If you’re a blogger, or even read blogs, then you’re aware of the new FTC requirements which compel bloggers to disclose any “material connections” with advertisers or face fines up to $11,000. This primarily concerns testimonials and reviews in which bloggers are compensated – either monetarily or with “freebies.” Unsurprisingly, the blogosphere has erupted with outrage and paranoia.  For example, Ron Hogan over at MediaBistro posted a lengthy open letter to the FTC posing a series of scenarios and asking if each one would constitute a violation.

Some excerpts from MediaBistro:

·    Will the New York Times’ “Paper Cuts” or the Los Angeles Times’ “Jacket Copy” or “Shelf Life” at Entertainment Weekly, to pick three examples, be bound by the same FTC guidelines as “The Elegant Variation” or “Smart Bitches, Trashy Books” ? If not, why not?

·    Just out of curiosity, will the FTC be requiring authors who blurb other authors’ books to disclose the “material connections” they have to those authors and the publishers of those books? If so, will those requirements apply to blurbs printed on book jackets as well as print advertising? (And if such disclosures are not made, against whom should a complaint be made? the publisher or the author who wrote the blurb?) If not, why not?

On the other hand, Associated Press writers Deborah Yao and Emily Fredrix respond to at least the first bullet by stating the following:

“Bloggers have long praised or panned products and services online. But what some consumers might not know is that many companies pay reviewers for their write-ups or give them free products such as toys or computers or trips to Disneyland. In contrast, at traditional journalism outlets, products borrowed for reviews generally have to be returned.”

Reading these reactions, I detect a fair amount of exaggeration and “slippery slope” fear-mongering. I do think that it’s interesting that both the print media and blogger factions choose to bring up books as the innocuous side of the endorsement coin. And I think discussing it in these terms sorely misses the point.

For one, I don’t know any bloggers who have been lavishly showered with all expense paid trips to Disneyland for giving Mickey the thumbs up in their weekly link round up and I don’t know of any journalists who are just in the biz for the free books (why waste time grinding through journalism school and covering town hall meetings for your local newspaper when you could just get a library card?). I also doubt that publishers are hounding journalists to return their $20 hardback after getting all that free publicity.  I know times are tough in the publishing industry, but that’s a bit much.

Whenever new legislation or regulations hit, it’s easy to assume that yours truly will be victimized and that this is the first step down the road to authoritarianism. But I don’t think the FTC has granted itself sweeping power to take down bloggers for no reason. Yes, the FTC regulations are a bit vague – stating that it will only seek to penalize bloggers running “substantial” operations with “material connections” to advertisers. But this vagueness is in the favor of legitimate bloggers.

The important thing to keep in mind that the FTC does not have the resources or the motivation to crack down on two-bit bloggers (or even big shot social media mavens) who forgot to mention that someone sent them a free book in the mail. What the FTC is likely after are those who are undermining the very collaborative, community driven Web 2.0 that we all value and love and make our livings from.

I’m talking about the companies paying for favorable reviews on Amazon.  Or how about the fake blog to which the ubiquitous “One Flat Stomach Rule (Obey!)” ads bring you, replete with fake comments from fake users.  Or how about the cosmetic surgery firm that had employees give fake customer testimonials on forums?

These are the people that the FTC are after. And these are the people that we, as bloggers, social media consultants and Internet marketers, should want to see wiped from the Web. They clutter our ad space, undermine our credibility and rip off web users. There is already a simmering mistrust of all things on the Internet (how many sitcom characters have you heard make the sarcastic crack, “It’s gotta be true, I read it on the Internet” or “Where’d you read that, Wikipedia?”) and those of us who have our trustworthiness debased from collateral damage will actually benefit from the unscrupulous getting taken down a peg.

In fact, the urge to remain transparent and open is already palpable in the blogosphere and has led to an admirable amount of self-regulation. Etiquette dictates that influential bloggers disclose when a product link is an affiliate link. When Deb Ng of the Freelance Writing Jobs Network cut a deal with the oft-slighted content aggregator Demand Studios, it sparked a controversy that shook the community to the core.  Deb handled the situation with enough class that FWJ continues to be on good terms with most of its readers, but the episode goes to prove that transparency isn’t just ethical, it’s what the readers demand. And if the readers demand it, then it’s just good business. You shouldn’t need the FTC to tell you to be straight with your readers. There’s far more at stake than a fine or a warning from regulators.

Plus, the FTC has said that it plans to mainly go after advertisers who violate regulations, and not the bloggers – unless, of course, the blogger willfully and repeatedly practiced unethical business practices.

Which raises the next point – there have always been laws on the books against deceptive business practices. They’re called Truth-in-Advertising laws, and they apply to every business, big or small, online or off. The recent measure merely seeks to update the FTC’s guidelines in order to provide some structure for how regulators will investigate, pursue and penalize patently unethical bloggers. Blogs, after all, didn’t appear on the radar as viable avenues for making money until recent decades.  And as the opportunities for making money grow and more consumers turn to the Internet for product reviews and more advertisers turn to bloggers to reach audiences, an FTC crackdown is perhaps what we need most.

As someone who does not get paid to write testimonials, does not write fake reviews and does not willfully engage in unethical business practices, I am not worried about possibly of incurring FTC fines up to $11,000. As someone who is thankful for the efforts the FTC has made to regulate spam, telemarketers, credit reporting bureaus, debt collection agencies, price fixing and other blights to consumers, I’m looking forward to seeing what the government can do about the Acai juice hawkers and the rest of the scammers. And you should be, too.

Credit: