Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 184 posts

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#51

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

ajhurliman wrote: post #17
xqcgrek2 wrote: post #10

Why does YouTube or Instagram tolerate sponsored content? They don't get a cut from a sponsored video or product placement, and their dominance in the advertising space means this is also cutting into their ad revenue.

Sponsored content is the main income for creators, so if a platform banned it there would be a mass exodus and they'd lose their dominance.

And make money how? Creators are dependent on platforms to get and monetize attention. People aren't going to stop using Instagram and YouTube because a few superstars only post content on TikTok.

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#55

Post by numair »

There’s laws, and then there’s enforcement. Let’s see who gets in trouble, and what happens to them.

We live in an era where governments are diluting the value of their legal frameworks through selective enforcement (SEC, anyone?). I don’t get too excited anymore when I see these sorts of “protections” passed.

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#56

Post by that_guy_iain »

xqcgrek2 wrote: post #10

Why does YouTube or Instagram tolerate sponsored content? They don't get a cut from a sponsored video or product placement, and their dominance in the advertising space means this is also cutting into their ad revenue.

Instagram actually force themselves into the value chain. Also, if all your content creators leave then you have no content. If you see the "sponsored" field on Instagram then it's part of Facebook forcing itself into the value chain.

I also suspect it's againist anti-trust to force yourself into that value chain and to prevent others from marketing.

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#57

Post by k1rcher »

eli wrote: post #44

US law already requires influencers to disclose ads. (And the FTC says that US law includes foreigners whose audience is reasonably likely to include Americans) https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/dis...

This is enormously surprising to me. I can't seem to find any links to official legal code or documents on that page (seems to be a guide for influencers). What I'm specifically interested in, is what happens when as an influencer you _don't_ disclose an ad? Are there fines? Is it a series of "stern warnings", akin to the Comcast emails you'd get for pirating big Hollywood studio movies from public trackers on a home connection? An n-strikes and you're out system?

Influencers (in joint union with targeted advertisements-- and even more tangentially cross-site/browser/device fingerprinting) has made me extremely embittered and disillusioned to social media in general, going so far as to delete old accounts made while I was younger and even abandoning certain platforms. (early-mid-20's here btw)

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#58

Post by katbyte »

Ansil849 wrote: post #53

I just assume that any time any product is promoted, that the person is a potential shill. It may be a cynical view, but I find it a cleaner metric than trusting the poster to disclose whether they are getting compensated for mentioning a product.

Indeed, and it becomes very apparent when it’s a product you know is rubbish.

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#59

Post by elif »

eli wrote: post #44

US law already requires influencers to disclose ads. (And the FTC says that US law includes foreigners whose audience is reasonably likely to include Americans) https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/dis...

Yep exactly like US law forbids email, SMS, and phone spam...

Re: Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules

#60

Post by kinkrtyavimoodh »

jjcm wrote: post #12

Good. I'd love if we could go further and make requirements to disclaim if a photo's structure has been digitally altered. Combining these two would be very effective in increasing clarity of content online.

No thanks, we don't want another Prop 65 nuisance, this time for photos.
Post reply on HN