The 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.
[...] 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.
— From Bloggers Must Disclose Payments for Reviews at the New York Times (update: link no longer working, but you can read the same article here). Many thanks to Sondra for the link!
I think this is very good and appropriate. And not only for perfume blogs.
I hate to have to ask myself questions about the transparency and ethics of the reviews and reviewers respectively.
Apart from free bottles and samples (you start to get the pattern if you follow several blogs: how come some products are reviewd on several blogs, at the same time, well before the official launch? my answer: they all received a sample, FB or whatever that captured their attention. Then, who sent it? A blogging friend or a PR?)…
I think readers should also be told what happens each time they click on a banner or advertisement present on their favourite blog.
Some blogs, as the non blonde, are always extremely clear about what they bought, what was a PR freeby, and about not feauturing direct advertisment.
This is something I appreciate a lot, though I think a careful reader can discriminate between interested reviews and sincere ones after a while. And also decide what is tolerable (an advertisment link on the page), and what is less so.
I don’t mind my favorite blogs having some sort of pecuniary (or fragrant 🙂 ) compensation for their time and passion. But the reader should be informed.
So: I think the e-land of blogs needs some rules.
Zazie, what do you mean by “readers should also be told what happens each time they click on a banner or advertisement present on their favourite blog”? I might be misunderstanding you, but what happens is you’ll leave the site and go to the site shown in the ad, right?
I should point out that the free bottles & samples will continue to flow. We get them, and we’ll continue to get them — our swag policy is already in keeping with the new FTC guidelines, so nothing will change here.
I think she may be referring to some sort of tracking program? Something like that.
Oh. Well, we’re not tracking anyone, but advertisers might be.
I think it has more to do with the fact that bloggers are paid a commission/revenue for each sponsored site they put on their blog… for example, if we click on perfumeland.com from NST, does Robin make money? Or is that link there because it’s simply another shopping option?
Some of the blogs I follow are very clear in which links are paid sponsors, and others are simply sites they love. Typically the sponsored, income-generating ads are grouped and linked in a box with a heading that says to the effect, “Show Our Sponsors Some Love”, etc. And the others are grouped differently…
I myself HATE HATE HATE paid ads posing as reviews.
My opinion is be HONEST. Disclose whether or not P&G Prestige (or other) sent you a press release and bottle(s). List your sources.
If you’re trying to make this a profitable venture, that’s all well and good, but just be up front about it. I don’t want to be deceived into thinking there are impartial reviews when in truth, they were motivated by cash and free stuff.
Ooh, Robin, I wasn’t implying that NST is a blog designed for profit, not love of perfume!
And I so appreciate your reviews – my only gripe is sometimes your negative reviews should be even more strongly worded!
Everything labeled “Shop for Perfume” or “Advertisement” (on the sidebars) is making me money one way or another, yes. I thought they were pretty clearly labeled? Nothing inside the middle column makes $ other than the Shop for Perfume page.
Oh – & good for you and your freebies! Nothing wrong with a job having a few perks. 😉
But we don’t keep any freebies, other than samples! I meant that we’re already in compliance because our policy is to give away any full-sized products we receive.
Aha – so that’s when we get a chance to win a bottle of something, I presume? Personally, I wouldn’t think of being able to keep the bottles as a ‘conflict of interest’. You have to test the product in order to review it, and you would go broke if you had to purchase everything. Plus, I would just look at it as a perk of the job. But I’m probably in the minority there.
Well, you don’t need a full-sized bottle to review anything…all you need is a few mls. I think the issue is not whether or not you accept full-sized products but whether or not you let you readers know what your policy is. When I read a blog that never writes negative reviews of anything, and they have no stated policy…well, that makes me suspicious.
This I know – about nst giving free bottles away, I mean.
You made your policy clear, and your balanced reviews speak for themselves.
But I thik such “disclosure” rules should be mandatory, not just reflecting the ethics of few transparent bloggers.
On the advertisement, I recently read on a blog explaining the “independent, unaffiliated, non-commercial” logo (non-blonde, always!), that beauty bloggers (and not only them) receive money by tracking means each time a reader is sent on a commercial site, presumably upon reading a review.
I do not think there is something wrong with that. But I think it should be disclosed. It is my very personal opinion, and it is not the most relevant issue. As I said, I don’t mind if the work behind a good blog is rewarded. But I think the are many gray areas yet to be defined. And few, intelligent rules could be valuable for the whole blogging community.
As I said, it is just my personal feeling… 🙂
I wrote everything awfully, and I don’t know if I was clear.
I hope so.
