[Last call] - Advertising Disclosure Rules

[Simone Republic]

Motivation

This is partly based on the FCC Sponsorship Identification Rules (for radio and television broadcasts), but is also apparent to anyone who uses Youtube and notices the tag that says “paid promotion included” in the corner of a video.

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/sp ... tion-rules

It now incorporates significant content (primarily the preamble and clause 1) from a partial 2020 draft from Imperium Anglorum.

Category: regulation/consumer protection

(This is not under “free trade” because it technically increases barriers to trade, it also doesn’t naturally fit education/free press, because it restricts free press by requiring disclosure of sponsorship. Technically it is a kind of labelling (of adverts) and the disclosure of the sponsorship makes the consumers aware that they are watching an advert, not an objective show (say a news show where there's an assumption of objectivity), so this is where it fits.)

The title was previously "Advertising Payment Disclosures" but changed to "Advertising Disclosure Rules" as it's no longer covering just payments.

Last call

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that media content are frequently transmitted across multiple WA states;

Believing that the freedom of expression ought not to include the right to express deceptive claims in advertising material or fail to disclose payment for commercial speech;

Desiring unified rules against deceptive and exploitative advertising practices given the vast trading of media content across WA states;

The WA hereby enacts as follows:

1. Definitions.
   
   1. "Advertising material" means any promotion for or on behalf of a payee. This includes negative advertising such as those that disparage a competitor’s product.
   2. "Content" means any media content distributed or transmitted in a WA state, including all forms of text or audio-visual media.
   3. "Outlet" means anyone (or any entity) who operates a service that provides such content to a wide audience, such as radio stations, social media, or streaming services, and whose content is available to a WA state.
   4. "Payee" means anyone directly or indirectly paying for advertising material, including the payee itself (and its associates), and any third party acting on behalf of the payee.
2. Claims in advertising.
   
   1. Claims made in advertising material must not be deceptive or false; must be substantiated with evidence demandable by the public; and must not omit or distort information necessary for an average consumer to make an informed purchasing decision.
   2. Whenever content is paid for, or has advertising material embedded, in kind or in cash, in which the payer exercises at least some level of control over such content, the payee must prominently disclose such payment, the identity of the payee if applicable, and clearly notify the content consumer as to what specific content was paid for.
3. Responsibilities of outlet.
   
   1. The outlet shall ensure compliance with this resolution. The outlet may not delegate compliance responsibility to third-party content producers and payees.
   2. Advertising material for addictive or health-damaging products or services (including gambling and betting) may not be targeted directly at anyone below the legal age of competence.
   3. All outlets have a duty of care to ensure that sponsored content are clearly distinguishable from editorial content, where appropriate.
4. Clarification. This resolution does not apply to political advertising or other forms of speech protected by previously enacted resolutions.

Char count: 2,510

Co-author: Imperium Anglorum

[Pacific Haven]

I suggest one thing- currently, there's no requirement as so where the broadcaster has to disclose the fact that they are being sponsored. I propose that they disclose it either to the clause 3 authority, or as a clear and unambiguous label at the start of each broadcast, or both.

Is it necessary to have an entire authority for just interpreting and adjudicating disputes? I doubt that there will ever be a dispute between two WA states, and you can make this clear by saying that the clause 3 authority responsible for the broadcaster from which the content originated (or even the production company of the content) should be responsible.

Also, since in the preamble you talk about how consumers may not be aware of the difference between sponsored content and editorial content, a catch-all clause saying "broadcasters and producers must take special care to ensure that sponsorships are clearly distinguishable from editorial content" would be beneficial.

[Imperium Anglorum]

I have from 2020 an Advert Disclosure Act which is slightly broader and takes a different enforcement approach. DM me for the link; if you want to use it, credit me as coauthor.

