The Ethics of Social Media Influencers

Bailey Hays
bh665415@ohio.edu


If you have a phone, internet, social media, or even plain old television... you know what a social media influencer is.

Social media influencers are everywhere. They are on every social media platform available, they have meet & greets (like celebrities), they create makeup and clothing lines, and they have even become the faces of huge beauty companies.

They have completely changed social media and not made it just an outlet for creative content output... but a business.

According to this article from Media Kix, top influencers on Instagram can make $50,000 just from collaborating with a brand. A blogger named Danielle Bernstein supports herself and makes a living that's in the mid six figures... All from being a social media influencer.

We see #AD all the time on our social media feeds. It can be for vitamins, skin care, clothing, shoes. ANYTHING. But, lets be honest... do we trust these? Do we actually believe that these items work? Or are bloggers simply posting about products to make a buck?

Source: www.smartinsights.com

This is where ethics are very important. Since influencers are considered a business, I believe that they have to have some code of ethics to follow or they must be following some other organizations code of ethics.

Even though it isn't seen as a "typical" job, it's still a job that's bringing in their income. But more importantly, that job is impacting millions of people everyday... which is why it's crucial they have some kind of code of ethics.

For both PRSA and AAF, the first major principle deals with honesty. Which is, to me, the most important value. Truth is so vital because it's how they keep their followers. If they're promoting a product that is horrible and a follower buys it/tests it, they're going to realize that influencer only put it on their page to make money.

The AAF had two interesting principles that I believe are important for influencers. The first is principle 3, which is basically saying that "news or entertainment" people are viewing that is considered advertising... needs to be labeled as advertising. Without this knowledge, people can get confused and not be looking at posts with a business mind.

The other important AAF principle for influencers was principle 4, which is saying that payment or receipt of a free product needs to be revealed when advertising a product. I feel like this is important because it allows a viewer to see if the influencer actually spent money on a product or not, and how trustworthy the ad is.

This video does a good job of talking about the regulations and rules made by the FTC for influencers. With social media becoming more and more important, it's even MORE important for the FTC to update and regulate their guidelines.

I think all of the codes that are guiding advertisers and public relation professionals are very just. When you're in a position where you are influencing people and want to gain their trust, you have to have these ethics. It's essential to any kind of business that wants to have loyal customers or followers that will support them.

But whether or not these people are following these codes? It's hard to say. You never really know whether an influencer likes a product or not. That's the hard part of social media; you can't just straight up ask them to their face. What I have noticed, however, is that many social media influencers have been telling their followers straight forward that they only partner with companies where they like their products.

I think this is a good step for influencers in gaining their followers trust. After all, most of these people are influencing all the people on social media.

We have a code but there is no enforcement...Odd?

Paige Zsebik
pz862718@ohio.edu

For this week, while diving into the explanations of the various Ethics Codes for journalism, I found something to be very strange. There are a multitude of codes such as The Society of Professional Journalists' (SPJ) and Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA) yet all have the same takeaway, there really is no way to strictly enforce them. So then what is the point? Who monitors these things? What consequences will occur when "breaking" them? Will the journalist police find you?
 
When I think of code of conduct, I think of rules, regulations, and clear consequences outlining what happens to the rule breakers. But the ethics codes such as The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) and American Society of Magazine Editors (ASME) do not really spell out the consequences. Maybe it is just me, but I like to have clean cut instructions and know my rights from wrongs. We do not have a mechanism for investigating complaints or enforcing discipline on SPJ members, much less other journalists" The SPJ. Weird right?

These codes include things like truth and accuracy, transparency, avoiding conflicting interests, and being respectful to both parties of the story. Journalists are just expected to "follow them" and that is the end of it. It is clear this explains why social media is blasted with false advertisements of weight loss shakes they swear work or a miracle pill that makes your hair grow 10 inches in a month. We now run into another problem with journalism and today's news. What are we supposed to believe? Where is the truth? If I order your weight loss shake that you swear works and I lose no weight, who is going to reap the domino effect of that? Definitely not the celebrity on Instagram!

