Paid influencers must label some posts as ads, German court rules • Hacker News Board

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

#171

Post by SavantIdiot » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 4:40 AM UTC

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…

Yeah, the problem with laws is they need to be enforced. It is even harder when the enforcers disagree with the laws (local police vs. gun laws, vax laws, noise laws), or if there deliberately are not enough enforcers (FTC, SEC, IRS, etc., underfunding).

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

#172

Post by varsketiz » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 5:30 AM UTC

bertday wrote: post #165

varsketiz wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the past big monopolies have been dismantled. See for example AT&T. Google, Facebook, Amazon, they exist for a relatively short period of time. Don't you think they will also be dismantled in the next 10-30 years?

AT&T just re-merged after the break-up, so it’s a bad example. See the diagram: https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/24/13389592/att-time-warner...

Not sure why it's a bad example. 35 years later it did not "just re-merged", it still is in a few pieces. You need to think about how the present would look like if there was no breaking up. And that present likely would not have google, fb, amazon - only AT&T.

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

#173

Post by moksly » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 5:45 AM UTC

jand wrote: post #162

moksly wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is frankly not true in a lot of European countries. Google, Facebook and every other company cannot advertise things like toys, tobacco or alcohol to children here in Denmark, and they have to clearly tell you which parts are advertising and which aren’t. This is why Facebook has an “suggested” and an “advertising tag, that you can even click on to be told what metrics decided that you should see it. As well as…

I did not read netcan's statement as the thesis that there is no legislation regarding "big corps" in the EU. I read it as a statement about speed and willingness regarding the establishment of new laws or law changes. Whether the statement i interpreted is true i cannot tell, but it would be interesting to have data points on it.

The thing I think is false is your portrayal of EU legislation targeting the little person while leaving the big corps alone. Because reality is quite the opposite.

We are struggling to handle “influencers” because they are a “new” concept in terms of legislation. They fall into a loophole, and dealing with it isn’t “quick” as you suggest, but something that has been slowly grinding into gear over the last decade and will in all likelihood take at least another decade to reach any form of completion.

By contrast the big Corps you say go free have been handled by advertisements legislation that has existed since the dawn of the news paper and which regularly gets updated.

The issue influencers pose the traditional legislation is that they fall into the category of being private individuals voicing their private opinion, which used to get regulated by the media platforms they did it on, but this isn’t true with SoMe because of the other legal loophole these platforms exploit by not being forced into an editorial role for the content they host.

That’s another issue that will also take decades to see decent legislation, but as far as advertisement goes, big Corps are covered while the little guy is not.

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

#174

Post by slightwinder » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 11:13 AM UTC

netcan wrote: post #136

Whether or not these influencers should have to label ads is one thing. But... I'll note how "little guy" regulation works relative to major players. You don't see court, legislature decisions, or such upending the business model of a FB, Google or whatnot. Every word will be negotiated, Google and/or FB will have control over implementation. Often, the regulation will be a net positive, given that it can slow small…

> You don't see court, legislature decisions, or such upending the business model of a FB, Google or whatnot.

Because they usually follow the laws, and their context is always obvious. The problem with the "little guy" influencer is the not so obvious mix between personal actions and business.

Sometimes they show you their dog pooping, the next second they tell you how awesome the shit-bags of $COMPANY are. How should the viewer know whether this was now a paid placement, or just the personal opinion of that person. With Google and Facebook you will never seen such things, and when they tell you how awesome their newest Service is, everyone knows the intention behind it. Para-social effects are not the same with an anonymous company.

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

#175

Post by slightwinder » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 11:24 AM UTC

phatfish wrote: post #161

netcan wrote: post #136

Whether or not these influencers should have to label ads is one thing. But... I'll note how "little guy" regulation works relative to major players. You don't see court, legislature decisions, or such upending the business model of a FB, Google or whatnot. Every word will be negotiated, Google and/or FB will have control over implementation. Often, the regulation will be a net positive, given that it can slow small…

I wouldn't call Instagram influencers the "little guy", many are millionaires (either off the back of social media or old school Kardashian style). They milk their fans through unregulated advertising and get richer. With the attitude that regulation disproportionately effects start-ups or small businesses no regulation would ever end up law, which seems to be the point of this style of comment.

Many is relative. The big "little guys" are making just a per mill of the whole. If you earn as much as a regular office worker, you are already part of the 0.1 top-Influencers. The millionaires are even lower, 0.01% or 0.001%. But the laws apply the same for all of them.

And from my understanding, the poor influencers are the most harmful ones, as they sell even the most awful trash. While the rich ones at least usually have some standards. An exception are the single cases of rich bitches who directly scam their followers with something illegal.

