The following is a list of the most important revisions made in the Guides:

• Endorsements must reflect the honest opinions and true experience of the endorser. If paid actors are used, this fact must be disclosed.
• Endorsements may not contain any representations which would be deceptive, or could not be substantiated, if made directly by the advertiser.
• Endorsements must be representative of what consumers can reasonably expect to achieve. Any claim made by the endorser must reflect the opinion or experience of a significant proportion of consumers. Disclaimers like “results not typical” are no longer sufficient.
• All material connections between the advertiser and the endorser (including research or medical organizations) that consumers would not expect must be disclosed, including free products or monetary compensation.

The full text of the guidelines is available here:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005endorsementguidesfnnotice.pdf

So who’s talking about the entrepreneurial recovery? This is the first resource I’ve heard, so I wanted to pass it along.

Toward An Entrepreneurial Recovery

As an entrepreneur, YOU are the key to a sustained recovery – to grow the economy, to create jobs, and to revitalize America.

For this reason, the Kauffman Foundation is spearheading the Entrepreneurs’ Movement to influence the dialog on the future of the country’s economy so that entrepreneurs and their specific needs are at the forefront of the policy decision-making process.

When you join the Entrepreneurs’ Movement you can expect to:

Receive news and information that is relevant to entrepreneurship and to the Movement

Be informed of and provide feedback on policies and programs that affect entrepreneurs

Connect with other entrepreneurs and hear their stories

Speak up for entrepreneurs!

You can join their email list here and also follow them on Twitter.

Here’s a video that is related as well:

Try this free webinar for practical help on how to do word of mouth marketing without running afoul of the law:

Bloggers, marketers and celebrities have a little reading to do this week. Yesterday, the FTC finally released its new “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.” This is the first time the Guides have been updated in twenty-nine years. Bloggers now must disclose any paid reviews or freebies or face fines up to $11,000. The new guides essentially maintain what was true for the rest of the marketing and advertising world, but until now didn’t explicitly include bloggers and user-generated testimonials. WOMMA is pleased that many of the changes correlated with our Ethics Code. We will be hosting an in depth webinar with Paul Rand, WOMMA’s President Elect, and Tony DiResta, WOMMA’s General Counsel this Thursday at 11am CST. To register, please visit http://bit.ly/FTCwebinar.

Here are some key ideas that stood out as I read the document:

Under the revised Guides, advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service as typical when that is not the case will be required to clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect. In contrast to the 1980 version of the Guides – which allowed advertisers to describe unusual results in a testimonial as long as they included a disclaimer such as “results not typical” – the revised Guides no longer contain this safe harbor.

Regarding bloggers it noted: The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service. Likewise, if a company refers in an advertisement to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. And a paid endorsement – like any other advertisement – is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims. (see above for what that might be).

Celebrity endorsers can also be held liable under the new guidelines.

Be sure to read it for yourself. Even a stupid bureaucratic misfire on their part could bankrupt you.

Here is the official press release:

The Federal Trade Commission today announced that it has approved final revisions to the guidance it gives to advertisers on how to keep their endorsement and testimonial ads in line with the FTC Act.

The notice incorporates several changes to the FTC’s Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which address endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities, as well as the disclosure of important connections between advertisers and endorsers. The Guides were last updated in 1980.

Under the revised Guides, advertisements that feature a consumer and convey his or her experience with a product or service as typical when that is not the case will be required to clearly disclose the results that consumers can generally expect. In contrast to the 1980 version of the Guides – which allowed advertisers to describe unusual results in a testimonial as long as they included a disclaimer such as “results not typical” – the revised Guides no longer contain this safe harbor.

The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service. Likewise, if a company refers in an advertisement to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. And a paid endorsement – like any other advertisement – is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims.