[Simone Republic]

Draft 2

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that many forms of media from WA states reach audiences in multiple WA states;

Noting that some of these may include commercial promotions, overtly or subtly, and that audiences may not be aware of their presence, sometimes jeopardizing assumptions on editorial independence;

Desiring a common approach to regulate this matter; hereby:

1. Defines:
   
   1. “Agents” to mean all employees and authorized representatives of the outlet who charges or accepts sponsorship on behalf of an outlet;
   2. “Content” to mean any audio and visual media that a broadcaster produces or transmits, such as audio packages, live streams, television broadcasts, and video uploads, intended to reach a mass audience;
   3. “Outlet” to mean any individual or entity who is subject to the jurisdiction of a WA state and who:
      
      1. produces any content (or any part thereof) intended to be distributed to, or received by, a mass audience, such as influencers, production staff, program hosts, and media production companies; and/or
      2. transmits any content to a mass audience (regardless of whether it is received by the said audience), such as radio stations, social media, streaming services, television stations, and video hosting sites;
   4. “Sponsor” to mean the individual or entity from whom (or on their behalf) such sponsorship was supplied, and for this purpose this includes any third party acting on behalf of a sponsor, such as an independent promoter;
   5. “Sponsorship” to mean any kind of payments, in money, products, services, or other valuable consideration, paid in order to amend, influence or modify any content from an outlet;
2. Requires:
   
   1. An outlet who produces or transmits any content for which sponsorship has been paid or promised to, or charged or accepted, such as to promote a product or service, must disclose at the time the content is produced or transmitted that:
      
      1. such content is paid for, either in whole or in part; and
      2. the name of the sponsor;
   2. Any agents(s), as well as any sponsor(s), must separately disclose such sponsorship to the outlet, in order for the outlet to comply with clause (2)(a);
   3. An outlet to have reasonable internal controls on their agents and anyone with whom they deal with in connection with any content to ensure that they comply with clause (2)(a);
   4. An outlet who relies on another outlet to produce (or transmit) their content must take reasonable steps to satisfy itself that the other outlet complies with clause (2)(a);
   5. An outlet who produces or transmits any content on behalf of its substantial beneficial owners is also required to comply with clause (2)(a) as if its substantial beneficial owners are its sponsors;
   6. All disclosures made pursuant to clause 2(a) must be prominent, embedded within the content itself, and can be reasonably expected to be received by the audience;
   7. All outlets have a duty of care to ensure that sponsored content are clearly distinguishable from editorial content, where appropriate;
3. Requires:
   
   1. Each WA state to designate a competent authority to enforce this resolution against all outlets subject to that WA state's jurisdiction;
   2. Each WA state to determine any penalties that apply to a violation of clause 2 (and all sub-clauses), subject to due process;
      [still to be inserted: jurisdiction dispute]
4. Clarifies that:
   
   1. References to "names" include all corporate names, trade names (such as "doing being as"), and common aliases of the individual or entity, and that all references to "such as" in this resolution are merely as examples only;
   2. The term “mass audience” excludes any content specifically produced for an audience that is related to the outlet for contractual reasons, such as employees in a single company;
   3. WACA shall be responsible for interpretation of this resolution and in adjudicating any disputes between competent authorities of WA states over this resolution. [still to be inserted: something on non-WA content]

Draft 1

Draft 1

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that many broadcasts from WA states reach audiences in multiple WA states;

Noting that many broadcasts include commercial promotions, overtly or subtly, and that audiences may not be aware of their presence;

Desiring a common approach to regulate this matter; hereby:

1. Defines:
   
   1. “Agents” to mean all employees and authorized representatives of the broadcaster who charges or accepts sponsorship on behalf of a broadcaster;
   2. “Broadcaster” to mean any individual or entity who:
      
      1. produces any content intended to be distributed to, or received by, a mass audience, such as influencers, programme hosts, and media production companies; and/or
      2. transmits any content to a mass audience (regardless of whether it is received by the said audience), such as radio stations, social media, streaming services, television stations, and video hosting sites;
   3. “Content” to mean any audio and visual media that a broadcaster produces or transmits, such as audio packages, live streams, television broadcasts, and video uploads, intended to reach a mass audience;
   4. “Sponsor” to mean the individual or entity from whom (or on their behalf) such sponsorship was supplied, and for this purpose this includes any third party acting on behalf of a sponsor, such as an independent promoter;
   5. “Sponsorship” to mean any kind of payments, in money, products, services, or other valuation consideration, paid in order to modify any content from a broadcaster;
   6. “WACA” to mean the WA Communications Agency;
2. Requires:
   
