5 ms·

This is frankly not true in a lot of European countries. Google, Facebook and every other company cannot advertise things like toys, tobacco or alcohol to child

by moksly 5y ago

This is frankly not true in a lot of European countries. Google, Facebook and every other company cannot advertise things like toys, tobacco or alcohol to children here in Denmark, and they have to clearly tell you which parts are advertising and which aren’t. This is why Facebook has an “suggested” and an “advertising tag, that you can even click on to be told what metrics decided that you should see it. As well as options to ignore advertisers or setup personal preferences. I’m not going to defend Google or Facebook, but they didn’t add those things because they wanted to. They added them because their platforms would be banned from Europe if they didn’t. Influencers are actually some of the only advertisers who aren’t well regulated in Europe, and it’s honestly a real issue when they have more reach than national television stations. In Denmark alone we’ve had issues with influencers advertising plastic surgery or sugar dating to teenagers and below. Things that are extremely illegal through any other medium, but because “influencers” fall outside of traditional law, it’s been very hard to stop them with the legalisation that we have. In fact they have only been stopped by being publicly shamed in other media, causing them so much bad press that nobody wanted to pay them to advertise things. So it’s actually quite the opposite, but I’ll be the first to agree that the platforms should also be held into account for the things they allow influencers to post. Not a very popular opinion on HN, but as far as I’m concerned Europe would lose nothing by kicking non-EU software companies where it hurts.

jand 5y ago
I did not read netcan's statement as the thesis that there is no legislation regarding "big corps" in the EU. I read it as a statement about speed and willingness regarding the establishment of new laws or law changes. Whether the statement i interpreted is true i cannot tell, but it would be interesting to have data points on it.
- moksly 5y ago
  The thing I think is false is your portrayal of EU legislation targeting the little person while leaving the big corps alone. Because reality is quite the opposite. We are struggling to handle “influencers” because they are a “new” concept in terms of legislation. They fall into a loophole, and dealing with it isn’t “quick” as you suggest, but something that has been slowly grinding into gear over the last decade and will in all likelihood take at least another decade to reach any form of completion. By contrast the big Corps you say go free have been handled by advertisements legislation that has existed since the dawn of the news paper and which regularly gets updated. The issue influencers pose the traditional legislation is that they fall into the category of being private individuals voicing their private opinion, which used to get regulated by the media platforms they did it on, but this isn’t true with SoMe because of the other legal loophole these platforms exploit by not being forced into an editorial role for the content they host. That’s another issue that will also take decades to see decent legislation, but as far as advertisement goes, big Corps are covered while the little guy is not.
- netcan 5y ago
  precisely and concise.
netcan 5y ago
>> they (Google & FB) didn’t add those things because they wanted to. They added them because their platforms would be banned from Europe if they didn’t. These regulatory environments, including european countries, merge regulator and platform. One controls the literal regulation, while the other controls implementation. Both are heavily involved in each others decision making. I'm not saying that advertising plastic surgery or sugar dating to teenagers is good, or should not be regulated. Lots of things are troublesome and need courts and legislators to do stuff. I'm just noting what happens the difference depending on who's pocket book it impacts. No countries, certainly not EU countries, make quick turnaround decisions that could gut a major revenue stream at FB-scale.
Fradow 5y ago
> Influencers are actually some of the only advertisers who aren’t well regulated in Europe, When was the last time you saw product placements being clearly labeled in TV shows/movies? For most people, the answer is "never". Just because we are used to it doesn't mean it's fair. Tom Scott explains it much better than I can: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-x8DYTOv7w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-x8DYTOv7w

by moksly 5y ago

jand 5y ago

I did not read netcan's statement as the thesis that there is no legislation regarding "big corps" in the EU. I read it as a statement about speed and willingness regarding the establishment of new laws or law changes. Whether the statement i interpreted is true i cannot tell, but it would be interesting to have data points on it.

moksly 5y ago
The thing I think is false is your portrayal of EU legislation targeting the little person while leaving the big corps alone. Because reality is quite the opposite. We are struggling to handle “influencers” because they are a “new” concept in terms of legislation. They fall into a loophole, and dealing with it isn’t “quick” as you suggest, but something that has been slowly grinding into gear over the last decade and will in all likelihood take at least another decade to reach any form of completion. By contrast the big Corps you say go free have been handled by advertisements legislation that has existed since the dawn of the news paper and which regularly gets updated. The issue influencers pose the traditional legislation is that they fall into the category of being private individuals voicing their private opinion, which used to get regulated by the media platforms they did it on, but this isn’t true with SoMe because of the other legal loophole these platforms exploit by not being forced into an editorial role for the content they host. That’s another issue that will also take decades to see decent legislation, but as far as advertisement goes, big Corps are covered while the little guy is not.
netcan 5y ago
precisely and concise.

netcan 5y ago

>> they (Google & FB) didn’t add those things because they wanted to. They added them because their platforms would be banned from Europe if they didn’t. These regulatory environments, including european countries, merge regulator and platform. One controls the literal regulation, while the other controls implementation. Both are heavily involved in each others decision making. I'm not saying that advertising plastic surgery or sugar dating to teenagers is good, or should not be regulated. Lots of things are troublesome and need courts and legislators to do stuff. I'm just noting what happens the difference depending on who's pocket book it impacts. No countries, certainly not EU countries, make quick turnaround decisions that could gut a major revenue stream at FB-scale.

Fradow 5y ago

> Influencers are actually some of the only advertisers who aren’t well regulated in Europe, When was the last time you saw product placements being clearly labeled in TV shows/movies? For most people, the answer is "never". Just because we are used to it doesn't mean it's fair. Tom Scott explains it much better than I can: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-x8DYTOv7w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-x8DYTOv7w