Why is there no disclosure in the Bangor Daily News that First Wind is a "Premium Level Supporter" of George Smith's blog, meaning it would seem they are contributing at least $5,000 a year to his blog. http://www.georgesmithmaine.com/advertising-sponsorship-opportunities
Their ad is right on his home page under "Premium Level Supporters" at: http://www.georgesmithmaine.com/
Doesn't, at a minimum, good jourmalistic practice require disclosure of any financial connection between a writer and his subject?
" Now, Maine snowmobilers have discovered the allure of wind towers. First Wind, working with local snowmobile clubs and the Maine Snowmobile Association, has linked its wind towers in a 590-mile circuit through some beautiful Maine country.
More than 200 snowmobilers participated in this year’s Stetson Wind Snowmobile Ride-In On February 16 including Carolann Ouellette, Director of the Maine Tourism Commission. Carolann knows a tourist attraction when she sees one! Everyone is hoping to help local businesses by directing the trails past many of First Wind’s 55 wind turbines".
Read the whole shameless plug here:
Is blogging without disclosure legal? Please read the following from the FTC and decide for yourself.
The Federal Trade Commission today announced that it has approved final revisions to the guidance it gives to advertisers on how to keep their endorsement and testimonial ads in line with the FTC Act.
The notice incorporates several changes to the FTC’s Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which address endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities, as well as the disclosure of important connections between advertisers and endorsers. The Guides were last updated in 1980.
Under the revised Guides, advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service as typical when that is not the case will be required to clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect. In contrast to the 1980 version of the Guides – which allowed advertisers to describe unusual results in a testimonial as long as they included a disclaimer such as “results not typical” – the revised Guides no longer contain this safe harbor.
The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service. Likewise, if a company refers in an advertisement to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. And a paid endorsement – like any other advertisement – is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims.
Celebrity endorsers also are addressed in the revised Guides. While the 1980 Guides did not explicitly state that endorsers as well as advertisers could be liable under the FTC Act for statements they make in an endorsement, the revised Guides reflect Commission case law and clearly state that both advertisers and endorsers may be liable for false or unsubstantiated claims made in an endorsement – or for failure to disclose material connections between the advertiser and endorsers. The revised Guides also make it clear that celebrities have a duty to disclose their relationships with advertisers when making endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media.
The Guides are administrative interpretations of the law intended to help advertisers comply with the Federal Trade Commission Act; they are not binding law themselves. In any law enforcement action challenging the allegedly deceptive use of testimonials or endorsements, the Commission would have the burden of proving that the challenged conduct violates the FTC Act.
The Commission vote approving issuance of the Federal Register notice detailing the changes was 4-0. The notice will be published in the Federal Register shortly, and is available now on the FTC’s Web site as a link to this press release. Copies also are available from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,700 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.
(FTC File No. P034520)
(endorsement testimonial guide.wpd)
NEW YORK The Federal Trade Commission has issued new guidelines designed to set clearer rules for disclosure in social media influencer campaigns.
The guidelines state that bloggers who have received money or "in-kind payment" tied to product reviews must disclose such deals to readers. Companies that refer to a research group finding about a product must disclose any relationship with that organization.
The new rules are the first update the FTC has made to its guide for testaments and endorsements in advertising since 1980. They bring into sharper focus the relationship of bloggers and brands. The FTC chose not to make a distinction between professional bloggers and amateurs. It also does not differentiate between paying cash and providing product samples.
Violators face fines of up to $11,000 per infraction.
Fair Use Notice: This website may reproduce or have links to copyrighted material the use of which has not been expressly authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available, without profit, as part of our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, economic, scientific, and related issues. It is our understanding that this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided by law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.