Too Hot to Handle?: Native Advertising and the Firestone Dilemma

Lee Silberberg
{"title":"Too Hot to Handle?: Native Advertising and the Firestone Dilemma","authors":"Lee Silberberg","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3897172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Native advertisements are advertisements that mimic the format and content of non-paid for content that surrounds them. Instead of interrupting the content being consumed, native advertisements become part of that content—they are largely indistinguishable from other tweets, posts, videos, and pictures appearing on a given platform. Because of this unique format, native advertisements are often content that consumers want to engage with. This reformulation of advertising has radically remade the process of persuading consumers to act, believe, and consume. And, over the past two decades, native advertising has become both a ubiquitous part of everyday content consumption and an ever-growing, billion-dollar industry. Unfortunately for consumers, native advertising is also very deceptive. While most people believe they differentiate native advertising from non-advertising content, that is unfortunately not the case. To make matters worse, most native advertising does not include a disclosure that it is advertising—and even when a disclosure is present, most consumers still fail to recognize the content as advertising. To paraphrase contemporary native advertising scholars, we live in a world where consumers cannot tell an advertisement and a non-advertisement apart. To control native advertising deception, the Federal Trade Commission has promulgated numerous subregulatory guidance documents, initiated enforcement actions, and engaged with regulated parties through educational events. The FTC’s goal has been to ensure that native advertising is transparent to consumers and that consumer deception from native advertising falls below 15% consumer deception—the threshold established in Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Federal Trade Commission. The outcome of these concerted efforts is an array of unclear, even contradictory guidelines that have worked against achieving the FTC’s goals. This Note proposes that the FTC adopt an easily met strict liability framework for native advertising disclosure. That framework would require that each native advertisement have a disclosure with three elements: (1) the disclosure must include the language “Paid Advertisement” or “Paid Ad”; (2) the disclosure must include the name (and also logo, if available) of the party paying for the advertisement; (3) the first and second elements must be in close proximity to each other and to the advertisement itself. This Note argues the FTC should adopt this framework because it is empirically likely to reduce native advertising deception below the Firestone threshold. Furthermore, this framework will also produce simple, clear guidelines that balance the FTC’s consumer protection interests with the commercial interests of regulated parties.","PeriodicalId":422997,"journal":{"name":"2021 TPRC49: Conference Proceedings","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 TPRC49: Conference Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3897172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Native advertisements are advertisements that mimic the format and content of non-paid for content that surrounds them. Instead of interrupting the content being consumed, native advertisements become part of that content—they are largely indistinguishable from other tweets, posts, videos, and pictures appearing on a given platform. Because of this unique format, native advertisements are often content that consumers want to engage with. This reformulation of advertising has radically remade the process of persuading consumers to act, believe, and consume. And, over the past two decades, native advertising has become both a ubiquitous part of everyday content consumption and an ever-growing, billion-dollar industry. Unfortunately for consumers, native advertising is also very deceptive. While most people believe they differentiate native advertising from non-advertising content, that is unfortunately not the case. To make matters worse, most native advertising does not include a disclosure that it is advertising—and even when a disclosure is present, most consumers still fail to recognize the content as advertising. To paraphrase contemporary native advertising scholars, we live in a world where consumers cannot tell an advertisement and a non-advertisement apart. To control native advertising deception, the Federal Trade Commission has promulgated numerous subregulatory guidance documents, initiated enforcement actions, and engaged with regulated parties through educational events. The FTC’s goal has been to ensure that native advertising is transparent to consumers and that consumer deception from native advertising falls below 15% consumer deception—the threshold established in Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Federal Trade Commission. The outcome of these concerted efforts is an array of unclear, even contradictory guidelines that have worked against achieving the FTC’s goals. This Note proposes that the FTC adopt an easily met strict liability framework for native advertising disclosure. That framework would require that each native advertisement have a disclosure with three elements: (1) the disclosure must include the language “Paid Advertisement” or “Paid Ad”; (2) the disclosure must include the name (and also logo, if available) of the party paying for the advertisement; (3) the first and second elements must be in close proximity to each other and to the advertisement itself. This Note argues the FTC should adopt this framework because it is empirically likely to reduce native advertising deception below the Firestone threshold. Furthermore, this framework will also produce simple, clear guidelines that balance the FTC’s consumer protection interests with the commercial interests of regulated parties.
太热了?原生广告和费尔斯通困境
原生广告是模仿其周围非付费内容的格式和内容的广告。原生广告不是打断正在消费的内容,而是成为内容的一部分——它们在很大程度上与出现在给定平台上的其他tweet、帖子、视频和图片无法区分。由于这种独特的形式,本地广告通常是消费者想要参与的内容。这种广告的重塑从根本上重塑了说服消费者行动、相信和消费的过程。而且,在过去的二十年里,原生广告已经成为日常内容消费中无处不在的一部分,也是一个不断增长、价值数十亿美元的产业。不幸的是,对于消费者来说,原生广告也非常具有欺骗性。虽然大多数人认为他们可以区分原生广告和非广告内容,但不幸的是事实并非如此。更糟糕的是,大多数原生广告不包括广告的披露——即使有披露,大多数消费者仍然不能识别出内容是广告。套用当代本土广告学者的说法,我们生活在一个消费者无法区分广告和非广告的世界。为了控制本地广告欺骗,联邦贸易委员会颁布了许多次级监管指导文件,启动了执法行动,并通过教育活动与受监管方接触。联邦贸易委员会的目标是确保本地广告对消费者是透明的,并确保本地广告对消费者的欺骗低于15%的消费者欺骗——这是在费尔斯通轮胎橡胶公司诉联邦贸易委员会案中确立的门槛。这些共同努力的结果是一系列不明确、甚至相互矛盾的指导方针,不利于实现联邦贸易委员会的目标。本说明建议联邦贸易委员会采用一种易于满足的严格责任框架,用于本地广告披露。该框架将要求每个本地广告都有包含三个要素的披露:(1)披露必须包括语言“付费广告”或“付费广告”;(2)披露内容必须包括广告费支付方的名称(如果有的话,还包括标识);(3)第一要素和第二要素必须彼此接近,并接近广告本身。本文认为,联邦贸易委员会应该采用这一框架,因为从经验上看,它有可能将原生广告欺骗减少到Firestone阈值以下。此外,该框架还将产生简单、明确的指导方针,以平衡联邦贸易委员会的消费者保护利益与被监管方的商业利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信