Support NeoGAF

[Nokterian]

Doubt it would've crossed these YouTubers mind if a legitimate company like EA/YouTube/Machinima would approach them with an offer like this. And besides the fact that they don't enclose the fact that they are being paid I don't see them lying. They say they enjoy the game, they say they have some doubt if they like the game more than BF3, they say the game is broken, etc. etc. I'm just not bothered by it, that's all.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not bothered by the YouTubers taking part in these promotions. I know I would. I am in fact bothered by EA going around with these shady practises.

Did you even read this?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=98404097&postcount=230

I think not and clearly you don't understand what is happening because you like wearing those rose tintend glasses.

 

[meppi]

Not surprising at all. I actually unsubscribed to Levelcap and Jackfrags a while ago because it became quite apparent they were not on our side.
Haven't been to their channels since and we were discussing this very thing yesterday. Especially about Levelcap...

Still fucking sucks that all of this turned out to be true. They deserve all the hate they are about to get.

 

[Insomnium]

Welp can someone please recommend me other bf channels to follow seeing as these 3 were literally the only ones I subscribed to.

Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

TheRussianBadger and blackmetash (iirc), blackmetash is rival.Ravic

 

[hesido]

JackFrags, I am done with you. Unsubscribing to your channel. Also, FrankieOnPC is pretty bad too:



Shameful. Hope ruining your integrity was worth the extra cash.

I don't think it is high enough to even think that "yeah, with that money, anybody could be tempted". Sure, you "can't put a price" on integrity but the amount they received for the deception is probablu not on the high side. Which makes me think there may not be an integrity to begin with.

 

[LeleSocho]

It's almost like they don't want to just blindly products when the makers of said product tell them too <strokes chin>

I guess i'm asking too much when i think people should make their own ideas given the material from the software house and/or waiting a couple of weeks before buying something.

 

[nib95]

So we're gonna have one of these a week now?

This is simultaneously depressing and encouraging. I hate the fact that this exists, and is even seen as normal by some people, but only good can come out of it being exposed like this. For as much as we say people on the internet don't matter (and they don't, and this will probably continue), the only way to keep a check on these kinds of things is to maintain constant vigilance. If that means we're gonna have to have a shitstorm every week about the next publisher doing this (I don't even want to imagine the threads if Nintendo or Sony somehow get linked to one of these), then so be it.

As for the legality of the matter: the Polygon article left me very confused at first; at first it seems to state point blank that these acts are not illegal, since the guidelines themselves are not legally enforceable. But later on, it also says:



This is an absurd statement. If these guidelines are meant to boil down U.S. Law in a way a layman can understand it, the law itself must make some mention of disclosure in advertisements. Further research on my part yielded me this:



The FTC wouldn't draft an interpretation of a law where it adds new regulation. Seeing as Polygon made no attempt at getting to the root of the issue (In hindsight, it seems to me as if this article did nothing but muddy the waters of the discussion, as did the comments but the FTC spokeswoman, which at this point seem like mere semantical argument.), I took it upon myself to peruse through the FTC Act, the piece of federal legislation that covers advertising. At first run through my search gave me nothing, and honestly after being in the middle of the discussion for almost 3 days by that point (and being quite tired of reading legalese) I left it aside. But this thread and some of the responses piqued my interest one more time and I went back into the law. Its quite funny now that I missed it, as it heads a section:



Seeing as these guides expound on the principles dictated in the law, and therefore must draw from it, it is my reading that this is the section the guides base themselves on to require advertisers to disclose monetary arrangements. It is my view that it falls directly under the 'deceptive acts' listed above. Furthermore, it is in this same section that we find mention of the $10,000 per infraction that was listed in the original Ars Technica article.

Due to this, It seems quite clear to me that failure to disclose of contractual endorsement not only violates FTC Guidelines, by extension it also directly violates the FTC Act. Polygon's article claiming that the guidelines themselves are not legally enforceable is correct only in strict sense of that sentence: the guidelines themselves are not enforceable, but the material they are based on is. Pure semantics.

