FTC sharpens its teeth over home entertainment company’s lack of transparency on commercial relationship with influencers and payment for positive reviews – writes Scott Guthrie
According to the Federal Trade Commission’s website Warner Bros. Home Entertainment, Inc. has settled Federal Trade Commission charges that it deceived consumers during an influencer marketing campaign for the video game Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor, by failing to adequately disclose that it paid online influencers.
Felix Kjellberg a.k.a PewDiePie was among the influencers included in the Warner Bros. influencer marketing campaign which saw gamers paid to post positive gameplay videos on YouTube and other social media platforms.
The Swedish gamer is the highest ranking YouTube video producer. Since starting to post to YouTube in 2010 PewDiePie has amassed 12.7 billion video views – averaging 4.3 million views per video.
His YouTube channel now boasts 46.2 million subscribers – slightly more than the entire population of Spain.
The Warner Bros sponsored content has been viewed more than 5.5 million times since the campaign ran in 2014.
The role of the FTC is to protect US consumers by preventing fraud, deception, and unfair business practices in the marketplace. This includes native advertising, sponsored content and endorsements.
“Consumers have the right to know if reviewers are providing their own opinions or paid sales pitches,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Companies like Warner Bros. need to be straight with consumers in their online ad campaigns.”
According to a December 2015 Digiday article only 30% of publishers are in compliance with the FTC’s guidelines that address how ads are labeled, visibility of sponsor name and prominence of the label.
Whilst in the UK six in 10 marketing and PR professionals admit to flouting the UK’s official code around influencer marketing according to a survey by Takumi, an Instagram broker connecting creators with brands.
The crux of meeting influencer disclosure rules internationally centres on three key areas:
Remember that ‘paid-for’ is not limited to financial payment. It can include free product, services or access to events.
Other commercial relationships may include being a business’s brand ambassador. The brand may not have paid for that particular content nonetheless it may be appropriate for the influencer to tell readers/viewers that they have a financial connection to the business.
Influencers should ensure that it is clear whose opinion or experience is being stated (i.e. their own or an advertiser’s).
It is this last point that Lesley Fair, a senior attorney at the FTC takes Warner Bros. to task on.
In a blog post for FTC Fair repeatedly calls out Warner Bros. for instructing influencers to ensure their videos “‘promote positive sentiment’ about the game,” “‘not show bugs or glitches that may exist’” and “‘not communicate negative sentiment’ about Warner Bros. Home Entertainment, its affiliates, or the game.”
As in April’s case against US retailer Lord and Taylor the FTC seems to be directing its ire against brands. However remember that brands, their public relations practitioners and the influencer are all responsible for ensuring that paid-for content is labelled properly and that the disclosure is displayed prominently.
Get posts like this one direct to your inbox. Subscribe by email using the box on the top right of the screen. You can also follow me on Twitter. I’d like that.
Scott Guthrie works with companies to drive business growth in the social age through strategic insight and technical know-how. That's not giving you a lot of detail, is it? So, read more here.
Influencer marketing backlash: 15 ways to reverse the trend
Influencer marketing image manipulation: Rimmel ad axed
Give us influencer marketing not influencer advertising
Product placement double standards affecting influencer marketing