If you’re a blogger, or even read blogs, then you’re aware of the new FTC requirements which compel bloggers to disclose any “material connections” with advertisers or face fines up to $11,000. This primarily concerns testimonials and reviews in which bloggers are compensated – either monetarily or with “freebies.” Unsurprisingly, the blogosphere has erupted with outrage and paranoia. For example, Ron Hogan over at MediaBistro posted a lengthy open letter to the FTC posing a series of scenarios and asking if each one would constitute a violation.
Some excerpts from MediaBistro:
· Will the New York Times’ “Paper Cuts” or the Los Angeles Times’ “Jacket Copy” or “Shelf Life” at Entertainment Weekly, to pick three examples, be bound by the same FTC guidelines as “The Elegant Variation” or “Smart Bitches, Trashy Books” ? If not, why not?
· Just out of curiosity, will the FTC be requiring authors who blurb other authors’ books to disclose the “material connections” they have to those authors and the publishers of those books? If so, will those requirements apply to blurbs printed on book jackets as well as print advertising? (And if such disclosures are not made, against whom should a complaint be made? the publisher or the author who wrote the blurb?) If not, why not?
On the other hand, Associated Press writers Deborah Yao and Emily Fredrix respond to at least the first bullet by stating the following:
“Bloggers have long praised or panned products and services online. But what some consumers might not know is that many companies pay reviewers for their write-ups or give them free products such as toys or computers or trips to Disneyland. In contrast, at traditional journalism outlets, products borrowed for reviews generally have to be returned.”
Reading these reactions, I detect a fair amount of exaggeration and “slippery slope” fear-mongering. I do think that it’s interesting that both the print media and blogger factions choose to bring up books as the innocuous side of the endorsement coin. And I think discussing it in these terms sorely misses the point.
Read the rest of the article at ReveNews.
Image by dbking.
