When a food blogger gets free stuff, it is payment in kind, which is considered compensation.
You know those disclaimers at the end of blog posts, when food bloggers write about a product or service and say whether they were compensated?
I’ve noticed some confusion (or should we call it denial?) about what constitutes payment.
There are two kinds of payment: cash payment and “paid in kind,” which means a company gives you goods or services for free. That could be kitchen products, food, restaurant meals, airfare, hotel, memberships, or subscriptions.
Payment doesn’t have to be in cash to be considered compensation. And regardless of what kind it is, it has to be disclosed on your blog if you blog in the US.
And did you know that payment in kind qualifies as taxable income the US? Some companies report the value of what they gave you to the IRS, and some may send a 1099 form as well. If they ask for your social security number, that is good clue.
Now, let’s get back to the confusion about disclosing payment in kind on blogs. I’ll give you a three examples:
1. A blogger posts about a product she got for free.
In her disclaimer at the end of one blogger’s post, she thanked the company for providing the product, then said she was “not paid for this post.”
Actually, she was paid. She was paid in kind. Receiving $25 worth of pasta or a few bottles of sauce is considered payment. It doesn’t come to much, considering her effort.
2. A blogger said she was not paid to speak at a conference.
True, she was not paid in cash to speak. But speakers usually get free admission to blogging conferences, and possibly hotel and transportation costs, which constitutes payment in kind of several hundred dollars. Also, given this payment in kind, technically she should disclose when discussing the conference on social media.
3. A blogger wrote a few posts about a media event she attended.
Her disclaimer at the bottom of her sponsored posts read: “I was invited by the XX Council. This post is sponsored by the XX Council and the opinions are my own… I was not compensated for this post.”
As far as I can tell from reading her posts, she was at a location for a few days. Assuming she did not pay her own way, she received free transportation, hotel, meals, and maybe even gifts to take home. That is typical for these types of events, and would explain why she considers her post “sponsored.” Otherwise I don’t know why it would sponsored if no payment in kind occurred! So she can’t say she was sponsored and then also say say she was not compensated.
And about that part where she said “my opinions are my own:” she might as well delete that. Hardly anyone will believe her because she received freebies and then wrote positive posts about them. I wish bloggers would retire the phrase, because it’s disingenuous.
So, is this definition about payment in kind clear? What do you think disclaimers should say in these types of posts? If you are not writing sponsored posts or considering it, how does this information affect you?
Regarding “my opinions are my own”, I use a similar phrase because some bloggers post the spiel the company sends them.
If at some point I am not confortable with the product I don’t post anything and thank them, and offer to reimburse them for the freebies if they wish. Although to be fair, that happened just once, I usually am pretty good at picking who I work with.
Oh that is awful, isn’t it? I’d like to think it’s not because a blogger is lazy but more about what she thinks she “owes” the company in exchange for a $25 freebie. But I don’t think the phrase “my opinions are my own” gets the point across that you are writing in your own words. Having a strong voice and opinions would work though.
Regarding your second point, if you feel that you can’t write about a product unless you love it, that creates a vicious circle. It pretty much guarantees that you will not write anything negative, which reinforces the idea that, because you were compensated and because the posts are always positive, your opinions are not your own.
I, too, use the “opinions are my own” phrasing because I mean to convey that the host/sponsor did not get to read in advance or input their wording (unless directly quoted) into my post. But you’re right — I should come up with a better way to say that. Thanks for making me think about it!
I also tend to simply not write about things I don’t like — not because I don’t want to critique a place that hosted me or because I got something for free, but because I am not a fan of negativity. It takes a lot of time for me to edit photos and write something, so I’m not going to waste that time on something I didn’t even like! If on the whole I liked something, but have some criticisms, I’ll include those. I’ve never been invited or given something with the caveat that it had to be covered and would never accept such a condition. I also never solicit invitations or products.
Maybe you could say on your about page that you only check quotes with sponsors and you use your own wording. How’s that?