Now, I don't presume my reading of the situation is the correct one. While I am a Lawyer, I am neither trained in Common Law nor much less U.S. Law (though I have lived here for the majority of my life, and as such have a certain affinity and understanding of it.) I welcome anyone with better credentials (or anyone that can read, as a Law Degree is not required to do research) to revise my findings. However, I believe this is the same interpretation that the FTC gives to the law (as evidence by their creation of the guidelines).

Link to the FTC Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which specifically "address the application of Section 5 of the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. 45) to the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertising."

Link to the FTC Act

Link to Section 5 of the FTC Act - Unfair Methods Of Competition Unlawful

Link to FTC Policy Statement on Unfairness


TL;DR - It's illegal as fuck.

Fantastic post dude.

 

[enanogrande]

Thanks for the comments guys. Just trying to get a bearing on the situation, that Polygon article was really all over the place. Hopefully this brings a bit more clarity to future discussions, and again if anyone wants to go over the documentation the links are all in the post.

 

[Haunted]

Can I get in on this promotion thing for money ?

Absolutely.

You just need

• a Youtube channel
• a couple hundred thousand subscribers
• no ethics or integrity

Obviously, the problem is standing apart from the hundreds of other YT channels out there that already satisfy all these requirements.

 

[Dire]

pretty sure the FTC already chimed in on both EA and Microsoft

http://www.polygon.com/2014/1/23/5337574/the-ftc-on-paying-youtubers-to-endorse-games

edit: ah you edited the OP before I found the link

This link directly from the FTC is far more informative and perfectly readable: http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/pres...al-guides-governing-endorsements-testimonials

In a nutshell their published guidelines are their legal interpretation of the not-so-readable law which is full of esoteria and legalese. The guidelines themselves are not the law per se and one could not be penalized solely for violating the guidelines. However, that would require the offender to prove in a court of law that the FTC's interpretation of their own laws is incorrect.

This was actually the sort of distinction offshore online poker sites used to operate in the US. The DoJ offered similar guidance stating that offshore online poker sites offering service to players in the US would be unlawful. However this was again only guidance, which is not the law, but an interpretation of such. Many of the online sites continued operating while claiming their actions were legal and the DoJ's interpretation of the law was flawed and not in accordance with their own legal council's views.

 

[Garcia]

Absolutely.

You just need

• a Youtube channel
• a couple hundred thousand subscribers
• no ethics or integrity

Obviously, the problem is standing apart from the hundreds of other YT channels out there that already satisfy all these requirements.

Exactly.

 

[Dire]

If you're considering accepting payments it might also be wise to read this: http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus71-ftcs-revised-endorsement-guideswhat-people-are-asking Basically that discuses things en endorser (as opposed to advertiser who hires endorsers) ought consider with a short Q&A section.

Here's another interesting link that has a number of hypothetical scenarios and whether it would likely be legal or not: http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/fi...stimonials/091005revisedendorsementguides.pdf

One even directly mentions video game blogging:

Example 7: A college student who has earned a reputation as a video game expert
maintains a personal weblog or &#8220;blog&#8221; where he posts entries about his gaming
experiences. Readers of his blog frequently seek his opinions about video game hardware
and software. As it has done in the past, the manufacturer of a newly released video game
system sends the student a free copy of the system and asks him to write about it on his
blog. He tests the new gaming system and writes a favorable review. Because his review is
disseminated via a form of consumer-generated media in which his relationship to the
advertiser is not inherently obvious, readers are unlikely to know that he has received the
video game system free of charge in exchange for his review of the product, and given the
value of the video game system, this fact likely would materially affect the credibility they
attach to his endorsement. Accordingly, the blogger should clearly and conspicuously
disclose that he received the gaming system free of charge. The manufacturer should
advise him at the time it provides the gaming system that this connection should be
disclosed, and it should have procedures in place to try to monitor his postings for
compliance

