FTC BACKS DOWN - Just Kidding About the $11,000 Fine!

[Catalyst eMarketing]

There are so many threads here at the WF about the new FTC Guidelines and this NEW info is really important. So I decided instead of running around trying to add this to existing threads I would start a new discussion.

OK now this is just plain confusing!

In case you don't know the situation, it's been WIDELY reported that the FTC will leverage fines up to $11,000 per violation of their new testimonial and endorsement guidelines which target bloggers and other Word of Mouth marketers.

Here's one story: Washingtonpost - FTC Values Sponsored Conversations at $11,000 Apiece

Here's the overview from the FTC, which I could swear also mentioned the $11,000 fines but now it's gone. FTC Publishes Final Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials

HERE IS THE NEW INFO - THEY RETRACT THE FACT THEY'LL BE FINING $11,000

FTC Responds to Blogger Fears: "That $11,000 Fine Is Not True"

"That $11,000 fine is not true. Worst-case scenario, someone receives a warning, refuses to comply, followed by a serious product defect; we would institute a proceeding with a cease-and-desist order and mandate compliance with the law. To the extent that I have seen and heard, people are not objecting to the disclosure requirements but to the fear of penalty if they inadvertently make a mistake. That's the thing I don't think people need to be concerned about. There's no monetary penalty, in terms of the first violation, even in the worst case. Our approach is going to be educational, particularly with bloggers. We're focusing on the advertisers: What kind of education are you providing them, are you monitoring the bloggers and whether what they're saying is true?"

They also respond to the question HOW do bloggers need to disclose by saying it's up to us.

"There is some vagueness....The bloggers have to look at how they do their blogging, their business practice, and figure out the way that consumers will best get the message that this is a sponsored post. In terms of clear and conspicuous, the criteria there is that the consumers will notice the disclosure. Disclosures can be made in different ways, whether you make it outside of the text but in proximity to blog, or incorporate it into the blog discussion itself--those are the issues that bloggers will have discretion about."

They also touch on how enforcement will be handled.

Here's another article about it.

FTC: Actually, We Don't Really Mean That Stuff About $11,000 Non-Disclosure Fines

So... do you think they are back peddling or do you think all the initial news reports about the fines were wrong?

At any rate I think you still need to be careful and disclose, but things are a little more clear now after reading the Fast Company Article.

FYI Here is a NIFTY little Disclosure Policy Generator you can use.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

I think everyone overreacted to the FTC guide from the get-go. It isn't what most people think it is, and I've made a thread about that very subject.

[DrewG]

Interesting....very interesting...

[Jason_V]

I am *hoping* they backed down because of the outrage from the blogosphere.

The second best news I could get today is a headline saying:

"Google Scraps Sidewiki" LOL

[ramone_johnny]

Originally Posted by Jason_V

The second best news I could get today is a headline saying:

"Google Scraps Sidewiki" LOL

Oh dude - HIGH FIVE!!

[Vital Video]

This makes more sense. Of course they now admit that there is some vagueness.

If your not going gangbusters over the top with obvious misleading hype then I feel there is nothing to worry about.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Vital Video

This makes more sense. Of course they now admit that there is some vagueness.

They admit in the guide itself that there is vagueness, it isn't new. And in fact you are correct about not having to worry about it...

[Mike Hill]

So I'm still a little leery on what would happen for people outside the US... Will their host company be forced to take down the site or what?

Also, this opens the flood gates to those who host sites overseas and refuse to comply. They will be playing by a different set of rules.

Mike Hill

[DogScout]

I wouldn't bet there is no $11,000 fine. Same thing happened with FTC used car stickers. Everyone was told the fine was rumor, even reported by the NY times as being rumor (I think...or the Wall Street Journal)...until they bankrupted their first prey.

Same with the privacy laws, everyone was told there were no fines 'per se'; but of course, there were.

[Lance K]

Originally Posted by 5starAffiliatePrograms

In case you don't know the situation, it's been WIDELY reported that the FTC will leverage fines up to $11,000 per violation of their new testimonial and endorsement guidelines which target bloggers and other Word of Mouth marketers.


