Font ResizeA blogger who reviews a product - --- but leaves out whether he or she got a payment, high-value gift or free vacation to write the review -- could run afoul of new federal regulations on advertising.
The blogger rules, announced last week by the Federal Trade Commission, are part of revisions to the agency's Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
The new regulations are aimed at the rapidly shifting new-media world and how advertisers are using bloggers and social media sites like Facebook and Twitter to pitch their wares.
The last time these guides were revised was in 1980, and of course at that time there was no such thing as a blogger.
But bloggers are mentioned several times in the 81-page revisions.
"The post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement," said the agency in a news release. "Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service."
A blogger, however, may accept a free sample of a product for review purposes without disclosure, "provided that the product itself does not have such a high value that would make its receipt material (e.g., a car)," according to the revised rules.
There's nothing in the rules that specifies how the disclosure must be made. "That's left up to the endorser," said Richard Cleland, assistant director of
The new rules also take aim at celebrities, who will now need to disclose any ties to companies, should they promote products on a talk show or on Twitter. A second major change, which was not aimed specifically at bloggers or social media, was to eliminate the ability of advertisers to gush about results that differ from what is typical -- for instance, from a weight loss supplement.
For bloggers who review products, this means that the days of an unimpeded flow of giveaways may be over. More broadly, the move suggests that the government is intent on bringing to bear on the Internet the same sorts of regulations that have governed other forms of media, like television or print.
"It crushes the idea that the Internet is separate from the kinds of concerns that have been attached to previous media," said Clay Shirky, a professor at New York University.
The new rules go into effect Dec. 1.
The new guidelines were not unexpected -- the commission gave notice last November that it would take up the matter. They will affect scores of bloggers who began as hobbyists only to find that companies flocked to them in search of a new way to reach consumers.
There are no penalties directly associated with violating the rules. But if a blogger constantly breaks them, the FTC could seek a cease-and-desist order.
If a blogger is thus ordered but continues to break the rules, it can run into real money. The fine for violating an order is up to $11,000 per incident.
Some marketing groups fought the changes. "If a product is provided to bloggers, the FTC will consider that, in most cases, to be a material connection even if the advertiser has no control over the content of the blogs," said Linda Goldstein, a partner at Manatt Phelps & Phillips, a law firm that represents three marketing groups, the Electronic Retailing Association, the Promotion Marketing Association and the Word of Mouth Marketing Association. "In terms of the real world blogging community, that's a seismic shift."
Goldstein added, "We would have preferred the FTC to work closer with the industry to learn how viral marketing works."
