Bloggers and #ad (Naming bloggers means a ban!)

retro:electro

I notice in the UK, with YouTube videos, if they video is sponsored it will always say AD, and if they product has been sent to them it will contain an asterisk in the description box below the video so the reader never feels duped and always is in the know.

onthemitch

fed_u wrote: »

Thanks to kirstiemcd for what I can say has been a very insightful post - I know other posters have said they blog and it's interesting to get diff perspectives but as onthemitch said it does sometimes feel she is the only one defending her corner so to speak! The gifting issue certainly has blurred lines but I don't think we can really lay all the blame at bloggers and have to point the finger more at the ASAI as until they clarify the rules it won't change! there are those that we know will plug anything to keep the crap coming through the door in the hopes of making themselves more appealing to potential brands..

Onthemitch could you give an idea of how much you get that doesn't feature and if these brands or PR co's have then stopped sending you stuff?

Like, do you want to know exactly what products? Like I said, around 80-90% of what I get sent, I don't feature. I don't really do "bloggermail" unless it's something incredibly interesting or innovative. If I really like a product (today I got sent a pair of runners, for example) I'll wear them and post about them then, or in an outfit for blog post pictures.

As to whether or not PRs continue to send things, some do and some don't. But to be honest, I'd rather they paid attention to what I feature and what I don't, and then tailor their drops to that. I mean, I guess people who feature everything get sent everything (because they know they'll feature it!) – but if I was a PR sending things to me, I'd probably try to go, well I know she likes X or Y, and generally doesn't talk about A or B, so I'll send things according to what I know!

That make sense?

idunno78

anna080 wrote: »

My answer was clearly hypothetical also. Also when people message you on snapchat and ask where you get your hair done and you tell them the business, that's still using social media to promote the business. What if you never replied to those messages and didn't send any business their way? Would the arrangement continue?

While I agree with some of what you said in other posts I think it's a bit silly to compare answering somebody asking where you get your hair done in a private message to an ad or promoting the business! it's not!

SB_Part2

anna080 wrote: »

My answer was clearly hypothetical also. Also when people message you on snapchat and ask where you get your hair done and you tell them the business, that's still using social media to promote the business. What if you never replied to those messages and didn't send any business their way? Would the arrangement continue?

Ah Anna come on. People ask me on snapchat where I get my hair done all the time. I tell them. Not because I get it for free but because people are always looking for hairdresser recommendations. Just because I replied to them on snapchat doesn't mean I'm using social media to promote a business.

retro:electro

SB_Part2 wrote: »

Ah Anna come on. People ask me on snapchat where I get my hair done all the time. I tell them. Not because I get it for free but because people are always looking for hairdresser recommendations. Just because I replied to them on snapchat doesn't mean I'm using social media to promote a business.

But she's saying because of those messages she would continue to get her hair done for free. So clearly it is promotion.
All I'm wondering is if that stopped, would the free service still continue.

fed_u

onthemitch wrote: »

Like, do you want to know exactly what products? Like I said, around 80-90% of what I get sent, I don't feature. I don't really do "bloggermail" unless it's something incredibly interesting or innovative. If I really like a product (today I got sent a pair of runners, for example) I'll wear them and post about them then, or in an outfit for blog post pictures.

As to whether or not PRs continue to send things, some do and some don't. But to be honest, I'd rather they paid attention to what I feature and what I don't, and then tailor their drops to that. I mean, I guess people who feature everything get sent everything (because they know they'll feature it!) – but if I was a PR sending things to me, I'd probably try to go, well I know she likes X or Y, and generally doesn't talk about A or B, so I'll send things according to what I know!

That make sense?

Thanks - just saw you had said a lot of what your sent doesn't make the cut! No not looking for specific brands or anything but more just outa curiosity to see if they've stopped sending stuff then!!

SB_Part2

anna080 wrote: »

But she's saying because of those messages she would continue to get her hair done for free. So clearly it is promotion.

No, she said was asking if she didn't promote them would she still get her hair for free and she said yes. So clearly it's not a promotion.

retro:electro

SB_Part2 wrote: »

No, she said was asking if she didn't promote them would she still get her hair for free and she said yes. So clearly it's not a promotion.

Well every time she leaves the salon she says they do her hair for free in exchange for social media promotion so to me the deal seems pretty clear cut.

onthemitch

anna080 wrote: »

Well every time she leaves the salon she says they do her hair for free in exchange for social media promotion so to me the deal seems pretty clear cut.

