{"id":20689,"date":"2022-12-03T00:37:01","date_gmt":"2022-12-03T00:37:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/12\/03\/google-strikes-9-4-million-settlement-with-ftc-for-paying-djs-and-influencers-to-praise-phones-they-never-touched\/"},"modified":"2022-12-03T00:37:01","modified_gmt":"2022-12-03T00:37:01","slug":"google-strikes-9-4-million-settlement-with-ftc-for-paying-djs-and-influencers-to-praise-phones-they-never-touched","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/12\/03\/google-strikes-9-4-million-settlement-with-ftc-for-paying-djs-and-influencers-to-praise-phones-they-never-touched\/","title":{"rendered":"Google Strikes $9.4 Million Settlement With FTC For Paying DJs And Influencers To Praise Phones They Never Touched"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n
<\/p>\n

\n

from the artificial-enthusiasm<\/i> dept<\/h3>\n

The FTC and four state attorneys general this week struck a $9.4 million settlement with Google over allegations that Google covertly paid celebrities money to promote a phone none of them had ever used. <\/p>\n

The FTC\u2019s announcement<\/a> states that the agency had previously filed suit against Google and iHeartMedia for airing nearly 29,000 deceptive endorsements by radio personalities and influencers, promoting their use of and experience with Google\u2019s Pixel 4 phone in 2019 and 2020.\u00a0The FTC and state AGs said the DJs and influencers had never actually so much as touched the phones, violating truth in advertising rules:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cIt is common sense that people put more stock in first-hand experiences. Consumers expect radio advertisements to be truthful and transparent about products, not misleading with fake endorsements,\u201d said Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey. \u201cToday\u2019s settlement holds Google and iHeart accountable for this deceptive ad campaign and ensures compliance with state and federal law moving forward.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Of course, this kind of obscured financial relationship is happening constantly, especially in the influencer space. But like most U.S. regulators, the FTC lacks the staff, finances, or overall resources to police this stuff with any meaningful consistency. So instead, they occasionally fire a warning shot over the bow of the biggest and worst offenders, in the hopes that it scares others into behaving. <\/p>\n

The Pixel 4 is a three-generation old phone, so, as usual, any regulatory action on this kind of stuff happens pretty late, if it happens at all. It sounds like Google would have been fine if it had just had the influencers more generally imply that they loved the phone, and it was the phony first-person endorsements that got Google and iHeartMedia in trouble. <\/p>\n

More generally, poorly or non-disclosed influencer marketing arrangements are everywhere<\/a>, and the FTC\u2019s simply too inundated with other responsibilities to take aim at the problem with any real consistency. Still, the agency issued warnings to 700 companies in 2021 that it was at least paying attention to the problem<\/a>, something that can\u2019t be said of previous incarnations of the agency. <\/p>\n

\nFiled Under: disclosure<\/a>, ftc<\/a>, influencers<\/a>, marketing<\/a>, phones<\/a>, regulatory enforcement<\/a>
\n
Companies: google<\/a>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n