Article on new FTC rules for bloggers

[Dana_W]

It will be interesting to see how much they really do crack down on bloggers. I'd hate to find out the hard way, though.

Poynter Online - Al's Morning Meeting

[Dan C. Rinnert]

"Yet in many ways, the hypercommercialism of the Web is changing too quickly for consumers and regulators to keep up," said Richard Cleland, an assistant director at the Federal Trade Commission.

I think it's regulators having problems keeping up, not consumers. Granted, there are stupid people out there and the politicians cater to them, but I'm not convinced most consumers are having problems.

Regardless of whether a blogger earns a commission on a product sale, their long-term growth depends on them recommending products that other people will find worthwhile. Otherwise, people will simply stop listening to them.

Besides that, people aren't sheep. They aren't going to go out and buy something just because one person said it's good. That may factor into their decision, but I very much doubt that people are hanging on the every word of bloggers in order to make their buying decisions for them. And, if they are, no amount of disclaimers or notices are going to help them.

On top of that, aren't there enough real scams out there that they should be focusing on? Shady companies and individuals that bilk people out of their money?

Instead, they decide to make a big deal out of minor issues in order to grab headlines for themselves and try to prove their relevance.

[Keith Kogane]

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

I think it's regulators having problems keeping up, not consumers. Granted, there are stupid people out there and the politicians cater to them, but I'm not convinced most consumers are having problems.

It's enough of a problem to warrant a fraud page on Snopes. That seems like a widespread problem to me.

snopes.com: Google 'Work from Home' Scam

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

Regardless of whether a blogger earns a commission on a product sale, their long-term growth depends on them recommending products that other people will find worthwhile. Otherwise, people will simply stop listening to them.

You assume they want to go for repeat business instead of a lot of single first sales. Judging by the complaints levied against the companies involved, I'm guessing they don't.

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

Besides that, people aren't sheep. They aren't going to go out and buy something just because one person said it's good.

Are you sure you understand how affiliate marketing works on the internet? LOL! I know what you mean, but come now. People ARE sheep. Worse, in fact. In the words of the immortal Eugene Schwartz, "I have terrible news for you. We are all chimpanzees!"

And that IS worse because most of us THINK we "know better" but then just look around you and see how people act. The chaos of the human world seems perplexing when you try to comprehend it using logic. But people don't ACT on logic, they act on EMOTION. As a marketer, you probably know that well, but we often forget when we try to think about it from the other side.

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

That may factor into their decision, but I very much doubt that people are hanging on the every word of bloggers in order to make their buying decisions for them. And, if they are, no amount of disclaimers or notices are going to help them.

What you say is true about their helplessness. And it's because they're helpless that there is a call for the government to come in and help them. And you're right about the decisions to buy not being based on the blogger's single recommendations, but look at the deep fraud perpetrated on the blogs referenced in the snopes article.

There are logos, videos, testimonials, fake reporting, fake comments, all accumulating into an effective illusion of trustworthiness. And because it's being abused, people will STOP trusting such indicators when making decisions, and that's not only bad for honest marketers, it's bad for society as a whole, when you generally mistrust the entire population at large any time they recommend something to help you.

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

On top of that, aren't there enough real scams out there that they should be focusing on? Shady companies and individuals that bilk people out of their money?

Instead, they decide to make a big deal out of minor issues in order to grab headlines for themselves and try to prove their relevance.

Read the article above - we're talking about abuse not only of the public trust and the social contract, but we're also talking about abuse of credit card billing systems resulting in massive losses via chargebacks and the like. How long do you think banks will want to continue working with marketers like us if this is what "those bloggers" are doing.

I'm not trying to single you out Dan, but I think a lot of folks are dismissing the importance of what's at stake here by thinking that the FTC will only go after the actual offenders and leave the honest bloggers alone. Like you said, they lack the resources to do it right, so they won't use a scalpel to respond to the problem. They'll use the biggest sledgehammer you ever saw.

It's no longer enough for marketers to say "well I'm not a scammer" because these people are poisoning our entire livelyhood. If we don't do what we can to oust the bad apples whenever we can, it's going to have SERIOUS consequences for lots of people.

Anyway, my $0.02 (not redeemable for cash).

[Dan C. Rinnert]

Originally Posted by Keith Kogane

It's enough of a problem to warrant a fraud page on Snopes. That seems like a widespread problem to me.

snopes.com: Google 'Work from Home' Scam

But, those are actual scams. Those aren't cases where a blogger got a laptop, wrote how great it was, and didn't disclose that he or she had gotten the laptop for free.

I'm not saying that we should let real scammers get away with things, only that the FTC appears to be honing in on things that are not major problems.

I'm not trying to single you out Dan, but I think a lot of folks are dismissing the importance of what's at stake here by thinking that the FTC will only go after the actual offenders and leave the honest bloggers alone. Like you said, they lack the resources to do it right, so they won't use a scalpel to respond to the problem. They'll use the biggest sledgehammer you ever saw.

It's no longer enough for marketers to say "well I'm not a scammer" because these people are poisoning our entire livelyhood. If we don't do what we can to oust the bad apples whenever we can, it's going to have SERIOUS consequences for lots of people.

That's exactly the problem. There are real scams out there that are defrauding people. Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be the FTC's interest here. They seem more worried that a blogger might get a free bird feeder in exchange for reviewing it than they are about actual bona fide scams.

[Keith Kogane]

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

But, those are actual scams. Those aren't cases where a blogger got a laptop, wrote how great it was, and didn't disclose that he or she had gotten the laptop for free.

I'm not saying that we should let real scammers get away with things, only that the FTC appears to be honing in on things that are not major problems.



That's exactly the problem. There are real scams out there that are defrauding people. Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be the FTC's interest here. They seem more worried that a blogger might get a free bird feeder in exchange for reviewing it than they are about actual bona fide scams.

Well the government is responding to the whining of a class of people who do not properly understand how they are being taken advantage of, so they can't really explain it right.

The same kind of people usually work for the government, so even if it was explained right, it wouldn't matter.

Then it comes down to having the manpower to correctly investigate and prosecute the matter... and that's when they just start with that giant hammer and start taking measures to squash the whole thing.

The FTCs interest is NOT in fighting the scammers. The FTCs interest is in responding to the complaints of the people who are contacting them. They hear "bloggers" and "fraud" and then by the time they're involved it's too late. Bureaucracy is a creature of inertia. It's slow to get em going, but once they do, it can get really expensive if you're trapped under that hammer.

That's why I personally am trying to do my own little part to report this kind of fraud when I see it, and heavily discourage people thinking of trying it when they see it and think that kind of method is "clever" and "cute".

There are plenty of examples of how abuse ruined certain marketing practices for everyone. For example, in some places it's illegal to sell siding door to door. This is because some assholes used to come to your house for a free inspection, peel off half the side of your house to show you how bad it is, and then go away for weeks and let it get worse and worse for you and then make you an insane gouge of an offer (which you have to take to fix your house).

Lots of housewifes home alone got scammed that way. Complaints were made. Scammers moved on and found another scam, and meanwhile the people who made and distributed the siding suffer.

I digress though. My main point in response to what you were first saying is that this is not about a government agency grabbing headlines. This is a cancer in our industry that has now harmed enough people for the government to take notice of all the people crying foul. They aren't grandstanding either, there WILL be some kind of swat and a lot of people are not going to like it.

But time will tell. Good debate, too.