shape
carat
color
clarity

Blogs, Endorsements Must Include Full Disclosure

Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

Serg

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Mar 21, 2002
Messages
2,627
http://www.diamonds.net/news/NewsItem.aspx?ArticleID=28221

Blogs, Endorsements Must Include Full Disclosure

By Jeff Miller Posted: 10/06/09 08:41
Submit Comment
RAPAPORT... The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) revised its guidance it gives advertisers on how to keep their endorsement and testimonial ads in check with new standards. The FTC Act incorporated several changes to the FTC''s guides and use of endorsements and testimonials whether through a blog post or any social media outlet that originates from consumers, experts, organizations or celebrities. Authors must disclose their connections and payment, if any, as of December 1, 2009. It was the first time since 1980 that the FTC has updated the guides.

The 1980 version of the guides did not explicitly state that endorsers as well as advertisers could be liable under the FTC Act for statements they make in an endorsement. The revised guides reflect FTC case law and clearly state that both advertisers and endorsers may be liable for false or unsubstantiated claims made in an endorsement or for failure to disclose material connections between the advertiser and endorsers.

The blogger, who receives cash, free product, or in-kind payment is considered an endorsement when posting a product story. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service. If a company refers to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. Any paid endorsement is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims, the FTC ruled.

Under the revised guides, advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service will be required to "clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect," according to the FTC. The revision also adds new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that free products or payment for a mention between advertisers and endorsers must be disclosed. "These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other ''word-of-mouth'' marketers," the FTC stated.

Celebrity endorsers have a duty to disclose their relationships with advertisers when making endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media, according to the FTC guides.

In any law enforcement action challenging a deceptive use of testimonials or endorsements, the FTC would have the burden of proving that the challenged conduct violates the FTC Act. The FTC voted 4 to 0 in favor of the changes.

Download and read the updated 81 page FTC Guides as a PDF.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005endorsementguidesfnnotice.pdf
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
After reading the whole thing they did a pretty good job of addressing a huge problem.
The rules at PS align well with the new FTC rules.
What is interesting is that PS could turn the shrills and their sponsoring companies over to the ftc for action after banning them.

The problem is out of control in the tech industry with paid reviews and entire sites that will be outlawed under the new rules.
Even the legitimate sites will have to change some things that have become standard industry practice.

Overall I like the new rules.
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Here is an example that would apply to the shrills PS has banned and those that employ them.

Example 8: An online message board designated for discussions of new music
download technology is frequented by MP3 player enthusiasts. They exchange
information about new products, utilities, and the functionality of numerous playback
devices. Unbeknownst to the message board community, an employee of a leading
playback device manufacturer has been posting messages on the discussion board
promoting the manufacturer’s product. Knowledge of this poster’s employment likely
would affect the weight or credibility of her endorsement. Therefore, the poster should
clearly and conspicuously disclose her relationship to the manufacturer to members and
readers of the message board.
 

Todd Gray

Brilliant_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
1,299
Well just in case anybody has ever wondered, I might be a vendor
2.gif
 

WinkHPD

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
May 3, 2001
Messages
7,516
Omigosh, I have been putting one over on all of you for so long.

I feel I must finally come clean, it will feel so good.

I am a vendor.

Can you ever forgive me???

Wink the Vendor formerly known as just Wink
 

glitterata

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 17, 2002
Messages
4,307
What about if a company sends free samples to frequent messageboard posters or bloggers, hoping they will review the product. Say it''s a soap or a book, and the board or blog is devoted to discussing beauty products or reviewing literature. Is the blogger/poster in danger of being prosecuted unless they specifically say, "I received a free sample of this soap from the manufacturer" or "The publisher sent me a review copy of this book"?
 

strmrdr

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
23,295
Date: 10/6/2009 3:28:08 PM
Author: glitterata
What about if a company sends free samples to frequent messageboard posters or bloggers, hoping they will review the product. Say it's a soap or a book, and the board or blog is devoted to discussing beauty products or reviewing literature. Is the blogger/poster in danger of being prosecuted unless they specifically say, 'I received a free sample of this soap from the manufacturer' or 'The publisher sent me a review copy of this book'?
yes
Basically they made an exception for a one time deal for items of low value from that company but if it happens more than once even if it is a different product from the same company then its a paid endorsement and covered under the new rules.
Every post where the product is mentioned by the person not just the review would have to have the disclaimer.
It is a game changer but doesn't affect PS much because of the way the rules are structured.
 

glitterata

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 17, 2002
Messages
4,307
Interesting. I wonder how places like the New York Times Book Review are going to handle this new law.
 

shertz1981

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
478
Date: 10/6/2009 6:01:02 PM
Author: glitterata
Interesting. I wonder how places like the New York Times Book Review are going to handle this new law.
I bet they either add a line into the masthead of the review ("Submitted by:") or put something in the italicized end statement, separated from the text of the review by a thin black line
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top