Disclosure
So … yeah. The FTC thing.
Enough people have asked or e-mailed me about the upcoming Federal Trade Commission guidelines for bloggers that I figured I should make some sort of blanket statement about the product reviews that have become the lifeblood of this blog in recent months.
Basically, the regulation that goes into effect December 1st requires anyone who reviews products online to disclose any connection with advertisers, including the receipt of free products, and whether or not they were paid to make an endorsement.
The rule is well-intentioned; it’s awfully easy for someone to rave on their blog or Facebook page or Twitter feed about the fantastic new diet plan they’re on, or how much they love a new TV show that debuted this fall – but it’s often difficult for readers to know if those opinions are being incentivized. It’s a well-known practice for some companies (weight loss product vendors seem most guilty of this) to create false blogs that appear to be everyday people gushing about what a great supplement they’ve discovered. Product endorsement is also prevalent among celebrities who have millions of followers willing to try whatever items their pop culture idols suggest.
So those are the primary targets of the regulation, but the rule also impacts smaller-scale websites and lesser-known proprietors who operate the Internet equivalent of Five and Dime shops - which brings us back to Running and Rambling.
The person behind this blog is me. I’m not a front for a larger company, and I don’t make any effort to keep product sources secret. The vast majority of gear I receive is provided to me directly by the companies involved. If there’s something specific I’m looking to review, I’ll occasionally reach out to a company on my own, but more frequently they contact me at the e-mail address I include at the end of each review post.
My other source is a connection I’ve (hopefully) been very up front about – my relationship with Wilderness Running Company. They’re an online vendor dedicated to the trail running community, and I have a ton of respect for the way they promote ultrarunning and the outdoor adventure lifestyle. I don’t have a financial stake in the company, but they occasionally send me products to review, usually in conjunction with a special promotion they are offering. They have become my primary choice for online vendors – so if a company sends me a product that is carried by WRC, I’ll link to the WRC page instead of Amazon or REI or ZombieRunner (all of whom I frequently use for links to non-WRC products).
Enough people have asked or e-mailed me about the upcoming Federal Trade Commission guidelines for bloggers that I figured I should make some sort of blanket statement about the product reviews that have become the lifeblood of this blog in recent months.
Basically, the regulation that goes into effect December 1st requires anyone who reviews products online to disclose any connection with advertisers, including the receipt of free products, and whether or not they were paid to make an endorsement.
The rule is well-intentioned; it’s awfully easy for someone to rave on their blog or Facebook page or Twitter feed about the fantastic new diet plan they’re on, or how much they love a new TV show that debuted this fall – but it’s often difficult for readers to know if those opinions are being incentivized. It’s a well-known practice for some companies (weight loss product vendors seem most guilty of this) to create false blogs that appear to be everyday people gushing about what a great supplement they’ve discovered. Product endorsement is also prevalent among celebrities who have millions of followers willing to try whatever items their pop culture idols suggest.
So those are the primary targets of the regulation, but the rule also impacts smaller-scale websites and lesser-known proprietors who operate the Internet equivalent of Five and Dime shops - which brings us back to Running and Rambling.
The person behind this blog is me. I’m not a front for a larger company, and I don’t make any effort to keep product sources secret. The vast majority of gear I receive is provided to me directly by the companies involved. If there’s something specific I’m looking to review, I’ll occasionally reach out to a company on my own, but more frequently they contact me at the e-mail address I include at the end of each review post.
My other source is a connection I’ve (hopefully) been very up front about – my relationship with Wilderness Running Company. They’re an online vendor dedicated to the trail running community, and I have a ton of respect for the way they promote ultrarunning and the outdoor adventure lifestyle. I don’t have a financial stake in the company, but they occasionally send me products to review, usually in conjunction with a special promotion they are offering. They have become my primary choice for online vendors – so if a company sends me a product that is carried by WRC, I’ll link to the WRC page instead of Amazon or REI or ZombieRunner (all of whom I frequently use for links to non-WRC products).

Seriously, they're awesome - go check them out sometime. Be sure to use my coupon code (R&R10) for a 10% discount.
And then, every so often, I actually buy something for the express purpose of reviewing it here. This is my least frequent means of obtaining products, as I’d probably go broke if this were my regular mode of operation.
As far as conflict of interest goes, I’d like to think that I stay fairly objective about the product regardless of its source. I don’t love every product, but I’ll never just say “I hate this thing,” or, “These shoes are terrible.” Rather, I try to point out what kind of user would benefit from the product in question, even if it doesn’t suit my individual needs. Although a product may not knock my socks off, it still might serve a need for somebody else – so I try to indicate where that would be the case.
I’m finding that my website has pretty good reach in cyberspace – especially in Google searches for specific products – so my goal is always to make my review worth the cost of a product sample to the company who has provided it. Considering the cost of mass marketing, and the fact that specialized websites tend to draw an ideally targeted demographic, I like to think that I hold up my end of the bargain fairly well.
Of course, I’ll never purposely write a glowing review of a product just because I received it for free – but to eliminate any hint of deception, it’s not that big of a deal for me to disclose my product sources. From now on, I’ll include that info at the end of each review post.
If you have any feedback or suggestions about this regulation and its impact on individual bloggers, I’d love to hear it. Comment below, or feel free to e-mail me at info@runningandrambling.com.
As far as conflict of interest goes, I’d like to think that I stay fairly objective about the product regardless of its source. I don’t love every product, but I’ll never just say “I hate this thing,” or, “These shoes are terrible.” Rather, I try to point out what kind of user would benefit from the product in question, even if it doesn’t suit my individual needs. Although a product may not knock my socks off, it still might serve a need for somebody else – so I try to indicate where that would be the case.
I’m finding that my website has pretty good reach in cyberspace – especially in Google searches for specific products – so my goal is always to make my review worth the cost of a product sample to the company who has provided it. Considering the cost of mass marketing, and the fact that specialized websites tend to draw an ideally targeted demographic, I like to think that I hold up my end of the bargain fairly well.
Of course, I’ll never purposely write a glowing review of a product just because I received it for free – but to eliminate any hint of deception, it’s not that big of a deal for me to disclose my product sources. From now on, I’ll include that info at the end of each review post.
If you have any feedback or suggestions about this regulation and its impact on individual bloggers, I’d love to hear it. Comment below, or feel free to e-mail me at info@runningandrambling.com.





4 comments:
I think you're right about the true targets of the new legislation. I also think the "Mommy Bloggers" are the online writers most under fire. In some TV clips, these women have entire rooms full of free toys to review. As you said, it's all in what you disclose and how the review is presented.
I once decided not to buy a pair of trail shoes based on your report. So I can attest that you don't just write glowing reports. While shoe choice is a personal think I agreed with some of your points. I have noticed that you have been reviewing a lot of gear lately and I am jealous about all the cool gear you get to test drive:) Frankly it's good to see you doing different things now that you are not so busy training for a big race.
I've always found your reports fair and balanced, so keep on trucking!
I wonder if this applies to me? I live in New Zealand, I am sponsored by Injinji (Australia) and Vespa (USA), but have a blog hosted on a server in the USA (.blogspot.com).
I also review (and preview) the products (above) as well as my upcoming races in NZ.
I think that since my blog is hosted in the US, perhaps the FDA rules do apply to me. God knows??
Cheers, Paul
Post a Comment