The FTC May Have Just Killed Twitter Marketing For Dealers

March 13, 2013 By Arnold Tijerina

Yeah, in the most absurd move ever, the FTC has determined that Twitter is not excluded from regulatory laws requiring full disclosure on products or services. The Wall Street Journal reports that any disclosures that would apply to any other advertising also apply to Twitter.

Hmm. Let’s think about that a moment. On a platform that allows only 140 character submissions, how, exactly, do you tell your followers about a great lease special, factory incentive or other promotion AND include the tiny, almost unreadable, 2 paragraph disclosure in 6 point font at the bottom of the ad? Well, you don’t.

So, what does that prohibit by default? Pretty much anything you want to promote that requires a disclosure and, for most car dealers, that’s just about everything. Heck, most factory incentives have disclosures. Contests, giveaways, or any other promotion (social media or otherwise) as well as coupons, service specials, and other customer offerings would also be excluded.

The easiest way to determine whether you can or can’t tweet something about any special, ad car, incentive, lease special, promotion, coupon, service special, parts special etc. is by following one basic rule:

If it needs a disclosure, you can’t tweet about it.

See, that was simple wasn’t it?

Now, all of the above being said, Facebook’s Terms of Service in regards to contests, promotions and such are violated, trampled over and ignored all of the time by both vendors (who know better) and by dealers (who may or may not).

That being said, Facebook can’t investigate your dealership and fine you for non-compliance with advertising regulations either.

So, has the FTC effectively killed Twitter marketing for businesses?

It depends on what you’re tweeting about.

If your tweets are informative, quality content or customer service and engagement focused then no. If your strategy is to blast your inventory and specials to Twitter on some sort of robotic RSS feed that forces everyone to not listen to you anyways, then yes.

You make the call. It’s your business but the U.S. Government has spoken.

Update 3.14.13

I spoke with Compliance expert Jim Radogna about this issue. He researched the actual FTC ruling & found the relevant passages and, in his opinion, you can still tweet specials, etc. as long as there is a clear link to the disclaimers included in the tweet. While the Wall Street Journal article seemed pretty straightforward, it’s in his opinion that they’re incorrect in their translation of the ruling and how it applies to tweets.

Business Insider reports that the FTC released more information outlining a way that businesses can continue to use Twitter to market without actually needing the disclaimer physically present within the tweet. Just use “Ad:” within the tweet

Stat of the Week & In the News Compilation September/October 2012

November 14, 2012 By Arnold Tijerina

September 24, 2012: “In the News” – [LINK]

Free Ride for Facebook “Offers” Comes To An End

If you’ve been using Facebook’s “Offers” feature with your business page, the free ride is over. According to the Wall Street Journal, Facebook began charging businesses last week to run new offers. The “Offers” pricing structure is similar to the “Promoted Post” feature, it will vary based on how many “Likes” you have and how much exposure you want, with a $5 minimum charge for smaller business pages. This move is certainly in line with Facebook’s need to further monetize its services to appease stockholders. While “Offers” may now cost money, the “Deals” feature is still free for businesses to use… for now.

September 27, 2012: “Stat of the Week” – [LINK]

5 million

Apple set new sales records last week, with the much-anticipated release of the iPhone 5. The company sold 5 million phones in just 3 days with 2 million phones sold within the first 24 hours, according to many sources including the International Business Times. Pre-orders for the first batch of iPhone 5s sold out inhours from Apple and all other vendors, the day pre-orders began–and that was just in the U.S. Today, the iPhone 5 launches in 22 countries with inventory already in short supply. Clearly, mobileusers–and smartphone owners in particular– have arrived in force. They are using their phones to read and write customer reviews, search for stores and inventory, and become more connected than ever on a more sophisticated

October 1, 2012: “In the News” – [LINK]

State of California to Employers & Schools, “Quit Snooping”!
California Ruling Bans Employers and Schools from Demanding Social Media Passwords

Last week, California became the third state to pass laws that restrict employers and post-secondary schools from requiring access to social media accounts. California joins Maryland and Delaware in recognizing that social media accounts are private by nature and that forcing an employee or student to grant access is an invasion of that privacy. As quoted in an article from Bloomberg, California Governor, Jerry Brown, says that California is “pioneering the social media revolution and these laws will protect all Californians from unwarranted invasions of their personal social media accounts.” This is a trend that will likely continue to expand as social media awareness and use increases.

