Thanks very much for the thoughtful reply. I won’t belabor the point, but, well, just a few points!

I’m not sure if a free book is that relevant. You’re still recommending a product published by “a member of the family.” What if, say, CNET wrote an article noting how they love a specific site owned by CBS and recommended people download a free video on that site? I wouldn’t be surprised if CNET had a disclosure about CBS ownership.

Also, even though many people have read your posts about WebWorkerDaily before jkOnTheRun, that was then. Both sites are now part of the GigaOM Network, and newer readers might not have any idea you previously discussed WebWorkerDaily.

On the one hand it’s sad to think about potential conflicts of interest or perceived conflicts when none exist. On the other hand, it’s healthy for all writers to think about “the correct thing to do” — even though “correct” is often anything but black or white.

I’m not suggesting, hinting or wink-wink you violated any ethics. I was just pondering it as tech blogger-to-blogger or Reiter-to-writer!

Have a great evening and keep up the great work. Thanks again for your reply.

I would definitely have pointed out that WebWorkerDaily was a GigaOM network site if that e-book had been a cost item. I discarded the idea to attribute the site to the network given the free download for the book.

That said, I do believe that I didn’t violate any ethics, or even create a perception of a violation, simply by stating that I like a given site no matter who owns it. In fact, if I search here on jkOTR for times I have linked to good articles WebWorkerDaily has published, I see a whole bunch of them dating from long before we joined the network (one, two years before).

It’s kind of sad that we have to be so concerned about such things, it strips some of the fun out of what we do. It is better to create no misconceptions as you mentioned, however, so I will certainly keep it in mind going forward. I appreciate your take on this from a professional standpoint.

This is an editorial “ethics” thought, although I don’t want to be melodramatic! When you write that you always read WebWorkerDaily, and you praise them, perhaps it would be appropriate to include something like…”WebWorkerDaily (a GigaOM site).”

I’m NOT — in any way — questioning your ethics.

But as a former full-time journalist and a long-time mobile tech blogger and columnist (who also looks at the FTC!), I’m just wondering whether it might be appropriate to note WebWorkerDaily is part of GigaOM.

Perhaps everyone who reads jkOnTheRun knows WebWorkerDaily is part of the GigaOM empire, so it’s not necessary. Or perhaps I’m just being a pedant.

But if I were writing an article for a mainstream media publication, and wrote that I always read a specific publication — that’s owned by the company for which I’m writing — I think a disclosure would make sense.

Again — absolutely no “slight” intended. I’m looking at this (perhaps extremely minor point) through my journalist’s eyes.