S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

Subscribe
Get the next ClickZ Today newsletter delivered to your inbox!

October 16, 2009

Anti-Dobbs Ad Money Raised Online Won't Go to CNN

Last month, I reported on a campaign targeting Capitol Hill staffers, CNN employees, and staff members of other media companies on Facebook. An immigration advocacy group called America's Voices aimed to vilify CNN host Lou Dobbs. People listed on Facebook as employees of media firms including CNN, The New York Times, Politico, and AOL were served ads featuring images of the CNN anchor accompanied by text like, "Hey, Anderson Cooper, What's it like to work with a racist at CNN? Time to drop Dobbs."

Sounds like a publicity stunt? Sure. Part of the goal was to spawn earned media coverage of the campaign. The organization, however, also aimed to raise money for anti-Dobbs TV spots. They wanted - in partnership with progressive media watchdog Media Matters for America -- to run an ad implying that Dobbs is an anti-immigrant hatemonger during the network's upcoming "Latino in America" special.

"All of the advertising so far has been digital and whatever we raise will go to traditional media," Jackie Mahendra, director of online communications for America's Voices, told me last month.

Yesterday, the group announced it had raised "nearly $16,000" towards that goal, and would run the ads during the series. Now, America's Voices - and HuffingtonPost - report that CNN has refused to run the ad. According to HuffPo, CNN stated, "Contrary to reports, CNN has not accepted these spots and they will not air on the network."

An America's Voice press release from yesterday says they play to run the ad "on a competing network in the next week."

Posted by Kate Kaye at 2:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

FTC Responds to IAB Letter on Blogger Guidelines

Yesterday the Interactive Advertising Bureau took a jab at the Federal Trade Commission's revised guidelines on online endorsements. Put simply, the guidelines call for online reviewers to disclose payment or affiliation with marketing campaigns or advertisers.

The way the IAB sees it, the FTC is unfairly favoring traditional media over digital media. In a letter sent to the FTC chairman, IAB prez Randy Rothenberg contended the FTC's call for disclosure of "material connections" between advertisers and endorsers in social media platforms will "shackle online media while exempting our offline cousins and competitors from equivalent constraint."

"I don't think that there is any favoritism based on the type of media," Rich Cleland, assistant director of the FTC's division of advertising practices told ClickZ News this morning. "The core here is do consumers understand the relationship that exists between the speaker and the seller." "Offline, if those lines are blurred, then there's a problem," he continued. "These are not new issues."

As iterated throughout his lengthy letter, Rothenberg and others fear that the FTC will now be on the hunt for bloggers reviewing and endorsing products, which he argues will squelch social media.

"In terms of bloggers and other endorsers...I don't think that there is any reason for concern," said Cleland, stressing, "We have explained on a number of occasions that we do not have civil penalty authority." In other words, he told me, the FTC is not planning an enforcement sweep against bloggers. Also, he confirmed, the FTC has no authority to fine anybody (despite countless erroneous reports to the contrary).

The IAB also suggested that the FTC guidelines are "perverse" and "constitutionally dubious," stating they imply "individuals writing in social media bear greater liability than do those writing for offline, one-way media."

"It's not clear what exactly the IAB thinks the constitutional issue is here," Cleland said. "The guidelines are in fact just guidelines and to the extent that they focus on [misleading] commercial activity and practices that are essentially promoting products in exchange for payments or free merchandise...we don't think that there's a constitutional issue."

As for the public hearing the IAB wants the FTC to hold to hash out the concerns, Cleland said, "We haven't made any determination on that.... We've already taken comments on this issue." Still, he added, "We don't want to preclude that we might do something in addition to [the comment period]."

Posted by Kate Kaye at 12:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

See More Posts From:

Today | This Week | This Month