 

[VibratingDonkey]

What do you guys expect? They were already going to make BF4 videos because that's what they do, make BF videos. They sure do say they enjoy the game but BF is actually a good and fun to play game. It's still broken you say? Yeah I know because I watch LevelCap, Frankie and Jack their videos and they acknowledge it in pretty much every video they make, just like they say they disagree with some of the core gameplay design. So they jumped on the train to get some extra money doing what they were already doing. Funny to see this 'outrage' as I know that every sane GAFfer would do the same in a heartbeat.

That's not how it works. You can only sell your integrity once. The people who hopped on this EA promotion without letting their audience know, and the ones who agreed to the Machinima/Microsoft promotion, are dead in the water as far as consumer guidance is concerned. From here on out they are marketers, shills, promoters, advertisers, and at best, entertainers. They've got no business pretending to be on the side of consumers any longer.

Jackfrags is still pretending, endorsing some key reseller he apparently mentioned in a video. Douchenozzle.

 

[Legato.Reborn-]

http://www.reddit.com/r/dayz/comments/13rruz/frankieonpc_a_hacker_please_read_before_you/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xC4SITywbE

Here's a thread, if you read through all of it you'll get the full picture

http://forums.dayzgame.com/index.php?/topic/108705-frankieonpcin1080p-accused-of-cheating/

But to summarize

• A guy who kills a German squad was banned for hacking, nobody knows who it was until Frankie uploads Episode 20 showing that HE was the formerly unknown guy who killed the German squad.

• In the video you can see evidence of god mode usage because of a flashing temp icon + debug monitor only possible through hacking bypass.
  The temperature icon flashes with irregular yellow blinking: This is a known feature of the hack, no bug that causes the temp to flash irregularly has ever been reported

• His blood level magically goes back to full, even though he had nothing in his inventory to restore it that much

• You could further find strange edits (frames cut from zooming out animation etc.) which points to deliberate removal of evidence during the firefight.
  Why whould he cut out a frame in the middle of a firefight if it was not to cover up being hit?

Thanks, I never saw this.

 

[Ultra Magnus]

So do we have all the Youtubers who took part in this or does this comprise everyone?

 

[Legato.Reborn-]

So do we have all the Youtubers who took part in this or does this comprise everyone?

The three I watched

 

[SmokedMeat]

Unsubscribed Jack Frags. I'll never watch another video of his.

 

[Cudder]

Hello Levelcap here lying to your fucking face.

I tried posting the link to the story on his latest video, but it seems he has something in place to auto-remove comments like that.

 

[Dire]

The FTC has only investigated 3 similar cases under the new rules. Given the fact that its actually Machinima's contract, the fact that they don't really seem to care given widespread similar abuse, and the presumptuousness of thinking that we, who lack expertise in this realm, know more about this sphere than the qualified legal teams of these companies, its unlikely that anything will happen.

You know, investigations of major violations of corporate law don't tend to happen overnight. I think it's safe to say that the clear majority end up taking literally years. The FTC has offered their guidance on what they feel is a good-faith interpretation of the law. Certain companies now seem willing to violate this interpretation of the law and, as you alluded to, have billion dollar legal divisions telling them they can get away with it. If and when the FTC/DoJ unseals a case it's going to be air tight.

Trying to have a third party as a fall guy or for plausible deniability is not some revolutionary new idea. The online poker sites, for instance, tried this. The law clearly made not the act of playing poker, but the international transfer of funds for playing poker illegal. Those sites also had billion dollar legal budgets. They took on the best council money could buy and also began utilizing third parties to perform all potentially disputable transactions. The DoJ case took some odd 7 years to build their case against them. By the time their was finally unsealed, well those billion dollar legal firms didn't exactly prove their worth.