Our first week we dove into the truth and how in today's news, we feel as if we are not getting the whole truth, or we are constantly reading between the lines. So to now learn about the multiple ethics codes makes me question why we have our first problem. The answer I now get is because of the lack of enforcement. Because journalists are held to the expectations we will all follow the codes. We have proven that very wrong. So why keep them? What is the point? We have the good ones and the bad ones in the journalism field. What is stopping a good one from reporting false news, or losing their transparency? I guess we can sum up the lack of enforcement to this, de “is not a set of rules, rather a guide that encourages all who engage in journalism to take responsibility for the information they provide, regardless of medium. … It is not, nor can it be under the First Amendment, legally enforceable.” The RCFP

image source: https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-is-kim-kardashian-pushing-sketchy-diet-lollipops

Government Snow Day

In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former contractor for the National Security Agency, shocked the world by publicizing dozens of classified documents containing information about the operations of surveillance programs, both nationally and abroad. In revealing these egregious misuses of power, Snowden has said that he was doing so for the public good. A long time computer security analyst and high level technologist, he had worked for many government agencies. However some of the information he gained there he found to be troubling, and he quit his work in 2013. He felt that it was the public’s right to know how their information was being used. Considering all the risks and responsibilities, he decided to release the papers to the press. Many have debated over Snowden’s motives, if what he did was right or constitutional. Yet for Snowden, the only outcome he feared from releasing the documents was “if nothing changes“.

Though Snowden was the one who took on the task of gathering and sorting this large amount of information, he did not work alone when seeking to publicize it. Glenn Greenwald, a reporter on national security for The Guardian, was one of the people whom Snowden contacted. Though initially hesitant, Greenwald agreed to meet with Snowden and help him to publish the confidential files. The ethics and morals of the whole situation seem to weave in and out of various grey areas, however, looking at several codes of journalistic conduct, in many ways, Greenwald seems to have been acting in accordance to these guidelines, even when taking part in such a controversial, watershed and history-making story.

CBC Interview

Among the websites for the SPJ, RTDNA, and PRSA, upholding the truth is central to the pursuit of news and journalism. RTDNA is quoted as saying “facts should get in the way of a good story“. By publishing truthful information with accuracy, it’s in the best interest of the public good. Says one of the core tenants of journalism: access to unparalleled levels of truth and information can allow people to decided for themselves.

Being a beacon of public good also means reporting on unethical practices without fear of reckoning, even if they are in the media or the government itself. By spotlighting areas of corruption and injustice, people can take action and great change can be made. Like The Washington Post says, “Democracy Dies in Darkness”

Another way Greenwald adheres to this code, is minimizing harm. While many NSA officials say these papers should not have been published at all, Greenwald still took great care when handling such sensitive information. He said that he’d looked over thousands and thousands of documents given to him by Snowden, of which, only a handful were published. He says in the CBC interview that he, and the others he would consult with, made sure that nothing they published would cause significant harm or endanger the nation in unneeded ways. He was scrupulous and selfless, making sure everything they put forth was truly of public interest.

Finally, Greenwald also protected his source. When Snowden first contacted Greenwald he asked to remain anonymous, so much so that he asked Greenwald to install an encryption software on his computer so that their messages would be secure. Greenwald accepted these precautions, yet he also asked Snowden to verify or give him some sort of tangible evidence that he was real, before he traveled around the world to meet him in Hong Kong. Along the course of this odyssey, Greenwald was always assuring his source’s anonymity, and confirming the accuracy of the information he was being given.

The events leading up to and after the Snowden case leave lots of room for discussion. Something like this really puts the media ethics codes to the test, as ways of navigating uncertain terrain while upholding the highest levels of professionalism and integrity. The media, above all, seeks to serve the people, and provide them a valuable service: protecting liberties and being ever vigilant towards wrongdoing. For his reporting on and discernment of such secure information, The Guardian and The Washington Post were awarded the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service. Reading through the list of winners since the award first was given out in 1917 is quite fascinating. Among them include the New York Times for their coverage of The Pentagon Papers, The Washington Post for investigating the Watergate case, and The St. Louis Post-Dispatch for its coverage of the Centralia, Illinois mining disaster. It’s interesting to note how many of these stories follow with an epilog, telling how their reports led to laws being changed, legislature being enacted, and change being made, as it says, for the public good.

Michaela

#spon: Ethics and Social Media Influencers

Christy Hamman
 ch629717@ohio.edu

"Swipe up!" "Use my code for 10% off!" "Today, I wanted to share something with you all that I really love and use every day..."

Sponsored Posts | source: Marie Claire

We've all scrolled across these posts online: in blog posts, in Instagram stories or on YouTube.

Usually, these phrases are part of a sponsored video or post.

These sponsorships are often disclosed in the video description box or the photo caption. 

When we see one of those #ad or “Sponsored” videos, this is called “native advertising.”

The Interactive Advertising Bureau explains:

"Native advertising is a concept encompassing both an aspiration as well as a suite of ad products. It is clear that most advertisers and publishers aspire to deliver paid ads that are so cohesive with the page content, assimilated into the design, and consistent with the platform behavior that the viewer simply feels that they belong.

So… what about my favorite blogger's beloved snack subscriptions or the "unboxings" on my YouTube feed? 

The IAB files all this content under “native advertising.”

This social-media-birthed advertising seemed to me like a chameleon, blending into “regularly-scheduled-programming, Is this ethical?