Most people don’t write about products or services they don’t like. The problem is that they think they have to be 98 percent positive, which is not interesting to read and makes people suspicious. Gushing is boring. The best write-ups are mostly positive (65-75 percent) with some decent criticism.
I’m thinking something along the lines of “the sponsor(s) did not receive the opportunity to read or comment upon this post in advance.” Thanks for the food for thought and feedback!
We can always count on you Dianne to write thoughtful and thought-provoking posts and I thank you for today’s post and all the ones that preceded it. I’ll share my current position, then will follow the discussion and am open to changing my ways.
Regarding #1, after saying that I got the product free of charge, I add that I have not and will not receive any monetary compensation for presenting the product on my blog. I decided on the wording exactly because I recognize that getting a product free of charge is a payment in kind. However, if I am not getting paid cash to write a post, I want to make that clear.
Regarding the “opinions expressed are my own” disclaimer. I use it and feel comfortable with it because it’s the truth. Keep in mind that the only products I have accepted so far are cookbooks for review and linens that I use in my photos. And I believe book reviews by food bloggers I know.
One detail I would like to add is that if I refer to a brand product, for example King Arthur Flour AP flour, which is my standard flour for making bread, I make it clear that I don’t have any business relationship with the company. But as not all flours are created equal, I feel comfortable mentioning the one I use by name.
Thank you Simona. It’s just as wonderful to have commenters who think about my posts and respond intelligently.
Re No. 1, yes, the first blogger I mentioned has now changed her disclaimer to say that she didn’t receive monetary compensation. Maybe it’s better to just say you got the product for free, instead of talking about what you didn’t get. It’s still kind of dances around the issue for me. When you are paid cash to write a post, do you say that?
I’m not saying it’s impossible to be honest in posts when discussing products, but because most write-ups of free products are almost entirely positive, readers get suspicious. I face this issue also when I write book round-ups. I may or may not have paid for the books, and I like some more than others. I hope my shades of grey come through!
I suppose it’s a little sad that you have to say you were not compensated when you name a product, but it’s very clear!
I say opinions are my own because I mean it–getting a free meal doesn’t preclude me from criticizing a restaurant
Then you are one of the few who do so. I bet if you criticize more than a small amount, though, restaurants will stop offering you free meals.
Bingo! DJ.
Well thank you, I think. This is a compliment, right?
I think I have just stopped accepting any product for “free”. The issues are troubling to me and I appreciate this thought-provoking post, Dianne.And maybe I should think twice before suggesting readers can pick up a product at a particular store, like Trader Joe’s. I only mean to tell them where to find something inexpensively and the same size as the product I used in a recipe, but that’s really advertizing for the store, isn’t it?
Thanks Liz.
Hmm. I suppose it’s free advertising, but unless you do it often, it probably isn’t a problem to mention TJ’s.
It makes me crazy that bloggers are held to a different standard than journalists. Journalists accept media rates, samples for review purposes and attend exclusive events all the time and aren’t required to disclose. Their publication may have rules about keeping samples or attending events, however.
True.
Newspaper journalists often can’t accept gifts of more than $25. Often magazines have no criteria at all. I have had to establish them myself.
It makes me crazy too, Amy, and I was just about to post something like this!
I’m all for transparency and disclosure to readers, and think this discussion is of capital importance if blogs are to remain a relevant medium, but I feel it’s picking on the little guys when magazines aren’t held to any standards at all in this regard, and will even think up entire articles just so a particular advertiser will buy the ad space facing it — and the average reader is none the wiser.
With regards to the “Opinions are my own” statement, I understand Dianne’s objection to it, but I feel including this sentence is a way for the (honest) blogger to keep him/herself in check and express a commitment to his/her readers. As a reader, at least, it means something to me when I see it.
Maybe someone will lobby the FTC to include print media. But the web is more powerful! Look at it that way. The FTC wants to make sure readers understand your post. As you can see from the comments, there’s lots of confusion.
