If you like fine print, you’re in luck. In the first major revision to product endorsement guidelines since 1980, the Federal Trade Commission now specifically requires online marketers to disclose any ‘material connection’ they have with a product or service they mention.

You’ve no doubt seen disclaimers in marketing efforts:

• not a real doctor

• past performance does not guarantee future results

• results not typical

Because social media, blogging, and word-of-mouth marketing make it especially difficult for consumers to identify paid endorsements, the new regulation requires that these relationships be made clear to the intended audience. If a company is providing free product or cash to someone to promote their product, the marketer must disclose it.

This is a good thing.

The FTC exists to (among other things) protect consumers and prevent fraudulent, deceptive and unfair business practices. By holding ‘mommy bloggers’ to the same standards as traditional sources of advertising, the FTC hopes to make consumers less susceptible to unsubstantiated or false claims (looks like the acai berry diet’s days are numbered).

In full disclosure: as a writer I love to use purple, extra fine point Sharpie pens. The Sanford corporation does not pay me to say this…but if they’d like to, I’m available (Wait!?! Is that Mont Blanc on the other line…?).

There’s a handyman at my house today.

I’m not exactly sure what the problem is, but something is leaking somewhere. Honestly, I didn’t even try to figure out what the problem was before I left the house. All I know is – there is water where it shouldn’t be, and somebody needs to set my pipes straight.

I had just the man for the job (and it wasn’t me). For the record, I’m not the least bit handy. If you give me a screwdriver, I hope it has a swizzle stick in it (and perhaps a nice orange wedge garnish).

That said, I could try to fix it myself, it doesn’t seem entirely impossible. With a few hours work, I could probably dig around in the house, look up things on the Internet, and even ask the folks at the hardware store…heck…

I might even fix the problem.

But. I could also:

• waste valuable time, and not fix the problem

• do more harm than good

In this case, outsourcing was my best solution. In the time my handyman fixes the leak, I will have written (and edited) this post, written copy for one client, sketched out ideas for a new campaign for another, and outlined two statements of work for new business.

By outsourcing to a trusted expert, I was able to do what I do best, and empower somebody else to do what they do best.

Anything else seems like flushing common sense down the drain.

As a marketing professional, I get a kick out of the cavalcade of corporate holiday cards that arrive in the mail each year.

For most companies, this is the only time of the year that they send their clients anything besides a product or an invoice. And for many of them, it pops up on the radar around November.

I can almost hear the internal conversations:
- let’s be religious…
- let’s be secular…
- let’s be funny…
and of course…
- let’s include a team photo

All of these are great topics to discuss, but there are two major problems with this scenario:
- it’s a month away
- they are discussing a ‘one-off’ marketing piece

Your clients are the lifeblood of your business, and even the very best Holiday card in the whole-wide-world can’t do it all. “Dear client, your business means a lot to us…and here is a bunch of other stuff you should buy…”

If you think you might fall into this category, here’s a suggestion; before the new year, make a resolution to create a marketing plan.

• Who were your best clients this year? How can I get more like them?
• How did you get their business? How do I repeat this?
• Consider industry events and seasonality when you plot the frequency and timing of your messaging.
• Make a budget.

It doesn’t have to be perfect (because it will most-likely change), but it does need to help you consistently deliver your message throughout the year.

Think about how you use email and networking. Write articles in industry publications, speak at events, try new tactics…but most importantly have a plan!

Then, next November…instead of panicking about a Holiday card, you’ll be improving your plan for 2011.

As I write this, the stock price of New York Times is trading below the cost of a weekly subscription. They’re losing money like it’s their job.

It’s no surprise that newspapers are dying, they report on it themselves fairly regularly. But…I’m really confused why they’re throwing gas on their own fire? Wherever I turn (actually, it’s usually when I turn to page 3) publishers are teasing me with story headlines, and then telling me to ‘read this story online…’.

Um. I’m holding the paper (paying for it, even). I don’t WANT to read your publication online.

I get it. It’s cheaper to publish some of the content online, plus the (hypothetical) ad revenue from the limitless pixels to pawn off might make web-only content alluring….but they’re wrong.

And they’re alienating their customers.

I like to read the newspaper…you know…the actual newspaper. Sure, I read news snippets and short articles online, but to really ‘read’ a story, I prefer the printed page. Heck, if there’s a long article online, I print it out to read (yes, I know that’s really stupid, and yes, I do recycle).

I’ve even proven to publishers that I’m willing to pay for the privilege of the printed word; we get 2 1/3 newspapers delivered weekly (I’m being charitable and counting St. Louis Post Dispatch as a third), and stacks of magazines.

Why then, do they force me online to read their content? I can barely tolerate the new format of the new Rolling Stone (a much, much smaller “more traditional” format rolled out Oct 30 of last year), but I like it a helluva lot better than reading online.

I guess I’ll have to learn to read online (like you). Or buy a better printer…

“The Brand” might not be officially dead, but it probably shouldn’t buy green bananas, either. If you don’t believe me, look no further than the aisles of any grocery store, and note the proliferation of private-label products.

Last week, several consumer-packaged-goods companies…Kellogg’s, Kraft and Sara Lee reported weaker-than-(they supposedly)-expected earnings, a weaker short-term forecast, and a negative outlook for growth. Every day, CPG companies are losing share to lower-cost products as consumers realize that the store brand is identical to the branded product in almost every way…except for the price.

If Wall Street mavens are looking for the next big bubble, it might just be coming from a big box of branded soap. Whatever companies think their brand is worth, they’re wrong. Whatever equity they think they have invested in their brand can be lost in an instant (see Budweiser).  During a merger or acquisition, Wall Street places a valuation on a brand’s worth, and they call it ‘goodwill’, and list it as an asset. This is now commonly perceived to be the value of the brand.

Here’s the problem. Whatever equation they use to evaluate the ‘worth’ of a brand, it is a made up equation (“um…what if we multiply it by three?”) Second, they’re entirely wrong. Each and every brand is teetering on worthlessness.

In the ‘good ol’ days’, brands served a purpose (“That’s my cow!”), and later, they helped consumers make purchases from trusted sources in a crowded marketplace (“I like Quaker oatmeal.”).

When information was scarce, brands were necessary in order for decisions to be made efficiently. The brand was a nice mental shortcut for consumers. In a marketplace crowded with a number of similar products, a brand can be a shopper’s friend…like a nod from an old buddy…tried, true and trusted. Put it in the shopping cart.

BUT. That was when information was scarce, and most consumers got their information from paid advertising. Technology continues to make information free and increasingly targeted, in addition, social networking has spawned a new breed of experts (mommy-bloggers, really?), making it easier than ever to avoid paid sponsorship (note the re-explosion of in-show product placement (Texaco Star Theater, anyone?).

The truth is, when given enough information and incentive, consumers will switch brands so fast it would make a sailor blush. It could be argued that I’m brand-loyal to Apple Computers. I have never purchased anything but Macs. I love the product (and make fun of my wife’s PC fairly often). However…if a company came out with an identical product for less money…say…The Banana Computer – I’d buy it in a heartbeat.

Consumers are brand loyal to their wallet, the value you offer them, and the bottom line.

(investor disclosure: I don’t own any of the above-mentioned stocks, but I once dated a girl named Sara Lee)