So... do you think they are back peddling or do you think all the initial news reports about the fines were wrong?

I think they're just dodging hypocrisy complaints.

I mean, unless they want to disclose that $11,000 isn't a typical result, and then go to the trouble of figuring out what is typical and then posting it next to the $11,000 figure.

Kinda kills the shock factor.

[DogScout]

The FTC seems to like $11,000. That is the fine in both the used car sticker and privacy violation law. It is also per incident/per day. A used car offered for sale with an improperly worded sticker generates $11,000 a day it is there. Sometimes, the FTC will go to a dealership at night, make a list and wait a month to jack up the ultimate fine and pay for the investigation. Same thing with the privacy law. You walk down the hall in a dictor's office and someone's chart is on a plastic holder next to the door another patient is in? That is against the law. The fact you could, if you wished pick that chart up and read it makes them guilty of not protecting their client's privacy, yet they still do it. Unless there is a complaint and a HUGE complaint, it is not enforced. If they decide to go after a doctor, a different agent will make an appointment for a month and count all the charts they could have read to jack up the fine and pay for the investigation.

Basically, if you are targeted, time to close that business and open another.

[RGallowitz]

All I can say is YIPPEEE!

[DAS_Matt]

If the government has a chance to get money from you.. they will take it.

[Pat Jackson]

So if the disclosure policy placement is at the bloggers discretion, does that mean we could just add a sidebar, header or footer link to a disclosure page?

I don't think this is anywhere near as bad as many people initially anticipated.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by Pat Jackson

I don't think this is anywhere near as bad as many people initially anticipated.

It isn't.

Originally Posted by Pat Jackson

So if the disclosure policy placement is at the bloggers discretion, does that mean we could just add a sidebar, header or footer link to a disclosure page?

The FTC guides say that it has to be "conspicuous".

[Pat Jackson]

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

The FTC guides say that it has to be "conspicuous".

Hmm. I think I'm going to put a link in my "about me" sidebar and make it a bigger font and highlight it. That seems conspicuous enough, I guess.

[wolfshaman]

I don't run google toolbar with the sidewiki feature but I'm kinda curious what sort of comments are posted on all those pages discussing the new FTC regulations. Just wondering???

[WritingMadwoman]

Is it April Fool's Day???

[melanied]

This is disappointing. What are people going to panic about now?

[nimcus38318]

I still don't get Mr. Cleland's differentiation between newspaper reviews and blogger reviews. It does seem to me that the FTC is punishing the medium.
With that said, I don't think that anyone will be going through too much hardship in figuring out how to explain that a paid review is a paid review.

But, isn't the FTC in violation of their own rules when they say $11,000 fine when that is not a "typical" or "average" persons result?

[pcpupil]

@Steven Carl,
Been right behind ya on all the threads.Just posted to your last one.
Most of the people here are not reading the PDF and misunderstanding the basics.
I downloaded it from [5staraffiliateprograms]from another thread.
Basiclly it says no more [white text box,with light grey text,in font size 1].
It just says there must be a disclaimer and it must be readable.
Thats my take on it,although im looking at it again to see if theres an absolute minimum requirement,although i havent found one yet.
Matt

[scrofford]

I remember reading at first that they weren't going to do much enforcement on this issue and then all of a sudden I heard about some $11,000 fine. Now its not true...thats really cool

[Thomas Prendergast]

This country is already moving forward in punishing productivity. The FTC anti blogging regulation is just one more action that will move more companies out of the USA.

Today Nancy Pelosi in an interview disclosed that she wants a new VAT tax across the nation.

When these people are done no one will do business in the US.

Ireland is looking pretty good.

Thomas Prendergast

[futuremills]

how many ppl do you think will lclose down shop due to this

[cypherslock]

I don't understand why they would do so Tom? After all, isn't the American dream to have the freedom to be the success you envision? Or is it "you can only be successful to a certain amount, then you must be cheating."

[Catalyst eMarketing]

Originally Posted by futuremills

how many ppl do you think will lclose down shop due to this

I don't see why anyone in the world would close down over this. (Except maybe the flogs and fake news sites that are total scams.) You just have to be smart about it, honest about it and disclose.

