This is good. We must regulate "influencers" as there has been a bunch of cases where they have endorsed products to their following.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
UK Advertising watchdog rules anyone with more than 30k followers is considered a celebrity and subject to advertising rules
- Thread starter spam musubi
- Start date
This is good. We must regulate "influencers" as there has been a bunch of cases where they have endorsed products to their following.
Although I can understand both sides of the argument, it doesn't detract from this being one of most the stupidest things I've ever heard of. There needs to be a deeper catergorisation, not just simply saying that once a person has hit 30,000 followers, regardless of output, that they should be classed as such.
e.g., let's say I make a game, that gains me 1 million followers, it doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to express my views on anything I choose, including medical products. Will they start classifying legit views on product X as endorsements?
e.g., let's say I make a game, that gains me 1 million followers, it doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to express my views on anything I choose, including medical products. Will they start classifying legit views on product X as endorsements?
Last edited:
OP
OP
OP
OP
The article says that they will evaluate on a case by case basis.
I know, I know, "mummy blogger" means something different in the UK, but I like the idea of someone getting really big on social media in the Egyptology sphere.
OP
OP
You've updated your post again. You seem to be fundamentally misunderstanding the ruling. You are not banned from sharing your opinion. This was a case of a paid ad that wasn't compliant with medical advertising regulations. If you are a person of note, and are doing paid ads, you should be subject to rules about paid advertising.
OP
OP
We have regulatory bodies which are far more stringent than the FDA or FCC.
I guess? These laws seem overly stringent. If the FDA approves a drug here to treat something then anybody can market the drug for that use. Don't know why "celebrities" would be barred. "Influencers" being barred is more hilarious.
Prescription drugs *not* being advertised directly to patients is how it is in many other countries. It's really odd that they can be advertised on TV as they are in the US.
Just because drugs are approved for human use, does not mean any tom dick or harry gets to promote their use. There's a reason all but two countries in the western world allows this.
I don't think so. Many people in this country don't go to the doctor regularly. Its very common for someone to see a dramatization on TV that describes symptoms they may be experiencing and that ultimately being the galvanizing factor for them to go seek an evaluation.
As long as the claims that the commercials make are regulated, then I don't see why not.
Depends on platform. And bots. Apparently you can get 1000 followers for about $10 on some of them.
christ, maybe this applies to arse over tit countries where you have to pay a small fortune before a doctor even calls you name, but in most civilised countries (including the one this article is about) you don't need tv adverts to motivate health decisions.
ehhh relax. No reason to act like a threatened house cat because someone is asking questions
OP
OP
You were all up in that China thread yesterday going "why criticize China when we could be self-criticizing America" and now you're criticizing the UK. Maybe have some self awareness
Last edited:
I really need to get into the habit of checking post history before replying
It's literally odd, in the sense that America is the odd one out here.
But given that patients *can't* choose their prescription, allowing advertising directly to them is ripe for leading to... ooooh… something like an opioid crisis.
I criticized China and brought up that this practice also goes on in America, which is supposed to be a democracy where the people can actually do something about it. But as per usual Americans are more into nationalism than actually addressing issues. Also in this case I actually like how America does it. I know, nuance is a very maddening thing...
You can't chose the drug but you can opt for generic versions, if they exist. That's neither here nor there though. My point is informing the patient who may be trying to tough out a serious condition.
OP
OP
Informing the patient should be the job of the doctors, not the drug companies trying to sell you drugs
What about my line of Blunt Acupuncture Knitting Needles? Or my Organic Organ Meat Grinding Organ? "All the Lungs with None of the Lumps(tm) "
If more doctor's and health organizations bought ad space and produced drug agnostic TV spots informing patients then maybe the ones produced by big pharma wouldn't be so effective.
OP
OP
This is a completely fucked view of a health system that is only reasonable in America.
Thank executive action from the Bush administration which the Obama administration only slightly scaled back by forcing more disclosure. Another good example of the 1 step forward, 2 steps back that defines incrementalism's ultiment result of movement backwards.
User Warned: Trolling Over Multiple Posts in this Thread
Shit piss tits?
Just take the loss, Christ. Prescription medicines are not something that need to be advertised on TV alongside the likes of junk food and cleaning products so that people can erroneously self-diagnose and self-medicate. It's a bad idea to market prescription drugs to people who aren't qualified to properly evaluate their usage. Period. Pretty much every other country in the world believes this, surprise that it's the country with one of the worst medical care systems in the world that doesn't.