• Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • News
  • Events
  • Media
  • Video
  • Glossary
  • Contact
  • Download
  • RSS

FTC goes after astroturfing

August 30th, 2010  |  by jz  |  Published in Future of the Internet  |  4 Comments

Last week the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced a settlement with Reverb Communications, a firm that describes its business as a:

… full service videogame agency that provides public relations, marketing, and sales services through one integrated campaign to the interactive entertainment and music industry.  Using precise messaging and calculated marketing campaigns, we are able to drive consumer and industry demand for our clients’ products, resulting in increased product sales.

According to the FTC’s complaint, some of the “precise messaging” involved the firm putting in fake positive user reviews of various video games on the iTunes store.

I haven’t been able to track down Reverb’s answer to the charges except a statement repeated here, a blog entry that reports some additional details of how the FTC got onto Reverb’s trail.  Reverb is said to have said:

During discussions with the FTC, it became apparent that we would never agree on the facts of the situation. Rather than continuing to spend time and money arguing, and laying off employees to fight what we believed was a frivolous matter, we settled this case and ended the discussion because as the FTC states: “The consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute admission by the respondents of a law violation.”

That sounds like a non-denial denial, and the FTC appears to be doing good work here.  In the fall of ’09 it announced that paid commercial endorsements had to be disclosed — even on Twitter, Facebook, and in blogs.  There was some handwringing over this — would the government be going after any blogger who says something good about something and might have a financial interest in it?  It is not particularly easy to predict, especially since the FTC, unlike other Federal agencies, does not do formal rulemakings — it can only announce guidelines and then bring one enforcement action at a time under its general charter to combat unfair or deceptive trade practices.

The Reverb case provides a good example of how the FTC is thinking about applying its limited staff power: to professional organizations working to subvert ratings schemes.  That’s a good place to start; if nascent ratings schemes are to work, it’s helpful to know what the boundaries are — especially to PR and marketing firms that don’t want to have to race to the bottom.  Now they can tell their clients that they’re just not able to help out with fake reviews.  (In the meantime, the Reverb main home page is showing a generic parked message — odd.)

I remain curious how effective sites like subvertandprofit.com are.  S&P says it:

… runs social media campaigns across a variety of social media sites, via our 25,000 users who earn money by viewing, voting, fanning, rating, or posting assigned tasks. Since 2007, our user actions have effectively promoted our advertisers’ web content to popularity at significant cost savings. In 2010, Subvert and Profit merged with Crowdsource Corp. to extend the power of crowdsourcing to a variety of social and business applications.

More directly, S&P tells advertisers that they can:

Buy votes on social media sites.

  1. Sign up.
  2. Add funds to your account.
  3. Buy votes.
  4. Get visitors to your site for cheap.
  5. Repeat.

And in turn, social media users can “get paid just for clicking buttons.”

Perhaps they or other intermediaries that help to launder ratings could find themselves answering some questions from the FTC.  I see the domain for subvertandprofit is registered in Massachusetts, so I’ve sent an email to its owner — I’ll update this post if I hear anything.

Responses

Feed
  1. Seth Finkelstein says:

    August 30th, 2010 at 7:46 pm (#)

    > … would the government be going after any blogger who says something good about something and might have a financial interest in it? It is not particularly easy to predict, …

    I understand the bogospheric politics behind that phrasing. But I can say, au contraire, it was very easy to predict that the FTC was not going to spend scarce agency resources to go after trivia. However, that sort of prediction doesn’t make good linkbait/hit-fodder.

  2. J.H. Snider says:

    August 31st, 2010 at 11:57 am (#)

    Hi Jonathan,

    You might be interested in my FTC testimony/working paper on the FTC’s blogger conflict-of-interest rules:

    http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/news/mar9/docs/snider1.pdf

    I argue for a more technologically sophisticated approach to such rules.

    If you like nice cartoons and graphics (and are also interested a much bigger framing of the issue), you might also be interested in:

    http://isolon.org/Reports/10-05-08–FOI-Summit–TransparencyInTheDigitalAge–Presentation.pptx
    (skip to the 2nd half of the presentation where I discuss government conflict-of-interest rules).

    Best,

    –Jim

  3. El astroturfing al banquillo de los acusados -- El Blog de Manuel Delgado says:

    September 1st, 2010 at 12:27 am (#)

    [...] Jonathan Zittrain en su blog que la FTC estadounidense le ha metido un puro a una empresa llamada Reverb Communications por basar su negocio en el astroturfing, [...]

