I don't profess to be lawyer-ish or to even be able to understand the fine print in my 28 page house contract (it may be 38 pages, I didn't count, the point is there is more legalese than I care to wade through). I do believe I am smart enough to figure the contract out, and I do believe it's important for me to do so, but I fully admit that I rely on Tom for that. Tom IS a lawyer, albeit, a non-practicing lawyer. He doesn't represent us in any legal issues, he just makes sense out of the fine print on contracts. We have practicing attorneys for the legal stuff.
The reason I'm bringing all this up is because of the FTC ruling that is taking bloggers to task. I invite you to read a more a more thorough explanation of the ruling at Damn I Wish I'd Thought of That, Andy Sernovitz's blog, where he deconstructs the FTC ruling for us in today's blog post. (I see Andy will be at MarketingProfs Digital Marketing Mixer in Chicago on Oct. 21st - wow - wish I could be there; if you can be, you should be) [note: discovered my link to Andy's explanation was wrong, and fixed it today, 10/11/09]
Here's my problem with this whole issue - why do we need the FTC to tell us that honest, open, authentic conversations on blogs are the only way to do business? Do we suddenly need to hire a lawyer, just in case, to have on retainer if we don't disclose our relationship in wording the FTC approves? I don't think so! I think we've been policing ourselves just fine. On the other hand, maybe I'm being too much of a Pollyanna.
I am pitched products and books on a daily basis. I accept some and not others. When I write about them, I reveal that the book was a review copy, or the product was given to me for free. The fact that none of the folks who send me this stuff ask me to specifically write something, and none of them expect me to write something positive, seems right, to me.
But, Andy notes in his blog post under "Monitor the conversation and correct misstatements" that, "Claiming that 'bloggers can write whatever they want' is not a protection."
Obviously, bloggers cannot write incorrect content or misrepresent a company or individual. Bloggers, like all people, are required to play by the rules. Rules that have been part of our world for my entire life, and longer. But, this section seems to say bloggers need to now ask the company what they would like us to say.
And, why don't these rules apply to TV commercials, also?
Brands can hire a model or celebrity on TV and give them a script (I guess it's okay if the brand misrepresents itself) and create a commercial with blatantly incorrect content, and nobody cares. I cite, for instance, commercials about mascara. EVERY model is wearing FALSE EYELASHES. There is NO WAY any woman's eyelashes will look the way the commercial says - without the addition of false eyelashes.
Where is the truth in advertising there? I don't see small print noting that the model is wearing false eyelashes, but she is.
Okay, that's a pet peeve of mine. Misleading women. And yet, a part of me thinks, "Wome would have to be stupid to believe this commercial." That's a part of "buyer beware."
What about car commercials with...say, Tiger Woods? There is honesty in his endorsement because he's there, promoting the car. But, would he really buy the car - or, did he only participate because he was paid? What are we, as consumers, to make of his endorsement - which is "understood" I guess, because no where in the commercial does he stop and say, "This is a paid endorsement."
I don't know. Maybe I'm overreacting. It's good to have rules. It's good to be held accountable. It's bad to write reviews or be paid and not disclose the relationship. Thing is, do we really need the FTC to tell us that?
Would YOU or anyone you know, hide the fact that you were paid (in-kind included) to write something? And, shouldn't those of us who do reviews be able to write the review in our own words - as "opinion"? If we write incorrect information, isn't the brand able to correct it in comments? Why would they be held accountable for the blogger's misconception? And if the blogger was stating something he or she believed and/or felt about the product, why would he or she be held to task?
Andy and I are debating a bit on Facebook. He has a level head about this. I'll follow his lead.
Comments