Protocol | Policy

If you're paying influencers, the FTC has a warning for you

The agency said it reminded more than 700 companies including Apple, Amazon and Tesla that they can face fines for certain deceptions about endorsements.

Envelope with red warning exclamation point coming out

The FTC under Chair Lina Khan has been coming down on corporate practices.

Photo: CalypsoArt/Getty Images

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday said it put hundreds of the world's most prominent companies "on notice" that being dishonest about endorsements comes with consequences.

The use of so-called influencer marketing, other sponsored content and even the use of positive customer reviews on services such as Instagram drove the warnings, the commission cautioned.

"The rise of social media has blurred the line between authentic content and advertising, leading to an explosion in deceptive endorsements across the marketplace," the FTC said in a statement about the letters.

A wide array of recipients received one of the warnings, including drugmakers like Pfizer, apparel companies such as Nike, video game publishers like Activision Blizzard, carmakers including Tesla, restaurant franchises such as Burger King as well as beer and liquor companies, home décor brands, broadband providers, hotels and more.

Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yelp all received the letters, according to the FTC, which said the list included more than 700 "large companies, top advertisers, leading retailers, top consumer product companies, and major advertising agencies."

The notices are not indications of wrongdoing, the agency stressed. Should a company be found in violation of the law, however, it could result in fines of nearly $44,000 per instance.

The commission, which has been taking an increasingly tough line on corporate practices and flexing little-used procedural powers under Chair Lina Khan, released a sample letter, which alerted firms to a long list of practices that the FTC has previously found illegal in other cases.

These practices include "falsely claiming an endorsement by a third party" as well as "misrepresenting that an endorser is an actual user" and "failing to disclose an unexpected material connection with an endorser."

While both the existence and use of social media "influencers" are a relatively recent phenomenon, the FTC said it found previously that such actions violate the prohibition on "unfair or deceptive acts or practices." A company that knows about these determinations and flouts them can face fines under the Federal Trade Commission Act — hence the notices warning these firms.

The true size of the influencer industry is difficult to measure, but data firm Statista estimates the global market was worth nearly $10 billion last year.

Users of Instagram or YouTube regularly come across prominent accounts and channels hawking clothes, cosmetics, gadgets, toys, investment products and more. Some of the accounts belong to celebrities; others have a strong online-only following in a particular niche. And while some of the posts make clear that they were sponsored or that the reviewers got the products for free before a recommendation, others are less transparent.

The FTC has weighed in on the issue before, but has largely focused its attention on influencers themselves rather than the companies that might partner with them. In 2019, for instance, the commission released "Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers," an eight-page pamphlet heavy on icons and illustrations for those who are trying to monetize their feeds.

The guide urges influencers to disclose "any financial, employment, personal, or family relationship with a brand," to view even tags and likes as endorsements, and to avoid making "claims about a product that would require proof the advertiser doesn't have — such as scientific proof that a product can treat a health condition."

Even before that, in 2017, the FTC released answers to questions it was receiving about endorsements pertaining to paid video game streaming, travel blogging, book reviews and even the operator of "a YouTube channel that focuses on hunting, camping, and the outdoors" who occasionally discussed specific knives.

Wednesday's letters, though, went to prominent international brands that might be hiring influencers, placing sponsored content in publications or republishing consumer reviews.

Earlier in October, the commission issued similar warning letters to for-profit colleges. The FTC said then it was "resurrecting" its authority to issue the notices and seek fines.

Khan, a tech skeptic who took over the commission earlier this year, spent much of her first few months leading the commission's Democratic majority to enact changes to streamline investigations, ready rules to govern certain industries and broaden the types of conduct that the FTC can look into.

Republicans have dismissed her actions as lacking in transparency and procedural fairness, and suggested the changes will confuse honest businesses.

Democratic Commissioner Rohit Chopra left the commission earlier this month, however, to take over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, meaning the FTC is now split 2-2 along partisan lines and Khan, for the time being, likely won't be able to advance major changes.

President Joe Biden has nominated privacy hawk Alvaro Bedoya to take over the final slot.

Protocol | Policy

Transparency can help fix social media — if anyone can define it

The latest buzzword in tech policy promises to give users more insight into and power over social media services, but mainly signals just how much more we need to figure out.

Social media companies, lawmakers and tech skeptics all say they want more visibility into how the sites work.

Image: dole777/Unsplash; Protocol

It's the one and only thing nearly everyone in tech and tech policy can agree on. Facebook and Twitter want it, as does the Facebook Oversight Board. Whistleblower Frances Haugen suggested it to Congress, and several lawmakers who heard her testimony agreed. Even the FTC is on board.

The vogue in tech policy is "transparency," the latest buzzword for addressing concerns about social media's reach, breadth and social effects. Companies, academics, regulators and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle all embrace transparency as a cure-all, or at least a necessary first step. But that agreement obscures a deeper problem: The various camps all have widely differing notions both of what the vague term actually means, and also what the public should do with any insights increased transparency might lead to.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

The way we work has fundamentally changed. COVID-19 upended business dealings and office work processes, putting into hyperdrive a move towards digital collaboration platforms that allow teams to streamline processes and communicate from anywhere. According to the International Data Corporation, the revenue for worldwide collaboration applications increased 32.9 percent from 2019 to 2020, reaching $22.6 billion; it's expected to become a $50.7 billion industry by 2025.

"While consumers and early adopter businesses had widely embraced collaborative applications prior to the pandemic, the market saw five years' worth of new users in the first six months of 2020," said Wayne Kurtzman, research director of social and collaboration at IDC. "This has cemented collaboration, at least to some extent, for every business, large and small."

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Silver

Kate Silver is an award-winning reporter and editor with 15-plus years of journalism experience. Based in Chicago, she specializes in feature and business reporting. Kate's reporting has appeared in the Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, The Atlantic's CityLab, Atlas Obscura, The Telegraph and many other outlets.

Protocol | Workplace

HPE joins IBM in threatening unvaccinated workers with unpaid leave

Biden's rules for federal contractors leave little wiggle room when it comes to vaccine mandates.

As a federal contractor, HPE faces a strict vaccine mandate.

Photo: Allison Levitsky/Protocol

Hewlett Packard Enterprise just made its employee vaccine mandate tougher to dodge.

The IT company told its workforce on Wednesday afternoon that the COVID-19 vaccination is now a "condition of employment" at HPE, even for remote workers.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Hirsh Chitkara
Hirsh Chitkara (@ChitkaraHirsh) is a researcher at Protocol, based out of New York City. Before joining Protocol, he worked for Business Insider Intelligence, where he wrote about Big Tech, telecoms, workplace privacy, smart cities, and geopolitics. He also worked on the Strategy & Analytics team at the Cleveland Indians.
Hirsh Chitkara
Hirsh Chitkara (@ChitkaraHirsh) is a researcher at Protocol, based out of New York City. Before joining Protocol, he worked for Business Insider Intelligence, where he wrote about Big Tech, telecoms, workplace privacy, smart cities, and geopolitics. He also worked on the Strategy & Analytics team at the Cleveland Indians.
Latest Stories