  4. Joly MacFie says:

    September 2nd, 2010 at 1:08 am (#)

    http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/10/businesses-buy-facebook-fans.html

    “The need to be liked has become important enough that some businesses are willing to pay for Facebook popularity. Advertising Expert, a small firm in Boynton Beach, Fla., is among a growing number of companies in the popularity-sales business. Others include USocial and Socioniks. Through a network of outsourced Facebook users, Advertising Experts garners fans for its customers, ideally those who already “like” products or companies in the market that the customer is looking to serve. Customers can order 500 “likes” for $55 or 10,000 “likes” for $900.”

Blog

  • Dropbox Ran Afoul of Apple’s App Store Review Guidelines: So What?
  • Last week, a number of developers reported that Apple was rejecting iOS applications that used Dropbox, a popular cloud file storage and backup system. An initial thread on the Dropbox developers’ forum has led to a outpouring of tech news full of hyperbolic claims. However, none of this reporting has covered the real problem – Apple is now more concerned about protecting its business model than serving its users or its developers.  Read more »

  • Help pioneer Casebook: The Next Generation
  • We at the H2O project are seeking a full-time Project Manager. H2O is an online platform for textbook development and distribution, currently in a pilot stage. H2O is based on the open source model – instead of locking down materials in formalized textbooks, we believe that course books can be free (as in free speech) for everyone to access and, equally important, build upon.

    Using H2O, professors can freely pull together materials for a course by selecting cases, editing those cases to the sections that are most relevant, and grouping them into readings. Once the materials are assembled, they can be copied in part or in whole by other interested faculty and then edited further.  H2O has been successfully piloted in JZ’s 1L Torts class, and will be rolling out further over the coming year.

    H2O’s project manager will play a leading role in shepherding H2O into its next phase, which will focus on developing new materials and incorporating additional features, in order to expand the platform beyond its law school roots.

    H2O is a  joint project of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society and the Harvard Law School library.  The Project Manager will be housed at the HLS Library and work in close collaboration with lead members of the Library Innovation Lab team; he/she will also work closely with the Berkman Center and current H2O teams. More info and job posting here.

  • Meme patrol: “When something online is free, you’re not the customer, you’re the product.”
  • I participated in the Berkman Center’s fascinating HyperPublic symposium in the summer of 2011.  When moderating a panel I invoked the aphorism that “When something online is free, you’re not the customer, you’re the product.”  It’s a way of encapsulating the idea that online free services usually make money by extracting lots of data from users — and then selling that data, or using it for targeted availability of those users for advertising, to advertisers.  In that sense, the advertisers are the clients, and the users enjoying free content are what’s being sold.  (Of course, sometimes that happens even when the user pays.)

    I didn’t coin the phrase, and since it was featured (and attributed to me!) in wordsmith.org’s wildly popular “word a day” as a thought for the day accompanying the word “enceinte” — I sought to nail down its provenance.

    The first use of the quote that we can find is as a comment within the famed MetaFilter community  in August 2010. The user’s name is blue_beetle, who might be someone named Andrew Lewis.  It’s entirely possible I saw it there, as MeFi is one of my five favorite sites on the Web.

    Similar sentiments (whether drawn from that source or independently invented) have been expressed by Bruce Schneier in October 2010 and by Douglas Rushkoff in September ’11.

    The phrase “you’re the product” also apparently appeared in a 1986 speech by President Reagan about the drug war.

    Just say know.

    –KA and JZ

  • OS X Mountain Lion and Gatekeeper
  • This week, Apple announced that it was moving to a new, faster OS X operating system development cycle, starting with the release of Mountain Lion next summer.  It previewed a number of features for the OS, and released some parts in beta.

    Mountain Lion is slated to include a feature called Gatekeeper as part of the security and privacy settings. Gatekeeper allows administrators (those with full privileges on a Mac) to limit the applications that can run on the Mac.  They can choose among allowing apps downloaded from the Mac App Store only, or apps from outside the Store so long as they are digitally signed to Apple’s satisfaction by their developers, or apps from anywhere.  (The latter has been the way both Mac and Windows PCs have worked, for better or worse, since the introduction of the Apple II in 1977.) Read more »

  • GPS-based Insurance Rates: The Devil is in the (Data) Details
  • A British insurance company called Motaquote has teamed up with TomTom, the GPS manufacturer to offer insurance prices based on data gathered by GPS. Fair Pay Insurance, Motaquote’s new program, is an opt-in insurance pricing scheme where drivers will get a free GPS unit in return for potentially lower (but possibly higher) premiums. The GPS unit will provide all the traditional navigational services as well as warn drivers when they corner too sharply or brake too hard. Read more »

About Jonathan Zittrain

jonathan zittrain

Jonathan Zittrain is Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and co-founder of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School

RSS Tweets from Z

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Blog Archives



Creative Commons BY-NC-SA Jonathan Zittrain unless otherwise noted.
Powered by WordPress using Gridline Lite.