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 things as a likely outcome of this 
sort of regulation. I dont buy slippery slope arguments easily, and certainly 
not in this case, though I would concede that it raises more issues than my 
initially dismissive musings suggest.

Im sure some of the difficulties with balancing freedoms and rights is that one 
persons freedom may impinge on anothers rights. The term 'consumer protection' 
is used to argue for regulation, as a consumer dont I have the right to know if 
someone is blogging positively about a product because they are being paid or 
given freebies? Considering all is not squaeaky clean in the traditional media 
in this regard, and that one of the great hopes for blogging is that it would 
somewhat overcome the duplicity between the media and the entities they write 
about, why must we focus only on the negative freedom-destroying aspects of 
legislation when considering these things? Im not complaining about people 
discussing the freedom stuff and their concerns for the future, its simply that 
as there seems to be no shortage of people prepared to make such cases, I 
prefer to focus on any valid reasons that may exist for regulation. 

So trying to keep it to the narrow specifics of these particular FTC 
guidelines, is it really wrong that I should face a fine if I endorse products 
without disclosing that I am benefitting in some way? It doesnt seem like a 
large and murky minefield that would disuade many from blogging at all?

Cheers

Steve Elbows

--- In [email protected], Markus Sandy <markus.sa...@...> wrote:
>
> 
> On Oct 6, 2009, at 3:38 AM, elbowsofdeath wrote:
> 
> > I have not yet had time to read the full arguments of those who are  
> > against this, though I start from the position of viewing their  
> > stance with quite some skepticism.
> 
> 
> I think the handwriting on the wall is pretty clear:
> 
> Make blogging something for only insured and licensed professionals  
> under the guise of protecting people.
> 
> markus
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply via email to