Celebrity endorsers also are addressed in the revised Guides. While the 1980 Guides did not explicitly state that endorsers as well as advertisers could be liable under the FTC Act for statements they make in an endorsement, the revised Guides reflect Commission case law and clearly state that both advertisers and endorsers may be liable for false or unsubstantiated claims made in an endorsement – or for failure to disclose material connections between the advertiser and endorsers. The revised Guides also make it clear that celebrities have a duty to disclose their relationships with advertisers when making endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media.

The Guides are administrative interpretations of the law intended to help advertisers comply with the Federal Trade Commission Act; they are not binding law themselves. In any law enforcement action challenging the allegedly deceptive use of testimonials or endorsements, the Commission would have the burden of proving that the challenged conduct violates the FTC Act.

The Commission vote approving issuance of the Federal Register notice detailing the changes was 4-0. The notice will be published in the Federal Register shortly, and is available now on the FTC’s Web site as a link to this press release. Copies also are available from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,700 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.

MEDIA CONTACT:
Betsy Lordan
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-3707

STAFF CONTACT:
Richard Cleland
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3088

I was talking to local car dealer yesterday and his experience is mirrored by dealers across the country. They have sold dozens of autos through the “Cash for Clunkers” program…the government program owes them between $100,000 and $200,000 and they have, to date, only been paid for ONE transaction.

So the promise of “free government money” sounded good. The car dealers jumped on it with abandon, but they are facing some serious cash flow issues while they wait for payment.

When the government is the one paying you, they take their own sweet time and do things their way…

It’s like government health plans designed to save money on Medicaid… doctors found they didn’t pay well in the first place, paid late most of the time while medical offices had bills to pay NOW, and sometimes didn’t pay at all and these HMO’s went bankrupt.

Looking for that “Free Government Money”? While some “free government money” may be viable options for you… most may be more trouble than they’re worth.

If that’s such a crucial issue to the safety of the American populace, where is the FTC when it comes to cracking down on the TV networks, radio networks, and newspaper chains who report on the “Cash for Clunkers” program without disclosing the millions of dollars of advertising revenue they receive from car dealerships who are promoting the “Cash for Clunkers” program wildly? Media watchdogs note that the major TV networks routinely praise the “Cash for Clunkers” program without mentioning it’s downsides.

What’s the difference between a compensated blogger making $5000 and media conglomerates making untold millions? Lawyers and lobbyists – that’s all.

If bloggers should disclose even the remotest compensation, under this same logic, the Federal Trade Commission should immediately SHUT DOWN and impose crippling fines on every media outlet that has taken advertising revenue in any fashion from the auto industry and reported on the “Cash for Clunkers” program without disclosing this financial interest in the program.

It’s that simple.

You’d get in trouble because you’re likely too far “off the beaten” path to be accepted under this program.

More details will be coming out later, but, for now I’m going to alert my readers to this blog.

You may qualify for this if you …

1. Have an existing business (or even operate a non-profit organization or “ministry”) that is easily accessible to the public and properly licensed.

2. Have a clean criminal record.

3. Would like to add a revenue stream or profit center to your existing business or organization.

4. You are friendly to the customer (unlike, say, Seinfeld’s “Soup Nazi”).

5. You are willing to be trained by phone (short term training).

6. You can allocate a fixed amount of space to this profit center – 3 feet by 3 feet is fine.

7. You have Hi Speed Internet Access on site (not negotiable)

8. You have staff available to perform the service during routine business hours.

9. You would like to have new potential customers walking into your business or non-profit.

Locations for this service are being sought nationwide.

While there is no guarantee of any particular revenue level from this venture, the national companies seeking these locations will be investing a signficiant amount of money in the equipment they place in your business. They will not be positioning equipment somewhere they are unlikely to earn a significant return on their investment which is why our existing business locations are currently earning $300, $500, $1000 or more per month offering this easy “add on” service. And, for the business or non profit, there is NO out of pocket cost, no ongoing royalty payments or other fees. You are paid per transaction and pay nothing to partcipate as the service location.