The American Advertising Federation states in Principle 4 that advertisers need to disclose material conditions, being fully transparent about endorsements, free products, and payment:

“Of concern is the need for advertisers to be transparent about the conditions for creating online endorsements, for example through bloggers or social media. It is often not clear whether people are endorsing on their own, or if they are being compensated by a brand/company or are even part of the brand/company organization.”

The Public Relations Society of America’s Ethics Code explains its provision to ensure the free flow of information by explaining what not to do under this provision:

"A member representing a ski manufacturer gives a pair of expensive racing skis to a sports magazine columnist, to influence the columnist to write favorable articles about the product.”

When I read this, I tilted my head in confusion. Aren't all these unboxing videos I watch titled "PR Unboxing?" Like, PR, as in public relations?

And aren’t those hypothetical skis a gift, just like many social media influencers receive?

“They aren’t paying me to say anything about them—they just sent me this,” is a common in-video disclosure.

The Federal Trade Commission had to make rules for these types of public relations freebies:

 If you received a free or discounted product to provide a review somewhere, your connection to the company should be disclosed everywhere you endorse the product.”

Yes, media-influencers. I read the hashtags. I know the disclaimer in the description box, and I’m pretty sure you’ll get a commission if I use your coupon code.

But I’m still confused.

And I think maybe brands like it that way

.

Native advertising is meant to blend into an influencer’s content. It’s not a banner advertisement, obnoxiously revealing the true nature of a photo. It’s baked into a snack of their other stylish, smiling snaps.

Blending In | source: instagram.com/luciebfink

The AAF and the PRSA clearly state that we disclose advertising. We don’t send product in order to influence opinions.

But I’m still clicking and viewing, just as much as flipping through a magazine or staring at television commercials.

Despite their efforts, I don’t think these ethics codes are clearing up enough of the camouflage created by social media influencers and native advertising.

Soon, we'll see new posts that announce, "Camo is in!" 

Effectiveness of Ethical Codes

Amanda Ehrmantraut
ae513115@ohio.edu

Ethics in public relations and advertising are vastly important, but also complex. Organizations like the American Advertising Federation and the Public Relations Society of America have attempted to create codes that dictate what is right and what is wrong for people in these professions, but by nature they are so abstract that it is difficult to strictly enforce these rules. Rather than rules, in fact, they are more like guidelines— of course, we all know that honesty is important, but loyalty, fairness and conflicts of interest are a little less concrete. When they say to “act in the best interest” of the client or the public, what exactly does that mean?

PRSA’s code of ethics first lays out the professional values that public relations professionals should uphold: advocacy, honesty, expertise, independence, loyalty and fairness. These are ethics that most people in general view as important in their daily life, professionally or otherwise. The descriptions for each of these words go into depth about how to incorporate them into the work environment. They mostly emphasize taking responsibility for your actions and dealing fairly and faithfully with each client. These values all seem like common sense, but in practice, the waters are muddied.

AAF’s code of ethics is based on a set of nine principles. It seems that one of the most vital and repeatedly restated values is transparency in all its different forms. Advertisers should be transparent with their clients and in the goals of their media, as well as with the benefits or endorsements received from their media. Again, they are fairly common-sense guidelines, but they also depend on the judgment of each individual.

Source: www.rjionline.org

When any organization or entity can create and release messages that the consumer directly receives, there is a lot at risk, and I do not think the ambiguity of these guidelines helps that cause. However, in the case of a topic as subjective as ethics, it is difficult to form stricter rules and laws. 

I think it is up to each individual company or firm to set more concrete, easily defined standards for their employees. These overarching codes of ethics are broad, but they are more of a baseline than a final word. Rather than public relations professionals directly following the codes, companies should use them as an outline to build their own. Because of this, I would say that they probably work and are being followed, but again, I think that is more on a company basis than an individual level.

Consumers’ trust in the media has declined in recent years; that is no secret. This decreases the effectiveness of advertising as a whole and must be remedied. However, I do not think codes of ethics are the only way to do this. If a public relations or advertising professional wishes to display unethical behaviors, guidelines will not fix that. There needs to be a better method for determining ethical standards and stricter punishments for those who do not.

 

Try it...You'll Like it

Trish Tierney (tt318700@ohio.edu)

YOU CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT THIS PRODUCT! #lifechanging #worksfirsttime #greatinvestment #ad

We see these claims everyday now on social media and all over the internet. Products, goods and services, you name it and someone near and dear to you is advertising it.

By near and dear to you, I mean your favorite celebrity or athlete. Or, maybe they are not your favorite but they are popular, beautiful, handsome, well built or smart. If they use this product, it has to work, right? They look amazing and they are saying this product will make YOU look and feel the same.