So hang on a second – what IS the issue? You say you want people to be clear and transparent when they get a freebie, which I am. But you seem, simultaneously, to be annoyed that I get my hair cut for free and post about it in exchange... or are you annoyed that I am so dumb that I somehow think they'd continue to offer me free haircuts if I didn't post about them?

Like: what is this exchange even about?

Kirstiemcd

fed_u wrote: »

Thanks to kirstiemcd for what I can say has been a very insightful post - I know other posters have said they blog and it's interesting to get diff perspectives but as onthemitch said it does sometimes feel she is the only one defending her corner so to speak! The gifting issue certainly has blurred lines but I don't think we can really lay all the blame at bloggers and have to point the finger more at the ASAI as until they clarify the rules it won't change! there are those that we know will plug anything to keep the crap coming through the door in the hopes of making themselves more appealing to potential brands..

Onthemitch could you give an idea of how much you get that doesn't feature and if these brands or PR co's have then stopped sending you stuff?

How would you like things to change though? As far as I can tell, though I could well be wrong, the ASAI is basing its requirements off many years of how the PR and print relationship has worked and that's why there's no requirement to declare when something has been received as a sample. Obviously, and I always did this as a blogger as the media form is so different and reviews-based, it's good form to say, we got this for consideration, because people are not stupid - and why wouldn't you? It's not a secret, and it baffles me when bloggers don't do it.

No money changes hands in this relationship, everyone knows (or should know) that it's all for consideration, and it facilitates the creation of new content which is the lifeblood of a magazine or newspaper. Lifestyle media in particular relies on PR information for a good portion of its content. And PR goes far, far beyond fashion and beauty.

We receive press releases about all manner of things - news about technology, pharma, food, science developments, consumer electrics, interiors, pets, health stories, survey results from brands which might spark a story, supermarket pitches, beauty and fashion releases, travel, yawnsome stuff you instantly delete, tonnes of different things.

Some come just as an email, some come as a drop into the office with a product, some come with a bribe-esque 'press gift' like cupcakes which I find hackneyed and boring in the extreme and don't work on me at all, sometimes you're invited to try a service (facial, new restaurant menu etc but I hardly ever do these because I value my spare time) so you can realistically write about it. Sometimes you get a voucher or discount code so you can pick up something you'd actually like - which is a far better use of PR resources to be honest than sending out 150 of the same ****e things no one likes.

In something like a magazine, none of this is remotely a big deal - it gets a paragraph in a roundup of a pile of other things selected by a particular editor in a feature and a load other things that weren't any way near as good get left out.

Plus, those sort of features, in any decent magazine, only make up a small portion of content in terms of news, food, travel and beauty. Features, fashion shoots, the meat of the mag, generally won't be using PR content at all. That will have been created as a result of the editor in consultation with her eds and contribs coming up with ideas and commissioning them.

retro:electro

onthemitch wrote: »

So hang on a second – what IS the issue? You say you want people to be clear and transparent when they get a freebie, which I am. But you seem, simultaneously, to be annoyed that I get my hair cut for free and post about it in exchange... or are you annoyed that I am so dumb that I somehow think they'd continue to offer me free haircuts if I didn't post about them?

Like: what is this exchange even about?

I'm not annoyed about anything. Just asking you to clarify if you didn't post about them on social media would you still get the service for free, you said you would. I said grand but you usually say that the service is stipulated by you posting on social media, so it seems odd that you are now saying you would continue to get it for free even if you withdrew your part of the deal. That's it.

SB_Part2

anna080 wrote: »

I'm not annoyed about anything. Just asking you to clarify if you didn't post about them on social media would you still get the service for free, you said you would. I said grand but you usually say that the service is stipulated by you posting on social media, so it seems odd that you are now saying you would continue to get it for free even if you withdrew your part of the deal. That's it.

You seem to be constantly trying to catch her out on something.

retro:electro

SB_Part2 wrote: »

You seem to be constantly trying to catch her out on something.

Nope. Just getting clarification is all.

onthemitch

anna080 wrote: »

Nope. Just getting clarification is all.

How exactly can you get clarification on my thoughts? I told you: I think that, if I stopped posting publicly about my haircuts (honestly this conversation is ridiculously), I would continue to get free services because of the amount of people I refer via private messages.

You then said that you didn't think I would.