Re “opinions are my own,” I have other objections to it besides the one I mentioned. 2. Of course they’re your own, because this is your blog. This is how readers see it. 3. Are you going to put this on every post? Because if you don’t, then you have to say whose opinions they are.
I am very wary of posts that say “my opinions are my own.” Would a legitimate journalist say that when reporting a news story? Never! It seems to code for “I got paid and am saying nice things, but please trust me anyway.”
It does seem like that code. Exactly! And journalists are not supposed to have opinions when reporting a story.
It’s funny, Dianne, but the first thought that crossed my mind in reading just the first few lines of this post is how it relates the the previous post about writing “for free”. “Paid in kind” means receiving some form of payment, whether money, goods, attendance at an event, etc, so why do folks understand that this works for bloggers but not professional writers? Funny, that.
Anyway, I have been invited to events and on one such blog post writing about a weekend in Cognac I ended the post with “Round trip travel from Nantes to Cognac via Paris, all hotel accommodations and meals were courtesy of Martell. No further gift (except a wee bottle of cognac) and/or remuneration has been solicited or offered. The decision to write about the trip was my own and all views and opinions are my own.”
Don’t think I have ever thought to add to a post that the price of attendance to a conference was waived because I was there as a speaker; maybe I assume this is understood? I do think that when a blogger posts about a junket or a product or a book on her or his blog it is understood that it was free to them, a gift offered from a publisher, a company or a tourist board. But although a book or a jar of something is clear and understood, I do as a reader feel lied to it the blogger doesn’t mention anywhere that a trip, hotel or restaurant meal was free. Maybe because there is more confusion? I mean, I have written about events that I have paid for as well as restaurant meals I have paid for….
The reason it doesn’t work for professional writers is that you can’t pay your mortgage with a free potato peeler, box of pasta, or an all-expense paid trip to a food processing plant.
I love your disclaimer! Very specific and thorough.
While bloggers who are reading your post can read through the lines about junkets, the general public can’t. More importantly, Americans are required by law to disclose any payment in kind within the post.
The default is that if you don’t have a disclosure in the post, it infers that you have paid for the meal or event yourself, although that notion is quite suspect. I wouldn’t want to have to put in a round-up of books, for example, which books I paid for and which were given to me for promotion.
I work with a lot of companies that require the “all opinions are my own” terminology be used. Before I began doing sponsored posts, I would use particular products and write about how I incorporated them into my recipe or edible craft project and tell my readers where to buy them. I felt the transition into doing sponsored posts was smooth, but it does seem a bit awkward to say, “all opinions are my own” as I feel all my posts are filled with my own opinions, but it’s required, so I do it.
Huh. I had no idea that companies require you to use that particular phrase. It’s telling, don’t you think? Especially, because, as you say, your opinions exist on every post. I wonder what would happen if bloggers stopped agreeing to say that?
I think bloggers are overthinking disclosures. Why not weave it into what you’re writing?
“XYZ publisher sent me this book.”
“I’ve been developing recipes with the ingredients BRAND sent to me.”
“I work with BRAND, who is sponsoring this post, on their new product line.”
“BRAND is a client of mine.”
That’s disclosure. No weird, stuffy, inauthentic, out of place, cut and paste legalese at the end.
As for “my thoughts and opinions are my own,” it just seems silly. Of course your thoughts and opinions are your own.
I do think this is a much more natural way to say it, Jenny. The FTC is not requiring bloggers to write these disclaimers at the end. They are requiring that sponsored posts be marked as much, though, in the title.
Which brings up a question I’ve been pondering: Are all posts that mention free products sponsored posts, since they involve payment in kind?
I think we all understand that there’s a huge difference between accepting a $30 book and accepting a series of sponsored posts for $10K. But, as far as the FTC is concerned, there doesn’t seem to be that distinction. Any compensation is compensation (the value does not), and needs to be disclosed – as soon as you mention the brand or link over.
In the end, I think the FTC is looking for exactly what the readership is looking for: honesty, clarity and authenticity.
