A good example of too much might be the authors bio advertisement in this article that doesn't have much to do with the article.

thanks for the feedback, I have adjusted it.

If I were writing an article for the JCM, it would most like be a case study of how Joomla was used to solve a business challenge for a client.

Obviously, the best way to illustrate this would be to link to the specific examples on my own website or the client website.

Excluding links in case they are viewed as self promotion would limit the usefulness of the article. I guess readers could track down the information for themselves if needed but as a reader, I'd rather that examples directly related to the article were included.

More education. Be objective in the article and keep self-promotion to a minimum. The text should always be easy to read and objective. If someone is interested in the authors expertice or company products then they will contact the author anyway. Having a seperate webpage with examples is a good way to promote more products and services outside the scope of the article.

I'd be worried that more promotion in articles would encourage "read more" social marketing articles with no in depth knowledge served to the reader.

I have no problem with the content but the Bio really should be kept to being a bio and not an advert.

This is definitely an advert
"Also, please download the free ebook, "The Essential Guide to Inbound Marketing & SEO"

And compared to other bio's this is an advert too
"If you enjoyed this content, follow savvypanda for more Joomla!, Inbound Marketing & SEO educational content "

Neither of those statements are "about the author" and do not in any way add any meaning to the articles submitted by the author

I do not mean to be irrespective or rude expressing my opinion, if so, please accept my apologize in advance for that is not my intention.

I agree with Sam´s and Brian Teenman´s comment, the actual Bio in this article is a good example of too much. And is OBVIOUSLY advert and not "Bio".

The use of self honesty, respect to the readers intelligence and common sense would be enough to solve this matter.

In my opinion, articles should be written by those without a vested interest in the topic, it's a matter of journalistic integrity and ensuring the magazine content is fair, relevant, and factual.

The author profile, however, is encouragement for participation and contributors should take full advantage of "advertising" who they are and using it to make personal connections with readers. It would be helpful to limit the number of words and links, but other than that, generosity and belief in community will pay off.

Credit is an important part of managing open source project and encouraging contributors. The magazine has been very good in this area.

Good resource:
http://producingoss.com/en/managing-volunteers.html

Thanks for asking!

I think there are some (limited) areas where "blatant" promotion is almost expected. If we ask a developer to participate in a case study of a site they did, you can expect some polishing or salesmanship to a certain extent.

But those cases are limited, and should be an exception, not a rule when looking at the average JCM article.

I am afraid i do not see what relevance

is to the discussion of this page - the difference between subtle vs blatent advertising and if this page in itself is advertorial.
Like forum signatures, one or 2 self promotional links is perhaps suitable. Bios/signatures that are almost as long as the article are considered "bad form"

The section on "credit" is the one relevant to this discussion.

In general, I believe Joomla overregulates participation and the result is reflected in what I see as diminishing community involvement. People need credit for what they do. Only a few have *huge* names they can leverage in business activities. Others need a little link. Small price to pay to have a great article that builds community.

Hope that helps explain my point of view. =)

Earlier this year there was an article which was essentially a blatant attempt by one company to use JCM a vehicle to get people to download a free report. It was well-written and had informative content, but it was still in essence an advertorial. JCM has also often run articles that have mentioned websites or extensions actually developed by the author. I feel that these examples are just not good form, and they undercut the credibility of the magazine and the professional reputation of Joomla! in general.

I'm not saying an article shouldn't feature specific extensions or websites or case studies or publications. And when an author offers an excerpt of her or his book, that's another beast, too. But generally, it ought to be simple enough, if one would like his or her own product or service featured, to find a neutral third party to write or edit that article. I edited a website case study once where I removed and rewrote a lot of self-interested language from the submitter, and that person thanked me because he felt it made a more credible and stronger article that he was then able to use in his marketing efforts. And I was proud of the article, too, and linked to it in my email signature all month.

I like Amy Stephen's thoughts that there ought to be some option for an author to be rewarded for their service to the community with a linkback or limited advertising copy. People do deserve credit for what they do; that's how Open Source projects sustain interest. Perhaps we can talk about what those limits should be?

I think a relevant parallel here is the standard the PBS uses here in the United States for accepting advertising. Being a public broadcaster, PBS programs and stations are only supposed to accept advertisements that lack a "call to action." That is, you can say something about your company or the products you produce, but you are not allowed to directly ask people to buy from you.

For instance, if Whole Foods were sponsoring a PBS station, this would be an acceptable advertisement:

"Whole Foods offers a wide range of organic breads, cheeses, vegetables, meats, beverages, and ready to eat meals. Whole Foods is proud to support public broadcasting in Austin."

They would not be allowed to say this:

"We've just opened a new Whole Foods store at Arbor Trails. Mention PBS this week and receive a 10% discount on our bakery items."

Also, advertisements on PBS are never shown in the middle of a program: they are always shown before or afterwards.

While the line can get a bit fuzzy, I think this is the general standard JCM should strive for. Authors should be free to link to their personal and professional sites, link to a few professional accomplishments, and leave it at that. I don't think it needs to be anything heavy handed, but I also think the expectation should be set ahead of time.

I think that's an excellent model to base a policy upon, Joe.

That's an interesting point Joe (never thought to look at PBS). Might be a good model to look into, good point.

In my opinion if the author is linking to a non-commerical page (like an educational blog) and it pertains to the topic being discussed... then it should be fine. Its also is good to be diverse in linking and not just link to your own site.

