• Best CPA Networks
  • Best Cost-Per-Sale Affiliate Networks
  • Best Pay-Per-Call Networks
  • mThink Digital
  • Thought Leadership
    • White Papers
  • About
    • Content Marketing
    • Content Strategy
      • Web Content
      • Social Media Strategy
      • Webinars & Video
      • Thought Leadership
    • Performance Marketing
    • Portfolio
      • Revenue Performance
      • Accenture
      • Microsoft
      • Java Detour
      • Our Process
    • Contact Us

mThink

Blue Book Logo

BlueBook Logo

The Trusted Name in Performance Marketing

Revenue & eCommerce Blog

  • Home
  • Blue Book
    • About Blue Book
    • Blue Ribbon Panel
    • Interviews
    • Research Methodology
    • Back Issues
    • Advertising
      • Website Creative Specifications
      • Newsletter Creative Specifications
  • Best CPA Networks
  • Best Cost-Per-Sale Affiliate Networks
  • Best Pay-Per-Call Networks
  • Best European CPA Networks
  • Best CPA Networks for Affiliates
  • Best CPA Networks for Advertisers

FTC’s Assault on Paid-For Rankings, Ratings and Review Websites Continues

February 10, 2020 by Richard B. Newman

The FTC’s Endorsement Guides provide that if there is a “material connection” between an endorser and an advertiser – in other words, a connection that might affect the weight or credibility that consumers give the endorsement – that connection should be “clearly and conspicuously” disclosed, unless it is already clear from the context of the communication.  A material connection could be a business or family relationship, monetary payment, or the gift of a free product.

Importantly, the Endorsement Guides apply to both marketers and endorsers.

A key issue is – and always has been – whether consumers understand the reviewer’s relationship to the company whose products are being recommended.  FTC defense lawyers have also begun to see the agency utilizing civil investigative demands (CIDs) to delve into the factors behind rankings and placements, including underlying algorithms.

Consider the recent announcement by the Federal Trade Commission that the operators of a website that compares student loans and other financial products have agreed to settle allegations that they misled consumers to believe their website provided objective product information, when in fact they offered higher rankings and ratings to companies that paid for placement.

In an administrative complaint against Delaware-based LendEDU and its operators Nathaniel Matherson, Matthew Lenhard, and Alexander Coleman, the FTC also alleged the company touted fake positive reviews of its LendEDU.com website.

“LendEDU told consumers that its financial product rankings were based on objective and unbiased information about the quality of the product being offered, but in fact LendEDU sold its rankings to the highest bidder,” said FTC attorney Andrew Smith, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection. “These misrepresentations undermine consumer trust, and we will hold lead generators like LendEDU accountable for their false promises of objectivity.”

According to the FTC’s complaint, the operators of LendEDU.com falsely claimed that the website provided “objective,” “accurate,” and “unbiased” information about consumer financial products, such as student loans, personal loans, and credit cards.  Specifically, as alleged by the FTC, LendEDU misrepresented that the information on its website was not affected by compensation from advertisers.

In addition, the complaint alleges that LendEDU and its operators misrepresented that consumer reviews on its website and third-party websites reflected actual experiences of impartial consumers.  In most instances, as alleged by the FTC< those reviews were written or made up by LendEDU employees, their family or friends, or other individuals with personal or professional relationships with LendEDU.

According to the FTC’s complaint, reviews about LendEDU’s website and customer service appear on third-party review platforms, including trustpilot.com, which allows users to select a star rating when reviewing a company.  Of the 126 reviews on trustpilot.com, 90 percent were written or made up by LendEDU employees or their family, friends, or other associates, and all of these manufactured reviews provided five-star ratings for the company, according to the FTC.

The proposed settlement order by would prohibit the company and its operators from making the same types of misrepresentations cited in the FTC’s complaint. The proposed order also requires the company to pay $350,000.