   1. A broadcaster who produces or transmits any content for which sponsorship has been paid or promised to, or charged or accepted, such as to promote a product or service, must disclose at the time the content is produced or transmitted that:
      
      1. such content is paid for, either in whole or in part; and
      2. the name of the sponsor;
   2. Any agents(s), as well as any sponsor(s), must separately disclose such sponsorship to the broadcaster, in order for the broadcaster to comply with clause (2)(a);
   3. A broadcaster to have reasonable internal controls on their agents and anyone with whom they deal with in connection with any content to ensure that they comply with clause (2)(a);
   4. A broadcaster who relies on another broadcaster to produce (or transmit) their content must take reasonable steps to satisfy itself that the other broadcaster complies with clause (2)(a);
   5. A broadcaster who produces or transmits any content on behalf of its substantial beneficial owners is also required to comply with clause (2)(a) as if its substantial beneficial owners are its sponsors;
3. Requires:
   
   1. Each WA state to designate a competent authority to enforce this resolution against all broadcasters subject to that WA state's jurisdiction;
   2. Each WA state to determine any penalties that apply to a violation of sub-clauses(2)(a-e, subject to due process;
4. Clarifies that:
   
   1. References to "names" include all corporate names, trade names (such as "doing being as"), and common aliases of the individual or entity, and that references to "such as" are merely as examples only;
   2. The term “mass audience” excludes any content specifically produced for an audience that is related to each other or to the broadcaster for contractual reasons, such as employees in a single company;
   3. WACA shall be responsible for interpretation of this resolution and in adjudicating any disputes between competent authorities of WA states over this resolution.

I suggest one thing- currently, there's no requirement as so where the broadcaster has to disclose the fact that they are being sponsored. I propose that they disclose it either to the clause 3 authority, or as a clear and unambiguous label at the start of each broadcast, or both.

A fairly detailed "prominently in the content" clause has arrived in clause 2f.

Is it necessary to have an entire authority for just interpreting and adjudicating disputes? I doubt that there will ever be a dispute between two WA states, and you can make this clear by saying that the clause 3 authority responsible for the broadcaster from which the content originated (or even the production company of the content) should be responsible.

I am thinking of using WACA for something else as well. It's being used solely for handling content from non-WA jurisdictions now.

Also, since in the preamble you talk about how consumers may not be aware of the difference between sponsored content and editorial content, a catch-all clause saying "broadcasters and producers must take special care to ensure that sponsorships are clearly distinguishable from editorial content" would be beneficial.

This has appeared in clause 2e.

I have from 2020 an Advert Disclosure Act which is slightly broader and takes a different enforcement approach. DM me for the link; if you want to use it, credit me as coauthor.

I have received a copy and considering it - see WALL.

4(a) now has the "references to such as are merely as examples" qualifier again because of the large number of times I use the word "such as" to try to catch all forms of media content from across the 20th and 21st centuries, from radio to streaming to TikTok / Douyin to Instagram Threads etc.

I've changed the word "broadcaster" to "outlet" as there is a difference in wording between someone who is "digital native" (effectively anyone post 2003 or so, given Youtube started in 2004, assuming they had broadband back then) vs someone who is "linear native" (which makes more sense to someone my age since I still recall the era of cable television).

I have introduced a draft 2 since I changed the title altogether from "broadcast" to "media". It's still not yet incorporating IA's draft at this stage.

[Simone Republic]

Draft 3 presented, incorporating texts from IA.

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: I have a few pieces of feedback to give. “The freedom of expression” should be “freedom of expression”. “The World hereby enacts”, though amusing, should be “The World Assembly hereby enacts”. 2a is absurdly broad. I would consider it necessary for a consumer buying a product for health reasons to have a basic understanding of his or her own health in order to make an informed decision, yet it is obviously silly to mandate that advertising provides this. 4a is presently ambiguous as to what qualifies as “protected speech”. This seemingly references a past resolution; which one is it?)

