FTC Chimes in on Native Advertising

You can call it “native advertising”, “sponsored content,” or some other trendy word for the modern iteration of an “advertorial.” Whatever you call it, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may be calling out publishers, as well as advertising and public relations professionals, if they don’t make it obvious when any content has been paid for and is not bonafide editorial or journalistic content.

That’s the outtake from a December 4 FTC workshop on the subject.  The newly redesigned (as of today) FTC.gov site does not give the detailed results of the workshop. But trade publications including PRWeek have covered the results.

Most interesting in the remarks from FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez is the proliferation of sponsored content. Citing a study from the Online Publishers Association, she noted that 73% of online publishers offer  sponsored content. In addition, she stated that 34% of advertising agencies work with clients to create sponsored content. I have read separately that the PR community is not engaged with this as much, largely because of the belief that earned media has more influence and because those in advertising are already used to paying for reach.

But the FTC’s primary concern is deception of consumers. Therefore, any sponsored content must be clearly labeled as such to avoid any potential confusion between advertising and editorial content.

Some might argue that with shrinking media resources the sponsored content idea is a win-win: publishers get content that is harder to come by with fewer reporters, they get revenue, and those seeking publicity have an avenue to reach people.

To a degree that’s all true. However, not every organization has the kin of budget to pursue sponsored content to scale, or even at all. Also, if PR pros and others are supplying content, in the online environment people are losing the distinction between old media, new media, and the brand journalism that is increasing via corporate and organizational blogs, online news sites, etc. It’s the same as young people grabbing a TV remote and having no idea what the difference is between cable and network TV. Or, using Netflix or some other device to view a show or an episode, with no thought given to the source of the show. Content is no longer tethered to creator or carrier.

But I would add that the FTC concern for consumer deception is a good one when it comes to news, which is entirely different than entertainment content in its importance and the perception of source. As Ramirez notes, the laws already state that connections between endorsers and sellers must be disclosed. That law can have new interpretation in the context of sponsored content.

As I tell my law and ethics students, government regulatory agencies often enact rules and laws where professionals left to themselves fail to follow basic  ethical guidelines. Such is the case here. The PRSA Code of Ethics  principle of “disclosure of information” covers the idea  of making sponsored content transparent. If your professional goal is to ensure that publics are able to make fully informed decisions, you would not hide the fact that content in a publication was written and paid to be placed by a brand or an agency. If your only goal is to persuade people by any means, then you are likely to cross an ethical line.

The FTC workshop merely discussed the issue. But enforcement may come if publishers and advertising and PR professionals think only of persuasion and not of public interest.

From the Journals: Ad Avoidance, User-Generated Content, Nonprofit Twitter Use

Continuing my periodic review of academic journal articles for public relations students and professionals who read my blog, I found three articles in recently published journals that I think will be of interest. Here are citations and key finding summaries:
Lovejoy, K; Waters, RD; Saxton, GD. “Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: How nonprofit organizations are getting more out of 140 characters or less.” Public Relations Review , 38 (2):313-318; JUN 1 2012
A review of 4655 tweets from 73 nonprofit organizations showed that the nation’s largest nonprofits are not using Twitter to fully engage stakeholders. Instead, they use social media mostly as a one-way communication channel.  Less than 20% of total tweets demonstrate conversations;  only 16% demonstrate indirect connections to specific users.
Baek, TH; Morimoto, M. “STAY AWAY FROM ME Examining the Determinants of Consumer Avoidance of Personalized Advertising” Journal Of Advertising , 41 (1):59-76; SPR 1 2012
People concerned about privacy or simply irritated by ads in personal media are more likely to avoid ads altogether. But, if they perceive the ads have been personalized to their needs and interest consumers are less likely to avoid ads. In other words, it’s not the channel of mobile or social media, but the ad content itself that makes a campaign successful or not.
Christodoulides, G; Jevons, C; Bonhomme, J. “Memo to Marketers: Quantitative Evidence for Change How User-Generated Content Really Affects Brands” Journal Of Advertising Research, 52 (1):53-64; MAR 1 2012
The findings indicate that when consumers perceive they are co-creating brand content, part of its community, and have a positive self-concept they are more likely to be involved in user-generated content (UGC.) This in turn positively affects consumer-based brand equity. They key is building deeper relationships between consumers and brands in the age of social media.

GR’s People Design Authors Brand Identity Book

I was reading through the book review section of the latest Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly before a class earlier this week, and the words “Grand Rapids” jumped out at me from one review.

Turns out the authors of a new book on brand identity are all members of the Grand Rapids advertising design firm People Design. Specifically, the authors are Kevin Budelman, Yang Kim, and Curt Wozniak.