October 12, 2012: “Stat of the Week” – [LINK]

48%

According to this article in the Atlantic, “Facebook alone refers more than 48% of small business web traffic.” If you include Twitter, which is responsible for 4% of web traffic, these two social media sites account for over ½ of all small business web traffic. It is becoming more important for small businesses to have and cultivate Facebook and Twitter presences. Just like traditional advertising, you want to be visible where your customers are but, unlike a billboard or newspaper ad, with social media you have the opportunity to engage and communicate not only with your customers but with potential customers as well. With almost 1 in 7 people in the world owning Facebook accounts, learning how to properly use it and other social networks to market your business is no longer optional.

October 29, 2012 – “In the News” [LINK]

In the News: Government & Business Embrace Social Media for Hurricane Sandy Notices

As Hurricane Sandy bears down on the East Coast today, evidence that social media as a common news source and method of instant communication is becoming more prevalent. According to Computerworld, everyone from private individuals, airlines, and Federal, State and local governments and emergency services are turning to social media to relay information. Google has setup an interactive hurricane map, Facebook itself set up a Hurricane Sandy community page, FEMA is using social media to update citizens, airlines are using it to update people on flights with over 10,000 flights cancelled today across the country and the American Red Cross has integrated social media into its “Hurricane” app which allows people to “update friends and family by simultaneously sending out messages on Facebook, Twitter, via text, and e-mail.” The hashtag #Sandy is the top trending topic in all areas affected by the storm. These actions validate that social media has evolved significantly from simply a way to let your friends know what movie you’re watching to a legitimate means of delivering news and information instantaneously to a lot of people all at once in a centralized location.

Ford Says Consumer Privacy Is Impractical

May 22, 2012 By Arnold Tijerina

In a Yahoo! exclusive article published today, it was reported that Ford has initiated a lawsuit against 13 individual eBay sellers who they accuse of selling fake or counterfeit Ford parts. I’m not arguing the merits of Ford’s lawsuit as it is certainly within their rights to protect their trademarks and copyrights as well as take steps to protect dealer’s profits in the part business but rather to question the bigger issue encompassed by this: an individual’s right to privacy.

The subpoenas for the lawsuits were granted by the court for Ford to obtain the seller’s identities and information. What is unusual about this is not that they requested it, but what they asked for after that request was granted.

As reported in the article, most ISPs and websites have policies in place that notify users when the company gives out their information for any reason except for that involving criminal activity and which is requested by law enforcement agencies.

In this case, Ford not only requested the user’s information but also asked for their bank account information (which was denied) then went a step further and asked for the court to prohibit eBay and Paypal (an eBay company) from notifying the targeted users that their information was requested and given out.

This move flies in the face of all privacy issues. With the public outcry against the recent legislation effectively designed to skirt privacy issues accompanied by Ford’s strong pro-consumer brand and social media presence, you’d think they would want to steer clear of any controversy in regards to consumer privacy.

“Much of the debate in recent months over online privacy has been spurred by bills in Congress, such as the Stop Online Piracy Act and a new bill, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which passed the U.S. House in April. CISPA would let companies and law enforcement agencies broadly share users’ personal information to fight potential threats — including accusations of copyright violations and counterfeit goods — without penalty, trumping any company policy.” writes Justin Hyde in the Yahoo! article.

The reason reported by Ford for this request was:

“Ford respectfully suggests this procedure is impractical and would serve to undermine the rationale for the subpoenas. The procedure would impose a substantial burden on [eBay and PayPal] to prepare, serve and enforce subpoenas and would serve to “tip-off” or warn the Doe defendants of Ford’s investigation. Under the procedure as written, the Does would have notice that Ford was seeking their identities and thus ample time to destroy evidence, the counterfeit and infringing goods, and flee to avoid service all before Ford would be entitled to receive their true identities.”

I understand why they asked the court to do this but just because it’s a good reason doesn’t mean it should outweigh the right to privacy that all citizens enjoy. This is a civil matter, not a criminal one.

Now that one court has issued what I feel is an invasion of privacy, what’s to stop other judges from following suit. I can think of plenty of GOOD reasons for a judge to do this but that doesn’t mean they SHOULD. Where does an ISP or website draw a “line in the sand”? Despite Facebook’s own internal privacy issues, they have, and are still, fighting other companies from requiring or being allowed to access their user’s information and accounts including employer’s requesting pre-employment access, schools requiring students to reveal their Facebook walls to administrators and more.

Being an eBay user for over 14 years and a Paypal user for about 12, I would hope that they would challenge and fight for their user’s right to privacy. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out and whether any of the companies involved will take a stand for their users.

While Ford may feel that their lawsuit against 13 people succeeding is more important than our rights to privacy, I just find that.. well.. impractical.