One of the points of goal of the magazine is to educate. If a link can add value to the reader's experience and education in the topic of what's being discussed, I think that's great. However, sending someone to commercial page like a sales page isn't adding any value.

Now, don't get me wrong, if an author is linking to 30 different pages on their site... it's a bit excessive too. Like Joe said, in moderation and not in your face.
----
To Amy's point, I do agree that a Joomla contributor (in any part of the project) does need some sort of reward to help encourage their participation.

For the magazine this is where the author bio. Here the author can do a bit of self-promotion to show who they are and what they do. This happens all the time in the marketing world and is also one of the reasons why the marketing world produces so much content everyday, because people are encourage to blog and guest blog. With that being said, I do see the point that it can't be excessive (hence why I have edited my bio down).

Like Joe said, the author bio is after the "meat" of the content and doesn't disrupt the reader while reading the article.

I think the current shape is quite fine. Just don't break it.

ROFL, just saw the author "bio". It is ironic that exactly he started this thread. For what reason? To get one more link from joomla.org

@Tomas, the article was written following several discussions that happened in the JCM chat and other venues. Luke happened to be the first to pull the article together (time constraints) and input was added by the editorial team.

@Amy - if someone doesn't have interest in a topic, it is very doubtful that he/she would write good content (if write it at all).

There is no problem to have links to products, when these are not the only and entire essence of the post.

There is no issue to have links to own products even, if this is properly disclosed.

I would like to see the JCM remain a place where we can look forward to learning about different Joomla related offerings from the world's leading experts on them - the community members who created them.

I think all of the examples mentioned in Luke's article are okay to be published in a community resource like the JCM. The JCM has disclosure guidelines in place, and it's important that those are followed.

One thing that might be good is if the JCM published some more detailed guidelines (I know some are already published) and examples of what is and is not appropriate, and included a link to those guidelines in an automated email sent to each new JCM author as soon as their account is created. That might help new authors to better understand the guidelines and might also lighten the JCM team's editorial workload a bit.

Finally, I think it's great when the JCM team asks for input from the community on an important subject like this. Thanks for doing things the right way in our community powered project!

Thanks Paul for your input. As you suggest, the purpose of this article is to refine our existing guidelines based on feedback from the community. The guidelines in place, and the decisions about self-promotion that go into the production of every issue, so far have been working pretty well. But some of the grey areas are getting tougher to figure out. I would like to thank Hagen Graf for suggesting the idea for this article, and Luke Summerfield for writing it. The feedback from the commenters here will be carefully considered, and will help us to frame a more precise set of guidelines. Thanks everyone!

I think JCM has to keep educational and not become advertising… And the best way is to be self-awared of this line, with the help of say 2 people to read the article before pulishing it, to be sure it is sticking to the line.

I like JCM as it is now and I don't think it should change.

And as I think this discussion is healthy, I don't think you can come up with a perfect solution. I think this has to be an attitude with some flexibility regarding each article… some times it will be really helpful to have specific insights or examples even if it can be seen as advertisement. Some other times, it will be unnecessary !

Just look at the Bio of Luke: it is a standard block. So for this article, the twitter part might seem unfitting but I'm pretty sure sometimes he rights articles where you can see the exact same call to follow him on Twitter and not be shocked because it will be the perfect occasion to follow-up the discussion for people who wants to…

I like the PBS example. That has the basis for an excellent solution. No call to action.

Growing up with the BBC in the UK, we Brits are well used to advertisement free broadcasting. Do not forget that as an international organisation, there are massive cultural differences too. I clearly remember my earliest visits to the US - and being shocked by the, to my mind, unrelenting and aggressive nature of advertising. TV constantly interrupted by BUY THIS NOW!!! type ads. It's much more subtle this side of the pond. (I'm not saying it's better - just different!)

There's also a saying, famous in the English county of Yorkshire - that says 'you don't get owt for nowt' - which means, for those less familiar with the dialect, you don't get something for nothing. I find some clients deeply suspicious of the entire concept of 'open source'. How can this be free? It can't be any good etc.

Many of us make a living from Joomla! (modest though it may be) and I think a little self promotion is entirely appropriate. Otherwise you'll only ever get articles from those with time on their hands - and dare I venture to suggest, they are less likely to be successful, busy people who can teach valuable lessons.

But eight links in one bio is about seven too many! So - one link, with no call to action?

There's a case to be made for strictly context relevant links in article content - but the key words are 'relevant' and 'context' and that's down to editorial decision.

Luke - a well written article on a fascinating topic but a tad too much personal puff. But, given your job, would we expect anything less, I wonder?

As the old saying goes, "Content is king!" If an article author can provide real-world answers to Joomla! problems and questions, it matters little to me if he/she also toots their own horn in the process. Hopefully most readers of a site like this will be informed enough to distinguish between an author primarily promoting his own website or business while providing little or no useful technical advice, and others who are savvy enough to really help people. In the end, it is the latter type of contributor who will receive the best PR rewards for his effort.

I think where it could get too much is when the magazine would be all about paid products/services and not something that really can benefit the reader if they have a very tight budget (thinking small non-profits here). Other than that I don't have an issue with a writer getting a plug for whatever it may be. And I don't mind some articles being about a paid/product or service directly as long as the whole magazine doesn't go that way (I'd think less than 20% of the magazine that way or even 10% of the articles). I don't want a infomercial magazine.

Your question is really genuine and thinkable. When it comes to self promotional how much really become too much. We all think that more and more promotion can bring us more and more visitors, it helps but not always.