Member Avatar for MktgRob

It seems the FTC has issues new regs covering the review of products by bloggers. Below is the link to the Yahoo news piece on this. Basically, under the new regs, bloggers who are reviewing products have to disclose if they are paid in cash, gifts or freebies for their reviews.

Many on this forum have discussed this type of blogging in terms of transparency and honesty. Obviously, these regs will make it easier for consumers reading such reviews to understand where reviews may be skewed. Additionally, this will cut down on the number of review opportunities that are available. Does anyone else see any other pros or cons to these new regs?

Having worked for a tech publication back in 2001-2002 where my colleagues and I reviewed products and most times were allowed to keep the products we reviewed under the guise of using them as test platforms for the review of other products. Speaking for myself and my former colleagues, we never were required to disclose such arrangements but we were also advised by our bosses that if we did anything to threaten the integrity of the publication and the parent company we would lose our jobs. I believe this is true of most if not all of the major tech pubs and websites that offer reviews.

  • 2 Contributors
  • 4 Replies
  • 176 Views
  • 1 Week Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by MktgRob

Dani AI

Generated

A brief follow-up and practical update for anyone reading this thread years later: the FTC’s 2009 revision of the Endorsement Guides (codified at 16 CFR Part 255) is the origin of the “material connection” concept that sparked this discussion, and the agency has continued to refine its advice and tools for influencers, platforms, and advertisers ever since. The Guides remain an administrative interpretation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, and the agency has published subsequent plain-language materials and further updates to reflect social media and review‑platform practices. (ftc.gov)

Addressing ’s newsroom example and ’s “what’s next?” concern: the FTC’s focus is consumer‑protection in commerce, not viewpoint policing. Where an audience reasonably understands a reviewer’s relationship (for example, an employed newspaper critic), the need for a disclosure is reduced; where that relationship is not apparent, the “material connection” test applies. The Commission’s Q&A and staff guidance explain those limits and the legal basis in plain terms. (ftc.gov)

Enforcement and evolution since 2009 are worth noting. The agency investigated brand outreach to bloggers (e.g., the Ann Taylor/LOFT preview) and closed that matter while reminding the company to require and monitor disclosures. In 2019 the FTC published “Disclosures 101” with explicit, platform‑specific examples (use “ad,” “sponsored,” or “Thanks to X for the free product,” placed so it’s hard to miss). More recently the Guides were updated (2023) and the FTC finalized a rule addressing fake or procured reviews and related practices (final rule effective Oct 21, 2024). (ftc.gov)

Practical checklist (short, actionable): treat any payment, free product, trip, affiliate code, or promise of future benefit as a material connection; disclose it clearly and conspicuously in the same post (not buried on an About page); use simple labels (#ad or “sponsored” work well on tight platforms); for images/videos overlay or state it in audio/video and in the description; brands should put disclosure obligations in contracts and monitor compliance. When in doubt, err on transparency — it protects credibility and reduces legal risk. For exact wording and platform examples, consult the FTC’s Disclosures 101 and the updated Guides. (ftc.gov)

Recommended Answers

All 4 Replies

Member Avatar for InsightsDigital

For the FTC to do this, it must have meant that they saw the urgency to do so from a consumer's perspective. This reminds me of the days when Nader would advocate for such legislation. I personally do believe that ethical bloggers should disclose but it is also a sign of good faith to not abuse the system or any system...

Member Avatar for MktgRob

For the FTC to do this, it must have meant that they saw the urgency to do so from a consumer's perspective. This reminds me of the days when Nader would advocate for such legislation. I personally do believe that ethical bloggers should disclose but it is also a sign of good faith to not abuse the system or any system...

Everyone should keep track of this in the press because I have read and heard that there are concerns that this could lead to an over-reach by the government to use the FTC to try to clamp down on blogs that are critical of government. I realize that this is entering the realm of '1984' but you never know.

Member Avatar for InsightsDigital

My concern is: "What's next?" on government control of public communication. Could it be next - limitations on text behavior - just a thought.

Member Avatar for MktgRob

My concern is: "What's next?" on government control of public communication. Could it be next - limitations on text behavior - just a thought.

What is troubling is that I just read that there is a provision in a bill in congress that allows government to expand the definition of what hate speech is if they have a stake in the argument. The article I read it in was discussing the fact that there are already cases in front of the courts where gay rights advocates are attempting to sue the Catholic Church for hate speech if a passage from scripture is read in a mass that states that homsexual behavior is a sin. So if the provision in question is signed into law, religious teachings can be labeled as hate speech. Would this also mean that a blog espousing a specific religious or political point of view could be shut down if the governement deems it hate speech. It would seem that the First Amendment gets called into question and that would not be good.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.