my content). That’s going to remain largely the same. I’m just hoping to toss some advertising into the mix, including the “in-my-content-stream ad posts” that offer the somewhat moribund online ad format a chance at a new life.
I know everyone expects everything on the Internet to be free, but if online advertising can’t be made to work, then it seems writers and artists face a pretty grim future online – working for free doesn’t exactly guarantee we’ll see the best writers/photographers/contributing to the online community.
Yeah, I’d like to see some return for all the time I invest in the Underground, but I’d also like to develop a model for other outdoor writers who’d like to get paid writing something aside from standard magazine fare. I have ideas for something bigger than the Underground, but until this piece of the puzzle starts paying its own way, the other stuff will remain an idea.
As for my editorial integrity, well, you’ll all have to decide that on your own. There’s precious little room to “firewall” anything in a one-man operation, but I’d like to make three points.
1. I’ve yet to hear anyone question Tom Bie’s ability to produce a kickass magazine (The Drake) despite the fact he’s generating more ad revenue from the latest issue than the Trout Underground will in a decade.
2. In just the last few weeks, I’ve been a little less than complimentary towards a pair of the industry biggies – despite the fact I’ve been thinking about this particular ad gig for the last year. If I was interested in playing it safe to court advertisers, I’m off to a pretty poor start.
3. There are a *lot* of interesting smaller companies out there (including other media types) building interesting stuff – people who probably can’t afford to advertise in one of the big magazines (and wouldn’t enjoy much benefit if they did).
Finally, the fact we’re even having this discussion suggests the world is tilting a bit; magazines don’t discuss advertising/editorial policies with their readers, suggesting once again that we’ve stumbled on a different kind of animal. I want to be transparent on this issue and hear what you have to say (hell, I never thought of the tip jar), but in the end, you’ll either believe me or you won’t, and we’ll see how that goes.
Thanks for all the thoughts and opinions. Expect to see some of the things I talked about appearing over the next week or two, and don’t stop with the comments.
TC
Tom Chandler(Quote)
I hope you can provide some honest gear reviews in the world of “advertorials.”
A random question for the Underground. I’ve just bought an 7’6 3 wt and a 8’0 5 wt McFarland Fiberglass Rods. Any ideas on possible reel/line combinations for these new toys?
Thank you.
Adam(Quote)
TC.
I have known you probably longer than most of the readers on this blog. I know for a fact that you will be honest on both sides. If you don’t think it is worth the money you would say so.
David
David Roberts(Quote)
Hey Tom, I think pretty much anyone with a soul would hope that you could get some financial reward for your efforts. You seem to have thought this through very well. Go forth and prosper… ya know, as much as you can.
Bjorn(Quote)
Tom,
the ability to turn your brain’s sweat equity into a dollar via the electronic ink machine, reminds me of the risk that a farmer takes early on in the spring of the year.
He has done his homework on the repairs of equipment over the winter, studied harder for deciding which crops will be the most profitable come harvest time, ante’s up the hard earned resources to seed the land, then prays that the good Lord will bless his plot with fair weather. He’s done the best he knows how to do.
Me? I’m just one of the malcontented misfits that visits your site every few days just to catch up on the latest gossip, oops, I mean gospel, of current events in the fly world. (And I guess that I just like to hear myself speak, but it’s my 2 cents, for whatever it’s worth, but I couldn’t even do that if it weren’t for you.)
I trust that you’ll have to do what’s right for you, and with that reasoning, I’m behind you 100%!
themaninthemoon(Quote)
Once you accept ads, there will always be a certain segment of the population that believes you are in someone else’s pocket no matter what you do. As long as you are true to your principles and your readers, that’s all that matters.
Fishing Jones(Quote)
The always-interesting Fly Fishing in Yellowstone blog felt moved enough by my article to post his gear whore policies, which frankly, I like a lot:
Tom Chandler(Quote)
Tom:
Sorry to get in late on this discussion. On your note that most folks commented on your ad policy and not the direction of on line content, you and your readers might want check out the new”Catch Magazine” (catchmagazine.net) which I have just reviewed briefly on my blog at ShastaTroutcom. Yes, BTW they solicit advertising.
Craig Nielsen(Quote)