I shouldn’t post so early in the morning. I meant that the value doesn’t need to be disclosed, but the relationship does need to be disclosed.
Jenny! You should have written this post. Exactly.
Your clarity should help people who are confused and encourage others to step up and understand their hobby is a business, regardless of the money involved, subject to FTC rules and regs. AND each time a blogger writes about and/or mentions the product they were given they must disclose – forever. On each post. That sous vide machine you gushed over? every time you show it or use it in such a way that it’s apparent in your post – the disclosure is mandatory.
Thank you, Barry. Whenever I write these posts I worry that I am lecturing people. It is really not my intent. We’re all trying to figure this stuff out simultaneously, and I don’t know everything.
True, there must be a disclosure every time you write about an item given to you for free.
Regarding whether bloggers have a business because they write about freebies, I’m not sure about that. The IRS has ideas about what makes a blog a business. See this post for an example:
http://mywifequitherjob.com/is-your-business-just-a-hobby-in-the-eyes-of-the-irs/
Yes, companies want to send me their product and write about it all the time, mostly I say no because I think reviews are tedious and I don’t like writing about a product unless I’ve stumbled upon greatness. But if they choose to send stuff anyway, in no way do I feel compelled to write about it on the blog, usually I’ll pass it along thru other forms of social media if I liked it. I have had companies think that sending me products was a promise in return I would write about them and that just annoys me when I receive email after email about when will it appear on my blog. That is when I tell them I never agreed to write about your product, I didn’t like your product so you have two choices, either I write nothing or I write a review about what I really thought, which would you prefer?
Especially in the small gluten free community, I see bloggers writing good things about products that I know are awful or have unhealthy ingredients and it bothers me that they would sell out to their own community so they don’t step on sponsors toes. Then agan I am a little fiesty. Thanks for the article.
This all sounds logical to me, Kirsten. I’m not sure you even need to pass it on through social media. Whenever I see a tweet from someone that says “XXX sent me their product to try” with no link, I kind of cringe. You don’t owe these companies anything.
If you don’t like the products, you would be doing a service to your readers if you did a round-up of products that suck. Can you imaging the sharing that would go on on social media if you wrote “10 Gluten-Free Products to Avoid?” Your numbers would go crazy. You could be very polite about it. Bloggers assume that any writing that is not completely gushing is trashing, and there’s lots of room between.
You said you were a little feisty, right?
Dianne, as far as I know, there isn’t a single movie, play, or book reviewer that discloses that they saw the event for free. Nor do they have to declare the ticket price as income-in-kind. And I know that some book reviewers turn around and sell review copies to used bookstores. So why are bloggers’ rules suddenly different?
I’m not saying there shouldn’t be disclosure, you understand, but it seems as if there are different rules for different writers, and that’s not right.
I follow a few book review blogs that do state when the publisher sent them an advanced copy for free in exchange for a review. And by and large I find that their reviews are very balanced and honest. Perhaps they’re few and far between though.
Apparently this is true, sadly!
Howard, the FTC decided that, because people make more and more shopping decisions online, it needs a way to protect consumers from bogus information. So if you are paid to promote a product (meaning writing about it, basically, in a non-negative way), you have to disclose the relationship.
I find it quite revealing that the government considers a post about freebies or pay-for-play suspect. As I said, so much for the credibility of writing “All opinions expressed on this blog are my own.”
I love reading your posts Dianne, since you always address the issues so many of us are thinking about.
I think that I have a very hard time wrapping my head around this since I came from mainstream publishing, where I was always accepting press rates and samples, according to the various publications rules. I continue to accept samples and always make this very clear in my posts.
Here are a few issues that I’d be curious to have your opinion on:
-Many of the samples that I receive are just that: sample. And often marked very clearly as ‘samples, not for resale, and have no value.’ In that case, what is the amount to be declared, if any?
-I am not blogging from the USA, so do those rules even apply?
