You may not be a blogger or care anything about the nuts ‘n’ bolts of blogging, but if you’re reading this, then obviously you DO read blogs. The one thing I think I can be fairly certain of is that I’ll bet you care how your tax dollars are being spent. Right? Especially in today’s economy as the government seems to keep adding layers and adding costs from increased regulation.
On Monday, (Oct 5, 09), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) decided that it needs to regulate blogging in order to protect consumers. That’s right … they’re going to assign people to monitor the hundreds of thousands of blogs to make sure that if a blogger receives something free or payment for blogging about a product, that the blogger discloses that fact. This regulation will also include testimonials.
The rules take effect Dec 1, 09 and violations can result in various sanctions, including lawsuits. The “guides are not binding law, but rather interpretations of law”. Interpretations?? Read the NYT article.
IMO, given the trillions of dollars in debt that our country is in, creating a Federal Dept. to watch what I say or don’t say, is a HUGE waste of money! They’ll be watching the mommy-bloggers, the garden bloggers, the foodie bloggers, and all the other gazillion bloggers then interpret whether they’re violating the guidelines. Yes, there are a few bloggers who are paid for positive reviews of a product or a company or a restaurant’s meal. Are there enough of them to warrant this cost? I really doubt it. Can you say CAVEAT EMPTOR? The majority of bloggers simply comment on a product, menu, or movie that they happened to like … or not.
I don’t have a testimonial page, but a lot of real estate agents do. Some of those testimonials are real, some are made up by the agent. Will those agents be forbidden to hide behind a disclaimer that “results may not be typical”?
For the record, I haven’t received any money for blogging … EXCEPT when one of the homes I have blogged about is sold. When I write about one of my listings that is for sale, will I now have to disclose that if the home is sold, that I’ll receive a portion of the commission that the seller is paying to my broker? That would seem obvious to me, but I guess the government doesn’t think you’re smart enough to figure that out, and therefore, you need to be protected.
In regard to this new ruling, a fellow blogger suggested that politicians should be required to wear patches representing the lobbyists who fund them … much in the way that race car drivers wear patches for the companies that support them with money. That doesn’t seem like a bad idea. How ’bout the FTC works on THAT disclosure?
What are your thoughts on this government expense?
Copyright © 2009. Elaine Reese, Real Living HER. Reproduction of any portion of this blog post or the images is prohibited by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. If this post is being viewed on any site other than www.ReesesPiecesOfRealEstate.com then the material has been stolen without permission. Violators will be reported.
Elaine,
“politicians should be required to wear patches representing the lobbyists who fund them …”
An outstanding idea! For many (most?) of them, what they would have to wear would drown out anything they say, thereby rendering themselves powerless in our eyes. And THAT would be a GREAT thing!
Vance, I thought it was an intriging idea when I read it. Maybe they should wear the logos whenever they are conducting a political debate prior to an election. The logos should be sized according to the amount received. It would give us a LOT more info than what is coming out of their mouths!