1) ANA just filed detailed comments with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on its revisions to the Guides governing the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertisements.
Our comments again note the serious methodological flaws in the two studies relied upon by the FTC in drafting the changes to the guidelines. Not only were the studies severely limited, but clearly their results cannot be extrapolated to the multitude of diverse categories of advertising where testimonials and endorsements are used. Relying on these studies to determine how to revise the current guidelines would be inappropriate. The proposed revised Guides would undermine the long standing existing FTC approach to Testimonials and Endorsements that ANA believes strike an appropriate balance between the governmental and business interests involved. The proposed revisions would have a substantial “chilling effect” on truthful speech. Advertisers, if the revised Guides are imposed, would be forced to comply with guidelines that often are likely not to be appropriate.
In addition, ANA believes the proposed revised Guides fail to take into account many important issues that arise from the technical and practical limitations of the emerging new media. The FTC, by introducing examples that raise more questions than they answer, creates substantial and unnecessary uncertainty. This approach threatens to interfere with the development of flexible and organic self regulatory approaches that are much more likely to work with the emerging technologies and the new media. The FTC’s analysis, in fact, raises serious issues about the efficacy of disclaimers beyond the endorsement and testimonial arena.
We urge the FTC to carry out careful additional analysis in regard to endorsements and testimonials in general and in particular as the guidelines relate to new media platforms, such as blogs and word-of-mouth marketing. These comments were written by John Feldman and Tony DiResta, Partners at Reed Smith LLP.
2) ANA, along with a number of other groups, also submitted an additional detailed research analysis to the FTC that demonstrates further serious problems with the two studies relied upon by the Commission in proposing additions and revisions to the Guides. This extensive analysis was carried out under the direction of the law firm of Kelley Drye & Warren and submitted by William C. MacLeod, a Partner at that firm. It builds on comments Kelley Drye filed in response to the Commission’s original request for additional information. Those earlier comments found that consumers understand that testimonials are frequently the “best case” scenario and are limited to the experiences of that particular user, and that consumers understand simple disclosures and also that endorsers are paid by advertisers. Unfortunately, the Commission appeared to dismiss this research in its proposed revisions to the guides, prompting Kelley Drye on behalf of ANA and a group of other advertisers to again examine this issue in greater detail. These new comments strongly confirmed the earlier findings and amplified them. This analysis consisted of a qualitative study of 500 consumers regarding their perceptions of weight loss and money-making program testimonial advertisements, which demonstrated that despite the FTC’s findings consumers largely understand that they may not achieve the endorser’s results. This research also found that consumers are skeptical about endorsement and testimonial claims, so that adding the type of disclosure requirements that the FTC is proposing would have little impact.
ANA believes that in light of all of this significant data and analysis it would be completely premature for the FTC to alter the existing Guides that have worked effectively and appropriately for decades.
the FTC to alter the existing Guides that have worked effectively eve isk
Posted by: shoujusheng | June 19, 2009 at 02:38 AM