Thanks to all of you who participated in the Living Ethics Project blog. The current comment period has closed.

As you may recall, one section of the WOMMA Code of Ethics was re-opened after the requisite three members requested a review. To date, more than 60 members and interested parties have commented on whether the statement, “We stand against marketing practices whereby the consumer is paid cash by the manufacturer, supplier or one of their representatives to make recommendations, reviews or endorsements” should be part of the Code.

Under the outlined procedures, the WOMMA Member Ethics Advisory Panel (MEAP) and I will review the feedback and make a formal recommendation to the Board of Directors, which will be announced by July 31, 2009.

Once the Board has reached a decision the following will happen:

• WOMMA will confirm to all members if a change that has been made.
• WOMMA will provide members a 180-day compliance period in which to comply, if necessary, with the new Ethics Code.
• If member companies are unable to comply with the changes the Ethics Code, any affected member company will be asked to resign from WOMMA membership.
  
  

The Living Ethics Project is an annual review of the Ethics Code. WOMMA is striving to ensure that we respond effectively to you, our members. It is imperative to the strength and growth of our industry that we remain proactive in our approach to ethical and effective word of mouth and social media marketing.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Kristen Smith, Executive Director at WOMMA at Kristen@WOMMA.org or me at prand@zocalogroup.com.

Regards,

Paul M. Rand
WOMMA President-Elect
President/CEO, Zócalo Group

Ethics

We’re now half way through the Living Ethics comment period on whether excluding cash compensation should remain part of the WOMMA Ethics code.  Lots of good comments so far.

Please continue to weigh in on the main question, but would also like feedback as to whether receiving cash needs to be disclosed differently than receiving product.  Is one form being paid for a job and the other simply being asked for an informed opinion?

Ethics

In the last formal, WOMMA Living Ethics Review the WOMMA Membership agreed to include the following language in the revised ethics code: “We stand against marketing practices whereby the consumer is paid cash by the manufacturer, supplier or one of their representatives to make recommendations, reviews or endorsements.”

Three WOMMA members, as part of the Living Ethics Review process, have formally asked that this issue be revisited.  Through this blog, we are hoping to generate comments from WOMMA members, industry insiders, bloggers and brands.  At the end of June, the WOMMA Board will consider whether to revise the Code, as currently written, or to leave it as it now stands until this Fall, when the formal review period commences.

Paid Blogging:  Ethical or Not

Forrester’s Josh Berhnoff, is an AdAge Article, stated that paying bloggers for recommendations is “easily the most contentious issue I’ve dealt with recently.”  He’s right.  It’s driving strong points of view on all sides.

So, please make your opinion heard.  Is it ethical or even acceptable for brands to pay bloggers cash to write reviews?

Ethics ethical WOM, Ethics, Paid blogging, WOM, womma, word of mouth marketing

Dear WOMMA Members:

The Living Ethics Blog is now available to discuss/debate the following issue:

“We stand against marketing practices whereby the consumer is paid cash by the manufacturer, supplier or one of their representatives to make recommendations, reviews or endorsements.”

This item in our Ethics Code was brought forward by three members in good standing to open dialogue as part of the WOMMA Ethics Code Interim Review Process.   The Blog will be live from June 1 to June 30th.    WOMMA strongly encourages members, interested parties, and consumers to submit comments on this issue. This issue will be held in abeyance for a period of sixty days. All of this information will be publicly stated on our web site so the entire process will be clear and transparent. In addition, after the comment period has ended, the Board will take all communication/discussion on the topic and render a final and binding decision.

Ethics, WOM cash, Ethics, suppliers

As marketers, is it ethical to have fun and be “playful” with social media if our efforts are designed to be a “hoax”? 

Current example making rounds is a video involving a menswear company.

Thoughts?

Ethics hoax, Living Ethics, viral, WOM, word of mouth

The following note was sent out to WOMMA members yesterday.  Please comment as well!

————————————————————————

Is it ethical to target WOM marketing to minors?

Is it ok to pay bloggers to write about your or your client’s brand?

Is it ethical to create and maintain multiple online identities when engaging in digital word of mouth marketing?

These and other questions are at the heart of WOMMA’s Living Ethics project and revisions/update to the WOMMA Ethics Code – regarded as the industry’s standard.

We held a live ethics session during the WOMMA Marketing Summit in Las Vegas and many people participated. If you’d still like to watch the session, go to http://womma.org and click the link for the Live Ethics Video on the homepage.

Since getting back to Chicago, we’ve hosted a blog for members and the public to discuss ethical issues in word of mouth marketing and any refinements needed to the Ethics Code.

Please go to http://womma.org/ethicsreview to make your voice heard in this important discussion. We’ve extended the deadline for comments until January 20, 2009. Revisions to the code will be announced in February 2009.

Should you have questions about the Living Ethics Project, call WOMMA staff at 312-853-4400 or contact me directly at 312.596.6272 or at prand@zocalogroup.com.

Have a wonderful holiday!
Paul M. Rand 

VP, WOMMA Board of Directors
Chair, WOMMA Living Ethics Project
President/CEO – Zócalo Group

Ethics, WOM Ethics, paul rand, sustainable word of mouth, WOM, womma, word of mouth marketing