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

#176

Post by corobo » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 12:40 PM UTC

Jerry2 wrote: post #156

corobo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sponsored content isn't locked in to YouTube The second they ban it all the creators that can afford to will jump ship. YouTube knows the creators that can afford to jump ship are also the ones keeping their lights on I have no idea the legal situation but I'd also imagine there'd be a safe harbour challenge in there somewhere too

> The second they ban it all the creators that can afford to will jump ship. Jump to where though? No other video platform is even close to the number of visitors. We really need a credible YT alternative :(

Probably Vimeo plus their remaining socials at first to satisfy outstanding contracts and then I'm not sure unfortunately

Depends on their access to tech knowledge whether they go distributed (peertube) or find another YouTube. Wherever they go would become the new YouTube over time

Oddly enough it seems all content creators quickly attract a tech person that they later rely on and make their first hire when successful. I doubt it'd be the issue, depends what exists at the time

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

#177

Post by netcan » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 2:22 PM UTC

moksly wrote: post #154

netcan wrote: post #136

Whether or not these influencers should have to label ads is one thing. But... I'll note how "little guy" regulation works relative to major players. You don't see court, legislature decisions, or such upending the business model of a FB, Google or whatnot. Every word will be negotiated, Google and/or FB will have control over implementation. Often, the regulation will be a net positive, given that it can slow small…

This is frankly not true in a lot of European countries. Google, Facebook and every other company cannot advertise things like toys, tobacco or alcohol to children here in Denmark, and they have to clearly tell you which parts are advertising and which aren’t. This is why Facebook has an “suggested” and an “advertising tag, that you can even click on to be told what metrics decided that you should see it. As well as…

>> they (Google & FB) didn’t add those things because they wanted to. They added them because their platforms would be banned from Europe if they didn’t.

These regulatory environments, including european countries, merge regulator and platform. One controls the literal regulation, while the other controls implementation. Both are heavily involved in each others decision making.

I'm not saying that advertising plastic surgery or sugar dating to teenagers is good, or should not be regulated. Lots of things are troublesome and need courts and legislators to do stuff. I'm just noting what happens the difference depending on who's pocket book it impacts.

No countries, certainly not EU countries, make quick turnaround decisions that could gut a major revenue stream at FB-scale.

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

#178

Post by netcan » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 2:23 PM UTC

jand wrote: post #162

moksly wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is frankly not true in a lot of European countries. Google, Facebook and every other company cannot advertise things like toys, tobacco or alcohol to children here in Denmark, and they have to clearly tell you which parts are advertising and which aren’t. This is why Facebook has an “suggested” and an “advertising tag, that you can even click on to be told what metrics decided that you should see it. As well as…

I did not read netcan's statement as the thesis that there is no legislation regarding "big corps" in the EU. I read it as a statement about speed and willingness regarding the establishment of new laws or law changes. Whether the statement i interpreted is true i cannot tell, but it would be interesting to have data points on it.

precisely and concise.

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

#179

Post by netcan » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #138

netcan wrote: post #136

Whether or not these influencers should have to label ads is one thing. But... I'll note how "little guy" regulation works relative to major players. You don't see court, legislature decisions, or such upending the business model of a FB, Google or whatnot. Every word will be negotiated, Google and/or FB will have control over implementation. Often, the regulation will be a net positive, given that it can slow small…

You’re right, but it’s worth pointing out that the other party being slowed down by these rules are corporations that are paying influencers to post ads, some of which are quite large. They’re losing a source of sneaky ads hidden as genuine personal endorsement.

Advertising exists, and I have no problem talking about that as a whole.

"Paid influencing" is The advertising buyer side has a megacorp presence, but it's mostly a lot of everything and there's not much power concentration. Platforms generally want to own the connections. Advertiser-influencer, artist-listener, youtuber-viewer, etc. Sponsorships and paid placement is a workaround. It's what TV, cinema, games and such got away with for decades. Maybe there are transparency rules or somesuch somewhere... but nowhere does regulation upend the business model or get overly handsy. When it's an instagram people instead disney, open season.

I'm not against regulating advertising. I just think picking on the smallest, ugliest kid and then running off is scapegoating.

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

#180

Post by daniel-cussen » Fri, Sep 10, 2021, 2:58 PM UTC

qwertox wrote: post #94

ramboldio wrote: post #2

The headline in a domestic newspaper reads "There are some product placements that influencers do not need to label as ads" https://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2021-09/bundesgerichtsh... :D it's all about framing

> it's all about framing My pet peeve are the news snippets in Google Discover or Google News, which then lead to a paywalled article. From my point of view these snippets are all ads for the newspaper or magazine which is promoting them by giving Google access to index them. One could argue that they are not actively promoting their articles, that it is Google who is "stealing" the content and publishing it, but the…

This is not new. Newspapers typically were folded so you could read the headline on the front page before deciding to buy it. And then you'd have a paperboy yelling "Extra! Extra! Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor!"