 

[Loxley]

At least Xcalizorz doesn't get roped into this shit. He remains one of the few YouTube gaming personalities I actually like.

 

[RE_Player]

Unsubscribed Jack Frags. I'll never watch another video of his.

Same. What a piece of garbage.

 

[Remmy2112]

If the payments and failure to disclose them has broken a law, fine, they broke a law.

But to the people denouncing these youtubers, saying things like "they were not on our side", are holding these people to a laughably high and ill-fitting standard. These are people who liked a certain video game series enough to make videos about them. These videos either depict them having fun, like in the Squad Up series, or providing helpful tips on specific weapons, gadgets, or vehicles. These people are not game reviewers, or previewers, or lets players, or whatever else. These are people having fun in a game series and providing tips. If you want to use their videos to help you decide to get or not get a product that rests entirely on YOUR head. They make this stuff to provide tips about playing the game.

As for no criticisms whatsoever being issued prior to a certain date that is entirely bullshit. LevelCap and Jack mentioned crashing issues when they happened at preview events, in the beta, and release, and offered suggestions in their videos for the game going forward regarding balance, tweaks to mechanics, etc etc. A number of these youtubers took the coming of Battlefield 4 as a reason to upgrade their PCs and a number of them did, either purchasing new systems or upgrading old ones so they were running on good to great rigs, so they had better performance on the whole with the game but were still subject to server crashes. Perhaps they were fortunate. I know I personally had few issues outside of actual servers dying hit me during beta and launch all the way to Christmas and I played on a older system but a friend was hit pretty hard with crashes who was on something slightly older.

It sucked for people it hit but it was not something universally plaguing everyone, at least not on PC. I did not play the game on any consoles so I cannot speak to the quality of those, and the youtubers in question are all PC-centric with pretty much their only console videos of BF4 being from the EA/DICE held events.
Don't put people up on a pedestal who shouldn't be and don't want to be up there in the first place or you're just going to be disappointed. If you want somebody like that then go seek out the youtubers who actually (try to) put out that kind of content, like TotalBiscuit just to name someone random. I am going to continue watching videos by these people because I find them to be entertaining and provide helpful tips about a game I enjoy. If you don't enjoy Battlefield 4 and/or are not watching the videos because of this stuff you should probably move on to something you do find enjoyment in. I recommend Seananners.

 

[tafer]

Aquamarine found a list of people that were confirmed to have taken part in that MS/Machinima campaign

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=97839551&postcount=506

So, there's a starting point.

Awesome, thanks!

It'll be interesting to see whether any of these guys make a video in response to the allegations.

Can't wait.

Same here.


Oh and thanks for that post enanogrande, excellent job.

 

[Dire]

....to the people denouncing these youtubers, saying things like "they were not on our side", are holding these people to a laughably high and ill-fitting standard. These are people who liked a certain video game series enough to make videos about them....

The "laughably high and ill-fitting standard" people are holding the tubers to is an expectation that they simply give their honest opinion about whatever game they happen to be discussing. Not so complex. These sort of secret marketing agreements that specify exactly what the tuber must say as well as what he cannot say make that impossible. The requirement that the tuber then not mention in any way that he is being paid to say/not to say certain things make it impossible for people to view his posts in the proper context. Like you said, most people just view these videos as people giving their down to earth unfiltered opinion on whatever they happen to be playing at the time. It probably wouldn't have been long ago that if you suggested that the popular tubers were signing secret agreements turning them into shills for various games/systems, you'd have been pretty quickly labeled a tin foil hatter. Microsoft's company goal just seems to be about proving every single loony toon conspiracy legitimate!

 

[jchap]

Wow Neogaf is really pissed about this. When money is involved I suppose stuff like this is inevitable. I rarely buy games at launch so fortunately I haven't fallen for a bad game getting glowing previews and early reviews. Sim City 4 is the closest I've come but thankfully I forgot the launch date and the shit storm came on pretty fast.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

My take on this is EA took advantage of enthusiastic Tubers who were probably star struck by being asked to promote a game. I blame EA here and they should be fined.

