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

111–120 of 184 posts

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

#111

Post by dathinab »

ajhurliman wrote: post #77
xqcgrek2 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they would earn more money from regular ad revenue, presumably. You're painting a rather bleak picture -- that the majority of creators/influencers' content is advertising. If that's the case, I'm not sure why Youtube/Instagram should also tolerate that -- it's basically spam on their platform they haven't curated through their ad network.

Brand deals are the majority of their income, but not the majority of their content. This just means the platforms aren't paying very much, since the platforms are advertising on _all_ their content and yet creators are managing to earn ~80% of their income through brand deals on a tiny fraction of their content. 58% of creators post 16 or less sponsored posts a year, and those with more followers post even less[0],…

> _all_ their content

Except if they believe you are not advertisement friendly content.

Like any discussion or educational material about any touchy topic gets not ads (and there are a lot of such thinks).

YT accidentally mistaking a think you sayd as a black listed swear word (even if you didn't say it and are not even speaking in the language its from and it just sound similar) => No Ad Money.

Politics => No Ad Money.

Covering Covid related thinks => No Ad Money.

Covering local news including violence => No Ad Money.

etc...

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

#112

Post by nicbou »

mrweasel wrote: post #97
pessimizer wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ads on TV as well as in the printed press and large online platforms are labeled either by law or more or less formal agreements between these publishers. Ads on TV are literally placed in news (local and national) broadcasts with no indication that they were paid for. Every morning show has a segment where they shill products, periodic "gift guides," and people being interviewed who are headlining or keynoting loc…

> Ads on TV are literally placed in news That's pretty country specific. I'd almost assume that Germany prohibits that, I know Denmark does. You CANNOT insert ads in any way into a program. Ads must specifically ONLY reside in ad blocks, between programs. Which is why many of Denmark commercial TV stations aren't technically Danish, but they also don't produce news shows.

Watch the video. It's pretty interesting, but it also addresses your comments. I watched it from Germany, and I found that it applies to Germany just as well as the UK (where it was recorded).

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

#113

Post by sofixa »

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.

In France that's the law, you must add a label on photo / video ads that were digitally altered.

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

#114

Post by dathinab »

colinmhayes wrote: post #36
zinekeller wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're in Germany or specifically targeting Germans, nope. But some people are interested in these type of topics, especially when compared to (for example) America's lax policies (but it can't beat America's very lax policies on sponsorships in television and movies).

Even if you're specifically targeting Germans. I don't see how international influencers could be judged against.

I don't think this law has the same (intentional) overreaching characteristics as GDPR, i.e. it only applies to people "doing business" in Germany.

In this end the ruling just clarifies some legal details about when and when not you need to label it in certain cases where the respective law(s) "standalone" was clear enough.

The ruling also seems to be in general in favor of influencers, making it clear that in certain situations they don't have to label content as ads.

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

#115

Post by not2b »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #85
space_fountain wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even moderately successful YouTubers rely on sponsorship and because there's competition for creators between platforms it would take illegal coordination to present a united front and ban it

Right... Like how Google and Apple and Steam and Microsoft and Playstation compete on transaction fees for their stores? If the platforms wanted to come after the money, they could. I suspect they're still in the growing phase. But I imagine in the near future, they'll start demanding all ads go through their platforms.

Only if they aren't worried about antitrust enforcement against their advertising monopolies. Probably safer for them to let it go.

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

#116

Post by mhh__ »

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.

Better the devil you know?

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

#117

Post by silisili »

cma wrote: post #106
silisili wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law is gutless. Spend like 30s on any Youtube channel. I really wish they'd actually enforce this one.

"This phone really shows fingerprints, so I would knock it down a notch, except this easily fixed with this dope x brand skin, so it's ok!"

Just recently I was trolling through youtube looking for tool reviews and insights. One in particular that stood out to me, the first video, the presenter(rather well known) blasted a brand of tool, saying he didn't understand why they even existed, seemed underpowered, overpriced, etc. A week later he had a video showcasing their tools, and at least tagged it 'sponsoredContent', as if anyone reads those. He featured them on about 3 more videos saying how surprising they are and good value. Really gross to watch. Youtube is about as helpful as Amazon reviews anymore.

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

#118

Post by trey-jones »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #80
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...

It seems to be WILDLY unenforced then, no? In the USA, it doesn't seem to be done. I was actually shocked -- and then realized how naive I was -- when i was talking to someone at a party who had a tiktok where she reviewed garden products, to find out that it wasn't just "free product", she was literally getting paid by the companies to give them good reviews, and from the tiktok you wouldn't know she wasn't just rev…

Perhaps I'm unimaginitive, but it seems impossible to enforce anyway: how can you tell the difference between my verbose and well-thought-out positive review of a product I really liked, compared to someone paid to come up with their own positive review?

Cynically, for years I've been treating pretty much every single product review I encounter as though it's bought by the manufacturer. Ya know, since the internet is a giant steaming pile of algorithmically generated bullshit (for the most part).

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

#119

Post by space_fountain »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #85
space_fountain wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even moderately successful YouTubers rely on sponsorship and because there's competition for creators between platforms it would take illegal coordination to present a united front and ban it

Right... Like how Google and Apple and Steam and Microsoft and Playstation compete on transaction fees for their stores? If the platforms wanted to come after the money, they could. I suspect they're still in the growing phase. But I imagine in the near future, they'll start demanding all ads go through their platforms.

Ignoring the ongoing court cases around that it's very different when you have huge barriers to entry and thus only a few companies especially when they just have to follow the existing norms vs imposing a new norm. Like starting up a video sharing site is hard, but we've seen a number of examples over the past 5 years who have gained traction where we've seen no examples of new successful app stores in that time

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

#120

Post by karaterobot »

trey-jones wrote: post #118
jrochkind1 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to be WILDLY unenforced then, no? In the USA, it doesn't seem to be done. I was actually shocked -- and then realized how naive I was -- when i was talking to someone at a party who had a tiktok where she reviewed garden products, to find out that it wasn't just "free product", she was literally getting paid by the companies to give them good reviews, and from the tiktok you wouldn't know she wasn't just rev…

Perhaps I'm unimaginitive, but it seems impossible to enforce anyway: how can you tell the difference between my verbose and well-thought-out positive review of a product I really liked, compared to someone paid to come up with their own positive review? Cynically, for years I've been treating pretty much every single product review I encounter as though it's bought by the manufacturer. Ya know, since the internet is…

> how can you tell the difference between my verbose and well-thought-out positive review of a product I really liked, compared to someone paid to come up with their own positive review?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but isn't this the problem of enforcement period? How can you tell I didn't just buy this garage full of Playstations and throw away the receipt? How can you tell he was pushed over that cliff, and he didn't just trip? In the case of paid advertisements, at least you've got a paper trail connecting the advertiser and the, ugh, influencer.

Post reply on HN