Comments on: FTC Guidelines and Shennanigans http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/ Irreverence Rebellion and interweb marketing. Sometimes with video thingies. Wed, 16 May 2012 13:14:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Graco Nautilus 3-in-1 car seathttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-14167 Graco Nautilus 3-in-1 car seat Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:37:02 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-14167 <strong>Links…...</strong> [...]Sites of interest we've a link to[...]……... Links……

[...]Sites of interest we’ve a link to[...]………

]]> By: Andy Jenkinshttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2253 Andy Jenkins Sat, 12 Dec 2009 03:54:03 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2253 Joe - you are awesome. Edit complete. Joe – you are awesome. Edit complete.

]]> By: Joehttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2252 Joe Sat, 12 Dec 2009 03:34:34 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2252 Andy, Edit the previous post or post this... either way... I was wrong to be critical of Jim for the way he conducted the interview. He is a stand-up guy and KUDOS to him for doing the call... As for the FTC guy... he IS pathetic and should get a real job :) Again, Jim Edwards... great job... FTC take your arbitrary rules and... Joe Andy, Edit the previous post or post this… either way…

I was wrong to be critical of Jim for the way he conducted the interview. He is a stand-up guy and KUDOS to him for doing the call…

As for the FTC guy… he IS pathetic and should get a real job :)

Again, Jim Edwards… great job… FTC take your arbitrary rules and…

Joe

]]> By: Comment on Andy Jenkin’s Blog | The Magic of Lifehttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2240 Comment on Andy Jenkin’s Blog | The Magic of Life Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:37:43 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2240 [...] to say, but more and more skip over the emails from stompernet. This is how it happened that I read Andy’s blog on the clarification of the new FTC rules. This blog was more or less a pointer to an interview of an FTC agent by Jim Edwards (an internet [...] [...] to say, but more and more skip over the emails from stompernet. This is how it happened that I read Andy’s blog on the clarification of the new FTC rules. This blog was more or less a pointer to an interview of an FTC agent by Jim Edwards (an internet [...]

]]> By: Merlin Silkhttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2239 Merlin Silk Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:08:20 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2239 Oh man, this got my blood boiling! What's really frustrating are these comments like "good info, thanks!" The only light in the tunnel was Dan Thies broomstick metaphor, which shows a bit what all 'agencies' are about - initiating violence. Reasonable men, if they have a disagreement, sit together and work it out and come to a mutually acceptable agreement. Not agencies! They work like bullies: "We tell you how it is, and if you don't do was we say - - - you know where the broomstick is, and how long it is!" Still, we can learn from them: they came up with the idea that we don't negotiate with terrorists. That is a good policy particularly if applied to them, because they are, in fact, the terrorists, a they initiate force. You don't think what they do is initiating force? Think again: they issue a fine (or sue you, which is the same because the courts belong to them and are paid by them), and you don't pay. Then you see that it IS force - just play it through in your mind. The only reason I write this is to plant this little seed in your mind, that you all see that 'agencies' are agencies not for us but only for themselves, that they are not our friends that will protect consumers. That's just double talk to hide the fact that they are taking more control by threat of stealing and imprisonment. Yes, follow the rules (for now) but keep in mind, that the tyrants are not here to help you. A slave master can only stay what he is as long as the slave behaves as a slave - stop being a slave. Resist with every fiber, without the need to put yourself in danger, but resists, don't see them as the benefactor. And above all, see them as different from you. They are not one of us, where we all work together to make the world a better place. See that anybody who has the idea to know better than you, how to live your life, is to be met with at least suspicion. Oh man, this got my blood boiling! What’s really frustrating are these comments like “good info, thanks!” The only light in the tunnel was Dan Thies broomstick metaphor, which shows a bit what all ‘agencies’ are about – initiating violence.
Reasonable men, if they have a disagreement, sit together and work it out and come to a mutually acceptable agreement. Not agencies! They work like bullies: “We tell you how it is, and if you don’t do was we say – - – you know where the broomstick is, and how long it is!”
Still, we can learn from them: they came up with the idea that we don’t negotiate with terrorists. That is a good policy particularly if applied to them, because they are, in fact, the terrorists, a they initiate force. You don’t think what they do is initiating force? Think again: they issue a fine (or sue you, which is the same because the courts belong to them and are paid by them), and you don’t pay. Then you see that it IS force – just play it through in your mind.
The only reason I write this is to plant this little seed in your mind, that you all see that ‘agencies’ are agencies not for us but only for themselves, that they are not our friends that will protect consumers. That’s just double talk to hide the fact that they are taking more control by threat of stealing and imprisonment.
Yes, follow the rules (for now) but keep in mind, that the tyrants are not here to help you.
A slave master can only stay what he is as long as the slave behaves as a slave – stop being a slave. Resist with every fiber, without the need to put yourself in danger, but resists, don’t see them as the benefactor.
And above all, see them as different from you. They are not one of us, where we all work together to make the world a better place. See that anybody who has the idea to know better than you, how to live your life, is to be met with at least suspicion.