 

[Amir0x]

Thanks for the comments guys. Just trying to get a bearing on the situation, that Polygon article was really all over the place. Hopefully this brings a bit more clarity to future discussions, and again if anyone wants to go over the documentation the links are all in the post.

Really appreciate you taking the time to analyze the situation that way. we need people better informed like yourself to guide us through these murky waters, since legality can be confusing as fuck.

 

[Yagharek]

I really appreciate the effort of people digging around to find out who the corrupt people are. Like many, I often use videos for impressions and they often help me form an opinion of whether a game is worth buying/trying or not.

When publishers like EA and Bethesda actively cover up their incompetence and lack of quality control by NDA-ing or buying silence on the matter until a certain date, it really pisses me off. I've bought games from those companies that have been fundamentally broken from day one and never fixed or acknowledged as being shit. Despite everyone knowing.

I have nothing but contempt for companies and their shills who lie and obsfucate to prevent people from finding out how incompetent and broken their products are (special shout out to Microsoft and selling $650 AUD consoles that were ticking timebombs).

Cant wait to see more names being named. This industry is rife with fraud.

 

[QaaQer]

The "laughably high and ill-fitting standard" people are holding the tubers to is an expectation that they simply give their honest opinion about whatever game they happen to be discussing. Not so complex. These sort of secret marketing agreements that specify exactly what the tuber must say as well as what he cannot say make that impossible. The requirement that the tuber then not mention in any way that he is being paid to say/not to say certain things make it impossible for people to view his posts in the proper context. Like you said, most people just view these videos as people giving their down to earth unfiltered opinion on whatever they happen to be playing at the time. It probably wouldn't have been long ago that if you suggested that the popular tubers were signing secret agreements turning them into shills for various games/systems, you'd have been pretty quickly labeled a tin foil hatter. Microsoft's company goal just seems to be about proving every single loony toon conspiracy legitimate!

.

If that shit is allowed, every media outlet is wrecked because nobody can trust anyone. It damages all of society. Need advice on buying a car? a home? a vacation destionation? political parties? issues of the day? too fucking bad because rich people can buy whatever message they want you to hear and you will never know about it.

That is why it is illegal, it kills trust and truth. And no, most companies do not do this shit. Microsoft (along with Big Tobbacco and Big Pharma) has a long history of it, and I guess now it looks like EA can be added to that pile.

edit: it also hurts game development because now gamers have become incredibly cynical. Titanfall, for example, could be the seconding coming but who is going to believe any pre-release stuff now? Forum shills, paid youtubbers, game journo bullshit...No doubt this will mean fewer sales.

 

[Dusk Golem]

This is disappointing of them all around and a very interesting look into the whole situation.

I mentioned this in the last topic, but I'm only a medium-small channel, only about at 20,000 subscribers, but I have received some offers. And I have taken offers, but never any that tell me to try and say something or deliver some message on a game. Thankfully, most of the people who have contacted me are indie developers, and they're more interested in honest thoughts on a game, to get the word of their game out there, and I always require three things for myself if I am going to do something like this.

A,) I am able to mention where I got the game, and that it was donated to me from the developer.
B.) I am just going to play it and react like it was any other game, I always mention where games are available anyway, but if I like the game, I'll express that, if I dislike it, I'll express that, and usually give in-depth reasons on why that is.
C.) I'm more interested in games, not money. I'm more likely to accept a deal where money isn't a factor, as money often makes things more complicated than it should be.

And I know that you are far more likely obviously to be contacted if your bigger, but I also know that, at least the people I know a bit personally, there are less people who accept these offers than take them. The biggest YouTuber I know personally is Cry or Cryaotic, and I know he doesn't accept offers of the sort either.

