Download Bloggers can be Advertisers and Endorsers

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Criticism of advertising wikipedia , lookup

Advertising management wikipedia , lookup

Digital marketing wikipedia , lookup

Viral marketing wikipedia , lookup

Advertising to children wikipedia , lookup

Social media marketing wikipedia , lookup

Radio advertisement wikipedia , lookup

Advertising campaign wikipedia , lookup

Ad blocking wikipedia , lookup

Racial stereotyping in advertising wikipedia , lookup

Online advertising wikipedia , lookup

Targeted advertising wikipedia , lookup

False advertising wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
Blogger Advertising & the
Federal Trade Commission
Meredith Lowry
Wright Lindsey Jennings LLP
[email protected]
@meredithlowry
Federal Trade Commission - FTC
Advertising Must be Truthful
Advertisers Must Have Evidence for Claims
Marketers Must Use Disclosures to Avoid Deception
Disclosures must be Clear & Conspicuous
#Spon WLJ is awesome. #AD
Bloggers & Advertising
Bloggers can be Advertisers and Endorsers
Bloggers are Liable for Claims made that are
Deceptive
#Sponsored post –
www.igotpaid.wordpress.com
Endorsers
Expresses His or Her Opinions
In a manner that Consumers would
believe reflects the Opinions of a Person
other than the Actual Advertiser
For a Product Used by the Endorser
WLJ attorneys are awesome.
WLJ attorneys are awesome.
#Spon. WLJ attorneys are awesome. #AD.
Bloggers Advertising Liability
Bloggers are liable for claims made that are Deceptive
Advertisers misrepresentations or Unsupported
Representations
#Sponsored post – Live Forever with
this Pill! The Internet says it is True!
Disclaimers
Disclaimers are not foolproof
#Sponsored post – Live Forever with this
Pill! www.maybenotreadthesedisclaimersfirst.com
Disclosures
Relationship that Materially affects the Credibility of
the Endorser must be Clearly & Conspicuously
Disclosed
Hyperlinks may NOT work for Every Situation
#Sponsored post
www.igot$$$forthispost.com
BunZai Media Group, Inc
(AuraVie)
• Online marketers were using misleading
“risk free trial” offers to sell skincare
products.
• These marketers were advertising
through banner ads and pop-up
advertisement on third party websites.
FREE
• Essentially, the marketers tricked consumers into providing their payment
information, charged them for full price of the product, and enrolled them in a
buying program with recurring fees.
• The FTC provided that if a company advertises a “risk free trial” that is what it must
provide.
FREE LUNCH! #nosuchthing
Allstar Marketing Group, LLC
• A direct marketing company was selling “as-seen-on-TV” products
(Snuggies, Magic Mesh door covering, etc.).
• Online consumers who opted to buy the products were required to pay
“processing and handling fees” that dramatically increased the price
above the advertised price, and those fees were disclosed only in very fine
print at the bottom of the webpage.
• The order requires the company to obtain customers’ written consent for
billing them for any product or service and requires the company to
conspicuously disclose the total number of products a customer has
ordered, all fees and costs related to the purchase, and all material
conditions related to the purchase.
FYI – Snuggies are not appropriate
workplace attire.
CarePatrol, Inc; ABCSP, Inc.
• Two online companies were recommending long-term care facilities for
senior citizens, apparently misleading consumers to think that they had
researched the facilities and had detailed knowledge about them.
• The companies said they monitored and graded all of the facilities when in
actuality they had not monitored or graded most, or any, of the facilities.
• The order requires that the company was barred from making false or
unsubstantiated representations about their placement services, finding
that “[s]enior citizens need honest information when they’re considering
long term care options.”
Google, Inc.
• Google was required to pay a record 22.5 million civil penalty to
settle FTC charges because Google had told users of Apple’s Safari
Internet browser that it would not place “cookies” or serve targeted
ads to those users, when actuality Google was placing cookies,
including the ones Google specifically said would be blocked from
the browsers.
• Google was charged the penalty because the misrepresentations
violated a settlement it reached with the FTC from a prior issue.
Brown, Koby, individually, and
d/b/a/ Dermapps, et al.
Three individuals claimed their smartphone app
could cure acne.
The FTC warning order requires them to cease
making claims about their apps, or about the
safety, performance, benefits, or efficacy of any of
their devices unless they have scientific support of
the truth of those statements.
There’s an app for that.
#theproofisinthepudding