-I get approached constantly to try different products. I have come to form relationships with certain importers who I know are dependable and whose companies often feature products that I love and can happily recommend. That said, there are also duds that I don’t like at all and I don’t ever write about them because, really, who would benefit from that? Just as I don’t write about restaurants to avoid, I don’t write about products to avoid. I think people want to know where to go and what to buy, not the other way around. But I don’t think that makes people respect my opinion any less, as you suggest.
-And what about galleys that you receive for review? Just curious if these, which have no value, are declared?
I always enjoy hearing what you have to say!!!
Hi Elizabeth,
Thanks for such a nice compliment. I enjoy having you as a reader.
These are very good questions.
I suppose you could just say that someone sent you a sample and that would solve it.
I don’t know if these rules of disclosure apply to you, but I happen to think they are worthwhile, so I would advise you to adopt them anyway.
Re galleys, while they have no retail value, you can always say they were sent to you in advance of publication.
This is just hypothetical: Maybe your readers, as Italophiles, think everything Italian is superior and therefore worth buying. You could set them straight on a few products or restaurants that are so-so or aren’t worth their time, without trashing anyone. You would be doing them a service. What’s wrong with that?
Re only writing positive posts…when I was a magazine editor, my staff (both full-time employees and freelancers) wrote reviews. Most blog posts are not true reviews, because most bloggers are so thrilled that a company chose them to receive a freebie or to pay them a small amount that they write about the product or meal in glowing terms. Most do not really evaluate a product in terms of how it compares to other products, whether it is worth the money, etc. Now, at the magazine, our reviewers wrote balanced reviews that were about 65-85 percent positive. It makes a much more interesting and credible review to make a few thoughtful comments that are not positive. That is not true of most blog write-ups, which are not proper reviews in the first place. And every once in a while, to enhance our credibility, the magazine slammed an awful product, in the most professional way possible. Sometimes the company that made that product was an advertiser, which created a whole raft of problems for the publisher. He or she had to tell the advertiser to avoid advertising in that issue. I never wanted to move up from editor to publisher!
You make my point exactly! My blog posts and app entries are definitely not reviews. And I’ve never defined them as such. They are more akin to guides, with information about places where you can eat, with descriptions and, often, personal opinions.
In this case, if you are comparing what I write to a guide book of yore, then there is no place really for a negative ‘review’ of a place. That said, I do include negatives if I think they are relevant. For instance if I think a place is overpriced or I don’t like the ambiance, I will always say so. Or, if there are certain dishes best avoided, I say that too.
That sounds reasonable to me, Elizabeth. Most guides are positive, it’s true. They tell you where to go, not where not to go. But still, people can offer discerning advice about what to avoid, and that makes the info such a nice break from all the gushing.
I scanned through my posts to see if and where I used the “my opinions are my own” meme. I found one ten or so posts down, although I didn’t use the exact language. I attended the 2014 Monterey Bay Aquarium CFS Conference. And since I wasn’t a paid speaker, nor on media scholarship, I didn’t think eating and drink, or taking samples of food qualified for a disclosure. But I felt compelled to include a disclosure of sorts anyway. Maybe you can tell me if the language I used was necessary? or incomplete? I wrote about a specific experience at the event and a product. Here is the disclaimer:
“TCHO ̶ New American Chocolate is a California-based chocolate company with a focus on innovation, flavor and quality. (This was not a sponsored or promotional post. I was not paid with money or chocolate by either MBA or TCHO to write about this experience.)”
Thanks Dianne.
Well, I am not an expert, but I believe that if the conference provided the chocolate, and you paid to attend the conference, then you don’t have to disclose anything.
The only thing that is suspicious is the sentence itself. It sounds rather promotional, so you might keep an eye on that kind of language.
