by Grandma EK » Sun Jan 19, 2025 11:55 pm
by Of The Revived Soviet Union » Sun Jan 19, 2025 11:58 pm
Grandma EK wrote:The World Assembly,
Recognizing that across the many nations of the World Assembly people dislike seeing sponsored advertising in the content that people make on social media,
Understanding that many companies such as Candy end up being scams to both the creator and the viewer,
Noticing that people comment timestamps in the comments of social media videos where the sponsored segment starts so people can skip through them,
Hereby enact that:
1. Paid sponsorship segments in social media content
a. A content creator is not allowed to accept any form of money to verbally endorse a product in their content.
b. A content creator is not allowed to accept any form of money to subtly include a product throughout a piece of content.
c. A content creator is not allowed to have a recurring sponsorship on every one of their pieces of content.
2. Unpaid endorsements in social media content
a. Content creators ARE allowed to endorse products if not affiliated with the company in question in any way.
a1. This applies to blog posts as well
b. A content creator must directly say that their endorsement is not affiliated with the company.
—————————————————————-
(Let’s ignore the fact that this nation is based on a character from a squarespace ad)
by Tinhampton » Mon Jan 20, 2025 4:39 am
by Kasdados » Mon Jan 20, 2025 4:41 am
by Tinhampton » Mon Jan 20, 2025 4:47 am
Kasdados wrote:Would ads count?
by Kasdados » Mon Jan 20, 2025 4:50 am
Tinhampton wrote:Kasdados wrote:Would ads count?
This proposal only applies to "content creators." Hosting platforms do not create content, they only host it, so they remain within their right to ensure that adverts are carried on those places where content creators may post, separately from such content (whether as pre-roll and mid-roll ads, associated banner ads, pop-up ads, or otherwise).
by Alkzine » Mon Jan 20, 2025 5:40 am
by The Byrdlands » Mon Jan 20, 2025 6:25 am
by Kasdados » Mon Jan 20, 2025 8:51 am
The Byrdlands wrote:Opposed, this is a completely ridiculous proposal. Not only is this absolutely not an issue that the WA should be legislating on, it would also absolutely kill the livelihoods of many content creators. Sponsorships are an incredibly important part of many content creator's revenue, and often make up the bulk of it. To ban sponsorships outright would put immense strain on many innocent people just trying to make a living.
Like Tin says, a proposal banning undisclosed partnerships would be better, but I also just believe this is far too small of an issue for the WA to be effective in enforcing.
by Seroscapia » Mon Jan 20, 2025 9:01 am
The Byrdlands wrote:Opposed, this is a completely ridiculous proposal. Not only is this absolutely not an issue that the WA should be legislating on, it would also absolutely kill the livelihoods of many content creators. Sponsorships are an incredibly important part of many content creator's revenue, and often make up the bulk of it. To ban sponsorships outright would put immense strain on many innocent people just trying to make a living.
Like Tin says, a proposal banning undisclosed partnerships would be better, but I also just believe this is far too small of an issue for the WA to be effective in enforcing.
Seroscapia is a Norse nation, benevolent autocracy, and pagan theocracy made up of various nomadic ethno-religious pagan groups in Northern Europe that resisted Christianization and were exiled from their respective homelands, until, after centuries of despair, received, with open arms a gift from the Gods in form of the promised lands for being the last beacon of loyalty for the true deities and resisting the wrath of worldwide Monotheism.
by Providence Plantations and Rhode Island » Mon Jan 20, 2025 9:13 am
by Grandma EK » Mon Jan 20, 2025 1:29 pm
Kasdados wrote:Tinhampton wrote:This proposal only applies to "content creators." Hosting platforms do not create content, they only host it, so they remain within their right to ensure that adverts are carried on those places where content creators may post, separately from such content (whether as pre-roll and mid-roll ads, associated banner ads, pop-up ads, or otherwise).
So, how would creators make money?
by Elyreia » Mon Jan 20, 2025 1:38 pm
by The Ice States » Mon Jan 20, 2025 2:10 pm
by The Overmind » Mon Jan 20, 2025 5:47 pm
by Pathonia » Mon Jan 20, 2025 5:54 pm
by The Byrdlands » Mon Jan 20, 2025 9:08 pm
Pathonia wrote:We'd probably oppose on IC grounds, it'd likely harm what few independent social media outlets there are here by depriving them of a main source of revenue, and probably forcing them to resort to requiring paid subscriptions by their users instead.
At least, I think so, I might've misread what a 'sponsored ad' is, which in my mind is really just an ad put up by an entity on a website, in exchange for paying the site to host the ad in question.
OOCly, I think the benefit of ad-less social media probably wouldn't make up for the draconian measures those sites would need to resort to in order to make money, unless you wanted to perhaps include a provision forcing the governments of member-states to finance social media outlets.
by Grandma EK » Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:06 pm
by The Overmind » Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:12 pm
Grandma EK wrote:How do I know if my proposal goes into voting?
by Grandma EK » Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:30 pm
by The Overmind » Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:31 pm
Grandma EK wrote:Do I have to submit a draft here?
by Grandma EK » Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:32 pm
by Of The Revived Soviet Union » Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:34 pm
Grandma EK wrote:Has anybody ever succeeded having a proposal submitted without having a draft here?
Advertisement
Advertisement