[Simone Republic]

(OOC: I have a few pieces of feedback to give. “The freedom of expression” should be “freedom of expression”. “The World hereby enacts”, though amusing, should be “The World Assembly hereby enacts”. 2a is absurdly broad. I would consider it necessary for a consumer buying a product for health reasons to have a basic understanding of his or her own health in order to make an informed decision, yet it is obviously silly to mandate that advertising provides this. 4a is presently ambiguous as to what qualifies as “protected speech”. This seemingly references a past resolution; which one is it?)

2a is from IA. Let me check on that line on WALL. This amalgamates what I had in mind (which is about Payola only, not whether an advertisement is truthful or not) versus what IA had in mind back in 2020 (which is much broader)

4a is from the fact that I forgot that the WA does not actually really protect free speech when I was checking Lexis-Nexis Rexis-Quexis.

[Simone Republic]

Further comments appreciated.

[Simone Republic]

Bump for further feedback.

[Simone Republic]

(IC)

"Another bump," says a bear in a Halloween costume, controlling a drone to try to hit the roof. "If no one cares (and so far, no one cares), this would be submitted sooner rather than later."

[Simone Republic]

Previous draft.

The World Assembly (WA),

Noting that media content are frequently transmitted across multiple WA states;

Believing that the freedom of expression ought not to include the right to express deceptive claims in advertising material or fail to disclose payment for commercial speech;

Desiring unified rules against deceptive and exploitative advertising practices given the vast trading of media content across WA states;

The WA hereby enacts as follows:

1. Definitions.
   
   1. "Advertising material" means any promotion for or on behalf of a payee. This specifically includes negative advertising such as those that disparage a competitor’s product.
   2. "Content" means any media content distributed or transmitted in a WA state, including all forms of text or audio-visual media.
   3. "Outlet" means anyone (or any entity) who operates a service whose main purpose is to provide such content to a wide audience, such as radio stations, social media, or streaming services, and whose content is available to a WA state.
   4. "Payee" means anyone directly or indirectly paying for advertising material, including the payee itself (and its associates), and any third party acting on behalf of the payee.
   5. "Producer" means any producer of content.
2. Claims made in content.
   
   1. Claims made in advertising material must not be deceptive or false; must be substantiated with evidence demandable by the public; and must not omit or distort information necessary for an average consumer to make an informed purchasing decision.
   2. Whenever content is paid for, or has advertising material embedded, in kind or in cash, in which the payer exercises at least some level of control over such content, the payee must prominently disclose (hereafter, "disclosure") such payment, the identity of the payee if applicable, and clearly notify the content consumer as to what specific content was paid for.
   3. The outlet has frontline responsibility to ensure that the appropriate disclosures are made.
3. Responsibilities of outlet.
   
   1. An outlet is required to have reasonable internal controls in place to ensure that all content on their outlet comply with the provisions of this resolution.
   2. Advertising or promotional material for addictive or health-damaging products or services (including gambling and betting) may not be targeted directly at anyone below the legal age of competence.
   3. All outlets have a duty of care to ensure that sponsored content are clearly distinguishable from editorial content, where appropriate.
4. Clarifications. This resolution does not apply to political advertising or other forms of protected speech, and is subject to resolutions previously enacted.

Last call. Note that the term "advertising material" has been slightly modified.

[Simone Republic]

Bump. Given this hasn't had any feedback for a year, I assume it's good.

[Bananaistan]

"Completely and utterly opposed. This is yet another sledgehammer to crack a nut that will have a huge chilling effect on freedom of speech and attempts to impose WA law on non-member nations. The idea that, say, advertisements in newspapers and television must include an accounting of who paid for what is insane. People are generally idiots but they are not so stupid that they won't realise that the ad for WMB's brand new 15 series was paid for WMB."

[Simone Republic]

"Completely and utterly opposed. This is yet another sledgehammer to crack a nut that will have a huge chilling effect on freedom of speech and attempts to impose WA law on non-member nations. The idea that, say, advertisements in newspapers and television must include an accounting of who paid for what is insane. People are generally idiots but they are not so stupid that they won't realise that the ad for WMB's brand new 15 series was paid for WMB."

IC

This is more for disclosures that, to quote your example, in case a "news" broadcast mentions WMB that it requires disclosure that WMB paid for it, or that a "news" disparaging WMB's competitors disclose that WMB paid for it.

[Simone Republic]

Another bump.