What more do you want me to clarify for you?

onthemitch

Kirstiemcd wrote: »

How would you like things to change though? As far as I can tell, though I could well be wrong, the ASAI is basing its requirements off many years of how the PR and print relationship has worked and that's why there's no requirement to declare when something has been received as a sample. Obviously, and I always did this as a blogger as the media form is so different and reviews-based, it's good form to say, we got this for consideration, because people are not stupid - and why wouldn't you? It's not a secret, and it baffles me when bloggers don't do it.

No money changes hands in this relationship, everyone knows (or should know) that it's all for consideration, and it facilitates the creation of new content which is the lifeblood of a magazine or newspaper. Lifestyle media in particular relies on PR information for a good portion of its content. And PR goes far, far beyond fashion and beauty.

We receive press releases about all manner of things - news about technology, pharma, food, science developments, consumer electrics, interiors, pets, health stories, survey results from brands which might spark a story, supermarket pitches, beauty and fashion releases, travel, yawnsome stuff you instantly delete, tonnes of different things.

Some come just as an email, some come as a drop into the office with a product, some come with a bribe-esque 'press gift' like cupcakes which I find hackneyed and boring in the extreme and don't work on me at all, sometimes you're invited to try a service (facial, new restaurant menu etc but I hardly ever do these because I value my spare time) so you can realistically write about it. Sometimes you get a voucher or discount code so you can pick up something you'd actually like - which is a far better use of PR resources to be honest than sending out 150 of the same ****e things no one likes.

In something like a magazine, none of this is remotely a big deal - it gets a paragraph in a roundup of a pile of other things selected by a particular editor in a feature and a load other things that weren't any way near as good get left out.

Plus, those sort of features, in any decent magazine, only make up a small portion of content in terms of news, food, travel and beauty. Features, fashion shoots, the meat of the mag, generally won't be using PR content at all. That will have been created as a result of the editor in consultation with her eds and contribs coming up with ideas and commissioning them.

The hope (I gather) is that the ASAI would somehow create a law that requires all bloggers, social media influencers and journalists to declare when something is a free sample. Which is patently ridiculous, because the ASAI is absolutely incapable of going after people when they very clearly and obviously flout their "an ad must be declared" guideline, and basically magazines would run out of space for editorial if they had to declare every single thing that was received.

Kirstiemcd

well, we'll be waiting as they don't have any legal powers as it is, RN...

idunno78

I guarantee you 90% of the bloggers we are on about all get there hair and extensions for free in exchange for a mention but onthemitch is the only one to admit she gets it for free for a mention in return! so I don't know why you are nagging her about it and haven't once mentioned the 'top' blogger for instance who changes her hair weekly almost has extension in and out like she is changing her top! Never once mentions it's for free or anything. (I highly doubt she pays out €300 quid a month to get new ones put in).

idunno78

All I'd like to see from ASAI them making sure bloggers understand the use of #ad and make sure they use it properally across all their social medias! Maybe use of #bloggermail or say they were sent it, not make out like they bought it! That's it!

retro:electro

idunno78 wrote: »

I guarantee you 90% of the bloggers we are on about all get there hair and extensions for free in exchange for a mention but onthemitch is the only one to admit she gets it for free for a mention in return! so I don't know why you are nagging her about it and haven't once mentioned the 'top' blogger for instance who changes her hair weekly almost has extension in and out like she is changing her top! Never once mentions it's for free or anything. (I highly doubt she pays out €300 quid a month to get new ones put in).

I don't follow the top blogger so I'm not aware of that. And I'm not nagging anyone about anything. All I was saying is it's odd that someone who quite clearly asserts that her hair is done free conditional to social media promotion would continue to get their hair done for free should she withdraw her part of the deal. That is all. That is my sole point and tbh I am so bored of this topic.

meeeeh

Kirstiemcd wrote: »

Plus, those sort of features, in any decent magazine, only make up a small portion of content in terms of news, food, travel and beauty. Features, fashion shoots, the meat of the mag, generally won't be using PR content at all. That will have been created as a result of the editor in consultation with her eds and contribs coming up with ideas and commissioning them.

I love comprehensive and interesting posts like yours because the shine the light on how much more complex is the relationship between pr/advertising and traditional/social media.

Anyway what I was always curios about is how often is there pressure to put clothes from a brand that heavily advertises in magazine into fashion shoot? You don't need to reply if it's an akward issue, it's just me being nosey.

retro:electro

idunno78 wrote: »

All I'd like to see from ASAI them making sure bloggers understand the use of #ad and make sure they use it properally across all their social medias! Maybe use of #bloggermail or say they were sent it, not make out like they bought it! That's it!

