Regulatory Warnings and Endorsement Disclosures on Social Media

Abhishek Rishabh
{"title":"Regulatory Warnings and Endorsement Disclosures on Social Media","authors":"Abhishek Rishabh","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3777034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social media platforms such as Instagram have become an important channel for influencer marketing. Regulatory bodies such as FTC(U.S.) and ASA(U.K.) require influencers on these platforms to clearly declare an advertised social media post as an ad using hashtags such as #ad, #sponsored. However, many a times influencers fail to disclose the endorsements. In light of these malpractices, FTC sent notices to 90 influencers in March 2017. In this paper, I estimate the impact of such disclosure notices on a) disclosure levels b) follower engagement. I create a novel dataset which consists of nearly 150,000 posts across 60 influencers. I use difference-in-difference method to find out that after the notice was sent out disclosure increases. I find that follower engagement (likes and comments) for the influencers which received warnings from the FTC got reduced substantially. Interestingly, I find substantial spillover effects of these notices on influencers which are in FTC jurisdiction but didn’t received the notice. Specifically, disclosure percent of these influencers increased and engagement rate reduced, however, as expected these influencers are relatively less impacted by these notices as compared to the influencers which did receive the FTC notice. I find these results consistent across different categories of influencers. This research is relevant for both social media influencers and policy makers, in that, influencers should preemptively disclose because if the regulator sends out notice, then customers may punish the influencer through less engagement. For policymakers, notices turn out to be a substantive policing instrument, in that, it not only effects the influencers who get the notice but also the influencers who are within the jurisdiction but didn’t get the notice.","PeriodicalId":11797,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Regulation (IO) (Topic)","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Regulation (IO) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3777034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social media platforms such as Instagram have become an important channel for influencer marketing. Regulatory bodies such as FTC(U.S.) and ASA(U.K.) require influencers on these platforms to clearly declare an advertised social media post as an ad using hashtags such as #ad, #sponsored. However, many a times influencers fail to disclose the endorsements. In light of these malpractices, FTC sent notices to 90 influencers in March 2017. In this paper, I estimate the impact of such disclosure notices on a) disclosure levels b) follower engagement. I create a novel dataset which consists of nearly 150,000 posts across 60 influencers. I use difference-in-difference method to find out that after the notice was sent out disclosure increases. I find that follower engagement (likes and comments) for the influencers which received warnings from the FTC got reduced substantially. Interestingly, I find substantial spillover effects of these notices on influencers which are in FTC jurisdiction but didn’t received the notice. Specifically, disclosure percent of these influencers increased and engagement rate reduced, however, as expected these influencers are relatively less impacted by these notices as compared to the influencers which did receive the FTC notice. I find these results consistent across different categories of influencers. This research is relevant for both social media influencers and policy makers, in that, influencers should preemptively disclose because if the regulator sends out notice, then customers may punish the influencer through less engagement. For policymakers, notices turn out to be a substantive policing instrument, in that, it not only effects the influencers who get the notice but also the influencers who are within the jurisdiction but didn’t get the notice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社交媒体上的监管警告和背书披露
Instagram等社交媒体平台已经成为网红营销的重要渠道。美国联邦贸易委员会(FTC)和英国广告协会(ASA)等监管机构要求这些平台上的网红明确声明,在社交媒体上发布的广告是广告,并使用#ad, #sponsored等标签。然而,很多时候,网红没有披露代言。鉴于这些不当行为,联邦贸易委员会于2017年3月向90名影响者发出了通知。在本文中,我估计了此类披露通知对a)披露水平b)追随者参与度的影响。我创建了一个新的数据集,其中包括60位有影响力的人的近15万篇帖子。我用差分法发现,在通知发出后,披露增加了。我发现那些收到FTC警告的网红的追随者参与度(喜欢和评论)大大减少了。有趣的是,我发现这些通知对在FTC管辖范围内但没有收到通知的影响者产生了实质性的溢出效应。具体来说,这些影响者的披露百分比增加了,参与度降低了,然而,正如预期的那样,与收到联邦贸易委员会通知的影响者相比,这些影响者受这些通知的影响相对较小。我发现这些结果在不同类别的影响者中是一致的。这项研究对社交媒体影响者和政策制定者都是相关的,因为影响者应该先发制人地披露,因为如果监管机构发出通知,那么客户可能会通过减少参与来惩罚影响者。对于政策制定者来说,通知是一种实质性的监管工具,因为它不仅影响到收到通知的网红,也影响到在管辖范围内但没有收到通知的网红。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sound GUPPI Safe Harbor: A Calibrated Unilateral Effects Screen for Horizontal Mergers with Differentiated Products Consolidation on Aisle Five: Effects of Mergers in Consumer Packaged Goods Optimal Exit Policy with Uncertain Demand Friends in High Places: Demand Spillovers and Competition on Digital Platforms The Ambiguous Competitive Effects of Passive Partial Forward Integration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1