It can be kind of obvious telling who's selling out or not though, so I also don't think some huge conspiracy of who is in on it and not is needed, as I will tell you, the 'contracts' that are offered of this sort are usually very blatant and make it pretty obvious who's doing it and not.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

I really appreciate the effort of people digging around to find out who the corrupt people are. Like many, I often use videos for impressions and they often help me form an opinion of whether a game is worth buying/trying or not.

When publishers like EA and Bethesda actively cover up their incompetence and lack of quality control by NDA-ing or buying silence on the matter until a certain date, it really pisses me off. I've bought games from those companies that have been fundamentally broken from day one and never fixed or acknowledged as being shit. Despite everyone knowing.

I have nothing but contempt for companies and their shills who lie and obsfucate to prevent people from finding out how incompetent and broken their products are (special shout out to Microsoft and selling $650 AUD consoles that were ticking timebombs).

Cant wait to see more names being named. This industry is rife with fraud.

And it's bad enough for us who pay attention being in the dark for so long and still in some capacities. Those who don't do what we do and do long-term research on this stuff are even worse off from what this hiding does.

 

[Jintor]

So we're gonna have one of these a week now?

...

TL;DR - It's illegal as fuck.

Ah ah! I knew I was on the right track. Thanks for wading through the bullshit.

 

[VibratingDonkey]

My take on this is EA took advantage of enthusiastic Tubers who were probably star struck by being asked to promote a game. I blame EA here and they should be fined.

EA didn't tell anyone not to disclose the promotional nature of their videos in the assignment conditions that have surfaced. Unless there's a separate, more detailed agreement I'm not aware of where EA does this, that was the decision of the video producers.

 

[DoubleTake]

So now ill have to check the about section of every single video I watch on Youtube, just to be sure im not being fooled. Great. Note Taken.

 

[Dire]

EA didn't tell anyone not to disclose the promotional nature of their videos in the assignment conditions that have surfaced. Unless there's a separate, more detailed agreement I'm not aware of where EA does this, that was the decision of the video producers.

As the FTC guidelines clarify it's the responsibility of the advertiser (which is EA - advertiser hires endorser) to ensure that the endorser is actively disclosing that they are being compensated by the advertiser to endorse said product when a "significant minority" of the audience would not otherwise realize this. I assume that "significant minority" stipulation is the reason seeing big name celebrity saying "I like this stuff!" on a commercial requires no disclosure, while a late night infomercial with consumer testimonials requires a slew of disclosures. Incidentally the FTC has also made it clear that should legal enforcement become necessary - they will target the advertisers, not the endorsers.

 

[ThirdEngine]

TheRussianBadger and blackmetash (iirc), blackmetash is rival.Ravic

RussianBadger is just as guilty as the other three. I'm on mobile but he definitely has a BF4 Launch video with the link in the description.

 

[someday]

I don't rely on youtubers for anything and didn't subscribe to any of the ones listed. That said, it's not shitty that they got paid, it's shitty that they lied about the state of the game (BF4) and only gave their honest opinions after a certain date. Them not mentioning the bugs for weeks while hyping this game for money and then after people have bought it finally saying how messed up the game is, is bullshit. No one should think this is ok.

 

[jacksepticeye]

I'm still surprised how many are surprised by this

If you've followed any of these guys for any decent length of time you will notice endorsements or sponsorship stuff like this often. Frankie and Jack always helped promote machinima original stuff before and you can bet that was for extra money and lvlcap promoste AirsoftGI and OriginPC all the time. It shouldn't be shocking that they got paid a little extra for promoting BF4 considering all the events they were at and exclusive footage they acquired

What is bad though is breaking the guidelines

 

[maneil99]

Whats more disgusting is while these people got rich they hyped others into buying it and losing 60$+

 

[maneil99]

My take on this is EA took advantage of enthusiastic Tubers who were probably star struck by being asked to promote a game. I blame EA here and they should be fined.