I agree with this. Or #freebie

Lunaarli

onthemitch wrote: »

I didn't actually address this for a number of reasons: firstly, because I sometimes get to a point where I'm like, URGH, I'm the only one here on the "blogger" side (if you get me) and it feels like I'm being attacked / targeted when ultimately I DO disclose all freebies and sponsored content (I just know that I don't HAVE to, so it's a goodwill gesture if that makes sense, and something that I know my followers want).

On the tax front, I don't know enough about the ins and outs of tax to know if the use of a car in exchange for social media posting is something that one should declare to Revenue. If it was, couldn't one work around it (for example) by billing the car company for the content you're producing for them, and having them bill you for use of the car, and then just write it off that way? I don't know.

Ultimately, though, are individuals obliged to disclose their tax concerns to the public? In other words: I have an accountant who does all of my taxes. I meet him about once a month to go through everything and talk about what is and isn't taxable (have just discovered that Depop takings should be declared, which has horrified me and I won't be Depopping anything any more!) and am fully transparent with him. I'm confident that I'm on the right side of the Rev, and anything more than that, I don't think I should have to get into with anonymous strangers on boards.ie.

I hope that makes sense and doesn't sound super defensive – I just feel like tax is a totally separate issue to transparency around advertising, and when we talk about disclosure we're not talking about disclosing earnings to Revenue, we're talking about disclosing collaborations for the purposes of NOT misleading followers. So they're two separate issues; one is for public consumption, one is not.

Pretty sure you should be paying BIK Tax for the car.. http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/bik.html

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

onthemitch wrote: »

How exactly can you get clarification on my thoughts? I told you: I think that, if I stopped posting publicly about my haircuts (honestly this conversation is ridiculously), I would continue to get free services because of the amount of people I refer via private messages.

You then said that you didn't think I would.

What more do you want me to clarify for you?

From another points of view, as manager of a salon, we have cut off a few bloggers who came for free treatments and didn't snap as per agreement and the next time they asked to come back we "didn't have any available appointments".

Kirstiemcd

All the ASAI can do is issue guidelines and warnings. It has no powers of enforcement.

A few years ago, it was absolutely standard for bloggers to declare that they'd been sent products for consideration, not sure when that stopped. Now, I think the resolution you want to see has been muddied by a few different, competing things:

A) some bloggers have no idea what constitutes an ad and mistakenly hashtag a press sample as an ad because they're a bit new or not sure
SOME of them are actually being paid to promote a new product and some are not - this makes sense depending on their follower numbers and engagement rate
C) Some actually use ad erroneously to make it seem they're working with brands when they're not, because they think it'll attract other brands to work with them
D) lots DGAF and refuse to declare commercial content because they simply don't have to

retro:electro

LexieOnRale wrote: »

From another points of view, as manager of a salon, we have cut off a few bloggers who came for free treatments and didn't snap as per agreement and the next time they asked to come back we "didn't have any available appointments".

I'd be mortified to keep doing that.

retro:electro

Kirstiemcd wrote: »

All the ASAI can do is issue guidelines and warnings. It has no powers of enforcement.

A few years ago, it was absolutely standard for bloggers to declare that they'd been sent products for consideration, not sure when that stopped. Now, I think the resolution you want to see has been muddied by a few different, competing things:

A) some bloggers have no idea what constitutes an ad and mistakenly hashtag a press sample as an ad because they're a bit new or not sure
SOME of them are actually being paid to promote a new product and some are not - this makes sense depending on their follower numbers and engagement rate
C) Some actually use ad erroneously to make it seem they're working with brands when they're not, because they think it'll attract other brands to work with them
D) lots DGAF and refuse to declare commercial content because they simply don't have to

That's really insightful. Point B comes up a lot here. It's interesting to know that where one blogger may be #ad on a product, another may mention it but not #ad because they've not been paid to promote it, they've just been sent it to try. I see. Point C is also interesting, if not a bit pathetic!

Kirstiemcd

Meeeh - sorry, I can't seem to quote you for some reason. Nope not awkward. I've never worked on a glossy with a lot of fashion advertising so can't say it's been an issue I've faced.

idunno78

Kirstiemcd wrote: »

All the ASAI can do is issue guidelines and warnings. It has no powers of enforcement.

