But blogs are self policing.
They are not a push technology.
They don't have giant multinational structures and teams of lawyers
avoiding the law.
I think the key here is that Blogs are self policing. That's why
they're cool and that's why they're popular.
People have the power to challenge
Nope. I used to work for a newspaper. Books were sent unsolicited by the
publishers.
Usually said PR folks and publishers that did not actually read the newspaper
to know that a standard cookbook isn't going to be reviewed by an alternative
newspaper.
The books were free to review or not.
Sull - it applies to any blogger tho the law of popularity may determine who
gets tracked. The larger your audience, the more likely.
Adrian - beautifully stated and I thank you for that contribution.
Gena - Interesting as I would not consider a review copy of a book to be all
that persuasive as
Well then.
I'd like to see disclosure on the Today Show when one of NBC's
musicians performs, or when a movie comes out that they review that
was produced by a GE subsidiary.
I'd like to see disclosure on large clients of GE, or reporting on
investments of GE Finance on CNBC.
I'd like to
Ron, that does happen, the public ridicule thing to bloggers going one toke
over the line. One of the Parental bloggers got ripped a new one when it was
discovered that she was on the take and did not disclose her paid affiliations.
People do talk.
http://www.responsibilityproject.com/blogher/
two wrongs don't make a right and if you want this to happen to
perhaps the best way is bottom up, so if bloggers acted ethically then
I think you are in a much stronger position to ask and expect it of
others. But if someone won't do it until the other does then you've
got exactly the
Apply these rules to Politicians and you can count me in.
I agree with Rupert. (shock, gasp)
It seems they would like to impose regulations on free people that they
begrudgingly impose on corporate society from time to time. The only truth in
advertising is in the fine print where they tell
There are some bloggers on the other side of the fence, a few (small, minority)
Parental bloggers have been shaking down PR folks for goodies, perks and pay
for play.
There have been raging debates about providing disclosure; i.e. tell your
visitors you are receiving compensation. Inform
Well you are certainly correct that I am not from the US so my knowledge is
somewhat limited, however I have witnessed enough ranting and drooling on the
net about related issues in the past to have some vague idea about the kind of
arguments that are made to support the special brand of
Sorry I am breaking my own claim that I would shutup already. I apologise as
Ive blundered into a minefield without considering all of the issues properly
before speaking.
Apparently this stuff applies to twitter and other things too, so I really dont
see the insured and licensed professionals
Im not even sure the US would request it, let alone the UK grant it.
We are after all talking about the sort of legislation where fines are used to
disuade companies and corporations from indulging in certain practices when it
comes to advertising and marketing, not exactly hanging offenses.
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Tom Gosse bigdogvi...@... wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:03 AM, Adrian Miles adrian.mi...@...wrote:
I don't think bloggers, on the one hand, can
call for the same rights and privileges as the press, but then not
want to actually be held to
From what I have read of the FTCs guidelines and stance so far, it mostly
boils down to whether people are being mislead, and the regard that consumers
have for different messengers is taken into account . eg if people dont trust
journalists very much in the first place, or expect them to be
What's the difference anyway? We are NOT talking about limiting free speech
or regulating independent opinions. This rule is about regulating COMMERCIAL
speech or speech that has been influenced by commerce.
Yep, good points. I originally laid out the fears/anger in the US over
the FTC
Jay - Yes, people may choose jobs with cancer over healthcare; without
transparency tho we don't know what we are choosing.
BTW, a fam trip means the trip was financed by the tourism company and the
arrangements were made and the connections created also by the company. Not
only is it cash on the
Very much agree with Roxanne and what Jay just said. But for many of us
blogger-types, it gets sorta murky. For large blogs with multiple staff, or
for blogs like in Roxanne's example, where the blogger happens to be a
travel blogger on a trip ... that seems fairly clear-cut to me. It's a
Spot on, especially the point in your blog about us being even more vulnerable
to such things, not less. I think the same is also true of politics, the
seductive trappings of power may overwhelm and corrupt those who have risen
from the lower planes of disenfranchisement even more than those
Its their own fault if it doesnt even dawn on them, let this be a long overdue
wakeup call.
The FTC look at all this stuff on a case-by-case basis anyway, they arent going
to attempt to police this stuff down to the last blog or twitter, indeed a
large point of updating the guidelines is to
Anyway enough of my opinions, here are 3 examples from the guidelines that
apply to blogging etc, as opposed to adverts, and hopefully clarify just what
we are talking about here. They are taken from a few different sections near
the end of this document:
David - true it is sometimes murky and I myself am on the lookout as I am
being paid at them moment by SOcial Media CLub (a nonprofit educational
organization) to produce a series of conversations across the USA and Sydney
about the current state of video. The campaign has a sponsor but the work
Yeah, I was killing time before leaving work and amping up the bad
media / freedom of speech thing to give you an argument - take with
salt :)
But still... I don't buy the regulation here. Maybe my experience of
bloggers is different from most, but I certainly don't trust them more
or
Well I think I understand what you are saying, and agree with some of it,
except the idea that this stuff is not enforcable, not sure what makes you
think that? The FTC has teeth, companies are prosecuted under previous rules so
why should the new rules be any different?
I mean they arent
22 matches
Mail list logo
