Altering History for Fun and Profit: An Affiliate Story
They say history is written by the winners. In the digital age that’s not entirely true. Content curated by users can create vast troves of knowledge but can also allow con artists easy grabs at legitimacy.
John Philip and Paul Birdsall know this quite well. They run a Canadian affiliate site called Greenprofits.ca that touts itself as the #1 Online Green Home Business. It’s a Clickbank site and offers to let you in on proprietary information on how to earn a mint using their system. Their video promises that they are honest, upfront folks who will offer “the best guarantee possible in Internet history” if you follow their system.
Fine upstanding gentleman indeed, but their crappy sub-affiliate generating auto-responder scheme website is hardly anything to blink at by black hat affiliate standards.
They seem to have even come up with an interesting way to prove their legitimacy. They are, after all, the winners of the 2009 Affiliate of the Year and Affiliate Manager of the Year Pinnacle Awards from Affiliate Summit. They have even scored a hat-trick taking home Exceptional Merchant of the Year as well. At least, according to an inaccurate listing on Wikipedia (screenshot below, click to enlarge).
Quite a feat indeed, considering it would be highly unusual to be nominated in all three categories.
Take this to be a simple reminder that just because it is on Wikipedia, or any place on the net, doesn’t mean it’s accurate. Always check the source because questionable content comes from questionable sources. In this case, at Affiliate Summit 2009 the real Affiliate of the Year was Mike Allen of Shopping-Bargains.com, the real Exceptional Merchant of the Year was Celebrate Express, and the real Manager of the Year award went to yours truly. You know what they say; imitation is the highest form of flattery. I just wish the flatterers had more class.
Now there is no way to know whether John Philip and Paul Birdsall actually altered the Wikipedia listing or if they did so in order to sucker poor folks into giving $37 to their “moral and ethical” business. But they sure look guilty. What I like best is the following quote from their “what our program is all about” video:
“So you never have to answer that embarrassing question when they ask you how much money have you made. Well, when you’re brand new and an amateur what are you supposed to say? You can’t lie; you have to be honest with them. So here you have someone already successful answering that question for you. You can capitalize on my success story so you can be seen as a seasoned pro instead of some piddly online newbie.”
Considering they’ve made millions and have so much street cred why would they waste the time editing publicly curated content? Apparently they don’t have to lie about being successful when an inaccurate listing on Wikipedia can do it for them.
The sophomoric tactic altering Wiki listings is laughable. But it does bring to mind real issues:
Awards do add legitimacy. People who are interested in affiliate marketing but don’t know or haven’t taken the time to understand its history can easily be taken in by such falsehoods. Later, when folks get bilked, they will blame the industry for giving awards to such shysters, when of course the industry has not.
Reputation management is not just for brands. It is a necessary reality in an age where perception can be easily influenced by association to a group, by the altering of an image, or by the editing of a post.
It used to be people thought that if it is in print it must be true. Some of that belief in validity of print has transferred online. As digital media expands so does the need for healthy skepticism. The willingness to go to and understand the source of the information is the only way to separate fact from fiction.
Or in the case of Greenprofits.ca’s many “awards”, veterans from con men.
Pingback: Dark Cloud Over ad:tech, Speeding Up a Slow Blog, and an Affiliate Summit Commercial