Facebook Is Using Minors To Advertise Alcohol

Social marketing holds lots of potential but also many perils, especially when it involves minors.

This is especially true for alcohol advertising. It is both illegal and improper for a 13 year old to promote Coors Light or a vodka brand in a television commercial or print ad.

But it appears that Facebook is clearly violating state and federal law – and its own policies – by using its rich social graph to promote alcohol advertising, on the Facebook pages of minors.

The fact that this is happening shouldn’t be a surprise to Facebook. They not only have known about it since 2007 when they launched ads – this is exactly what social graph based advertising was supposed to do. Here’s what Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg said in 2007 when Facebook launched Ads

Facebook Ads represent a completely new way of advertising online. For the last hundred years media has been pushed out to people, but now marketers are going to be a part of the conversation. And they’re going to do this by using the social graph in the same way our users do … Social actions are powerful because they act as trusted referrals and reinforce the fact that people influence people. It’s no longer just about messages that are broadcasted out by companies, but increasingly about information that is shared between friends. So we set out to use these social actions to build a new kind of ad system.

Want proof? Here’s the ad I saw yesterday on my daughter’s Facebook page. My daughter is 13.

 

Social Media Insiders Fiddle While Twitter Burns

Many have written about in-tweet (also called in-stream) advertising. Just in the past few days, among many posts on this topic, Mark Suster asks whether it’s a good idea to have ads in tweets and concludes that it is (Mark is an investor in Ad.ly – one of the companies making possible in-tweet ads). Robert Scoble is not a fan of in-tweet advertising but points out that “people who produce content should be able to make a living for producing that content.” Nick Halstead, CEO of tweetmeme, argues that companies should leverage re-tweets for in-stream advertising. Seth Simonds asks whether he is worth money to his followers/reader. The discussion has even moved into the mainstream media – The New York Times cautions that A Friend’s Tweet Could Be an Ad.

The discussions around in-stream advertising are intellectually interesting. However, they obfuscate a bigger problem: in-stream advertising can (and I believe, will) destroy Twitter.

Here’s why: imagine if Google allowed paid search listings within organic search results. Sure, paid listings could be clearly marked as paid. Why has Google not done so? Because including paid listings within organic search results would compromise search.

What if Google allowed another type of transaction: imagine if Google allowed pages that attained a high PR value to sell the title or description meta tags (or both) to a third party for advertising purposes. If this was done, search results would be far less meaningful.

In each of the above examples, there is a predictable outcome. People would search less often. Fewer people would click on adwords ads. And Google’s core business model would suffer.

The impact of in-stream ads is further complicated by the recent search deals that Twitter signed with Google and Bing. Both search engines are now indexing tweets and the organic search results will contain sponsored tweets – the equivalent of having paid search listings within organic search results. This is a disaster waiting to happen – it’s precisely what Google has worked hard, for ten years, to avoid.

[Read more...]