A good post on Interview with the FTC’s Richard Cleland.If you very much interested in knowing how to generate traffic by using google adwords then the free video at http://debtfreeliving.freeppcleads.com may help you.

Thanks,
John.

As it stands where does disclosure fit in my review of a great live event that I am invited to. My readers had better know that I pay cover sometimes and sometimes don’t. The guides say disclosure is only needed if the reader can’t make that distinction. Well let me say if the reader doesn’t know that we sometimes get free swag then they need to go back to 2nd grade.

However I now have to wonder if I get a business license for my blogging wherever. Then set my salary at $1/mo I am now being paid and no longer have to state the free swag. Sounds about right to me so what is the FTC really trying to do kill social media in order to save the newspapers???????

I can tell you from the music industry’s attempt to kill P2P. It does not work the record industry is still dying a little more every day. Of course on the plus side the music industry is doing better every year in over all revenue.

I think an interesting point that occurred to me in all of this is a potent question. Will the FTC apply these same rules to the U.S. Government itself. Let’s see, we can’t make claims based on unsubstantiated evidence, we can’t make claims unless they are typical results. OK, so Obama claims we have a Swine Flu epidemic, yet more people die every year from the seasonal flu. He says we should be vaccinated but there is quite a lot of evidence suggesting flu shots don’t work and worse they can deliver unexpected health complications or even death.

To be fair, we had Bush saying Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Both Bush and Obama said that the TARP funds would bailout our economy.

So in light of these endorsement/claim statutes we are all supposed to live by, where is the accountability of the government to set the example of compliance?

I didn’t even mention Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare etc. All promised to cure problems and failed miserably, all were quoted at a much lower price than they actually ended up costing. Get my point?

They might earn some revenue for the short term but not for the long term.

Consumers would simply not rely on them after following their recommendations.

Beside consumers are not that stupid. They do not check one single review and decide to make a purchase. Often time they would check several to get a more objective picture.

The readers are free to buy the product through their links or not. They can choose to buy them somewhere else, if they could get them cheaper.

FTC should rather direct their concern to advertisement on TV or publication by doctors or experts who endorse products directly, making unfounded claims. They are the ones who deceive people using their authority and expertise.

A review is simply the personal opinion of someone regarding something. We can choose either to believe it or not. We can also choose whether to buy it or not through their link. No one forces us.

FTC does not need to babysit us.