{"id":802,"date":"2009-11-24T09:59:31","date_gmt":"2009-11-24T13:59:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/?p=802"},"modified":"2009-11-24T11:15:14","modified_gmt":"2009-11-24T16:15:14","slug":"companies-obligations-under-ftc-endorsement-guidelines","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/2009\/11\/24\/companies-obligations-under-ftc-endorsement-guidelines\/","title":{"rendered":"Companies&#8217; obligations under FTC endorsement guidelines"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As I noted in <a href=\"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/2009\/11\/16\/once-more-with-feeling-ftc-guidelines-bloggers-and-companies\/\" target=\"_blank\">last week&#8217;s post<\/a>, companies using social media marketing tactics have an equal, if not greater obligation, than bloggers under the revised FTC guidelines. It just hasn&#8217;t gotten as much media coverage. In part because the story isn&#8217;t as\u00a0 provocative as &#8220;Bloggers are Shills! Big fines!&#8221; and in part because it&#8217;s not news. The advertiser has ALWAYS had liability under the deceptive advertising statues.<\/p>\n<p>In short, companies using word of mouth marketing and their agencies are required to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Disclose their relationships when posting, commenting or tweeting. Including reviewing products on websites. Let\u2019s call this the anti-astroturfing provision;<\/li>\n<li>Provide guidance to people participating in their campaigns about their obligation to disclose;<\/li>\n<li>Monitor to ensure both compliance with the disclosure requirements and accuracy of information;<\/li>\n<li>Take steps to correct inaccurate or misleading information.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><em><strong>What does this mean in practical terms? <\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<p>Companies must<strong> revise their social media policies to require employees to identify themselves <\/strong>as interested parties when posting or commenting about the company and its products. This does not preclude the ability to post anonymously. It&#8217;s not the employee&#8217;s name that&#8217;s important. It&#8217;s the fact of employment. <em>What you are &#8212; an employee &#8212; is more important than who you are &#8212; your name. <\/em>The same requirement applies to agencies acting on the company&#8217;s behalf. If you work for Brand X&#8217;s PR firm and leave a comment on a review site, you&#8217;d better identify yourself. Companies also must train all employees about the disclosure requirements and their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>Companies engaged in blogger outreach and word of mouth marketing programs must<strong> inform participants about the obligation to disclose.<\/strong> In my opinion, this advice must be <em>specific to the program,<\/em> not a generic statement about the need to disclose.<\/p>\n<p><em><strong>Updated to add: <\/strong>I think <strong>affiliate marketers<\/strong> are obliged to provide disclosure guidance to their affiliates, and expect responsible affiliate programs will be making changes to their agreements to reflect both the disclosure requirement and the affiliate&#8217;s (the blogger&#8217;s) responsibility. Assuming, as I do, that affiliate marketing will be under the FTC&#8217;s microscope, I would not be surprised to see non-compliance as grounds for removal from the program. <\/em><\/p>\n<p>The company&#8217;s<strong> monitoring program must be fine-tuned <\/strong>to look for<strong> <\/strong>the proper disclosures as well as the mention of the brand. Processes must be developed to surface and correct inaccuracies and other misleading statements, including,\u00a0 I imagine, missing disclosure statements.<\/p>\n<p>And, of course, all of this must be carefully documented should it be needed as a defense in an enforcement action. You can&#8217;t just say you did it. You have to be able to prove it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>As I noted in last week&#8217;s post, companies using social media marketing tactics have an equal, if not greater obligation, than bloggers under the revised FTC guidelines. It just hasn&#8217;t gotten as much media coverage. In part because the story isn&#8217;t as\u00a0 provocative as &#8220;Bloggers are Shills! Big fines!&#8221; and in part because it&#8217;s not [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":""},"categories":[5,23],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/802"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=802"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/802\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":803,"href":"https:\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/802\/revisions\/803"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=802"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=802"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/\/getgood.com\/roadmaps\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=802"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}