Clandestine Advertising On Social Media: Swiss Sense

GA
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)

Contributor

With firms representing more than 90 countries, each GALA member has the local expertise and experience in advertising, marketing and promotion law that will help your campaign achieve its objectives, and navigate the legal minefield successfully. GALA is a uniquely sensitive global resource whose members maintain frequent contact with each other to maximize the effectiveness of their collaborative efforts for their shared clients. GALA provides the premier worldwide resource to advertisers and agencies seeking solutions to problems involving the complex legal issues affecting today's marketplace.
Adverting should be recognizable as such. This is one of the key rules of the Dutch Advertising Code. This often goes wrong on social media:
Netherlands Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment

Adverting should be recognizable as such. This is one of the key rules of the Dutch Advertising Code. This often goes wrong on social media: companies recruit consumers or bloggers to advertise, without it being obvious to the reader or viewer that the purpose is advertising. The Social Media Advertising Code has counteracted that since 2014: the payment of influencers must be apparent. This can be done in various ways, such as adding the hashtags #ad or #spon. However, sponsoring can also be made apparent from the text in the message: "I received this wonderful product from [company name]". So far, so good. But in practice, this is not always clear. It is also difficult to prove specifically that a company has actually hired a consumer or blogger. Take the recent Swiss Sense case, for example. Video blogger ("vlogger") Mascha Feoktistova was looking for a new bed at bed store Swiss Sense in her vlog. Shortly after this vlog, a second video appeared online showing a visit to the Swiss Sense web shop. In it, the vlogger gave the viewers a discount code. It was great publicity for Swiss Sense, of course, which then embedded both blogs onto its website. A complaint with the Advertising Code Committee soon followed: isn't there an #ad or #spon missing here? Swiss Sense did not think so: the vlogger may have received a discount on her bed, but not until after the first vlog was made. The ACC did not accept that. A conclusion was easy to draw for the second vlog: Swiss Sense had already given the vlogger a discount, but the vlog did not indicate anything about it. That is definitely not allowed. The case of the first vlog is more nuanced: the discount was offered after the vlog was made. But it is unclear whether the video was already online at that point. Swiss Sense was charged with this lack of clarity: in this situation, the ACC had reason to suspect sponsoring at the time the vlog was put online. Swiss Sense had to be more specific and convincing if this was not the case. This is important news for advertisers who want to hire influencers on social media without making it clear: simply suggesting that the influencer is not being paid is not always sufficient, even if there is no concrete evidence of payment or gifts. So be careful!

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More