Advertisers are responsible for any material they hoover up from social networks to use in their promotions - and that user-submitted content must comply with UK advertising rules. That's according to the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP), which together with the Broadcasting Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP), is …
This is like expecting Dracula to apply some TCP and a bandage to every neck he bites.
One weird old tip
So where does the DOCTORS ARE ANGRY ABOUT THIS WEIRD OLD TIP ads stand in this, I assume you'd actually have to find an angry doctor?
Re: One weird old tip
Doctors probably are angry about that weird old tip if it draws people into some made-up woo instead of actual medicine.
Re: One weird old tip
Those ads always annoy me for some reason, so I'm sure there'd be some doctors who they make angry too, just by existing, not necessarily anything to do with the content.
"On Twitter we’ve suggested that advertisers use #spon or #ad to make it obvious"
Because "#spon" is immediately obvious.
I'm *assuming* it stands for sponsored, but that that is "obvious" is far from given. #ad - I'll give you that one.
I agree, but if it's used enough, we'll learn what it means; they could agree to use #xyzzy and we'd pick it up.
FWIW, I would be fine with them attaching the "ⓐ" symbol ("circle-A" or "enclosed A" U+24D0) to every tweet. Or, thinking about it, "ⓢ" for "sponsored" (not "spam", you understand).
I'd be more inclined
.. to use #ignore ,or, depending how outrageous the claim, #bullshit
A better way...
I think the best way to mark sponsored/advert tweets would be to begin the tweet with the following:
"This is a sponsored tweet from *company name* about "product name*.
How many characters left for the "important message"?
#spon - good, I have a float-plane.
I didn't think it was obvious the same way you think it was obvious.
Scope for fun here
Each time you upload a hi-res piccy to some social sharing site you should embed a low-res bit of extreme porn in a corner somewhere where it won't be noticed. Then when some big-name company lifts your photo and uses it in their latest ad campaign you post an anonymous tweet "hey, guess what you get if you zoom in to the bottom left of the new Tesco/Ford/Smirnoff/etc. ad".
Re: Scope for fun here
They're certainly leaving themselves open to some fun and games. The 'advice' reads like a manual of how to land some egg on the face of your least favourite (now there's a tough shout) advertisers.
I imagine a lot will run shy of user content for exactly this reason; potentially toxic and a fine platform for your loudest detractors to piss on your carefully crafted festival of brand elevating whalesong.
Stop before it's too late
One day you guys are going to wake up and find that the bureaucrats have sat on everything that made life worthwhile. All these OfCom, OfPut and OfToss entities are just people sitting on high looking down and deciding what they will allow. Soon they will be thinking about who to harass.
Advertisers may not quote people without permission, nor use their images without permission. Anything else is outside the reach of the law, except for libel.
Any retail site which allows user comments, images, or video, on a huge range of products may fall foul of this e.g. Amazon; however, it is fantasy to think that either party can monitor it all! Even comments about products on other sites, possible astroturfing, could be considered dubious advertising too!
- JLaw, Kate Upton exposed in celeb nude pics hack
- Google flushes out users of old browsers by serving up CLUNKY, AGED version of search
- GCHQ protesters stick it to British spooks ... by drinking urine
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? If you think 3D printing is just firing blanks, just you wait