but it is uncanny that this is precisely the issue Catherine and I have been debating for months, most esp. the past week.

This is hand-in-hand with lambert's business model for PB2.0, isn't it? The idea that you need money but generating revenue often means compromising to the point of corruption. Or perhaps even people wanting to compromise to achieve corruption, because people who are corrupt generally have better cars and bigger bank accounts.

I think, too, though that the nature of the corruption is an important thing to consider. I think it is more likely that the corruption was indirect. It wasn't as baldfaced as "support my guy, you get more money" as it was "support that guy, more people show up, I get more money and fewer people yelling at me."

Cowardice before corruption. And if I can toss in Maslow, the corruption may not have been strictly or even primarily financial as it was emotional: They like me! I'm popular! Now Heather and Taylor will let me hang out with them and Dallas will ask me to the prom!

But "professionalism" can definitely be a block to honesty.

With PB2.0, I think this elusive business model will require an acutely high level of financial transparency and integrity. Difficult, yes, but it is another form the "eat your own dogfood"* that seems to inform most of the PB2.0 ideas I've read so far.

*Eat your own dogfood is a quote from an executive who came into an ailing company and pointed out that if the people who worked there won't even buy the products they make, why would anyone else? With PB2.0, it's not enough to say something, you must act on it in accordance with your principles.

I like "PB2.0" because everytime I read it, I think of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. It's cozy.

___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

'professionalism' happens when a blogger start believing s/he is as wonderful as her/his readers tell s/he is.

Suddenly, the idea of making a living spouting ones opinions becomes a possibility -- and who wouldn't want to make a living bloviating for people who constantly tell you how wonderful yuo are -- and consider themselves blessed when you respond to them in the comments or (oh, ecstasy!) mention them in a front page post.

The problem, of course, is that suddenly the blogger becomes a slave to the audience -- the 'professional' blogger must constantly provide new content, and that content has to be stuff that the audience wants to read.

So the blogger who was once clever, witty, and insightful on topics that s/he cared about in a vanity blog winds up writing pap for the masses --- constantly seeking out things to care about enough to blog about them -- and write about stuff that other "professional" bloggers care about, because the link is all important.

As a result, the wit and insight that was parcelled out on topics of true interest to the blogger gets diluted to the point where it no longer exists (I'm looking at you, Duncan!)... instead the blog becomes interchangeable with all the other "professional" blogs, filled with vapid prose and pre-digested opinions.

Kinda like the op-ed pages of the Post and Times, in fact...