There has been a fair amount of discussion about the recent FTC Guidelines on Endorsements and Testimonials.I serve as the Board President of the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA) and we have been supportive of the FTC's effort to try and protect consumers amidst some pretty fast-paced change in online media. We commented on the proposed Guidelines before they were adopted and pushed back pretty hard on some of the points that seemed to put undue burden on the blogger for product claims they make.
New Responsibility
The final Guidelines do hold bloggers and brands responsible for what they say about products and services and, more importantly, their disclosure to their followers of any material connection between them. The FTC has refined its message over th past week by clarifying that they will look mostly to the marketers to enforce the disclosure requirements. There are some vague areas. The definition of whether of giving product samples is considered a "sponsorship" hinges on the undefined value of a product (stick of gum? probably not. laptop? oh yes.) and whether there is a history between marketer and blogger or if the blogger has a history of routinely accepting products for reviews. I agree, this is an area that needs to be sharpened if anyone every has a hope of enforcing a guideline.
Not About Advertising; It's About Word of Mouth
But the "sky is falling" claims of some marketers are just not warranted. Randall Rothenberg who heads up the IAB wrote a long, impassioned letter to the FTC Chairman via Huffington Post. I respect IAB and Randall. His book, "Where the Suckers Moon" is one of the best ad books on the market. Their representation of their members is laudable. And if this were all about "advertising" than he might have a point. It's about word of mouth marketing.
As consumers, we have grown used to reading and watching the opinions of peers and 'strangers with expertise'via their blogs, Twitter feeds and facebook pages. This extends the reach of offline word of mouth and together they represent the most trusted source for opinions and purchase decisions around many products and services. That trust is dependent on the transparency of the relationship between marketer and blogger/influencer and the assurance that the opinion a blogger states is truly her own. At WOMMA we want to protect that power which is why we have our own Code of Ethics that guides our members' behavior in this space.
Randall's chief complaint is how the FTC holds online influencers/bloggers to a different standard than traditional media. The former must disclose receipt of products and other considerations that qualify as a material connection. The latter do not.
I agree this is lopsided. I respectfully request that all traditional journalists disclose when they receive a product from a marketer.(we are really talking about the traditions of the fourth estate not the broader 'communications' field)
Rather than the IAB stance that hopes to relieve bloggers of any special requirement to disclose, we should really just get everyone to disclose. Let the consumer decide who is credible regardless of whether they write periodically under a recognized media masthead or not. I actually think Mr. Rothenberg is onto something when he says this is confusing. The confusion starts with consumers not always knowing the source of content they browse in the great aggregator - Google. What is traditional media - governed by a journalistic code and what is the emerging media of everyone - which is often oblivious to that code? Rather than treat blogs like traditional media, let's follow a new standard which calls for full disclosure. If journalists and traditional media follow suit, great. If they don't, at least full disclosure by bloggers protects their consumers. I don't seriously think that media companies will jump on the disclosure bandwagon. But if bloggers disclose, they will keep their side of the street clean. This will protect the power of word of mouth for brands and consumers alike leaving them to collaborate and share about what matters most to them.
The Answer is a Simple Disclosure
The IAB points out many weaknesses in the FTC approach. Their primary concern seems to be whether bloggers will be wrongfully prosecuted for non compliance and whether the Guidelines are constitutional. Sharper minds than mine will debate if there truly is a constitutional issue here. The FTC has already commented that they have no intention of going after bloggers even admitting that they have no real enforcemnt 'engine.' All a blogger has to do to align themselves with the new Guidelines is add a few brief words to their post in a clear way - "they sent me this book (laptop, mobile phone, case of soap, airplane ticket) free of charge to give me an experience with the product. The opinions that follow are my own..."
Let's Define 'Best Practice' Disclosure Next
All a brand has to do is ask them to disclose, monitor if they do and take a reasonable action if they don't. The details of "best practice" disclosure are what we need to iron out next. Rather than rail against the FTC that their current first pass is confusing or worse, unconstitutional, WOMMA will do what it always has done, roll up our sleeves and define the best practice model, in this case, for disclosure between brands and bloggers. Like our Code of Ethics referenced by the FTC, this new guide for how disclosure should be handled by brands may go a long way to satisfy the FTC that the industry really is earnest in protecting consumers.
Come to our Summit in November to meet the FTC (and FDA!) and participate with our panel as we define very specifically the best way for brands to achieve the highest levels of disclosure. The FTC has started a process. Now they want the industry to continue with the hard work of making it real.
Comments