Dave’s Take

On previous blogs, I’ve commented on the new FTC regulations designed to reduce false ad claims made by advertisers on broadcast and online promotional channels. While I completely support the stronger rules due to take effect in December, I questioned the part of the law that forces bloggers to disclose any compensation they receive from sponsors.

While transparency is a noble goal with all public interaction, nitpicking with writers over petty discounts or free samples seems to strain the credibility of the stated purpose of the new law. Since I have yet to read a PDF of the entire bill, I’m hoping that its final version sets some reasonable threshold for monetary compensation, say anything over $100 in actual remuneration. Previously, I’ve expressed my concerns about threatening bloggers over failure to disclose any kind of compensation or discount and how such harassment could have a chilling effect with online reporter’s/blogger’s ability to review products and services.

Online Media Daily has just published an article about the legalities of blogging and its good news for news sites and independent bloggers. According to OMD, the Citizens Media Law Project has launched a new service that will provide free legal services to small news sites and bloggers. While intended mainly for use by nonprofits, its legal team will help those who qualify (they have to be making less than $45,000 for individuals and less than $100,000 for nonprofit organizations). For profits are limited to those grossing less than $250,000. Individual online publishers can qualify on a case-by-case basis, regardless of income.

The backbone of the project is a conglomeration of First Amendment law firms, including such well-known barristers as Baker & McKenzie. A gaggle of nine firms comprise the legal force that will represent writers, reporters and journalists who write about matters of public interest from being legally harassed as a result of their stories. According to David Ardia, Director of the Citizen Media Law Project, the intended goal of the group is to protect writing and reporting with national implications, as opposed to those focused mainly on local issues. The stated motto of the program is to protect those writers that adhere to the standards of “truth, fairness and transparency”, a noble threshold indeed.

This is the type of logical, necessary program that not only helps protect our First Amendment rights, but also works to eliminate the “David vs. Goliath” type of intimidation big firm lawsuits create. As summed up by Jay Rosen, a journalism professor at New York University, “We have taken down the barriers to participation in other ways, but one of the final barriers is legal resources—which are difficult for individual (online) providers to afford.” Amen to that, professor.