Wikipedia:Deceptive advertising

This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

This document is listed essential reading for New Page Reviewers

Deceptive advertising is any statement by an advertiser that is false or misleading, or that does not adequately identify itself as an advertisement.

According to the United States Federal Trade Commission: "A basic truth-in-advertising principle is that it's deceptive to mislead consumers about the commercial nature of content. Advertisements or promotional messages are deceptive if they convey to consumers expressly or by implication that they’re independent, impartial, or from a source other than the sponsoring advertiser ..."^[1] The British Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 which broadly replaces the Trade Descriptions Act 1968, has similar implications.

Undisclosed native advertising is a type of deceptive advertising. Native advertising mimics the format of the medium in which it is displayed; for example, a native ad in a newspaper may adopt the tone and appearance of a news article.^[1] Undisclosed native advertising in Wikipedia is paid text or other material that appears to be part of an unbiased encyclopedia article, but that does not identify itself as an advertisement. Even when the relationship with the business is disclosed on the talk page, readers are left unaware; other editors may also have difficulty identifying which parts of an article originated with the client.

Deceptive ads, and specifically undisclosed native ads, have long been a problem on Wikipedia. This essay describes how to spot and remove them.

The American Marketing Association (AMA) defines advertising as:

The placement of announcements and persuasive messages in time or space purchased in any of the mass media by business firms, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and individuals who seek to inform and/ or persuade members of a particular target market or audience about their products, services, organizations, or ideas.^[2]

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) described native advertising in 2015:

Marketers and publishers are using innovative methods to create, format, and deliver digital advertising. One form is "native advertising," content that bears a similarity to the news, feature articles, product reviews, entertainment, and other material that surrounds it online. ... In digital media, native ads often resemble the design, style, and functionality of the media in which they are disseminated. ... The more a native ad is similar in format and topic to content on the publisher's site, the more likely that a disclosure will be necessary to prevent deception.^[1]

The AMA defines deceptive advertising as "advertising intended to mislead consumers by falsely making claims, by failure to make full disclosure, or by both".^[3]

The Federal Trade Commission Act defines an act or practice as deceptive "if there is a material misrepresentation or omission of information that is likely to mislead the consumer acting reasonably in the circumstances. A misrepresentation is material if it is likely to affect consumers' choices or conduct regarding an advertised product or the advertising for the product."^[1]

Under Section 17b, Securities Act of 1933 anybody who describes, publicizes, or communicates about a security for sale, for compensation "received or to be received, directly or indirectly," is violating the law by "touting" unless three disclosures are made:

• the nature of the compensation, e.g. whether the publisher was paid in cash or with securities;
• the source of the compensation, the person or organization who paid for the publicity; and
• the amount of compensation.^[4]

The section reads:

It shall be unlawful for any person, by the use of any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by the use of the mails, to publish, give publicity to, or circulate any notice, circular, advertisement, newspaper, article, letter, investment service, or communication which, though not purporting to offer a security for sale, describes such security for a consideration received or to be received, directly or indirectly, from an issuer, underwriter, or dealer, without fully disclosing the receipt, whether past or prospective, of such consideration and the amount thereof. (15 U.S.C. § 77q(b).)^[4]

When deciding whether an ad is deceptive, the FTC looks at the overall impression the ad gives, which includes examining its format: "the FTC will look to the overall context of the interaction, not just to elements of the ad in isolation. Put another way, both what the ad says and the format it uses to convey that information will be relevant. Any clarifying information necessary to prevent deception must be disclosed clearly and prominently to overcome any misleading impression":

A basic truth-in-advertising principle is that it's deceptive to mislead consumers about the commercial nature of content. Advertisements or promotional messages are deceptive if they convey to consumers expressly or by implication that they’re independent, impartial, or from a source other than the sponsoring advertiser – in other words, that they’re something other than ads. Why would it be material to consumers to know the source of the information? Because knowing that something is an ad likely will affect whether consumers choose to interact with it and the weight or credibility consumers give the information it conveys.^[1]

The FTC prohibits deceptive advertising (bold added):

In determining whether an advertisement, including its format, misleads consumers, the Commission considers the overall “net impression” it conveys. Any qualifying information necessary to prevent deception must be disclosed prominently and unambiguously to overcome any misleading impression created. The Commission has long held the view that advertising and promotional messages that are not identifiable as advertising to consumers are deceptive if they mislead consumers into believing they are independent, impartial, or not from the sponsoring advertiser itself.^[5]

The FTC has enforced their rules on native advertising against Lord & Taylor^[6] and SmartClick Media.^[7]

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission considers the touting of securities to be a type of fraud. Any paid editor who simply describes a security available for sale in the United States or to a United States person is likely to be committing fraud unless they disclose the nature of their compensation, and the source and amount of the compensation. The SEC regularly enforces the anti-touting provisions of the law, often labeling the violation pump and dump.^[8] The first SEC actions against touting on the internet were taken in 1998.^[4]

Similar laws against fraud by touting or pump and dump schemes are also enforced in Canada.^[9]

For the purposes of Wikipedia, we define deceptive advertising as:

any text placed in an article by, or on behalf of, a business that is

• false or misleading, or
• does not disclose, in accordance with FTC or SEC standards, that the text was placed in the article by that business.

