ReactS : Advertising Lawyers & Attorneys : Reed Smith Law Firm : Marketing Regulations, Product Placement

If you can't beat them, join them. News this week that Facebook and Myspace, two of the biggest rivals in the social media arena, are to form a rather unlikely alliance. Myspace has dubbed the move its "Mashup with Facebook". The partnership will allow Myspace users to create a "personalised stream of entertainment content" by matching their likes and interests on Facebook to relevant Myspace topic pages, profiles, videos and other content in various categories such as TV and film, music and celebrities. It also allows users to engage with other fans who share the same interests, further promoting the concept of sharing, which is at the heart of social media. And this is about to be made even easier, since Myspace will reportedly soon incorporate the Facebook "Like" button onto its site. The collaboration appears to be engineered by both companies to combat the potential threat created by the launch of Apple's music-orientated social network, Ping, in September this year. Ping allows the estimated 160 million iTunes users to follow their favourite artists and friends to find out what music people are talking about, listening to and downloading. They can find out about tour dates, and share views on new material. According to Apple, the number of users on its new social media service rocketed to 1 million within 48 hours of its launch, so the threat to other social networks is apparently very real, although as Josh Halliday points out in The Guardian, this threat may ultimately be limited, since Apple's social network is restricted to users of iTunes.

The benefits for advertisers with the Myspace-Facebook alliance remain to be seen, but it goes without saying that with a potential combined audience of upwards of 600 million users worldwide, and growing, brand engagement opportunities seem endless. Lady Gaga currently has 32.6 million people "liking" her on Facebook, and 1.4 million friends on Myspace, not to mention her 7 million followers on Twitter. The major international brand Starbucks, has over one million followers on Twitter, and over 18 million "likes" on Facebook. In a week which saw the announcement of a new royal engagement, it is pertinent to note that even the Queen of England now maintains a vast presence on social media sites, running an official profile on Facebook, tweeting on her official Twitter page, and operating an official YouTube channel. It is essential these days for any and all brands to actively participate in the social media environment. But social media marketing is littered with legal and reputational pit-falls and advertisers need to tread carefully. Please see our AdGuide for further information on how to navigate this minefield and protect your brand online.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The news that Prince William is to marry Kate Middleton has caused huge media excitement in the UK and across the world. Like all celebrities, Will and Kate attract huge interest and brands want to benefit from association with a major event, a royal wedding between the future King of England and a commoner being possibly the most important national celebrations in many years.

Many people will have no interest in the nuptials at all. Equally an overly extravagant ceremony and festivities, in what will be an inevitably difficult financial year for many in UK , may be unpopular. For the Royal family there will be a fine line between staging a show to boost morale amongst many Royal supporters, while not being seen to be spending too much money in a year when even the Queen has been forced to make financial cuts to her budget. Nevertheless, thousands are expected to want to join the celebrations of this fairytale romance and there is undeniable benefit to advertisers associating themselves with the story. The media frenzy will continue in the lead up the wedding and focus not only on the wedding day itself, but on all elements surrounding future Princess Catherine's life, what she wears, where she goes, what she likes to buy.

Advertisers and ad agencies beware however, there are a few important legal issues that restrict the use of Royalty and royal emblems and insignia, uniforms and private buildings in advertising.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Governments across the world are increasingly under pressure from privacy advocates and some consumers to better regulate the use of personal data on line. Under Ed Vaizey's proposed plan announced last week, Google and Facebook and other social media networks and search engines would be required to sign up to a new code under which consumers would be able to get redress if they feel their privacy has been invaded.

The UK government is in discussions with the ICO, Information Commissioners Office, about how to develop such a code. What this will mean for advertisers using social media is as yet unclear though Ed Vaizey likened this idea to the mediation service offered by the Press Complaints Commission, which is both worrying and perhaps reassuring since the PCC is not renowned as particularly effective means of redress for consumers but is totally self regulated by the newspaper industry. Thus we might be led to assume that the search engines are being asked to run their own such self regulatory body. Given the lack of funds in the public purse one can assume this to be the case. No doubt Google will argue that it already has means for consumers to complain and seek redress. The cost of establishing and maintaining an independent body offering a complaints and mediation service would be colossal and without funding it seems unlikely this idea will take off in the immediate future.

What would it mean though for website owners and major brands?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Completely free-range pork? Pigs might fly, according to the ASA. Waitrose is the only major supermarket never to have its advertising fall foul of the Advertising Codes until its recent high-profile celebrity-endorsed advertising campaign which has been dealt a rather embarrassing blow. The £10m campaign fronted by Delia Smith and Heston Blumenthal, aims to reinforce Waitrose’s brand image as a supermarket priding itself on the provenance and traceability of its produce. These ads have also been accompanied by recipes and a new range of products. However, a recent ASA adjudication held that two TV ads and one press ad concerning Waitrose's pork products were misleading and in breach of rule 5.11 of the BCAP Code and rule 7.1 of the CAP Code. The first TV ad showed Heston outdoors with some pigs saying "in my opinion, some of the best tasting pork comes from British pigs that have been outdoor bred, just like these pigs". The ad then features a conversation between Heston and a pig farmer concerning the effect "plenty of fresh air, cereal-based diet and of course a comfortable bed" has on the meat’s flavour. The second TV ad stated "Waitrose essential pork comes from pigs that are outdoor bred." The print ad stated "All essential Waitrose pork and bacon comes from British outdoor bred pigs…". However, it emerged that these pigs, whilst technically bred in fields, were reared indoors after only a few weeks. Waitrose argued that there was a clear difference between an animal being "outdoor bred" and "outdoor reared". The ASA said this was confusing to consumers, and the ads have been banned from appearing again in their current form.

Other supermarkets have received complaints in a similar vein, but have managed to save their bacon. A Sainsbury’s TV ad earlier this year featuring Jamie Oliver was challenged for claims that Sainsbury’s pork sausages were made from 100% British pork, a possible interpretation being that there were no other ingredients. The ASA held, however, that the majority of viewers would appreciate that sausages are made from ingredients other than meat and would view the statement as a reference to the origin of the meat only. Likewise, Tesco recently received

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks