I’m also like you, Phillip. I will tell you everyone if I think a product sucks as well. I would never review a product, and lie about it’s actual functionality.

Interesting, though, that the FTC is doing this. I’m going to have to read a little more about it.

It may not change how you behave, and that’s perfectly fine. But the point of this is, and it’s an argument made by the business community, that by even giving the companies liability, the purpose is to chill speech and this form of outreach. You may not be personally “run[nig] over the a family of five,” but if they choose to prosecute your favorite manufacturer for your mistakes in posting, that could put a small company out of business.

So, which quotes from the rules would you like first? On the benefits of selective prosecution? On the purpose in refusing to whether or not a review product is considered compensation or how much stuff they have to send you before it becomes so? On the acknowledgement by FTC that companies cannot control what bloggers say, but they will prosecute them as liable for misstatements anyway? On the footnote that they will try to prosecute the companies first? On the mandate that companies monitor and try to control what bloggers say in hopes that such formal policies and monitoring actions may mean prosecutors will go easy on them? Or how about the paragraph on how bloggers aren’t as trustworthy as reporters, so the review copy sent to you is clearly a case of bought sponsorship as opposed to that review copy sent to Outdoor Life?

I saved all of the best quotes and formal examples. Even WOMMA which has an ethics policy that this was modeled after noted that this has a risk of shutting down even legitimate conversation on the web.

Regardless, they’re not even putting resources specifically on this thing. It’s like the cellphone-while-driving B.S. You’re fine as long as you don’t run over a family of five.

Personally, I’m not changing anything I do.

More interestingly, the FTC says they are really going to focus on prosecuting companies with these guidelines. In the guidelines, companies are told that when working with new media, they must have disclosure policies in place and monitor everything you say with an attempt to control that you never forgot to put the disclosure in and that you never make a single mistake in talking about the features of their products. If you forget to disclose in a future post or mistakenly say the bow can do something it cannot, then they are also on the hook for each violation.

Oh, the fine is for each violation. So if you mess up more than once, either you or the company, or both, could be fined for each and every post.

Also, they do not put a value on the product received. You don’t have to receive something as big as bow to trigger the policies. If you have ever regularly received any kind of goodies from any company, you are liable, as is the company. So don’t pick up too many hats at SHOT or say anything remotely positive about any company that is giving out any goodies to writers.