Product Placement

Before I get to the meat of today's blog, I'd like to take a moment to address my exceptional typing abilities. It is rather amazing that I can type so proficiently considering that I have only four toes on each of my rather small front paws. However, I find that they are the perfect size for touch typing with practically any hand held device. Currently, I am borrowing time on Alpha Female's Treo, but I'm saving up my allowance for an iPhone. Which brings me to the focus of this entry. Renumeration.

There has been some suggestion, perhaps even encouragement, that I should get a corporate sponsor involved with my site. Some may think, "why not?" I can get a little (very, very little) bit of money that I can put toward the purchase of my new iPhone and what is the harm with one little ad on my blog? This analysis brings to my mind a concept of tort law dealing with cost benefit analysis. The theory is that if the burden is less than the probability of harm multiplied by the loss involved and the burden is not undertaken, than there is negligence ([B < P x L] = N). The result is that the determination of negligence can by very closely tied to the severity of harm that could have been avoided by taking protective steps.

This is relevant to my issue of product placement. The burden is pretty clear, I would have to register with AdSense and post an ad on my blog. A relatively low burden task. However, this brings me to my loss. The potential loss involved with placing advertisement on my site is a complete breakdown of my journalistic integrity. Additionally, the probability of this loss actually resulting is very high. How could you believe that I really like Oatmeal shampoo if you had to wonder whether I was getting paid to say I liked Oatmeal shampoo? How could you believe that mandarin oranges make a delicious snack for my human sister if you had to wonder whether the mandarin orange council had a bug in my ear? This is why I cannot have product placement on my blog at this time. However, once this blog gets an international following and I can rake in some real dough by advertising, my analysis might change.

BTW, it was this kind of cost/benefit analysis that led a court to conclude that not screening a 20 something for glaucoma was negligent even though the standard of care at the time included screening only people over 40. Now I'd better get back to helping Alpha Female study for her exams.