The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Apparently little things like the Constitution are really unimportant when it comes to government wanting to regulate things:
FTC to Regulate Blogging
Monday, October 05, 2009The Federal Trade Commission will try to regulate blogging for the first time, requiring writers on the Web to clearly disclose any freebies or payments they get from companies for reviewing their products.
The FTC said Monday its commissioners voted 4-0 to approve the final Web guidelines, which had been expected. Violating the rules, which take effect Dec. 1, could bring fines up to $11,000 per violation. Bloggers or advertisers also could face injunctions and be ordered to reimburse consumers for financial losses stemming from inappropriate product reviews.
The commission stopped short of specifying how bloggers must disclose conflicts of interest. Rich Cleland, assistant director of the FTC’s advertising practices division, said the disclosure must be “clear and conspicuous,” no matter what form it will take.
Bloggers have long praised or panned products and services online. But what some consumers might not know is that many companies pay reviewers for their write-ups or give them free products such as toys or computers or trips to Disneyland. In contrast, at traditional journalism outlets, products borrowed for reviews generally have to be returned.
Before the FTC gave notice last November it was going to regulate such endorsements, blogs varied in the level of disclosures about these potential conflicts of interest.
Thus far, I have never received a “freebie” to review on this site. Private Pigg, who has a few articles here, has received books for free which he has reviewed on his site; publishers sending out advance copies to reviewers is an old industry practice.¹ Would the FTC regulations compromise that?
Mr Grey Ghost, who publishes the “Insane Liberal of the Week” articles (somewhat less than weekly 
) here, has occasionally published, on his site, product reviews for which he has acknowledged being paid. That would fit within the FTC guidelines.
But, quite frankly, I don’t see where such is any of the FTC’s business. Blogging is a sort of free-form open source publication venue, and is — or at least should be — understood as covered under freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Whatever “danger” there is from blogger Joe Schmuckatella writing a product-praising article about something, and having been quietly paid by the manufacturer for the article, seems far less a danger to me than allowing the federal government to regulate speech.
Once again, the government is getting too intrusive, trying to “solve” a problem which does not exist; even if the problem did exist, the proposed solution is far worse than the problem.
It ought to be an axiom: any problem that people think can be solved by regulating speech isn’t nearly as much of a problem as the proposed solution.
_________________________
¹ – I have paid for every one of the books I have reviewed on this site.
If I review a book and say how great it is, simply because somebody paid me to review it (or sent me a book for free), and my reviews turn out to be pretty poor, I’ll suffer for it. That’s the way it should work.
“Bloggers or advertisers also could face injunctions and be ordered to reimburse consumers for financial losses stemming from inappropriate product reviews.”
Reimburse consumers? Because I give an opinion on a product? Do any of those hosses on QVC reimburse my wife if she “suffers a loss” because she buys the product they advertise? What does it matter whether they were paid or not? Isn’t that why people pay celebrities to advertise for them? We know Peyton Manning, or Tiger Woods, is paid for his time, but we readily buy “his” products anyway (or else why would they command such high fees for doing ads?). Clearly, disclosing that the pitch man is “paid” for the advertisement does not discourage people from making a purchase. So the idea that you need to “reimburse” a consumer if you were paid and didn’t tell, but not if you were paid and upfront about it, is a distinction without a difference.
I have never been paid to say anything I’ve said, except for the times I was. I was never given any “freebie” except the times I was. There, I got it covered.
[...] what made me make that crystal clear legal declaration? Dana’s article over at Common Sense Political Thought. It is a [...]
When is the Rheb’s Candy company going to send me those dark chocolate delights that I praised?
I used to do both book and movie reviews (and a few theater reviews and music reviews, as well) for the local paper. I never paid for a book, and I was reimbursed the price of admission for the others, but none of that made any difference to the review I wrote. If I thought the entertainment worthwhile, that’s what I wrote. Otherwise, I just said, “Don’t go here.” It was my favorite job I ever held at the paper.
[...] to CSPT: The Federal Trade Commission will try to regulate blogging for the first time, requiring writers [...]
I have been generally disdainful of celebrity endorsements since early childhood. We never bought a box of Wheaties.
These puffings of a product only add cost to the item. Perhaps a great increase in sales might allow some economies of scale to creep in,
I have seen old cigarette ads in which doctors endorsed a Chesterfields. Anything for a buck, I suppose.
How believable are the endorsements? If Cheech or Chong endorsed a particular bong, it might encourage some to consider a buy.
But is the FTC really going too far and are they capable of really taking action?
Perhaps as an antidote to this silliness, I should try to find a copy of ‘Putney Swope’.
I have been generally disdainful of celebrity endorsements since early childhood. We never bought a box of Wheaties.
My God – lack of roughage can do that much damage to a kid?