Hopefully they won't.Likely considering how common it is already.
Hopefully they won't.Likely considering how common it is already.
http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus71-ftcs-revised-endorsement-guideswhat-people-are-askingI’ve read that bloggers who don’t comply with the Guides can be fined $11,000? Is that true?
No. The press reports that said that were wrong. There is no fine for not complying with an FTC guide.
Section 507 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 508, requires that, when anyone provides or promises to provide money, services or other consideration to someone to include program matter in a broadcast, that fact must be disclosed in advance of the broadcast, ultimately to the station over which the matter is to be aired. Both the person providing or promising to provide the money, services or other consideration and the recipient are obligated to make this disclosure so that the station may broadcast the sponsorship identification announcement required by Section 317 of the Communications Act. Failure to disclose such payment or the providing of services or other consideration, or promise to provide them, is commonly referred to as ``payola'' and is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year or both. These criminal penalties bring violations within the purview of the Department of Justice.
The Federal Trade Commission says Nissan and its advertising agency have agreed to settle allegations of deceptive advertising over a TV spot that showed a Frontier pickup truck pushing a dune buggy up a hill.
The 3-second ad was shot YouTube-style as if onlookers had come upon the pickup rescuing the stalled dune buggy and shot the scene with a mobile phone, according to the FTC. In fact, the FTC says, the Frontier was not capable of pushing the dune buggy up the steep hill. Under the proposed settlements, Nissan and its agency, TBWA Worldwide, are prohibited from using deceptive demonstrations in advertisements for pickup trucks. They are still allowed to use special effects as long as they depict actions that the vehicle is capable of performing.
So you're claiming it's common practice to produce and air free commercials for your clients without even telling them? Is it also common practice to also alter your boilerplate agreements to ensure FTC violations in the process?They claim it was added value aka bonuses media. This happens quite a bit and is beyond the standard media buy. Usually thrown in if the publisher screwed up before, or if the initial media buy is rather large.
So you're claiming it's common practice to produce and air free commercials for your clients without even telling them? Is it also common practice to also alter your boilerplate agreements to ensure FTC violations in the process?
You didn't even screen it? That seems a bit haphazard. Aren't you ultimately responsible for the content of the ads? What if they were all filled with horrible lies about your competitor's product, for example?Sort of. Bonus content produced by a vendor happens all the time. All they would have said during the planning process is "for x amount of dollars you are getting y impressions for these banners, and z impressions for the preroll. As value add to make sure you buy from us, we'll throw in some video content that we'll produce at no added cost"
I've had as high as $30k worth of free media thrown at me for buying a rather large amount of home page takeovers spread over a year. All of it was created by the site and nothing had to be done by us.
You didn't even screen it? That seems a bit haphazard. Aren't you ultimately responsible for the content of the ads? What if they were all filled with horrible lies about your competitor's product, for example?
I'm not sure what the difference is. Which are MS, Machinima, and the tubers in this scenario?It wouldn't be the media agencies job, it would fall on the creative agencies.
Because when they see a guy wearing headphones, they forget what laws are?The problem with this case it was User generated content which throws a curve ball at creative teams.
So basically bribes are totally accepted in the industry, no one cares about ethics, and there will never, ever be any integrity whatsoever.
Lovely. Okay.
I'm not sure what the difference is. Which are MS, Machinima, and the tubers in this scenario?
Regardless, if I made widgets, I certainly wouldn't let anyone publish ads for them sight unseen. Aren't I ultimately responsible for any advertising done for my product?
Because when they see a guy wearing headphones, they forget what laws are?
So basically bribes are totally accepted in the industry, no one cares about ethics, and there will never, ever be any integrity whatsoever.
Lovely. Okay.
It is a soul sucking industry, but pays pretty well with lots of room for advancement.
Sounds like the columbian drug cartel
Sounds like the columbian drug cartel
pretty sure drug cartel's a little more....dangerous
Aren't Microsoft ultimately responsible for the content of ads promoting their product?When it comes to UGC, it becomes incredibly difficult for the creative teams to screen every single video or piece of content unless its just a handful.
Aren't Microsoft ultimately responsible for the content of ads promoting their product?
"This is all so hard to manage" seems to be being offered an excuse here, but rather than excusing bad behavior, shouldn't it instead be an indication the system itself is flawed? If MS can simply claim ignorance and get away with it, isn't the system ripe for abuse? They just need to find someone willing to take the fall in exchange for a pile of cash.
Since this has more or less wrapped itself up since the FTC ain't doing shit, I put together my final thoughts on the matter.
Hopefully this can all do some good in the gaming world on youtube and people will remain vigilant about the disclosure of paid advertisement
All you can really do now is trust your friends. Even if no legal action is taken, the damage to basically all forms of opinion-media has hit.
The underlying federal laws are enforceable. The guide itself is not enforceable. The guide is based off summaries and interpretations of the federal law applied to today's new emerging mediums. Crecente's interpretation of that as these tactics being immune to litigation or not answering to the underlying laws is confusing.
More or less, except bribes are more cleverly disguised as prizes to media people, lunches, event tickets, trips to the local stripclub or small gifts below $200
It is a soul sucking industry, but pays pretty well with lots of room for advancement.
From the other thread:
Here is the list of YouTube channels that have accepted this deceptive terms of marketing:
73. acidglow accepted the Xbox One Console Campaign Assignment http://www.youtube.com/user/acidglow/ 19,979 subscribers
Yeah, no doubt Mariah Carey is hot stuff. Every time I choose to listen, I'm all "fuuck, this is damn good."
In fact, the best thing about Mariah's version is how perfectly it captures the spirit of Christmas
Thanks for smelling that something was up.
If you get banned for this, I have to ask now... was it worth it?