3 ms·

Here's the FTC's "truth in advertising" guide, which has links to the primary-source documents: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/adverti

Here's the FTC's "truth in advertising" guide, which has links to the primary-source documents: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/advertising-faqs-guide-small-business https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/adv... The most questionable mainstream ad I've seen recently is by Amazon.com, which somehow manages to convince employees that it's "Earth's most customer-centric company" while concurrently using some of the sleaziest dark patterns of any merchant, small or large. Spot the $99/year recurring fee on this page: https://twitter.com/troyd/status/902673505157648384 https://twitter.com/troyd/status/902673505157648384

zodPod 9y ago
If that legitimately violates the FTC's rules then I've seen a lot of sites in worse violation. Because honestly that $99/yr is pretty obvious in that screenshot. It definitely doesn't make it obvious but it is in plain text on that site.
- troydavis 9y ago
  Quoting from the FTC page that I linked to: > Nor can advertisers use fine print to contradict other statements in an ad or to clear up misimpressions that the ad would leave otherwise. For example, if an ad for a diet product claims "Lose 10 pounds in one week without dieting," the fine-print statement "Diet and exercise required" is insufficient to remedy the deceptive claim in the ad. > … > Most importantly, if you are concerned that a disclaimer or disclosure may be necessary to clarify a claim, evaluate your ad copy and substantiation carefully to ensure that you are not misleading consumers. Obviously it's subjective whether this ad violates any FTC laws (and presumably, Amazon's legal counsel reviewed it and deemed it worth the risk), but presence of a statement in fine print (or as you stated, that "it is in plain text") isn't the deciding factor.
hw 9y ago
Thanks, didn't know there was a TIA guide. Would one consider 'X people bought this recently', or 'X people are looking at this now' to be an advertisement for the product, or just a statement unrelated to the actual product (what it is and/pr does, price)

zodPod 9y ago

If that legitimately violates the FTC's rules then I've seen a lot of sites in worse violation. Because honestly that $99/yr is pretty obvious in that screenshot. It definitely doesn't make it obvious but it is in plain text on that site.

troydavis 9y ago
Quoting from the FTC page that I linked to: > Nor can advertisers use fine print to contradict other statements in an ad or to clear up misimpressions that the ad would leave otherwise. For example, if an ad for a diet product claims "Lose 10 pounds in one week without dieting," the fine-print statement "Diet and exercise required" is insufficient to remedy the deceptive claim in the ad. > … > Most importantly, if you are concerned that a disclaimer or disclosure may be necessary to clarify a claim, evaluate your ad copy and substantiation carefully to ensure that you are not misleading consumers. Obviously it's subjective whether this ad violates any FTC laws (and presumably, Amazon's legal counsel reviewed it and deemed it worth the risk), but presence of a statement in fine print (or as you stated, that "it is in plain text") isn't the deciding factor.

hw 9y ago

Thanks, didn't know there was a TIA guide. Would one consider 'X people bought this recently', or 'X people are looking at this now' to be an advertisement for the product, or just a statement unrelated to the actual product (what it is and/pr does, price)