FTC guidelines on blogger disclosure seem toothless
ADOTAS – Chest puffed up, the Federal Trade Commission issued 81 pages of guidelines aimed at increasing disclosure from bloggers and celebrities about their relationships with companies whose products they endorse. However, without any real penalties for violators or a team to monitor malfeasance, the guidelines seem like little more than hot air.
The current FTC rules regarding endorsements and testimonials have been in place since 1980, but last November the commission announced it would attempt to place the same amount of scrutiny on Internet stumping as other forms of media.
Beginning Dec. 1, bloggers must disclose relationships they have with companies whose products they endorse, including whether they were paid or received other compensation (e.g., product giveaways). These rules will also apply to celebrities giving shout-outs on Twitter or other social media sites. Also online advertising testimonials are forbidden to use atypical results (”I lost 140 pounds using this pill!”) to promote products.
However, these guidelines don’t have the weight of requirements. FTC Assistant Director of Advertising Practices Richard Cleland admitted to CNN that there will be no group actually enforcing the guidelines. There is also no standardization regarding how the disclosure should appear other than that it should be clearly visible.
Also no penalties for violators were illuminated in the guidelines — sanctions and lawsuits are vaguely threatened. Cleland suggested that circumstances will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
The new FTC guidelines apparently are aimed more at advertisers than bloggers. But Cleland suggested bloggers running “substantial” operations who were serial violators could be targeted. Still, Cleland’s comment to CNN that enforcing the guidelines would be a “game of whack-a-mole” given the scope was not encouraging.
Many bloggers were not surprised by the FTC announcement; current regulations already bar deceptive business practices and the FTC sought to ensure these stretched over the tubes of the Internet as well. However, the FTC’s 81 pages of guidelines feel more like an amorphous, and possibly impotent, threat over Internet product endorsement rather than concrete regulations.
Reader Comments.
No comments yet
Leave a Comment
Article Sponsor
More News
-
Loading ...
Latest News
- Hulu’s Bringing Its “A” Game But… March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – Hulu’s sales team is actively subverting the ad [...] more »
- Yelp! A class-action suit? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – One of three civil suits against Yelp filed [...] more »
- Viacom Accuses Google; Testing Digital Millennium Copyright Act March 19th 2010 Viacom has accused Google of turning a blind eye to [...] more »
- Google to Leave China April 10th? March 19th 2010 ADOTAS – According to the China Business News, Google Inc [...] more »
- [x+1] Creates The Smartest Tagging System Around March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Today, if you happen to be at the [...] more »
- IAB’s Video Standards Tackled By ADTECH March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – ADTECH, a part of AOL Advertising and an [...] more »
- Google Search and Mobile and….TV? Oh My! March 18th 2010 ADOTAS – Google wants to dominate your screens…. Not just [...] more »
Features
- Growing Pains March 19th 2010
- For Better or For Worse? March 18th 2010
- Yahoo! Wants to Get More Personal March 17th 2010
- Creative Considerations for the iPad March 16th 2010
- Amazon Leaves Colorado Affiliates Out in the Cold March 12th 2010
Spotlight
AdBidCentral’s CEO, Vivek Veeraraghavan Talks Openly*What was the inspiration to start AdBidCentral? The conditions that inspired AdBidCentral came from a variety of factors in my personal [...] more...
Reader Favorites
Classifieds
- Communications Fellow
- Sr Director, Marketing Services
- Senior Web Analyst
- Account Director
- Director of Analytics
Recent Comments
- Durk Price: This is one early adoption I would do!
- Rolv Heggenhougen: Companies invest a great deal in their website which in many cases is their only
- docreiss: I find it interesting that the author ("Bob") indicates the reader may have the "patients"
- Jedd Gould: I think you miss the point. Publications have to charge because the content most are