Obviously this is NOT MLM or network marketing. It is a completely digital process. It’s clean, requires no inventory, no shipping, receiving, stocking, and, as a result, there is no “loss” due to theft, breakage, or spoilage!

Ideal business locations for this service we’ve found are:

Insurance agencies

Coffee shops

Shipping stores and/or “Copy Shops”

Lock and Key stores

Non-profit service agencies

Child and Family Service Agencies

Career Centers

Virtually any public small business or non-profit that opens its doors to the working public!

How will you be making money? Did it sound so good you wondered if it were legal by now?

Yes, it’s entirely legal. In fact, you will be helping national companies fulfill state contracts to perform digital fingerprinting for people required by the government to keep their finger prints on file. In this age of homeland security and increasing concern about child protection, this is a “trending topic”!

Nationwide, the demand for these sites – the more people the more locations needed – is growing.

The company telling me about this will be charging a $25 to businesses to register their site. They are the site location firm for these national companies who obtain these government contracts.

A few readers of this blog will be allowed to register their sites for free while the company tests their registration process!

So stay tuned! This will get very interesting.

To register to “win” a free site listing, leave a COMMENT.

In the comment field (in addition to any URL you leave) place your company’s

Name
Address
City State Zip

If it’s verified by Google search, we’ll enter you in the drawing for a free listing and notify winners by email. (It may be several weeks).

This employer is not exactly known for offering generous health benefits… most workers don’t seem to qualify given they have so many part time workers.

But this employer IS known for crushing their competition in every known way.

My guess is they’ll lobby for a plan like the one they have so they have no net tax impact (they think at least) but this type of legislation will likely destroy possible competition by adding an extra layer of overhead to any profit margin they might expect.

Call me cynical, but with Wal Mart already so big, why compete head to head when you can cut off competition from entering the race at all?

I believe that’s why Wal Mart is making their play now. To take the focus off what they don’t do and as an added benefit to eliminate potential competition.

Early on, President Barack Obama’s magical mystery tour gained power in places you would not expect it to — winning critical victories in overwhelmingly white, socially conservative Great Plains and Midwestern states. Yet today, he has built one of the narrowest administrations, both ideologically and regionally, in recent memory.

This trend became apparent in a new National Journal study of the administration’s top 366 officials. To be sure, the Obama team has more Hispanics, African-Americans and women than its predecessors. But beyond gender and color, the Journal reports, this is an administration of remarkable sameness.

For one thing, people with practical business experience — outside of finance — have little role in formulating economic policy. This differs from the Bush administration’s tilt toward traditional autocracies; this is more rule by the cognitive elites. A history of real problem solving seems to matter less than the quality of university pedigrees; the Obama team appears to be a bit like a giant law review, drawing on only the best and brightest from places such as the University of Chicago, Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, as well as some elite think-tank denizens.

This narrow gauge is even clearer geographically. There are few people around the president who come directly from exurbs or small towns; virtually all the inner circle hail from a handful of locales — Washington, Chicago, New York, Boston and the Bay Area. Remarkably, according to the National Journal, only 7 percent worked last year in a state carried by John McCain. Red appears to be one color that does not pass diversity muster for this administration.

The danger here is not so much inexperience but a vision clouded by similar experiences and prejudices from the liberal wing of the baby boomer generation. The president remains broadly popular with the young, yet his administration is actually older than that of President George W. Bush. Obama may be a millennial matinee idol, but his administration appears boomer-dominated in its point of view.

Read it all

Here’s the warning Bill Mencarow of Paper Source Online sent out today.

All home business people should tell the Government to back off with their stupid, ill conceived regulations.

H.R. 1728 has recently passed the U.S. House of Representatives and has been sent to the Senate for a vote. It says you won’t be able to sell residential real estate using owner financing more than once every three years unless you have a government license.

Please take a few moments to read this e-mail and then contact your two U.S. Senators. Sample letters are at the end. If you need your senators’ contact information, go here:
http://snipurl.com/senatorscontactinfo
Thank you for helping to stop this horrible bill.