ASA raps vloggers over undisclosed ads The Advertising Standards Authority has rapped the knuckles of video bloggers for making it unclear when they’re actually recommending something and when they’ve been paid to hawk it to unsuspecting YouTubers. Vloggers, as we’re apparently meant to call them now, are big business these days with stars like Blighty’s Zoella …
I never realised that poor, oppressed USA biscuit makers needed rabid defence by British commenters.
I think one can not blame an organisation, whether called, BBC or NHS or Shell, for promoting its own facilities or products. Somehow, I managed to understand that the advertisements with "BBC" on them may be connected to the broadcaster. But perhaps I am especially percipient and clever.
But so-called vlogs that purport to be independent and are actually paid to push, for instance, an American biscuit manufacturer's wares, seem to me a totally different and dishonest matter. However, I realise it may take some intellectual ability to distinguish the difference.
"Vloggers build their fan base on the originality and authenticity of the material they produce."
As I have teenagers in the house, I've endured a few of these so I can gauge the kind of content on show and they're just copies of each other. One person will do something that's been done by everyone when they were little and then the rest will all produce similar shows over the next few weeks.
Fair shout to them for making the money, but they're not doing anything special, they just jumped on the bandwagon before it came into view.
Oh and even though the kids are stupid enough to watch them, I'm pretty sure they know the sponsored videos when they see them. Nice sour grapes from the BBC.
Since a broad definition of diary doesn't actually mandate the medium, it's a good use IMHO.
Diarist : one who keeps a diary (whether public or private)
Diary : a recorded collection of a persons opinions and experiences, usually segmented by days.
Given the penetration of the internet, the latter phrase would be assumed to include online diaries too.
Dear Ed., how is the reader meant to know that this headline:
"ASA raps 'F*CK YOU GOOGLE' vlogger + chums over VIDEO LICKFEST"
or this sub headline:
"Paid tongue action nipped by adland watchdog"
refers to a story about the ASA warning Youtube vloggers to clarify their ads ? I now can't fathom what many Reg articles are about from the headlines. Instead, I hover the mouse over the headline and look at the destination URL in Firefox to get a more accurate, less overwrought description. Just sayin'.
It has been a grey issue in the UK, realistically youtube channels should tell you what's sponsored content and what's not - of course sometimes the question is "is this an advertisement or a piece of entertainment" ergo a lot of the Yogscast content is entertainment, the reason it's interesting is that the person presenting is entertaining. I'd rarely buy something that Sips played because the reason the games are funny is because I find him funny, there are a few exceptions I pretty much bought Don't Starve off the back of his series but then I did watch about 10 hours of gameplay first. As opposed to someone who poses as say a reviewer but is in fact being paid.
But anyway - it's always better for the consumer to know who is backing content so I welcome this clearing up of the issue and hope people make sure they abide by it.
There is a difference between
a) Here is some stuff I bought that I like because...
- and -
b) Some company gave me a bunch of free stuff so I'm going to say it's great because I want more free stuff.
It's not new, look at movie reviewers that give 90% of movies 4 stars because they want to get invited to parties.
It would be nice if they were labeled as ads, but how can it be enforced.
Every Hollywood film is stuffed full of paid for product placement to advertise the products - I see no warnings on films.
Same goes for sporting events - every football match or F1 race is stuffed full of billboards and adverts on clothing - where's the warning on Match of the Day "Warning - the following football match contains adverts for Ginsters Pasties and Expensive Trainers'
Advertising is a fact of life - the only place I don't expect to see it is factual content - news, documentaries etc. Everything else is just 'Meh' and the brain filters it out (or subliminally goes out and buys an Aston Martin because James Bond drives one)
Read the film credits rather than rushing out to be first to the bar. Such items are usually noted there.
Buy the way, films tend to be blatantly commercial products, or did you think they are all done gratis, for the public good?
Also, never, ever credit (or discredit) others with the same experience, education (in)ability or ideas as yourself. You may be a clever clogs who spends the whole film remarking upon the product placements. The rest of us just watch the story and a few, without the benefit of your supreme intellect, may be fooled.
Yet another yucky North American product being foisted on us by cultural imperialism / Social marketing.
It's pretty horrid compared to proper British Bikkies.
Coca Cola
Levis (remember the pop song?)
McDonalds
KFC
Intel
Microsoft
Apple
Budweiser
Pumpkins for Halloween
Cranberry sauce
Cranberry juice
US Films
US TV serials
Marvel & DC comics
Maybe we will forgive them for Kraft Philadelphia cheese and Heinz tinned goods?
Yes, of course they are going to use YouTube, Twitter, Facebook as well as TV, Radio and Newspapers.
Icon because the USA calls Foreigners, Aliens.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
