FTC

Our sister blog PRNewser also got a hold of the FTC's Richard Cleland who assured them that it would be advertisers, not bloggers, who would be fined in cases of infringement:

We have never brought a case against a consumer endorser and we've never brought a case against somebody simply for failure to disclose a material connection. Where we have brought cases, there are other issues involved, not only failing to disclose a material connection but also making other misrepresentations about a product, a serious product like a health product or something like that. We have brought those cases but not against the consumer endorser, we have brought those cases against the advertiser that was behind it. If people think that the FTC is going to issue them a citation for $11,000 because they failed to disclose that they got a free box of Pampers, that's not true. That's not going to happen today, not ever.

Read the whole thing at: FTC Clarifies Blogger Guidelines: 'We've Never Brought a Case Against Somebody Simply for Failure to Disclose'

Related Post: FTC Clarifies $11,000 Blogging Fine, Courtesy of Fast Company

While the blogosphere erupted these past few days in protestations and expostulations over the news that the Federal Trade Commission updated its "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising"—especially the assertions that bloggers could be fined $11,000 for not disclosing freebies—the good folks at Fast Company went and did some old fashioned reporting.

Specifically, they gathered up the primary concerns of major bloggers and then went back to the FTC and asked, "So, what's the deal?"

Among the revelations comes this assertion by FTC assistant director, division of advertising practices, Richard Cleland:

That $11,000 fine is not true. Worst-case scenario, someone receives a warning, refuses to comply, followed by a serious product defect; we would institute a proceeding with a cease-and-desist order and mandate compliance with the law. To the extent that I have seen and heard, people are not objecting to the disclosure requirements but to the fear of penalty if they inadvertently make a mistake. That's the thing I don't think people need to be concerned about. There's no monetary penalty, in terms of the first violation, even in the worst case. Our approach is going to be educational, particularly with bloggers. We're focusing on the advertisers: What kind of education are you providing them, are you monitoring the bloggers and whether what they're saying is true?

Read the whole thing at: FTC Responds to Blogger Fears: "That $11,000 Fine is Not True"

The death of newspapers is apparently a competitive and consumer protection issue according to the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC, which is better known for watchdogging deceptive advertising and going after identity thieves, is holding a series workshops titled "From Town Criers to Bloggers: How Will Journalism Survive the Internet Age?" on December 1 and 2, rescheduled from September 15.

Issues the workshops will be addressing, after the jump.
"The workshops will bring competition, consumer protection, and First Amendment perspectives to bear on the financial, technological, and other challenges facing the news industry," says an FTC statement, "as consumers increasingly turn to the Internet for free news and information, advertisers increasingly move their ads onto online sites and reduce advertising buys as a result of the recession, and news organizations struggle with large debt that was taken on when times were better."

University of California, Berkeley, j-school dean Neil Henry told the New York Times that the FTC seems to be "attempting to play a facilitating and public educational role in gathering together various disciplines and perspectives to talk about the crisis in mainstream journalism."

He added that the government's willingness to raise awareness about the issues is "generally welcome," but that in the end, it will have to be the people in the business itself who figure out solutions.

Issues the workshops will be tackling, after the jump.

continued...

The AP is reporting that the Federal Trade Commission is planning to enact rules later this year that require bloggers to disclose whether they are getting paid or receiving freebies in return for reviewing products and services.

A whole industry has arisen in recent years around getting "word-of-mouth" marketing from popular bloggers. The FTC now says it's time for the federal government to update their truth-in-advertising rules and protect consumers by getting such bloggers to 'fess up when they receive compensation in return for their bon mots.

Rich Cleland, assistant director in the FTC's division of advertising practices, told the AP: "Online, if you think that somebody is providing you with independent advice and ... they have an economic motive for what they're saying, that's information a consumer should know."

The proposed guidelines, part of the existing "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising," won't be limited to reviews. Bloggers who include links from which they get commissions, like links to Amazon, will also have to disclose that compensation.

PCMag.com reports that the FTC says the revised guidelines, while specifying bloggers, are not actually new rules. "They simply apply established law to paid bloggers," the agency said in a statement, according to PCMag.com.

The questions bloggers are buzzing about, after the jump.

continued...