It’s interesting that this same discussion is also going on right now on YouTube. YouTubers are being told that they must disclose in their video that they are being compensated within the first 30 to 45 seconds of the video. “Weaving it in” doesn’t cut it and nor should it. Here is a link to an interview with Mary Engle of the FTC on this subject. I like the part where she was asked about YouTubers finding that if they disclose within the first 30 seconds that people stop watching the video. Her answer was that this proves it’s material to people!! http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/227587/With_paid_coverage_developers_share_responsibility_with_YouTubers.php
It seems to me that bloggers that feel the need to “Weave it In” AKA “bury it” know their audience won’t like it!! Otherwise why take the time to be creative about this! I would submit bloggers that do this are “under thinking it” over the long term.
There have been big bloggers that accepted free trips, kitchen appliances and all sorts of free bees over the years in exchange for plugs on their blogs. They even disclosed that they were compensated. Now if you look at their traffic on Quantcast they are way down from where they used to be. Could it be the audience doesn’t like that sort of thing? I’d say so. Over time they get it that this is what your content is about even if you weave it in. So beyond that it is illegal to weave it in it also doesn’t make sense if you want to stay in business over the long haul.
OMG Rick, the parallels to food bloggers are fantastic! I almost choked. Thank you so much for this link.
I love that the FTC person said to use language consumers can understand, especially in light of many comments here about “the opinions expressed on this site are my own.” One commenter said she was using it to mean she didn’t just cut and paste from a press release, and another blogger said companies require them to state this phrase! That in itself is suspect. And what does it mean, anyway? That the other posts are someone else’s opinions or that you’re lying in them?
You may have a point about the effect of plugs, as the gamers said their viewers left if they had to disclose that their content was sponsored up front. I just wrote a post about how readers in a survey said they don’t trust sponsored posts anyway.
I guess we can agree on some things Dianne! lol Yes it’s exactly the same issue if you are a blogger or a vlogger. You’ll like this one too. Recently one vlogger had his video pulled by the UK equivalent of the FTC because they did not disclose “clearly enough” that they were being compensated by Oreo Cookies. It’s an interesting story and it’s not confined to the US, the UK has an issue with this as well. http://www.reelseo.com/youtube-videos-pulled-failing-declare-oreo-sponsorship/
I think this is a very interesting discussion and personally Dianne, I agree with you about the gushingly positive reviews being suspicious. There are a few sites I follow that went from interesting to mostly “sponsored”. I no longer find them interesting and am certainly suspicious of the genuiness of the Blog/posts.
I do usually mention specific products that I use in my cooking if I feel the brand or exact product makes a difference. In those cases, I have never mentioned that I was not compensated; do you think it is necessary for me to mention this? I have never been given a free meal or anything free that I have written about (except the samples at IFBC this past September). Thoughts?
Thanks Stacey. Re your question, if you are not mentioning products you received as freebies, there is nothing to disclose. It’s as simple as that. Apparently if you paid to attend a conference and you received free samples there, you are not obligate to disclose, although there’s nothing wrong with saying “I picked up this sample at IFBC.”
You left out the part that the disclosure must happen before any review, endorsement, affiliate link, etc. Putting the disclosure at the very bottom is not sufficient — which of course makes sense, because by the time they get to the endorsement they will have been reading it without the awareness that there was some kind of compensation involved.
I completely agree with Jenny’s point above — it’s better to weave the disclosure into the writing, and do it in a natural, honest way. Your readers are likely to respond better to it, understand what’s going on, appreciate your forthrightness, and above all, won’t feel like they’ve been duped as soon as they read that little disclaimer at the bottom.
Ultimately, though, I think all of this is much less an issue of the FTC’s enforcement (have there even been any cases of bloggers getting in trouble for little $25 slip-ups?) — and much more of one of maintaining credibility with your audience.
Well said, Andrew.
The problem is that bloggers know that if they put “sponsored post” in the title that people will be likely to click away, or question what that means, exactly.
It’s amazing to me how so many bloggers don’t even consider their audience and are more concerned with pleasing the sponsor. I hope there’s a way to do both.