Disclosure doesn't need to be a negative thing either. You can actually turn it into a positive.

READ THIS!
How to Turn Affiliate Marketing Disclosure Into a Selling Point

[mr2020]

I used to be a beat cop.

You can't legislate morality and integrity.

Those who have both will pretty much be okay, with and without the new rulings. Those who don't, well that's another story.

As long as we seek to have laws legislate morality and integrity we as a culture are screwed.

Twenty Twenty

[TommyG]

Originally Posted by Thomas Prendergast

This country is already moving forward in punishing productivity. The FTC anti blogging regulation is just one more action that will move more companies out of the USA.

Today Nancy Pelosi in an interview disclosed that she wants a new VAT tax across the nation.

When these people are done no one will do business in the US.

Ireland is looking pretty good.

Thomas Prendergast

Totally disagree. It isn't punishing productivity and it's not anti-blogging. It's going after fake promo's. Look at the fake blogs on the web for acai and resveratrol. There are so many fake CPA related blogs with regards to trial products that the FTC is getting countless complaints so they are letting people know they need to be honest. Oprah, Dr Oz and others have filed lawsuits to get these marketers to stop using their names to promote these products. It was only a matter of time before the FTC stepped in and did something.

This is nothing more than letting people know you use affiliate links. If you do that you're okay. Unfortunately we are conditioned to hide them and keep our true nature for having a blog secret.

I was reading a thread on another forum about this and as I was reading I thought it seemed ironic that we don't want to tell people that we use affiliate links and yet we complain when someone on this forum or other IM forums gives us an affiliate link. It's like it's okay for marketers to give out links but they don't want to receive one.

On a humoristic note. It's funny you mention Ireland. During a presidential debate John McCain talked about Ireland having a 11% business tax. I remember thinking "How many aircraft carriers does Ireland have?" LOL!!

[Thomas Prendergast]

Originally Posted by TommyG

Totally disagree. It isn't punishing productivity and it's not anti-blogging. It's going after fake promo's. Look at the fake blogs on the web for acai and resveratrol. There are so many fake CPA related blogs with regards to trial products that the FTC is getting countless complaints so they are letting people know they need to be honest. Oprah, Dr Oz and others have filed lawsuits to get these marketers to stop using their names to promote these products. It was only a matter of time before the FTC stepped in and did something.

This is nothing more than letting people know you use affiliate links. If you do that you're okay. Unfortunately we are conditioned to hide them and keep our true nature for having a blog secret.

I was reading a thread on another forum about this and as I was reading I thought it seemed ironic that we don't want to tell people that we use affiliate links and yet we complain when someone on this forum or other IM forums gives us an affiliate link. It's like it's okay for marketers to give out links but they don't want to receive one.

On a humoristic note. It's funny you mention Ireland. During a presidential debate John McCain talked about Ireland having a 11% business tax. I remember thinking "How many aircraft carriers does Ireland have?" LOL!!

I like the point about aircraft carriers, pretty funny. I have thought about moving to Croatia too. They have a Navy. I think it is one gun ship and 20 zodiacs or something like that.

Here is my point. Back in the 80s I had a business with 35+ employees. The Workman's Comp, regulations, OSHA, lawsuits, unemployment insurance, audits, etc. Well it got to the point that all I was doing was dealing with State and Fed regulations, bureaucrats and issues and never getting anything done.

First thing I did was I laid everyone off them left California and moved to another state, Never again to build a business with employees. Now I contract them from other states or build automation.

As regulations, taxes and interference continues, more businesses will move away. It is a trend that has been going on for decades.

California raised taxes, fees and rates and new fees a year ago and saw a 38% drop in revenue this year. Small businesses are fleeing from California right now.

Thomas Prendergast

[E. Fire]

Here's the overview from the FTC, which I could swear also mentioned the $11,000 fines but now it's gone.

The FTC probably forced them to remove it because it wasn't a "typical result".

...oh wait, they are the FTC ;-)