The removal of text by a business is also considered deceptive advertising if the removed text would prevent the article from being false or misleading, or if the text is needed to properly disclose advertising.

Wikipedia encourages editing by employees of non-profit organizations which share Wikipedia's educational goals, e.g. for GLAMs (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums). Nevertheless, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and individuals might also be engaging in deceptive advertising if they edit in order to advertise a product or service.

Several of our rules can help prevent deceptive advertising and prevent businesses from adding any text on article pages.

• The terms of use prohibit any use of Wikipedia for illegal or fraudulent purposes. They also require that any paid editors post their paid status on the talk page of any affected article page, in edit summaries, or on their user pages.
• WP:NOT prohibits the posting of advertising, marketing, public relations, or promotional text in an article.
• WP:NOR prohibits businesses from including text in articles that is based on its own original research unless independent reliable sources report the information
• WP:OWN states that no editor owns an article, that anybody may edit an article within our rules, and that "content should not be signed."

These are all Wikipedia policies. Any editor may help enforce these policies, e.g. by removing any advertisements or signed content. Administrators may block editors who violate these policies, particularly if the editors are disruptive in their editing. Violations of these policies may lead to sanctions, even if the editor is complying with the paid disclosure requirements.

Several of these policies superficially appear to contradict the FTC's disclosure requirements, e.g. WP:NOT allows any editor to remove advertising in articles, but the FTC requires businesses to state that the content they added is advertising. Nevertheless, these apparent contradictions can always be avoided by the business by simply never editing article pages. Their ability to edit talk pages, with disclosure, is not affected however.

Several other rules, including WP:Conflict of interest may also limit a business's ability to edit article pages.

In short, to be sure of following both FTC rules and Wikipedia rules, businesses should never edit article pages.

These examples may be simplified versions of specific cases.

None of the articles in these example had a disclosure in the article.

• A company hires an editor to place a product list or list of awards the company has received in the article on the company.
• A dog food manufacturer creates press releases about its product, then hires an editor who creates an article about the manufacturer sourced to the same press releases.
• A well-known restaurant chain rewrites the lead of the article on its signature product. Later it runs an advertisement on television that triggers smart speakers to read the rewritten lead aloud to viewers.
• A law firm edits an article about a situation or company that it is involved with in court, inserting a link to an advertising website it owns which is used to solicit potential plaintiffs.
• Employees or contractors of a brokerage firm remove information about the firm being fined for fraud from the lead of the article on the firm; the aim is to prevent that information being repeated in Google's Knowledge Graph.
• A company about to issue a new cryptocurrency by means of an ICO available to U.S. investors hires an editor to "neutrally" describe the ICO.
• A clothing manufacturer adds images (some digitally altered) to articles about famous locations, prominently featuring models wearing or carrying the manufacturer’s products.

1. Advertising is addressed to prospective purchasers/clients/students/donors/users/participants – see the definition by the ASA at the top of this page. Encyclopedia articles are addressed to the general public, who likely include many prospective purchasers, clients, etc. If the advertiser might possibly reach these target markets through an encyclopedia article, their text additions are still considered advertising.
2. Advertising and press releases say what the subject would like said; encyclopedia articles say what the public would like to know.
3. COI almost always produces advertising or press releases, because it says what the COI editor would like said. Almost no COI editor is able to avoid this.

In 2012 the Munich Oberlandesgericht court ruled that if a company or its agents edit Wikipedia with the aim of influencing customers, the edits constitute covert advertising, and as such are a violation of European fair-trading law. The ruling stated that readers cannot be expected to seek out user and talk pages to find editors' disclosures about their corporate affiliation.^[10]

The WMF maintains servers in the European Union and English-language articles are often distributed to EU member countries via these servers. In a copyright case against Project Gutenberg another German court forced Project Gutenberg to block access to its U.S. based site from internet users in Germany.^[11][12]

One question about the Oberlandesgericht court ruling is: Do articles on the English-language Wikipedia that may have affects in Germany have to comply with their ruling?

• A U.S. company with an office in Germany paid an editor to create and maintain an article about the company. Later the company was purchased by a German publisher and is now a subsidiary of the publisher. Is the English-language article in violation of the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive?

• False advertising
• California Unfair Competition Law (US)
• Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (UK)
• Fair Trading Act 1986 (New Zealand)
• Truth in Advertising (organization) (US)
• Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005 (Europe)
  • Signpost article (2012)

• Amazeen, Michelle A. (February 7, 2018). "Content Confusion in an Era of Fake News". Truth in Advertising. Retrieved May 3, 2018.