Heavy sigh. PBW posted about Disclosure and what the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has recently decided regarding Word of Mouth Advertising * (from a Washington Post article — may require free registration to access).

Just in case anyone is wondering, I make no money, directly or indirectly from this blog. If I win free books, I do it the same way you do when you enter here for one of my giveaways. I should note Holly Lisle is a personal friend of mine in real life. I tend to speak highly of her books — but only after I have personally read them. Holly has never given me a book written by her that hasn’t been made freely available to everyone else. Wait — I did get a free copy of one of her e-books after performing a pre-publication read through — the same deal she made for the two or three other people who did the same thing — read the pre-publication copy to search for errors and inconsistencies and provide feedback on any I found.

As for everyone else? Some of the authors I recommend I met on-line through Forward Motion. Most I only know in electronic passing. If I don’t like a book, I won’t recommend it. That’s not to say a book I recommend may not be flawed or that you would be guaranteed to enjoy a book I recommend. Everyone has differing tastes and preferences. I have learned over the last few years to be more open to reading genres and subject matter I wouldn’t have considered reading in the past. I’ve been personally pleased with the results of expanding my reading material, and I’m going to recommend things that may do the same for you.

But, seriously, I believe the FTC is really deciding to crack down upon the “fake” fans which ultimately diminish the value of word-of-mouth. These people are being paid by companies to pretend to like something, and it could be difficult for the everyday consumer to tell the difference. I hope it works for the good of consumers everywhere, but my concern is if they become overzealous in enforcement and innocent people are drowned with the burden of proof. For Americans, it could become a significant First Amendment concern — someone who chooses not to speak out because of fear of reprisal is just as limited as someone who cannot speak out. On the other hand, if paid “fans” go unchecked, consumers won’t know who to trust, a problem which is already rampant in other forms of advertising which has lead to the attempt to corrupt the genuine word of mouth campaigns.

*I don’t see anything inherently wrong or ‘evil’ in the efforts by Sony Ericsson  (disclosure:  I use a personally purchased Sony Ericsson s710i cell phone and Sony DSC-V1 CyberShot camera) or Proctor & Gamble’s teenage volunteers cited in the article.  In the case of the camera phones, the intent was to show someone how easy they were to use — that one could have gone over the line depending upon how the actors implemented their roles.