Adam1222

I'm assuming there are no standards on BA for disclosures of blatant advertisements.
This post today, http://www.travelcodex.com/2016/04/h...rol-on-the-go/, is outrageous in how miniscule its disclosure is at the bottom.
When I commented that it should have appropriate disclosure, I first got a reply saying that Scott does all "necessary disclosures" even those that are "not required." I tried to respond by linking to the FTC guidance which requires conspicuous, upfront disclosures, but the entire comment had been deleted. (Putting aside how something can be "necessary" but "not required.")

oliver2002

Then file a complaint with the FTC?

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/busi...re-asking#more

Adam1222

I would've hoped that some constructive criticism would have been looked at more favorably. I don't have a desire to see the blogs fined, just that they do the right thing.

oliver2002

But you did try to offer constructive criticism, which was clearly declined. So why not do the right thing?

Adam1222

I don't think an FTC complaint is so clearly "the right thing" to do. (Maybe "a" right thing?) I also don't have much faith that the blog will be an enforcement priority for the FTC. It's also very hard for me to do something like an FTC complaint half-heartedly.

eunduklee

aside from FTC reporting, a faster route would be DMCA. aren't most of there content copy and pasted?

Adam1222

I wouldn't be surprised if it was written by National Car Rental's PR firm for him to post, but DMCA wouldn't apply to this issue.

rehoult

You can only DMCA materials that you own or are an authorized agent for. So the people that wrote it could do so, but they probably don't object to their marketing material being used for marketing.

RFDMinnesota

Those things are cake to fill out - I might just start filling them out for fun!

Adam1222

Administrative advocacy is a skill. A detailed form, providing the intake analyst with the allegations framed in a manner that is clear and suggests jurisdiction and the nature of the violation plainly, is more likely to get acted upon.

Scottrick

And when I suggested that email would be a better way to address your concerns and discuss how to improve disclosure, you said you didn't want to "discuss" it. Rather you just linked to another document and said I should do better.

My blog is not your platform for public shaming. If you were interested in constructive criticism you would engage through a medium that allows us to discuss the issue in more detail, not through 140 character limits on Twitter and a one-sentence comment on a blog.

RFDMinnesota

I for one would have been much more impressed had you replied to his comment and let it stand. But I guess you're in the "R[.] Points" group now.

Adam1222

My comment was hardly public shaming. Don't overinflate how many people read the comments section of your blog. If I wanted to "publicly shame" you, I would have alerted one of the review blogs that criticize blogs, and hope that it got widely circulated.

There's not much more to be said than 140 characters or one sentence, which were clear.
"You should indicate a post is really an advertisement at the beginning of the post."

You don't think you should, or that it's best practices to do so. What can I do to support my assertion other than link to the FTC, which explains that a "clear and conspicuous" disclosure is not one buried at the bottom of a blog post ("Disclosures should not be hidden or buried in footnotes, in blocks of text people are not likely to read, or in hyperlinks. If disclosures are hard to find, tough to understand, fleeting, or buried in unrelated details, or if other elements in the ad or message obscure or distract from the disclosures, they don’t meet the “clear and conspicuous” standard.") (Or "A single disclosure on your home page doesn’t really do it").

I guess I could have pointed also to Best Practices on the web that say things like, "Disclosures that aren’t made until the end of your post when you’ve inserted affiliate or sponsored links in the content that comes before the disclosure may be construed as misleading."

See, I was more verbose, but I didn't say anything different. You think you're right, I don't.

You're free to say the only forum which you are willing to consider criticism is email. That doesn't however indicate an openness to criticism.

eunduklee

has made a valid point. +1

kokonutz

Posting an ad and calling it a blog post is just lame anyway. No matter whether disclosure requirements are met or not.