Earlier this month, the FTC announced that on December 1, a new law will go into effect that demands bloggers to disclose their relationship to manufacturers, advertisers, etc. whenever a product review crops up on the blog-o-sphere.
So, for example, if I wrote a review about a blender that a company sends to me, I would be breaking the law if I did not include how I got said blender and could be fined $11,000 for it.\nNow, if you only take a second to think about this law, it may actually seem like a good idea. Consumers have the right to know whether or not companies are "bribing" consumer-generated media outlets in order to pump out positive reviews, right? But, if you think about this for a couple more seconds, it may become clearer to you that there is no good reason for this law to go into effect, as it only really helps to prevent lazy shoppers from being swindled and poses a threat to legitimate writers everywhere.
Sure, there's a clearer line leading back to each individual's motives, but there's one general rule of thumb that should remain true nonetheless: don't take the advice of someone you don't trust. It's as simple as that. Perhaps there is something in defense to be said regarding this law, but the only one I can think of is the submissive, apologist argument of "why not?" Why shouldn't we protect people that haphazardly buy stuff and then complain when it doesn't quite meet expectations? Well, here's a reason for you: considering the current, breakneck rate at which media - both professional and non-professional - are converging, where exactly can the line be drawn for what certain writers are required to say? And, more importantly, regardless of where the line falls, isn't this a violation of our freedom of speech?