Last week, the FTC published media guidelines for social media. The guidelines were complete with a response to blogger payola and celebrity endorsements through tweets on Twitter and other networks. Basically, the FTC extended the rules of endorsement consistent in other media sources to the social media world.
Therein fuels the argument: does the implementation of these rules just safe harbor the everyday consumer or do they violate freedoms of speech and give government too much control?
In the article by Andy Sernovitz at AdAge.com, Andy claims that the new guidelines clarify the rules on how to use social media, providing increased credibility for the organization by the consumer. He also says that now that organizations know the rules, they will be more apt to invest in the new media and use its capabilities for it’s benefit.
In a counter article by Dan Gillmor in Ad Age, Gillmor feels that the FTC regulations are too vague and inconsistent with regulations for other mediums. He says that the broad guidelines make the rules difficult to apply across the net world and that the regulations are much more harsh on the blogger-world than in traditional print media.
I find strong points in both arguments. Initially, I was a little turned off by, yet again, another attempt by the government to over-regulate the market place. But I am torn because I also see an open window for dishonest business practices by unethical marketers. Both gentlemen provide strong counterpoints, however, I feel one may be too naive (Sernovitz) and the other may be too critical (Gillmor).
In theory we need to find that balance. We need regulation without somewhat "strangling" social media. We need regulations that are concise enough to be applied across the board. We need strong writing that will make the regulators jobs easier. We need to evoke an ethical tone into social media to with gain trust from the consumer, or social media as an outlet for brand awareness and advertising would be ineffectual. We need parameters set so that organizations can start really pumping resources into social media in order to use the utilize the outlet to its full potential.
This drives the issue: regulation is needed, but how do we do it effectively? Right now, as the new guidelines stand, anyone who blogs or tweets about a product they may have a slight connection with, and doesn’t disclose this connection, has the potential to receive a $11,000 fine. With the size of the net world, how do you regulate every little thing every waitress says about a delicious cherry pie serves at her place of work? I think the regulations are helpful for larger corporations or organizations, in order to give them a path for investment in social media, but I think the rules need to be “tightened up” to relieve them of their vagueness in order for more consistent regulation.
Question to be considered: Are the regulations helping the consumer...or the larger businesses by preventing small business the same amount of face time and endorsements? Social media was extending the stage for business in a way that you didn’t need to “break the bank” in order to gain awareness. Do these regulations destroy that capability? Social media made small business competitive with large. New regulations have the potential to curb the competition, bring the small business back to square one in terms of brand awareness.
No comments:
Post a Comment