). We see a wrong and we write about it. Recently, local writers Nicole and Jeff have posted interesting pieces about bloggers as journalists. Nicole, in Citizen Journalism in Brattleboro: An Interview « Nicole, Worcester, shows how Brattleboro VT has developed a community of contributors and identifies some of the challenges associated with coordinating a team of volunteer and usually amateur writers. Jeff's piece, Wormtown Taxi: Journalistic Legwork, demonstrates that the local professional journalists are less than thorough in using basic, publicly available resources to complete a story.
Somehow, then, from this highly irregular legion of professional journalists join with paid and unpaid bloggers to consume and produce streams of news from credible and incredible sources.
As long as you don't look too closely, it just might work.
Which means, of course, that it's time for the federal government to weigh in.
New FTC guidelines for endorsements and testimonials went into effect last week. Among other things, the guidelines try to ensure that bloggers disclose any financial interest in the products, services, or business about which they write.
Seems reasonable. You, faithful reader, should know if my opinions are shaped by my desires for revenue enhancement.
So, naturally, the blogosphere sees this move by the FTC as attempt to control free speech by redefining bloggers as advertisers, that 'mommy bloggers' will be subject to $11,000 fines per blog post if they fail to disclose that they received a free sample of anything, that this is part of a great takeover of the news industry in general.
Look, we're in areas that are simultaneously new and yet with precedent. The role of the federal government in news goes way back. The newspaper industry has long benefited from favorable postage rates. When technological advances in the 19th century reduced printing processes, it became practical for non-traditional (i.e., poor, immigrant, non-white, or non-English-speaking) publishers to deliver news by and for new communities.
And with the growth of foreign-language newspapers came the concern, even among relatively liberal New Yorkers, that the radicals might be taking charge.
3 comments:
I am especially concerned about the FCC stuff as regards book review blogs. I think I can assume that if a review is coming out a month or even a day before the book is published that the person got a free review copy of the book. So, you don't need a disclaimer if you publish a review in a newspaper or magazine, but you do if you publish online. That makes no sense.
I know a few people who are regular Amazon reviewers. They say that their biggest problem is getting rid of the books that they receive to review. Some books aren't very good and go straight to the local library or such for their next life.
My reading of the subsequent comment on this proposal is that a book reviewer would not be affected by these guidelines, that the value of the book is low and not seen as a factor that would affect your opinion.
I've gotten some review copies via librarything, and after I review them, they go to the library. Most libraries could use another copy of a new book...
But your point is a valid one. Does receiving a book that's worth $20 mean you're going to give it a good review? (This is also why I like e-copies; there's really not a lot of value to it, so there's nothing that you should have to "declare" to the FCC.)
Post a Comment