I am very new to all of this but I will say that I like Jenny’s way of disclosing the information. It sounds honest and it sounds natural. I haven’t had this problem since no one has given me anything or approached me to partner with them or review their product. I have mentioned TJ and King Arthur Flour — that is the only flour I use unless it is the Caputo 00 flour. I’ve also seen disclosures at the bottom of the post and also at the top.
Yes, that is more natural. You do have to say it right away, though.
G’day Very interesting post worldwide and I personally think all should be disclosed as it avoids confusion amongst readers and bloggers who seem more interested in what everyone else is doing in my opinion.
I too use the phrase “the words and opinions are my own” so that my readers know this is what I think and has not been influenced in any way because of a product, cookbook etc. restaurant review simply because they provided something as a courtesy. (which is always disclosed)
I like how you think!
I hope you don’t have to state this in every post. If you don’t, though, it makes people wonder whose opinion is voiced in the other posts.
Here’s another question for consideration. My blog posts are profiles of different local food or beverage artisans. I do not review or endorse their products in my posts. However, sometimes the people I interview give me their products. The posts are centered on their personal stories, and I write about them because I find them interesting and ask to interview them regardless of their product or whether I receive it.
Is this technically payment in kind if I’m not endorsing or reviewing their products?
I’m sorry to tell you that you are endorsing these people and their products simply by writing about them. Your interviews are very long and there’s lots of info about their products, so the bottom line is that you are receiving payment in kind and you need to disclose – or decline their products and/or services.
I’ve got to fess up, I use the “despite their generosity my opinions are my own.” I don’t feel disingenuous using it though. First of all, I don’t write posts like this often. Actually it is very, very rare. And, even if it means nobody sends me freebies anymore, I wouldn’t feel comfortable endorsing something I didn’t believe in, because I would be letting my readers down if they went out and purchased and inferior product. My blog community is far more important to me than receiving some free product. Maybe I am in the minority here, but that’s how I feel about it.
I think most people feel that way, Susan – or at least I hope they do. And you don’t even have to use a disclaimer, as long as you say in your post copy that a company sent you something to try. I’m not sure readers understand what it means to say “despite their generosity.” The point is to be clear.
I have never heard of or even thought about this. I’d be curious to know if there are any actual documented cases about the FTC going after a food blogger who has not included a disclaimer/disclosure statement in a post? I should certainly hope the FTC has bigger issues to police?
There is the YouTube example in Rick’s post, but I have not researched whether the FTC fined food bloggers. The issue is being clear and honest with your readers. Surely no one can object to that.
This is a great piece Dianne. The only suggestion I would make, as a follower, rather than a blogger, is that you might be underestimating the ability of the community to identify these issues and act accordingly. I think it is generally easy for regular blog followers to spot the unmentioned plug or the disguised recommendation. These do not sit well, and I believe they turn people off sites very quickly, so they must be counter-productive. Where I find I am getting constant marketing messages I look for the acknowledgements, if they are not there I am inclined to unsubscribe. The contract between blogger and reader is information and entertainment in exchange for the pleasure of posting and the ability to openly monetise the experience. That is understood, and everyone appreciates that, but if it is all money and products and no great stuff, good teaching and clever ideas, readers will turn off; and if the message and information is corrupted and lacks integrity, they will walk away more quickly. Readers are smart ! (I don’t mean me, by the way.) This Christmas I have been slightly depressed by the number of blogs I follow that have converted for many weeks to outright marketing sites. It is not disguised, so no accusation, but there has been very little offered on some sites other than the constant opportunity to buy stuff, and that is not really what we sign up for – there has to be a balance.
Yes, in the early days there were discussions about whether bloggers were journalists, and now we wonder whether they have become marketers. I love bringing up these issues because I don’t have all the answers either. We are all trying to figure out what’s comfortable and what’s right for each of us.
As a journalist, my view has always been that readers come first — not clients, but then I worked on newspapers and magazines and books. When bloggers arrived, I thought they would have the same principles. I remain “cautiously optimistic,” as they say.