According to some reports in the media recently, the OFT could be about to stop debt management companies from using social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook to advertise their services. Firms that use pay-per-click advertising on Google could also be targeted as the OFT continues its clampdown on the debt advice industry.
The OFT has implied that companies that use social media sites to advertise services such as IVA’s, Bankruptcy or a Debt management Plan, may be acting ‘inappropriately’ and that this form of promotion could be viewed as ‘unfair business practice’. The proposals have not yet been confirmed and a consultation is currently taking place.
The main argument behind the OFT’s stance is highlighted in its consultation paper, where it questions whether the limited information that can be transmitted through sites such as twitter can provide a balanced picture for clients. Often, the content on these sites are written by the MD’s and SEO’s of debt solution companies, highlighting all the great things about their companies without ever giving much regard for the ‘free’ or ‘alternative’ debt solutions that are available.
As part of ‘best advice’ guidelines, the OFT have previously stated that commercial debt help companies, as part of their advertising, should always make their clients aware of the free and charity debt advice that is available. This is rarely talked about on Facebook and Twitter.
Most often, the only information that can be found will be written in the garbled ramblings of an enthusiastic director, passionate to get content onto the internet containing as many popular keywords as he can cram into his message in order to boost his company’s website SEO. In many cases, the information to be found on social media sites can be biased, inaccurate and even misleading. Who knows where many of them get the time to post so many blogs and messages – often at a rate of one every half hour or even more frequent, and usually from devices such as Blackberry’s and I-Phones. It could actually be viewed as a little bit sad and desperate.
The question that the OFT raises in regards to pay-per-click advertising is in regards to the limited number of characters available to advertisers, and whether a fair message can be conveyed to potential customers in such a short amount of space. Normally, a debt help firm will be expected to provide certain warnings to potential customers, such as the adverse effect that a debt solution can have on a person’s credit rating and the fact that a debt solution such as a debt management plan can extend the term of a person’s indebtedness.
There have been some murmurings from those in the debt advice sector who use social media to flog their wares that any ban on this form of advertising would be ‘draconian’ and disable commercial debt management firms from operating on a level playing field with others in the industry. The OFT has responded to these concerns by stressing that use of social media is fine as long as the information is accurate, clear and truthful.
The OFT has implied that companies that use social media sites to advertise services such as IVA’s, Bankruptcy or a Debt management Plan, may be acting ‘inappropriately’ and that this form of promotion could be viewed as ‘unfair business practice’. The proposals have not yet been confirmed and a consultation is currently taking place.
The main argument behind the OFT’s stance is highlighted in its consultation paper, where it questions whether the limited information that can be transmitted through sites such as twitter can provide a balanced picture for clients. Often, the content on these sites are written by the MD’s and SEO’s of debt solution companies, highlighting all the great things about their companies without ever giving much regard for the ‘free’ or ‘alternative’ debt solutions that are available.
As part of ‘best advice’ guidelines, the OFT have previously stated that commercial debt help companies, as part of their advertising, should always make their clients aware of the free and charity debt advice that is available. This is rarely talked about on Facebook and Twitter.
Most often, the only information that can be found will be written in the garbled ramblings of an enthusiastic director, passionate to get content onto the internet containing as many popular keywords as he can cram into his message in order to boost his company’s website SEO. In many cases, the information to be found on social media sites can be biased, inaccurate and even misleading. Who knows where many of them get the time to post so many blogs and messages – often at a rate of one every half hour or even more frequent, and usually from devices such as Blackberry’s and I-Phones. It could actually be viewed as a little bit sad and desperate.
The question that the OFT raises in regards to pay-per-click advertising is in regards to the limited number of characters available to advertisers, and whether a fair message can be conveyed to potential customers in such a short amount of space. Normally, a debt help firm will be expected to provide certain warnings to potential customers, such as the adverse effect that a debt solution can have on a person’s credit rating and the fact that a debt solution such as a debt management plan can extend the term of a person’s indebtedness.
There have been some murmurings from those in the debt advice sector who use social media to flog their wares that any ban on this form of advertising would be ‘draconian’ and disable commercial debt management firms from operating on a level playing field with others in the industry. The OFT has responded to these concerns by stressing that use of social media is fine as long as the information is accurate, clear and truthful.
{ 2 comments... read them below or add one }
I am very happy to be here because this is a very good point that provides lots of information about the topics covered in depth.
I am really disappointed that the rules aren't more specific about training: Lot's of consumer detriment is caused by poorly trained advisors and I think the OFT should have been more prescriptive here.
Thanks
Post a Comment