Give me 31 Days and I’ll Give You a Better Blog… Guaranteed

Check out 31 Days to Build a Better Blog

Give me 31 Days and I’ll Give You a Better Blog

Check it out

A Practical Podcast… to Help You Build a Better Blog

The ProBlogger Podcast

A Practical Podcast…

FREE Problogging tips delivered to your inbox  

Blogger Starts ‘Shut Up Jar’

Posted By Darren Rowse 26th of November 2005 Pro Blogging News 0 Comments

The AFL Player Spectator is having some fun with their readers by offering to stop blogging for a $1000 donation to their ‘shut up jar’.

Yep – many blogs out there have a tip jar where your readers can encourage you to keep writing through a donation – but this blog is flipping that idea and is offering to stop blogging for a donation.

Of course there is a bit of a twist – there is also a tip jar where readers who like the blog can donate – this money offsets the ‘shut up’ jar money…. it’s a little complicated and I’m not sure it’ll make them any money – but it’s a fun idea.

I wonder how much people would pay me to shut up?

About Darren Rowse
Darren Rowse is the founder and editor of ProBlogger Blog Tips and Digital Photography School. Learn more about him here and connect with him on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ and LinkedIn.
  • Not many I would imagine. We NEED this blog.

  • A.H

    I’d pay you.

    I’d pay you a visit you’ll never forget if you shut up :P


  • Idon’t think the”shut up jar” idea would fly, simply because most people don’t continue to visit or subscribe to blogs they don’t like.

  • I think this is based on the fact that this guys whole motive is to go into the news and find articles or rumors about AFL players (Aussie Rules Footy) and the problems they have (i.e. Drink Driving, etc). It is totally unbalanced and basically an irrelevent blog.

    Personally I wouldn’t give this guy a cent as I think he shoots himself in the foot by being so totally unbalanced that you just ignore what he says.

    But I guess this is a little bit off the topic that you are discussing in this forum, Darren. Sorry about that.


  • Uh, Molly, did you miss the mission statement?

    To balance the undue adulation of AFL players through scrutiny of their negative off-field behaviour.

    Of course the blog is unbalanced! It’s pretty much the lone voice trying to counter thousands of news and fan sites falling over themselves to suck up to footy players!

    But I’ll let you know how I get on. I’m not hopeful, but those footballers have deep pockets, fragile egos and this is a hell of a lot cheaper than coming after me with defamation lawyers.



  • I don’t understand your logic on this on! As far as I am concerned the media is a lot quicker to jump all over the players for doing a little thing wrong (or even just rumor of doing something wrong) then they are to report the good things that they do (don’t remember seeing that much about the Clarke boy (not sure which one) doing community work in St Kilda but sure saw a lot about the two boys that were occused of sexual harasement.

    And yes, I have read your mission statement and it two totally discredits your site.


  • Hm. “Pay me or I will continue to smear you” – isn’t that basically extortion? I hope you have a good lawyer :-) I know if I had “deep pockets” and were on the receiving end, I’d rather pay a lot of money to a lawyer than a little money to a guy who is basically blackmailing me….

  • Thanks for the free legal advice, Nils. Not sure how it works for you, but as it happens, my jurisdiction (State of Victoria, Commonwealth of Australia) has some of the “strongest” (ie beneficial to powerful, cashed-up, public figures) defamation laws in the world. For example, the implications of the famed Gutnick Case are still reverberating throughout the internet.

    Fortunately, my girlfriend offers legal advice from time to time. Which basically amounts to “Greg, you’re an idiot. Stop it.” (Since we co-habitat, we’re deemed a de facto married couple and she’s – entirely reasonably – worried about her liability.) My rule of thumb: quote people with better lawyers than me (ie newspapers, government officials etc).

    The second strategy relies on absurdism – comments so outrageous that no reasonable person could take them at face value. (Of course, footy players and fans aren’t noted for being especially bright, but the law says “reasonable person” so it’s okay.)

    But that’s just legalities. Morally speaking, my view is “If you don’t want to be (ahem) smeared then don’t commit illegal acts ie bashings, rapes, drug offences while pulling down hundreds of thousands of dollars of year in a high-profile job”. But where to draw the line? My own guideline is: if you’re famous enough not to pay for beers, then you’re famous enough to get your crimes written up on the net. In one AFL player’s own words:

    I’m overpaid. I’m known in some parts of town. The chicks really dig me. I rarely have to pay for a drink. I drive a nasty car and I’ve just put a deposit on my first investment property. “Cha-ching,”

    Why shouldn’t a guy in this position get scrutinised?

    Think that’s wrong? I mean, these are just allegations, right. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. But what’s the alternative? That people’s crimes are not reported/analysed by the media? That court cases are held in secret? That it’s forbidden to talk about current court cases or convictions or police media releases? That’s dangerous territory for any country to head down.

    BTW, I’m pleased to announce my first payment! Bizarrely, it came from a fanboy who only hours earlier publicly declared:

    Personally I wouldn’t give this guy a cent

    … while attempting to shoot down my credibility!


  • Jealousy is a curse, Greg.
    And if you got a payment, why not update the total?

    I for one would be interested what the new total is?


  • I can’t and won’t judge your particular site – hell, I haven’t even looked at it – and I am not giving any legal advice. I just hope you read the stuff you quote more carefully than you read my comment.

    Exposing someone’s crimes is a classic task for journalists. You, however, sound more like a jealous little wannabe – and your site seems like a cheap attempt to make a quick buck by annoying someone. By your own words your publication is “unbalanced”.

    In my book what you are doing is still at least a wrong approach and you really don’t have much of a moral leg to hop on, but that’s just my personal opinion. If it makes you happy, fine.

  • Nils: This isn’t journalism. It’s blogging. There’s no requirement to be “balanced”. How many single-issue opinion blogs do you know that are fair, balanced, tempered, air both sides of the story and generally comply with accepted standards of professional public journalism?

    It’s like your comment: I’m sure people don’t condemn you out of hand when you state that you won’t judge my site, yet promptly introduce indefensible standards for doing exactly that and then offer an opinion on it – all done while not even making a visit!

    While that’s atrocious journalism, it’s entirely acceptable for blogging.