ReputationOnline » Blog Archive » Loft bribes bloggers for positive coverage

Loft bribes bloggers for positive coverage

Posted by Vikki Chowney
on 4th February 2010

2130_400x300 Fashion label Loft has been rewarding positive posts from bloggers with ‘mystery’ giftcards, in what could be the sneakiest example of payment-for-post manipulation we’ve seen of late.

Though Loft’s president, Gary Muto, insisted that; “We don’t incentivise the press, we would never do that,” it seems that the invite to the exclusive blogger briefing to launch Loft’s summer 2010 collection came with some rather specific small print.

“Please note all bloggers must post coverage from our event to their blog within 24 hours in order to be eligible. Links to post must be sent to [address], along with the code on the back of your gift card distributed to you at the event. You will be notified of your gift card amount by February 2. Gift card amounts will vary from $10 to $500.”

As reported on Jezebel earlier this week, hardly any of the bloggers disclosed their financial relationship or turned down the giftcards, flaunting recently tightened FTC regulations. The update – which we discussed on Reputation Online last year – states that a blogger is eligible for a fine of up to $11,000 for failing to mention that they’ve been given goods or monetary reward that may have swayed their opinion.

Loft also pointed out in a statement that blogger relations was a whole new world to the brand, so perhaps it could be forgiven for making a mistake. But sticking its head in the sand and flatly denying that it ever attempted barter its way into favour online is no way to repair the situation. This would never (hopefully) happen with ‘traditional media’, so what led to the company think that it would be ok online?

Recent comments

domsparkes on Facebook needs to take a proactive approach to child safety

Andrew Stretton on Fisheye Analytics reignites the debate around AVE

gedcarroll on Fisheye Analytics reignites the debate around AVE

Owain Betts on Fisheye Analytics reignites the debate around AVE

garveyae on Digital natives discuss

Jon Silk on Jon Silk on 'Greenpeace unfriends Facebook over dirty data'

barneyc on Jon Silk on 'Greenpeace unfriends Facebook over dirty data'

Annemarie

I've also seen Loft pay for advertising (not PR) on blogs, ie via banner (display ad) which ran in January 2010 and a competition on this site http://www.whowhatwear.com/website/full-article...

samdeeks

Good post! I'm not surprise, though - seems to me that social media just carries on what people in the real world started: doing whatever they could to make a profit and to hell with the ethics or the morality of it.

Right now, we're still in the 'everybody in the world is trying to get rich online' phase. Social networks are choked with hustlers trying to sell their stuff or get an advantage. In the end, it all comes down to how much you value your credibility and what risks you're prepared to take with it. Some companies don't care; others simply don't understand the risk they're taking.

On a positive note, the transparency of social media means that it isn't long before people acting unethically get the finger pointed at them by people like us.

On the other hand, I can't help wondering whether the number of people like us who even notice - let alone care about - what Loft was doing is decreasing all the time. Frankly, Scarlett, my stepson probably couldn't give a damn.

Siany

This is happening more frequently than bloggers admit (although not by myself). But, I have been approached by companies offering goodies or cash in exchange for blog posts. But that's where the problem lies. When is it OK to get 'samples' from a company, rather than cash? I guess everyone decides what their price is. For some, it's a gift card or cash, for others it's a t-shirt or some such thing. The lines are blurred.

I refused to work with someone who wanted to pay me to write a blog post about a client (and sent them links to several strongly worded blog posts about the subject). They understood, but after a bit more hunting, they found 10 more bloggers to take my place. It's not OK for companies to do this, and when their brand is brought into question they'll realise that. But a lot of the fault lies with bloggers who take the money in the first place. And that doesn't look set to change any time soon.

Daan Jansonius

I think you're last sentence is key - his reponse, to me at least, suggests that he does not see bloggers as part of 'the press' or traditional media as you say. So to his mind he is not lying, nor have they done anything wrong.

It just shows that, even though we are moving forward, there still is some way to go for brands to fully grasp the new reality they will have to deal with eventually.