Social Media Influencers Are Being Watched by FTC
As of late, social media influencers are on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s radar because of the rise of social media being used as a marketing…
October 03, 2017 at 08:28 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
As of late, social media influencers are on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)'s radar because of the rise of social media being used as a marketing tool. Due to the high financial stakes involved and the influencers' ability to reach millions of consumers, the FTC is keeping a very close eye on influencer posts.
In fact, the FTC sent warning letters to over 90 social influencers and brands in April 2017 to remind them that, if there is a material connection between a brand and an influencer, then that connection must be disclosed or clear to consumers in materials where the influencer endorses the brand. This has been an increasing issue that needs to be addressed, given that the dollar amount of endorsement contracts between brands and social media influencers including celebrities, athletes and reality stars, who are bringing in as much as seven figures. And, violating FTC advertising requirements could cost influencers and brands a lot of money—not to mention their reputational.
In September 2017, the FTC sent follow-up letters to 21 of those influencers and cited specific social media posts by the influencers that concerned the FTC staff because they did not appear to include required “material connections” disclosures. The FTC requires that commercial relationships between influencers and brands be clearly disclosed or otherwise known to consumers.
Char Pagar, of VLP Law Group, sat down with Inside Counsel to discuss the issue of celebrity social media influencers.
“My experience is that brands – both startups and established brands — are increasingly turning to social influencers to get the word out about their products and services,” she explained. “As more brands spend more money in the space, I suspect the FTC wants to spend its attention in the space as well — so marketplace participants are aware that the traditional FTC rules that apply to material connections disclosures apply to endorsements made via this new technology as well.”
Marketers often carefully gather and utilize their resources – sometimes over the course of years – to build their brand and ensure that the brand means something of value to their customers. For their part, social influencers often take the same careful approach when building their own personal brands.
“The negative reaction from an FTC spotlight on a brand or influencer resulting an agency enforcement action can reduce or eliminate value that took a long time to build,” she said. “Prudent marketers realize this, and structure their marketing plans and relationships in ways that comply with the FTC's guidance to protect their own hard-earned brand value.”
The FTC recently announced its first enforcement action against social media influencers. In that case, they accused two social media influencers in the online gaming community of failing to disclose their ownership in an online gambling service that they endorsed. As more money and attention is spent in the social media space and with social media influencers, it only makes sense that the FTC will direct some of its enforcement resources and attention to that space, per Pagar.
So, what are some best practices for social media influencers to protect themselves?
According to Pagar, social media influencers should endeavor carefully to comply with the material connections disclosure standards outlined by the FTC. Brands should also consider having a written social media policy in place for third party advocates like social influencers, attaching that policy to written agreements with social influencers and social influencer agencies, training associates on compliance with that policy, auditing social media influencers for compliance with that policy on a regular basis. And, they should take appropriate actions against influencers who do not act in accordance with the policy.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFatal Shooting of CEO Sets Off Scramble to Reassess Executive Security
5 minute readBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readShareholder Activists Poised to Pounce in 2025. Is Your Board Ready?
Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250