You know those annoying FreeCreditReport.comcommercials with the guitar-playing guy singing a catchy song about how you can easily check your credit report online? Well, it turns out that FreeCreditReport.com isn’t exactly free (who’da thunk it, with the word “free” in the name and all?). When you sign up to receive your credit report, you have to provide your credit card information, and if you don’t call and cancel within 7 days (and they don’t make it easy for you — I’ve done it), your card is charged $15 per month.
Apparently, many people have been reeled in by the catchy jingle and charged for their supposedly “free” credit report. Now, the FTC is fighting back with their own online videos — complete with a guitar-wielding dude and catchy jingles — to promote AnnualCreditReport.com, which is actually 100% free. The videos are spot-on parodies, and it’s very clever of the FTC to give them a dose of their own medicine.
TechCrunch is reporting that Christine Varney, Obama’s antitrust boss at the Department of Justice, is looking to make a big case - potentially against Google.
I think the article’s author, Erick Schonfeld, hits the nail on the head with his analysis arguing against Department of Justice action: “The problem with antitrust lawsuits, particularly in fast-moving industries such as technology, is they take so long to go through the courts that by the time a ruling is handed down the market has moved on (see Microsoft). The market will always do a better job undermining monopolies than the Justice department will.”
Here’s a scary thought for PR people: the Federal Trade Commission is expected to adopt a new regulation that would hold companies liable for untrue statements written by bloggers who receive samples of their products. The Financial Times explains:
If a blogger received a free sample of skin lotion and then incorrectly claimed the product cured eczema, the FTC could sue the company for making false or unsubstantiated statements. The blogger could be sued for making false representations.
I’m not really sure how this rule is sensical or fair, since I don’t believe companies can be sued if a journalist writes something incorrect about their product. I know the line blurs in certain situations, but for the most part, I think bloggers should be treated like journalists. However, it appears the FTC sees bloggers as “advertisers” for products and direct mouthpieces of the companies that send them samples.
“The guides needed to be updated to address not only the changes in technology, but also the consequences of new marketing practices,” said Richard Cleland, assistant director for the FTC’s division of advertising practices. “Word-of-mouth marketing is not exempt from the laws of truthful advertising.”
As a publicist who has sent samples to many bloggers, I can assure you that couldn’t be further from the truth. It looks like the FTC needs a lesson in Blogs 101.
