They wouldn’t blog it if it wasn’t true, right? Not no more according to the FTC.

I saw this over on Tribble Agency and unless it’s a late April Fool’s prank, it’s going to be a really shitty year for bloggers. The FTC is looking at changing the regulations on how products are advertised through social media sites:

“...would hold companies liable for untruthful statements made by bloggers and users of social networking sites who receive samples of their products.”

Aside from the fact that the Financial Times article calls blog posts viral, this is pretty major stuff for anyone with a blog, not just the Mommy Bloggers™ and paid review freaks who I have no love lost over. This could be a big topic over the next few days, but my initial reaction is that it raises a lot of questions:

1) Where do you draw the line? I know the intent is to go after misleading reviews, but I’m guessing the narrowly-focused wording will expand to include the shill anything for $5 crowd and beyond. How many laws or regulations are inacted for one purpose, but then expand to include things they were never originally intended to cover.

C’mon, you know what happens. When it comes time to go after someone, lawyers use anything at their disposal no matter how tangential, just as long as it’s already on the books.

Not to mention, what if people are promoting stuff who live outside the U.S.? The FTC has no jurisdiction over them. (I can see it now: Canada just become a growth industry for paid reviews and William Shatner has to move back.) Or do they go after the brands that reside here?

2) Only the paid review crowd? What if an anon poster endorses something in the comments section that turns out to be false. Am I as blog owner now in trouble for that? Or conversely, what if I neg something, can they claim I’m trying to harm a brand?

3) What about political ads? With the stuff a 527 can put out, isn’t it then responsible for misleading information in its advertising or pundits who blog on a candidate’s or party’s behalf?

4) Opinion vs. paid endorsement. What if I’m just giving my opinion of something without being paid. I’m still using my influence with my audience to sway their attitude one way or the other. The value readers assign a blog and the writer matters, paid or not.

What if I’m an adviser on the board of a brand in question. I don’t get paid to tell you about a product I’m blogging about but I want you to check it out. How’s that different?

5) All social media? At some point, social media won’t be called social media. It’ll just be. So what’s covered here: Blogs? Websites? Twitter? My personal Facebook profile? What about traditional media? FCC, FTC, FDA; yes they all regulate everything from radio station licensing to false ad claims—but it’s all the same in the consumer’s mind.

(Speaking of, Yaz recently got spanked for false claims it made on TV and basically got a slap on the wrist, yet it still fails to mention this on their website even as new commercials air. Smells like a violation.)

6) Loud TV commercials. Has nothing to do with the discussion other than to point out that while this particular peeve of millions is surprisingly not under anyone’s jurisdiction, (but other transmitted signals are—go figure), the FTC and FCC need to fix real problems before moving onto other things.

Like whether DarkSith2190 from Iowa lied or not about the Bic razor he got paid $5 to hold up and pretend to use.

(Image via.)