Question:

Sony Ericsson Mobile used actors to pose as tourists to demonstrate its camera phone at attractions in New York City and Seattle. The actors asked passersby to take their photo, thus demonstrating the camera's capabilities, but the actors did not identify themselves as actors representing Sony Ericsson. Advocacy groups have complained to the Federal Trade Commission about this word-of-mouth marketing campaign.

What objections might the advocacy groups have to the Sony Ericsson approach? Should the FTC intervene in some fashion.

Do you agree with the post below:

According to the federal trade commission, there are specific guidelines related to the word-of-mouth campaigns, they should not be deceptive and in case the product or brand is using the paid artist for the word-of-mouth campaign then they should disclose it to the public. If not, then the actions will be taken against the company and the marketing agency he objection that may be raised by the advocacy groups would be that passersby (potential consumers) are more likely to rely on false advertising as they are not aware that the company is undertaking this promotional measure with the use of actors. There wouldn't have been any concern if the company discloses the fact (to the passersby) relating to the use of actors to market its product as company's agents would obviously speak in favor of the product and its features. Consumers should be encouraged to make informed decisions and should not be made to rely on any form of undercover marketing. In simple words, the relationship between the company and the actors should be made known to the public. Sony has played with the people's right and emotion which is not accepted according to the advertising laws and FTC has every right to block the campaign and can even penalize the Sony for this kind of advertising. Being a supreme authority FTC takes care of the rights of the people in a way that an ad campaign should not mislead people to the false promises and in case of the word-of-mouth campaign the agenda and the motive should be clearly stated to the public, so they can make up their mind about the product

FTC can intervene on the grounds ofdeceptive advertisingas the relationship between the company and its agents (actors) is not made clear to passersby. Passersby would believe in the product and its features on the basis of what is conveyed to them through this form of undercover marketing which is not correct. FTC can initiate appropriate action based on the facts of the case and may prohibit the company from undertaking any such campaign in the future.