I mean, if Kim Karsdashian uses it then it has to be fantastic, right? Well, think again. Sapna Maheshwari, from the New York Times, explains the new “trick” advertisers and Public Relations Consultants are using to market and advertise to consumers:

“In the case of Ms. West and her sisters, Khloé and Kourtney Kardashian and Kylie and Kendall Jenner, TruthinAdvertising.org, a nonprofit that fights deceptive advertising, asserted that dozens of Instagram posts from the sisters violated guidelines from the F.T.C. that say it should be “clear and conspicuous” to consumers if a person endorsing a product “has been paid or given something of value.” However, while the agency suggests putting “#ad” or “#sponsored” at the start of those kinds of social media posts, or providing verbal disclosures in videos, there are no hard and fast rules.”

Photo: New York Times

In the quote at the start of my blog, notice the placement of the hashtag #ad. And, in the photo above notice Kim Kardashian’s (or the sponsors) carefully placed hashtag for sponsor #sp at the end of her long post. Even though it is expected they put the ads or sponsors information at the start of the post, many do not. 

Are they still following the AAF and PRSA ethics codes? Unfortunately, they probably are. Both require honesty. Who is to say that Kim is not being honest? Maybe she used the product once, maybe she uses it daily. Can we prove or disprove her? And, can we prove she would have used the product even without a lucrative contract? 

More importantly, the ad does seem to follow one of the Principles in the AAF:

Advertisers should clearly disclose all material conditions, such as payment or receipt of a free product, affecting endorsements in social and traditional channels, as well as the identity of endorsers, all in the interest of full disclosure and transparency.

She did disclose it was a sponsored post by using #sp. Where she placed it may be questionable but there seems to be no set rule or standard as to requiring where it be placed. 

Is it dangerous to believe what we read from celebrities? Some say no because we should be able to make up our own minds. If someone says "Try it...You'll Like it", you should exercise your own caution. What happens if you don't?

Matthew Geiger, in an article on LinkedIn, points how that this type of advertising can be dangerous:

The most serious conflicts occur when unsafe or ineffective products and services are promoted by celebrities. Whether discussing Dr. Phil's endorsement of weight loss products based on body shape or the use of tobacco, celebrities can push consumers to purchase things that will not work or can cause harm. It is especially unethical when a celebrity endorsement is used to override expert opinion. When a celebrity interjects his or her non-expert opinion, it had better not undermine the opinion of more qualified individuals.

While there are set ethics codes in place, it is clear they do not cover this new form of advertising. Social Media has been around awhile but the landscape and how it is used changes daily. In order to be effective, the ethics codes need updated to keep up. Along with a strong enforcement, or at the very least-consumers realizing they need to think about what they are reading and determine if the product is right for them. #stoplookandlisten

Social Media and Ethics

Samantha Hamilton 

sh548815@ohio.edu

What do you think about the codes that guide advertisers and public relations professionals? Do they work, are they being followed? 

A company can use strategic communication when advertising, communicating new products, public relations or any entity in this advertising marketing area. Anywhere you can use a strategic process to create a verbal or written message to your audience. In this process the main goal to achieve is to inform the audience or persuade. Today, we are looking into the values and codes that organizations and companies follow that are written by the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and the American Advertising Federation (AAF).


The main way you can use strategic communication to get a message to persuade your viewers in in the social media world. This is where most of marketing has seen rise in numbers and where they can reach the most people for certain companies and products. It is as easy as writing a little message less than 140 characters and hitting post and in minutes millions of people receive the message. It sounds very easy, but you need to make sure you have a specific strategic plan and what your message and vibe you want to give off on the social media platform. You also want to make sure that you are ethically right in everything that you post. This can become a huge issue and be hard to dig yourself out of since these days everything that you post is out there for everyone to see forever. This is even more true with big staple companies.



There is an issue arising of the term “fake news” which is has been an issue on multiple platforms now. The majority of the public still get their information and news from their favorite social media sites still. “About two-thirds of Americans get news on social media about most social media news consumers expect news there to be inaccurate.” (Pew Research Center)

https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/pj_2018-09-10_social-media-news_0-01/

Being a part of the social world realm constantly I have seen many issues for companies following the ethic codes that are set for them to guide them. I feel that influencers are a huge fad right now that many different companies are following. If they can get someone like a Kardashian or Jake Paul. They get a company to contact them and want them to use their product. Then they make a deal normally that every post they make they get a profit or get paid a certain amount. The viewers get misread truth because in reality are those celebrities using that product that are standing in front of a pool taking a picture with? Probably not. This can get out of hand because social media is so easily accessible, and I think sometimes it can get ethically out of hand with many posts that are put out there. Here are some different examples below of influencers for different products