My start in the world of storytelling and marketing came from the rough and tumble world of political campaigns for which I produced TV ads, websites, and direct mail. The First Amendment allows for a wide latitude about what you can say about a candidate for office in a campaign ad, but one law that leaves little room for interpretation is the disclosure law. You know, the “Paid for by…” at the bottom of the ad, or the voice over from the candidate who announces, “I approved this message.”
As the world of influencer marketing has grown exponentially over the last several years, it’s made me wonder whether online consumers deserve the same transparency as voters?
I’m not talking about e-commerce sites like Amazon or E-Bay, where the consumer goes with the intent of purchasing items or a storefront site which sells shampoo. I’m talking about people who use their social media accounts to hawk products because companies pay them. Should those people be legally forced to disclose the association?
If Charo was the original template for being famous for doing nothing, we now have a cottage industry of online Charo-wannabes who have acquired fame not because they sing, dance, act, run, shoot a basketball, own a successful business, or make significant scientific breakthroughs. They’re just famous for being famous on Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat or Facebook, and companies seek them out to “sponsor” their products.
Some of these “brand ambassadors” get paid when viewers click on a link from their social profile to a product on Amazon, and it’s obvious the retailer paid the person to endorse their product. It’s a new frontier in the ever-evolving world of marketing in a world of micro-niches made possible by algorithms and analytics. Maybe it makes me uncomfortable because it’s a sign of my diminishing cultural relevancy when I don’t know the names and faces of names and faces I feel I should recognize because (Grandpa Simpson voice-over) back in my day, you at least had to star in a summer straight to Blockbuster Video movie before your agent could get you a commercial deal.
Yelling at you to get off my lawn aside, social media has opened up a Pandora’s Box of ethical issues. In a pre-social media world, and even today, most television ads will be upfront about using paid or unpaid spokespeople. Additionally, in the past companies advertising directly to the consumer could be held liable for misleading claims by the Federal Trade Commission. Now, due to the democratization of communications and advertising, that link has become very opaque.
Would you feel manipulated if the wine connoisseur you follow on Twitter is drinking a glass of Gewurztraminer because of ill-gotten gains? What about an Instagrammer using blush for a fee that would make you blush?
Society has lost trust in institutions, and social media influencers have stepped in to fill that void. But since they’re filling that vacuum, who is going to hold them responsible the same way institutions can be held in check by shareholders, consumers, and voters?
While the FTC has addressed ‘truth in advertising’ and compliance rules in online influencer marketing, only 1 in 10 marketers know “sponsored” posts should be tagged as ads. Undoubtedly, regulations will eventually catch up with marketing trends and those who abuse their trust, but in the meantime, a good rule of thumb is to #LookForTheHashtag. Influencers, ad agencies and sponsoring companies know it’s a sign of transparency and compliance. It might not be the full disclosure, but the hashtag is a useful shorthand on a medium reliant on brevity just like Charo is shorthand for an actress who would have never gotten famous if she went by her real name, Maria del Rosario Mercedes Pilar Martinez Molina Baeza.