FTC States Bloggers Must Disclose Paid Reviews

An anonymous reader writes to tell us that in the first revision of how endorsements and testimonials work since 1980, bloggers will now be required by the FTC to clearly disclose freebies or payments they received for product reviews. "the commission stopped short Monday of specifying how bloggers must disclose any conflicts of interest. The FTC said its commissioners voted 4-0 to approve the final guidelines, which had been expected. Penalties include up to $11,000 in fines per violation. The rules take effect Dec. 1."

Comments

Astroturfing.

[JCSoRocks]

Maybe the astroturfing garbage will finally stop... or at least be more obvious.

Re:Astroturfing.

[moogsynth]

Maybe the astroturfing garbage will finally stop... or at least be more obvious.

That's pretty naive. Of course it will continue. Although it will be obvious to you or me, it will still be somewhat deceptive. They'll probably try and portray the freebies themselves as positive endorsements for Company X. "Luckily for me they even included a stylish bag to carry it around in! These will be sold separately and I must say they look super stylish!!!!1"

Re:Astroturfing.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing good will come of this except more $$$ for more government positions or contractors.

Re:Astroturfing.

[sampas]

The new FTC rules aren't exclusive to bloggers. They cover celebrities, too. You can read the proposed rule changes on the FTC's site here: http://www2.ftc.gov/opa/2009/10/endortest.shtm and in detail here: http://www2.ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005endorsementguidesfnnotice.pdf . Saying "results not typical" won't make it legal any more. Also, ads will need to disclose sponsored "independent research," e.g. "we paid this doctor $10k to help us sell this garbage." Finally, maybe Slashdot stories could include links to the primary source?

Re:Astroturfing.

[mrjohnson]

Not in time to prevent the massive astroturfing campaign for Windows 7, however...

Re:Astroturfing.

[Red Flayer]

I know, don't feed the trolls...

But seriously... if slashdot "went straight down the toilet" -- and you're still here -- that implies you're a turd.

Just thought you should know.

Re:Astroturfing.

[mcmonkey]

Why would you hope for someone with similar biases?

For something like game reviews, yes, if the reviewer and I have liked the same games in the past then I have a better shot at liking the new game that just got the good review.

However for political and social commentary, what do I get from reading a web log written from the point of view of my own biases? Someone to tell me what I already believe so I can respond with how insightful the poster is?

If I read a web log written from a different perspective, I might actually learn something (I know--scary thought).

At least then when I walk away with my same old biases, they've been positively reenforced by standing up to counterargument rather than coming out of the echo chamber of people who all agree.

Re:Astroturfing.

[EastCoastSurfer]

Good point, I was thinking about reviews, but ended up writing about everything. My point is that full disclosure is generally a worthless charade. Even though this is specifically about investments it's the best explanation of the sham of full disclosure I've seen.

Re:Astroturfing.

[Shakrai]

However for political and social commentary, what do I get from reading a web log written from the point of view of my own biases? Someone to tell me what I already believe so I can respond with how insightful the poster is?

Unfortunately that seems to be the state of the majority of our political discourse. People fill up on web logs that cater to their own biases (Dailykos, Redstate) or watch "news" networks (MSNBC, Fox) that do the same. Why expose yourself to competing points of view when you can join an echo chamber and shout down anyone who dares to disagree with the group think?

Re:Astroturfing.

[Tetsujin]

But seriously... if slashdot "went straight down the toilet" -- and you're still here -- that implies you're a turd.

Now now, he could also be a dead goldfish, or a gob of hair picked out of the shower drain...

Re:Astroturfing.

[kannibal_klown]

Personally for reviews I like to find the ones reporting problems or other low-scoring responses.

Great, 80% of the owners on the forum LOVE this car and think it's god's gift. Good for you.

I want to read from that other 20% where people are talking about rattling, quirks, and bad experiences.

Those 80% are usually from Joe Sixpack applauding the number of cup holders and the glovebox, or couldn't tell a quality DLP tv from a 10-year-old analog projector TV.

I like to get some of the good reviews too, and sometimes a bad review is just the writer's bias showing, but I find it informative.

Get paid...

[Protonk]

So we'll be seeing fewer reviews on slashdot, then?

US only

[Monoman]

What about bloggers that are not U.S. citizens?

Re:US only

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Last I checked, most places won't extradite you for things that aren't crimes in their legal code, especially when you did the deed in that country in the first place.

Re:US only

[Yvan256]

although cultural references can sometimes give it away.

