Posh frockers Lord & Taylor spanked after Instagram fillies shocker Fashion retailer Lord & Taylor has been slapped on the wrist by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for paying people to post pictures wearing one of its dresses without disclosing the fact. Back in March last year, the company paid 50 online fashion "influencers" between $1,000 and $4,000 to wear a dress it sent them and …
I read about the UK advertising standards slapping down companies for making claims that are not only legal but widely accepted as normal in the US, but I was surprised to see this is illegal in the US. I'd much rather enforce laws against false advertising than laws against astroturfing.
"I'd much rather enforce laws against false advertising than laws against astroturfing."
False advertising is never likely to be enforceable. You're supposed to know that if you buy that new car advertised with the two sexy ladies that the ladies are not included. Did you want to see a disclaimer on the ads?
You should see what they get away with in Spain. One milk advert claims it will help the intellectual development of your child and Danone just manage to stop short of claiming their products will cure cancer, they will cure everything else. However the best one is for self regulation of advertisers which obviously claims self regulation works and adverts are truthful.
You're supposed to know that if you buy that new car advertised with the two sexy ladies that the ladies are not included.
Please, tell me that's not true. What's the point of winning the lottery and buying a car that makes you look like an utter twat if you don't get to play with the accessories? Gutted I am...
@Ole Juul "You're supposed to know that if you buy that new car advertised with the two sexy ladies that the ladies are not included."
Ole, everyone knows the sexy ladies aren't included with the car. They will, however, flock to you after you purchase the car. The same is true of beer, aftershave lotion, razors, cologne, clothing, and many other fine products.
I don't expect you to take my word for this, but I'm telling you, I saw it on the television!
it will be prohibited from carrying out such misrepresentations in the future and will require people it has paid to display its goods to clearly disclose the fact. [...]
The FTC did not impose a fine
This is barely a stern telling off, it's just a finger-wagging.
'Guilty. But we'll let you off if you never, never, ever do it again. OK?'
What response will be engendered by requiring that the stooges publicly admit, in appropriate context, to having whored their on-line personas to a commercial enterprise?
'OMFG! Easy money! Ker-fucking-ching! Sign me up.'
As for: "Companies are going to have to be much more careful and/or honest in future if they don't want the FTC knocking at their doors.", let me FTFY:
'Companies are going to have to be much more careful and/or honest in future if they don't want the FTC polishing their door knockers.'
"For $4k, what the hell I'll wear a frock for a photo.
Will borrow some lipstick even...
After that well it's just a jump to the left and a step to the right ?"
Dr Scott, Jad, Branett. You have no right to make me giggle uncontrollably and misspell people's names. You'll need the mind bleach if I reminisce any further here.
I almost always do this.
Rule 1 Don't attempt to buy clothes that someone else is already wearing. They are likely not for sale anyway
Rule 2 Always prefer clothes that someone else hasn't worn already. If they have been worn insist on washing as a condition of sale
simples
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
