13 thoughts on “ParaUSA Makes The Greatest 1911s Ever!”

  1. Bah. I just WISH that I’d had actual paid endorsements for the seven-odd years I was blogging — I might still be blogging today if I had. Roughly speaking, Springfield and Remington (to name just two) probably owe me a hundred grand each, for all the unpaid endorsements I put their way over that time.

    As for Collector’s… oy, it hurts to think.

  2. Sebastian,
    For once I totally agree with you (well, except for that part about Para making the best 1911!) …. the FTC can kiss my ass as well.

    And I’m just looking to up my readership!

  3. I will be honest – I disclose any post wherein I receive payment to endorse a product, but that is simply because I believe my readership should know when I am being paid to support something. I consider that kind of support to be very different from word-of-mouth, just-because-I-feel-like-it support.

    But I only do so because I think it is a good idea – I echo your sentiments, Sebastian, and this law is not going to change anything for me.

  4. Unless Para’s paying you, the FTC doesn’t care about you endorsing them.

    As their bulletin says, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service.

    If they’re paying you to talk about their stuff, you have to tell us they’re paying you. Seems fair enough, and something you’d do anyway, right?

    1. Sigivald, come on, do you really think it’s that simple? There’s a lot more to this law than just that. Of course he’s always been honest about any reviews or gifted opportunities. FTC will care that he’s “endorsing” them because at one time he received something from them. If you receive a hat from a company at an event and then go on to write something about their products, you need to pay up, bud.

      Obviously, I believe that Sebastian’s blood pressure has been far too low lately. That must be why I sent him the full guidelines after reading just some of the horrors on advertising blogs I follow. As he pointed out from my reading various sections, no corporate lawyer would allow their client to do any kind of outreach after this comes into effect. The companies are liable for things they cannot control, like whether the blogger ever misunderstands something their product does and publishes a review based on that misunderstanding.

  5. how long until a “this ruling violates my 5th amdt rights as I only review things I steal, like music” argument arises?


    I’m glad everything important has been taken care of.

  6. Sheesh! Another intrusion of Big Gub’ment into our lives. I would do it anyway, just because it’s the ETHICAL thing to do, not because some jackassery told me it was the LEGAL thing to do.

  7. Whew! Just this morning I was thinking “y’know what we really need? More laws!”

    I feel so privileged to live under the authority of such a responsive government.

  8. Kim kindly posted on his blog emails I wrote him once or twice. And that cool guy in Idaho who makes tannerite once made a comment of mine his quote of the day. Small fame, perhaps, but enough for my small efforts as a commenter.

    I don’t blog, myself, but I like to comment on several excellent blogs. If in future some comment I submit to a blog is used as blogfodder, am I subject to this regulation? Because I could really really use the endorsement money. Are you reading this Rossi and Savage and Remington and Mossberg and Ruger? Send the checks asap!!!!

Comments are closed.