The youtubers knew exactly what they were doing

 

[HariKari]

Whats more disgusting is while these people got rich they hyped others into buying it and losing 60$+

This is the most unforgivable thing. If the game was good and not a total mess, I'd cringe at LevelCap taking obvious promotional money, but it'd be understandable. But to willingly hide some of the bugs and to talk up the game for some extra gravy cash? Come on man. Your channel was already bringing in a nice chunk of change. LevelCap went off the deep end around launch and started posting videos with clickbait titles like "Fastest gaming PC ever?" for an Origin PC endorsement and all this crap.

These guys are actively scrubbing their channels of any mention of this, by the way. So people who may not read reddit, bf4 central, or NeoGAF have no idea. Some of these YT channels have effectively turned into advertising for any publisher or company that throws a little cash at them. Not in the "we will pay you to play our game for some exposure" way, but in the "show our game in a good light or else" way.

I hope Rivalxfactor isn't one of those people on the list.

Xfactor attended the initial event where they went over how they were going to market the game, but he didn't go to the special event where they handed out 'exclusive' footage to each channel like Jackfrags and LevelCap did. I think he's a little too salty for promotional purposes, and that's why I subscribe to him. I didn't really see any shilling videos from him that were obvious.

 

[gogosox8]

Aquamarine found a list of people that were confirmed to have taken part in that MS/Machinima campaign

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=97839551&postcount=506

So, there's a starting point.

Wow theradbrad has 2 million subs? Damn I remember watching that guy when he had 50,000 subs when I watched his shadow of the colussus lp. Why would he take part in this? He's gotta be making a ton money through the subs. Guess he must have done it before and no one said shit so he figured no harm no foul.

 

[gogosox8]

So we're gonna have one of these a week now?

This is simultaneously depressing and encouraging. I hate the fact that this exists, and is even seen as normal by some people, but only good can come out of it being exposed like this. For as much as we say people on the internet don't matter (and they don't, and this will probably continue), the only way to keep a check on these kinds of things is to maintain constant vigilance. If that means we're gonna have to have a shitstorm every week about the next publisher doing this (I don't even want to imagine the threads if Nintendo or Sony somehow get linked to one of these), then so be it.

As for the legality of the matter: the Polygon article left me very confused at first; at first it seems to state point blank that these acts are not illegal, since the guidelines themselves are not legally enforceable. But later on, it also says:



This is an absurd statement. If these guidelines are meant to boil down U.S. Law in a way a layman can understand it, the law itself must make some mention of disclosure in advertisements. Further research on my part yielded me this:



The FTC wouldn't draft an interpretation of a law where it adds new regulation. Seeing as Polygon made no attempt at getting to the root of the issue (In hindsight, it seems to me as if this article did nothing but muddy the waters of the discussion, as did the comments but the FTC spokeswoman, which at this point seem like mere semantical argument.), I took it upon myself to peruse through the FTC Act, the piece of federal legislation that covers advertising. At first run through my search gave me nothing, and honestly after being in the middle of the discussion for almost 3 days by that point (and being quite tired of reading legalese) I left it aside. But this thread and some of the responses piqued my interest one more time and I went back into the law. Its quite funny now that I missed it, as it heads a section:



Seeing as these guides expound on the principles dictated in the law, and therefore must draw from it, it is my reading that this is the section the guides base themselves on to require advertisers to disclose monetary arrangements. It is my view that it falls directly under the 'deceptive acts' listed above. Furthermore, it is in this same section that we find mention of the $10,000 per infraction that was listed in the original Ars Technica article.

Due to this, It seems quite clear to me that failure to disclose of contractual endorsement not only violates FTC Guidelines, by extension it also directly violates the FTC Act. Polygon's article claiming that the guidelines themselves are not legally enforceable is correct only in strict sense of that sentence: the guidelines themselves are not enforceable, but the material they are based on is. Pure semantics.

