Having worked in the weight loss industry I understand what it’s like to be regulated in everything you do, with every page you create and even every banner you publish. But now the entire marketing world gets to share in that fun thanks to an update to the FTC’s Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials.

The last time the FTC revised this document (Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials) the web was a distant idea and many of the people now tasked with addressing the change were not even walking. While the overhaul may have been a long time coming the impact is not mitigated by the time that has lapsed. And now thanks to decades of free reign, marketers have moved so far away from thinking about disclosure that moving to adopt it will be a painful, complicated effort.

“the revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that ‘material connections’ (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other ‘word-of-mouth’ marketers.”

So what does this mean for marketing and the web? It’s not clear what this change will mean for every instance of blog or word of mouth marketing but what is clear is that marketers and publishers must now state their affiliations when a product is exchange or payment is made on any social media from a simple review up to a full commentary piece. The nature of the relationship should also be disclosed clearly.

Just how to disclose an affiliation is not spelled out but again, it seems reasonable to assume something visible should be included on the endorsing page. In the weight loss industry the term “results not typical” has been used (although the revised rules now state that it is not strong enough). On blogs something like “The product in this review was provided by ABC, Inc. for review and was kept by the author.” makes sense and fully explains the relationship and that the product was kept. Of course not all mediums have the luxury of such long formats and other alternative means of disclosure must be found. In these cases I would imagine most companies will model after the weight loss industry adopting short phrases – short or long the changes the FTC made to endorsements in the weight loss industry illustrate the need for clear disclosures.

A few suggestions that come to mind for Twitter, Blogs and other limited formats (be sure to run these by your lawyer):

• #IVR (I Received a Product) – Twitter
• #PD (Paid Endorsement) – Twitter
• #PAR (Paid Advertising Relationship) – Twitter
• Sample Provided for Review.
• Payment provided for comment.
• Company is a paid advertiser.

And these changes aren’t limited to publishing sites. Advertisers may also need to disclose if a comment comes from a paid study or endorsement.

Brands should also be sure to educate the publishers and endorsers they work with to insure compliance. Relying solely on these individuals to define the relationship is directly discussed.

“Example 7 states more clearly that although the blogger has primary responsibility for disclosing that he received the video game system for free, the manufacturer has an obligation to advise the blogger at the time it provides the gaming system that he should make the disclosure in any positive reviews of the system”

There’s no telling just how well enforced this will be or how deep it goes. Forum posts, blog comments, tweets all fall into the bucket of word of mouth marketing, which is now regulated.

But there are some limits in what is considered endorsement and what is not.

“The Commission does not believe that all uses of new consumer-generated media to discuss product attributes or consumer experiences should be deemed “endorsements” within the meaning of the Guides… In other words, in disseminating positive statements about a product or service, is the speaker: (1) acting solely independently, in which case there is no endorsement, or (2) acting on behalf of the advertiser or its agent, such that the speaker’s statement is an “endorsement” that is part of an overall marketing campaign? The facts and circumstances that will determine the answer to this question are extremely varied and cannot be fully enumerated here, but would include: whether the speaker is compensated by the advertiser or its agent; whether the product or service in question was provided for free by the advertiser; the terms of any agreement; the length of the relationship; the previous receipt of products or services from the same or similar advertisers, or the likelihood of future receipt of such products or services; and the value of the items or services received. An advertiser’s lack of control over the specific statement made via these new forms of consumer-generated media would not automatically disqualify that statement from being deemed an “endorsement” within the meaning of the Guides. Again, the issue is whether the consumer-generated statement can be considered ‘sponsored’”

I suspect it will take a long time to see these changes permutated across all levels of the social and press world online and with so many old articles it’s almost certain much of the content we consume will remain unmarked for a long time to come. Still, disclosure can be seen as a good thing in educating the consumer openly – it’s transparent and that’s an important word these days.

Most interesting to me will be seeing the affiliations some companies have made over the years. It’s certain that relationships will change quickly. Publishers taking payments for positive remarks will have to find different models or face public scolding. Quotes on brand sites will come with little stars and the whole world and the marketing world as we know it has changed forever. Or at least until the next revisions.

Read the full details and examples at http://ftc.gov/opa/2009/10/endortest.shtm

And please check with your attorney to fully understand these rules and how they impact your business. I am merely a marketer provided my own commentary, without endorsement from the FTC or anyone on this post [hopefully that's a big enough disclosure].