What makes you say that, eh?

Re:US only

[pete6677]

Companies won't even have to move their astroturfing overseas. They'll just have to redefine compensation and promotions.

It's much like what political lobbyists do to get around laws against bribery: call it something else. It's no longer a paid review; it's promotional consideration, a free sample, whatever the law did not yet address. The law will not get rid of paid reviews anymore than campaign finance reform got rid of influence peddling.

Re:US only

[MyLongNickName]

You are from Los Angeles?

Re:US only

[mewsenews]

The proper usage of "eh?" is following a statement. It's an expression that looks to garner agreement.

Proper usage: Oh man, it's cold out eh?

Improper usage: Did you file those TPS reports eh?

Sincerely,
Canadian Cultural Relations Committee, Winnipeg

Re:US only

[RealGrouchy]

Actually, the extraneous variant of "eh" is permitted for the purpose of exaggerating Canadian mannerisms to Americans.

- RG>

What about politicians?

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop calling it lobbying and call it by its real name: bribery. Will the politicians be fined to death in slices of $11K?

A fixed fine is not a good idea.

[Locke2005]

Penalties include up to $11,000 in fines per violation. Note to self: require a payment of at least $12,000 to endorse a product in my blog.

Re:A fixed fine is not a good idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

They should have gone with an over-100% value instead. Fine them $11000 or 125% of the value of the items/money/services received in exchange, whichever is more.

Re:A fixed fine is not a good idea.

[amoeba1911]

Hey, why is that marked troll? He's right, if it's a fixed fine you might as well just say that government is going to tax each instance of lobbying the reviewers by $11000. If your overall profits exceeded the fine greatly, that's not a fine, that's just a tax on your profits. And that's assuming you get caught every time!

And the politicians?

[Neuroticwhine]

I may be incorrect on this, but do american politicians need to do the same, i don't believe they do (when considering modern lobbying)?

It's a funny country when the random blogger on the interwebs is held to a higher standard than those that govern.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States (it looks like ethic reform bills have been repeatedly struck down... surprise on that on eh?)

What's a blogger?

[girlintraining]

So what exactly constitutes a "blogger", or a "paid review"? If I post a twitter update, is that a "blog"? What about a note on facebook, is that a blog? What if I don't call it a blog, but call it a public diary instead?

Re:What's a blogger?

[Bazzargh]

The actual FTC guidelines (Section V) don't use the word 'blog' in the guideline itself. Instead, they talk about 'endorsements' and define them like this:

(b) For purposes of this part, an endorsement means any advertising message (including
verbal statements, demonstrations, or depictions of the name, signature, likeness or other
identifying personal characteristics of an individual or the name or seal of an organization) that
consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experiences of a party
other than the sponsoring advertiser, even if the views expressed by that party are identical to
those of the sponsoring advertiser. The party whose opinions, beliefs, findings, or experience
the message appears to reflect will be called the endorser and may be an individual, group, or
institution.

They give a bunch of specific examples (which do mention blogs), including one of astroturfing which implies this applies to appstore, amazon reviews (which would be nice). It does seem as if they mean things like twitter should be covered. There's also a bunch of circumstances they describe where you don't have to mention your affiliation, eg if you're a sports star with a clothing contract and always wear that brand off the field as well as on, or if you appear in a clearly-labelled advertisment giving a testimonial and are only paid for the ad - its a different if you have a financial interest in the product.

Re:What's a blogger?

[Velorium]

No. This is applying to reviewers that are getting the reviewed item for FREE OF CHARGE. If you bought the item, then you don't have to bother. The point of this is to make bias due to incentives given by the company/manufacturer a bit more obvious. For example, rewind to 2007. Say John Smith is set on reviewing HP computer that is running Vista and doesn't know much about the system requirements. He's not really looking to spend too much, but is still buying one of the newer computers Vista is being sold on. Because of not wanting to spend extra money, he decides he will go with the option to have only 1gb of ram on the computer. HP knows the system requirements better than John smith does for Vista and says hey, we'll upgrade that to 4gb of ram for free. Because of this possibly subtle but important difference, John's experience of running Vista would be much different than the average buyer only buying a computer with 1gb of ram; and publish his review accordingly. HP and Vista get their good review for throwing in the extra ram, and the average consumer suffers with the computer with less ram, and HP still receiving money from that customer. Was John's intent to be biased or show Vista in a better light? No. But it will show something of the intents of the companies, if not John by notion of this little factoid.