]]> By: Richhttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2237 Rich Thu, 10 Dec 2009 06:20:37 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2237 Three quick things: 1) This ruling bites. The "between the lines" writing is essentially saying the American public is too stupid to discern good from bad and should not be held responsible for their own action. Therefore as the all powerful government, we shall step in and "protect" the public from themselves so they can continue a life of dependence upon their government. 2) X in his comments above is correct. It is serious. Not because it's right, but because it is now part of the fabric of American business. So, you either conform and learn to do business this way, or get your butt sued off. The FTC is the new IRS. 3) I'm not down on Jim Edwards, but I got weary of him kissing up to the FTC official in the video. It was very thick. Jim may make a nice buck or two with his business, but if that doesn't work out, I'm sure there is a job at the FTC waiting for him. Three quick things:

1) This ruling bites. The “between the lines” writing is essentially saying the American public is too stupid to discern good from bad and should not be held responsible for their own action. Therefore as the all powerful government, we shall step in and “protect” the public from themselves so they can continue a life of dependence upon their government.

2) X in his comments above is correct. It is serious. Not because it’s right, but because it is now part of the fabric of American business. So, you either conform and learn to do business this way, or get your butt sued off. The FTC is the new IRS.

3) I’m not down on Jim Edwards, but I got weary of him kissing up to the FTC official in the video. It was very thick. Jim may make a nice buck or two with his business, but if that doesn’t work out, I’m sure there is a job at the FTC waiting for him.

