OK, so that hasn’t happened yet. But it should.
Kim Kardashian, one of those famous-for-being-famous celebutantes we just can’t get away from, has a new income stream. Tweeting. And get this: Ms. Kardashian’s rate is $10,000 per.
It shouldn’t surprise you that Kardashian gets paid to tweet, any more than it would if you found out that any message to 2.7 million people (her following as of December 20 2009) was compensated.
Now do the math: a television ad during the Super Bowl goes for about $3.5 million, and reaches about 400 million people. Paying Kim Kardashian $10,000 to put a message in front of her followers, who wish to hear what she has to say, is a bargain. The Super Bowl ad reaches 148 times more people, but cost 350 times as much. And a bunch of the potential viewers walk away from their TVs to get snacks while the ad is running!
Still think social networking doesn’t matter to the way you manage business change?
Point #2: a couple of months ago the FTC made it illegal to blog for pay without disclosing that you were being paid. And let’s be clear; both by function and frequently being referred to as a micro-blogging service, posting on Twitter is blogging. So when we see this . . . :
. . . where’s the disclosure?
It’s coming, and soon. To be fair, Kardashian claims that when she posted that Tweet she hadn’t yet signed as a spokesperson for Carl’s Jr., so maybe there’s a loophole to wriggle through. For you though, the message, again, is clear: ignore social networking at your own peril.
Oh, and by the way: The fine is $11,000. This tweet could actually cost Ms. Kardashian money.
Repost This Article
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by yamasas, Jeff Yablon. Jeff Yablon said: FTC to Fine Kim Kardashian for Paid Tweet: http://answerguy.com/2009/12/22/ftc-fine-kim-kardashian-paid-tweet/ [...]
[...] couple of days ago I pointed out that Kim Kardashian might be in hot water with the FTC over her non-disclosed paid-endorser schtick for Carl’s Jr. on Twitter. The topic of business [...]
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by yamasas: [twitter] FTC To Fine Kim Kardashian For Paid Tweet http://bit.ly/58vKFB…
[...] Tweet. Thanks to new disclosure rules on paid Internet endorsements, those undisclosed sponsors could get Kardashian in trouble with the FTC, which could fine her up to $11,000 per [...]
[...] to new disclosure rules on paid Internet endorsements, those undisclosed sponsors could get Kardashian in trouble with the FTC, which could fine her up to $11,000 per [...]
[...] while back, I told you about Kim Karsahian’s deal to be paid $10,000 per tweet by certain advertisers. I suggested that paying that amount of money to reach 2.8 million opted-in receivers of an [...]
[...] Cyrus had stopped using Twitter, my commentary ran toward how bad a business decision that was. My recent comments about Kim Kardashian and her $10,000 Titter posts have been about business change in the advertising world and how things that look unimportant can [...]
[...] this link and some instructions, like I have.That’s called a disclosure, by the way; see this link about Kim Kardashian and the FTC for why I needed to include it.The bottom line remains that you absolutely must be doing long tail marketing and Search Engine [...]
[...] to deny that she was paid to Tweet about their product. Kim’s per-Tweet fee is reportedly $10,000; if the Tweet was sponsored and she did not disclose this, she could be fined by the Federal Trade [...]
[...] Failure to do so carries an $11,000 fine.Soon after the regulation was enacted I mentioned that one Kim Kardashian was shilling for Carl’s Jr. over Twitter and that her tweets weren’t mark…. I presume Ms. Kardashian hasn’t been fined.Yesterday, the FTC gave me good reason for that [...]
[...] follower count just isn’t that important? Now, there’s proof.It’s true, despite Ms. Kardashian’s seemingly important role in the Twitterverse, and Mr. Kutcher’s claim to fame as the first person ever to have over a million Twitter [...]
[...] As we move into a world where communication is driven by social networking and less by direct contact, this subject gets harder to encapsulate, and harder to police. It’s been about three years since the FCC enacted all-but-unenforceable rules about “paid blogging”, and nearly that long since I told you about Kim Kardashian’s paid tweets that weren’t disclosed as such. [...]
[...] mass, so they aren’t going away either, even if what they say is no more meaningful than what comes out of Kim Kardashian. YOU, on the other hand, have to do the social media thing, but not tick anybody off. It’s [...]