Are We on The Path to Making Clear That Ads Are Ads?

Well, we just might be if the CCPA turns the new advertising guideline draft into enforceable regulations!

We live in a world where damaging things get more oxygen than they deserve, and good things get swiftly swept under the rug. Since DYT became operationally active, I’ve heard about the negative side of influencer marketing so many times that my ears are seared. 

One of those woes is the lack of guidelines. The US has had them for years. The most comprehensive of which was released by FTC late last year. UK’s ASA has 20 pages worth on how influencers can make it clear that ads are ads. Then, why don’t we? 

Even I, a card-carrying member of the niche, have asked the question before. India’s digital advertising space is worth INR 21,000 Crore. Influencer marketing makes 10% to 15% of it. That’s one giant pie to reign supreme in chaos.

But it seems the powers-to-be have finally caught on!

Making endorsements ethical

Under the Consumer Protection Act, the CCPA proposed a ten-page long guideline in early September. And until a week ago, they welcomed views, suggestions, and comments.

Even though it’s only a draft, I still took a look. So, what does the mouthful’ Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Necessary Due Diligence for Endorsement of Advertisements’ guideline cover?

• It blankets all forms and mediums of advertising and marketing. Think print, social media, TV, radio, etc. 
• There are specific clauses on comparative advertisement, bait advertising, expert endorsements, free claims, puffery, and more. 
• It encompasses all the usual things like ‘honest representations’ and not misleading people by exaggerating a product’s performance. What echoes more are the rules set for comparing one brand with another. Such ads have to be ‘factual, accurate, and capable of being substantiated.’

Moving on to what’s more germane to us

Three sections - due diligence by endorsers, personal use of products & consumer endorsements, and disclosure of material connection – may apply to influencer marketing, even though they’re not explicitly mentioned. 

In broad strokes, they ask of an influencer:

• To be honest about their statements, and this includes being adequately informed about what they are endorsing.

Translation:

Creators can’t place blind trust in a brand’s brief. The onus is on them now to make an effort to gather information about the product or service they are promoting to their community. If the brand claims something about the product, it’s also the creator’s responsibility to research and verify it. 

• To stay true to their product or service experience when giving a testimonial, opinion, etc.

Translation:

Creators who post reviews, testimonials or even preference for a particular product have to ensure that it mirrors their genuine opinions. More than that, when they say they “use” a product, it must be true at the time of endorsement. Meaning, you can’t say you loved using a face mask that you last applied in 2015.

• To fully disclose a material connection if it affects their endorsement’s credibility and if their audience might not expect it. 

Translation:

This one is simple and a rule fairly common in the rest of the world. Creators who are paid or rewarded for a post must disclose it as such. But this clause has the biggest loophole in a draft that already resembles Swiss cheese. A creator only needs to tell their followers a post is sponsored if it’s not “reasonably expected.”

There is too much leeway in the guidelines. 

Even I, not an expert in legalese, can fathom that. For it to be more effective than a band-aid on a leaking dam, one would have to follow the spirit of the guidelines, not the written word. Unless, of course, changes are made, which I expect will happen.

That said, they are, without a shadow of a doubt, a step in the right direction. We are long due a framework that moves the needle on streamlining the unorganised sector.

The lack of regulations has made it laughingly easy for any random person to promote anything under the sun as long as they are paid for it. It has slowly chipped away the trust consumers placed on influencers, starting a sepulchral chain reaction.

That’s why there’s been a sharp exodus towards advocacy marketing - using creators who are also genuine product users of your brand. Something DYT has been doing right from the start because it separates the wheat from the chaff. 

A set of guidelines would work as an additional filtration system, weeding out those who merely want to be an influencer as opposed to a true creator and brand advocate.