]]> By: Bill Lillinghttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2236 Bill Lilling Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:59:35 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2236 Talk about Big Brother… “discretionary enforcement”!? This is all so objective it will in essence give the FTC carte blanche to skewer anyone it wants to, and of course be able to protect anyone it wants to as well. Hey... does anyone out there remember McCarthy? What merchant (or service provider) in this country does not receive free merchandise, and then sell that company’s product to his clientele? Is a doctor now supposed to tell his patients he gets free product (and can get a cut as well in some instances), or is a hospital supposed to disclose that it derives profit from the prescriptions they fill for their “affiliate” doctor’s who get the free samples? Why should someone who owns a blog or a website about bicycles for instance have to go through all these hoops, but someone who owns a physical bicycle store not have to? FTC regulations should apply equally to virtual and physical merchants, otherwise they are discriminatory (obviously in favor of property owners). And if you carry the FTC “clarifications” to their logical extreme, the major offenders of all this are Google, network talkshows, and all of the Shopping Channels on TV. The ladies on the shopping channels for sure are nothing short of paid shills, and Google PPC by the FTC’s own definition is the biggest super affiliate of them all… not to mention that Google "slaps" affiliates and manipulates ad placement based on how much a company pays, not on how truthful their ads are. But in the infinite wisdom of the FTC’s discretionary power, I really doubt the FTC would even consider either of them as a threat to the general public, but in essence they are the biggest, most deceptive advertisers of all. This, like most other government regulations, is designed to "protect the wealth of the wealthy" by throttling competition. Talk about Big Brother… “discretionary enforcement”!? This is all so objective it will in essence give the FTC carte blanche to skewer anyone it wants to, and of course be able to protect anyone it wants to as well. Hey… does anyone out there remember McCarthy? What merchant (or service provider) in this country does not receive free merchandise, and then sell that company’s product to his clientele? Is a doctor now supposed to tell his patients he gets free product (and can get a cut as well in some instances), or is a hospital supposed to disclose that it derives profit from the prescriptions they fill for their “affiliate” doctor’s who get the free samples? Why should someone who owns a blog or a website about bicycles for instance have to go through all these hoops, but someone who owns a physical bicycle store not have to? FTC regulations should apply equally to virtual and physical merchants, otherwise they are discriminatory (obviously in favor of property owners). And if you carry the FTC “clarifications” to their logical extreme, the major offenders of all this are Google, network talkshows, and all of the Shopping Channels on TV. The ladies on the shopping channels for sure are nothing short of paid shills, and Google PPC by the FTC’s own definition is the biggest super affiliate of them all… not to mention that Google “slaps” affiliates and manipulates ad placement based on how much a company pays, not on how truthful their ads are. But in the infinite wisdom of the FTC’s discretionary power, I really doubt the FTC would even consider either of them as a threat to the general public, but in essence they are the biggest, most deceptive advertisers of all. This, like most other government regulations, is designed to “protect the wealth of the wealthy” by throttling competition.

]]> By: Terry Retterhttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2234 Terry Retter Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:33:59 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2234 Thanks for the heads up on this Andy. That was great interview done by someone who knows how to conduct an interview. Also, some really good information that clears up some of the questions regarding disclosure. Those of you in the hype and promise business have a lot more to deal with compared to those of us who sell physical products from original manufactures is seems. What will be interesting to watch is how enforcement rolls out over the next months and years. Hopefully I will stop getting those emails saying that I can earn thousands in just a few days for only minutes a day. yogiwan <a href="http://chefwannabee.com" rel="nofollow">Chef Wannabee</a> Thanks for the heads up on this Andy. That was great interview done by someone who knows how to conduct an interview. Also, some really good information that clears up some of the questions regarding disclosure.

Those of you in the hype and promise business have a lot more to deal with compared to those of us who sell physical products from original manufactures is seems. What will be interesting to watch is how enforcement rolls out over the next months and years.

Hopefully I will stop getting those emails saying that I can earn thousands in just a few days for only minutes a day.

yogiwan
Chef Wannabee

]]> By: Claudiahttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2232 Claudia Wed, 09 Dec 2009 13:15:42 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2232 As far as affiliate marketing is going tactics have changed. The gurus used to tell you to hide your affiliate link, because some people take offense. Infact I even bought a cloaker from Jim Edwards a couple of years ago. Now you are obliged to let people know that your link is an affiliate link. Personally I've just written an affiliate disclosure on my blog which I think should cover it. As far as affiliate marketing is going tactics have changed. The gurus used to tell you to hide your affiliate link, because some people take offense. Infact I even bought a cloaker from Jim Edwards a couple of years ago. Now you are obliged to let people know that your link is an affiliate link. Personally I’ve just written an affiliate disclosure on my blog which I think should cover it.

]]> By: Andy Jenkinshttp://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/2009/12/08/ftc-guidelines-and-shennanigans/#comment-2230 Andy Jenkins Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:33:39 +0000 http://www.andyjenkinsblog.com/?p=550#comment-2230 That sucks Pete - I hope you were able to modify the site to come into compliance. That sucks Pete – I hope you were able to modify the site to come into compliance.

]]>