It would be nice to think that this report would signal the end of deceptive practices in the marketing arena. Sure it will. Sorry to be a skeptic, but this quote just pushed me over the top:
The group has also tried to hold members accountable. Sernovitz said the group is reviewing the membership status of the Edelman public relations firm after Wal-Mart, one of the firm's clients, reportedly gave positive comments to bloggers who then posted the comments without mentioning the source. Edelman later admitted that some of its employees had written the blogs.
Yeah, that was effective enforcement, followed immediately by the blogging across Wal-Mart work, for which, again, the organization, "reviewed" the membership status. And Edelman is just the tip of the iceberg.
And finally, weighing in with a TOTALLY unbiased view comes...a company getting paid to track buzz! You are kidding me...here it is:
Peter Blackshaw, chief marketing officer for Nielsen BuzzMetrics, which tracks the effectiveness of word-of-mouth marketing, said brands have more than a moral incentive to be upfront with consumers. "There's a high turn-off factor if consumers learn that the person making a recommendation is actually on contract," with an incentive to push a product, he said.
First, morality and marketing don't always go together. Second, that's like saying politicians have a moral responsibility to air informative ads. Here in the US we've just been through election -- anyone believe that?
Just a terrible story by the Post. Factually accurate, I'm sure, but totally not useful.