Full Disclosure Blogging

Scott White asks bloggers: how far are you willing to go for full disclosure? The question is important and reminds me that I have no disclaimer here on J’s Notes, even though the issue has come up in the past during conversations I’ve had with others.

Scott uses Mitch Radcliffe’s ZDNet disclosure as an example of a lot of information and maybe too much. Though maybe it isn’t, considering that bloggers at ZDNet may find themselves blogging about any number of things which Radcliffe might be involved in. So while intensive, Radcliffe’s disclosure is exactly the type of stuff he needs to reveal if folks are going to take him and his blogging seriously.

In Scott’s case, a short and sweet disclosure is all he needs since he probably won’t find himself blogging about a business he may have investments in or about any number of things he may have a personal vested interest in. Aside from his own politics, which he defines just fine.

This connects directly with a blogger giving his audience enough information to be able to evaluate the source. If people are going to trust the blogger and his information, they should probably know if the blogger has any vested interest in what they’re talking about. Or whether or not this opinion is their own or the product of a paycheck or other outside influence.

How much one says in such a disclaimer is up to the blogger and the subject matter they find themselves discussing. For many there are ways to be brief instead of posting a full resume that simply acts to show off, but for others you may find a disclosure the length of your arm in order to be all encompassing.

In the case of J’s Notes, it doesn’t have to be much:

Any opinions or information on J’s Notes reflects the opinions and thoughts of Jason Kenney and do not necessarily represent the opinions or or official policies of RedStormPAC or WVCW.

What more do you need?