Now, I don't presume my reading of the situation is the correct one. While I am a Lawyer, I am neither trained in Common Law nor much less U.S. Law (though I have lived here for the majority of my life, and as such have a certain affinity and understanding of it.) I welcome anyone with better credentials (or anyone that can read, as a Law Degree is not required to do research) to revise my findings. However, I believe this is the same interpretation that the FTC gives to the law (as evidence by their creation of the guidelines).

Link to the FTC Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which specifically "address the application of Section 5 of the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. 45) to the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertising."

Link to the FTC Act

Link to Section 5 of the FTC Act - Unfair Methods Of Competition Unlawful

Link to FTC Policy Statement on Unfairness


TL;DR - It's illegal as fuck.

Great post.

 

[k4n3]

pretty sad i liked lvlcap alot too, but i always knew someone was fishy he would say things like "We all know about the problems so im not going to go into that" ALOT

 

[Ominym]

Tell me again why people think listening to YouTubers is ever a good idea?

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

Never have got the whole youtube watching someone else play thing, Granted not getting demos doesn't help so how are people supposed to see gameplay etc, Seems you'll have to watch a random guy's stream or what not and forget about the big channels.

Knowing they were paid to lie to promote the game is unforgivable and everyone should call them out on it.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I don't rely on youtubers for anything and didn't subscribe to any of the ones listed. That said, it's not shitty that they got paid, it's shitty that they lied about the state of the game (BF4) and only gave their honest opinions after a certain date. Them not mentioning the bugs for weeks while hyping this game for money and then after people have bought it finally saying how messed up the game is, is bullshit. No one should think this is ok.

I agree. There's a few I like to watch, but Jack Frags is one of the first who was showing off PS4 BF4 footage. Oh boy was he having a blast! Everything looked so great, and then you get the game home and can't even access a 64 player conquest match because it doesn't work. The biggest feature for console players DOES NOT WORK! Imagine the sales if consumers knew the truth from the get go? It's sick that EA paid known Youtubers to ignore the game's many issues and project an false image of a product we were about to spend our hard earned money on.

 

[B_Spooky13]

Alright... I might get hate for this but Really guys??? Really?

If a company came up to and hey we'll give you a few grand ( not exactly sure on the amount but at least for me it would have to be at least a grand) and all you have to is play the game and not really say anything bad about it for one month.

None of you guys would take the money?? Come on now guys. I know this is the internet and what not.. You know if it was you, you would totally take that money and run.

I don't get why these Youtuber's wouldn't take the money.. They got bills too.. maybe they wanted a new PC. They're just human. You would take the money.. I would, you would, any person in their right mind would.

And if you think about it it's not like they knew that the game was going to be a mess.. They knew as soon as any BattleFielder bought it at launch. Who cares if they didn't say anything bad.. They aren't really reviewers. They are a group of guys who like to play BF.

I think you guys are blowing this outta proportion

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

Alright... I might get hate for this but Really guys??? Really?

If a company came up to and hey we'll give you a few grand ( not exactly sure on the amount but at least for me it would have to be at least a grand) and all you have to is play the game and not really say anything bad about it for one month.

None of you guys would take the money?? Come on now guys. I know this is the internet and what not.. You know if it was you, you would totally take that money and run.

I don't get why these Youtuber's wouldn't take the money.. They got bills too.. maybe they wanted a new PC. They're just human. You would take the money.. I would, you would, any person in their right mind would.

And if you think about it it's not like they knew that the game was going to be a mess.. They knew as soon as any BattleFielder bought it at launch. Who cares if they didn't say anything bad.. They aren't really reviewers. They are a group of guys who like to play BF.

I think you guys are blowing this outta proportion

get better at your job schill

 

[meppi]

I don't even know where to start with that last post. Just about everything is wrong with it.

Come the fuck on dude.

Edit. Obviously not aimed at Lactose_intolerant

 

[k4n3]

if you watch alot of these guys (and i do) you hear ALOT of how they cant wait to play titanfall!