July 19, 2020

More Problems With The FTC’s coque original samsung j3 2017 New Disclosure Rules

More Problems With The FTC’s New Disclosure Rules: Free Speech And Liability ProblemsI’ve already noted my general problems the https://www.sushicube.fr/collections/coque-samsung-j4 FTC’s new disclosure rules, but as others look into the details, the worse they seem and the more you realize the unintended consequences may be pretty bad. Jeff Jarvis makes some key points concerning how this could be seen as a restriction on free speech. And that’s because the FTC seems coque algerie samsung j3 2017 to be viewing blog posts as if they are media, rather than straightforward communication. As we’ve pointed out in the past, for many, blogging is often no different than a conversation. It’s not journalism. It’s not reporting. It’s having a discussion with people:

Second, the FTC assumes as media people do that the internet is a medium. It’s not. It’s a place where people talk. Most people who blog, as Pew found in a survey a few years coque bulldog samsung galaxy j3 2016 ago, don’t think they are doing anything remotely connected to journalism. I imagine that virtually no one on Facebook thinks they’re making media. They’re connecting. They’re talking. So for the FTC to go after bloggers and social media as they explicitly do is the same as sending a government goon into Denny’s to listen to the conversations in the corner booth and demand that you disclose that your Uncle Vinnie owns the pizzeria whose product you just endorsed.

As such, you could make a case that the new rules are an unconstitutional law hindering First Amendment guarantees on freedom of speech. As I noted originally, it seems like samsung j3 2017 coque manga these things get sorted out in the marketplace of ideas whereby those who do something so stupid as to sell coque samsung j3 2016 chat licorne their “views” on things face the potential of a substantial loss in credibility. But suddenly demanding people reveal the sourcing of some product they mention in blogs leads to all sorts 3 coque samsung galaxy j3 2017 of silly results, amusingly mocked by Mark Cuban in a blog post, where he wonders what sorts of disclosures he’ll have to make if he mentions a breakfast at IHOP where the managers comps the breakfast. And while he’s mocking the overall situation, it’s not so silly. You shouldn’t have to confer with your lawyers to figure out how you mention any particular product, just because you got a freebie or a sample somewhere.

And, what’s really scary It appears that even the coque portefeuille samsung j4 plus eclair FTC isn’t https://www.artcorekirbies.fr/collections/coque-samsung-a8 sure what the policy actually means, and hasn’t thought through any of the unintended consequences or fuzzy borders.

Separately, Eric Goldman https://www.lastage.fr/collections/coque-samsung-a40 highlights another massive problem with the new guidelines that no one else seems to have picked up on yet: that in some cases it’s the company providing the product that will be liable ridiculously blaming the company if a blogger makes claims about its products that are not true. As Goldman points out, there’s no way the FTC would be successful in going after companies for that, as Section 230 clearly would protect the advertiser from bogus statements by someone else. It’s like a government goon saying you have to disclose that your Uncle Vinnie paid you to endorse his pizzeria. Or at least had provided you with some form of compensation https://www.simonjara.fr/collections/coque-samsung-j6 in the hopes that you would endorse it.

[ reply to thislink to thisview in chronology ]

Re:Mike gets a lot wrong in this article. He probably gets some sort of remuneration for some of these posts, so that’s why he’s saying this is so confusing.

If you talk about someone’s product or service and that person/company gave YOU something or did something for YOU, then you as a blogger have to disclose it. It’s simple. It’s no different than it is on any other medium/platform or whatever word you want to call it. There are paid posts, product placement, and even reviews written by the manufacturer being posted under blogger’s names without disclosure this is all advertisement. Congress has said repeatedly [and requires in the Communications Act] that every person has a right to know when they’re being advertised to. Television currently has to disclose at the end of every episode anyone who gave them anything of legal value for a product or service coque samsung j3 2017 punk to be displayed or discussed during the actual programming. Magazines which have a page that looks like a story about a product usually say ADVERTISEMENT at the bottom. It’s because you have a right to know when someone coque samsung galaxy a50 pastel is being paid to say something.

Mike, when you say “Section 230 clearly would protect the advertiser from bogus statements by someone else,” you clearly have no idea what 230 means. 230(a) does not actually create any immunity for anyone it just means the forum/service is not responsible for what coque samsung a50 2017 disney unaffiliated users say. Let’s take your blog for instance. You are a blogger here. Let’s say someone pays you to talk about them in one of your posts (that’s exactly what the FTC is regulating). You’re the speaker. You’re the one who has to disclose. You’re an employee of TD, and TD is still vicariously liable for your actions. The FTC regulation is saying that whoever you’re advertising for can also be liable. All 230 does is make it so if you get one of those techcrunch comments where the guy is plugging some product/service, techcrunch is not liable.

The only problem with advertiser liability is when some random guy posts his opinion as a relatively anonymous comment in a manner that looks like product placement. If companies are paying you to talk about their products in a post, usually you’ve broken through the blogosphere’s glass ceiling, and you’re disclosing on your tax forms that you’re blogging.

Oh, yeah, and umm. this comment paid for by Bullshit Off, a subsidiary of No Bull Industries.

[ reply to thislink to thisview in chronology ]

Re: Re:You are right, YouAreWrong. Plenty of bloggers like Mike are going to have to take stock coque de samsung j3 2016 homme and figure out how they are going to break the news to us all that they have been accepting gifts, getting paid by, or receiving support from the very groups they discuss and promote.

More over, it’s funny as heck to read all this. Mike has plenty of posts here about the need to transparancy in companies, accounting, whatever. Yet when the light even suggests to shine his way, he is fast to pull down the blinds and tell us all we have no right to peep inside.

It isn’t just directly being paid to post, you know the “here coque samsung a20e en silicone fille is $1000, write good stuff about us coque licorne pour samsung j3 2016 in 3 posts this week”, but rather the coque souple samsung galaxy a40 broader implications. If Mike gets paid to speak to group, https://www.anten.fr/collections/coque-samsung-a6 then everything he posts about that group in future needs to mention that payment. Payment can be anything from a free dinner to free airfare to actually paying an appearance or speaking fee.

For someone like Mike, this could entirely undermine his credibility, if in fact certain groups are paying for his time.

The implications all over the net are huge. My personal favorite for this is going to be the celeb bloggers, like Perez Hilton. Rumors have swirled for years that certain c listers have paid to get posts made about them, shows like the “reality” show The Hills have been featured prominently on his blog, but barely registered on the American population in general. How much is he getting paid to make the posts, if he is The answers will be interesting.

45 days to figure it out, get to work Mike!

[ reply to thislink to thisview in chronology ]

Re: Re: Mike gets a lot wrong in this article. He probably gets some sort of coque silicone samsung a40 marbre remuneration for some of these posts, so that’s why he’s saying this is so confusing.

YouAreWrong is wrong. We do not get paid or any kind of remuneration for any blog post on Techdirt. We do get paid for Insight Community cases, but that’s quite clearly disclosed.

Not sure why YouAreWrong would say this, other than, when, he’s living up to his own name.

If you talk about someone’s product or service and that person/company gave YOU something or did something for YOU, then une coque de samsung j3 you as a blogger have to disclose it. It’s simple…

Comments are closed.