Vered's post about the new FTC rules for bloggers got my head spinning. To show you why, let me provide a little background.Do you have a blog? Or a facebook page? Are you on Twitter? And do you ever mention products, goods, or services (like I did, when I had a run-in with Highlights Magazine, or wrote about my free stay at the Chicago Trump)?
If you ever leave your house and speak to other people on the internet, the FTC's new rules may include you.From hereon and forthwith, from henceforth to hemlock, if you are "compensated" for reviewing a product or service on your blog, you must disclose this fact on your blog.
And you don't have to receive money or the actual product to be considered "compensated." In fact, "compensation" can be a book, coffee mug, baseball cap, movie pass, etc.If you receive any compensation whatsoever in exchange for your "review" of the product or service, you must disclose this relationship.
But what this "disclosure" must contain is still up in the air. We do know if you say "MiniPoo shampoo helped my sex life," a disclaimer that merely says, "results not typical" won't cut it. The new "rules" are not as simple as they sound.
Q: Does my disclosure have to appear in all of my blog posts or just the post mentioning the product?
LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: What does "review" mean? Say I got a manufacturer's rebate on my new car and I just mention the car in passing?
LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: Suppose the manufacturer sends me a product for free and I give it a terrible review? Would this still be considered an "endorsement" that triggers the disclosure rule?LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: What if I buy the product on my own and give it a great review, and later the manufacturer sends me flowers, or a bottle of wine or . . . additional free products?
LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: Suppose my sister gets the product for free . . . oh, say, a case of Sierra Mist at the grocery store, and she gives it to me. Can I review it on my blog and say it's great, without disclosing my sister got it for free?
LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: What if we go to Steak and Shake for one of those "kids eat free" weekends, my kids eat free, and we leave, thinking the burgers were great? Can I blog about the burgers without mentioning the "kids eat free" part?LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: If I get a free screen pass to a movie, is that considered "compensation" that I have to disclose, if I write about the movie on my blog?
LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: What if I go to a hotel for a week and they give me one night free? Do I have to disclose that if I leave a comment on someone else's blog, saying the hotel was great?
LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: Do I have to declare the value of the screen pass or Sierra Mist or free hotel room as income on my tax return?LM: Who the hell knows?
Q: Say a drug company gives my psychiatrist free samples of Prozac and in turn he gives them to me. If I blog about how great Prozac is, will the FTC fine me the $11,000.00 and take my children away from me while I'm in jail, for violating the "non-disclosure" rules?
LM: Who the hell knows? But I'd line up a bondsman, just in case.
The most disturbing part about all of this is that it sets an alarming precedent. Moreover, the vague and overbroad text of the new rules make them ripe for abuse and selective prosecution, prosecution based on your blog post's content.
The precedent is alarming because the government is treating bloggers and "social media types" differently than individuals working in the print and television media. A wine critic at a newspaper or magazine, for example, can receive a free bottle of wine from the vineyard and need not "disclose" that fact in his or her "review."
In other words, bloggers are "individual" mediums whose speech is regulated differently by the government than the "main stream press." And if bloggers are considered individuals and our speech on the internet can be regulated, where do we draw the line?
Let's say I volunteer for a political campaign and get a free t-shirt. Can I blog about the candidate without disclosing my affiliation to the candidate? I did get a free t-shirt, after all.
And if I can't rave about the candidate on my blog without disclosing my interest, can I speak about him at the shopping mall? At the beauty parlor? Because, really, what's the difference?We're along way from here to there, at the moment. I'll give you that.
But in the future, who the hell knows?
Posts
21 comments:
It will be very interesting to see how all this plays out. Obviously, there will be some precedents established eventually which will give us a clearer understanding.
It does seem a little unfair that bloggers are treated very differently than mainstream journalists, but remember, there has been a significant abuse of the blogger community's perceived immunity to the rules, and mainstream journalists have had to obey the basic rules for a long time.
I have personally run across bloggers recommending Phen-Fen, that dangerous diet drug combo. Tons of weight loss mumbo jumbo, which probably can't hurt people, but certainly won't help, show up on blog posts routinely.
The 23 and Me promotion was enough to turn my stomach--like the average mom blogger really understands the medical and legal implications of chromosome mapping, just because she got a free trip to the facility in California and a free map of her family's genetic code (These are issues that the medical/legal/ethics community are wrestling with, and have been for a decade. The mommy bloggers, apparently, solved them overnight).
Here's my solution--don't do product reviews. EVER. Problem solved.
I don't read them. If you write a review of anything more than the movie you saw last weekend, don't expect me to read it.
And DON'T give medical advice on your blog, unless you have the credentials to back it up. Sheesh. (Can you tell this is a pet peeve? Can you?)
I actually am OK with this. One of my huge pet peeves is when I read a blog and the blogger seems to be reviewing a particular product or restaurant, but I can't quite tell if they are receiving compensation to do so. It does seem rather shady.
And for the record, Snuggie hasn't sent me anything. :)
This is one of those situations where, because some abused the system, all must be punished. Vaguely. Because the government has never been able to do anything logically.