Well, anyway…
Oh, I gotcha. We don’t do that…we only do fixed price image ads. People can see our ad policies here:
https://nstperfume.com/about-now-smell-this/advertising-on-now-smell-this/
And our swag policy here:
https://nstperfume.com/about-now-smell-this/nst-policies/
Robin, I’ve always trusted the reviews here precisely because they are not all positive. The choice of perfumes reviewed also argues for your integrity. It’s clear there are many, many more releases (and, potentially, samples sent by perfumers) than there are reviews on any blog, yet a very fair cross-section appears here.
Thanks Bergere.
I want MORE giveaways! I love those minis and decants. LOVE the little glass bottles taking up space and driving my husband crazy!
For the blogs I frequent, the opinions regarding scents seem to be diverse enough that this never really occurs to me. I also think because there don’t seem to be universal releases for a lot of scents (they get staggered by region) and the people on the perfume blogs seem to be for the most part a small universe, that it’s easy enough to see friendly samples being got from counters and sent to others, completely non-PR related. You can kind of tell most of these blogs are done through love and interest. As to ads? Well, most of these guys put in loads of time and the ad sponsorship don’t even give that much compensation – I don’t care about disclosure there. It seems obvious when you have ads on a site that you’re getting paid for ad space, end of. Personally, once blogs start getting really super-slick with ads and testimonials, I’ll probably tune out.
on the flipside, too much regulation will mean blogs will turn into huge pains for most people and therefore stop becoming fun, causing them to just shut up shop, so to speak.
I seriously doubt the FTC is going to be running down individual bloggers with this new policy, but we’ll see. I don’t think it’s a huge pain to simply disclose what your policy is, and very few blogs (in the beauty area, anyway) have a stated policy.
However, I don’t see why they’re singling out blogs: it ought to be the same for all media, print and online. We all know many magazines get swag in huge quantities!
I was writing about the paper press – you were faster!
I was really surprised to see what happens with free dresses and bags in paper magazines…. Evil wears Prada, anyone?
So I thing regulation is due, and, as you say, this should hold in all kind of media.
Sheesh, no kidding! Magazine writers get major perks for writing dishonestly glowing reviews. Really, magazines (I’m speaking of fashion mags, as opposed to, say Newsweek, which is something I know nothing about) are just giant advertisements. I remember my mom telling me that when I was a kid and wanted a subscription to Vogue and Mademoiselle. (I still got them, and I still read the fashion stuff now, so I was obviously a lost cause. But at least now I know the beauty editor’s “new go-to scent” is one she was given for free, and the makeup the model on the cover is wearing is whatever the makeup artist brought, not the latest Estee Lauder collection.)
All true! And so it seems comical that someone might fine a blogger $11,000 (no small chunk of change) while Allure can take all the swag they want and never say a single negative word about any of the products they write about.
I agree.
But “clearly disclose any freebies or payments they get from companies for reviewing their products” does just seem reasonable to me.
If other cumbersome rules are involved, I don’t know.
I guess it would be a different issue, then.
(You know, sometimes, on some blogs, suspicion arises… I simply quit following them, however… And I think the above simple rule should also apply for paper press, and not only for blogs).
Right, wasn’t there a “blog” that took the format of an independent review that was actually an organ for a major perfume company?
Really? I missed that!
Yes, and oddly enough I stumbled across it yesterday. (Or one, anyway–there could be several.) I wish I could remember who and for what, but I will say it took me a while to catch on that it wasn’t an independent blogger.
Nice initiative, but I doubt it’ll be effective given the international nature of the net and blogging. I mean, a US institution can’t possibly have international jurisprudence, right? And I do wonder how they’re supposed to monitor bloggers beyond forcing them to write a policy. Can’t check they’re being honest about those policies, short of kicking the living room door down. Or, yaknow, building a whole new registry system to track corporate gifting.
They’re only regulating US blogs (whatever that means) and the plan at the moment seems to be to concentrate on the “supplier” end…remember the whole scandal when Microsoft gave out laptops for bloggers to test Vista? Well, they’d start w/ Microsoft. I don’t think they’re going to hire an army to read blogs.
To tell the truth, I think that this is aimed more at a few major electronics bloggers who were receiving thousands of dollars in free gear and then giving out glowing reviews for the products. Most independent reviewers either purchase the products (Consumer Reports) or review demo models and send them back to the manufacturer. I wish I could remember the names of the blogs, but it was a huge scandal in the computer and electronics review world when the info came out.
I think in general that you’re right, but in practice it will effect everyone: anyone who reviews books, music, baby products, etc etc.
That’s crazy – you know that the NYT Book Critic isn’t paying for all of his own books.
