Advertising Disclosure - Must We Disclose Each And Every Form Of Ad?

Reading this story about Fox News repeataedly airing live from in front of investment firm Charles Schwab’s office piqued my interest. There has been a lot of debate online about advertising disclosure (Just try doing a Google search for PayPerPost disclosure to see what I mean. Now, we carry it forward to ask if Charles Schwab paid Fox to broadcast in front of their office and wether or not it is right to do that or not. News Hounds thinks it’s a form of product placement and that Fox should disclose such, if in fact it is (There is no proof that this is a paid ad by Charles Schwab).

Here’s my opinion: If it is true that Charles Schwab paid Fox to broadcast news in front of it’s office building, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that; it’s a different form of advertising and probably works much better than the standard 30-second spot television commercial. Advertisers need to find creative new ways to reach their audience. However, if Charles Schwab’s payment influenced or biased news reporting, I would have a problem with that. That is something that should be disclosed. Otherwise, I don’t believe disclosure is required. But judging from the post on News Hounds, that wasn’t the case.

Take, for example, News Hounds’ own blog. There are certain ads on it that are not disclosed as ads. That’s perfectly fine with me as those ads don’t influence the blog’s content. But, if you take News Hound’s own reasoning, this would be wrong. But it’s not. It doesn’t harm anybody. It’s perfectly OK.