Comments on: ParaUSA Makes The Greatest 1911s Ever!

By: Mikee

Mikee — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:07:23 +0000

Kim kindly posted on his blog emails I wrote him once or twice. And that cool guy in Idaho who makes tannerite once made a comment of mine his quote of the day. Small fame, perhaps, but enough for my small efforts as a commenter.

I don’t blog, myself, but I like to comment on several excellent blogs. If in future some comment I submit to a blog is used as blogfodder, am I subject to this regulation? Because I could really really use the endorsement money. Are you reading this Rossi and Savage and Remington and Mossberg and Ruger? Send the checks asap!!!!

By: Snowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » New FTC Rules Will Have Serious Impact on Blogs

Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:44:25 +0000

[...] As Sigivald initially thought, most of the reports indicate that only bloggers who are paid by companies or marketing agents are at risk of prosecution by the FTC. However, the FTC is clear that payment need not be in the form of cash, and even merely providing a review copy of a product itself may be considered compensation. But, just to keep things interesting, review copies may not always be compensation. The bureaucrats admit to being intentionally vague because they may or may not consider the value of the product as evidence against bloggers in the decision to prosecute. For example, a blogger could receive merchandise from a marketer with a request to review it, but with no compensation paid other than the value of the product itself. In this situation, whether or not any positive statement the blogger posts would be deemed an “endorsement” within the meaning of the Guides would depend on, among other things, the value of that product, and on whether the blogger routinely receives such requests. [...]

By: SayUncle » Endorsements

SayUncle » Endorsements — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:21:13 +0000

[...] The FTC can also kiss my ass. [...]

By: Bitter

Bitter — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:15:11 +0000

Sigivald, come on, do you really think it’s that simple? There’s a lot more to this law than just that. Of course he’s always been honest about any reviews or gifted opportunities. FTC will care that he’s “endorsing” them because at one time he received something from them. If you receive a hat from a company at an event and then go on to write something about their products, you need to pay up, bud.

Obviously, I believe that Sebastian’s blood pressure has been far too low lately. That must be why I sent him the full guidelines after reading just some of the horrors on advertising blogs I follow. As he pointed out from my reading various sections, no corporate lawyer would allow their client to do any kind of outreach after this comes into effect. The companies are liable for things they cannot control, like whether the blogger ever misunderstands something their product does and publishes a review based on that misunderstanding.

By: elmo iscariot

elmo iscariot — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:03:57 +0000

Whew! Just this morning I was thinking “y’know what we really need? More laws!”

I feel so privileged to live under the authority of such a responsive government.

By: B Woodman

B Woodman — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:01:07 +0000

Sheesh! Another intrusion of Big Gub’ment into our lives. I would do it anyway, just because it’s the ETHICAL thing to do, not because some jackassery told me it was the LEGAL thing to do.

By: Peter

Peter — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:33:55 +0000

Perfect response, d00d!

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:24:23 +0000

how long until a “this ruling violates my 5th amdt rights as I only review things I steal, like music” argument arises?

I’m glad everything important has been taken care of.

By: Caleb

Caleb — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:10:26 +0000

Well shit. Now how am I supposed to sell out under the table to every wayward advertiser?

By: Sigivald

Sigivald — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:16:39 +0000

Unless Para’s paying you, the FTC doesn’t care about you endorsing them.

As their bulletin says, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service.

If they’re paying you to talk about their stuff, you have to tell us they’re paying you. Seems fair enough, and something you’d do anyway, right?

By: Linoge

Linoge — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:39:01 +0000

I will be honest – I disclose any post wherein I receive payment to endorse a product, but that is simply because I believe my readership should know when I am being paid to support something. I consider that kind of support to be very different from word-of-mouth, just-because-I-feel-like-it support.

But I only do so because I think it is a good idea – I echo your sentiments, Sebastian, and this law is not going to change anything for me.

By: The Packetman

The Packetman — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:09:27 +0000

Sebastian,
For once I totally agree with you (well, except for that part about Para making the best 1911!) …. the FTC can kiss my ass as well.

And I’m just looking to up my readership!

By: Kim du Toit

Kim du Toit — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:39:12 +0000

Bah. I just WISH that I’d had actual paid endorsements for the seven-odd years I was blogging — I might still be blogging today if I had. Roughly speaking, Springfield and Remington (to name just two) probably owe me a hundred grand each, for all the unpaid endorsements I put their way over that time.

As for Collector’s… oy, it hurts to think.