I just wanted to say, on Robin’s behalf (not that she needs me to), that one of the reasons I came to NST is her honest reputation. I knew about the no-full-bottle-freebies policy before even reading the blog, and that sold me on the opinions espoused here. And obviously I keep coming back. 🙂
That’s kind. But we took them in the beginning — not that we got many, but I didn’t even think about it until I’d been blogging for about a year and people starting sending more “stuff” and I decided it wasn’t a good idea. There was a mini scandal in the beauty blogging world about swag in 2007 though, and even after that, very few beauty blogs came up with formal policies, so all in all, I think this is a good thing.
OHNOES!!! There goes the many thousands of dollarz a year I am making off my nefarious perfume blogging.
Sigh. I guess I should have a page of disclosures? Mine’s gonna end up saying something like, SUCK IT if I’m not careful. Seriously, I’d be making more money at McDonalds.
LOL…yeah, it cracks me up when people say perfume bloggers are in it for the money. Yes, I make money, but I could make more doing almost anything else.
Whatever. I think you ought to have a policy posted somewhere. I think it’s just fine if all it says is SUCK IT — at least that’s a policy 😉
I like it. 🙂
oh March, your perfume blogging is only nefarious when you like something that I don’t…. 😉
So you think SUCK it is a legit policy? Actually I’m going to cut and paste Robin’s and see if she notices…
LOL..not likely. Nobody reads those things.
R: I think you’ve mentioned somewhere in the past your policy on receiving “freebies” or gifts or whatever. Am I imagining?
I will read the full article, but I’m wondering about this “must clearly state”… I don’t understand, do newspapers “clearly state” whether their theater/music reviewers receive free tickets to the events they attend and review? Radio stations receive truckloads of free promo CDs.
This is kind of strange.
No…bloggers are being subjected to much more stringent rules than other types of media, which I think is misguided.
And yes, I have posted policies in the past, and you can find them through the About page as well.
I think this is a bad idea to target bloggers in particular – we all know about women’s magazines being given tons of freebies and promoting stuff because of it. Why not fine them too?
Seriously. Please tell me that the “editor’s pics” over at Elle and Bazaar aren’t what they received for free to promote that month!
It’s misguided, not least because many of the print magazines now have their own blogs. Why be subjected to a rule just because of how you format your content? That’s senseless.
For all the negatives involved here, there is one definite positive……you know you’re being taken seriously as a journalist when you attract regulators. Congratulations.
An interesting way to look at it!
Good Point!
What have we come to when blogs are being regulated? Is this Big Brother or what?
Personally, I don’t mind blogs being regulated at all. I just think all media should be regulated.
I think this is a worthy attempt at instilling ethics among bloggers, but it’s utterly unenforceable and thus utterly futile. Instead of government ham-handedness, probably the best solution would be some sort of independent blogging council to come up with a code of ethics that bloggers could adopt voluntarily, placing some kind of Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval thingy on their sites so readers would know the blog adheres to the code.
I have no problem with any of the ads I see on perfume blogs, since they seem to be only for perfume retailers, not for specific perfumes (and more power to you for monetizing your hard work and talent!). As for the freebie issue, although I think it’s good to have the policy somewhere on the site, I would like to see one little line at the end of each review stating where the perfume came from — maybe it’s just nitpicking (or idle curiosity), but I actually think anyone who reviews anything should do this in the interests of full disclosure.
I’m not buying the “but Mom, the magazines don’t have to!” argument — you really want to have the same lack of ethics as the fashion/beauty mags?! Yes, someone should crack down on them, but that’s no excuse for shoddy practices elsewhere (by the way, I’ve never seen shoddy practices on a perfume blog, but some beauty blogs are pretty suspect).
Thanks for putting this issue out there, Robin — three cheers for transparency!
It’s an interesting thought…that every review should state the provenance of the perfume in question, but in practice: no way! I have literally hundreds upon hundreds of samples, and that would require yet another niddly record-keeping procedure. And in some cases, frankly, I’d rather not advertise my sources.
In a perfect world, I’d get all the juice myself. But, can’t afford it, and frankly don’t have time. I have no problem with accepting a few mls of perfume for review when I can get my hands on it. Sometimes those samples come from retailers, sometimes directly from perfume companies, sometimes from PR agencies. In all cases, when given a choice I take a sample over a bottle. If I get a bottle, I get rid of it when I’m done. Not perfect, but the best I can do.
And will add: don’t think it’s unenforceable at all, but do think the majority of the enforcement will be on the supply end…that is, they’ll go after the companies, not individual bloggers.