The book, the fourth in a series of ‘essentials’ books by Rockport Publishing, is “Brand Identity Essentials: 100 Principles for Designing Logos and Building Brands.”  As the author’s say on their own web site

The book lays a foundation for brand-building, defining the tools and building blocks, and illustrating the construction of strong brands through examples by world-class design strategists.”


The journal reviewer took issue with the order of presentation of some of the principles, and the brevity of text explaining and justifying them. However, it is recommended for the many examples provided.

As such, the book might be a valuable resource for advertising and public relations pros who want to enhance their understanding of branding, or who understand it conceptually but need help with the design aspect of it.

I bought the book as a resource to add to my crowded shelves. Also, since the firm is from Grand Rapids, it’s another way to ‘buy local.’

From the Journals: Search Ads, Mobile Politics, Online Sources

Search ad impact, mobile political discourse, and online news source credibility are some of the interesting subjects in current academic journals. Public relations and advertising practitioners don’t have the time, and often the access, to academic journals, so I periodically give a brief summary of articles I find interesting. I provide source information for anyone who wants to access them via an academic library.

Incremental Clicks: The Impact of Search Advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 51(4), 643-647.
A meta-analysis of several hundred studies revealed that 89% of visits to advertisers’ web sites were the result of search ad campaigns. Obviously this shows the value of search advertising as part of an effective campaign in which an objective is to drive traffic to a product page or other site.

Political Involvement in “Mobilized” Society: The Interactive Relationships Among Mobile Communication, Network Characteristics, and Political Participation. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1005-1024.
This study looked at how mobile-mediated discourse is related to political participation. Essentially, political participation increases in large networks of like-minded individuals, but decreases when mobile technology is used in smaller homogenous networks. This would indicate that a strategy to increase mobile networks would be effective in efforts to get out the vote.

Source Cues in Online News: Is the Proximate Source More Powerful Than Distal Sources? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(4), 719-736.
Readers have lots of sources of news online–a media site, an aggregator, a bookmarking page, shared links via Twitter or Facebook, and so on. This study showed that highly involved (i.e. deeply interested in subject, more seriously considering content) will consider both proximate and distal sources, or those that are close and identifiable as well as distant or second-hand sources. Meanwhile, readers of low-involvement are primarily influenced by a proximate source. This has interesting implications for messaging as well as a social media delivery strategy to reach and resonate with intended publics.

Ford Follows Up, Gives Better ‘Focus’

I blogged in an earlier post about a Ford PR event in Grand Rapids that didn’t seem to go too well. I subsequently followed up about how a Ford PR representative reached out to me and offered to visit campus.

That happened yesterday, when Dan Pierce, Environmental Communications Manager for Ford, and engineer Mike Tinskey, who manages Ford’s electric vehicle program, came to our Allendale campus with a prototype of the Ford Focus Electric and ample time to spend with some of our Advertising and PR students.

Pierce talked to students about internships at Ford in our student study, then spent some time outside with Tinskey talking to students about the vehicle. From 6-8:30, more than a dozen students took in a presentation about electric vehicle technology and Ford’s broad communications strategy with this emerging product category. The students did as much talking as Pierce and Tinskey.

Garret Ellison of the Grand Rapids Press was both outside and in the presentation. You can read his account. As for me, I’ll share just a few PR lessons learned in an event that happily lasted longer than I anticipated:

  • Ford recognizes the variance among publics and its “Power of Choice” campaign is designed to let consumers decide between battery only electric vehicle, plug-in hybrid, or gas-electric hybrid. 
  • Timeframe is important in PR campaigns. They acknowledge the need to reach early adopters and allow the popularity of electric vehicles to grow. They showed data and charts that illustrate slow initial growth that is starting to accelerate.
  • PR people have to think holistically. Pierce repeatedly pointed to Tinskey as an example of working with engineers and other internal publics. He also noted that the campaign needs to consider partnerships with companies that make charging equipment, addressing concerns of utility companies and government leaders and many other considerations beyond just sales pitch to consumers.
  • Messaging is important and must be tailored but sometimes a “shotgun” approach of multiple messages is necessary and strategic to reach diverse psychographic differences in a new product category.
  • This blogging thing can lead to great campus visits for students 🙂
The best part was hearing the students’ smart questions, hearing Pierce and Tinskey tell me how impressed they were with the students, and watching students show off their PR campaign plan books and resumes. Being taken by Tinskey for a short ride in the vehicle afterwards was pretty cool too. My ’99 internal combustion looks dated now.
In the end, I’d like to think Ford and the GVSU School of Communications have charged up a positive relationship.