Two Takes On New FTC Rules For Bloggers
By now most bloggers have heard the Federal Trade Commission has updated their guidelines regarding testimonial advertisements and endorsements. The rules, and fines for failing to comply, go into effect on
I have blogged about my feelings on the guidelines. In a nutshell, I am for transparency on the part of bloggers. Requirements should come from the companies that act as intermediaries between advertisers and bloggers. I am not comfortable with the government deciding how bloggers should conduct themselves. And the fine. Overkill. $11,000 fine for a blogger? A doubt I'll be sent a sample of Men's Skin Cream to review worth even half that amount.
In the name of both fairness and information, I have found an solid article from each side of the issue.
On the pro side, we hear from one of the first, and certainly the highest profile, company in social networking and advertising, Izea. Back when they were still PayPerPost, they started requiring site wide disclosure policies on all blogs in their system. To that end, they fund DisclosurePolicy.org where bloggers can generate a policy that suits their needs. Speaking of disclosing relationships, I have worked with Izea off and on since 2006 on every blog I've had - even want I was just on MySpace. I follow founder and CEO @tedmurphy on Twitter.
It was Ted who wrote about the new FTC rules on the Izea blog. He reminds everyone the guidelines are a good thing for Izea since the disclosure rule "creates a safe framework for creators and marketers, and inhibits unscrupulous marketers." I would also say Izea will gain a higher percentage of the social marketing pie. They can reassure advertisers their campaigns are compliant with the guidelines, because Ted has been in communication with the FTC on the issue long before the decisions were made.
Most importantly, the article details steps advertisers and bloggers can take to remain compliant. December 1, 2009 is when the guidelines go into effect. I know if I'm concerned, other bloggers certainly are confused or worried. I doubt much enforcement can take place, but better safe than sorry when dealing with the government.
On the flip side, Wired published an insightful piece on why the guidelines unfairly target bloggers rather than writers for print media. They point out something I didn't think of - newspapers, magazines, television news, radio or any other "mainstream media" outlets receive free items all the time. And they are in no way required to disclose the fact the thing they are reviewing came free to the office door. The argument seems to be traditional media has an expectation of ethics.
I would argue, the average American doubts the integrity of standard news sources. Shouldn't they be held to the same standard when some company sends them a laptop to test drive for months as the blogger who is sent an advance copy of a book?
Wired pointed out one thing I did notice. The ambiguity of the statements may be the scariest thing beyond the dollar amount involved (again, $11,000 is a ton of money). They even question if they are subject to the rule as the blog of a print magazine. Do the ethics transfer to the digital arm or are they unreliable as mere bloggers.
My biggest question is what counts as disclosure. Is site wide okay? Is typing "This post is sponsored" required for each post? Do I have to say what I got - cash? product? both? When I am not paid for promoting a product or service, it will feel like I should explain myself or live in fear. I wonder how the FTC plans to notify bloggers of their investigation. I would recommend leaving a comment on the offending post.
I don't like the rules, but if we have to have them, I want to know what I must do to comply. So far that hasn't happened. My plan is to keep up with the conversions as they develop. And, of course, I'll keep on blogging. It's what I do.
Comments