Topics in Digital Media – Fall 09

I want to give a quick rundown of some of the interesting threads of discussion I’ve found through the blogs.  In the discussions found in the posts and accompanying comments, there is a number of arguments, for and against these new rules.

The Bad

By simply doing a Google search for “FTC Blog Regulations”, you instantly find a veritable sea of dispair from bloggers across the Internet.  A taste of my favorite hyperbole so far:  Ad group: FTC blog rules unfairly muzzle online media , Did The FTC’s New ‘Blogger’ Guidelines Just Change The Way All Book/Music Reviews Must Be Conducted?, New FTC Rules Aim to Kill the Buzz on Blogs, The little FTC rule that changed web marketing forever.

Clearly, there is some hyperbole at work.  The blogs echo some of the panic of the headlines in the text.  Buzzmachine blogger Jeff Jarvis claims that the rules are “a monument to unintended consequence, hidden dangers, and dangerous assumptions.”  Further Jarvis states that

“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.”

This sort of rhetoric is exemplary of a lot of the fear found in many bloggers uncertain of how these new rules will be implemented, and potentially used against them.  Bloggers are genuinely petrified in many cases that they will be called out by the FTC will single them out for failing to disclose products that they have received in exchange for review, or from advertisers.

These same bloggers are also most concerned with exploring the extremes of the debate.  One of the questions raised is what exactly will be construed as a material connection: sponsors who buy ad space, people who send writers products, or will a material connection include Google AdSense ads that are driven by the content supplied by the blogger, and clicks are paid to the blogger.

In any case, there is a definite sense of panic going on with many bloggers who are fearful of what these new regulations may mean for their sites and their livelihoods.

The Good

On the flipside of all this, there are a number of arguments coming from commenter’s who believe this to be a good thing.  In particular, these new regulations will increase transparency and make the purely paid, astroturfed bloggers clearer for more Internet users.  Matt Cutts, a Google engineer who developed anti spam software and the SafeSearch feature, commented on Jeff Jarvis’ blog stating that:

“As a Google engineer who has seen the damage done by fake blogs, sock puppets, and endless scams on the internet, I’m happy to take the opposite position: I think the FTC guidelines will make the web more useful and more trustworthy for consumers. Consumers don’t want to be shilled and they don’t want payola; they want a web that they can trust. The FTC guidelines just say that material connections should be disclosed. From having dealt with these issues over several years, I believe that will be a good thing for the web.”

Cutting through all the hyperbole and the persistent cries of  “OMG WTF”, there is a rational argument emerging that this might not be that bad of an idea.  On the internet already saturated with spam, unsubstantiated advertising, paid shilling for products and fake testimonials, a little disclosure could not be all that bad if it could give the FTC a legitimate weapon to go against this persistent annoyance.  Many legitimate writers, writing for the sake of personal expression, seem fine with these proposed rules to require disclosure.

The Unconstitutional?

The Interactive Advertising Bureau has been leading the charge against the FTC regulations, setting off a debate regarding the distinguishing between online and traditional media. Randal Rothenberg of the IAB penned a screed to the chairman of the FTC, found here. In it, he outlines his worries regarding these proposed rules, the confusion brought on by these rules, as well as how different these rules are applied only to the new internet writers and not back towards traditional journalists.   Rothenberg states that the FTC is favoring

“traditional” distribution channels deserve more protection than innovative online channels; and, finally, that the Internet, the cheapest, freest, most accessible communications medium ever invented, should have less freedom than other media”

This point is a thorn in the side of Rothenberg, as well as many other bloggers out there.  Rothenberg also has a gripe with the new FTC regulations on First Amendment grounds, in that he believes these new regulations to be unfairly limiting bloggers right to free expression.  This argument plays out here and there throughout other threads on the Internet, with many bloggers taking the stand that this is a direct attack on their rights as independent citizens and journalists.

Next time I plan to look at traditional news media sites to see how they are covering these stories, and how blogs found on traditional media websites are handling coverage.

Please let me know what you guys think.

Possibly Relevant Posts:

• WTF FTC? What does the FTC have against bloggers? Or…How are varying media outlets going to cover the roll out of the FTC rules? (10) | Franklin
• The FTC took my Sponsors Away (8) | Franklin
• Concluding Travelogue 3- FTC Rules on Blogging (3) | Franklin