* article updated: see bottom of article
If you post a pin to Pinterest, and it links to an ecommerce site that happens to have an affiliate program, Pinterest modifies the link to add their own affiliate tracking code. […] They dont have any disclosure of this link modification on their site […]
— Josh Davis, Pinterest is quietly generating revenue by modifying user submitted pins
Thats not cool.
Its totally OK to make money with a site. Really, were all for it! And if you want to do that by doing the we modify links so they become affiliate links for our benefit – more power to you.
IF there is is clear, upfront disclosure, that is.
Clear, upfront disclosure is key.
Like the +1 button as fake spam blocker earlier this week, this may all very well fit just between the lines — but it feels wrong.
And talking about wrong, how is Google going to balance their intense dislike of affiliate-driven sites and Pinterest's 36+ million indexed pages?
Their House, Their Rules
Of course if it can be done, if it's fully allowed, then it's their house, their rules. As long as we're not throwing that out there to simply cut off any discussion I'm fine with that. But the question how we want our Internet to be is one in flux and not a bad one to discuss.
How do you feel about this? Would it matter to you if Twitter were to start modifying it's t.co links to add Twitter-benefiting affiliate code?
* Update: Skimlinks, the company powering the link injection, informally responds via its blog, distancing itself every so slightly from Pinterest's non-disclosure :
Pinterests use of Skimlinks technology is nothing new, nor is it secretive. Skimlinks has been around for almost 4 years now […] Creating a beautiful, user-friendly site, as Pinterest has done, mandates a non-intrusive way to make money. […]
While we fully encourage transparency and disclosure, at the very least because it is a nice thing to do, many sites choose not to be blatant about their monetization techniques […]