I've been turning down ads for months. It's not that I couldn't use the money...it's just that...I don't know...I don't look at blogging as a profit center. I guess it would be worth the headache to make big bucks, but I'm happy where I am. Small, obscure and off the beaten path. I had the opportunity to make a large jump recently and decided against it. My blog is just an outlet for writing that I don't sell to print.

I have no problem with bloggers who sell ads...none at all, although I have noticed some bloggers have no shame regarding tip jars. And I mean NO shame.

I certainly understand and feel your nostalgia, but parctically speaking I don't see a problem. When any particular blogger sells his/her soul to the Ad Mammon, the readers will figure it out very quickly. They'll point their browsers elsewhere, taking the Ad Mammon with them.

I love capitalism!

I couldn't care less about the ads, so long as it doesn't degenerate into pop-ups and flash ads that assault the center of your screen, which seems to the new, next things for many websites. And there's no need to make some declaration, since it's very obvious that BlogAds and Google Sense are now on all the more popular blogs. The biggest threat is that some bloggers will adjust their content or political views to improve their financial position.

Paul: I'm with you. If that Murdoch fellow rings me again, I'm taking out a restaining order! But I do agree I don't see blogging as a profit maknig venture, but I can understand those that do.

Alisa/FD: What worries me are two things: Firstly that a single person doing a blog is not going to be as able to police against conflicts of interest, either conscious or more importantly those subtle ways that having advertisers can influence you. Secondly its the point FD makes; that certain bloggers may be tempted to adjust their views to draw more advertising. Tail wagging the dog and all that.

I am not sure that you have to change your message just to reach a wider audience. In fact in blogging I think the opposite is happening. The MSM has benn unwilling to change their message, so bloggers have been reaching wider and wider audiences by filling the market need. Like Fox news, they see an audience that was untapped and are now reaping the rewards.

In fact, if they do start changing their message to get "wider appeal" they are making the same exact mistake the MSM was doing. Ignoring what their audience is telling them. Their biases will still be obvious but their attempts to be "balanced" will end up being bland and no one will think they are balanced anyway. Readership will drop and ad revenue will drop. Look at CBS and see what they've done to the "Tiffany" network as an example.

Capitalism means filling a public need and you profit from it. Don't fill it, don't profit. Do I know whether Glenn Reynolds, Bill Quick, Charles Johnson ever really believed what they write. Actually I can't be sure they are even real at this point. But another take on current events and call outs on the BS is what I am looking for to balance blatant forgery I see on the airwaves and they are fulfilling that role.

An interesting thing: The discussion around blogging for profit currently centers around political blogs. It makes sense - that's the current focus of blogging hype, and it's unclear how (or even why) people who blog outside of the political sphere should be renumerated for their work. Will people pay for a tongue-in-cheek parenting blog, e.g.? Or are the political blogs tapping into a unique market of die-hard wonks with cash to burn?

Personally, I use my blog as a writing showcase. I've already sold pieces to editors based on the strength of my blog pieces. Whether I'll ever net anything for the blog itself is an open question.