TV testimonials are usually backed up in writting by those who give them. Not to say they are not “exagerated”, but the person who makes the infomercial jumps through the hoops to make sure that they are covered.

In the weight loss space, there are companies you can work with to have people use your product and lose the weight - normally through some extreme dieting as well, but the point is that the TV Producers back it up.

Yes, there are some radio commercials and TV spots that run with questionable support, but any of them that go big time get all there items taken care off.

Look at Kevin Tredeau - that guy is a master marketer and he continually gets busted up by the FTC - he can no longer market diet products because of his whole “coral calcium” issue.

Steve Warshack (smiling bob/Enzyte) paid 2.5M fine plus had to deal with the IRS back in 2006 for making fake health claims and for dishonest advertising over “free trials” - he was essentially doing what most of the grant/money/acai trial offers are doing right now. Starting a 14 day trial, having the product show up on day 12 or 13, and then charging the card.

As discussed, the folks at the highest risk level here are the Aff Networks and sites like Facebook. Those are the ones that will get targeted.

Now, remember TV and Radio marketers have the FTC and the FCC to contend with. To date, the FCC has left the internet alone mostly - trying to figure out how to manage it is difficult.

The FTC could definitely come in - per there own website (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/business/ecommerce/bus28.shtm) . You get enough of a target like the Grant or diet ads, and it will eventually hit someones radar.

Since these offers are clearly false advertising how can the FTC or any other agency allow them to be on TV for all these years. I would think TV ads are easier to regulate then online ads.

While the facebook ads are more clear examples of shady ads I think by its nature most advertising can be considered technically misleading. Any search on Google will produce tons of sponsored results that say one thing but it would be almost impossible to prove the ad copy was 100% compliant with what the offer provides. Its the only way to compete and get high ctr.

1) in the “about me”
2) different name on the check
3) referred to himself later in the story… and this guy is on facebook like white on rice.

Plus, he’s using some BS geoplugin. Yeah, sure he just happens to be from the little backwater town my ISP is in. What a coincidence. Looks like an easy way to get burned to the ground if the Feds ever crack down on that. You’d think someone running that much volume would know you never mess with the government. Just give them their money, obey the rules, and live and let live.

i dabble in a little domaining here and there and find this interesting. All networks ads4paper(ads4dough, click2ads , azoogle, copaec) seem to run the same offers.
The domaining companies that are making it right now parked.com, hitfarm, domainsponsor.com have nothing but crown jewels and provide nothing but sweet high quality traffic to yahoo and google respectively.
If i have this right, azoogle started the ringtone business and made a killing off that, right now shouldnt this upcoming networks focus on coming up with unique offers that actually help people.
Sounds like a pipe dream , but i beleive whoever works harder than the next person is going to survive. Unlike the domain community where having a 300 premium generics can be the difference a lawsuit aimed at any of this networks will completely wipe them off and affiliates will suffer too with their massive creditcard bills.
hmm… i think you already adressed this in your post lol.