” I have literally hundreds upon hundreds of samples”. *sigh* LOL
I know I felt the way you do once upon a time. Trust me, now I look at them and sigh. I’ll never catch up.
Golly, I didn’t even think of what a pain it would be for you to have to catalog the provenance of every last sample — never mind! Although now you’ve got me intrigued with your mysterious sources…
Oh Jesus Christ! First: What about freedom of speach?
Bloggers are cut in their freedom of speech, that’s all. It is not about making clear “This is an advertorial” – what in VOGUE, Elle or InStyle is NOT an advertorial?? They get so many products (all products, even clothes, shoes, handbags) and noone asks about.
I think NST is one of the most honest and trustfull blogs. I do blog for 4 years now and I never set up a policy because imho a blogger ist just honest. He is not paid by anyone but his ads, which are titled ad, like you find them here in the sidenar, and nothing else.
We sell credibility, and yes, I would earn a lot more of money if I go cleaning.
I agree on transparency and infomartion: PR freebies are meant as freebies, but: Do you think we just give away our money to YOU?
Buying thousands of products, and spending 8-10 hours daily to help you at your shopping decision?
Without this PR freebies would blogging be again only for some bored, rich housewife. Common, do not take there. I will not take it there.
Let us blog, let us freedom of speech. And yes, I do not like all the internet sites which are only about advertisment, SEO or SEM.
I write my master thesis ob blogs, I will do my ph.d on blogs and I will keep blogging. But only because I work hard to finance it. Because I love to say: This sucks, and no one can do me harm on thta, because it is my free opinion.
End.
🙂 Sorry, I get mad on that topic. Really. I posted 1300 posts until now, if they were paid I could have bought a house on that. And a sportscar.
But no one is saying you don’t have freedom of speech. You can say what you like, you just need to disclose where your products come from. I have no problem with that at all: I don’t think all bloggers are honest. There are many companies in the US that will pay you to blog on products, and it isn’t always clear to the reader whether what they’re reading is essentially an advertisement or an independent review.
My policy is btw to not say something bad on PR freebies. If they are bad, I ignore them, if they okay, I say okay. And then I take them and have a contest, because I know I might not use it, but the readers would love some free gifts. And that again, costs ME money (shipping&packaging). Well, For my quarterly google income I bought myself ONE perfume. And I am one of the big blogger in Germany!
But why would you not say something negative about a product just because a PR firm sent it to you?
Robin: I just do not review it.
The point is that the bis companies can sue me without any warning. Every time I go to the mailbox I am a bit frightened. This is a special case in Germany. You have to say explicit “my opinion” or something, otherwise they can get you.
But now I decided some weeks ago that I do not care anymore. They will not sue me because I got to well known, at least I hope.
I just try to show the good products, there is enough crap out there.
So if I get a load of freebies and half of them is rubbish, 2 are good, I take the 2 good ones.
It is also a method to choose between thousand of products.
I get a lot of stuff from L’Oreal e.g. not any of it I put on my hair/skin. How can I say something good? I do not say anything then say something bad.
What do you think on that?
For me “bad” is a category when it comes to cremes or shampoos which consist mostly on chemistry, preservatives and too much perfume.
It’s tough if you have to worry about lawsuits. Other than that, all I can say is that it’s a matter of personal preference: blogs that only say positive things don’t interest me…I figure I’m not going to learn anything that I couldn’t learn from the product advertisement. But there are many perfume blogs that never do negative reviews, so obviously not everyone feels that way!
I seldom reviwe perfumes, then I try to describe them, of course only stuff I like.
Hmm, I always try to show both sides of the story. Might be nice, but it is too expensive. Or bad packaged. Bad reviews I do only when something is so extraordinary bad that people should just get their hands off. Because I focus on organic stuff I od not have such a broad range.
I think it might be easier to focus on perfume, but then I would have to criticize 80% as cheap, awful smelling toilet cleaner.
And the rest will be somtehing rather expensive.
Maybe I should mke up my mind about such a written policy. And have some insurance for a lawyer.
Well, I like to try to show both sides of the story too, nothing wrong with that. I just wouldn’t let yourself avoid a bad review because a PR company sent you something!
Funny is – I reviewed today a shampoo I just bought last week and was not what I expected, not at all!
I had to admit that hemp is good for your hair, but it just smells blah.
I did NOT recommend it.
Maybe the NYT should disclose that its major mac columnist David Pogue gets paid to write books on how to use apple’s latest products. No wonder they get such positive reviews!
This law will never stand.
Yes, I think that’s a great example of a case where reader trust trumps other concerns.