I debated for a long time about whether or not to do any product reviews. All except one (from my sponsor)I did just because I wanted to, not because I received any compensation or even asked, but because they made sense with my blog topic. I figure that, if I won't use the stuff/spend money on it myself, then I sure as heck won't promote it on my blog. I write a lot about moms having their own "business" cards and presenting themselves well, so when my sponsor contacted me and asked if I'd do their promos I said yes because it made sense and matched the content of my blog. And I got some free business cards. :-) I'm also going to do one more review for a company from whom I already shop and offered me a giveaway for my blog. Heck, I'm not even getting the benefit here...I'm passing it along...which is how I want it to be for my blog.
However, I'm with The Mother: it appears to be much simpler, in light of the current circumstances, to Just Say No. I believe in the capitalist system and I don't begrudge anyone making some money blogging, but vague rules from the government and runaway grabs for giveaways by the bloggers are silly. I don't read a lot of blogs that do product reviews...I want content and good writing. That's what keeps me coming back. But I also suspect I am a minority in the blogsphere here.
PR/Giveaways are nothing more than the commercials for blog content, and, while I prefer my blogs commercial-free, I also know that commercial-free blogs are not being subsidized by grants from the government and corporations (think public television/radio). So I don't mind seeing an occasional product review on a blog so long as it is not obsessive. I may continue to do one from time to time...but only if I can stand behind it and not get threatened with jail time...which may mean, ultimately, that it's just not worth it.
Whoa. I had heard of this FTC pronouncement, but I never really considered all the potential ramifications. Because I am not the mighty Lawyer Mom! I had thought, well, I really prefer when people say that they're doing a paid or "paid" review.
I get offers for free junk from time to time, and I ignore them, 'cause usually it's something I just can't get interested in. But I'm open to being corrupted, by the right people.
But all I've ever gotten for free was an elf doll. I never thought about all the myriad other products we mention all the time as part of talking about life.
Wait, and what about if I have a giveaway of something I bought with my own actual money? I'm about to do that. But will I be put in the stockade? Do I need to say, "I bought this with my own money," so people don't think it was a freebie? Confused.
thanks, that about clears it all up for me!
With a law like this, you know it has to be screwed up ;)
*Disclaimer: this "product disendorsement" was not compensated with any free or paid items. In fact, this commenter pays the government with tax dollars to do that voodoo that they screw up so wellllllllllll*
That does seem scary, like if I get a cough drop at the doctor and then mention him on my blog I could get fined. I mean, really. Fortunately no one ever gives me anything for blogging. But what if someone mentions my blog on their blog and I don't even know about it? Does that count as compensation??
How could the government enforce any law which is so vague. Call me crazy, but I'm not gonna get paranoid about this one.
So if I continue to keep my blog devoid of any content, I may be okay?
LM: Your refrains of "Who the hell knows" totally cracked me up.
I can see how the questions just go on and on regarding this.
I have mixed emotions on this one. Yes it is selective but maybe it will also cut down on the amount of trashy posts I see on some blogs. "Swiffer Changed My Life" "Swiffer Saved My Marriage!" and I'm sure soon "Swiffer Is So Awesome It Could Lead To World Peace!!!" because honestly, I am so over watching people whore themselves out for a few products or a free buck.
As for when you have to disclose, it's my understanding that it's only when you have been given something with the expectation of giving a product review. Also, you should know that the FTC has made it clear they will more likely go after the companies and not the bloggers. I'm pretty sure they understand most of these Mommy Bloggers don't have an extra 11k laying around.
So, like I said, mixed emotions. Not a fan of huge government regulations but also sick of hearing about Swiffer...and even sicker of Eden Fantasy reviews GAH.
UH...I guess I'll just shut the hell up now... I damn sure do Not want to claim anything that I may have been given for free to the IRS. Much less get sued for my opinion of how great or terrible something is. Are celebs ever taxed on their free promotion bags with all the gucci shades, prada bag, and lancome lipstick???
I want to post a link to one of my favorite columnist's blog post about this. I think he makes excellent points, and he quotes several examples from the FTC. Honestly, I think that it seems fair.
http://www.ericdsnider.com/blog/2009/10/06/freaking-out-about-the-new-ftc-rules/
See, now this is exactly why I limit my blog content to boring stuff and/or nonsense so as not to attract offers for compensation.
I believe it goes back to that pesky little personal responsiblity clause, again.
Damn it.
And the answer to: Do I have to declare the value of the screen pass or Sierra Mist or free hotel room as income on my tax return?
Depends? Do you make over $200,000? Then yes, hand it over you greedy blogger.
Hey, if Frownies sue me for slandering their good name, will you represent me?
"Who the hell knows" does sum it nicely.
Thank you for the link. :)
I've spent so much time blogging about my unique cocktail adventures this summer I was hoping I'd start getting free drink coupons in the mail. All for nothing now.
I don't like it, but I see why it had to happen. I miss the relative integrity found in journalism - where everything is very clear. (no prattling about Swiffers changing lives) I'm thinking of starting a second blog to do reviews because I love doing them... I'm hoping someone gives me a kindle, & heck yeah, I'll review it and happily disclose, but I also plan on reviewing things just because I feel like it. And no laundry products! Thanks for bringing up so up so many great points xoxo
I think that's my new response to everyone:Who the hell knows. BAHAHAHAHA Because seriously that seems to be how I feel more and more.
I don't really do paid reviews, but do some with product I've been sent etc. and I've always said right up front who sent it and then blogged what I thought. This to me seems like overkill because a few bloggers are taking advantage. So, now we all suffer.
Post a Comment