Commissioner Rebecca K. Slaughter issued a concurring statement on the matter.  “In this matter, our dedicated staff in the Division of Financial Practices assembled a powerful complaint that underscores how pay-to-play greed and deception have corrupted the ratings and rankings on which consumers increasingly rely to make informed purchasing choices online … I write separately to highlight the importance of this case in addressing a cutting edge market practice that I fear is becoming increasingly common online: purportedly neutral rankings and recommendations that actually reflect paid product placement.  The complaint’s second count alleges that the respondents violated section 5 of the FTC Act by deceptively failing to “disclose adequately to consumers that financial services companies paid Respondents for website content, including rate tables, rankings, and star ratings.”  Companies that engage in pay-to-play rankings and ratings should take heed: This conduct robs consumers of vital information, pollutes our online marketplaces, and violates the law, which will result in serious consequences.”

This matter should be of interest to marketers and lead generators involved in paid-for ratings, rankings, comparison and/or review campaigns.  If you or your company are interested in implementing preventative compliance measures, or have received an FTC subpoena, a civil investigative demands (CID) or have been named as a defendant in an enforcement lawsuit, contact experienced FTC defense lawyers.

Richard B. Newman is one of the leading FTC defense lawyers in the digital marketing industry.  Follow him on National Law Review @FTC Defense Lawyers and Facebook  @FTC Defense Attorneys.

Informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May be considered attorney advertising.

Related posts:

  1. Court Addresses Unconstitutional TCPA Damages and Who Can be Held Liable A company that managed the ownership rights of a film...
  2. Federal Court Holds TCPA Plaintiff Did Not Adequately Allege ATDS In Bader v. Navient Solutions, LLC (N.D. Ill. June 14,...
  3. Nevada Passes Law Allowing Opt-Out of Data Sale Nevada has just passed SB 220, a data privacy law...
  4. FDA Position on Cannabis-Derived Compounds Regulation of Products Containing Cannabis and Cannabis-Derived Compounds Immediately following...

Filed Under: Blue Book, Revenue, Revenue Blog Tagged With: FTC Compliance, FTC compliance attorney

Survey

The Blue Book survey for the 2021 rankings is now closed. Winners announced in January!

Search

ROS Column 2 High – 300×250 (Global)

ROS Column 2 Mid – 300×250 (Global)

ROS Column 2 Low – 300×misc (Global)

Subscribe to our newsletter!

* indicates required

Lowest Ad in Column 2 – 300×250

Recent Posts

  • How to Set Up a Warm Transfer Campaign Without Breaking the Bank (Step by Step)
  • Five Advertisers Speak Their Minds on the Importance of Network Partnerships, Transparency, and Fraud Prevention
  • Why All Media Buyers Need to Add Pay Per Call in 2021
  • Court Holds No TCPA Standing With Ringless Voice Mail Message
  • Promote E-gift Cards to Drive More Last-Minute Holiday Sales
  • Ecommerce Is On Top Of The World As Consumers Embrace Online Shopping Like Never Before
  • DoJ Announces Historic Civil Penalty in a Telemarketing Enforcement Action
  • How ClickDealer Grew To Be The Best CPA Network In Europe – An Interview with Taras Kiseliuk
  • Why Fewer, Better Customers Is The Way To Thrive – An Interview With Olivier Bourque, CrakRevenue
  • The Best CPA Networks In Europe
  • Alexandra Forsch of Awin & ShareASale Talks Opportunities, Technology & How Affiliate Marketing Will Take A Bigger Share Of Ad Budgets
  • How Networks Drive Efficiencies For Advertisers & Publishers – An Interview With Some of The Perform[cb] Leadership Team
  • Can an EBR be Created DURING a Telephone Solicitation?
  • Beyond 2020: Perform[cb] on the Future of Performance Marketing
  • PerformLEAP®: The Future Of Marketing Platforms?

About mThink

mThink is a specialist digital marketing company based in San Francisco. We focus on media buying, Facebook marketing, direct response, social and mobile. In addition mThink produces the annual Blue Book Rankings of major performance marketing networks. Read More »

Copyright ©2021 · mThink. All rights reserved.
3053 Fillmore Street, Suite 325 | (415) 787-0250
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy