Brett_Tabke - 4:49 pm on Oct 5, 2009 (gmt 0)

I think this is a huge waste of taxpayer money. There is zero way to determine that a blog post is "paid" for.

Would Matt Cutts entire blog have to have a disclaimer on it that he is speaking for Google?

What about Robert Scoble who is not employeed by Rackspace, but a loyal former microsoft employee? He just put out a blog post that was quite critical of Google Wave.

We signed Microsoft to a sponsorship in Vegas. I have liked Bing since it was live search, does that mean this whole post should be disclaimed?

What about any site that receives money from Google AdSense? If they remotely talk about tech, google, or the internet, should that whole site be disclaimed?

What I am saying, is that the Govt is looking into all but about 10% of the web will need to have a disclaimer on it.

This is a backwards step.

<disclaimer>
I am a major fan of Izea and Ted Murphy. The man and the product are pure genius.
<disclaimer>

<discalimer2>
Izea is a exhibitor at PubCon Las Vegas.
</disclaimer2>

<disclaimer3>
Microsoft will be a major sponsor of PubCon Las Vegas
</disclaimer3>

<disclaimer4>
Google is pulling back from conference support this year. Whoever thought Google would pull a Nixon and put the GooglePlex into bunker mode?
<disclaimer4>

<disclaimer5>
Rackspace is probably going to be an exhibitor at pubcon las vegas. Robert Scoble now works for Rackspace.
</disclaimer5>

<disclaimer7>
During a second grade straw poll in the fall of 1972, I voted for Richard Nixon.
<disclaimer7>

<disclaimer8>
Under the advice of counsel, I deleted disclaimer #6
</disclaimer8>

...any Onion writers in the crowd? lol