A few years ago, it was absolutely standard for bloggers to declare that they'd been sent products for consideration, not sure when that stopped. Now, I think the resolution you want to see has been muddied by a few different, competing things:

A) some bloggers have no idea what constitutes an ad and mistakenly hashtag a press sample as an ad because they're a bit new or not sure
SOME of them are actually being paid to promote a new product and some are not - this makes sense depending on their follower numbers and engagement rate
C) Some actually use ad erroneously to make it seem they're working with brands when they're not, because they think it'll attract other brands to work with them
D) lots DGAF and refuse to declare commercial content because they simply don't have to

It is silly that the ASAI can't do anything but just tell them! Kinda like civilian guards!! Maybe someone should hold a masterclass for the bloggers 😂😂 (joke I'm not serious). I completely agree with you that it's all of the above a-d. The ASAI should tho be a bit more informative and give them gentle reminders' for the guidelines every couple of months. Or maybe Do random spotchecks like shops would get with health and safety!

onthemitch

idunno78 wrote: »

It is silly that the ASAI can't do anything but just tell them! Kinda like civilian guards!! Maybe someone should hold a masterclass for the bloggers 😂😂 (joke I'm not serious). I completely agree with you that it's all of the above a-d. The ASAI should tho be a bit more informative and give them gentle reminders' for the guidelines every couple of months. Or maybe Do random spotchecks like shops would get with health and safety!

Y'see, the issue is – the ASAI can get reports, the ASAI can get in touch with bloggers, the ASAI can offer cautions... But they can't prosecute anyone. They can fine brands, but I've yet to see them doing that. Even if they DID spot checks, all they can do is offer slaps on the wrists and as far as I know they don't have anyone who does spot checks!

Hopeful2016

onthemitch wrote: »

I didn't actually address this for a number of reasons: firstly, because I sometimes get to a point where I'm like, URGH, I'm the only one here on the "blogger" side (if you get me) and it feels like I'm being attacked / targeted when ultimately I DO disclose all freebies and sponsored content (I just know that I don't HAVE to, so it's a goodwill gesture if that makes sense, and something that I know my followers want).

On the tax front, I don't know enough about the ins and outs of tax to know if the use of a car in exchange for social media posting is something that one should declare to Revenue. If it was, couldn't one work around it (for example) by billing the car company for the content you're producing for them, and having them bill you for use of the car, and then just write it off that way? I don't know.

Ultimately, though, are individuals obliged to disclose their tax concerns to the public? In other words: I have an accountant who does all of my taxes. I meet him about once a month to go through everything and talk about what is and isn't taxable (have just discovered that Depop takings should be declared, which has horrified me and I won't be Depopping anything any more!) and am fully transparent with him. I'm confident that I'm on the right side of the Rev, and anything more than that, I don't think I should have to get into with anonymous strangers on boards.ie.

I hope that makes sense and doesn't sound super defensive – I just feel like tax is a totally separate issue to transparency around advertising, and when we talk about disclosure we're not talking about disclosing earnings to Revenue, we're talking about disclosing collaborations for the purposes of NOT misleading followers. So they're two separate issues; one is for public consumption, one is not.

Thanks for answering. My queries were more what are your thoughts on the topic moreso than please disclose your tax affairs to us here on Boards. The rules are as they are currently and you comply 100% with them but what do you think about the rules. Do you agree with very expensive items and ongoing arrangements being treated as pr samples regardless of the value or the benefit to the blogger.

The tax reference was to highlight that from the company's perspective this is a tax deductible business expense yet from a blogger's point of view it's a present/gift. Presents/gifts are not normally tax deductible for businesses so it seems likely that there is difference between the nature of these items from the company's and the blogger's point of view. The business' tax treatment of the items doesn't marry with the blogger's assertions that they are purely gifts, business' are clearly working from the perspective that they are getting a service in return, social media mentions.

His thread has gotten v busy since I last posted. To keep things in perspective, I don't really care. It interests me from a taxation point of view because I'm an accountant and it think it's a grey area that will be clarified in the future. I'm not really interested in petty bickering back and forth but it has passed some time for me today while on strict lie-flat instructions after my lumbar puncture earlier today. I asked you these things onthemitch, not because I'm out to attack you personally, but because it's so rare to hear anything on this from a blogger's point of view and it's interesting to hear if can appreciate the arguments from the follower's perspective (and vice versa).

So in summary, it's a somewhat interesting topic but most people have bigger fish to fry and more pressing issues so there's no need to be tearing shreads off each other because of differing opinions on the topic. Discussion is normally a positive thing. It's ok not to agree with everyone.

I fainted during the lumbar so I may not be particularly coherent above, haven't had my hospital issue tea and toast yet.