
Joel N. Kreizman
Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
Date: March 20, 2015
Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comHowever, businesses looking to boost their online reviews with offers of compensation or other financial incentives could face legal action by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
In a recent enforcement action, the FTC charged a California shipping company with deceptive advertising after the company failed to disclose that it gave customers a $50 discount as long as they agreed to review AmeriFreight’s services. In addition, the company offered a $100 monthly prize for the review with the “most captivating subject line and best content.” In its defense, AmeriFreight maintained that customers were paid regardless of whether they posted negative or positive reviews.
The FTC was unpersuaded. As detailed in a recent FTC blog post:
In short, AmeriFreight encouraged customers to endorse the company with offers of discount payments and other incentives, and then advertised those positive reviews to lure prospective new customers to the company. The problem with this approach is that when it paid consumers to endorse the company, AmeriFreight was obligated to disclose those payments, but it didn’t. According to the FTC, this is deceptive.
According to the FTC, AmeriFreight ran afoul of the agency’s requirement that consumers have a right to know when there’s a material connection between an advertiser and an endorser. As stated in the FTC’s Endorsement Guidelines: “When there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed.”
AmeriFreight will not face any monetary sanctions for its violation. Rather, the FTC appears to be using the company to set an example. Under the terms of its settlement with AmeriFreight, the company is prohibited “from misrepresenting that any products or services are highly rated or top-ranked based on unbiased customers reviews or that their customer reviews are unbiased.” Going forward, the order also requires AmeriFreight to disclose material connections between its company and people who endorse its products or services.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
However, businesses looking to boost their online reviews with offers of compensation or other financial incentives could face legal action by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
In a recent enforcement action, the FTC charged a California shipping company with deceptive advertising after the company failed to disclose that it gave customers a $50 discount as long as they agreed to review AmeriFreight’s services. In addition, the company offered a $100 monthly prize for the review with the “most captivating subject line and best content.” In its defense, AmeriFreight maintained that customers were paid regardless of whether they posted negative or positive reviews.
The FTC was unpersuaded. As detailed in a recent FTC blog post:
In short, AmeriFreight encouraged customers to endorse the company with offers of discount payments and other incentives, and then advertised those positive reviews to lure prospective new customers to the company. The problem with this approach is that when it paid consumers to endorse the company, AmeriFreight was obligated to disclose those payments, but it didn’t. According to the FTC, this is deceptive.
According to the FTC, AmeriFreight ran afoul of the agency’s requirement that consumers have a right to know when there’s a material connection between an advertiser and an endorser. As stated in the FTC’s Endorsement Guidelines: “When there exists a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience), such connection must be fully disclosed.”
AmeriFreight will not face any monetary sanctions for its violation. Rather, the FTC appears to be using the company to set an example. Under the terms of its settlement with AmeriFreight, the company is prohibited “from misrepresenting that any products or services are highly rated or top-ranked based on unbiased customers reviews or that their customer reviews are unbiased.” Going forward, the order also requires AmeriFreight to disclose material connections between its company and people who endorse its products or services.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!