Can of worms

[slashkitty]

What's considered a blog? Is a twitter message included? What about facebook status updates? Affiliate links? It seems that almost every message that mentions a product on sites that make money will now have to include a disclaimer.

just wait

[rossdee]

if they ever catch this 'Anonymous Coward' guy, they will throw the book at him.

This is Crazy

[colganc]

I can't believe they're doing this. I don't care if a review is paid or not. If I can't think analytically or critical about a review(er) then I deserve what I get. How does the process even work. Can I go around submitting tons of accusations to an FTC site about any random blog? How are they defining a blog or blogger? How does a blogger defend themselves from accusations? On a separate issue, this is really terrible reporting. There is almost no information.

Re:Where does the FCC get the authority?

[Fierythrasher]

Um, it's FTC not FCC...big difference.

Partially About Consistency

[EXTomar]

Doing this brings blogs into alignment with a lot of media paid advertising. No one should worry (or be elated) about the end of these things because even with the "This program is a paid advertisement of XYZ Co..." there are just as many infomercials floating around than there always was.

Advertising isn't necessarily wrong (not necessarily right either but that is another thread). It is when advertising presents itself as something other than advertising that is a problem.

Re:Where does the FCC get the authority?

[MarkvW]

This isn't about the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). It's about the Federal Trade Commission--the FTC.

A blogger is one thing and an advertiser is another. Getting paid in exchange for publishing advertising copy is definitely something that is (and should be regulated).

Re:Excellent. After 8 years the FCC is showing som

[Macthorpe]

FCC =/= FTC.

US only

[Roger W Moore]

The FTC rules only apply to people in the US. Once again this is an example of how one country's laws are meaningless on the Internet. They will simply pay non-Americans to astroturf. You cannot tell whether someone is typing with an American accent on the net - although cultural references can sometimes give it away.

How about in review mags?

[rAiNsT0rm]

I worked as a videogame reviewer for a number of years and the amount of bought and paid for "reviews" in that game is just silly. I once panned MGS3 (for being all hype and cutscene and little substance) and got a nasty letter from them stating they would not continue to reimburse me or advertise for our site... we were a totally independent site and took no money or ads in the first place.

With Leo on a recent epsiode of...

[Tetsujin]

Except that he hasn't fapped over every Apple thing ever. He pretty convincingly addressed all this with Leo Laporte on a recent episode of TWIT.

For some reason I misread that as "a recent episode of TMNT"...

Needless to say I was rather confused...

Score another one for the corporations.

[professorguy]

ANY statement of endorsement in print, media, or on the web, where ANY form of payment, discount, freebie, etc was given, with or without a request for a favorablke posting, requires disclosure

My wife's gardening website includes a link to her friend's wedding bouquet service with language indicating my wife's endorsement.

While she was not paid for that link, they have known each other for 50 years. So many, many free gifts have been exchanged in that time. Even money has probably changed hands between them at some time during their association.

Is a disclaimer required on her site? Because if so, then this is a win for the mega corporations. If I can't recommend my friend's service, then only massive corporations will get any advertising at all.

Biases

[Blink Tag]

However for political and social commentary, what do I get from reading a web log written from the point of view of my own biases? Someone to tell me what I already believe so I can respond with how insightful the poster is?

What do you get? You get to be like the vast majority of people. We (often unconsciously) seek out those that are similar to us as a way of validating ourselves. If others are like us, we must be pretty good people. If (smart|rich|famous|powerful) people think the same way we do, we must then be more valuable. Feeding our self-image leads to some pretty potent biases.

And while you certainly deserve kudos for seeking out those with conflicting opinions in order to challenge your world views, it is still highly likely you're seeking out those like you. (You're on Slashdot, for goodness sakes.) Most of your friends are likely of similar age, marital status, education, and ethnicity. They have similar interests to you.

Trying to overcome these biases can be a good thing. Just don't think you've beaten them.

Re:Biases

[falconwolf]

And while you certainly deserve kudos for seeking out those with conflicting opinions in order to challenge your world views, it is still highly likely you're seeking out those like you. (You're on Slashdot, for goodness sakes.) Most of your friends are likely of similar age, marital status, education, and ethnicity. They have similar interests to you.

Similar interests yes, but not similar beliefs. For instance a number of people on slashdot, including myself, support free markets whereas others prefer socialism. Some support proprietary software, some FOSS, and some like me like or use what works.

Falcon

Re:Moderation

[TheKidWho]

Because you're being paranoid and delusional.